There are intelligible historical reasons why our great grandfathers
adopted this view. They found themselves in a world regulated by the
customs and beliefs of a landed society. They could not operate their
factories successfully in such a society, and they rebelled fiercely
against the customs which restricted them. That rebellion [p242]
was rationalized in the philosophy of _laissez-faire_ which meant in
essence that machine industry must not be interfered with by landlords
and peasants who had feudal rights, nor by governments which protected
those rights. On the positive side this rebellion expressed itself in
declarations of the rights of man. These declarations were a denial of
the vested rights of men under the old landed order and an assertion of
the rights of men, particularly the new middle-class men, who proposed
to make the most of the new industrial and mechanical order. By the
rights of men they meant primarily freedom of contract, freedom of
trade, freedom of occupation—those freedoms, that is to say, which
made it possible for the new employer to buy and sell, to hire and fire
without being accountable to anyone.
The prophet of this new dispensation was Adam Smith. In the _Wealth of
Nations_ he wrote that
All systems either of preference or of restraint ... being thus
completely taken away, the obvious and simple system of natural
liberty establishes itself of its own accord. Every man, as long as
he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to
pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry
and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order
of men.
The employing class in the early days of capitalism honestly believed,
and indeed its less enlightened members still believe to this very
day, that somehow the general welfare will be served by trusting
naively to the acquisitive instincts of the employing capitalist. Thus
at the outset the machine technology was applied under the direction
of men who scorned as sentimental, when they [p243] did not regard
as subversive, that disinterestedness which alone makes possible the
machine technology itself. They did not understand science. They merely
exploited certain of the inventions which scientists produced. What
they believed, insofar as they had any philosophy, was that there
exists a preestablished harmony in the universe—an “obvious and
simple system of natural liberty,” in Adam Smith’s language, “which
establishes itself of its own accord”—by which if each man naively
pursued his primitive impulse to have and to hold in competition with
other men, peace, prosperity, and happiness would ensue.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account