More Macaulay

by Don Boudreaux on December 17, 2009

in Complexity and Emergence, Everyday Life, History, The Economy, Trade

Here’s a letter that I sent last week to the Wall Street Journal:

Edward Short offers one of his favorite quotations from Thomas Babington Macaulay (Letters, Dec. 10).  I here offer one of my own; it is the final paragraph of Macaulay’s brilliant and timeless 1830 essay “Southey’s Colloquies on Society“:

“It is not by the intermeddling of Mr. Southey’s idol, the omniscient and omnipotent State, but by the prudence and energy of the people, that England has hitherto been carried forward in civilization; and it is to the same prudence and the same energy that we now look with comfort and good hope.  Our rulers will best promote the improvement of the nation by strictly confining themselves to their own legitimate duties, by leaving capital to find its most lucrative course, commodities their fair price, industry and intelligence their natural reward, idleness and folly their natural punishment, by maintaining peace, by defending property, by diminishing the price of law, and by observing strict economy in every department of the state.  Let the Government do this: the People will assuredly do the rest.”

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux

Comments    Share Share    Print Print    Email Email

  • Barbarossa
    Brilliant quote, Don! If Facebook didn't have a character limit on status updates, surely this quote would be mine every day henceforth!
  • vidyohs
    Amen!

    We are what we are, we accomplish what we do, not because of government but in spite of it.
  • danielkuehn
    I do like his phrase "the price of law". Very Coasian.
  • danielkuehn
    Aw, I liked the last Macaulay thing you posted. Now I see he also engages in accusing his opponents of thinking that the State is omniscient and omnipotent and deserving of worship.

    Granted, I don't know Southey. Maybe he really did have these views. I highly doubt it. How can you admire that sort of hyperbole and reliance on strawmen? Doesn't it signal a major deficiency if Macauly can't engage Southey's argument - and instead has to rely on the crutch of claiming that he thinks the state is omnipotent? It's quiet possible to disagree with someone's conclusions without assuming they worship the state, isn't it???
  • jcdecardenas
    Daniel, it is obvious that Macaulay (and Don by posting his quote) has hit a nerve. Your knee-jerk response says it all.
  • Barbarossa
    "He who proclaims the godliness of the State, and the infallibility of its priests, the bureaucrats, is considered as an impartial student of the social sciences."--Mises
  • danielkuehn
    Huh - so Mises was a drama queen too, huh?

    I'd have to disagree with Mises here. Maybe times were different back then (I'm not sure when he wrote it), but anyone who even insinuates that the state is "godly" would be laughed out of the socia sciences.

    You guys really think the select few that think like Don and Russ are the only ones who don't worship government, don't you? You've honestly convinced yourselves of that, haven't you? That's truly incredible.
  • "It is not true that Lassalle gave Bismarck the idea that revolutionary socialism was a powerful ally in the fight against liberalism. Bismarck had long believed that the lower classes were better royalists than the middle classes…Perhaps his predilection toward universal and equal suffrage was strengthened by his conversations with Lassalle…who spoke the words which characterize best the spirit of the age to come: ‘The state is God’…"

    MIses, Omnipotent Government
  • vidyohs
    It is typical of your immature mindset and impulsive silliness that you would confess to ignorance of Southey and state you highly doubt his views as gleaned from Don's post.

    Can't make yourself more exposed than that.
  • danielkuehn
    Not gleaned from Don's post - gleaned from Macauly's statement, which comes across as excessively melodramatic.

    The shame is he has a good point buried in all that melodrama.
  • vidyohs
    Invitation to the chase around the mulberry bush, no thanks.
  • When people make this accusation, I do not think they're claiming that they worship the state in little candle lit alcoves, etc., but rather that they assume that the state can accomplish any laudable goal through the application of its power, that through this power, good intentions can take the state shortcut to good results in a manner that is otherwise transparent.

    IOW, a thoughtless worship of a manifest god of self evident power.

    Most of what passes for god worship is due to the lack of a physical manifestation of god walking around as god pleases. If god were actually manifest that way, the forms of worship would likely be much different.
  • danielkuehn
    Re: "When people make this accusation, I do not think they're claiming that they worship the state in little candle lit alcoves, etc.,"

    Ya, thanks for that. That's not what I was thinking they were claiming either.
  • The suggestion of state worship is made in response to the apparent assumption that the state is omnipotent, without limit to what it can do if "properly" implemented. The assumption of omnipotence is associated with the assumption of omniscience, for omnipotence could not be had without omniscience.

    Hence, the charge is made of those who answer every perceived social/economic problem with the facility offered by the state.
  • danielkuehn
    Yes - as I said I'm quite aware that that was what was meant by the charge. It's still hyperbolic and attacking a straw man.
  • Sometimes, hyperbole can be useful. The idea is to do a little balloon puncturing. The balloon, of course, being out-sized expectations of the state.

    And to libertarians, most lauded expectations of the state are out-sized.
  • Randy
    Well said, Sam. They may have changed the ceremonies and focal points, but not the behavior, and not the inherent belief in authority.
  • Wow!

    They sure knew how to say it in those days.

    They'd get run out of town for it today.
  • Randy
    "idleness and folly their natural punishment"

    This is an idea that has been mostly lost in the modern world. Progressive propaganda would have us believe that idleness and folly are explainable, forgiveable, even rewardable, but never punishable.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: