Soundings, May 1998

"Greenspan's Manifesto" was the headline over the "Perspectives" column of Investor's Business Daily on April 14. Quoting from a speech that the Fed chief had given, the column reported Greenspan as saying: "'Only free markets exhibit the flexibility and robustness to accommodate human nature,' consumer preferences and rapidly advancing technology 'to consistently advance living standards. . . . Market economies have succeeded over the centuries by thoroughly weeding out the inefficient and poorly equipped, and by granting rewards to those who could anticipate consumer demand and meet it' at minimal cost." Human nature. Free markets. Prosperity. Entrepreneurial reward. Greenspan has a reputation for uttering Delphic remarks, but this time he spoke out loud and clear. Congratulations.

Objectivists often say the GOP undercuts its tepid advocacy of capitalism by accepting the prevailing altruist morality. Now, someone else has noticed the same incompatibility—sort of. David Horowitz, a 1960s New Leftist who came right, believes the GOP undercuts its advocacy of capitalism by its tepid acceptance of altruism. "What really ails conservatives," he writes, "is not that people think they lack the lift of a driving dream, but that they appear to have a mean spirit." This is why the American people chose Bill Clinton to implement their agenda. "It is because—however odd this may sound—they trust Bill Clinton to do it with compassion." So what must the GOP do? Sell capitalism as altruistic. "Liberate the American people, most especially minorities and the poor, from the oppressing shackles of liberalism. But to be credible in advancing this agenda, conservatives have to first reach out and show people they care." David Horowitz, Conservatism with a Heart.

If social sciences do not get the respect physical sciences do, "research" like the following may be to blame. "Economists have long constructed mathematical models of bargaining tactics favored by a theoretical 'rational man,' who tries to slice off as big a piece of the monetary pie for himself as possible. . . . Rational man heeds a blunt motto: 'I got mine, and I'll get yours, too, if you give me half a chance.' . . . [But] a substantial minority of economists and other social scientists now questions the bedrock assumption that self-interest provides the sole, or even the best, explanation for the ways in which people divvy up goods and services." (Science News, March 28, 1998). As David Kelley said of the "pie" metaphor (on "Greed with John Stossel"), "That's really a child's view of how the world works." And to equate "self-interest" with "I got mine, and I'll get yours" is a savage's view of how the world works.

The Art of Smearing: How do you accuse American businessmen of a deceptive practice—without really accusing them of it? A New York Times story by Dana Canedy (April 24, 1998) demonstrates. The reporter notes that Gilette's new razor has a blue strip to indicate when the blade needs replacing, and that other companies are providing similar devices for their products. Why? The story's highlighted quote suggests an answer: "If you double the throwaway rate, you double sales." So is this deceptive marketing? "Whether the indicators give a true sense of when products need to be replaced is anyone's guess," Canedy writes. But why is it anyone's guess? Couldn't the Times afford to conduct some consumer tests? Or was the reporter afraid of the results? Four paragraphs from the end of the story, he concedes: "If consumers use goods as they are intended, manufacturers protect brand loyalty by reducing the likelihood that someone will complain about an overused product whose performance has slipped." U

This department seeks items that reveal the state of the culture, in America or the world. Please include source and date.