I don't know that I'd bother following this list if Brad weren't on it.
Not becuase I enjoy the fights, but because he offers an informed and
vigorous response to the knee-jerk statisim that otherwise dominates the
list. I call it statism rather than Marxism because I know of no other
forum where the policies of Juan Peron, the South Korean government and
state media monopolies (monopolies, not the Beeb) could all get such
sympathetic hearings. I know that not everybody shares these views, but
I do think that the overall tone of this list is as reflexively statist
as Schleifer is anti-state. In both cases that reflex leaves a lot of
good insight as roadkill.
I do agree that Brad can be condescending at times, and also that
tit-for-tat may not be the most constructive response. However, I think
there's an unwillingness on this list to face the issue of civility. Jim
can, in the same message, rubbish tit-for-tat and ridicule Brad's appeal
to the rules of the US Congress, the latter on grounds entirely
irrelevant to the issue at hand (courtesy). So what's your solution,
Jim? Michael K. says he's not attacking Brad personally, but attacking
the economics profession. That misses the point. Many comments in
response to Brad (not just by Michael K) take the following form:
neo-liberal economists condone starving people to death in the name of
the market
Brad is a neo liberal economist
(but nothing personal)
When the argument is being put in terms as serious and emotive as those
reflected in the first line, the second line is not an innocuous
judgement. It is also entirely unnecessary to the argument at hand,
unless what you want is the opportunity to beat up a representative of
the neo-liberal establishment. And the sequence I've given here is, I
think, understated compared to what goes on: much of the response to
Brad is about Brad, not about his arguments. About where he works, where
he used to work, what he edits, who his friends are, what sort of
profits he might make on his textbook. Almost everybody else on the list
is allowed to state their views as views, while Brad gets constructed as
a representative of something, and abused for it. I don't enjoy reading
that, I think it's a style that has probably driven most dissenting
voices either into lurking or off the list entirely, and I wish it would
stop.
Fred Guy
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
