J.K. Galbraith on the Death of Liberalism

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Randall <rvh40 () insightbb com>
Date: November 17, 2004 6:36:18 PM EST
To: "This is not a gentle place." <cuckoosnest () riddlemaster org>
Cc: Dave <dave () farber net>
Subject: J.K. Galbraith on the Death of Liberalism

http://tennessean.com/opinion/columnists/lewis/archives/04/11/ 
61493825.shtml?Element_ID=61493825


CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — ''Is liberalism dead?''

''What?'' the elderly man sitting in the wheelchair here on the campus
of Harvard University asked after not being able to hear the question
being put to him.

''Some people are writing the eulogy for liberalism since the Democrats
lost the election last week,'' the man relaying the question said. ''The
person wants to know if liberalism is dead?''

''I never think that anything is finished,'' the 96-year-old man said
after finally understanding the question being put forth this past
Tuesday afternoon. ''There can always be corrections and improvements.
Let's never doubt that.''

The elderly man was John Kenneth Galbraith, who served as President John
F. Kennedy's economic adviser during the 1960 presidential campaign and
later as ambassador to India. He had come out to a public event for the
first time in at least four months to have a conversation with a group
of newspaper columnists.

The practical advice of Galbraith, perhaps the best known economist of
the 20th century: ''Those of us who have privilege, such as we have here
at the university, and those of you who have the privileged role in the
media and have other access to good fortune'' must work to rid the
community of injustice.

''That is the nature of what we call liberalism, and nobody should be
backward about his or her responsibility for improving the well-being of
others and people in general.

''And possibly, just possibly, we should allow a certain enjoyment, a
certain satisfaction in causing annoyance for those who have it too
good.''

Galbraith, the Paul M. Warburg Professor of Economics Emeritus at
Harvard, is a man who has consistently been committed to the liberal
economic, political and social point of view, according to his
biographer, Richard Parker.

''He has been a tireless advocate for social justice,'' Parker said
Tuesday.

But Galbraith, who opposed America sending armed troops to Vietnam in
the early 1960s, really didn't need anyone speaking for him. He told his
guests that he didn't foresee and certainly didn't hope for the
re-election of George W. Bush as president of the United States.

One of the reasons for Bush's re-election, Galbraith said, is the great
flow of money by the corporate world into politics.

''I think we will make a mistake if we do not see that the modern focus
of power is in the corporate structure,'' the white-haired Galbraith
said.

Other questions for Galbraith:

If Bush was one of your economic students, what lesson would you remind
him of for him to repair the economy?

I would urge him to get hard manual effort on some productive farm.

Can Bush be called a fiscal conservative as far as how his
administration has managed the economy?

Fiscal conservatism is something that happens when somebody has
forgotten to reduce the taxes, and that has not been true in these past
years. On the contrary, we've had tax reductions for the very affluent,
and there's going to be no reversal of that policy.

Any of you who are making a huge income ('These are journalists,
Professor Galbraith,' Richard Parker reminded the speaker) can reflect
that for the next four years, your situation is decidedly secure.

Would you critique John Kerry's campaign?

I would have liked John Kerry to have been more aggressively liberal,
particularly on economic issues, but there are all kinds of people to
whom you have to lend your effort, and I think he ran a good campaign on
the whole.

I'm not blaming him for the loss. I hold all my blame for the American
people.'

Why were you surprised by the Bush victory?

> From my point of view, there still wasn't a full appreciation of the
insanity in Iraq and as a tragedy that some thousands of young Americans
have gotten killed for essentially a useless enterprise, for a
government that might cause people to yearn for the one it replaced and
the control of weapons that didn't exist.

That was the biggest issue, but ... the overwhelming problem is the
suggestion in the economy of boom and bust.

And the overwhelming effort of the Republicans and conservatives is to
stimulate the boom and accept the bust. … We still have a grossly
unequal distribution of income.'

That's why, as John Kenneth Galbraith said, nobody should be backward
about his or her responsibility for improving the well-being of others.
And that's why those of us who really care about others ''should allow a
certain enjoyment, a certain satisfaction in causing annoyance for those
who have it too good.''

And if that's liberalism, then so be it.

Dwight Lewis is a columnist, regional editor and member of the editorial
board for The Tennessean. E-mail: dlewis () tennessean com.



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/