Would anyone walk into a lion's cage because both the lion and the cage, as we see them, are ultimately things constructed in our brains? More important, why not? Only because the verification processes so deftly made to disappear in theory could become very quickly, very brutally, and very agonizingly apparent. That is also the very reason why dogs do not run into a roaring flame and why bats swerve to avoid colliding with a stone wall. All these differently constructed worlds are subjected to verification processes. All these creatures' worlds, like our own, are indeed "perceptions" but they are not just perceptions. The position of the observer is indeed an integral part of the data, but it is not the only part of the data.

Residual claims set in motion different behavior patterns from fixed claims. Whoever has the legal title to the residual claim has an incentive to make that residual-the difference between production costs and consumer value-as great as possible. The same thing, from a social point of view, is that the residual claimant has an incentive to supply what is desired by consumers at the least sacrifice of inputs used for things desired by other consumers. To the residual claimant, these social consequences of his behavior are secondary at best. But from the point of view of the economy at large, this behavior pattern that grows out of the attempt to maximize residual claims is crucial, and whether the residual claim turns out in fact to be large or small, or even positive or negative, is secondary.

Merely a failure to use the ever-growing list of "politically correct" terms for all sorts of things can have serious repercussions. Moreover, more than a passive imposition of taboos is involved. Very often, these taboos are accompanied by militant promotions of new social visions throughout educational, religious, and other institutions. The instruments of intimidation include vaguely-worded speech codes under which students may be punished or expelled from many colleges, insulting harangues by "diversity consultants" employed by corporations, colleges, and other institutions, and threats to the careers of military officers, civilian officials, and corporate executives who do not march in step with the new orthodoxies.

Quotes Test…

Quotes Test…

Plain and commonsensical as this approach may seem, it goes directly counter to the way many of the issues of the day are discussed. Much of the literature on racial or sexual prejudices and their discriminatory economic effects, for example, proceeds in utter disregard of knowledge-validation processes, such as competition in the marketplace.

But scientific inquiry into the problems of Socialism is not enough. We must also break down the wall of prejudice which at present blocks the way to an unbiased scrutiny of these problems. Any advocate of socialistic measures is looked upon as the friend of the Good, the Noble, and the Moral, as a disinterested pioneer of necessary reforms, in short, as a man who unselfishly serves his own people and all humanity, and above all as a zealous and courageous seeker after truth. But let anyone measure Socialism by the standards of scientific reasoning, and he at unce becomes a champion of the evil principle, a mercenary serving the egotistical interests of a dass, a menace to the welfare of the community, an ignoramus outside the pale. For the most curious thing about this way of thinking is that it regards the question, whether Socialism or Capitalism will the better serve the public welfare, as settled in advance to the effect, naturally, that Socialism is considered as good and Capitalism as evil - whereas in fact of course only by a scientific inquiry could the matter be decided. The results of economic investigations are met, not with arguments, but with that 'moral pathos', which we find in the invitation to the Eisenach Congress in 1872 and on which Socialists and Etatists always fall back, because they can find no answer to the criticism to which science subjects their doctrines.

One striking fact illustrates the success of socialist ideas: namely, that we have grown accustomed to designating as Socialism only that policy which aims to enact the socialist programme immediately and completely, while we call by other names all the movements directed towards the same goal with more moderation and reserve, and even describe these as the enemies of Socialism. This can only have come about because few real opponents of Socialism are Ieft.