Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

LeFevre Correspondence – by, from and about Robert LeFevre, president, The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, CO

1957-1961

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   

 

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2636

Letter from Robert LeFevre, President,

The Freedom School, Inc., Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

June 28, 1957

 

Dear Mr. Heath:

We are honored to receive with your compli­ments the personally inscribed copy of your book, “Citadel, Market and Altar.”

    I am looking forward with keen anticipation to reading the book, for three reasons: My preliminary correspondence with you indi­cates an exposure to your thinking should prove stimulating and valuable. Baldy Harper has included your name among those of real merit in the pursuit of an ever greater understanding of human liberty. And, of course, a recommendation by Rose Wilder Lane that this book be brought to our attention here at Freedom School, creates an immediate desire to delve into it.

Please know how grateful we are to have this addition to the Freedom School library, where students from all parts of the country can have access to it.

Cordially,

                       /s/ Robert LeFevre

Robert LeFevre, President

RL/d

cc:  Mrs. Rose Wilder Lane

 

_____________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 2876

Letter to Heath at 1502 Montgomery Road, Elkridge 27, Maryland,

from Robert LeFevre, Office of the President, The Freedom School, Inc.,

Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

October 12, 1959

 

Dear Spencer:

Thank you very much. I’ll put these little pamphlets to good use.

 If only some more of the Georgists could grasp the beauty and love of your outlook it might yet be that George would have served the purpose of a sort of transformer — not an end in himself, but a passageway into something infinitely more grand and glorious than he ever imagined.

Cordially,

/s/ Bob

Robert LeFevre

RL/d

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Letter to Heath from Robert LeFevre, president, The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

January 2, 1960

 

Dear Spencer:

It’s official! Word has just been received at Freedom School that we have attained federal tax exemption. The letter states in part:

“Contributions made to you are deductible by the donors in computing their taxable income in the manner and to the extent provided by section 170 of the 1954 code.”

Cordially,

/s/ Bob

Robert LeFevre

RL/d                    President

______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Letter to Heath from Robert LeFevre, president,

The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, CO

May 21, 1960

 

Dear Spencer:

     I am sorry that you were not successful in your effort to obtain tax exemption. A delay of a year can seem forever.

     In our own case at Freedom School, it took us closer to three years. And we, too, had to revise our charter to make ourselves wholly into an educational institution which was all we were trying to do in the first place.

     I do hope you have better fortune this next time. And do let me know when your wanderings bring you again into this part of the world.

Cordially,

/s/ Bob

Robert LeFevre

RL/d

 

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Archive

Item 3095

Carbon of letter from Heath to Robert LeFevre,

The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

May 28, 1960

Dear Bob:

Thank you for your kind wishes and considerations re: tax exempt status and your many other remembrances. However, there is a possibility that the tax situation may become a blessing in disguise. There are a lot of things I wish I could talk with you about. I expect to be returning to California sometime in August. Could possibly see you en route.

One thing on my mind right now is Robert V. Andelson. I met him at Spiritual Mobilization and liked him very much. For a year or so he has been president of the Henry George School of Social Science in San Diego, where I visited him last summer. But he is far from an orthodox Georgist — so far in fact that he has been trying to get various Single Tax organs to publish an article written by him urging that Georgists give some intelligent consideration to the ideas set out in my CMA concerning the natural function of the institution of private property in land. Perhaps because of this, he has been eased out of the San Diego School.

Andelson is not only a very personable young man but has a fine lot of academic and professional background. I think you ought to know him. I am enclosing a note from him that I received yesterday written on a printed University of Southern California Oral Examination Program for his Ph.D. degree, containing abstract of his dissertation on “Human rights.” Please look this over and then be sure to return it to me.

A good many things here are claiming my attention, including some visiting with Felix Morley and his associates in the American Enterprise Association, John Chamberlain, George S. Montgomery, Jr., Dr. Roscoe Pound and Dr. Hocking and possibly a fortnight or so among some public-spirited friends in Montreal who propose dating me there.

I dare say the Freedom School is going ahead nicely in the right direction and surely hope that everything is flourishing with you and all yours.

                       Sincerely,

                             Spencer Heath

SH/m

Enclosure

/Pencil note in MacCallum’s hand:

“Copy sent to Andelson with penned greetings./

 

________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Letter to Heath at Roadsend Gardens, 1502 Montgomery Road, Elkridge 27, Baltimore, Maryland, from Robert LeFevre, The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

May 31, 1960

 

Dear Spencer:

Thank you for your good letter. I have looked over the “Final Oral Examination” of Robert V. Andelson with considerable interest. His synopsis is quite impressive and assuming he does what he says he does, it could have value. I think his summation of Rousseau is correct. I think he is correct re the protestant reformers but I do not learn from his summation why he thinks Brunner is the man he selects as the polar object in his own orbit.

I think his treatment of Bentham is somewhat too abrupt and arbitrary. His assumption that Bentham’s utilitarianism must end in the “tyranny of consensus” is by no means proved. Nor would Bentham himself have approved of that conclusion, so far as I can learn. The utilitarian compulsions of the individual would, I believe, find room for expression in Bentham’s thesis. I somewhat suspect Andelson has been repelled by Bentham’s obvious unwillingness to include anything in the nature of a divine purpose in his analysis. I think if Andelson has not already familiarized himself with Harper’s “Liberty Defined,” he might find it useful in its great simplicity.

Whether I agree with Andelson is not important. The young man is obviously someone with a head on his shoulders and would be an asset to any reliable teaching institution, I believe. The fact that he finds merit in CMA is another telling factor.

The Freedom School is going to open as scheduled. For a while there was some doubt. We are completely out of funds. But I was able to borrow $5,000 and thus assure that our scheduled classes will go on as planned. How I will pay back the sum is a matter which is really bothering me.

I hope you are fortunate in your dealings with Morley, et al. And when you come by this way, be sure you stop off.

Cordially,

/s/ Bob

Robert LeFevre

RL/

______________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1950

Extract from carbon of letter to Robert LeFevre

The Freedom School, Inc., Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

June 16, 1960

 

Mighty sorry the School has had to go into the red (wrong color). I enclose my check for a hundred dollars which, with many others, I hope should help some.

Don’t forget that Citadel, Market and Altar is unique in that it lays down an alternative, money-making procedure in lieu of everything that points towards the red — Bentham included.

______________________________________________________  

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Letter to Heath from Robert LeFevre, president,

The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, Colorado

June 18, 1960

 

Dear Spencer:

Many thanks for this unexpected and greatly appreciated check in the sum of $I00.

I’m glad you found my comments on Andelson of some merit.

It might interest you to know that during our courses at the school, ever since you paid us the visit when Frank Chodorov was here, I include in my discussion of various ideas and suggestions a summation of your own very fine ideas as set forth in “Citadel, Market and Altar.”  Additional­ly, I urge the students to read your book, and you invariably come in for a share of discussion and some praise.

So please know that you are never forgotten in what we do here at the school.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, in the final analysis, when we have enough persons acquainted with the concept of a non-violent, non-coercive society, they may find the honesty and the pioneering of your book as one of the truly great aids, if not the greatest, in coming to a practical way to arrive at the ends sought.

It’s always good to hear from you. Take care of yourself, and don’t over do. When are you coming through this way?

      Cordially,

                           

/s/ Bob

                            Robert LeFevre

RL/d

________________________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1952

Extract from carbon of letter to Dr. F.A. Harper

September 10, 1960

 

I was much interested some time ago in an enclosure from you … criticizing our excellent friend, von Mises, for some of his theoretical shortcomings perhaps. The authorship was not given, but I think it might easily have been Bob LeFevre. The criticism seemed on the face of it well taken, even if not of immediate practical importance. This matter of absolutes and relatives is highly illuminated, historically at least, by Ernst Cassirer. But his conclusions, if any, I have not read him far enough to evaluate. In the case of von Mises, I think we should have too much gratitude and appreciation for his influence on behalf of liberty in general, without being too critical of his ulterior philosophic abstractions — however much we may like to delve into these matters among ourselves. (What I have just written has been without convenient reference to the memorandum you sent.)

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1763

Penned notes for a letter to F. A. Harper

December 1960?

 

Dear Baldy –

I have kept up poorly my acknowledgments of your various remembrances and enclosures.

The one by an unknown critic (Bob LeFevre, I suspect) concerning the “relative ethics” of our great friend, Von Mises, is interesting indeed. The critic, I am glad to say, does not gainsay the competence and value of Von Mises in his own special field of economics, but only in the field of moral standards where he is under the widely prevailing handicap /of/ a blind empiricism — whatever is, the custom, in my time or place is right. The vice of moral (mores) point of view is

/Page missing/

…their uniquely human and spiritual potentials their common and united motivation is mutual and proceeds from within instead of being compelled from without. It liberates men physically and thereby metaphysically, giving them facility to gratify their non-conflicting needs and desires and the freedom from coercion by another whereby, without conflict and in mutual aid, to pursue the inspiration of their dreams. On this level gradually attained the motivation towards good conduct instead of moral, based on fear, becomes esthetic, based on a feeling for things conceived as beautiful, of loveliness dreamed and desired.

Not to ward off deficiencies and disabilities, whether of body or of mind, but to reach out serenely towards ever unattainable ideals as the mariner is guided by his heavenly stars.

The test of virtue (vitality and strength) in any act is not in the customs that prevail at any time or place but this: Does it serve life? And here the esthetic motivation is supreme both for the individual and for the whole. A commonplace prudence, even fear, may save the drab life merely of being, but the life of becoming is saved only by the free outreachings of the spirit towards its ideals.

To be more specific:  The criterion for any precept or code of

To take mere custom as the criterion of any code or precept as Von Mises seems to do, leaves one with no standard at all…./leaves/ one bogged in the indeterminate relativism of which the critic complains and may well deplore.

______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1764

Pencil notes for a letter to Dr. F. A. Harper re Mises

December 1960?

 

Dear Baldy

Anent (belatedly) your note to Spencer and me carrying a criticism of Von Mises’ relativistic ethics, I have not read the particular Mises “paper” to which this criticism is addressed by, as I suspect, our fine friend, Bob LeFevre, but its points seem to me well made. For von Mises, like most of us, has no ultimate criterion or unassailable guiding star by which to set the course of ideal human action, no final standard by which to guide it towards the good — and thereby away from evil. I think he is too little of a Benthamite to take happiness, either as freedom from pain or as gratification of mere animal needs and desires, for the final human            So he accepts the idea that there needs to be an ethic, a morality, a negative discipline for suppression of the primordial depravity (original sin) which is the heritage of the mere animal nature in man and against which all kinship groups at least set sanctions arbitrary and more or less condign. Von Mises doubtless sees this in all its manifold variety according to circumstance and environment, with no uniformity to bespeak any unchanging absolute at its core. So, for want of any recognition of the creative capacity, the spiritual nature of socially and thus voluntarily functioning mankind he accepts this relativistic ethics as the only recourse of socially functioning and thus regenerate men.

All men are finite and relative to their environment and one to another. Hence there can be no absolute behavior (or government) among them. But they can have an absolute even though not completely attainable ideal, not as a chosen end or goal but as a progressive guide towards ever widening dreams, more real, and thus more enduring, goals.

Man, in his animal nature has no immortal dream, but the regenerate man, the creative and thereby spiritual man aspires to and in free and reciprocal relations with his fellow man aspires to and moves onward towards a higher and ever more abundant life and length of days as dreamed of old.

Thus life itself, creative, advancing and immortal life is the absolute ideal, never to be fully attained in our relative interdependence but always to give direction towards ever more enduring

______________________________________________________________________

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Carbon of letter from Heath at 312 Halesworth Street, Santa Ana, California,

to Robert LeFevre, president, The Freedom School, Box 165, Colorado Springs, CO

August 24, 1961

 

Dear Bob:

I am getting from time to time happy reports of how the Freedom School is getting along. But it was a bit shocking to know, somewhat belatedly, about Frank Chodorov’s demise. It was good that, within his limitations, he was so useful to the School both in getting it started and carrying it on. I wish I could have done as much.

They tell me at the Register here that many of the leading editorials I have been reading of late were authored by you. I wonder at as much as I admire, your ability to set out the libertarian position concerning government with so much clarity and force. In many of these writings, you point up the poignant need to dis­cover and develop an alternative mode in which community administration is carried on under the free enterprise system without resort to taxation or other force.

I think you might find the definitive answer in the very readable and entertaining thesis for which my grandson, Spencer MacCallum, has just received his Master’s degree from the University of Washington. In this, he sets out the development of proprietary com­munities in past, present and future perspective. He tells me your local library could get a copy of it through Interlibrary Loan Service.

I also wonder if you will not sometime give some very careful attention specifically to part II of my Citadel, Market and Altar.

I am, as you know, reluctant to make contributions to things with which I am not personally or immediately in touch. But I am enclosing herewith a hundred dollars just the same.

Cordially,

 

____________________________________________________________________  

Spencer Heath Archive

Item 3095

Letter to Heath from Robert LeFevre, president,

The Freedom School, box 165, Colorado Springs, CO

August 31, 1961

 

My dear friend Spencer:

 

I much appreciate your generous contribution to our efforts. Believe me, this is appre­ciated.

 

But I must hasten to correct a false impression. Frank Chodorov is still with us. He suffered a stroke which turned him into a patient for a number of weeks. But he is improving quite steadily as I understand it and they now anti­cipate full recovery, or nearly so.

 

Frank had the stroke when he was at the school. He stood up to speak and then went white. He tried to talk but couldn’t make any sense and we had to take him from the room. His daughter was called in New York City and she came out to get him. Meanwhile, we had put him in a Denver hospital for full care. Finally, he was per­mitted to travel and his daughter flew him back to New York and put him in a hospital there. He is out now, I have learned from her, and everything seems to be working in his favor.

 

Yes, Spencer, for a number of years the bulk of the Register’s editorials have come off my typewriter. I am very happy that you give your approval. While I don’t believe I have ever reached the conclusion that your own particular conclusion is the “definitive” solution, I am content that it is a possible one. I see no necessary flaws in it. But I prefer to recom­mend it as A way rather than as THE way.

 

You’ll be pleased to know that I always instruct my classes concerning this excellent idea you have and your book is recommended reading in every session. I think it is splendid. And, were you to dig back in your files I think you would find that I have commented on your idea editorially and with favor.

 

Someday I would like to read Spencer MacCallum’s master thesis. At the moment, I’m over my head in reading matter and wouldn’t recommend an assault on such a profound study as I’m sure this is. If your grandson has an extra copy that he can spare for about six months I’m sure I could crowd it in during that time.

 

It is always good to hear from you. You are something of an institution in your own right. I expect to have you as my very special guest at the Freedom School on your 100th anni­versary.

 

Cordially,

Robert LeFevre
RL/d                       President