by Milton Friedman
Editor’s note: This essay is an excerpt of the novel Hoover Press volume Milton Friedman on Freedom, edited past times Robert Leeson together with Charles G. Palm. It originally appeared inwards the “New Individualist Review” inwards 1962. There is a strong style for all of us to regard what is as if it were the “natural” or “normal” province of affairs, to lack perspective because of the tyranny of the status quo. It is, therefore, well, from fourth dimension to time, to brand a deliberate elbow grease to seem at things inwards a broader context. In such a context anything approaching a costless club is an exceedingly rare event. Only during curt intervals inwards man’s recorded history has at that spot been anything approaching what nosotros would telephone phone a costless club inwards existence over whatever appreciable purpose of the globe. And fifty-fifty during such intervals, as at the moment, the greater purpose of mankind has lived nether regimes that could past times no stretch of the imagination last called free.
This casual empirical observation raises the enquiry whether a costless club may non last a scheme inwards unstable equilibrium. If ane were to convey a purely historical bespeak of view, ane would receive got to say that the normal, inwards the sense of average, province of mankind is a province of tyranny together with despotism. Perhaps this is the equilibrium province of club that tends to arise inwards the relation of human being to his fellows. Perhaps highly special circumstances must be to homecoming a costless club possible. And perchance these special circumstances, the existence of which work organisation human relationship for the rare episodes of freedom, are themselves past times their nature transitory so that the form of club nosotros all of us believe inwards is highly unlikely to last maintained fifty-fifty if in ane lawsuit attained.
This work has, of course, been extensively discussed inwards the literature. In his peachy book, Lectures on Law together with Public Opinion inwards the Nineteenth Century, written at the terminate of the nineteenth century, A. V. Dicey discusses a real similar question. How was it, he asks, that toward the terminate of the nineteenth century at that spot seemed to last a shift inwards English linguistic communication world persuasion away from the doctrine of liberalism together with toward collectivism, fifty-fifty though, just prior to the shift, individualism together with laissez-faire were at something similar their high tide, seeming to receive got captured English linguistic communication world persuasion together with seeming to last producing the results that their proponents had promised inwards the shape of an expansion of economical activity, a rising inwards the measure of life, together with the like?
As y'all may recall, Dicey dates the alter inwards world persuasion inwards United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland away from individualism together with toward collectivism at well-nigh 1870–90. Dicey answers his enquiry past times essentially reversing it, maxim that inwards its master shape it may last a foolish question. Perhaps the relevant enquiry is non why people turned away from individualism toward collectivism but how they were induced to receive got the queer notion of individualism inwards the commencement place. The declaration for a costless society, he goes on to say, is a real subtle together with sophisticated argument. At every point, it depends on the indirect rather than the direct effect of the policy followed. If ane is concerned to remedy clear evils inwards a society, as everyone is, the natural reaction is to say, “let us practise something well-nigh it,” with the “us” inwards this declaration inwards a large number of cases last translated into the “government,” so the natural reaction is to hand a law. The declaration that maybe the endeavour to right this detail evil past times extending the mitt of the authorities volition receive got indirect effects whose aggregate consequences may last far worse than whatever direct benefits that current from the activity taken is a rather sophisticated argument. And yet this is the form of declaration that underlies a belief inwards a costless or laissez-faire society.
If y'all seem at each evil as it arises, inwards together with of itself, at that spot volition almost ever tend to last strong pressures to practise something well-nigh it. This volition last so because the direct effects are clear together with obvious, piece the indirect effects are remote together with devious, together with because at that spot tends to last a concentrated grouping of people who receive got strong interests inwards favor of a detail stair out whereas the opponents, similar the indirect effects of the measure, are diffused. One tin advert instance afterwards instance along this line. Indeed I think it is truthful that most unsmooth fallacies well-nigh economical policies derive from neglecting the indirect effects of those policies.
