• Anthony de Jasay, Political Philosophy, Clearly: Essays on Freedom and Fairness, Property and Equalities, Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2010, 347 pages, $24.
One of the great myths of society today is that life is too complex to leave unregulated. Liberty was fine for a simple agrarian society a couple of centuries ago. But now we need the state to manage human affairs.
In fact, experience demonstrates that it is even more important to rely on the decentralized decision making of the marketplace as society grows more complex. The commissars had a pass•able chance of figuring out how to make steel. Creating an advanced industrial economy in the midst of the information and other technological revolutions is beyond any human’s ability.
French economist Anthony de Jasay explores the ability of individuals to organize their affairs privately, often through conventions rather than laws. The essays collected in this volume span a broad array of issues, but de Jasay emphasizes the importance of distinguishing recognizable reality from normative pronouncements. Some of de Jasay’s essays make for difficult reading; he is capable of turning a nice phrase, but the subject matter discourages stylish writing. However, the substance is worth the effort.
He begins the book with a frontal attack on two traditional precepts of classical liberals: the social contract and constitution•ally limited government. The basic problem, he contends, is “confusion between ‘ought’ and ‘it.’” The theory of what he calls “the fictitious social contract” logically results in far more government than originally desired. “There is an obvious potential gain to the government or, to be pedantic, the persons in charge of it, from exceeding this mandate, and the means are available for doing so,” he explains.
The means are evident in the failure of constitutional paper guarantees to constrain effectively the growth of government. The liberal ideal “irritates” him, he writes, since “it makes it seem that the writing of a constitution of liberty is a plausible means for transforming the normative ideal into positive reality.” Alas, this is easier said — or thought — than done.
Not all is bad news, however. De Jasay’s very detailed discussion of rules and government indicates that limits sometimes are respected, but often for idiosyncratic reasons. “Unreasoning, even plainly unreasonable, standards can effectively limit government if they are widely followed,” he notes. “For about a century and a half before Keynes’ General Theory became common currency for the literate and the semiliterate, it was widely believed that repeated deficits in the state household were mortally dangerous, liable to lead to the country’s ruin, and to be countenanced only in desperate circumstances.” During this period governments were constrained to balance their budgets. No longer, however.
De Jasay’s determination to separate idealism from reality is evident in his discussion of justice and liberty. It is believed widely that laws can be unjust. So he contends with such basic questions as where justice comes from and how we recognize it, as well as the relationship of liberty, property, and equality.
But he never forgets that we are dealing with imperfect human beings and processes. He writes with characteristic bluntness: “Liberty shares with justice the dubious honor that most collective abuse of the individual, from regimentation to harassment to spoliation to mass killing, has been committed in the name of one or the other and sometimes both at the same time, the better to assure us that abuse is really a worthy deed on behalf of the common good in pursuit of the values all right-thinking people must share. Taking the names of liberty and justice in vain, whether out of political cynicism or muddle-headedness, has always been done with remarkable impunity.”
The question of rights and “rights” attracts de Jasay’s attention. This is another highly complicated complex of issues. He bluntly asserts that “liberties are not rights, and rights are not liberties.” He sorts through wrongs, conventions, claims, rules, presumptions, duties, obligations, morality, consequences, and rights, and how all of them relate to “liberties.”
These questions matter because claims of artificial “rights” very often turn out to conflict with natural liberties. De Jasay explains: “Modern rule-making rules, notably those dependent on building voting coalitions, display a propensity for conferring new rights and extending old ones. They also seem to permit the imposition of the corollary obligations with almost surreptitious ease. The resulting proliferation of rights is widely regarded as a sign of progress and generosity. How•ever, it is careless thought that lets the corresponding shrinkage of freedom
go unnoticed.”
He does not spend all of his time in the philosophical clouds. He also looks at nationalism in the context of the European Union. In the case of Great Britain, he argues, nationalism has performed a salutary role, encouraging resistance against the tendency toward continental political consolidation.
Nevertheless, politics does not always operate rationally. Writes de Jasay: “the electorate does not decide on the balance of reasons. In great national questions, it is gut feelings that count, not intellectual arguments. And the gut feeling is that not for nothing is Britain an island.” Americans have much the same sensible gut reaction against turning sovereignty over to transnational organizations such as the United Nations.
The European Union also provides a malign example when it comes to antitrust enforcement. De Jasay refuses to allow “public servants” to get away with their public-spirited rhetoric:
“Clearly, much progress has been made since the mid-20th century, especially in the demolition of barriers to foreign trade. Nevertheless, if fostering competition is a serious concern of the political authorities, it is upon exogenous barriers to entry that they should focus, for it is here that they are most likely to do some good and least likely to waste their efforts, let alone do inadvertent damage, by misdirected zeal.”
Politicians fight over policies, but those policies are shaped by broader public philosophies. It is these philosophies Anthony de Jasay ably dissects and ex•plains. His thoughtful writings give an important boost to the cause of liberty.
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute.