Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

MURRAY N. ROTHBARD VS. THE PHILOSPHERS: UNPUBLISHED WRITINGS
52 ON HAYEK, MISES, STRAUSS, AND POLYANI
were the days of eliminating the unfit . . . crude . . .
but effective. 7
After hypnotizing himself into believing that he can gaze
into a crystal ball and divine exactly what Nature is doing, who
she is, and what her motives are, the Rugged Individualist
then returns to the cave, as in Plato, to advise us poor mortals
who have not as yet “seen the light.” Horrors! He finds
that men are violating Nature’s wishes and injunctions, that
the unfit are being protected by “modern medicine and modern
philanthropy” 8 and are debilitating the race by being permitted
to live and have children. The Rugged Individualist
reluctantly admits that he will never be able to convince us
weaklings to abandon penicillin, hospitals, and soft armchairs.
So, he very generously compromises and comes up
with this magnificent solution: “the broadest application of
sterilization.” In other words, the unfit will be magnanimously
permitted to live, but not to pollute the racial stream.” Thus
will our “responsibility for posterity” be fulfilled. 9
That is the essence of Dr. Cutten’s thesis and the broad
outlines of social Darwinism or rugged individualism. It
seems to me that the mere statement of it would expose it
as obvious bilge. Apparently not, however, since this philosophy
had a considerable vogue, and Dr. Cutten apparently
believes in it wholeheartedly. Demolition is therefore in
order, although there are so many fallacies it will be difficult
to treat them more than sketchily.
1. The Absurd Mysticism about Nature
First, I see no validity whatever in this making nature an
anthropomorphic figure Nature. This mystic absurdity
Nature apparently is cast in the image of man, with human
feelings, desires, and attributes. She is strong, farseeing,
7Ibid., p. 71.
8Ibid., p. 70.
9 Ibid.