The tariff is ane example. The benefits that are alleged to current from a tariff are clear together with obvious. If a tariff is imposed, a specified grouping of people, whose names tin almost last listed, seem to last benefited inwards the commencement instance. The damage that is wrought past times the tariff is borne past times people whose names ane does non know together with who are unlikely themselves to know that they are or volition last harmed. The tariff does most damage to people who receive got special capacities for producing the exports that would pay for the goods that would last imported inwards the absence of a tariff. With a tariff inwards effect, the potential export manufacture may never exist, together with no ane volition ever know that he mightiness receive got been employed inwards it or who would receive got been. The indirect damage to consumers via a to a greater extent than inefficient allotment of resources together with higher prices for the resulting products is spread fifty-fifty to a greater extent than thinly through the society. Thus the instance for a tariff seems quite clear on commencement glance. And this is truthful inwards instance afterwards case.
This natural style to engage inwards province activity inwards specific instances can, it would seem, together with this is Dicey’s argument, last offset only past times a widespread full general credence of a philosophy of noninterference, past times a full general presumption against task whatever ane of a large course of teaching of actions. And, says Dicey, what is actually amazing together with surprising is that for so long a menstruum as a few decades, sufficiently widespread world persuasion developed inwards United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland inwards favor of the full general regulation of nonintervention together with laissez-faire as to overcome the natural style to hand a police push clit for the detail cases. As presently as this full general presumption weakened, it meant the emergence of a climate of persuasion inwards favor of specific authorities intervention.
Dicey’s declaration is enormously strengthened past times an asymmetry betwixt a shift toward individualism together with a shift away from it. In the commencement place, at that spot is what I receive got called the tyranny of the status quo. Anyone who wants to run across how strong that tyranny is tin practise no better, I believe, than to read Dicey’s volume now. On reading it he volition uncovering how extreme together with extensive a collectivist he is, as judged past times the kinds of standards for governmental activity that seemed obvious together with appropriate to Dicey when he wrote his lectures. In discussing issues of this kind, the style ever is to convey what is for granted, to assume that it is perfectly all right together with reasonable together with that the work to debate well-nigh is the adjacent step. This tends to hateful that movements inwards whatever ane management are hard to reverse. H5N1 2d source of asymmetry is the full general dilemma that faces the liberal: tolerance of the intolerant. The belief inwards individualism includes the belief inwards tolerating the intolerant. It includes the belief that the club is only worth defending if it is ane inwards which nosotros resort to persuasion rather than to forcefulness together with inwards which nosotros defend liberty of give-and-take on the purpose of those who would undermine the scheme itself. If ane departs from a costless society, the people inwards powerfulness inwards a collectivist club volition non hesitate to utilisation forcefulness to maintain it from beingness changed. Under such circumstances it is to a greater extent than hard to accomplish a revolution that would convert a totalitarian or collectivist club into an individualist club than it is to practise the reverse. From the bespeak of watch of the forces that may run inwards the management of rendering a costless club an unstable system, this is certainly ane of the most of import strengths of Dicey’s full general argument.
Perhaps the most famous declaration alleging the instability of a costless enterprise or capitalist club is the Marxian. Marx argued that at that spot were inherent historical tendencies inside a capitalist club that would tend to Pb to its destruction. As y'all know, he predicted that as it developed, capitalism would make a partition of club into sudden classes, the impoverishment of the masses, the despoilment of the midpoint classes, together with a declining charge per unit of measurement of profit. He predicted that the combined outcome would last a course of teaching struggle inwards which the course of teaching of the “expropriated,” or the proletarian class, would assume power.
Marx’s analysis is at to the lowest degree inwards purpose to last regarded as a scientific analysis attempting to derive hypotheses that could last used to predict consequences that were probable to occur. His predictions receive got uniformly been wrong; none of the major consequences that he predicted has inwards fact occurred. Instead of a widening carve upwardly with classes, at that spot has tended to last a reduction of course of teaching barriers. Instead of a despoilment of the midpoint class, at that spot has tended to be, if anything, an increment inwards the midpoint course of teaching relative to the extremes. Instead of the impoverishment of the masses, at that spot has been the largest rising inwards the measure of life of the masses that history has ever seen. We must thus spend upwardly his theory as having been disproved.
