The Culture of Charity: Mark Fiorenzo

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 Religion Inside this issue

Couretas Solzhenitsyn and Russia's Golgotha • Sirico Ideology vs. Reality • Phelps The Leaky Bucket • In the Liberal Tradition Liberty & Walter Eucken • Sirico What Is Capitalism?

An Interview with Arthur C. BrooksPhoto :

A Journal of Religion, Economics, and Culture Editor’s Note

thought Christianity and patriotism were was passionately committed to economic enemies of freedom. For those of us who freedom as an essential part of human believe in both religion and liberty, Sol- liberty itself. Indeed, as is not often re- zhenitsyn is a friend. marked, Friedman went so far as to argue that he would favor free markets and I would like to use this space to note the economic liberty even if those arrange- death late last year of Milton Friedman. ments were less economically efficient. Professor Friedman’s rather well-known His argument was that such liberties cor- discomfort with religion renders him a responded to human nature and there- rather unsuitable candidate for a profile in fore were appropriate for societies in pages dedicated to the intersection of reli- In this issue of Religion & Liberty we meet a which men and women were to flourish. gion and liberty, but he remains an im- giant of the Twentieth century: Alexander The argument for liberty is one princi- portant figure. Indeed, that is why he was Solzhenitsyn of Russia. He has been both pally concerned with the nature of the the chosen interview subject sixteen years widely celebrated and widely reviled. His human person and his good. And be- ago in only the second issue of Religion & courage is admirable—risking his life and cause it begins with who the human Liberty (Michael Novak was the first). You suffering the torment of the Soviet gulag. person is, it is the happy result that can read the 1991 interview at www. Now in his old age, his place is secure as a human liberty also makes for good poli- acton.org and see how reluctant he was hero in the history of liberty. tics and efficient economics. to entertain a positive role for religion. For those unfamiliar with the great Rus- One other note: I hope our feature inter- Yet it is important that Friedman be re- sian, Acton’s own John Couretas pro- view with Arthur C. Brooks will encour- membered as an advocate for the per- vides an excellent introduction to Sol- age many readers to look at his important sonal liberty we argue for at Acton, and zhenitsyn in his review essay. As Coure- book, Who Really Cares—a study of chari- not merely economic efficiency. To be tas notes, because Solzhenitsyn was at table giving. Longtime readers of Religion sure, he believed that economic liberty the same time a serious Christian, de- & Liberty will not be surprised by his find- produced greater economic wealth and voted patriot, and defender of liberty, he ings, but they are remarkable nonethe- better opportunities for the poor. Yet he was not well received by those who less and deserve wide attention.

Editorial Board Contents

Publisher: Rev. Robert A. Sirico The Culture of Charity: Arthur C. Brooks ...... 3 Executive Editor: John Couretas Solzhenitsyn and Russia’s Golgotha: John Couretas .. 4 Editor: Rev. Raymond J. de Souza Acton FAQ ...... 7 Managing Editor: David Michael Phelps Ideology vs. Reality: Rev. Robert A. Sirico ...... 8 Graphics Editor: Peter Ho Double-Edged Sword ...... 9 The Leaky Bucket: David Michael Phelps ...... 10 The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty promotes a free society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles. In the Liberal Tradition: Walter Eucken ...... 14 Letters and requests should be directed to: Religion & Liberty; Acton Institute; Column: Rev. Robert A. Sirico ...... 15 161 Ottawa Ave., NW, Suite 301; Grand Rapids, MI 49503. For archived is- sues or to subscribe, please visit www.acton.org/publicat/randl. The views of the authors expressed in Religion & Liberty are not necessarily those of the Acton Institute.

