Libertarian History/Philosophy

Richard Cornuelle, R.I.P.

|

American libertarian movement founding father Richard Cornuelle died last week at age 84.

Cornuelle was introduced to libertarianism through his older brother Herbert Cornuelle, whom he admired greatly. Herbert had worked directly under Loren Miller at the 1940s Bureau of Government Research, a private foundation. Miller was in many ways the ur-source of modern libertarianism as a movement since he converted Harold Luhnow, who ran the Volker Fund, which was the only action going in libertarian financing in the 1940s and 1950s.

The Volker Fund supported the university berths of both Ludwig von Mises and F.A. Hayek, kept Murray Rothbard going through the 50s by paying him to read widely and find libertarian fellow travelers and funded his Man, Economy, and State, among other works; ran the seminars from which Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom arose; and helped fund Americans' travel to Mont Pelerin Society meetings.

In the 1950s, Richard Cornuelle worked for the Volker Fund himself, helping find and introduce to each other the rare scattered gangs of libertarian-leaning scholars. Cornuelle told me of finding "tearful recognition that there was someone else out there [who believed in libertarianism]–everyone thought they were the last one."

At the advice of Laissez-Faire Books' Andrea Millen Rich, Cornuelle was one of the very first people I interviewed in researching my book on the libertarian movement, Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement. He was a great choice to begin with: there from the beginning but at that point mostly above the fray, no longer considering himself an active part of the movement but still recognizing its achievements. His affection and admiration for his old associates and comrades from Mises to Rothbard was clear and invigorating.

Cornuelle had been Garet Garrett's assistant, a student of Mises' at NYU, and first great booster of Rothbard's career; at the time I interviewed him in 1996 he was publisher for Critical Review, a scholarly academic journal that both promoted, explored, and questioned and tested libertarian ideas.

Some details from the New York Times obituary (which missed the Volker connection entirely) extending the institutional history of Cornuelle's career:

In the 1950s, Mr. Cornuelle was vice president and editorial director of the Princeton Panel, a center for the study of American capitalism; he was later executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

He helped found several nonprofit organizations, including United Student Aid Funds (now USA Funds), which guarantees student loans….

Though the news media of the 1960s often described Mr. Cornuelle as a conservative, he later bristled at the term, his wife said on Friday. In any case, he took pains throughout his life to articulate his personal construction of the word.

As he told Life magazine in 1968, "The notion that a conservative is indifferent to human problems is part of a myth — the same myth that says the government is the only instrument that can solve social problems."

Cornuelle's popularizing of how the voluntary sector could meet social needs also led him to being head of a government task force on the voluntary sector for the Nixon administration in 1969. He concluded of this effort, in the afterword to the 1993 edition of his 1965 classic on voluntarism, Reclaiming the American Dream, that "I was sure we had at last succeeded in building a platform from which a great renaissance of independent action could be launched. But that was a naive and idle expectation….I cannot imagine why I thought for a moment that the state could be persuaded to contrive its own undoing." In that same afterword, he apologized for in that era painting himself as a "right-wing extremist" who had seen the light; he felt explaining the peculiarities of libertarianism in that benighted era would be too complicated and useless.

Jeffrey Friedman, founder and editor of Critical Review, which Cornuelle was publisher of through most of the 90s, sums up some of the more controversial positions Cornuelle took within the standard libertarian catechism, and some of his real-world effects, in an email he sent to friends and supporters of the journal. Some of the key points:

In 1958, [Cornuelle] created a competitor to the government's nascent student loan program that was less bureaucratic for the colleges and less costly to the students. By 1963, two-thirds of all American banks were making low-cost loans to any impoverished student whose college declared that he or she was likely to graduate if enrolled. By the fall semester of 1964, 48,000 students were attending 674 colleges with loans reinsured by Dick's organization….