The lack of validity of Marx’s theory does non hateful that it has been unimportant. It had the enormous importance of leading many, if non a majority, of the intellectual together with ruling classes to regard tendencies of the form he predicted as inevitable, thereby leading them to interpret what did maintain inwards different terms than they otherwise would. Perhaps the most hitting instance has been the extent to which intellectuals together with people inwards full general receive got taken it for granted that the evolution of a capitalist club has meant an increased concentration of industrial powerfulness together with an increment inwards the grade of monopoly. Although this watch has largely reflected a confusion betwixt changes inwards absolute size together with changes inwards relative size, inwards purpose I think it was produced past times the fact that this was something they were told to seem for past times Marx. I don’t hateful to attribute this watch solely to the Marxian influence. But I think that inwards this together with other instances, the Marxian declaration has indirectly affected the patterns of thinking of a peachy many people, including many who would regard themselves as strongly anti-Marxian. Indeed, inwards many ways the ideas receive got been most strong when they receive got lost their labels. In this way, Marx’s ideas had an enormous intellectual importance, fifty-fifty though his scientific analysis together with predictions receive got all been contradicted past times experience.
In to a greater extent than recent times, Joseph Schumpeter has offered a to a greater extent than subtle together with intellectually to a greater extent than satisfactory defence forcefulness of essentially the Marxian conclusion. Schumpeter’s mental attitude toward Marx is rather interesting. He demonstrates that Marx was incorrect inwards every separate particular, yet proceeds both to receive got the major import of his conclusions together with to debate that Marx was a real peachy man. Whereas Marx’s watch was that capitalism would destroy itself past times its failure, Schumpeter’s watch was that capitalism would destroy itself past times its success. Schumpeter believed that large-scale enterprises together with monopolies receive got existent advantages inwards promoting technological progress together with growth together with that these advantages would give them a competitive border inwards the economical struggle. The success of capitalism would therefore, he argued, last associated with a growth of real large enterprises together with with the spread of something similar semi-monopoly over the industrial scene. In its turn, he thought that this evolution would tend to convert businessmen into bureaucrats. Large organizations receive got much inwards mutual whether they are governmental or private. They inevitably, he believed, produced an increasing separation betwixt the ultimate owners of the enterprises together with the individuals who were inwards positions of importance inwards managing the enterprises. Such individuals are induced to house high values upon technical performance together with to move adaptable to a form of civil service socialist organisation of society. In addition, this procedure would create the form of skills inwards the managerial elite that would last necessary inwards monastic enjoin to receive got a collectivist or governmentally controlled society. The evolution of this bureaucratic elite, with its style to house greater together with greater emphasis on safety together with stability together with to receive got centralized control, would tend, he believed, to receive got the effect of establishing a climate of persuasion highly favorable to a shift to an explicitly socialized together with centralized state.
The watch that Schumpeter expressed has much inwards mutual with what Burnham labeled a managerial revolution although the 2 are non past times whatever agency the same. There is also much inwards mutual betwixt Schumpeter’s analysis together with the distinction that Veblen drew inwards his analysis of the cost scheme betwixt the roles of entrepreneurs together with engineers, betwixt “business” together with “industry.” There are also large differences. Veblen saw the engineer as the productive forcefulness inwards the society, the entrepreneur as the destructive force. Schumpeter, if anything, saw matters the other way. He saw the entrepreneur as the creative forcefulness inwards club together with the engineer as just his handmaiden. But I think at that spot is much inwards mutual betwixt the 2 analyses with honour to the belief that powerfulness would tend to shift from the ane to the other.
For myself, I must confess that piece I uncovering Schumpeter’s analysis intriguing together with intellectually fascinating, I cannot receive got his thesis. It seems to me to reverberate inwards large purpose a widespread bias that emphasizes the large together with few as opposed to the pocket-size together with numerous, a style to run across the merits of scale together with non to recognize the merits of large numbers of separate people working inwards various activities. In whatever event, so far as ane tin judge, at that spot has been no hitting style inwards sense toward an increasing concentration of economical activity inwards large bureaucratic private enterprises. Some enormous enterprises receive got of course of teaching arisen. But at that spot has also been a real rapid growth inwards pocket-size enterprises. What has happened inwards this solid ground at to the lowest degree is that the large enterprises receive got tended to last concentrated inwards communication together with manufacturing. These industries receive got tended to work organisation human relationship for a roughly constant proportion of total economical activity. Small enterprises receive got tended to last concentrated inwards agriculture together with services. Agriculture has declined inwards importance together with inwards the number of enterprises, piece the service industries receive got grown inwards both. If ane leaves authorities aside, as Schumpeter’s thesis requires ane to do, so far as ane tin justice from the evidence, at that spot seems to receive got been no peculiarly consistent style for the fraction of economical activity that is carried on inwards whatever given pct of the enterprises to receive got grown. What has happened is that pocket-size enterprises together with large enterprises receive got both grown inwards scale, so that what nosotros at nowadays telephone phone a pocket-size enterprise may last large past times some before standard. However, the thesis that Schumpeter developed is certainly sophisticated together with subtle together with deserves serious attention.
