Midnight in the Garden of My Hate Mail
By Robert Higgs • Wednesday April 8, 2009 2:33 PM PDT • 36 Comments
As readers of this blog may be aware, I was the guest on C-SPAN’s “In Depth” program on Sunday, April 5. Afterward, the volume of my e-mail messages rose substantially as people wrote to me to express their opinion of my performance or to ask me questions. Although many of these messages sent approbation, for which I am grateful, others, like most of the people who called in during the program, were less than complimentary.
I had a foreboding that one of these messages might contain, shall we say, a bit of denunciation when I saw that its subject line read “You’re a fucking STUPID and VAPID.” In the body of the message, the sentence continues:
little insect.
“Everything deregulated...”
Please shoot yourself now and by chance, you haven’t bred have you?
Scum sucking maggot, get the fuck off my CSPAN channel and get out of my society.
Although this foul-mouthed lingo is not the kind of language that my mother taught me to use, I understood it well enough to file it under the rubric of ”strong disapproval.”
Over the past decade or so, my popular articles on the Web have frequently elicited similar expressions of personal contempt and hatred. Had I not been a student of ideology, I might have been somewhat perplexed by such malevolent missives. After all, what do my writings endorse? As a rule, they uphold peace, voluntary cooperation, tolerance, and friendship toward all who do not proclaim themselves to be my sworn enemies. How can such inoffensive views touch a reader’s nerves so painfully that he responds by assaulting my character and demanding that I evacuate the country in which my ancestors and I were born? (Indeed, some of my forebears lived here even before the Europeans came to North America. If my information is correct, one-eighth of my ancestors were Cherokees, who, historians inform us, did not formally invite the white people to invade their long-inhabited, well-developed territory and, later, to expell them from it at bayonet point and march them, amid great suffering, to live in a wilderness known as Indian Territory.) So, I always wonder, who the hell does my correspondent think he is that HE should command ME, of all people, to leave this country? Can’t we at least flip a coin to decide which of us must go?
During the painful years of the Bush regime, we had to endure the slings and arrows of the brown shirts who compose the so-called Republican base. Now that Obama has ascended the throne, the brown shirts of the left are emerging as the more conspicuous barbarians. Thank God it is not the case, as far too many people suppose, that we must be on one of these sides or the other. We can transcend this disgusting political spectrum, placing ourselves neither on the left nor on the right — nor even in the so-called “independent” zone somewhere between them — but rather rising above the entire line and insisting that red-state savagery and blue-state savagery are equally despicable and intolerable. I daresay that the future of our civilization hinges on whether a sufficient number of us will choose this transcendence.
Tags: American History, Fascism, Politics, The State, Video 
“Red” state, “blue” state,” even “purple” state. The problem isn’t the color; it’s the state.
Franklin Harris | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
The lefties out there preach toleration until you dissent. Then tolerance goes out the window. Mutual respect is replaced by name-calling.
This is what happens when people rely on politics to achieve their ends.
Steve Hogan | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
You are a candle in the dark, Dr. Higgs. I have always enjoyed your writings, and I feel nothing but pity for those pissants (e.g., your correspondent), who will never read them, having locked their minds in a box and thrown away the key.
Eric | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
You are a hero.
Carolyn | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
I watched the C-SPAN program replayed on YouTube, and I just don’t get the hostility of some of the callers. I generally avoid engaging in pop psychology, but it must be the case that your (and my) position on individual liberty somehow threatens in a fundamental way the perceived well-being of those folks. I don’t see how, but the viciousness of your e-mail indicates that you struck a nerve.
Gandhi said, “First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.” It looks like those callers skipped the laughing part.
B Carlisle | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
This morning, I forwarded a link to your article, “The Legions Arrayed Against Us” to my nephew who is a freshman in college. I’ve turned him on to this site, The Freeman, Cafe Hayek, Mises.org and several other libertarian and Austrian economics sites. I can tell he is making use of the sites because he linked me an article from Mises.org that was written in ’06. He was digging deep.
My dentist, who is a young man, and I had a discussion about you this morning too. He also is a newcomer to libertarian thought. I wrote down a couple of the same sites for him and listed a couple of books. I took your advice from the C-SPAN interview and suggested Against Leviathan.
An old friend and I discuss regularly how much our own thinking has changed over the last few years. Some of this change came from personal reflection but a lot of it happened because we discovered the writings of F.A. Hayek, Mises, Robert Higgs and many other champions of liberty.
The Schumpeter quote you included in the Legions article (at LewRockwell.com) pretty much sums up what lovers of liberty have always been up against. But even in my limited circle I’m finding people who are waking up to the dangers inherent in government assuming more and more control over their lives.
I just keep on talking to people and nudging them towards the people who have taught me so much. You, Dr. Higgs, are always one of the first names I mention.
By the way, you know you are having an impact when the forces allayed against you respond so fiercely. Your message frightens them because there is so much truth in it.
Thanks.
RickC | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
Sir,
I learned a great deal from your appearance on C-SPAN. And I thank you.
Jason | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
Such eloquent words from your email friend. He must NOT have read the King James Bible. I was also intrigued by the comments of the callers that suggested they were listening (or not) to someone else. I have long contended that the political spectrum is not linear and we should not call it so. Let freedom ring......
Greg Farrington | Apr 9, 2009 | Reply
Mr. Higgs,
Great article. As for the e-mailer’s foul comments as Oscar Wilde wrote, “The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.” If that e-mailer is so sure of his position (if you can even call it that) surely he would be willing to debate you in public? O.K., everyone can stop laughing now.
The Dude | Apr 9, 2009 | Reply
Your patience with the callers, reiterating your points over and over, was herculean. When you challenge people’s life-long ideologies you are affecting their mental capital built over decades and life times. They feel threatened when their foundation is challenged. This typically elicits the type primal responses you have received.
Regardless you are a champion in your oratory skills. Three hours of questions and answer would make any man weak. I was proud every minute to see such a great champion of liberty speak so boldly for our cause. It is people like you that keep our hopes alive.
Thank you sir.
Matthew | Apr 9, 2009 | Reply
I watched it and it was clear to me what your position was. I admired the way you calmly answered the questions. It is unfortunate that people do not respect the person after they come to disagree with their viewpoint. You wonder how anything ever gets resolved.
I think there exists a great confusion, not only amongst many of the viewers, but in the rest our society. The confusion is that the unhampered or free market advocated by Mises, Rothbard and libertarians is identified with, or considered to be, the current fascist arrangement also known as the mixed economy. Take for example Naomi Klein’s book, The Shock Doctrine. In this book, an author with left-wing bias, an advocate of socialism and more governmentm rails against the mixed economy but identifies it as the unregulated free market. I do not know whether she intent was deliberately doing this or she does not know what a free or unhampered market is. Libertarians have an idea, but one has never existed. Anyone who does not support more government control of corporations is considered to be a capitalist and by association can be described disrespectfully. If the irate viewers really understood the situation, and as you pointed out to them, the foe is common.
Fred | Apr 9, 2009 | Reply
Bob may be brilliant, but he’s also humble. Wanted to share with everyone just a few of the nice comments I’ve witnessed since Bob’s appearance on C-SPAN:
“thank you for your defense of freedom”
“fantastic interview”
“educated, articulate, and consistent”
“thanks for having the guts”
“Sir, I saw you on C-SPAN Sunday....BRAVO!”
“Wonderful, enlightening session, better than any other in memory. Really an
incredible accomplishment.”
“Hello, just curious if you’ve ever considered running for congress. We need
more people like you.”
“I know how refreshing it is to receive email from my students, so I wanted you to know, as an unofficial ‘student’ of your writing, that you have, more than any other scholar, helped me come to understand the meaning of peace and freedom in American history...you have consistently amazed and impressed me with your level of knowledge and ability to convey it so easily.”
and my personal favorite (besides the one where the guy thanks Bob for being patient with the “idiots”):
“Just a personal note to thank you for an inspiring 3 hours. Your passionate integrity came through loud and clear. I remember getting the same sense when I attended a Rothbard Lecture in 1969. I’m a member of the choir, but I hope your message caused many people to awake from their statist slumber.”
Thanks to everyone who watched last weekend. And thanks to Bob, for letting me convince him that flying to DC for the interview wasn’t such a bad idea after all. (Or maybe he remains unconvinced?) At any rate, it was awesome. If you missed it, you can catch it again tomorrow:
http://www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=10300&SectionName=In%20Depth
Wendy | Apr 10, 2009 | Reply
I’ve never heard such a collection of moronic nonsense as I heard from the C-SPAN callers. You have the patience of a saint for not immediately calling them all blithering idiots as soon as they hung up.
Brian Garst | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
Dear Mr. Higgs,
I saw a portion of the Book TV discussion and found your comments interesting if not original. You continually spoke of “getting BACK” to some preferred point in time and place. I have a question: please cite for me any example of a time period and a geographical location which demonstrates what you would continue the most ideal example of a society operating under the principles you espouse.
No long discourse, please. I am a historian by training and preference, so I will gladly research the records. I would like SPECIFICITY so that I can examine the characteristics of that ideal world in which you would prefer to live.
Best Wishes
Carol | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
Good Morning Mr. Higgs:
61 yr-old black man very much impressed by your commentary. Whether I agree or not with all you say, the very thoughtfulness of your commentary compels my respect and therefore my interest. I’m sure that you are technically correct in your analysis, my caution is that the American people have been spoiled and protected from pain which has weakened them. If this is true, then letting the bad banks fail will result in massive internal unrest. If this happens government will be the real winner. I don’t know that there is enough of what my parents called “grit” for us to willingly and calmly take the economic medicine you properly prescribe.
As for the cranks and fanatics, my sense of you after C-SPAN is that something like that doesn’t come close to bothering you. I would like your permission to write you from time to time with queries or comment.
As soon as financially possible, I will start reading your works. I saved up and got the Stiglitz book and was impressed. What did you think? And have you read Chalmers Johnson.
I’m an everyday person (janitor) with little education but well-read. If your schedule allows, visit my blog sometime.
Thanks
John Leak | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
Dr. Higgs... I saw the last two hours of your Saturday C-SPAN2 appearance on April 11. Thanks for your patience, scholarship and dedication to ‘getting the truth out.’ Having been on the Senate staff and the White House staff in the past, I know how easy it is to be not only misunderstood but unfairly attacked. You survived both well—and I find you an excellent example of what *ought* to move our public servants and that is dedication to do the right thing—and be civil. Both of which are lacking in our government I fear.
Thanks for showing it can be done.
Jack Buttram, Taylors, SC
Jack Buttram | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
Bravo Dr. Higgs,
I would only add that we may see a great increase in numbers of people who transcend the left-right paradigm relatively soon. It is no secret that many currently view the Republicans as discredited. If conditions deteriorate, as I fully expect they will, many others will come to question the value of the Democratic party as well. Sure, it is terribly unfortunate that it has come to this in order to wake people up, but perhaps some good may come of all of this destructive action yet.
D. Saul Weiner | Apr 12, 2009 | Reply
I am reminded of a remark made to me while I was passing across the space at Powell and Market in San Francisco (where the cable cars turn around). The comment was from an old Scotsman. He came up to me and said (turning to observe someone who was shouting at the people waiting in line to board the cable cars), “Empty vessels make the greatest noise.”
Richard Sikes | Apr 12, 2009 | Reply
After catching a replay of your appearance on C-SPAN, I was very impressed with your views, as well as the historical evidence you note to support them.
I can’t help but think that the callers in general, and the gentleman (?) quoted above, are willfull creations of the government itself, in it’s ever expanding quest to expand it’s own power base by making all citizens, to some extent, dependent on government for more and more basic needs. I believe we as a nation jumped the shark some time ago, as the combination of all government employees & beneficiaries now represent a voting block that could be impossible to combat, as they will continue to vote for the growth of government services as a means to support their own personal jobs and/or government benefits.
Keep up the good fight please.
Bryan | Apr 13, 2009 | Reply
Immediately after your C-SPAN appearance, I sent a question via email which i have not received a response. Your excellent analysis aside, you did not address the root of our economic, security, and moral problems which is the abandonment of traditional Christianity to which the rise of democracy, individual rights, women’s equality, equality before the law, Western common law itself and the rule of law, science, technology, capitalism, the sacredness of life, individualism over the group, personhood, the freedoms found in the Bill of Rights, the freedom of choice and personal responsibility, and in short all that separates the Western Civilization and in particular, America from the Eastern tribalism, oppression of the individual and underdeveloped economies and technology. No matter how you may personally feel about Christianity, all of the above and much more is due to its influence and everything that is problematic and all that is collapsing today is due to the abandonment of the Christian faith spearheaded by our political and “intellectual” (cough) elite. Unless Americans return to our founding principles and faith no amount of systematic and symptomatic correctives will keep the barbarians from destroying our institutions and everything that is America. Please Dr. Higgs the courtesy of your reply is very much appreciated. Thank you for the three hours of wisdom and uncommon sense you shared with the C-SPAN viewers.
Michael | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
The message (eloquent in its own way) you quote and the commentary with which you surround it provide a very engaging contrast.
With no difficulty, you come off as the better of the two, a compliment MUCH fainter than the one you deserve. Comparing your broader commentary and analysis with that of your opponents (in their more-analytic mode) yields the same ranking—time after time after time.
N. Joseph Potts | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
You and the Institute are a national treasure. What you have to understand is that ideologues on either the Left or the Right are not accustomed to being treated this way—with facts, logic, evidence, and reason. They can’t stand it. Therefore, continue. Force them to be shamed into actually looking in the mirror. Their numbers will dwindle.
Eric | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
Dear Carol,
I can give you one very specific example of the free market working just fine. For years, all across America, as well as possibly a number of other nations, young people have approached neighbors and asked if they would like their lawns mowed or raked, or, for those of us who live in the north, driveways shoveled. The deal is struck and the job done. The final piece in the puzzle is the recipient of the services paying for said services.
No government interference. No regulation of the size or shape of the shovel, rake, or mower. No required safety equipment. Just a service being provided at an agreed upon price. That, my friend, is the finest example of the free market I can think of.
If you’d like others, feel free to visit a farmer’s market, or the vendors booths at county fairs or festivals. It’s the last bastion of freedom in today’s economy.
Ed Burley | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
Religion isn’t necessary. Just follow the Constitution. Keep your religious beliefs to yourself.
Steve Victor | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
Steve Victor:
Religion does indeed matter and a great deal because one’s metaphysical worldview directly affects how each of us deals with others and how societies themselves are formed. In this regard, you expressed your own worldview in your comment, not noting that your prescription that all metaphysical (i.e., religious) views should be kept silent would similarly include your own, hence denying your own ability to express such an opinion.
But the problem goes deeper as many scholars have shown that the ideas of universal individual rights and natural law did not exist until the arrival of Christianity, as Michael has correctly suggested. Until the radical changes ushered in by Christianity, neither the ancient Greeks nor the Roman stoics nor anyone else presented a universal worldview that each and every person has unalienable rights to life, liberty and property. But with the legacy of natural law from Thomas Aquinas and other Christian Scholastic scholars in the Middle Ages, the ideas of liberty took on real and systematic content.
However as modernist notions of naturalism (atheism) have gained ground in Western culture, utilitarianism and moral relativism have undermined natural rights and the rule of law (such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights) as civic standards. And the drive, under Bush and now greatly escalated under Obama, for gigantic new forms of statism in America is based on the utilitarian fantasy that “the end justifies the means,” trampling on any concept of natural law (both of morality and economics).
An excellent book that traces the centrality of Christianity to liberty, reason, science, and the rule of law is the following:
The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success, by Rodney Stark (Random House)
Classic Christian natural law proponents included John Locke, Lord Acton, Alexis de Tocqueville, James Madison, Frederic Bastiat, etc., and a recommended sampling of contemporary natural law scholars would include Heinrich Rommen, Jacques Maritain, Harold Berman, Yves Simon, Henry Veatch, Johannes Messner, Russell Hittinger, J. Budziszewski, and Robert George.
And the following book is one of the finest, short presentations of natural law thinking, and in the process refuting aesthetic, epistemological, and moral relativism:
The Abolition of Man, by C.S. Lewis (HarperOne)
David Theroux | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
Dr. Higgs:
In my work I too am required by principle to say things that are at times diametrically opposed to the status quo. While watching your interview on C-SPAN Book TV I was struck by a phenomenon that I experience on a regular basis. When people’s deeply held beliefs are challenged, they often HEAR one thing but, because it conflicts with their core beliefs so profoundly, they actually hear the OPPOSITE of what you just said! There must be a term in psychology for this tendency to turn words inside out, but I’m not familiar with it. I can only say that as I watched you deal with this amazing reaction people exhibit to opposing realities, I admired you beyond words. I only wish I were able to weather the storm as graciously once I’ve invoked it, and you are to be highly commended. Amazing performance.
Gerald Zemens | Apr 14, 2009 | Reply
The Christian faith in America has corrupted itself through its attachment to the State. It has accepted worldly power as an extension of God’s justice of the world through its poor interpretation of Romans 13. The State is violence and force. It was designed to rob and oppress. It is doing exactly what it was designed to do.
Christians in America continue to believe the myth that we only need to get back to the Constitution and our founders beliefs, all will be well. This is nonsense, i.m.h.o. I don’t believe the Constitution was all designed to protect our rights. It was a bloodless coup d’etat. It was Trojan horse; a gift to the American people so that eventually a strong central government would escape from the horse’s body and enslave them. There were anti-Federalist at the time who predicted this and they were all correct.
I agree with Michael and Mr. Theroux that the radical ideas of natural law and natural rights are derived from Christian thought. However, Christians in this country need to see the State for what it is; a gang of thieves and murderers writ large. As long as Christians continue to believe the myth that the State exists to protect natural rights and that through violence and threats of violence, justice can be manifest in our country, our descent into social chaos will continue unabated.
Brutus | Apr 15, 2009 | Reply
Professor Higgs, you are a sane voice in a mad world filled with petulant and irritable baboons. I know this sounds horribly elitist, but I think H.L. Mencken had the pulse of the masses vis a vis liberty right long ago when he wrote “The Beloved Turnkey” in 1923 (before the New Deal even!):
The media tells the public that “deregulation” and “greed” are the source of all their ills and anxieties, so they fly into a fit of screeching rage whenever someone appears to be arguing for those things. Easier to get out the pitchforks than to reason and reflect.
Even so, unlike our political and media elites, I think it beneath any conception of human dignity to regulate the lives of the masses simply because they will gladly submit to it. They should have freedom anyway: then they can turn over all their life decisions to some authority of their own accord, and on their own dime.
Ray Mangum | Apr 15, 2009 | Reply
I would LOVE to see the show but do not have the bandwidth on my limited satellite Internet connection. I’ve been unable to find an MP3 file of the audio so I can listen to it. Does anyone know if the audio (only) is available anywhere?
Scott | Apr 19, 2009 | Reply
Dr. Higgs:
As I’m sure you know, people who attack the person, rather than the problem, lack the capacity to understand, and to analyze an issue.
“Ad hominem” comments are worthless noise, and never lead to positive progress on any issue.
Les | Apr 21, 2009 | Reply
As a 50 year old single mom of two, CSpan junkie, working on completing my college degree, I am learning about the various viewpoints in our country, and the labels attached to those viewpoints.
My naive knowledge base about “liberal” attitudes has been replaced with knowledge that liberals are just as capable of spewing venom and vial comments as any one else. They are not above the flock, they are in the middle of it. Right, left, under, over, none of this matters when it dissolves into name calling and death wishes.
I am working my way into a belief system based on knowledge and the willingness to keep an open mind. it is obvious from the writer of the email to Dr. Higgs, that his/her mind has closed for business and will not learn another thing. Another mind wasted with hatred. Might as well been due to shooting heroin, because the effect is the same. Useless.
I often get caught in the middle of conversations between both “sides” of the fence. the one thinks I”m Liberal, the other thinks I’ve changed, and can’t see where my conservative attitudes come from. I don’t see what they see. I’m still learning about things.
Dr. Higgs’ thoughts, books, and talks sound good to me, and I am eager to hear and read more. While I may not agree with everything that he says, I value his thought process/logic, and expression of his ideas. That is what our country needs more of. Not less. Thank you Dr. Higgs. Please keep up the good work!!
Lori | Apr 21, 2009 | Reply
Try the C-SPAN website. I’m not sure, but they may have the audio...
Lori | Apr 21, 2009 | Reply
From George Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address:
“...Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle...”
[Translation into 21st century American-English:
Religion and morality are important for the proles who believe the morality stems from believing in the invisible and unprovable. If the proles lost their faith in punishment after death, they wouldn't be compelled to testify honestly in court; However, for the superior thinkers, who know that morality, such as expressed by the Golden Rule, is quite secular, worldly, and does not require any belief in anything supernatural, are excused from this requirement. This list would include Franklin, Paine, Jefferson, and even Washington, the Deist and Mason. JKL]
“It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”
[We dare not question the myths that support popular government. Questioning that false foundation may shake the republic. In other words the truth will not set the proles free, it will only confuse them. We must defend against anything that might threaten the stability of the ship of state. JKL]
“Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.”
[Unfortunately, the collectivists among us have seized upon this concept to establish local, then State, then national government control over all 'public' school curricula. Public opinion is now controlled by the MSM. I'm for the truth in all circumstances.
Obviously morality has survived the death of the Greek and Roman pantheons, ditto the Egyptian's elaborate belief system. I merely add modern gods to the list of the forgettable. I just follow the Golden Rule, the Declaration and the Constitution of Original Intent.JKL]
Jim Lorenz | Apr 23, 2009 | Reply
John Leak: I admire your open-mindedness. There is a tremendous amount of great reading material—for free—www.mises.org and at http://www.LewRockwell.com; great places to start. Dr. Higgs is well known to readers of these sites.
Thanks for your contribution.
Jim Lorenz | Apr 23, 2009 | Reply
Dr. Higgs
After watching the C-SPAN segment you referenced, I ordered three of your books. I’m about 2/3 of the way through Crisis and Leviathan and I’m looking forward to Depression, War, and Cold War and Resurgence of the Welfare State.
My interests in your work stem from my roles as a citizen of our culture and as a Churchman.
I have sensed a rapid coarsening of our culture and politics in the last twenty years. I’m sure that if your ratchet theory is correct in terms of government it may also apply to our social and interpersonal structures as well.
One of the things I find especially disturbing about the trend is that much of the coarseness, hate, and incivility finds its source in, of all places, the Church, particularly many of the Church’s “compassionate conservatives.” It seems to me that the movement with which I hold many principles in common has gotten derailed, abandoning the principles of service and charity and grasping for power and notariety. The result has been a reaping of the whirlwind.
I will continue to read your work. I find it thought-provoking/challenging. That, and daily doses of the Sermon on the Mount, have become islands of sanity and civility in the midst of the storms of the times. Thanks!
I do have two questions. Is there any hope of reviving or re-inventing our political institutions and culture? Or, are we better off just creating revived sub-cultures within the greater whole (being “in”, but not “of” the world)?
Phil Dillon | May 4, 2009 | Reply