xxii
Human
Action
Revised editions preserve that passage with only minor alterations,
but add seven wholly new paragraphs preceding it. These new
paragraphs in the revised editions introduce a different focus on the
necessary and specific powers of government, which appear rather
expansive by Misesian standards: "The maintenance of
a
govern-
ment apparatus of courts, police officers, prison, and of armed
forces requires considerable expenditure. To levy taxes for these
purposes is fully compatible with the freedom the individual enjoys
in a free market economy" (third ed.,
p.
282).
Also, these later editions substantially alter the definition of free-
dom itself.
In
the original, Mises states:
"A
man is free as far as he can
live and get on without being at the mercy of arbitrary decisions on the
part of other people" (p. 279). Mises does not define "arbitrary," but
he appears to have in mind actions that infringe on someone's person
or property without his agreement. Revised editions, in contrast,
state: "we may define freedom as that state of affairs in which the
individual's decision to choose is not constrained by governmental
violence beyond the margin which the praxeological law restricts it
anyway" (third ed., p. 282). The phrase "praxeological law" (meaning
the law of cause and effect in human affairs) works here as qualifier;
it is so 'expansively applied that
any
government activity, however
arbitrary, that is said to preserve or achieve "freedom" might be
deemed permissible. The original definition, more specific and smn-
gent,
rules
out arbitrary interventions altogether.
Thus, these added passages in later editions go even further to
permit conscription, and it is here we find a direct inconsistency
withMises's prior writings.
In
particular, the passage is at odds with
Mises's defense of secession, which he elevated to the rank of a core
principle of the liberal program, as explained in Nation, State,
and
Economy in 191960 and even more emphatically in Liberalism in
1927." If every person is entitled to secede from the state then the
ower of coercion. No wonder that all who have had something new to offer
Eumanity have had nothing good to say of the state or its laws!" (San
Francisco: Cobden Press, [I9271 1985),
p.
58.
60. "No people and no part of
a
people shall be held against its will in a
political association that it does not want." Nation, State, and Economy (New
York University Press, [I91
91
1 983),
p.
65.
61. For Mises, the only possible objections to unlimited secession were
practical or technical, not principled concerns. Liberalism, pp. 109-1 10.