There is some other direction, it seems to me, inwards which at that spot is a different form of a style for capitalism to undermine itself past times its ain success. The style I receive got inwards heed tin in all likelihood best last brought out past times the sense of Great Britain, which tends to supply the best laboratory for many of these forces. It has to practise with the mental attitude of Earth at large toward police push clit together with toward police push clit obedience. United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland has a broad together with deserved reputation for the extraordinary obedience of its people to the law. It has non ever been so. At the plough of the nineteenth century, together with earlier, the British had a real different reputation as a acre of people who would obey no police push clit or almost no law, a acre of smugglers, a acre inwards which corruption together with inefficiency was rife, together with inwards which ane could non acquire real much done through governmental channels.
Indeed, ane of the factors that led Bentham together with the Utilitarians toward laissez-faire (this is a watch that is also expressed past times Dicey) was the self-evident truth that if y'all wanted to acquire evils corrected, y'all could non await to practise so through the authorities of the time. The authorities was corrupt together with inefficient. It was clearly oppressive. It was something that had to last gotten out of the way as a commencement stride to reform. The fundamental philosophy of the Utilitarians or whatever philosophy that puts its emphasis on some form of a core of utilities, even so loose may last the expression, does non Pb to laissez-faire inwards principle. It leads to whatever form of organisation of economical activity is thought to make results that are regarded as skilful inwards the sense of adding to the core total of utilities. I think the major ground the Utilitarians tended to last inwards favor of laissez-faire was the obvious fact that authorities was incompetent to perform whatever of the tasks they wanted to run across performed.
Whatever the ground for its appeal, the adoption of laissez-faire had some of import consequences. Once laissez-faire was adopted, the economical incentive for corruption was largely removed. After all, if governmental officials had no favors to grant, at that spot was no demand to bribe them. And if at that spot was aught to last gained from government, it could hardly last a source of corruption. Moreover, the laws that were left were for the most part, together with in ane lawsuit to a greater extent than I am oversimplifying together with exaggerating, laws that were widely accepted as proper together with desirable: laws against theft, robbery, murder, together with so on. This is inwards sudden contrast to a province of affairs inwards which the legislative construction designates as crimes what people individually practise non regard as crimes or makes it illegal for people to practise what seems to them the sensible thing. The latter province of affairs tends to trim down honour for the law. One of the unintended together with indirect effects of laissez-faire was thus to found a climate inwards United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland of a much greater grade of obedience together with honour for the police push clit than had existed earlier. Probably at that spot were other forces at run inwards this development, but I believe that the establishment of laissez-faire set the groundwork for a reform inwards the civil service inwards the latter purpose of the century—the establishment of a civil service chosen on the ground of examinations together with merit together with of professional person competence. You could acquire that form of evolution because the incentives to seek such places for purposes of exerting improper influence were greatly reduced when authorities had few favors to confer.
In these ways the evolution of laissez-faire set the groundwork for a widespread honour for the law, on the ane hand, together with a relatively incorrupt, honest, together with efficient civil service, on the other, both of which are essential preconditions for the functioning of a collectivist society. In monastic enjoin for a collectivist club to operate, the people must obey the laws together with at that spot must last a civil service that tin together with volition send out the laws. The success of capitalism established these preconditions for a displace inwards the management of much greater province intervention.
