 Welcome to George H. Smith's Excursions into Libertarian Thought, a production of libertarianism.org and the Cato Institute. I'm your host, Terence West. Among My Favorites, History of Civilization in England by H. T. Buckle, Part 1 by George H. Smith. From time to time, I'll write essays on some books of interest to libertarians. I hereby kick off my intermittent series, Among My Favorites, with the work that truly is among my all-time favorites, History of Civilization in England by H. T. Buckle, 1821 to 1862. Once famous but now virtually unknown, even among libertarian scholars, this massive and heavily documented bestseller, originally published in two volumes in 1857 and 1861, is one of the most libertarian histories ever written. The following passages, which typify Buckle's perspective, should wet the intellectual appetite of my listeners. There is another circumstance worthy of the attention of those writers who ascribe a large part of European civilization to measures originated by European governments. This is that every great reform which has been affected has consisted not in doing something new, but in undoing something old. The most valuable additions made to legislation have been enactments destructive of preceding legislation, and the best laws which have been passed have been those by which former laws were repealed. Indeed, the extent to which the governing classes have interfered and the mischiefs which that interference has produced are so remarkable to make thoughtful men wonder how civilization could advance. In the face of such repeated obstacles, in some of the European countries, the obstacles have in fact proven inseparable, and the national progress is thereby stopped. Even in England where from causes I shall presently relate, the higher ranks have for some centuries been less powerful than elsewhere. There has been inflicted an amount of evil which, though much smaller than that incurred in other countries, is sufficiently serious to form a melancholy chapter in the history of the human mind. To some of these evils would be to write a history of English legislation, for it may be broadly stated that, with the exception of certain necessary enactments respecting the preservation of order and the punishment of crime, nearly everything which has been done has been done amiss. Reports were offended by many things in history of civilization in England, but nothing offended them more than Buckle's insistence that greater knowledge, not moral or religious factors, has been the mainspring of human progress. A person may act from the purest moral or religious motives, but if he or she is ignorant and has the power to impose his ignorance upon others, disaster will almost certainly follow. In such cases, therefore, hypocrisy is preferable to moral purity and religious devotion. There is no instance on record of an ignorant man who, having good intentions and supreme power to enforce them, has not done far more evil than good, and whether the intentions have been very eager and the power very extensive, the evil has been enormous. But if you can diminish the sincerity of that man, if you can mix some alloy with his motives, you will likewise diminish the evil which he works. If he is selfish as well as ignorant, it will often happen that you may play off his vice against his ignorance, and by exciting his fears restrain his mischief. If, however, he has no fear, if he is entirely unselfish, if his soul objective is the good of others, if he pursues that objective with enthusiasm upon a large scale and with disinterested zeal, then it is that you have no check upon him. You have no means of preventing the calamities which, in an ignorant age, an ignorant man will be sure to inflict. It is an undoubted fact that an overwhelming majority of religious persecutors have been men of the purest intentions, of the most admiral and unsullied morals. Passages like this enraged some of Buckle's pious readers who accused him of being an enemy of both morality and religion, an enemy of morality he certainly was not. His views on religion, however, were less clear. Buckle appears to have been a deist, and his thoroughly secular approach made his book a favorite among 19th century free thinkers. Indeed, his most avid and capable defender was the Scottish atheist and free thought scholar, J.M. Robertson, who dubbed Buckle a sentimental theist, with a sharp practical antagonism to the theological spirit. In 1895, Robertson published Buckle and His Critics, an extensive vindication of the maligned historian, and in 1904, Robertson published a critical edition of Buckle's book in one volume, Introduction to the History of Civilization in England. Rather than use Buckle's original title, Robertson retitled his edition, Introduction to the History of Civilization in England. He did this because Buckle presented his two volume work as a general introduction, rather than a history of England per se. This may seem curious, even amusing, considering that the two volumes consumed 1,455 pages. Unfortunately, Buckle didn't live to write his projected multi-volume history of English civilization. Having died in 1862, the year after the second volume had been published. We thus have what is probably the longest introduction in the history of historical writing, as well as one of the most original and interesting. Most of Buckle and His Critics is devoted to defending Buckle against prominent critics and correcting their misrepresentations. As Robertson puts it, perhaps no man has been blamed more for mistakes he did not make. But Robertson had his own disagreements, many of which focused on Buckle's advocacy of laissez-faire. He wrote, in respect of his uncompromising