Meditating on a 1967 pamphlet by Leonard E. Read in light of FEE’s upcoming 80th anniversary.
At a speaking engagement last November on the campus of Northwest Nazarene University in Nampa, Idaho, an old friend gave me a pamphlet published in 1967 by FEE. His name is Dr. Pete Crabb, and he teaches Economics at NNU. Titled Reflections on Coming of Age: FEE Faces the Future, the pamphlet’s author was none other than FEE’s venerable founder, Leonard E. Read—the anniversary of whose passing on May 14, 1983, makes this a fitting moment to reflect on his legacy as we approach FEE’s 80th year.
I thought I had read everything FEE ever produced, at least after 1968 when I first began devouring its publications. But this little essay somehow escaped my attention, so I am especially grateful to Pete for saving it and passing it along to me.
FEE was 21 years old in 1967, hence Leonard’s reference to “coming of age” in the title. Because 21 is considered a pivotal year when a person’s life and career take new direction, Leonard expected FEE to undertake something similar. It was a moment of reflection—a time to assess, recalibrate, and plan for the future. He was among the most thoughtful people I ever knew, so I am not surprised he paused in 1967 to think about “mid-course corrections” that might be needed.
Over the decades, other occasions arose for the FEE’s board and staff to re-think its principles and trajectory. During my presidency (2008–2019), for example, we decided to focus our work on high school- and college-age “newcomers” to freedom and free markets. We also cut our operating costs substantially by moving from New York to Georgia.
Next year, we will be 80 years old. In preparation for that milestone, FEE is already reassessing itself, as every organization should do from time to time. While reading Leonard’s 1967 essay, I realized that our founder’s intellectual audit of that year was of momentous and lasting impact because of one very profound observation.
Leonard noted that FEE’s first 21 years were shaped by the assumption that the chief problem that needed to be fixed was economic illiteracy. “Let enough of us understand the economic facts of life and America would soon be back on course again!” he said. By 1967, it was becoming apparent to him that “we had pinpointed only part of the problem.” He expressed it as follows:
Time and again we have observed persons soundly instructed in free market principles yet so lacking moral scruples that they have ignored their economic knowledge. This explains why we have more and more emphasized moral as well as economic principles. These 21 years have taught us an important lesson: an understanding of economics without an understanding and practice of moral principles is utterly useless. Economic giants who are moral infants are not fitted to advance the way of life we believe to be right.
One consequence of focusing purely on economics, Leonard wrote, is its limited resonance beyond those with a “professional stake in the issue.” If, for instance, the government moves to control or even seize a particular business, that firm may cry about the economic harm that will ensue while others not directly involved remain silent.
Call it the “Niemöller effect,” if you will. The Reverend Martin Niemöller was the famous German Lutheran pastor who lamented his initial acquiescence to the Nazi regime. He looked the other way as Hitler silenced one group after another until he came for Niemöller himself; by then it was too late.
Leonard Read believed that for freedom to survive, its moral foundation must become more powerful. It must be understood and trumpeted with no less passion and frequency than its economic elements. Economics is about what works; morals are about what is right. We can argue about where it comes from, but the fact is that in the long run, most people see a moral argument as more compelling and universal than a dollars-and-cents one, no matter how sound the economic case may be.
In a free society that Leonard envisioned, doctors or pastors wouldn’t keep quiet until the government threatened their profession; rather, they would cry out in defense of any profession facing the jackboot of coercive statism. After all, Leonard noted, freedom is rarely lost in one fell swoop. It usually gives way to “salami tactics,” that is, one slice at a time. It’s not enough for each of us to defend his own freedom. It’s a higher and more effective calling for each of us to get active in defending the freedom of others. In Leonard’s words:
When a clergyman denounces sin, that’s “old hat.” It is expected of him; it’s his job. But let the same clergyman staunchly proclaim for private ownership and a mighty blow will have been struck for that human right—and his subsequent pronouncements against sin also might have better reception.
In my 2015 book, Real Heroes: Inspiring True Stories of Courage, Character, and Conviction, I wrote about men and women who were not content to defend themselves and who eagerly embraced a bigger assignment. They rallied to the defense of others. What made the former slave Harriet Tubman a real hero, for example, was so much more than her courage in escaping bondage. She was a hero because she did not stop there. At great risk to herself, she ventured back into slave states 13 times to liberate dozens of others. That’s the spirit that Leonard found so necessary, inspiring, and principled.
In 1967, Leonard determined that FEE would ramp up the moral case for freedom and free markets. Indeed, he argued in his essay that it should be completely inseparable from the economic case:
[I]t simply means that the things we see and touch—a loaf of bread, an automobile, or whatever—are not possible where moral rectitude is absent. In essence, this means that sound economic practices rest upon and presuppose a high moral order. To teach the former and to ignore the latter is fractured education! Much of the chaos of our times doubtless stems from treating economics and moral philosophy as if they were separate and unrelated disciplines. But they’re not; these are integral parts of a single discipline!
It is no coincidence that the man regarded as the “Father of Economics,” Adam Smith, was a moral philosopher before he was an economist.
“There must be no letup in the teaching of free market economics,” Leonard cautioned. “But we must, for certain, emphasize moral principles, even more than in the past, for these principles take precedence as related to economics.” He declared that FEE should “perform an exemplary role,” namely:
[By] demonstrating that moral rectitude and sound economic practice are closely related parts of a whole and satisfying way of life, we can expose the fallacy of treating these as unrelated disciplines.
For two decades after Leonard’s 1967 essay, the moral aspect of FEE’s message radiated more brightly than ever. After the great man’s passing at the age of 84, the message slowly shifted more toward its original economic component. One of the hallmarks of my eleven years as FEE’s president, I’m proud to note, was a reinvigoration of the moral case. I often referred to it in terms of personal character—essentially a matter of individual moral choices for immutable truth, honesty, intellectual humility, responsibility, courage, patience, gratitude, and respect for the rights and property of others.
Here’s another way to express it: Supply and demand are fundamental economic concepts. But a people who think the phrase means “the people demand, so the government should supply” are not likely to be a free people. To ensure freedom, they must understand the intimate connection between economics and morality. They must eschew, among other things, the use of force and theft for allegedly good causes. The concept of supply and demand, in the end, works for the good of all in a context of moral behavior.
As FEE looks to its 80th anniversary in 2026, we can be proud that in 1967, Leonard Read reinforced the importance of moral principles to the freedom philosophy. And in turn, I think he would be very proud that all these years later, we agree with him wholeheartedly.
It is our hope that readers will want to know more about our remarkable founder, Leonard Read, in the run-up to FEE’s 80th. Toward that end, I’ve assembled some recommended readings below:
Ten Things You Might Not Know About FEE Founder Leonard Read by Tyler Brandt
Leonard Read, the Man by Lawrence W. Reed
Leonard E. Read, Philosopher of Freedom by Mary Sennholz
The Collected Works of Leonard E. Read
Leonard E. Read, Crusader by Bettina Bien Greaves
Leonard E. Read, A Portrait by Edmund A. Opitz
Leonard Read, the Founder and Builder by Mary Sennholz