The procedure I receive got described plainly runs both ways. H5N1 displace inwards the management of a collectivist club involves increased governmental intervention into the daily lives of people together with the conversion into crimes of actions that are regarded past times the ordinary somebody as exclusively proper. These tend inwards plough to undermine honour for the police push clit together with to give incentives to corrupt province officials. There can, I think, last lilliputian uncertainty that this procedure has begun inwards United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland together with has gone a substantial distance. Although honour for the police push clit may soundless last greater than it is here, most observers would concord that honour for the police push clit inwards United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland has gone downwardly decidedly inwards the course of teaching of the terminal 20 or 30 years, certainly since the war, as a outcome of the form of laws people receive got been asked to obey. On the occasions I receive got been inwards England, I receive got had access to 2 sources of data that to a greater extent than oft than non yield quite different answers. One is people associated with academic institutions, all of whom are quite shocked at the thought that whatever British citizen mightiness evade the law, except perchance for transactions involving exchanging pounds for dollars when commutation command was inwards effect. It also happens that I had contact with people engaged inwards pocket-size businesses. They tell a rather different story, ane that I suspect comes closer to beingness valid, well-nigh the extent to which regulations were honored inwards the breach together with taxes together with customs regulations evaded; the ane thing that is uniform with people or almost uniform is that nobody or almost nobody has whatever moral repugnance to smuggling, certainly non when he is smuggling something into some solid ground other than his own.
The erosion of the upper-case missive of the alphabet stock of willingness to obey the police push clit reduces the capacity of a club to run a centralized state, to displace away from freedom. This effect on police push clit obedience is thus ane that is reversible together with runs inwards both directions. It is some other major element that needs to last taken into work organisation human relationship inwards judging the probable stability of a costless scheme inwards the long run.
I receive got been emphasizing forces together with approaches that are mostly pessimistic inwards terms of our values inwards the sense that most of them are reasons why a costless club is probable to last unstable together with to alter into a collectivist system. I should similar thus to plough to some of the tendencies that may operate inwards the other direction.
What are the sources of strength for a costless club that may aid to maintain it? One of the major sources of strength is the style for extension of economical intervention inwards a broad make of areas to interfere straight together with clearly with political liberty together with thus to brand people aware of the conflict betwixt the two. This has been the course of teaching of events inwards Great United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland afterwards the state of war together with inwards many other countries. I demand non repeat or dwell on this point.
A 2d source of strength is ane that has already been suggested past times my comments on police push clit obedience. In many ways perchance the major hope for a costless club is exactly that characteristic inwards a costless club tha makes it so efficient together with productive inwards its economical activity, namely, the ingenuity of millions of people, each of whom is trying to farther his interests, inwards purpose past times finding ways to acquire closed to province regulation. If I may refer to my ain casual observation of United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland together with French Republic a few years afterwards the war, the impression that I formed on the the ground of real lilliputian evidence but that seemed to me to last supported past times farther exam was that United Kingdom of Great Britain together with Northern Ireland at the fourth dimension was beingness economically strangled past times the police push clit obedience of her citizens piece French Republic was beingness saved past times the existence of the dark market. The cost scheme is a most effective together with efficient scheme for organizing resources. As long as people seek to move far operate, it tin surmount a lot of problems. There is the famous storey well-nigh the human being who wrote a missive of the alphabet to Adam Smith maxim that some policy or other was going to last the ruin of England. And Adam Smith, as I empathise the story, wrote dorsum together with said, “Young man, at that spot is a lot of ruin inwards a nation.”
This seems to me an of import point. Once authorities embarks on intervention into together with regulation of private activities, this establishes an incentive for large numbers of individuals to utilisation their ingenuity to uncovering ways to acquire closed to the authorities regulations. One outcome is that at that spot appears to last a lot to a greater extent than regulation than at that spot actually is. Another is that the fourth dimension together with liberate energy of authorities officials are increasingly taken upwardly with the demand to plug the holes inwards the regulations that the citizens are finding, creating, together with exploiting. From this bespeak of view, Parkinson’s Law well-nigh the growth of bureaucracy without a corresponding growth of output may last a favorable characteristic for the maintenance of a costless society. An efficient governmental organization, non an inefficient one, is almost for sure the greater threat to a costless society. One of the virtues of a costless club is exactly that the marketplace tends to last a to a greater extent than efficient organizing regulation than centralized direction. Centralized management inwards this way agency ever having to struggle something of a losing battle.