2 Religion& Liberty The Culture of Charity: An Interview with Arthur C. Brooks

Arthur C. Brooks

Arthur C. Brooks, the author of Who Really in trouble. And that’s a ridiculous reason to Cares (Basic Books, 2006), is a professor at not do research on important topics that Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Public actually affect people’s lives. But when Affairs and a visiting scholar at the American you’re a full professor with tenure, like I “ I think people are just Enterprise Institute. Reviewing the book in am, you’ve got no excuse. A couple of The Wall Street Journal, Wilfred McClay years ago I said, “I’m protected in my ca- not aware that, in fact, wrote: “Mr. Brooks concludes that four distinct reer. It’s time to say something about why your views on govern- forces appear to have primary responsibility people give.” I have all the data. I own all for making people behave charitably: religion, the data on this stuff. So I figured nobody’s ment are not a viable skepticism about the government’s role in eco- really looked effectively at the culture and substitute for personal nomic life, strong families and personal entre- politics of giving, and it was time to do it. preneurship.” Brooks took time recently to And so I embarked on the study and sys- checks.“ speak with Religion & Liberty managing tematically went through what I thought editor David Michael Phelps. were the biggest social and cultural reasons why people give, and reported my results. —————————————————— And so that’s where I start the story. I In your book, you identify four predictors of found this difference between conserva- What motivated you to write this book? What charity: religion, skepticism about the govern- tives and liberals, and it wasn’t because of questions were you hoping to answer? ment in economic life, work, and strong fami- politics. So I said, what is it due to? Why is it the conservatives give more than mod- I’m an economist and I’ve been doing lies. How effective are these four categories in erates and liberals? And the reason starts charitable giving research for a long time. predicting the personal giving of individuals? with the fact that there are so many reli- When economists look at charitable giving They’re hugely effective. Nothing is deter- gious conservatives in this country. And now, they always ask these prosaic ques- ministic, which means that these things religious people just give like crazy. Reli- tions like, “what will happen to charitable don’t absolutely determine charitable giv- gious liberals give like crazy. They give as giving if we decrease the death tax by a ing, but predict charitable giving in an un- much as religious conservatives, but there quarter?” They’re important questions, cannily accurate way. The first is faith. are fewer than one-third as many. So just but they’re really all about economic in- Faith is one of the major predictors of val- by virtue of the arithmetic, you find that centives. Over the years I’ve been involved ues in American life and indeed in most religious conservatives make conservatives in a lot of charitable giving efforts from the countries. In the United States, in particu- look really good. That’s the first. university and through my own church. lar, faith and the lack of faith have defined Nobody has ever said to me privately, “The a lot of cultural differences that intrude on The second is the belief that the role of reason I give is because of that sweet tax our lives everyday—everything from poli- government is to provide for needs—that break.” That’s not why people give. tics to how we feel about public expression, belief in and of itself suppresses charitable giving. Ask somebody, “do you think the One of my great mentors is James Q. Wil- to what commentators call the coarsening government should do more to redistrib- son, a classic case of someone who has of our culture. It’s not to say that people ute income?” People who strongly dis- social science tools and chooses to answer who are secular have a coarse culture and agree with that give twelve times more the most interesting questions. Most social people who are secular can’t give. We’re money a year to charity than the people scientists actually choose not to answer just saying that faith predicts so accurately who strongly agree with that. You virtually interesting questions because that gets you many of these social phenomena that you can’t ignore it. It’s causal, actually. never see differences that are that big. continued on pg 12

SummerSpring 2007 2005 | |Volume Volume 17 15 | |Number Number 2 1 3 Solzhenitsyn and Russia’s Golgotha

By John Couretas

In the “Ascent,” one of the autobiographi- Solzhenitsyn was a writer whose vast body cal sections of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s of work, beginning with the great artistic “Solzhenitsyn was a writ- Gulag Archipelago, you will find the justly achievement of the stories and novels, but famous assertion that “the line separating also of course the essays and speeches, was er whose vast body of good and evil passes not through states, guided by a great moral imagination. The work, beginning with nor between political parties—but right writer who took the Bolshevik Revolution the great artistic through every human heart.” and its aftermath as his great theme and achievement of the And read just a little further and you come life’s work, could only understand what to these words, not so well known but just happened to Russia in terms of good and stories and novels, but evil. Those who engineered and imposed as true, which describe the evil that roots also of course the essays itself not in the personal, but in the the Bolshevik and Soviet nightmare were political: not merely ideologues, they were and speeches, was guid- evildoers. … I have come to understand the false- ed by a great moral hood of all the revolutions in history: In The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential imagination.” They destroy only those carriers of evil Writings 1947-2005 (2006, ISI Books), contemporary with them (and also fail, editors E. Ericson, Jr., and Daniel J. Ma- and falsehood.” out of haste, to discriminate the carriers honey have assembled, in one volume, a With this excellent new reader, the editors of good as well). And they then take to new collection of the author’s work that also hope to provide a corrective to the themselves as their heritage the actual provides a broad sweep of his prodigious many misstatements and misinterpreta- evil itself, magnified still more. talent: history, autobiography, political tions of Solzhenitsyn’s work and life. These writing, speeches, misreadings—which lately seem more

© Free Software Foundation, Inc. Foundation, SoftwareFree © fiction, and poet- based on disinterest or neglect—come ry. Ericson and from both the left, which could not forgive Mahoney place Solzhenitsyn for so devastatingly exposing Solzhenitsyn— the violence and the lies of Soviet totali- who always first tarianism, and the right, which suspected and foremost that the writer was no friend of liberty. considered himself a writer and In their illuminating introduction, Ericson artist—in the tra- and Mahoney state simply that, “Solzhen- dition of Dosto- itsyn was the most eloquent scourge of evsky and Tol- ideology in the twentieth century.” The stoy, “a moralist editors are right to remind us of that. And who defends age- any news account, biography or political old distinctions history of the twentieth Century that talks between good about who “won” the Cold War—a com- Gulag prisoners at work and evil and truth plicated historical reality for sure—and

4 Religion& Liberty Solzhenitsyn and Russia’s Golgotha

en.” That humility also involves reverence faith, that cannot be ignored. Says Ericson

