It can be disheartening at times to hear people talk about drifting deeper into socialism and the dark night of totalitarianism 58 years ago and think not much has progressed in the opposite direction.
One of the causes of Authoritarianism from Leonard Read's Book Why Not Try Freedom is
FAILURE: Inadequate Development of Self
Every individual is faced with the problem of whom to improve,
himself or others. The aim, it seems to me, should be to
effect one's own unfolding, the upgrading of one's own consciousness
- in short, self-perfection. Those who don't even try or, when
trying, find self-perfection too difficult, usually seek to expend
their energy on others. Their energy has to find some target.
Those who succeed in directing their energy inward - particularly
if they be blessed with great energy, like Goethe, for instance
- become moral leaders. Those who fail to direct their
energy inwardly and let it manifest itself externally - particularly
if they be of great energy, like Napoleon, for instance - become
immoral leaders. Those who refuse to rule themselves are usually
bent on ruling others. Those who can rule themselves usually
have no interest in ruling others.
He goes on to say
I do not know all of the reasons for governmental interventionism or why
so many people are intent upon forcibly imposing their wills on
others or why they attempt to cast others in their own little images.
Further, I am acquainted with no thoughtful person who
claims to know all the forces which make us behave as meanly
toward each other as we do.
Nothing less than one's best, nothing short of
deep, devoted, consecrated effort is adequate. Indeed, the tides
of authoritarianism are running so high that no action can be
significant that does not in some way arise out of an intellectual
and, I might suggest, a spiritual revolution.
Method is of supreme importance if this revolution is to be
accomplished. If everyone's method were in accord with the concept
here advanced, there would be no ideological problem at all.
This is by way of saying that if everyone were attending to the
improvement of his creative self, there couldn't possibly be a meddler
among us; and with no meddlers there could be no authoritarianism,
no socialism, no intervention by government into the
creative and productive activities of the citizens.
The choice in method is between improving self and reforming
others. It is comforting to diagnose the world's ills as due to other
people, and consequently most folks are bent on reforming others.
This is so nearly an instinctive trait that we overcome it only with
difficulty. Few persons appear to have any faith that this will become
a better world if they do nothing about it beyond improving
their own understanding and exposition. Apparently they fail to
realize the impossibility of creatively doing to others that which
they have been unwilling or unable to do to themselves. No man
It can be disheartening at times to hear people talk about drifting deeper into socialism and the dark night of totalitarianism 58 years ago and think not much has progressed in the opposite direction.
One of the causes of Authoritarianism from Leonard Read's Book Why Not Try Freedom is
FAILURE: Inadequate Development of Self
Every individual is faced with the problem of whom to improve,
himself or others. The aim, it seems to me, should be to
effect one's own unfolding, the upgrading of one's own consciousness
- in short, self-perfection. Those who don't even try or, when
trying, find self-perfection too difficult, usually seek to expend
their energy on others. Their energy has to find some target.
Those who succeed in directing their energy inward - particularly
if they be blessed with great energy, like Goethe, for instance
- become moral leaders. Those who fail to direct their
energy inwardly and let it manifest itself externally - particularly
if they be of great energy, like Napoleon, for instance - become
immoral leaders. Those who refuse to rule themselves are usually
bent on ruling others. Those who can rule themselves usually
have no interest in ruling others.
He goes on to say
I do not know all of the reasons for governmental interventionism or why
so many people are intent upon forcibly imposing their wills on
others or why they attempt to cast others in their own little images.
Further, I am acquainted with no thoughtful person who
claims to know all the forces which make us behave as meanly
toward each other as we do.
Nothing less than one's best, nothing short of
deep, devoted, consecrated effort is adequate. Indeed, the tides
of authoritarianism are running so high that no action can be
significant that does not in some way arise out of an intellectual
and, I might suggest, a spiritual revolution.
Method is of supreme importance if this revolution is to be
accomplished. If everyone's method were in accord with the concept
here advanced, there would be no ideological problem at all.
This is by way of saying that if everyone were attending to the
improvement of his creative self, there couldn't possibly be a meddler
among us; and with no meddlers there could be no authoritarianism,
no socialism, no intervention by government into the
creative and productive activities of the citizens.
The choice in method is between improving self and reforming
others. It is comforting to diagnose the world's ills as due to other
people, and consequently most folks are bent on reforming others.
This is so nearly an instinctive trait that we overcome it only with
difficulty. Few persons appear to have any faith that this will become
a better world if they do nothing about it beyond improving
their own understanding and exposition. Apparently they fail to
realize the impossibility of creatively doing to others that which
they have been unwilling or unable to do to themselves. No man
can teach that which he does not know.