Four Steps to Freedom

THE POLITICAL revolutions in Eastern Europe have raised in an acute form questions about the relation among four different sorts of freedom (civil, personal, economic, and political) that have troubled economists, scientists, and philosophers for centuries.

It is a historical fact that 1) free and prosperous societies have been rare in world history, very much the exception; 2) all such exceptional societies have organized the bulk of their economic activities through free private markets—competitive private capitalism; 3) the converse is not true: not all societies that have organized the bulk of their activities through free private markets have enjoyed civil, personal, and political freedom (Classical Greece and the pre—Civil War U.S. with their slaves are ancient examples; Portugal under Salazar and Chile under Pinochet are more recent examples); 4) political freedom is neither necessary nor sufficient for economic, civil, and personal freedom (re necessary, Hong Kong has been one of the freest societies in the world in these respects, yet it has had no political freedom: it has been ruled by Britain; re sufficient, India has had a large measure of political freedom, yet it has little economic freedom and only limited civil and personal freedom); 5) political freedom has often led to the limitation and destruction of economic and civil freedom and to its own demise (the former British colonies “liberated” after World War II are striking examples).

THE POLITICAL revolutions in Eastern Europe have raised in an acute form questions about the relation among four different sorts of freedom (civil, personal, economic, and political) that have troubled economists, scientists, and philosophers for centuries.

It is a historical fact that 1) free and prosperous societies have been rare in world history, very much the exception; 2) all such exceptional societies have organized the bulk of their economic activities through free private markets—competitive private capitalism; 3) the converse is not true: not all societies that have organized the bulk of their activities through free private markets have enjoyed civil, personal, and political freedom (Classical Greece and the pre—Civil War U.S. with their slaves are ancient examples; Portugal under Salazar and Chile under Pinochet are more recent examples); 4) political freedom is neither necessary nor sufficient for economic, civil, and personal freedom (re necessary, Hong Kong has been one of the freest societies in the world in these respects, yet it has had no political freedom: it has been ruled by Britain; re sufficient, India has had a large measure of political freedom, yet it has little economic freedom and only limited civil and personal freedom); 5) political freedom has often led to the limitation and destruction of economic and civil freedom and to its own demise (the former British colonies “liberated” after World War II are striking examples).