The Walter Lippmann Colloquium: The Birth of Neo-Liberalism

by Jurgen Reinhoudt, Serge Audier

This book is an introduction to and translation of the 1938 Walter Lippmann Colloquium held in Paris, which became known as the intellectual birthplace of “neo-liberalism.” Although the Lippmann Colloquium has been the subject of significant recent interest, this book makes this crucial primary source available to a wide, English-speaking audience for the first time. The Colloquium features important—often passionate—debates involving well-known intellectual figures such as Walter Lippmann, Louis Rougier, Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Michael Polanyi, Jacques Rueff, Alexander Rüstow and Wilhelm Röpke. Many of the topics addressed at the Colloquium, such as the proper methods of economic intervention, the relationship between the market economy and democracy, and the relationship between economic liberalism and political liberalism are issues that still vie for our attention in the aftermath of the Great Recession. 

313 pages, Kindle Edition

Published October 20, 2017

Reviews

[Otto Lehto · Rating 5 out of 5]

This collected volume is essential reading for anyone interested in the history of ideas in the 20th century. In order to avoid using the word "neoliberalism" as a meaningless catch-all term, it is especially important to go to the intellectual sources of the movement. The reality, as always, is more complicated than the convenient narratives of most contemporary commentators. The 1938 Lippmann Colloquium was spurred by the recent publication of Walter Lippmann's "The Good Society" (1936) on the occasion of the pending French visit of its author. The event was notable for attracting many of the leading classical liberal (broadly speaking) thinkers of the era, including F.A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Wilhelm Röpke, Alexander Rüstow, Louis Rougier (the instigator of the event), Michael Heilperin, and Étienne Mantoux. It was also historically significant for contributing arguably the first self-conscious stage of the elaboration and crystallization of the "new liberal" program into something distinct from both "Manchester school" (or "laissez-faire") classical liberalism AND the "New Deal" liberalism and Keynesianism prevalent at the time. These ideas would live on primarily through the Mont Pelerin Society - at whose inaugural meeting in 1947 many of the same people who attended the Lippmann colloquium were also present. Indeed the present volume should be studied closely together with the recently released Mont Pèlerin 1947: Transcripts of the Founding Meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society.

Why do I give the book 5 stars? This is for three reasons: excellent presentation, important historical context, and inherent theoretical value. First, the presentation is excellent. The introductory sections are not exhaustive, but they suffice to contextualize the historical moment, introduce the participants, and summarize the key themes of the meeting. The list of participants is carefully curated along alphabetical lines. (Some of the participants have been forgotten today.) The index, bibliography, and footnotes make for an excellent scholarly companion. And, of course, the main transcript itself is allowed to take centre stage with minimal editorial meddling. Second, the historical context is absolutely crucial to understand the events of the 20th century. Everybody who writes about "neoliberalism" should be forced to read these transcripts to get a better sense about the complexities of what they are writing about. (If only to learn that that "neoliberalism" is not a term that many people in the movement frequently used on themselves.) And third, the debates around freedom vs authority, individualism vs collectivism, growth vs redistribution, economic prosperity vs social cohesion, democracy vs. markets, etc., remain with us today. Indeed, as I was reading through the transcript, I became acutely aware of how little the basic debate has changed - and indeed, how eerily similar some of the discussion today (2024) sounds to what they were worried about then (1938): the inherent "contradictions" of free markets, the need for a safety net that does not undermine the functioning of the competitive market order, the persistent allure of socialism, the lack of economic education among the masses (but also the elites!), etc. (Unfortunately, even the threat of another World War feels all too present tense...)

I will not attempt to summarize the discussions, but I will point out a few key takeaways: 1) The neoliberal project, if you can call it that, was not uniform or univocal, but highly diverse and subject to many permutations, disagreements, and factional disputes. 2) Far from equating it with laissez-faire unregulated capitalism, we should remember that neoliberalism was founded on its explicit rejection. 3) The Lippmann consensus (much like the Mont Pelerin consensus a decade later) accepted the "Manchester school" emphasis on competitive markets and economic liberty but wanted to complement it with an newfound emphasis on the institutional and cultural trappings of an orderly society, as exemplified by the Ordoliberal emphasis on the "strong state" that oversees the markets, and Hayek's idea of the "rule of law." 4) The early generations of neoliberals (from Lippmann to Mont Pelerin) were generally very supportive of providing various public goods, government regulations, and robust welfare support to the poor, although the extent of such support varied from person to person. Hardliners like Mises who supported only very minimal government intervention were clear outliers, as were people who fully embraced the welfare state. 5) There was tremendous interest and emphasis on the cultural and social dimensions of the free society; the goal of maximizing prosperity was not to be accepted as a blind economic mantra.

I believe that most of the substantive issues debated at the Lippmann Colloquium (and make no mistake, it was a vibrant debate, not a church where likeminded people confessed their faith) remain as important today as they were in the pre-WW2 era. Finding the right balance between individualism and collectivism, economic values and moral values, remains an active puzzle. There is much to be learned from these transcripts. It does not matter whether one sympathizes with or detests the ideas that the neoliberals advocated. Studying them first hand, through primary sources, is absolutely the best way to get a grip on the values and stakes involved.