© Free Software Foundation, Inc. Foundation, SoftwareFree © for the mystical depths of faith. and Mahoney: “Solzhenitsyn accepts the Solzhenitsyn’s deeply religious view of validity of a classical Christian cosmology things is everywhere evident in Ericson and anthropology, one that has nothing in and Mahoney’s new volume. It is there common with facile modern (and post- explicitly in the poem “Acathistus” with its modern) belief that that universe is intensely personal, hymn-like theme of indifferent or even hostile to human pur- repentance in the face of “purpose-from- poses.” on-High’s steady fire.” There is the short This new volume includes Solzhenitsyn’s story “Easter Procession,” in which a gang famous 1978 commencement address at of young hoodlums threatens a solemn Harvard (deserving to be read at least an- procession of believers on the holiest day nually), where he catalogued the West’s of the Orthodox Christian calendar. Or the failings, including rampant materialism, slow, wrenching torment of Zinaida, the the superficiality of the media, and the young woman in The Red Wheel, whose moral cowardice of intellectuals. (A proph- selfish rendezvous with a lover has led, et tends to speak his mind, even when she believes, to the neglectful death of her invited to the most exclusive parties.) At infant son. Transfixed before an icon of Harvard, before the cream of the Cam- Christ, deaf to a church service going on bridge intelligentsia, Solzhenitsyn accused around her, Zinaida perceives that “Christ the West of leaving behind “the moral Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Gulag Mugshot 1953 was suffering acutely, suffering yet not heritage of Christian centuries with their complaining. His compassion was for all great reserves of mercy and sacrifice.” He does not include Solzhenitsyn with Rea- those who approached him—and so at took the political and intellectual elites to gan, Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II is not that moment for her.” task for cowardice, a “lack of manhood” in only incomplete but wrong. Solzhenitsyn Solzhenitsyn follows God, and it is not so its dealings with international aggressors was the inside man. hard to imagine why the writer has been and terrorists. He lamented the “boundless space” that the West had provided for Ericson and Mahoney tell us that The ignored or dismissed by Western secular human freedom but without making any Gulag Archipelago, perhaps Solzhenitsyn’s progressives and much of the media. While distinctions for human decadence. “The best known work, was written to “help some may be able to tolerate his decora- West has finally achieved the rights of readers imagine the unimaginable.” The tive Russian Orthodox pieties, it is the man, and even to excess, but man’s re- author was successful. The book got Sol- stark morality behind it, and the perfectly sponsibility to God and society has grown zhenitsyn kicked out of the Soviet Union orthodox understanding of the Christian dimmer and dimmer,” Solzhenitsyn told and sold more than 30 million copies the Harvard crowd. worldwide in three dozen languages. “By discrediting Soviet communism at home “ It was his experience As a boy, Solzhenitsyn was deeply influ- enced by his Aunt Irina who instilled in and abroad, this single book played an with the realities of the undeniable – perhaps a decisive – role in him a love of literature and of Russian ending the Soviet Union and thus the Cold Soviet system that Orthodoxy. But he drifted away from the War,” the editors say. brought him to his Christian faith under the spell of state in- doctrination in Marxist-Leninism. It was Solzhenitsyn accomplished this as a true metanoia, the change of his experience with the realities of the So- artist, not a propagandist. He understood viet system that brought him to his the artist as one who “recognizes above mind that put him on metanoia, the change of mind that put him himself a higher power and joyfully works the road to repentance.” on the road to repentance. “He returned as a humble apprentice under God’s heav-

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 5 Solzhenitsyn and Russia’s Golgotha with adult thoughtfulness to the Christian demned man: “Interrogation and trial are Nazi war criminals in West Germany—by worldview of his rearing,” the editors merely judicial corroboration. They can- one count some 86,000 convicted by 1966. write. “Solzhenitsyn’s mature articulation not alter your fate, which was previously And he compares that with the almost of Christian truths was deeply informed by decided. If it is necessary to shoot you, total lack of any justice served for the ar- his experience in the prison camps. There then you will be shot even if you are alto- chitects of Soviet terror: “Someday our he witnessed human nature in extremis gether innocent. If it is necessary to acquit descendents will describe our several generations as generations of driveling do- © Free Software Foundation, Inc. Foundation, SoftwareFree © nothings. First we submissively allowed “ First we submissively al- them to massacre us by the millions, and lowed them to massacre then with devoted concern we tended the murderers in their prosperous old age.” us by the millions, and But for those descendents to come to con- then with devoted con- clusions about “driveling do-nothings” cern we tended the they will first need moral criteria. And that is what worries Solzhenitsyn. In a 1993 murderers in their pros- address in New York, shortly after the col- perous old age.” lapse of the Soviet Union, the author ob- served that “for a post-modernist, the world does not possess values that have and learned about the heights and depths reality.” Perhaps it is the moral reality pro- of the human soul.” vided by true faith that most threatens Solzhenitsyn reserved his harshest con- revolutionaries and totalitarians, and ex- demnation for his own, particularly the plains why the Church, which stands in Soviet leadership, and could not forgive the way of these utopian fantasies, re- Mask of Sorrow monument, in memory of the what he saw as passivity in so many Rus- thousands that died in the Dalstroi camps ceives so much of their fury. sians during the long terror. The political Russian historian George Vernadsky esti- problem was, again for the author, not so mated that between the years 1917-1920 much a matter of sorting out competing you, then no matter how guilty you are you will be cleared and acquitted.” “several hundred bishops, priests, and political systems, but a question of evil. monks were either shot or starved to In a chapter of the Gulag Archipelago that The chapter closes with the narrator dis- death in prisons.” In 1922, the Soviets looks at the history of the Soviet political cussing the just punishment for evildoers. confiscated religious art and liturgical police, one of the interrogators tells a con- He talks about the vigorous prosecution of items, citing the need to raise funds to

The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings, 1947-2005

Edited By Ericson, Edward E./ Mahoney, Daniel J. Publisher: Intercollegiate Studies Institute (November 1, 2006) 650 pp. Hardcover $30.00

