How Should We Treat Our
Neighbor ? Episode 3 : Understanding Freedom and Liberty, part B
In this episode, I will continue the discussion of freedom and liberty that I began in episode two. You may recall that I was considering objections which claim that we are not free or cannot be free. Here are more objections and my responses to them –
"A hungry man is not a free man"
This objection is actually a quote from the late Adlai E. Stevenson II, a former governor of Illinois. He said this in 1952, while running for the office of President of the United States. This sentence was part of a campaign speech delivered to an audience of agricultural workers and their families in Kasson, Minnesota. Here is a longer quote from that speech to put those eight words in their original context –
"Our struggle to strengthen the free world against communism demands the continued and growing productivity of the American farm. A hungry man is not a free man. In the long run, peace will be won in the turnrows, not on the battlefields."
[ Note 1 ]
It's not clear to me what Stevenson meant with the reference to the "hungry man". Since this speech was directed primarily to farmers, I doubt he was suggesting that people in the US were suffering from hunger. That might imply that farmers were failing to produce adequate food for the nation. Rather, the reference to the "hungry man" and the phrase "peace will be won in the turnrows" may have been intended to emphasize the importance of the farmers in what he called "our struggle to strengthen the free world ". People like to be praised for making a significant positive contribution to society and a political candidate will be happy to offer such praise in the hopes of garnering more votes.
At the time of this speech, the US was in the midst of a 44-year period of political tension with the communist countries. This period became known as the "Cold War" [ Note 2 ]. So, Stevenson's reference to communism may have been intended to remind his audience of the Cold War as well as a major famine in the Soviet Union from 1946 to 1947 that killed as many as two million people [ Note 3 ]. Stevenson may have been suggesting that the freemen of the US were not hungry, thanks to the farmers in his audience, while the people of the Soviet Union were hungry because they were not free. That seems to be a plausible interpretation of the sentence in the context of its usage.
Now let's consider the eight-word sentence apart from its historical context. The fact that a man is hungry does not tell us why he is hungry. Behind every hungry man is a chain of causality leading to that condition. To make a proper evaluation, we must understand the causes that led to the man being hungry.
For example, if the man were a farmer and his hunger was due to unforeseeable natural causes beyond his control, such as a flood, drought, or plant-killing pests, and he was unable to obtain crop insurance, then he would be worthy of charity. But if the man were hungry because he lost his job due to alcohol or drug abuse, then he would not be a case for charity. Allowing people to be free requires that they accept responsibility for their choices in life. Sheltering a person from the consequences of bad choices will only encourage him to persist in making bad choices.
In episode two, I mentioned government policies that prevent an individual from starting a business or getting a job, such as occupational licenses, certificates of need, scope-of-practice restraints, or minimum-wage laws. As I noted in that episode, these are cases where government violates individual rights. Such a situation helps to illustrate why the hungry man needs freedom. He needs to be free of interference from his neighbors or his government, so that he may pursue the activities he deems appropriate to produce the wealth he needs to survive and thrive. A person suffering in this situation would also be worthy of charity, but the long-term solution is to eliminate the violation of rights by the government.
“When
I think about being free, I’m hoping to be free from all worries. I don’t want to worry about how to obtain
food, shelter, health care, happiness or anything that I desire”
The food, shelter and health care that you desire are the products of the minds and labor of people. The farmer rightfully expects to be compensated for the planning, time and effort that she expended to produce the food you desire. Similarly, the builder expects compensation for the house that he built which you want to inhabit. In health care, it is not reasonable to expect that highly-trained doctors will provide their services without any recompense.
You may be able to persuade your parents, spouse, children or friends to pay for those things, but whoever is paying had to produce the wealth that was exchanged for the things you desire. Charitable organizations may be able to fulfill some of your desires, but they are reliant on the voluntary contributions of others who possess excess wealth to give away. That is, those people who engaged in the thought and labor required to produce more wealth than they needed for themselves.
In episode two, I responded to the fellow who objected to being “forced to get a job”. As I mentioned there, government welfare programs can also provide you with things you desire. Such programs rely on the coercive power of government to take money from your neighbors to fulfill your desires. For this reason, welfare programs are unjust, immoral and irrational.