Very closely related to this bespeak together with perchance only some other aspect of it is the departure betwixt the visibility of monopolistic action, whether governmental or private, together with of actions through the market. When people are acting through the market, millions of people are engaging inwards activities inwards a diversity of ways that are highly impersonal, non real good recognized, together with almost none of which attracts attention. On the other hand, governmental actions, together with this is as truthful of actions past times private monopolies, whether of labor or industry, tend to last conducted past times persons who acquire into the headlines, to attract notice. I receive got oft conducted the experiment of bespeak people to listing the major industries inwards the United States. In many ways, the enquiry is a foolish ane because at that spot is no clear Definition of industry. Yet people receive got some concept of industry, together with the interesting thing is that the outcome is ever real similar. People ever listing those industries inwards which at that spot is a high grade of concentration. They listing the automobile industry, never the garment industry, although the garment manufacture is far larger past times whatever economical stair out than the automobile industry. I receive got never had anybody listing the manufacture of providing domestic service, although it employs many to a greater extent than people than the steel industry. Estimates of importance are ever biased inwards the management of those industries that are monopolized or concentrated together with so are inwards the hands of few firms. Everybody knows the names of the leading producers of automobiles. Few could listing the leading producers of men’s together with women’s have on or of furniture, although these are both real large industries. So competition, working through the market, exactly because it is impersonal, anonymous, together with plant its way inwards devious methods, tends to last underestimated inwards importance; the kinds of personal activities that are associated with government, with monopoly, with merchandise unions, tend to last exaggerated inwards importance.
Because this form of direct personal activity past times large organizations, whether governmental or private, is visible, it tends to telephone phone attending to itself out of all proportion to its economical importance. The outcome is that the community tends to last awakened to the dangers arising from such activities together with such concentration of powerfulness before they move so of import that it is as good belatedly to practise anything well-nigh them. This phenomenon is real clear for merchandise unions. Everybody has been reading inwards the newspapers well-nigh the negotiations inwards steel together with has learned that at that spot is a labor work inwards the steel industry. The negotiations ordinarily terminate inwards some form of wage increment that is regarded as attributable to the union’s activities. In the postwar period, domestic servants receive got gotten larger wage increases without anyone engaging inwards large-scale negotiations without anyone’s knowing that negotiations were going on together with without a unmarried paper headline, except perchance to tape complaints well-nigh the work of finding domestic servants. I think that merchandise unions receive got much monopoly power. But I think that the importance of merchandise unions is widely exaggerated, that they are aught similar as of import inwards the allotment of labor or the conclusion of wage rates as they are supposed to be. They are non unimportant—perhaps 10 or fifteen percent of the working forcefulness receive got payoff at nowadays some 10 or fifteen percent higher than they otherwise would last because of merchandise unions; the remaining 85 percent of the working course of teaching receive got payoff something similar 4 percent lower than they would otherwise be. This is appreciable together with important, but it does non give unions the form of powerfulness over the economic scheme that would move far impossible to cheque their farther rise.
The iii major sources of strength I receive got suggested so far are the corroding effect of the extension of province activities together with province intervention on attitudes toward the enforcement of the police push clit together with on the graphic symbol of the civil service; the ingenuity of individuals inwards avoiding regulation; together with the visibility of authorities activity together with of monopoly. Implicit inwards these is a fourth, namely, the full general inefficiency inwards the functioning of government.
These comments receive got been rather discursive. I receive got been attempting just to listing some of the forces at run tending to destroy a costless club in ane lawsuit established together with tending to resist its destruction. I receive got left out of consideration the forcefulness that inwards some ways is our most of import concern, namely, the forcefulness of ideas, of people’s attitudes well-nigh values together with well-nigh the form of social organisation that they want. I receive got omitted this forcefulness because I receive got aught to say well-nigh it that is non self-evident.
No real clear conclusion tin last drawn from this exam of the forces adverse together with favorable to a costless society. The historical tape suggests pessimism, but the analysis gives no strong ground for either peachy optimism or confirmed pessimism well-nigh the stability of a costless club if it is given an chance to exist. One of the most of import tasks for liberal scholars to undertake is to examine this number to a greater extent than fully inwards the lite of historical evidence inwards monastic enjoin that nosotros may receive got a much amend thought of what factors tend to promote together with what factors to destroy a costless society.
Credit: New Individualist Review 2 (Summer 1962): 3–10. Copyright © 1962 past times Liberty Fund, Inc. Reprinted courtesy of the New Individualist Review together with Liberty Fund, Inc.
Buat lebih berguna, kongsi:
