Chapter dzǹ: Is Ļere a Bias Toward Overregulation? ȂȁȈĻe psychological rootsȀǿof interventionism include people’s tendency
to believe what they want to believe and the readiness of politicians to
exploit this tendency. In political argumentation, plausibility counts. Mere
slogans and name-calling sometimes work. Ļe acceptance of merely plau-
sible arguments is aided by a trait of contemporary thought roughly equiv-
alent to what F.A. Hayek has called “scientism.”ȀȀJust as Chanticleer
thought his crowing made the sun rise, so voters and politicians seem to
think that their laws are what make good things happen. People are unac-
customed to conceiving of how good results will occur unless they are
explicitly sought; the invisible hand is not universally appreciated. When
a problem has become politically fashionable, to suggest leaving its solu-
tion to private initiative seems callous.ȀȁAction is considered “positive”
and therefore good, while opposition is “negative” and therefore bad.
Support for activism intertwines with the idea that democracy is a
good thing. Ļat idea slides into the belief that doing things democrat-
ically, that is, through democratic government, that is, through govern-
ment, is a good thing.
Another reason for the widespread appeal of government intervention
is disregard of the incompleteness of knowledge and the costs of informa-
tion, transactions, and decisionmaking in the public sector while empha-
sizing such “imperfections” of the private sector. Tacitly, the government
is regarded as a philosopher-king, totally benevolent, omniscient, efficient,
and effective.ȀȂHanding over a problem to such an entity seems like solv-
ing it.
şŜőŏŕōŘ ŕŚŠőŞőşŠş ōŚŐ şťŚŠŔőŠŕŏ řōŖśŞŕŠŕőş
So far we have been considering the average voter, his circumstances and
attitudes, and the appeals directed toward him. Next we turn to special
interests and then to “hobbyists.” Politicians are tempted to appease each
ȀǿHere I am falling into temptation—into amateur psychologizing—and what follows
should perhaps be discounted.
ȀȀHis articles on “Scientism and the Study of Society” are reprinted inĻe Counter-
Revolution of Science(HayekȀȈȄȁ, Pt.Ȁ).
ȀȁSee below in the section on “crowding out.”
ȀȂGeorge Stigler quotes a pair of rather typical passages on the defects of a private
market economy that could readily be overcome by “a socialist economy” (Oskar Lange)
or by “the State” (A.C. Pigou). Ļen he substitutes “Almighty Jehovah” and “his Serene
Omnipotence” for the words here in quotation marks—with amusing and telling effect.
See StiglerȀȈȆȄ, pp.ȀȀȁ–ȀȀȂ. Ļe assumption illustrated is now being undermined by the
application of methodological individualism to the study of government.