BROOKLYN, NY: Last Friday, November 9, saw
the big “Milton Friedman
Centennial” celebration at the University of Chicago’s
Becker Friedman Institute for Research in Economics. It was a big
day for fans of one of the Founding Fathers of
neoliberal/libertarian free-market ideology, and those fans are
legion on both sides of the narrow Establishment divide —as Obama’s
economy czar Larry Summers wrote in
2006, “Any honest Democrat will admit that we are all Friedmanites
now.”
One episode in Milton Friedman’s career not celebrated (or even
acknowledged) at last week’s centennial took place in 1946, the
same year Friedman began peddling his pro-business “free market
economics” ideology.
According to
Congressional hearings on illegal lobbying activities '46 was the
year that Milton Friedman and his U Chicago cohort George Stigler
arranged an under-the-table deal with a Washington lobbying
executive to pump out covert propaganda for the national real
estate lobby in exchange for a hefty payout, the terms of which
were never meant to be released to the public.
The arrangement between Friedman and Stigler with the Washington
real estate lobbyist was finally revealed during he Buchanan
Committee hearings on illegal lobbying activities in 1950. But then
it was almost entirely forgotten, including apparently by those
celebrating the “Milton Friedman Centennial” last week in
Chicago.
I only came across the revelations about Friedman’s sordid
beginnings in the footnotes of an old book on the history of
lobbying by former Newsweek book editor Karl
Schriftgiesser, published in 1951, shortly after the Buchanan
Committee hearings ended. The actual details of Milton Friedman’s
PR deal are sordid and familiar, with tentacles reaching into our
ideologically rotted-out era.
It starts just after the end of World War Two, when America’s
industrial and financial giants, fattened up from war profits,
established a new lobbying front group called the Foundation for
Economic Education (FEE) that focused on promoting a new
pro-business ideology—which it called “libertarianism”— to
supplement other business lobbying groups which focused on specific
policies and legislation.
The FEE is generally regarded as “the
first libertarian think-tank” asReason’s Brian
Doherty calls it in his book “Radicals For Capitalism: A
Freewheeling History of the Modern Libertarian Movement”
(2007). As
the Buchanan Committee discovered, the Foundation for Economic
Education was the best-funded conservative lobbying outfit ever
known up to that time, sponsored by a Who’s Who of US industry in
1946.
A partial list of FEE’s original donors in its first four years
includes: The Big Three auto makers GM, Chrysler and Ford; top oil
majors including Gulf Oil, Standard Oil, and Sun Oil; major steel
producers US Steel, National Steel, Republic Steel; major retailers
including Montgomery Ward, Marshall Field and Sears; chemicals
majors Monsanto and DuPont; and other Fortune 500 corporations
including General Electric, Merrill Lynch, Eli Lilly, BF Goodrich,
ConEd, and more.
The FEE was set up by a longtime US Chamber of Commerce executive
named Leonard Read, together with Donaldson Brown, a director in
the National Association of Manufacturers lobby group and board
member at DuPont and General Motors.
That is how
libertarianism started: As an arm of big business
lobbying.
Before bringing
back Milton Friedman into the picture, this needs to be repeated
again: “Libertarianism” was a project of the corporate lobby world,
launched as a big business “ideology” in 1946 by The US Chamber of
Commerce and the National Association of
Manufacturers. The FEE’s board included the future
founder of the John Birch Society, Robert Welch; the most powerful
figure in the Mormon church at that time, J Reuben Clark, a
frothing racist and anti-Semite after whom BYU named its law
school; and United Fruit director Herb Cornuelle.
The purpose of the FEE — and libertarianism, as
it was originally created — was to supplement big business lobbying
with a pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-economics rationale to back up
its policy and legislative attacks on labor and government
regulations.
This background is important in the Milton Friedman story because
Friedman is a founder of libertarianism, and because the corrupt
lobbying deal he was busted playing a part in was arranged through
the Foundation for Economic Education.
False, whitewashed history is as much a part of the Milton Friedman
mythology as it is the libertarian movement’s own airbrushed
history about its origins; the 1950 Buchanan Committee hearings
expose both as creations of big business lobby groups whose purpose
is to deceive and defraud the public and legislators in order to
advance the cause of corporate America.
The story starts like this: In 1946, Herbert Nelson was the chief
lobbyist and executive vice president for the National Association
of Real Estate Boards, and one of the highest paid lobbyists in the
nation. Mr. Nelson’s real estate constituency was unhappy with rent
control laws that Truman kept in effect after the war ended. Nelson
and his real estate lobby led what investigators discovered was the
most formidable and best-funded opposition to President Truman in
the post-war years, amassing some $5,000,000 for their lobby
efforts—that’s $5mln in 1946 dollars, or roughly $60 million in
2012 dollars.
So Herbert Nelson contracted out the PR services of the Foundation
for Economic Education to concoct propaganda designed to shore up
the National Real Estate lobby’s legislative drive — and the
propagandists who took on the job were Milton Friedman and his U
Chicago cohort, George Stigler.
To understand the sort of person Herbert Nelson was, here is a
letter he wrote in 1949 that Congressional investigators discovered
and recorded:
"I do not believe
in democracy. I think it stinks. I don’t think anybody except
direct taxpayers should be allowed to vote. I don’t believe women
should be allowed to vote at all. Ever since they started, our
public affairs have been in a worse mess than ever."
