Excursus: Neo-Liberalism in the UK
This page is currently under revision.
Neo-liberalism is a revival of Adam Smith's liberalism. Adam Smith (1723-90) defined political economics. In 1752 he was appointed to the chair of moral philosophy at Glasgow University and lectured on natural religion, ethics, jurisprudence and economy. From the latter he published "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" in 1776.
Smith was influenced by Stoicism where a harmony resulted in the triumph of good over evil. Smith had no books of Christian doctrine in his personal library, if he had a religion, it was that of stoicism. The Stoics believed that evil deeds could produce good outcomes - that the means justify the ends. This led Smith to talk of "trickle-down" economics - even if people are rich and selfish at one level, their riches will "trickle down" to produce a good benefit for those at a lower level. The selfish activity of economics produces benefits for others - Smith spoke of people as though they were driven entirely by economic motives. When economic thought is applied to all areas of life, as Smith did, this becomes an ideology, a lens through which a person perceives the world.
Before Smith it had been thought that there was a fixed amount of wealth which was periodically divided and redivided. By Smith's time it had been realised that wealth was being created, and Smith wrote the "Wealth of Nations" for governments. Smith said the first duty of the state is to ensure economic freedom by securing the borders. The state must ensure private property is secure and must not interfere in the workings of private property too much (laissez faire). Employment should be regulated only by the market, not the government, and the internal market (home-grown businesses etc) should not be protected. Smith also rejected the idea of monopolies and certain countries having favoured status in trade. Competition is all, to Smith, and he invested his economics with a moral idea. Smith saw almost everything as a commodity which the consumer should pay the best supplier of that commodity for. He saw education as a commodity which students should pay for, in order to ensure, by competition, the best education - so he would have been utterly against the idea of state schools. Smith also saw religion as a commodity - whereas established churches (such as the Church of England) can ignore their congregations as they have no competition, new sect leaders only get paid if they make new converts and so must compete with each other to offer the best "product".
The British thinker, Hayek (1899-1992) revived Adam Smith's thought as neo-liberalism. He was originally a technical economist with interests outside his discipline. In 1944 Hayek wrote "The Road to Serfdom", an attack on socialism. The post-war British state was socialist under the 1945 Atlee government (Labour Party), and it was this Hayek was challenging. Hayek wrote that it was liberalism which had made the country great - the liberalism of Adam Smith. Thirty years after he wrote about neo-liberalism Hayek received a Nobel prize for his book, and his ideas influenced Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.
Hayek uncovered a hidden and pervasive socialist ideology (note: not Marxist/Communist, but socialist). Some Christians of his time had also seen this ideology in their religion as many people saw Christianity as having socialist values. Hayek believed economic freedom would ensure social and spiritual freedom - there following Adam Smith's belief that everything could be seen through the lens of economics. Hayek also believed that the institutions of an economically liberal state could not be changed, unlike socialism, which teaches that institutions are man-made and can be changed.
Hayek advocated "the abandoned road" while noting that this is not as glamorous as reconstructing society under socialism. He described neo-liberalism as "the game of catallaxy" as exchange makes previous enemies, friends, and trade creates a spontaneous order. Hayek's views made him most emphatically not a Conservative (UK political party roughly equivalent to the Republican Party), but a member of the radical right, advocating change against conservativism, but not in favour of socialism. (See "Why I am not a Conservative" by Hayek).
Neo-liberals tended not to be land-owners in the sense of inherited land, and so were not classically Conservative, protecting the rights of land-owners. This was typified by the neo-liberal Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, who was a greengrocer's daughter. Conservatives and socialists have more in common with each other than with the neo-liberals because both sides think elites should have power. Conservatives also tend to be more xenophobic or isolationist than neo-liberals, who see other nations as an opportunity for trade.
Hayek noted that conservativism has no philosophy/ideology, as it is essentially a practical medium, something to live by. Conservativism also does not require expertise in its leaders and thinkers, as could be seen when, in the 1960's they elected Harold Macmillan (who said he did his sums with matchsticks) as Chancellor.
Neo-liberalism needed to be promoted as a moral force as it had been largely rejected on moral grounds. Keith Joseph in 1975 said "Britain never really internalised capitalist values", so neo-liberalism needed to be promoted as an economic and moral system. Chris Tame wrote a moral case for private enterprise, but as neo-liberalism had no moral ideas bequeathed by the Conservatives they were forced to look to the US for their theory. Rand said neo-liberalism/capitalism would have to be promtoted as a Christian ideology and thereby a moral system. The problem with this, of course, is that neo-liberalism idealises selfishness as a way to benefit the whole society and this value had to become a moral one.
Margaret Thatcher came to address the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1988. Her speech was later called the "Sermon on the Mound" (the place where the assembly was held) and in it she said a fundamental mark of the church was to give people the right to choose. The Church of Scotland had criticised her as lacking a social policy, and she spoke on the relation between church and state, although what she said was more neo-liberal than to the point - not Romans 13 or Revelation 13, but Thessalonians 3. One of Thatcher's advisors was Brian Griffiths, and in 1984 he wrote "Christianity and Capitalism". He had an influence on the "sermon on the mound". He said that the redistribution of capital had no connection with Christianity as well as being bad economic policy which bred dependency. He said the Old Testament encourages people to create wealth in order to serve others, and God and that there is no rejection of private property there. The Prophets, however, while not advocating redistribution, did criticise capitalism, see Amos.