But the motive underlying the public control of men’s possessive impulses should always be the increase of liberty, both by the prevention of private tyranny and by the liberation of creative impulses.  If public control is not to do more harm than good, it must be so exercised as to leave the utmost freedom of private initiative in all those ways that do not involve the private use of force.  In this respect all governments have always failed egregiously, and there is no evidence that they are improving.

The creative impulses, unlike those that are possessive, are directed to ends in which one man’s gain is not another man’s loss.  The man who makes a scientific discovery or writes a poem is enriching others at the same time as himself.  Any increase in knowledge or good-will is a gain to all who are affected by it, not only to the actual possessor.  Those who feel the joy of life are a happiness to others as well as to themselves.  Force cannot create such things, though it can destroy them; no principle of distributive justice applies to them, since the gain of each is the gain of all.  For these reasons, the creative part of a man’s activity ought to be as free as possible from all public control, in order that it may remain spontaneous and full of vigor.  The only function of the state in regard to this part of the individual life should be to do everything possible toward providing outlets and opportunities.

In every life a part is governed by the community, and a part by private initiative.  The part governed by private initiative is greatest in the most important individuals, such as men of genius and creative thinkers.  This part ought only to be restricted when it is predatory; otherwise, everything ought to be done to make it as great and as vigorous as possible.  The object of education ought not to be to make all men think alike, but to make each think in the way which is the fullest expression of his own personality.  In the choice of a means of livelihood all young men and young women ought, as far as possible, to be able to choose what is attractive to them; if no money-making occupation is attractive, they ought to be free to do little work for little pay, and spend their leisure as they choose.  Any kind of censure on freedom of thought or on the dissemination of knowledge is, of course, to be condemned utterly.

Huge organizations, both political and economic, are one of the distinguishing characteristics of the modern world.  These organizations have immense power, and often use their power to discourage originality in thought and action.  They ought, on the contrary, to give the freest scope that is possible without producing anarchy or violent conflict.  They ought not to take cognizance of any part of a man’s life except what is concerned with the legitimate objects of public control, namely, possessions and the use of force.  And they ought, by devolution, to leave as large a share of control as possible in the hands of individuals and small groups.  If this is not done, the men at the head of these vast organizations will infallibly become tyrannous through the habit of excessive power, and will in time interfere in ways that crush out individual initiative.