A Tribute to Mises on the 100th Anniversary of his Birth by George Reisman
A Tribute to Mises on the 100th Anniversary of his Birth
by George Reisman
September 29, 1981, is the one-hundredth anniversary of the birth of Ludwig von
Mises, economist and social philosopher, who passed away in 1973. Von Mises was my
teacher and mentor and the source or inspiration for most of what I know and consider to
be important and worthwhile in these fields of what enables me to understand the events
shaping the world in which we live. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to
him, because I believe that he deserves to occupy a major place in the intellectual
history of the twentieth century.
Von Mises is important because his teachings are necessary to the preservation of
material civilization. As he showed, the base of material civilization is the division of
labor. Without the higher productivity of labor made possible by the division of labor,
the great majority of mankind would simply die of starvation. The existence and
successful functioning of the division of labor, however, vitally depends on the
institutions of a capitalist society that is, on limited government and economic freedom,
private ownership of land and all other property, exchange and money, saving and
investment, economic inequality and economic competition, and the profit motive
institutions everywhere under attack for several generations.
When von Mises appeared on the scene, Marxism and the other socialist sects enjoyed a
virtual intellectual monopoly. Major flaws and inconsistencies in the writings of Smith
and Ricardo and their followers enabled the socialists to claim classical economics as
their actual ally. The writings of Jevons and the earlier Austrian economists Menger and
Böhm-Bawerk were insufficiently comprehensive to provide an effective
counter to the socialists. Bastiat had tried to provide one, but died too soon, and
probably lacked the necessary theoretical depth in any case.
Thus, when von Mises appeared, there was virtually no systematic intellectual
opposition to socialism or defense of capitalism. Quite literally, the intellectual
ramparts of civilization were undefended. What von Mises undertook, and which summarizes
the essence of his greatness, was to build an intellectual defense of capitalism and thus
of civilization.
The leading argument of the socialists was that the institutions of capitalism served
the interests merely of a handful of rugged exploiters and monopolists and operated
against the interests of the great majority of mankind, which socialism would serve.
While the only answer others could give was to devise plans to take away somewhat less of
the capitalists' wealth than the socialists were demanding, or to urge that property
rights nevertheless be respected despite their incompatibility with most people's
well-being, von Mises challenged everyone's basic assumption. He showed that capitalism
operates to the material self-interests of all, including the non-capitalists the
so-called proletarians. In a capitalist society, von Mises showed, privately owned means
of production serve the market. The physical beneficiaries of the factories and mills are
all who buy their products. And, together with the incentive of profit and loss and the
freedom of competition that it implies, the existence of private ownership ensures an
ever-growing supply of products for all.
Thus, von Mises showed to be absolute nonsense such clichés as poverty causes
communism. Not poverty, but poverty plus the mistaken belief that communism is the cure
for poverty, causes communism. If the misguided revolutionaries of the backward countries
and of impoverished slums understood economics, any desire they might have to fight
poverty would make them advocates of capitalism.
Socialism, von Mises showed, in his greatest original contribution to economic
thought, not only abolishes the incentive of profit and loss and the freedom of
competition along with private ownership of the means of production, but makes economic
calculation, economic coordination, and economic planning impossible, and therefore
results in chaos. For socialism means the abolition of the price system and the
intellectual division of labor; it means the concentration and centralization of all
decision-making in the hands of one agency: the Central Planning Board or the Supreme
Dictator.
Yet the planning of an economic system is beyond the power of any one consciousness:
the number, variety and locations of the different factors of production, the various
technological possibilities that are open to them, and the different possible
permutations and combinations of what might be produced from them, are far beyond the
power even of the greatest genius to keep in mind. Economic planning, von Mises showed,
requires the cooperation of all who participate in the economic system. It can exist only
under capitalism, where, every day, businessmen plan on the basis of calculations of
profit and loss; workers, on the basis of wages; and consumers, on the basis of the
prices of consumers' goods.
Von Mises's contributions to the debate between capitalism and socialism the leading
issue of modern times are overwhelming. Before he wrote, people did not realize that
capitalism has economic planning. They uncritically accepted the Marxian dogma that
capitalism is an anarchy of production and that socialism represents rational economic
planning. People were (and most still are) in the position of Moliere's M. Jourdan, who
never realized that what he was speaking all his life was prose. For, living in a
capitalist society, people are literally surrounded by economic planning, and yet do not
realize that it exists. Every day, there are countless businessmen who are planning to
expand or contract their firms, who are planning to introduce new products or discontinue
old ones, planning to open new branches or close down existing ones, planning to change
their methods of production or continue with their present methods, planning to hire
additional workers or let some of their present ones go. And every day, there are
countless workers planning to improve their skills, change their occupations or places of
work, or to continue with things as they are; and consumers, planning to buy homes, cars,
stereos, steak or hamburger, and how to use the goods they already have for example, to
drive to work or to take the train, instead.
Yet people deny the name planning to all this activity and reserve it for the feeble
efforts of a handful of government officials, who, having prohibited the planning of
everyone else, presume to substitute their knowledge and intelligence for the knowledge
and intelligence of tens of millions. Von Mises identified the existence of planning
under capitalism, the fact that it is based on prices ( economic calculations ), and the
fact that the prices serve to coordinate and harmonize the activities of all the millions
of separate, independent planners.
He showed that each individual, in being concerned with earning a revenue or income
and with limiting his expenses, is led to adjust his particular plans to the plans of all
others. For example, the worker who decides to become an accountant rather than an
artist, because he values the higher income to be made as an accountant, changes his
career plan in response to the plans of others to purchase accounting services rather
than paintings. The individual who decides that a house in a particular neighborhood is
too expensive and who therefore gives up his plan to live in that neighborhood, is
similarly engaged in a process of adjusting his plans to the plans of others; because
what makes the house too expensive is the plans of others to buy it who are able and
willing to pay more. And, above all, von Mises showed, every business, in seeking to make
profits and avoid losses, is led to plan its activities in a way that not only serves the
plans of its own customers, but takes into account the plans of all other users of the
same factors of production throughout the economic system.
Thus, von Mises demonstrated that capitalism is an economic system rationally planned
by the combined, self-interested efforts of all who participate in it. The failure of
socialism, he showed, results from the fact that it represents not economic planning, but
the destruction of economic planning, which exists only under capitalism and the price
system.
Von Mises was not primarily anti-socialist. He was pro-capitalist. His opposition to
socialism, and to all forms of government intervention, stemmed from his support for
capitalism and from his underlying love of individual freedom and conviction that the
self-interests of free men are harmonious indeed, that one man's gain under capitalism is
not only not another's loss, but is actually others' gain. Von Mises was a consistent
champion of the self-made man, of the intellectual and business pioneer, whose activities
are the source of progress for all mankind and who, he showed, can flourish only under
capitalism.
Von Mises demonstrated that competition under capitalism is of an entirely different
character than competition in the animal kingdom. It is not a competition for scarce,
nature-given means of subsistence, but a competition in the positive creation of new and
additional wealth, from which all gain. For example, the effect of the competition
between farmers using horses and those using tractors was not that the former group died
of starvation, but that everyone had more food and the income available to purchase
additional quantities of other goods as well. This was true even of the farmers who lost
the competition, as soon as they relocated in other areas of the economic system, which
were enabled to expand precisely by virtue of the improvements in agriculture. Similarly,
the effect of the automobile's supplanting the horse and buggy was to benefit even the
former horse breeders and blacksmiths, once they made the necessary relocations.
In a major elaboration of Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage, von Mises showed
that there is room for all in the competition of capitalism, even those of the most
modest abilities. Such people need only concentrate on the areas in which their relative
productive inferiority is least. For example, an individual capable of being no more than
a janitor does not have to fear the competition of the rest of society, almost all of
whose members could be better janitors than he, if that is what they chose to be. Because
however much better janitors other people might make, their advantage in other lines is
even greater. And so long as the person of limited ability is willing to work for less as
a janitor than other people can earn in other lines, he has nothing to worry about from
their competition. He, in fact, outcompetes them for the job of janitor by being willing
to accept a lower income than they. Von Mises showed that a harmony of interests prevails
in this case, too. For the existence of the janitor enables more talented people to
devote their time to more demanding tasks, while their existence enables him to obtain
goods and services that would otherwise be altogether impossible for him to obtain.
On the basis of such facts, von Mises argued against the possibility of inherent
conflicts of interest among races and nations, as well as among individuals. For even if
some races or nations were superior (or inferior) to others in every aspect of productive
ability, mutual cooperation in the division of labor would still be advantageous to all.
Thus, he showed that all doctrines alleging inherent conflicts rest on an ignorance of
economics.
He argued with unanswerable logic that the economic causes of war are the result of
government interference, in the form of trade and migration barriers, and that such
interference restricting foreign economic relations is the product of other government
interference, restricting domestic economic activity. For example, tariffs become
necessary as a means of preventing unemployment only because of the existence of minimum
wage laws and pro-union legislation, which prevent the domestic labor force from meeting
foreign competition by means of the acceptance of lower wages when necessary. He showed
that the foundation of world peace is a policy of laissez-faire both domestically and
internationally.
In answer to the vicious and widely believed accusation of the Marxists that Nazism
was an expression of capitalism, he showed, in addition to all the above, that Nazism was
actually a form of socialism. Any system characterized by price and wage controls, and
thus by shortages and government controls over production and distribution, as was
Nazism, is a system in which the government is the de facto owner of the means of
production. Because, in such circumstances, the government decides not only the prices
and wages charged and paid, but also what is to be produced, in what quantities, by what
methods, and where it is to be sent. These are all the fundamental prerogatives of
ownership. This identification of socialism on the German pattern, as he called it, is of
immense value in understanding the nature of present demands for price controls.
Von Mises showed that all of the accusations made against capitalism were either
altogether unfounded or should be directed against government intervention, which
destroys the workings of capitalism. He was among the first to point out that the poverty
of the early years of the Industrial Revolution was the heritage of all previous history
that it existed because the productivity of labor was still pitifully low; because
scientists, inventors, businessmen, savers and investors could only step by step create
the advances and accumulate the capital necessary to raise it. He showed that all the
policies of so-called labor and social legislation were actually contrary to the
interests of the masses of workers they were designed to help that their effect was to
cause unemployment, retard capital accumulation, and thus hold down the productivity of
labor and the standard of living of all. In a major original contribution to economic
thought, he showed that depressions were the result of government-sponsored policies of
credit expansion designed to lower the market rate of interest. Such policies, he showed,
created large-scale malinvestments, which deprived the economic system of liquid capital
and brought on credit contractions and thus depressions. Von Mises was a leading
supporter of the gold standard and of laissez-faire in banking, which, he believed, would
virtually achieve a 100% reserve gold standard and thus make impossible both inflation
and deflation.
What I have written of von Mises provides only the barest indication of the
intellectual content that is to be found in his writings. He authored over a dozen
volumes. And I venture to say that I cannot recall reading a single paragraph in any of
them that did not contain one or more profound thoughts or observations. Even on the
occasions when I found it necessary to disagree with him (for example, on his view that
monopoly can exist under capitalism, his advocacy of the military draft, and certain
aspects of his views on epistemology, the nature of value judgments, and the proper
starting point for economics), I always found what he had to say to be extremely valuable
and a powerful stimulus to my own thinking. I do not believe that anyone can claim to be
really educated who has not absorbed a substantial measure of the immense wisdom present
in his works.
Von Mises's two most important books are Human Action and Socialism, which best
represents the breadth and depth of his thought. These are not for beginners, however.
They should be preceded by some of von Mises's popular writings, such as Bureaucracy and
Planning For Freedom.
The Theory of Money and Credit, Theory and History, Epistemological Problems of
Economics, and The Ultimate Foundations of Economic Science are more specialized works
that should probably be read only after Human Action. Von Mises's other popular writings
in English include Omnipotent Government, The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality, Liberalism,
Critique of Interventionism, Economic Policy, and The Historical Setting of the Austrian
School of Economics. For anyone seriously interested in economics, social philosophy, or
modern history, the entire list should be considered required reading. [All titles of von
Mises currently in print can be ordered on this web site.]
Von Mises must be judged not only as a remarkably brilliant thinker but also as a
remarkably courageous human being. He held the truth of his convictions above all else
and was prepared to stand alone in their defense. He cared nothing for personal fame,
position, or financial gain, if it meant having to purchase them at he sacrifice of
principle. In his lifetime, he was shunned and ignored by the intellectual establishment,
because the truth of his views and the sincerity and power with which he advanced them
shattered the tissues of fallacies and lies on which most intellectuals then built, and
even now continue to build, their professional careers.
It was my great privilege to have known von Mises personally over a period of twenty
years. I met him for the first time when I was sixteen years old. Because he recognized
the seriousness of my interest in economics, he invited me to attend his graduate seminar
at New York University, which I did almost every week thereafter for the next seven
years, stopping only when the start of my own teaching career made it no longer possible
for me to continue in regular attendance.
His seminar, like his writings, was characterized by the highest level of scholarship
and erudition, and always by the most profound respect for ideas. Von Mises was never
concerned with the personal motivation or character of an author, but only with the
question of whether the man's ideas were true or false. In the same way, his personal
manner was at all times highly respectful, reserved, and a source of friendly
encouragement. He constantly strove to bring out the best in his students. This, combined
with his stress on the importance of knowing foreign languages, led in my own case to
using some of my time in college to learn German and then to undertaking the translation
of his Epistemological Problems of Economics something that has always been one of my
proudest accomplishments.
Today, von Mises's ideas at long last appear to be gaining in influence. His teachings
about the nature of socialism have been confirmed in the first-hand observations of
honest news reporters with extensive experience in Soviet Russia, such as Robert Kaiser,
Hedrick Smith, John Dornberg, and Henry Kamm. They are being confirmed at this very
moment by the actions of millions of angry workers in Poland.
Some of von Mises's ideas are being propounded by the Nobel prizewinners F.A. Hayek
(himself a former student of von Mises) and Milton Friedman. They exert a major influence
on the writings of Henry Hazlitt and the staff of the Foundation for Economic Education,
as well as such prominent former students as Hans Sennholz. Von Mises's monetary theories
permeate the pages of recent best-selling books on personal investments, such as those by
Harry Browne and Jerome Smith. And last, but certainly not least, they appear to be
exerting an important influence on the present President of the United States, who has
acknowledged reading Human Action and has expressed his admiration for it.
Von Mises's books deserve to be required reading in every college and university
curriculum not just in departments of economics, but also in departments of philosophy,
history, government, sociology, law, business, journalism, education, and the humanities.
He himself should be awarded an immediate posthumous Nobel Prize indeed, more than one.
He deserves to receive every token of recognition and memorial that our society can
bestow. For as much as anyone in history, he labored to preserve it. If he is widely
enough read, his labors may actually succeed in helping to save it.
---------------
George Reisman,
Ph.D., is the author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics(Ottawa, Illinois: Jameson Books,
1996) and is the translator of Ludwig von Mises's Epistemological Problems of
Economics(New York: D. Van Nostrand & Co., 1960). His web site
iswww.capitalism.net. You may contact Dr. Reisman
at MAIL. See his
Mises.org Archive.