Scientism and Values.pdf - Ludwig von Mises Institute

44 Scientism and Values
conditions in society that are opposed to the general welfare. It
should not be necessary to say here that the pretension of social
science to stand for and to cultivate the general welfare is not a
self-vindicating one. It is held here that the power of the social
scientist in modern society is even greater than that of the physical
scientist. The power of the social scientist is the decisive power.
He, more than anyone else, created the state of mind in the United
States that led the people of this country to accept a policy that,
during the second of this century's world wars, turned a large part
of the world over to communism and resulted in the situation
under which, after the war, free society had to retreat or face a
third world war. He, more than anyone else, created the state of
mind that prior to and during the Second World War denied the
possibility of any choices. in the world other than those between
fascism and communism. He was completely unaware that his talk
about justice was empty and illusory and that in engaging in such
talk he was stirring up and adding to the destructive conflicts. that
he said he wanted to allay.
We shall now call on two distinguished social scientists to illustrate
this problem. Robert M. MacIver illustrates it with crystal
clarity in his Web of Government as well as in other writings. We
shall refer here to only two passages of many that need examination.
First, let us document the statement made above concerning
the attitude of the social scientist toward communism during
World War II: "... the successors of the Versailles states.men,"
writes MacIver, "dream vain comfortable policies of appeasement,
wishfully thinking that the growing fury can be diverted from
themselves toward Soviet Russia, the portentous. revolutionary
state they stupidly imagineto be the real menace." 28 This attitude
,vas general among social scientists during World War II. A few,
like Joseph Schumpeter, saw the truth in spite of the blinkers that
modern science had put on them; but what they saw has never
been passed on effectively to the general public, so deep is the
prejudice that has been built up against the truth in this matter.
It might be argued in extenuation for MacIver and the majority
of his colleagues that the leaders of the country in all walks of life,
and not merely the social scientists, held this attitude. But it has