The Essential Rothbard - Ludwig von Mises Institute

72 The Essential Rothbard
Kendall is right to protest the tyranny of the expert, but he
himself has uncritically accepted the supposed dichotomy between
fact and value. Kendall assumes that one person’s preferences is as
valid as another’s. There cannot, then, be experts about the ends of
morality. But how does Kendall know this?
His [Kendall’s] . . . major solution seems to be to hammer
home the distinction between fact and value, to convince
everyone that experts are only experts on facts and scientific
laws, while every citizen should choose policy on the basis of
which means will lead to his ends. 195
Rothbard rejects Kendall’s contention.
He assumes that morally, everyone is equal and therefore the
democratic census can decide. Why? Why is there not a
“moral roster,” even though a separate one from an “intellectual
roster” [of experts]? 196
Kendall has uncritically embraced moral relativism and subjectivism.
Kendall claims that a society has the right to preserve the
orthodoxy that governs it, but Rothbard finds his argument wanting.
He considers Kendall’s striking claim that the Athenian
Assembly rightly condemned Socrates to death:
If the Athenians were so damn committed to their way of life,
they had little to worry about; and if Socrates were really
becoming a threat, then they were no longer particularly
committed to their way of life. 197
Suppose Kendall were to acknowledge this point, but still
wanted to suppress dissent. Then, contrary to his claim, he is not
195 Ibid.
196 Ibid.
197 Ibid.