In 1968, Life magazine lauded Dick's Center for Independent Action in Indianapolis, which had trained the "unemployable" and found them jobs with much greater success than had the federal Job Corps. It cost the Job Corps $6695 per person to find someone a job; the Center for Independent Action did it for $22.50. More importantly, virtually all of the newly employed in Dick's Indianapolis project kept their jobs…

But just at the moment in 1991 when Critical Review was in desperate need of someone who could raise the small amount of money that it required, Dick, of whom I had never heard, wrote a wonderful article in the TLS, "New Work for Invisible Hands," pointing out that with the fall of the Berlin Wall, libertarians' 50-year crusade against central planning was no longer relevant. What is "the libertarian answer" to the piecemeal, case-by-case, social-problem-solving government that we'd had in the West since the Progressive Era, Dick asked?…

Needless to say, when Dick and I met, we hit it off immediately. We shared an interest in some of the libertarian criticisms of the efficacy of government action, but we had no truck with "the moral argument" that so many libertarians (especially potential donors, it seems) think are adequate….

Austrian economist Peter Boettke's memories of Cornuelle, with good summations of some of Cornuelle's key ideas and books:

His book De-Managing America (1975) is a radical denunciation of the "front office" view of society as requiring management by an educated technocratic elite and any idea of a natural aristocracy. But Dick understood as well that in real democratic ways of relating with one another that granted authority did play an essential role in social progress. Earned authority was real and in fact vital, but imposed authority was pretend and destructive. Dick's critique of modern US policy was that we had lost sight of the power of individuals and communities to mobilize and effectively address even the most pressing social issues, and instead we were derailed into thinking that we needed politicians and the state to realize the good society.

In Healing America (1983) Cornuelle argued that what was required was a radical reconsideration of the scope of government responsibility. Public policy had come to a dead end. We had come to believe that we cannot make society habitable without making government bigger, and yet we cannot pay the cost of the bigger government without creating more problems that add to the cost of government. A vicious cycle ensued following the Great Depression—"Government is growing as it fails, and, to a chilling degree, it is growing because it is failing."…….

Dick's most well-known work was Reclaiming the American Dream (1965, reprinted in 1993). The subtitle for that book is: "The Role of Private Individuals and Voluntary Associations." His argument builds on Tocqueville and as stated above, Dick saw the American Dream as a society of free and responsible individuals, who prosper in a vibrant commercial life, and live and participate in caring communities…..

Other tributes to Cornuelle from Bill Dennis at the Atlas Network and Gus DiZerega of Studies in Emergent Order ("Everything I have written or will write about civil society owes an immense debt to Dick Cornuelle, and in my writings it is civil society, and not the market, that is the locus of freedom and creativity. So this is no small thing").

Cornuelle was affectionately aware of how far the movement had to go, while remaining hopeful. "Opposing the state has become an industry," Cornuelle told me. "And it failed. The state is doing fine….did it preserve the point of view through a dark time? It did that. But did it slow down the growth of the state? I don't see any evidence of that. Murray [Rothbard] and I used to talk about blowing up the UN. Now the talk at these free market foundations is about fringe benefits."

This was all said with humor, and Cornuelle never gave up being excited about the possibility for these ideas' future. Cornuelle's old friend Andrea Millen Rich told me how even toward the end of his life, on meeting active younger libertarians such as June Arunga, Cornuelle's excitement toward the finding and cultivating of libertarian thought and action, begun during his Volker days in the 1950s, was still vivid and driving.

Through his support of other scholars and his own set of ideas about how a voluntary sector can and must provide the services people think they must rely on the state for, Cornuelle's contributions to the libertarian project were of immense importance. He will be missed.

NEXT: Chapman's David Porter on Solving University Parking Gridlock

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So he worked for Nixon – arguably the least libertarian administration of modern times. Wage and price controls, the Controlled Substances Act, the EPA, the SSDI, removal from the gold standard and the ensuing inflation of the 70’s, etc.

    So libertarians have long been flogged lifeless by Republicans? Nothing new to see.

    1. But the most Fed-a-licious administration of all time. Spend all you want, we’ll print more!

    2. You forgot ending the draft. That alone could balance out everything shrike raised.

  2. Hey shrike! I can’t read a word you wrote. Life is great!

      1. Obviously someone obsessive enough to make a bitchy, passive-aggressive micro-comment.

        You guys have figured out these are all rather, right?