ISBN-13: 978-1933859002

6 Religion& Liberty Acton FAQ Witnesses said "enemies of the people" were Why is the Acton Institute producing brought to the shooting documentaries? range in food vans marked "MEAT." Shoot- In a word, audience. With this year’s release of The Call of the Entrepreneur, ings went on non-stop Acton is embarking on one of the most important—and potentially most influ- day and night in the ential—media programs in its seventeen-year history. later stages. Acton has always been a leader on the communications front. This is true for our high quality journals and newsletters, and for our web presence, which combat a famine, and in the process, Ver- makes use of the latest tools such as podcasts, video, and the Acton PowerBlog. nadsky wrote, “many priests were arrested The move into documentaries is a natural progression and one that taps into and a number executed, among them the the dominant medium of our age—the motion picture—in high definition bishop of Petrograd, Benjamin.” To this video. day, the Russian Orthodox Church holds The Call of the Entrepreneur tells the story of three very different entrepreneurs—a an annual memorial service in Butovo, the farmer, a financial executive and a retail and a media baron who escaped from location of a former secret police camp now known as Russia’s Golgotha. No one communist China. In their own way, each put their God-given creativity to knows exactly how many died at the work building wealth, creating useful new services and goods, and providing “shooting field” in 1937-38, although the opportunities for countless others to improve their lot in life. The documentary official number tops 20,000 people. Among is an inspirational story—many who’ve seen it have been greatly moved by them were more than 1,000 clergymen, it—and it’s one that is contrary to the culture’s often dominant image of the including seven bishops. Witnesses said business person as a greedy fat cat. "enemies of the people" were brought to Frankly, most documentaries produced today on political and economic themes the shooting range in food vans marked are not very friendly to the “free and virtuous society.” Acton doesn’t believe "MEAT." Shootings went on non-stop day that it’s smart to leave this powerful medium to those who would produce and night in the later stages. more sensational works like Fahrenheit 9/11 or An Inconvenient Truth. We have The Russian exile theologian Vladimir high hopes for The Call of the Entrepreneur, and have plans for more compelling Lossky defined evil as “nothing other than documentaries in the works. We hope you’ll be educated—and entertained— an attraction of the will towards nothing, a by what’s to come. negation of being, of creation, and above all of God, a furious hatred of grace against which the rebellious will puts up an impla- cable resistance.” Solzhenitsyn, now eighty-eight and for a long time back in his native land, under- stands this. If he had only written history, his contribution to our understanding of political terror and totalitarianism would be incalculably great. But he also gave us the artist’s moral vision. And that is something that Russia—and the West—need now more than ever.

Kris Alan Mauren Executive Director

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 7 Ideology vs. Reality by Rev. Robert A. Sirico

If one becomes aware that the original Most intellectuals in the world are aware to cite only the most conspicuous exam- moral argument for socialism is wrong— of what socialism did to Russia. And yet ple—spring up daily in town after town that capitalism is actually benefiting people many still cling to the socialist ideal. The worldwide. Within each of these stores is a and serving the common good—why truth about Mao’s reign of terror is no lon- veritable cornucopia of goods designed to would one hold on to the ideology rather ger a secret. And yet it remains intellectu- improve human well-being, at prices that than abandon it? Clearly, it is difficult to ally fashionable to regret the advance of make them affordable for all. Here is a abandon a lifelong ideology, especially if capitalism in China, even as the increasing company that has created many millions one considers the only available alterna- freedom of the Chinese people to engage of jobs and brought prosperity to places tive to be tainted with evil. Thus socialism in commerce has enhanced their lives. where it was sorely needed. was for generations of socialists simply an Many Europeans are fully aware of how Although the free enterprise system obvi- entrenched dogma. It was possible for damaging democratic socialism has been ously does not incorporate the old socialists’ them to argue the finer points, but not to in Germany, France, and Spain. And yet idea of a commonality of goods, it does abandon it. they continue to oppose the liberalization seem to achieve the common good as they of these economies. Here in the United However understandable this might be, it conceived it. What then can we say of those States, we’ve seen the failure of mass pro- is not praiseworthy. To hold on to a doc- who today remain attached to socialism as grams of redistribution and the fiscal crises trine that is demonstrably false is to aban- a political goal? We can say that they do not to which they give rise. And yet many don all pretense of objectivity. If someone know or have not understood the eco- continue to defend and promote them. could demonstrate to me that free markets nomic history of the last 300 years. Or and private property rights lead to impov- The older socialists dreamed of a world in perhaps we can say that they are more at- erishment, dictatorship, and the violation which all classes the world over would tached to socialism as an ideology than they of human rights on a mass scale, I would share in the fruits of production. Today, we are to the professed goals of its founders. think that I would have the sense and abil- see something like this as new Wal-Marts— When we speak of ity to concede the point and move on. In the common good, we need also to be “ ...socialists lacked any clear-minded such intellectual humili- about the political ty. They clung to their and juridical institutions that are faith—their false reli- most likely to gion—as if their lives bring it about. Let me list them: pri- © Free Software Foundation, Inc. Foundation, SoftwareFree © were at stake.” vate property in the means of pro- any case, socialists lacked any such intel- duction, stable lectual humility. They clung to their faith— money to serve as their false religion—as if their lives were at a means of ex- stake. Many continue to do so today. change, the free-

8 Religion& Liberty “ These institutions must Double-Edged Sword: be supported by a cul- The Power of the Word tural infrastructure that respects private property, regards the human person as possessing an Matthew 6:1–4 inherent dignity, and “Take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them otherwise, you confers its first loyalty to will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a transcendent authority trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the over civil authority.” praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let you left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your almsgiving dom of enterprise that allows people to may be in secret. And you Father who sees in secret will repay you.” start businesses, the free association of workers that permits people to choose where they would like to work and under what conditions, the enforcement of con- In this passage and those surrounding it, Jesus compares the rewards of “the tracts that provides institutional support hypocrites” and those who follow his words. But some of the subtlety of the les- for the idea that people should keep their son is lost in translation. When describing the reward of the hypocrites, the Greek promises, and a vibrant trade within and word used for reward denotes giving of a receipt for a full payment—in other among nations to permit the fullest possible flowering of the division of labor. These words, a commercial transaction. institutions must be supported by a cul- This is important because it creates an important distinction, a distinction be- tural infrastructure that respects private tween giving because of what it gives the property, regards the human person as possessing an inherent dignity, and confers recipient and giving because of what it “ If we allow ourselves its first loyalty to transcendent authority gives the giver. Should praise become the praise for our good over civil authority. This is the basis of free- motivation of a gift, the gift ceases to be a dom, without which the common good is works, we risk falling gift because it has become instead the unreachable. into the trap of purchase of praise. To summarize: We are all entitled to call purchasing praise.” ourselves socialist, if by the term we mean This is why our Lord warns us against an- that we are devoted to the early socialist nouncing our good deeds. He wants us to goal of the well-being of all members of love, to give of ourselves, to give ourselves truly as gifts. But even in this, there is society. Reason and experience make clear temptation. If we allow ourselves praise for our good works, we risk falling into that the means to achieve this is not through central planning by the state, but the trap of purchasing praise. And then we become self-directed instead of other- through political and economic freedom. directed. Thomas Aquinas had an axiom: bonum est The idea is this: in giving, let us be so other-directed that we become self-forgetful. diffusivum sui. “The good pours itself out.” The good of freedom has indeed poured Let us be so focused the outstretched hands of the needy that our own hands are itself out to the benefit of humanity. unaware of what the other is doing. In conclusion, I ask you, “Who did the will of the Father?” Rev. Robert Sirico is president of the Acton Insti- tute. This article is adapted from a speech he delivered at Hillsdale College in October 2006 at the first annual Free Market Forum.

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 9 The Leaky Bucket: Why Conservatives Need to Learn the Art of Story by David Michael Phelps

In his biography of St. Thomas Aquinas, G. ism is now a powerful force in the Ameri- Syllogism, and is explained concisely by K. Chesterton said that “most men must can political landscape, it is still the under- David Yeago: have a revealed religion, because they dog in a war of connotation. (This is evi- [T]he coherence of a narrative is of a have not time to argue.” The same might dent in the fact that the phrase ‘compas- different kind than the coherence of a be true for political philosophy. In the Age sionate conservative’ had to be invented.) syllogism. The latter sort of coherence is of Information, most men do not have And I think there are two reasons why deductive; the conclusion is given in time to sift critically through the barrage of conservativism, by and large, does not yet the premises and needs only to be information that comes their way. So if appeal to the heart as does “bleeding drawn out of them. The coherence of a most people do not have time to reason heart” liberalism. narrative, by contrast, has room for out their own political philosophy, how do freedom and thus for surprise. It is a Firstly, as Hayek says in his essay, the so- they decide which to adopt as their own? coherence which is not already given at cialist program promises a utopia, very the start, but only in and with the sto- Sixty years ago, in a time of less noise, much an emotional idea. Since conserva- ry's resolution, when the climactic Friedrich Hayek offered an answer. His tives tend not to believe in utopian social events actually occur and draw togeth- essay, The Intellectuals and Socialism, exam- structures, they are less likely to promise er the threads of the plot into a unity. ined “the character of the process by the grandiose, and more likely to prescribe The coherence of a drama is established which the views of the intellectuals influ- practical, more foundational, less emo- from the end of the story, not at its be- ence the politics of tomorrow.” Ideas move, tional policies. ginning, although that end is aimed at said Hayek, from the scholars to the mass- However, this is not to say that the conser- by the playwright from the beginning. es via the Intellectual, the “secondhand vative movement does not have ideals dealer of ideas.” The “power [Intellectu- This is an important distinction because it which appeal to the imagination (and als] wield in shaping public opinion” is offers a reason why those who argue with therefore to the hearts) of the masses – therefore very great, and Hayek proved narrative logic, or Story, have easier access freedom and virtue are the stuff of our this by showing how socialism moved in to the hearts and minds of the masses than greatest stories. No, what is lacking is not precisely this fashion, from Scholar to In- those who rely solely on Syllogistic Logic. the ideas, nor the imaginative capacity of tellectual to mass implementation. Scholars who form ideas largely use syllo- those ideas. What is lacking in modern gistic logic, deduction. And while Syllo- What was therefore necessary, said Hayek, conservativism, in large part, is the mecha- gism is a critical tool in coming to the truth was that classical liberalism pony up with nism to communicate the ideas in ways of things, it isn’t necessarily the best tool in its own intellectual project, and the last that capture both the Truth and Beauty of conveying the truth of things. Stories, on sixty years has seen Hayek get his wish in those ideas. What is missing, by and large, the other hand, contain a totality of an what is commonly known as the Conser- is the Art of Story. idea along with a unifying beauty, an emo- vative Movement. But this present essay To understand this, it is important to make tional power that smuggles an idea into the has less to do with the intellectual project a distinction between two types of logic. head by way of the heart. Or to put it an- of classical liberalism and more to do with This distinction (given eloquent expres- other way, an idea can be the corollary of what has been, by and large, a failure to sion in the work of the Swiss theologian an accepted artistic unity. This is why nov- create “a new liberal program which ap- Hans Urs von Balthasar) is between narra- elists and filmmakers can be such power- peals to the imagination”. While conservativ- tive logic and syllogistic logic, or Story and ful convincers – they rely on the totality of

