home  |  book  |

The Illusion of a "Neat-and-Tidy" World It's Not the Spending, Stupid

print view

Milton Friedman, American Hero

by Christopher Chantrill
November 20, 2006 at 7:12 am

|

IN THE 1960S and 1970s the United States conducted a spirited argument about the bridge to the economic future. Should Americans continue to implement the New Deal with its cocktail of economic planning and elite political control, or should it return to the pre-Depression policy where the the political and the economic forces competed in rough equality?

Three Americans symbolized this contest, with John Kenneth Galbraith arguing for planning and control and Paul Samuelson for a steady-as-she-goes Keynesianism. The greatest and the most conservative of the three, Milton Friedman, died November 16, aged 94.

It is a tribute to his courage and indomitable will that Friedman persevered and won his personal battle of ideas. For in his heyday—as in ours—a conservative polemicist labored under the disadvantage that he was perceived and reported as a little too extreme, a little too dogmatic, and a little too uncultured to be trusted in polite society.

This was perfectly communicated by the producers of his 1980 PBS TV series Free to Choose. The show was aired to provide equal time for Friedman against John Kenneth Galbraith and his BBC series Age of Uncertainty. Against the urbane Galbraith Friedman came across as decidedly prickly.

If Friedman had been a liberal we could have celebrated his abrasiveness as a natural response to the experience of his working-class Jewish origins and the anti-Semitism he encountered as a Jew pushing into the Jewish-quota academy of the 1930s. But such allowances are not made for conservatives. Friedman had to make his way by being right.

It was not until after World War II (in which he famously helped to implement income tax withholding) that he got his academic career on track and built a reputation at the University of Chicago by developing a modern formulation of the quantity theory of money, “monetarism,” against the fashionable Keynesianism preferred at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In his Monetary History of the United States, written with Anna Schwartz, he proposed that the Great Depression was caused by the deflationary monetary policy of the Federal Reserve Board between 1929 and 1933.

In his Capitalism and Freedom in 1962 he championed school vouchers and a negative income tax. Today the negative income tax lives as the Democrats’ favorite social program: the Earned Income Tax Credit.

But Friedman’s modest proposal for school vouchers, the idea that government money for education should go to the parents not the school, has provoked such opposition from the education producer interest, the Democrats’ public schoolteacher paymasters, that nothing less than total implosion of the government school monopoly may permit the solution of the central injustice of government education, the utter failure of schools for poor children in inner cities. Nevertheless, Friedman and his wife founded in 1996 the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation to work for school reform.

In comparing Friedman against his rival economist intellectuals John Kenneth Galbraith and Paul Samuelson one is struck by the poverty of the opposition. Extravagantly lionized in his prime, Galbraith seems today more an entertainer on the liberal improv circuit than a thinker, a man who served up crowd-pleasing one-liners to a generation of liberal readers while successfully representing himself as an iconoclast that challenged “conventional wisdom.” Galbreaith’s theory of “countervailing power” between Big Business and Big Labor in American Capitalism in 1952 proved to be empty rubbish. In fact the reign of Big Business and Big Labor in the early post World War II era, condoned by Big Government, amounted to a conspiracy to loot America’s great manufacturing corporations. His Affluent Society advanced the preposterous notion that a government already grown to imperial grandeur in the 1950s suffered from underfunding in a nation of “private affluence” and “public squalor.”

Friedman’s other rival Paul Samuelson was one of the leading developers of mathematical economics in the 1940s, and built a lifelong franchise with his Economics, an introductory college economic text that owed its success through its many editions to a keen sensitivity to the ever changing liberal zeitgeist.

It was not Friedman’s way to pander or to placate liberal opinion. Instead his tireless advocacy plowed a political space in which the economic reforms of the 1980s could take root. To test that notion we can ask the question: Could President Reagan have won the battle to transform the US economy without Friedman’s polemics? The answer is clear. The triumph of Reaganism is unthinkable without Friedman’s contribution.

There is one black mark against Milton Friedman. In the 1970s he gave some lectures on monetary economic policy in Chile. Then he actually met with dictator August Pinochet. For this he was excoriated in the usual places. But the result of his speeches in Chile was that the Pinochet regime implemented a series of landmark economic policies including school vouchers, free trade, and social security privatization that has made Chile the envy of Latin America (See the way that lefties dispute this). Curiously, Friedman’s speeches on economics in socialist countries like China did not provoke similar outrage.

America has need of men like Milton Friedman. Let us pray that in the challenges of the twenty-first century we shall not lack for successors.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS

Action

The incentive that impels a man to act is always some uneasiness... But to make a man act [he must have] the expectation that purposeful behavior has the power to remove or at least to alleviate the felt uneasiness.
Ludwig von Mises, Human Action

Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.”  —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison

China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing

Churches

[In the] higher Christian churches... they saunter through the liturgy like Mohawks along a string of scaffolding who have long since forgotten their danger. If God were to blast such a service to bits, the congregation would be, I believe, genuinely shocked. But in the low churches you expect it every minute.
Annie Dillard, Holy the Firm

Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph

Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh

Democratic Capitalism

I mean three systems in one: a predominantly market economy; a polity respectful of the rights of the individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and a system of cultural institutions moved by ideals of liberty and justice for all. In short, three dynamic and converging systems functioning as one: a democratic polity, an economy based on markets and incentives, and a moral-cultural system which is plural and, in the largest sense, liberal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

Drang nach Osten

There was nothing new about the Frankish drive to the east... [let] us recall that the continuance of their rule depended upon regular, successful, predatory warfare.
Richard Fletcher, The Barbarian Conversion

Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State

Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990

presented by Christopher Chantrill

 •  Contact