Report on the symposium organized by the Cercle from 3rd to 5th July 2009
We wished to radically and definitively establish that economic freedom generated prosperity and full employment and that, contrariwise, State intervention in the economy gave rise to unemployment, scarcity or waste. Inspired by Frédéric Bastiat, we endeavoured to follow the scientific method, which consists in basing ourselves on facts, in attempting to organise those facts by means of a theory, and in supporting the theory with fresh observations.
The facts on which we based ourselves are the measurements carried out year after year over the past fifteen years by the American “Heritage Foundation”. Its researchers, in collaboration with academics and other researchers belonging notably to the Cato Institute and to the Wall Street Journal, have defined the degree of economic freedom prevailing in a given country by means of an index ranging from 1 to 100. Every year, they measure the value of that index for each of the countries in the world, which enables them to draw up a rating. The results are contained in a large book entitled “Index of Economic Freedom”. Five copies of the book were at the disposal of the participants so that they could look through it. In addition, the complete content of the book on DVD was given to each participant.
A synthesis of this work was presented at the opening of the symposium by Patrick de Casanove, general secretary of the Cercle Frédéric Bastiat. Patrick is a doctor in the small town of Ondres, a commune on the Basque coast, of which he was formerly mayor.
We then asked ourselves whether those facts were consistent with economic theory. And there, we had a problem, for unlike Physics, economic theory is not yet a unified scientific theory. Today there are still several rival economic theories, but that which has the favour of Liberals or Libertarians is what is known as the “Austrian” theory, so called because it developed from the initial work of great Austrian economists, of whom the most well known are Von Mises and Hayek. Bastiat was a forerunner of that school and the Austrian economists consider him as one of their own. Henri Lepage showed us that the Austrian economic theory perfectly explains the facts brought together by the Heritage Foundation. Henri is one of the best living French economists as well as an incomparable populariser. For a long time he directed the Euro 92 Institute, founded by Alain Madelin, then he spent many years as an analyst for the European Commission in Brussels. Today he is president of the Turgot Institute. Incidentally, Marie France Suivre, general secretary of the above Institute, was also present amongst us.
The third part of the scientific method consists in seeking fresh facts to see whether they confirm or invalidate the theory. In that spirit, we sought to observe concretely what is happening in a certain number of countries, and we principally chose Socialist or Communist countries, all the better to show that even there, liberalizing the economy has significantly increased prosperity.
Vincent Ginocchio, president of “Liberté Chérie” and board member of the Cercle Frédéric Bastiat, presented a few examples of socialist countries, that have remained socialist, but have at some point adopted market economy.
Yves Montenay explained the difference in economic evolution between two totalitarian regimes, Vietnam and Cuba, of which only one has chosen to liberalise its economy. Yves, a graduate of the “Ecole Centrale” and a former company director, today teaches economy and demography in higher education and regularly publishes quality books. His wife is Vietnamese, and he occasionally accompanies her to her country. On each trip, he notes that a small additional degree of liberalisation in the economy leads to a big leap forward in standards of living.
Guy Sorman, one of the few Western economists to have been to China and to India several times and at some length, spoke to us about those two countries. His latest book, Economy doesn’t lie, is a brilliant and very vivid illustration of the theme of our Weekend.
It was only natural to examine a counter example, that of a country that enjoys a good level of political freedom, but a rather mediocre level of economic freedom : our own. This task fell to Alain Mathieu, a former company director and president of “Contribuables Associés” (Taxpayers Associated). His latest book, The French anti-social model, is a real panorama of what is wrong with France and of what should be done to improve the situation. Benoîte Taffin, who has been the mainspring of Contribuables Associés for so many years, was also in our midst.
The most impenitent interventionists, if there had been any at the Weekend, could not have failed to be confounded by the above demonstrations, which would not have prevented them from raising two objections :
First objection – Okay, fine, we lay down our arms regarding the link between prosperity and economic freedom, but alas, all this is at a cost of increasing inequality. No, in fact, it isn’t! And it was Sandrine Gorreri who had the honour of proving it. Sandrine is Chief Editor of Société Civile, the monthly revue of the “iFRAP” institute.
Second objection – Yes, all that may be true under normal conditions, but in a crisis like the one we are experiencing, state intervention once again becomes indispensable. Henri Lepage saw to sweeping away that objection.
There remained, not an objection, but two question marks for Libertarians themselves.
First question : we have seen that economic freedom may exist in the absence of political freedom. Can economic freedom at least bring about political freedom in the long run? Unfortunately, that is questionable. There are examples in favour and examples against, arguments for and arguments against. That is why we gave up the idea of dealing with the subject during our Weekend, after hoping that it would be dealt with by Jacques Garello, president of the ALEPS association, but Jacques was in the States at the time. We resigned ourselves by telling ourselves that it was perhaps better for the participants to leave with certain convictions on a well defined subject, rather than with doubts on a more general subject.
Second question : if it is clear that direct intervention by the State in the economy, in order to regulate it or as a producer, is always a bad thing, does that mean that the State should ignore what goes on in the economy? Jacques de Guenin, president of the Cercle, answered this question in his concluding speech : economic life is made up of a series of transactions and contracts. The role of the State is to see to it that no transaction, no contract, is implemented by coercion or by violence. That is part of its more general duty, which is to ensure the respect of individual rights : liberty, property, safety and resistance against oppression (Article 2 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789). For, unfortunately, there are on Earth many evil people who find it more convenient to lay hands on the possessions of others rather than to earn them honestly.
Alas, the State fulfils its role very badly, so busy is it doing things that it shouldn’t be doing.
About 60 people – including 10 or so young people – attended the Weekend on Freedom. They came from just about everywhere in France. They expressed great satisfaction. Many asked us to renew the experience. That will give the Board of the Cercle food for thought.
The conferences (in French), are available from Vidéos du Week-end de la liberté.
Back to the English-language section of bastiat.net.