10 Religion& Liberty The Leaky Bucket: Why Conservatives Need to Learn the Art their presentation to make their ‘argu- the right ideas and the trust to manifest them Artists concentrate on making great buck- ment.’ Both Story and Syllogism are im- in Art, not propaganda. Storytellers and Art- ets, often concerning themselves less with portant, but in the age of visual media, ists, whether they have right ideas or not, the contents. Story is increasingly important to convince will create. But as Chesterton those “who have no time to argue.” said, “poetry without philosophy has only inspiration, or, in Both Story and Syllogism vulgar language, only wind.” If anyone doubts that those who tell the So it is best that the Beauty he better stories have the upper hand in the creates also contain Truth. arena of ideas, let him consider the recent So what must happen is that popularity of the ONE Campaign. Is it a those with solid ideas, derived flash of economic enlightenment that from Syllogistic Logic, must drives the masses to Bono like sinners to not only educate the Artists, the Jordan? No. While his economic pa- but also allow them to trans- tron, Jeffrey Sachs, is by no measure a © Geir-Olav Lyngfjell. Image from bigstockphoto.com late Syllogisms into Stories, into unified Likewise, conservatives may be more apt lightweight, Bono owes the success of his presentations of the Truth in Beauty. It is to produce propaganda when they at- appeals to end poverty less to his econom- this that will achieve long lasting change tempt to create Art because their ideas are ics and more to his formidable ability as an in the hearts of the finicky MTV genera- often more sound than the liberal (in the artist to highlight the human in humani- tion. Unfortunately, this can be frightening modern sense) alternative and they have tarianism, to appeal to the narrative and for those committed to protect right ideas, less need for – and therefore less incentive emotional sensibilities of young people, to because the “coherence of a narrative … to learn – Story. Liberals can indulge take an idea from a scholar’s head to a has room for freedom and thus for sur- themselves in shoddy Syllogism, because citizen’s heart. prise.” Communicating with Story means they make up for the lack with good Sto- Imagine, then, if sound economic (or po- one has to allow for a dramatic tension, rytelling. But this doesn’t excuse conser- litical or social) thinking were wedded not has to allow the audience the possibility of vatives from falling off the other side of only with the intention to act, but with seeing the viability of the other side of the the horse. Beauty, the inspiration to act. This is what argument. And for some, this is too risky a There a popular saying that suggests “If the Story artist can do, if he can be given venture. you are a liberal when you are young, you But here we reach a very crucial point, the have no heart. If you aren’t a conservative point where we see that handing ideas to when you are old, you have no head.” But “ There a popular saying the Artist is not the same as handing them I see no reason why must we lack one to that suggests “If you are to the Propagandist. For the Propagandist, have the other. We should have, and must the message is the focus, the party line is communicate with, both. We must add a liberal when you are towed without falter, and as a result, the Story to our Syllogism, adding emotional young, you have no Propagandist seldom produces Art of last- punch to our reason. After all, Socrates heart. If you aren’t a ing persuasive power. For the Artist, the taught with syllogisms, and Jesus with vehicle of the message – that is, the Art parables. conservative when you itself – is the focus, and this is precisely David Michael Phelps, managing editor of Reli- why Artists are so much more convincing are old, you have no gion & Liberty, is the director of development at in their work than Propagandists: Propa- Compass Film Academy in Grand Rapids, head.” gandists so concentrate on the water that Michigan. they attend less to the holes in the bucket.

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 11 Brooks interview continued from page 3

