tions, commonsensical as they may be,nhave called down showers of abuse uponnGilder. But Gilder provokes even greaterncontroversy when he unveils the centerpiecenof his vision for national renewal.nQuite simply, Gilder believes that risk,nchance and choice form the bedrock ofnthe existence of free men. Freedomnbrings anxiety, for the free man mustnface unflinchingly the bewildering andnofttimes frightening exigencies of life.nOpportunity beckons, but the quest tontake advantage of that opportunitynleaves one prey to the unknown, to thenmultiple possibilities of failure and success.nGeorge Gilder would do no lessnthan restore to Americans their rapidlynwaning sense of the high adventure ofnlife, of the infinite possibilities of freedomnand of faith in man’s ability tonconquer the obstacles that confront himnin an open society.nThe minions of Marxism, armednwith their deterministic schemes, offerna carefully charted path to Utopian bliss.nSocialists and liberal proponents of economicnstasis promise the same redemptionnfrom the exigencies of human existence:nperfect security through planning.nNo risk, no chance—and no freendom—in this future world. One neednonly turn to Edward Bellamy’s LookingnBackward, the novel of 1888 that firednleftist imaginations at the turn of thencentury, to glimpse the socialist visionnof a society devoid of risk and blessednwith complete security. Happinessnreigns in Bellamy’s Utopia, for a powerfulnstate ensures equality and the satisfactionnof material needs. From cradlento grave the state shelters the citizensnfrom strife, worry and anxiety. Ofncourse, everyone must serve his twentynyears in the industrial army, and dissentersnare clapped into mental hospitals,nbut who could cavil at such a smallnprice for harmony and security.”nFor Edward Bellamy, caught in thenthroes of a rapidly industrializing andnurbanizing society, the prospects of anUtopia devoid of the messy realities ofnfreedom proved too alluring to resist.nBut when I plod through the tedious,nbland pages of Bellamy’s paean to a riskfreenlife I am struck by one thought: thenmasses of people in such a world wouldnprobably sink into a stuporous ease,nwhile those few individuals still ablento remember the exhilarating anxietynof freedom would long for even one dis-n. . LTitranfin^ whacko stult …”nclad veteran as General George Pickett’snmen stood ready on the morning of Julyn3, 1863: “Maybe this time with all thisnmuch to lose and all this much to gain:nPennsylvania, Maryland, the world, thengolden dome of Washington itself toncrown with desperate and unbelievablenvictory. . . .”It takes little insight ton— Village Viinen•”‘I’liis kind of icasoiiiri); doc-s mciri’ to maki- altruisiu look bail than lo make capilalisiiinIcink ^iKxI.”n— The Self Republicnruptive act as a reminder that the spiritnof adventure had not completelynwithered.nGilder recognizes the need for choice,nchance and risk; like the philosophernWilliam James, he celebrates an opennuniverse filled with a mutability andnchange that continually produce newnproblems for man to grapple with andnnew obstacles to hurdle. And in thisngrappling and hurdling man extractsnthe full measure of enjoyment from lifenand hones his sensibility to a keen edge.nThis urge has abounded in the historynof the West. Columbus felt it when henstruck out across the Atlantic in hisnfrail ships. Galileo exhibited it when,ncounter to the received wisdom of hisnday, he ventured to revise man’s viewnof the universe. The heroes of thenChurch have frequently been mennwilling to risk their very lives to spreadnthe Gospel; it does not demean thensaintliness of the Jesuit missionariesnof the 16th and 17th centuries to suggestnthat a high sense of adventure impellednthem to brave the wilds of thenAmericas and the unknown lands ofnthe East. And who can forget the warriors,nthose men who willingly facedninsuperable obstacles for some compellingnvision.’ William Faulkner sensednthis with all the power of his magnificentnartistry when he described in Intrudernin the Dust the thought thatnmust have seized more than one gray-nnnrealize that the makers of socialistnUtopias have failed to reckon with whatnmakes a man’s heart throb and his nervenendings tingle.nFor George Gilder, man’s essentialnurge to assert his freedom through risknappears in the entrepreneurial capitalist.nBut lest this trait degenerate into a blindnand mindless love of adventure for itsnown sake (something the warrior hasnalways been prey to). Gilder’s entrepreneur,nin the very act of risking, commitsnhimself to the good of society by usingnhis money and energy to benefit others.nA measure of altruism, then, informsnthe entrepreneur’s taste for exploitingnthe contingencies of life. In analyzingncapitalism’s strengths and weaknesses.nGilder writes, both friend and foe havenfailed to discern the “high adventurenand redemptive morality” of the system.nWhat does one make of all thisnfinally.’ At the very least, Gilder hasnpulled off an intellectual tour de force,nfor he has stood Adam Smith’s self-interestednindividual on his head, turnednhim into an altruist and imbued himnwith an existential enthusiasm for thenmaelstrom of experience. No greedy,nself-seeking capitalist here, but ratherna hero of the 20th century. I grantnGeorge Gilder the sparkling insightnand intellectual acumen—not to mentionncourage—that runs throughoutnWealth and Poverty. This man has then11nJttly/Augttst 1981n