        1. She’s worse than herpes.

          1. So sorry you have herpes 🙁

          2. I dunno, Herpes can’t be INCIFed.

        2. did sugarfree same something?

          Let me guess: he was jerking off last night, his dick went full diabeeeetees and he couldn’t cum and and and it was rather’s fault! Am I close?

    1. Can you actually block usernames on H&R?

        1. Sloopyinca is telling the truth! I started using it today and no longer have to read anything written by MNG, shrike, rather, OhioOrrin, Tony, etc. Think about that for a moment. Just let it sink in.

          I heart sloopyinca!

          1. The statement that tells everyone you have a limited mind, and that you cannot abide diverse opinion.

            It is a wonder that you can survive in this world when knowledge is the key.

            Pride in illiberality is pitiable, and that Jesse Helms felator is equally foolish.

            1. love =/= knowledge, asshat. Just because someone says, “I love so-and-so” doesn’t meat they are blindly allegiant to whatever that person says. I sincerely doubt Lord Googoo will agree with me on everything I say. As a matter of fact, my religious beliefs put me at odds with most of the posters on here on a few important issues. That, however, wouldn’t stop them from loving me or vice versa if one of us somehow enabled the other to go through life without being exposed to your inane ramblings. Not that I’d go all homo or anything (NTTAWWT), but I’d love ’em all the same.

              1. sloopyinca, you go to church but you don’t live church.

                Lord Googoo sincerely thinks he is an advocate of freedom but he’s a fool

          2. While I don’t like to label anyone a troll (since more often than not I choose to not add anything substantive to the conversation in favor of hopefully humorous snark), I don’t understand why MNG gets called a troll. His arguments seem to be at least as well reasoned as those of whomever he’s debating.

            I also don’t understand why anyone uses Chrome. It’s like volunteering all your intimate information to Google for their evil machinations.

            1. MNG isn’t a troll. He’s just got a mild case of Evil.

        2. I don’t like to block trolls. You lose a sense of just how bad it is out there. Plus, you then see non-troll responses and you’re all, ‘wtf’?

          1. I only block rectal and OhioOrrin. The other trolls add something.

            1. I’ve even gotten back to where rectal amuses me from time to time. It’s like watching a retard take the SAT or a kid with polio run cross country.

              1. I find a nice compromise is to INCIF her, but peek at her comments once in a while anyway. She’s the commenting equivalent of nam pla. You don’t want to baste your food in it, but a little bit adds a pleasant funk.

        3. This is the best thing ever. It would be a triumphant contribution to the achievements of humanity simply for the feature set slideshow.

          I’m not worthy! I’m not worthy! I’m scum! I suck!

          1. The YouTube comment filter for Firefox is also choice. Unless you feel like tasting a big ol’ spoonful of stupid.

  3. “tearful recognition that there was someone else out there [who believed in libertarianism]–everyone thought they were the last one.”

    Now there are about 25 of us.

    1. last one standing collects the tontine.

    2. Now we are nine, I was about to say.

  4. This is OT, but a jury kicks the NYPD and DA’s office in the nuts in a high-profile case. Somewhere in a cell, Plaxico is shaking his head.

    1. He’s lucky his dog wasn’t in the car.

      1. Actually, he’s very lucky. He had a negro in there with him. It could have ended quite badly had the negro “resisted.”

        Of course, the cop probably saw some cash coming his way for arresting a football player. It always struck me as odd that the press was at the station within an hour of the arrest.

  5. Nice collation, Brian. I might draw your attention to the Project on New Philanthropy Studies and our journal, Conversations on Philanthropy, as an example of a living legacy of Dick’s.
    http://www.conversationsonphilanthropy.org

  6. I met him only a couple of times, but enough to learn — and keep forgetting — that the “u” in his name was silent, unlike the way Murray Rothbard pronounced it. He seemed to be often misunderstood because his ideas were interesting and not simple minded.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.