charitable giving is not predicated on hav- ing a lot of means. The working poor and the working lower middle class are actually the most generous Americans, when you look at the percentage of their income that they give away. And these people, ironically, have no tax incentive to give either. So, we Americans can take a charity lesson from people with modest means who work for a living in the United States. That’s one thing that actually is pretty shocking, at least to me, that these are America’s big givers. And a lot of that, once again, has to do with faith. But it’s also true that the working poor and the working lower middle class are a highly Even when you correct for income and age you’re willing to do something. income mobile group. And then, it’s not a and education, there are big differences coincidence. My own research on family When we talk about a religious impulse behind that persist between [those two] groups. income shows that families that give tend charity, do we mean all religious traditions are to see about a four to one income increase This boils down to a world philosophy. equally engaged in helping the poor and needy? that comes because of their charitable gifts Whose responsibility is it to solve prob- in the long run. And the idea is that fami- Well, it’s not all just helping the poor and lems? All of us are somewhere between lies that give have a different quality to needy. Giving to others is really what I’m the idea that the government should do it them than families that don’t give. They talking about. A pretty small percentage of all and that we should do it all. What you have more family integrity, and they’re charitable giving actually makes its way to find is that for people who believe that it’s more likely to have healthy habits. They the poor. We do give away vast amounts the responsibility of society writ large [to have more of a sense of meaning. They’re that we share with each other. We give solve problems], that very belief is sup- more productive. They’re liked better. away a lot; it’s just that not all of it is redis- pressing their charitable giving. I think that They’re more socially adjusted and inte- tributed. The problem is that there are most people who have those views and get grated. And the end result is that charitable some people that think if charity is not that result and behavior don’t realize it. I giving is one of the things that measures redistributive, it’s not charity. I can’t imag- think people are just not aware that, in the likelihood of people being successful. ine disagreeing more with that point of fact, your views on government are not a view, because I think that we need to viable substitute for personal checks. You also find that charitable giving is part share, and we all have needs, and our so- of the economic growth process; that Most of my friends and colleagues are lib- ciety has needs that are not just handing when the United States gives more, it sees erals, and this is one of the things that out sandwiches. We have needs for sym- enormous return on investment in GDP most characterizes the difference between phony orchestras and universities and en- over time. But probably the biggest impact political conservatives and liberals: the vironmental organizations, and that stuff that you see in people’s lives is the happi- views on income redistribution. Liberals is not redistributed, but we really need it ness, the very clear happiness advantages yell at me a lot saying, “we don’t believe in and we need charity to pay for it. So, it that they get when they give. There are a income redistribution!” But if you ask, “Do doesn’t socially trouble me that not all lot of before and after experiments where you think the government should do more charity is going to the poor and needy, but people are measured on their happiness to redress income in equality,” 80 percent what we should find is that religious peo- with surveys, and then they’re asked to of liberals say yes and 27 percent of con- ple are more likely to give to all causes, partake in a charitable giving experience servatives say yes. This is the issue that and in both formal and informal ways, of some kind, and then they measure their differentiates conservatives from liberals including to totally secular causes. happiness again. In virtually every case, today. [It] just culturally makes it harder they get happier, even if they’re helping Most people, I would guess, would argue that for people who believe in income redistri- the homeless or dying people. And the first of all a certain level of prosperity is neces- bution to give intuitively, to take personal physiological explanation is that endor- sary for the kind of charitable giving that takes ownership of a problem. And the one phins are released in the brain when peo- place in the United States. Can charitable giving thing is, they’re not bad people. I just ple serve others. You actually get a helper’s contribute toward a more prosperous society? think that this is impulse. I think it’s high, and that’s precisely what psycholo- human to feel compassionate because Actually, the first thing that we find is that gists call it. Psychologists have taken to

12 Religion& Liberty prescribing service to others as a manner What effect do you think your research will est things you can do in your life is to give of therapy for patients. I’ve talked to clini- have? and to give more. The second measure of cal psychologists who routinely prescribe success for me will be if other researchers Well, there are two effects that I hope it volunteering in a soup kitchen. It’s rather start challenging my findings and doing has. The first is that I hope that people extraordinary because the benefits are so more research. I want replication. I want, read it and give more. I hope that people distinct. in five years, to have more books and read it, examine their conscience, examine more articles and more op-eds out there Is the idea of incentive antithetical to charity? their giving patterns, think about the bar- saying, “Brooks was wrong,” or “Brooks riers to their own giving, and destroy the was right,” and “I’ve got the data,” and “I’ve done this new research.” That’s really what I want because if we spur a debate, people give more—I can’t imagine defin- ing success in any other way.

I have an opportunity to talk a lot to clergy and a lot to serious evangelicals. When I’m talking to these groups, I say, “Look into your hearts about what the Scripture really says.” When we’re talking about tithing, this is allegory. This is resources of value. In the American economy, the resource of value that we have is primarily intelli- gence, ideas, and creativity. That’s the source of wealth in America today. That being the case, how are you going to tithe that? How are you going to tithe what you © Ljupco Smokovski. Image from bigstockphoto.com truly value and what is truly the engine of your growth? If you’re just doing cash, Frequently what we think of as rewarding barriers. That’s what I want, because it’s so that’s not enough. As a matter of fact, that’s people’s charity is really just taking barri- clear in my research that one of the great- not really what’s going to lift other people ers away. It’s just dismantling disincentives up. That’s not really our mission, in a to giving. In other words, I’m not going to sense. So I’m able to actually talk openly to confiscate as much of your money if you challenge people to think about what tith- give. That’s what tax breaks are. It’s not ing deeply means when we have a multi- like you give something to charity and the dimensioned bundle of currencies and government gives you a gift. They just value. How am I going to tithe my time, take less of your money. That’s not really a my love, my affection, my expertise? reward. That’s simply taking away some of the barrier to giving. And I think that Thinking that way has totally changed my philosophically that’s more than just a so- own views and changed my own behav- phistic difference. It’s rather an important ior. I started writing this charity book and substantive difference. Frankly, people my wife says, “I think we need to go and don’t even need tax incentives. At the adopt a kid. I mean, read your chapters. maximum, getting rid of the tax incentives This is a blessing to you and a blessing to entirely would wipe out less than 20 per- others. This is an expression of our values, cent of charitable giving in the short run, so come on. Let’s express our values.” and that would probably all come back in What am I supposed to say? No? Now we the long run. So, it does change things a have another kid. And of course, who do little bit in the margin. I can understand you think is the net recipient of the benefit moral qualms about rewarding people, parts? Me, my wife, and our biological paying people for their charity because children. We’re the ones who made out. that doesn’t seem like charity anymore, Just like the data said. exactly, but getting rid of barriers is quite important.

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 13 In the Liberal Tradition

Walter Eucken [1891-1950]

“Eucken believed markets gave economic expression to man’s innate dignity in ways that collectivist alternatives never could.”