attitude to the principle of protection and his implied approval of laissez-faire in politics, he may be accused of failing to turn his social science to any great constructive account. But it is to be remembered that Buckle wrote exactly when the optimism of laissez-faire was most plausible. This remark displays the condescending attitude of many sociologists during the late 19th century toward advocates of laissez-faire. In opposition to Spencer, Sumner, and other sociologists who opposed government intervention, many sociologists viewed the emerging science of society as an instruction manual, in fact, for social planners. Although Robertson embraced some principles of classic liberalism, such as international free trade and anti-militarism, he is more accurately described as a proponent of the new liberalism that gained traction during the late Victorian era. According to many new liberals, the science of economics, which had been used to defend free markets, was being supplanted by a broader discipline, sociology, the science of society that related economics to one of its branches and condemned the abstraction economic man as an unduly narrow conception of human nature. Thus, any competent sociologist, and there was no doubt that Buckle's history relied heavily on sociological reasoning, who dared defend laissez-faire, obviously did not understand the great potential of sociology to distinguish between beneficial and harmful forms of government intervention. Robertson attempted to excuse Buckle's supposed ignorance in this matter by noting that he merely shared the naive prejudices of an earlier time. Before delving into the substance of Buckle's complex and controversial book with the purpose of highlighting the parts that libertarians will find most interesting, I wish to sketch some personal aspects of the author. Buckle, like his contemporary Herbert Spencer, was largely self-educated, thereby corroborating Spencer's observation that most defenders of freedom were market intellectuals, whereas most advocates of statism were university men. Blessed with a photographic memory, Buckle, by age 29, could read 19 languages, seven of which he could also converse and write in with ease. Buckle conceived his magnum opus when he was 19, and thereafter he worked on it 8 to 10 hours, nearly every day for 21 years. By all accounts, H.D. Buckle was an entertaining conversationalist. One of his favorite stories was about a trip to Italy that involved passing through Austria. At the Austrian border, Buckle's baggage was searched by a customs officer. A fanatical bibliophile who eventually amassed 20,000 volumes in his personal library, Buckle always carried books on his many travels, and in this instance he had a copy of The Seminal Work by Copernicus on the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres. After the customs officer said that he was under orders to confiscate any book with revolutionary tendencies, Buckle explained that this book was about the revolution of planets. The customs officer replied that it didn't matter where the revolutions took place, all revolutionary books were banned in Austria. Thus, Buckle did forfeit his copy of Copernicus to bureaucratic stupidity. After Buckle's untimely death at age 42, the most glowing testimonials appeared not in intellectual journals, which tended to be critical of this amateur historian, but in chess magazines. A lengthy article about Buckle and some of his games appeared in The Chess Players Magazine in 1864. It begins, the genius of Henry Thomas Buckle came and went like a splendid meteor, shedding its radiance over two spheres of intellectual life. Over the world of chess, as over the world of literature, its glorious career shed a luster, and its sudden extinction cast a gloom. Those who observed him in the mental wrestlings of The King of Games recognized a player of extraordinary power, daring originality, and calm self-reliance. While all who met him in the regions of learning and philosophy felt the august presence of a penetrating mind, schooled to independent wanderings in every department of human thought. Years later in 1898, the American chess magazine set of Buckle to Henry Thomas Buckle, the brilliant author of The History of Civilization, belongs to the distinction of one of the finest chess players of his time. Had he not already been noted as a historian, his name would still be enrolled high on the scroll of Case's favorite chessists. Though never a professional himself, Buckle defeated many of the eminent professionals of his day. Indeed, England has so far produced no truer chess genius unless it be stuntin'. Buckle's victories over some of the most renowned chess masters of his day, including Adolf Andersen, Johann Lowenthal, and Lionel Kaisereitzke, led some fans to proclaim him the greatest English player of all time, better even than the celebrated Howard Stanton. This assessment incurred the wrath of a writer for the chess player's chronicle. Published shortly after Stanton's death in 1874, this article ridiculed the notion that Buckle was, by far, the greatest player England ever produced and much superior to Stanton. On the contrary, Buckle was not only immeasurably but decidedly inferior to Stanton and his published games bear no comparison with Stanton's. This critic went on to suggest that Buckle's fame as a historian, like his famous chess player, was transitory and would not long endure. Unfortunately, this prophecy proved accurate. This has been Excursions into Libertarian Thought, a production of Libertarianism.org and the Cato Institute. To learn more about Libertarian philosophy and history, visit www.libertarianism.org. I'm Terence West. Thanks for listening.