It’s an old libertarian mantra, libertarianism versus democracy,
libertarianism versus women’s suffrage; a position most recently
repeated by billionaire libertarian Peter
Thiel —Ron Paul’s main campaign funder.
So in 1946, this same Herbert Nelson turned to the Foundation for
Economic Education to manufacture some propaganda to
help the National
Association of Real Estate Boards fight rent control
laws. Nelson knew that the founder of the first
libertarian think-tank agreed with him on many key points. Such as
their contempt and disdain for the American public.
Leonard Read, the legendary (among libertarians) founder/head of
the FEE, argued that the public should not be allowed to know which
corporations donated to his libertarian front-group because, he
argued, the public could not be trusted to make “sound judgments”
with disclosed information:
"The public
reporting would present a single fact—the amount of a contributor’s
donation—to casual readers, persons having only a cursory interest
in the matter at issue, persons who would not and perhaps could not
possess all the facts.
These folks of the
so-called public thus receive only oversimplifications or
half-truths from which only erroneous conclusions are almost
certain to be drawn. If there is a public interest in the rightness
or wrongness of corporate or personal donations to charitable,
religious or education institutions, and I am not at all ready to
concede that there is, then that interest should be guarded by some
such agency as the Bureau of Internal Revenue, an agency that is in
a position to obtain all the facts, not by Mr. John Public who
lacks relevant information for the forming of sound
judgments...Public reporting of a half-truth is indeed a
significant provocation."
So in May 1946, Herbert Nelson of the Real Estate lobby, looking
for backup in his drive to abolish federal rent control laws,
contacted libertarian founder Leonard Read of the FEE with an order
for a PR pamphlet “with some such title as ‘The Case against
Federal Real Estate Control’,” according to Schriftgiesser’s
book The Lobbyists.
What happened next, I’ll quote from Schriftgiesser:
"They were now
busily co-operating on the new project which the foundation had
engaged Milton Friedman and George J. Stigler to write. It was to
be called Roofs and Ceilings and it was to be an
outright attack on rent controls.
When Nelson received a copy of the manuscript he wrote Read to say,
“The pamphlet...is a dandy. It is just what I
wanted."
The National Association of Real Estate Boards was so pleased with
Milton Friedman’s made-to-order propaganda that they ordered up
500,000 pamphlets from the FEE, and distributed them throughout the
real estate lobby’s vast local network of real estate brokers and
agents.
In libertarianism’s own airbrushed history about itself, the
Foundation for Economic Education was a brave, quixotic bastion of
libertarian “true believers” doomed to defeat at the all-powerful
hands of the liberal Keynsian Leviathan. Here is how Brian Doherty
describes the FEE and its chief lobbyist Leonard Read:
"[Read] would
never explicitly scrape for funds... He never directly asked anyone
to give anything, he proudly insisted, and while FEE would sell
literature to all comers, it was also free to anyone who asked. His
attitude toward money was Zen, sometimes hilariously so. When asked
how FEE was doing financially, his favorite reply was, “Just
perfectly.”... Read wanted no endowments and frowned on any
donation meant to be held in reserve for some future need."
And here is what the committee’s own findings reported—findings
lost in history:
"It is difficult
to avoid the conclusion that the Foundation for Economic Education
exerts, or at least expects to exert, a considerable influence on
national legislative policy....It is equally difficult to imagine
that the nation’s largest corporations would subsidize the entire
venture if they did not anticipate that it would pay solid,
long-range legislative dividends."
Or in the words of Rep. Carl Albert
(D-OK): "Every
bit of this literature is along propaganda
lines."
The manufactured history about libertarian’s origins, or its
purpose, parallels the manufactured myths about one of big
business’s key propaganda tools, Milton Friedman. As the author of
The Lobbyists, not knowing who Milton Friedman was at the time,
wrote of Friedman’s collaborative effort with Stigler:
“Certainly [the
FEE’s] booklet, Roofs or Ceilings, was definitely
propaganda and sought to influence legislation....This booklet was
printed in bulk by the foundation and half a million copies were
sold at cost to the National Association of Real Estate Boards,
which had them widely distributed throughout the country by its
far-flung network of local member boards.”
Which brings me back to last Friday’s “Milton Friedman Centennial”
celebration at the University of Chicago’s Becker Friedman
Institute, featuring a distinguished panel of economists from
Stanford, Princeton and of course U Chicago, among them two Nobel
Prize winners — James Heckman and Robert Lucas —all gathered
together to “explore both aspects of
Friedman's legacy: the impact of his policy insights and his
enduring scholarship”...
Like everything involving modern economics and libertarianism, it
was a kind of giant meta-sham, shams celebrating a sham.
Even the Nobel
Prizes in economics awarded to people like Milton Friedman, George
Stigler, or Friedman’s contemporary fans Heckman and Lucas,
are fake Nobel Prizes — in fact, there is no such thing as a
Nobel Prize in economics; its real name is the
“Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred
Nobel” and it was first launched in 1969 by the Swedish Central
Bank and has since been denounced by Alfred Nobel’s
heirs.
And yet — in the words of Larry Summers, "Any honest Democrat will
admit we are all Friedmanites now." Of course, there are no honest
Democrats. And
there are no honest economists. And these are the
people who are framing our politics, the people who have told
Greece and Spain they have no choice, and the people who today are
making sure that the number one item on Obama’s and Congress’s
agenda is cutting Social Security and cutting Medicare and cutting
"entitlements" — and the only thing that divides the elites in
charge of this mess is “how much of these moochers’ lifelines can
we cut?”
http://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/milton-friedman