Following the National Socialists’ seizure of power in 1933, Eucken maintained contact with other anti-Nazi Germans who understood the need to think about how to transition a post- Nazi Germany towards a society marked by ordered liberty rather than socialism or communism. Without freedom, there can be no solution of the social question. . . . Thus, at the end of World War II, Eucken was one of a small Under a proper marketing system, it becomes impossible for individual number of individuals able to present the intellectual case for the freedom to degenerate into the arbitrary domination of many by a few. market economy in occupied Germany. While West Germany’s As a result of the general interdependence between all markets, the 1948 currency reform and abolition of price-controls was engi- social question can only be resolved by means of an adequate and free neered by Ludwig Erhard, Erhard himself acknowledged Eucken economic system. —Walter Eucken as an intellectual godfather of the changes that took West Ger- An intellectual architect of West Germany’s post-war economic many from rubble to riches in less than ten years. miracle, Walter Eucken was the primary founder of the Walter Eucken never made any Freiburg ordo-liberal school of economics. The son of Rudolf secret of his Christian convic- Eucken—winner of the 1908 Nobel Prize in Literature—Walter tions. At the first Mont Pèlerin Eucken studied history before turning his attention to econom- Society meeting convened by ics during his studies at the universities of Bonn, Kiel, and Jena. Friedrich von Hayek in 1947, Eucken became a professor of economics at the University of participants were struck by Eu- Freiburg in 1927, remaining there until his death in 1950. cken’s forceful insistence Chris- Though proficient in technical economics, Eucken was primar- tianity’s essential compatibility ily interested in the broader issue of the legal rules that make with the market order. Euck- both freedom and market economies possible. en’s use of the word ordo The state’s economic role, Eucken argued, needed to be limited partly reflected his effort to to protecting and upholding the key rules from which we derive re-establish links between the type of legal order that facilitates the free market’s dyna- Christian social doctrine and free market thought. mism. Eucken held that the state’s authority should be used— Given the right conditions, Eucken believed, markets gave and used vigorously—to uphold the rule of law, private prop- economic expression to man’s innate dignity in ways that col- erty rights, freedom of contract, and open markets. But once the lectivist alternatives never could. Eucken’s early death at the state moved beyond these parameters, Eucken warned, both age of fifty-nine was a grievous loss to the cause of freedom freedom and economic prosperity were endangered. and Christian faith in a Europe that deeply needed both.

14 Religion& Liberty Rev. Robert A. Sirico

Walter Eucken [1891-1950] What Is Capitalism? It’s not entirely easy to understand conceptual clarity by just letting it go and setting on some other why, but the term capitalism is al- term, such as the market economy or the business economy. most universally used derisively, par- But even these phrases are seriously limited because they do ticularly in religious circles. To say not account for the fullness of economic activity in society. something is capitalist is to condemn They only cover what has been called (from the nineteenth- it without argument, as if the label century) “catallatics“ or the science of monetary exchange. alone settles the question. But monetary exchange covers only a part of overall econom- Let’s say that we believe that there are only two possible sys- ic activity. Providing for and managing a household is eco- tems of organizing the economic forces of society: capitalism nomic and yet the internal matters of a household do not and socialism. It would seem from experience and logic that usually involve monetary exchange. The massive charitable there is no contest. The experience with socialism has been sector in the United States is funded by people giving contribu- one long and grueling disaster for every country that has tried tions and receiving no direct good or service in exchange. This it, while capitalism has created prosperity consistent with is how American houses of worship are funded, for example. human rights. For that matter, large business firms are places where the primary means of cooperation is not monetary exchange. We And yet I suspect that this is not what people mean when they cooperate based on need and desire. refer to capitalism with derision. What they mean is a system of social organization that is driven by an engine dominated by Should non-catallactic action be included in our definition of large capital currying favor with an insatiable consuming pub- what constitutes economic behavior? Most certainly! A major lic. Such a system is seen—and rightly so if that’s all there is to part of the work of the Acton Institute consists in the effort to it—as crude, unenlightened, and contrary to all high ideals. expand our understanding of what economic is. It is not only stock markets, corporate buyouts, and large chain stores. It is I can concede that what I just described is a bad system. In fact, also houses of worship, families, extended communities, civic I’ll go further and agree that such a social system is undesirable associations, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, and volunteer and contrary to high ideals. My problem here is the identity of efforts of all kinds. such a system with the term capitalism, which might be used more broadly to refer to the economic component of the vol- I have no problem in saying that these are part of the capitalist untary society. order, rightly understood. But the more important point is that they are part of the social order that respects private property, Capitalism is really a misnomer. Under a voluntary economic human rights, and the freedom of association. We must not system, capitalists have no power of compulsion. The primary think too narrowly on these questions. Economics, rightly un- influence over what is produced, how, and in what quantity derstood, encompasses the whole range of human behavior. are consumers. It is they who reward or discourage the pro- This is why it is such a mistake to speak with such disdain for duction decisions of capitalists. If you know anyone in busi- what is merely a reflection of mutually beneficial exchanges ness, you know that consumers must always be the first con- and voluntary behaviors. cern. The second concern is the workers who make production possible. A capitalist who serves himself the first fruits just isn’t If we want to give up the term capitalism to appease its critics, going to last very long in the market. Capitalist actions that are so be it. But let us replace it with something even more poi- successful in the long run are always other-directed. gnant and descriptive of the reality of which we speak: freedom. Perhaps the real problem is the term itself. We can gain great

Spring 2007 | Volume 17 | Number 2 15