What you are saying is that you want to be free from the responsibility to earn the things you desire. You are hoping to fulfill your desires by preying on others. You cannot achieve self-esteem or happiness by living parasitically on your family, friends or neighbors, even if you collaborate with the government to do it.
“You
libertarians talk about freedom and liberty, but all you really want is to get
drunk, take drugs and have sex. You keep
adding more freedoms without limit until society ends up in chaos.”
We libertarians take seriously the idea that individual liberty also requires individual responsibility. Society won’t end up in chaos if individual rights are strictly enforced and violations are punished via a regime of individual responsibility. Rights and responsibility are conjoined principles that limit individual freedom.
Those individuals who choose to consume alcohol or drugs are responsible for consequences of their choices. If they suffer poor health, injury, addiction or death, they have only themselves to blame. They should not expect the government to provide taxpayer-funded treatment for their condition. They should not be allowed to sue a doctor, pharmacist or drug manufacturer if they become addicted to some drug. The individual makes the choice to consume the drug and cannot blame others for the results. Only if there were some harm caused by incompetence, malfeasance or fraud on the part of the manufacturer, doctor or pharmacist would the drug user be allowed to sue.
Also, individuals who consume intoxicating substances and then engage in potentially harmful activities, such as driving a motor vehicle, should be punished for doing so.
As for sex, libertarians expect that a man who impregnates a woman be responsible for supporting the child that is born. If necessary, it is proper for the government to compel the man to support his child.
In my answer to the previous objection, I was clear that an individual bears the responsibility to produce the wealth needed to sustain her own life. She should not have a freedom to loot her neighbors, either without or without assistance from government. I made the same point in episode two.
We libertarians support free speech, but also recognize that there should be penalties for fraud, defamation, slander or libel.
Libertarians support the right to own a gun for purposes of self-defense, hunting or target shooting. But we recognize that the owner must securely store the gun so that it cannot be accessed by children or criminals. If the gun is used to initiate harm of others, that is, not in self-defense, the user must be punished for such consequences.
All of these examples illustrate the libertarian focus on individual rights and responsibilities as constraints on libertine behavior.
“Your description of freedom is
not consistent with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s four freedoms”
This objection refers to President Roosevelt’s State of the Union Address to Congress in January of 1941. Towards the end of that speech, he spoke of four freedoms. Here is the relevant portion of the speech –
“In
the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world
founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The
first is freedom of speech and expression – everywhere in the world.
The
second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way – everywhere in
the world.
The
third is freedom from want – which, translated into world terms, means economic
understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for
its inhabitants – everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear – which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor – anywhere in the world.”
[ Note 4 ]
There is no disagreement with Roosevelt regarding freedom of speech and expression, which libertarians see as extremely important. In order to create a society where coercion is minimized, we must be free to persuade our neighbors. If freedom of speech is curtailed, the basic tool of persuasion is unavailable and we are only left with coercion as a tool. Coercion cannot change the thoughts of our neighbors, but can change their behavior if it is severe enough. Persuasion can change our neighbor’s thoughts and they will consensually change their own behavior. That is the moral means of creating social harmony.
Regarding freedom to worship God, libertarians prefer to talk about freedom of thought. Some religions have no concept of God and it is not the role of government to dictate which religion an individual should choose. Some people are not religious at all, and government has no business dictating that its citizens must practice a religion. The individual should be free to worship one God or many gods, or reject the idea of God entirely.
Roosevelt’s phrase “freedom from want” is ambiguous, in spite of his passing references to economy and health. As I have discussed previously, each individual should bear the responsibility for producing the wealth that is needed to sustain his own life. And each individual should take responsibility for his own health by eating and exercising properly. There is no need for coercion in these areas of life, and thus, no government interference is needed. If Roosevelt intended to promote economic freedom to produce wealth and personal freedom to pursue a healthy lifestyle, then I would agree.
Next, he again uses an unclear phrase – “freedom from fear”. He talked about a world-wide reduction of armaments in January of 1941, after World War Two had begun in 1939. But, after the attack on Pearl Harbor in December of 1941, his administration oversaw a massive buildup of armaments as the United States was drawn into that war. Since that time, the US has always faced military threats from other nations. Absent our well-armed military forces, the US would probably be invaded and subjugated by some hostile foreign power. At this time, there appears to be no hope for Roosevelt’s proposed world-wide reduction of armaments.
Finally, Roosevelt talked about implementing his four freedoms “everywhere in the world”. Libertarians focus on expanding freedom in their own community. Other towns, states or nations may then look to our community as an example to emulate. Libertarians do not want to go about the world imposing their ideas by force on other societies. Libertarians are not central planners trying to re-organize the world according to their designs.
“I am not free to buy the
things I want. I can’t bargain for a
lower price. I just have to accept
whatever the seller wants to charge me”
Economic transactions require a willing seller and buyer to reach agreement on the trade. Both parties must consent before the exchange can occur. Sometimes you can bargain, such as when buying a house or an automobile. In other cases, you may have to accept a fixed price that the seller requires for the property he is offering. Both buyer and seller are free to walk away from the deal if they cannot agree on the terms of sale.
Consider your purchases in a grocery store. You may think that one brand of potato chips is too expensive, but you are free to choose a different brand. You are free to look for your preferred brand in a different store where you may find lower prices. You are also free to substitute a different cheaper product. For example, pretzels may be cheaper than the potato chips you think are too expensive.
Some types of consumer goods are available at lower prices in discount stores, pawn shops, consignment stores, Goodwill stores or the Salvation Army. Also, the Internet offers websites like eBay that may be able to provide what you want at a price you consider acceptable.
In a free market, sellers seek ways to lower costs so they can offer lower prices in order to attract more customers. If a seller does attract more customers, then the profit margin per unit can also be lowered. Looking at the history of consumer products, we see examples where a new product or service enters the market at a high price and is considered a luxury. Over time, the price is reduced and the product or service becomes much more affordable. As examples, we’ve seen that happen with videocassette players, CD players, personal computers, mobile telephone service, or manicure and pedicure services.
Unfortunately, government intrudes in the free market and there are cases where vendors are prosecuted for selling a product or service at a price that the bureaucrats decided is “too low”. In other words, our tax dollars are used to pay government lawyers to sue a company with the intent of forcing it to raise the price that consumers must pay for its product. I plan to cover this abuse of government’s power in a future episode of this podcast.
“I’m not talking about potato
chips or CD players ! I’m talking about
things I really need ! Like an
affordable apartment and my medications !”
Housing and medicine are examples where government intervention causes prices to be higher than they would in a free market.
Regarding an affordable apartment –
Existing residents in the vicinity of a proposed development are often opposed to anything they think might “change the character of their neighborhood”. This gives rise to the often-heard phrase “not in my backyard”, or NIMBY. Local politicians hoping to attain, or retain a position of power have an incentive to garner more votes by helping existing residents prevent any new development. The people who would live in the new housing generally don’t have a vote to offer in that district.
For example, zoning restrictions may require that only single-family detached dwellings be built on relatively large lots. This prevents the construction of multi-family or multi-tenant buildings and also helps to exclude lower-income residents who cannot afford a house on a big lot. Other restrictions may prevent the building of houses that are deemed “too small”.
Urban growth boundaries are used to restrict development within a constrained geographical area, which causes land prices to rise, making housing more expensive. A potential buyer or renter faces a choice of expensive housing inside the boundary or less expensive housing outside the boundary that is farther from their place of work and city amenities.
The local government may designate an existing structure as a “historical landmark” to prevent the old building from being torn down to make way for new apartments or condominiums. Or, the local government may require environmental impact studies and shadow studies that raise the cost of building and will raise the price of the new structure, if it is approved. Such requirements may dissuade the developer from even attempting to build. If the developer is persistent, local officials may require additional studies to further delay the project and raise the cost to the developer.
The national and state governments offer tax credits to developers as incentives to build housing for low-income renters. However, the net effect of these programs is to raise the cost of the housing that is built because of complex regulations to be followed and the hiring of more bureaucrats for administration. [ Note 5 ]
Where apartments already exist, government may pass coercive rent control laws to please renters. But such laws may cause the property owner to lose money on rental units, which motivates the owner to remove the unit from the rental market. An apartment building may even be abandoned if rent control guarantees that the owner will lose money on most or all units. Or, the owner may convert the building to condominiums or use the property for a parking garage.
Regarding medications –
Development of drugs is very expensive. Pharmaceutical companies must test many different potential drugs before they find one that is worth submitting to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process. The testing required by the FDA is also time consuming and very expensive. Estimates for the average cost to develop a drug range from 1.3 billion to 2.8 billion dollars [ Note 6 ]. At the end of the process, the drug may not be approved. Ultimately, those costs have to be recouped from sales of drugs that are approved.
The FDA does not allow medications to be sold in the US even though they have been approved and used successfully in other countries. The manufacturer would be required to undergo the expense of clinical trials in the US, even though successful trials have already been performed in another country.
Also, some medications that are available over-the-counter in other countries require a prescription in the US. At a minimum, the patient will require at least one visit to a doctor to obtain a prescription. This results in a cost to the patient in time and money. Some doctors require an office visit just to renew an existing prescription which further raises the cost to the patient. This arrangement benefits the doctor, but is bad for the patient.
In future episodes of this podcast, I plan to cover in greater detail these and other cases of government interference in free markets.
This episode has reached a reasonable length. The discussion of liberty will continue in the next episode.
I leave you with this quote by John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, taken from a series of essays called Cato’s Letters that was published in the London Journal in the early 1720s –
"By liberty, I understand the power which every man
has over his own actions, and his right to enjoy the fruits of his labour, art,
and Industry, as far as by it he hurts not the society, or any members of it,
by taking from any member, or by hindering him from enjoying what he himself
enjoys”
[ Note 7 ]
A transcript of this episode is available on the “Podcasts” tab of the website “hswton.com”. The link may be found by expanding the plus sign next to the episode number and title. The transcript also contains supporting notes and links for quotes, definitions and other content contained in this episode.
Thank you for listening. I hope you will continue with the next episode of "How Should We Treat Our Neighbor ?".
Good day.
|
Note |
1 |
|
Source |
Internet Archive |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Author |
Adlai E. Stevenson II |
|
Author URL |
|
|
Quote |
"Our struggle to strengthen the free world against communism …" |
|
Quote URL |
|
|
Speech starting URL |
|
|
Date updated |
2011 December 16 |
|
Comment |
The web article on Archive.org contains the complete contents of the book titled “Speeches” by Adlai E. Stevenson II. The book was published by Random House in 1952. |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
2 |
|
Source |
Wikipedia |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Authors |
Various |
|
Authors' URL |
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cold_War&action=history |
|
Content title |
Cold War |
|
Content URL |
|
|
Date updated |
2024 March 05 |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
3 |
|
Source |
Wikipedia |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Authors |
Various |
|
Authors' URL |
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%931947&action=history |
|
Content title |
Soviet famine of 1946–1947 |
|
Content URL |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%931947 |
|
Date updated |
2024 March 07 |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
4 |
|
Source |
National Archives |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Author |
Franklin D. Roosevelt |
|
Author URL |
|
|
Quote |
“In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms …” |
|
Quote URL |
|
|
Entire speech URL |
|
|
Date last reviewed |
2022 February 08 |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
5 |
|
Source |
Cato Institute |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Author |
Chris Edwards |
|
Author’s URL |
|
|
Content title |
Affordable Housing: Tax Credits vs Deregulation |
|
Content URL |
https://www.cato.org/blog/affordable-housing-tax-credits-vs-deregulation |
|
Date updated |
2024 February 26 |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
6 |
|
Source |
Wikipedia |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Authors |
Various |
|
Authors' URL |
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cost_of_drug_development&action=history |
|
Content title |
Cost of drug development |
|
Content URL |
|
|
Date updated |
2024 February 23 |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
|
Note |
7 |
|
Source |
Wikisource |
|
Source URL |
|
|
Author 1 |
John Trenchard |
|
Author 1 URL |
|
|
Author 2 |
Thomas Gordon |
|
Author 2 URL |
|
|
Quote |
"By liberty, I understand
the power which every man has over his own actions …” |
|
Quote URL |
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cato%27s_Letters/Letter_62#:~:text=By%20liberty%2C |
|
Quote source |
Cato’s Letters |
|
Quote Source URL |
|
|
Comment |
The “Quote Source URL” will take you to a list of all 144 letters. The text of each letter is available by clicking the associated URL in the list. The selected quote comes from Letter 62. |
|
Date URLs accessed |
2024 March 07 |
Transcript and notes last updated – 2024 March 07
Copyright 2024, by James W. Troy. All rights reserved.