![[ Developing Ideas Digest ]](/buttons/didstr.gif){kind=small}
![[ IISDnet Contents ]](/buttons/contents.gif){kind=small}
|
|
| About Di Digest | Back Issues | Mailing List | Email DI | On Line Features | 1
| 2
| 3 |
4
| 5
| LitScan TrendWatch |
 |
Laissez-pas-faire economics |
| As quickly as support built for laissez-faire economics during the early
nineties, so another sea-change in economic ideology appears imminent. Over the
past six months a rash of articles has appeared in influential magazines like
The Atlantic and Harper's questioning the reasonableness of
no-ifs-ands-or-buts libertarianism. Even The Economist got in the act
recently with a February book review called 'The Invisible Fist' – although
the magazine's editors took care to label the article a 'guest review' and ran a
more adulatory piece immediately alongside. All of a sudden it seems that
laissez-pas-faire economics is worth discussing again though few are
calling for a return to communism and planned economies. The most unlikely of
the lot is The Atlantic piece by George Soros, a
currency-trading-tycoon-turned-philanthropist. Soros argues that while the
communist threat disappeared with the Berlin Wall, a new menace looms in
unexamined libertarianism. He dubs it the 'capitalist threat', and cautions
against rampant ideology of any flavour, whether fascist, communist or
libertarian. Soros fears that tolerant, democratic, pluralistic societies –
Karl Popper's 'open societies' – are under siege. The problem is
complacency after the apparent win of free-market economics over communism and
the sometimes-virulent belief that all government interventions must therefore
be bad while all market – and price-determined outcomes are good. He argues
for a middle ground of common sense and for a revival of values rather than of
solely-price-determined decision-making. For the clarity and sophistication of
its arguments, the Soros article is exceptional. Accolades like 'history-making'
and 'a landmark article' come to mind.
The Harper's article is a little more problematic – strong on
describing social problems on the US-Mexico border, but poor on analyzing their
underlying causes. The author claims that the social disorder he describes so
eloquently is caused by free trade, but readers are left simply having to take
his word for it. Still, the article is unusual and haunting and worth a read.
The description of a renegade group of Mexican photographers bent on capturing
the social injustice they see around them on film is, all on its own, worth the
newstand price of the whole issue. References Handy, Charles. “The Economist Review: The Invisible Fist”. Economist (15 Feb. 1997): 3-4 Soros, George. “The Capitalist Threat”. The Atlantic Monthly (February 1997): 45-58 |