Here are some thoughts on psychology and traditional liberalism. The first was a university major of mine and the second a consuming passion.
I’ve been ruminating over something Dr. Nathaniel Branden once said about the similarity between psychology and libertarianism. He pointed out the goal of both - when properly done - is to expand individual choice and freedom. It was a short comment he made, and I never got the chance to ask him to elucidate it for me. So, I’ve given some thought.
One thing psychology problems do are limit your options; they restrict you and the choices you can make. Consider the similarity between phobias and prejudices or bigotry.
A bigot limits himself in regard to whom he will hire, whom he will sell to, and from whom he will make purchases. In other words, his prejudices restrict his options. Fewer options mean he is less likely to find the optimal choice and thus worse off because of them.
Bigotry imposes costs, not only on the victims of prejudice, but also on the bigots themselves. One of the major differences between dirigisme and free markets is the former severely restricts our choices – the same way prejudice does, or the same way phobias do.
The more choices you have the more likely you are to find one to optimise your return. You have a better chance of improving your life the more choices you have and less chance of improvement when facing fewer choices. It really doesn’t matter if those costs are inflicted by regulations and law or are self-imposed due to personal prejudices or psychological issues.
A core purpose of psychology is to help you expand your choices. If you are afraid to travel your options are severely limited. If therapy helps you overcome that fear your available options expand dramatically. If you lack confidence in your own self, you are less likely to make those choices most likely to have higher returns. You will be hesitant to take a bigger risk, but which tends to mean you must shun bigger returns or profits.
Now, of course, profits and costs cover more than monetary returns or monetary investments. It means all costs. If you go to the movies on Friday, you can’t simultaneously have a night out walking along the beach. You give up one in to do the other. If you create a business and it works you gain economic profits, but you also have psychological gains – a sense of satisfaction and esteem. Profits and costs are not just monetary in nature.
Traditional liberalism is about maximising individual choice consistent with the rights of others. Good therapy is about maximising your individual choice as well. I would argue these choices must be consistent with individual rights, that choices which harm others, emotionally or psychologically, harm the individual being unpleasant as well. If you treat others badly, they will tend to treat you badly in return.
I’ve have long noticed that angry, cruel people are rarely happy people – at least none I’ve met – they tend to be miserable. The harm they inflict on others, or wish upon them, does damage to their self-image – it must unless they totally lack empathy. If they lack empathy, they lack the ability to share the joy of others.
Germans call this schadenfreude, which basically means taking joy or satisfaction in the suffering of others. A variation is freudenfreude which means taking joy in the happiness of others.
That is one of my greatest pleasures, seeing wonderful things happen to other people. It makes me smile, I feel good when it happens. I also think when someone lacks empathy they suspect everyone else does as so well and thus, they can never trust the good intentions others express to them. They can never be sure when someone else says “I love you,” whether they mean it or not. When someone congratulates them, they can’t take pleasure in it, they are too suspicious.
These sorts of people not only act out toward others but assume others are as dishonest as they are. They must be suspicious as they wait for the other person to act the way they act toward others. It’s a miserable existence. In economic terms you could say they aren’t making a profit but suffering a daily loss.
One thing I noticed is how basic economics is really another form of basic psychology. Consider how personal dissatisfaction inspires markets. If you hungry you want to buy food, you act within markets to gain things you want or need. You exchange one thing of lower value for something you value more. You can’t separate the psychological from economics.
The economist Ludwig Mises said markets are “the outcomes of countless conscious, purposive actions, choices, and preferences of individuals, each of whom was trying as best as he or she could under the circumstances to attain various wants and ends and to avoid undesired consequences.”
You can’t separate basic liberal markets from good psychology. Both have the same goal of maximising your freedom and helping you find greater happiness as your choices expand. Markets and effective psychological therapy both do the same thing – they expand choices and thus maximise the individual’s ability to find happiness and satisfaction.
James Peron has written for multiple publications and is the author of several books, including Exploding Population Myths and The Liberal Tide. James is an Associate of the Free Market Foundation.
