[lbo-talk] Lionizing Wealthy Americans, Rather Than Taxing

Chris Sturr sturr at dollarsandsense.org
Wed Dec 7 14:12:56 PST 2011


I wasn't following Carrol, I was following Marx, who, as I pointed out, disdained moral arguments (or at any rate arguments about "right" and "desert" and "justice"--what he called "juridical" arguments) because he regarded them as idealist (i.e., as ideological). But I am happy that Carrol emphasizes that point frequently.

I have become less rigid in my anti-moralism lately, though, so I'm willing to entertain strategic arguments like the ones you're making here. But check out this piece from liberal George Lakoff, in response to Frank Luntz's worry that OWS is making Americans think capitalism is immoral: http://www.truth-out.org/words-dont-work/1323270276. I do tend to think moral arguments = idealist = ideological = liberal.

You say "The 1% make moral arguments concerning moral hazard and individual moral responsibility, work ethic," etc. But the 1% also exploit people--should we? So the 1% depend on obfuscating ideology--does that mean we should? Christians speak of "sin"--does that mean we should? Why shouldn't we instead go for analytically rigorous and illuminating arguments, vs. mystifying ones?

But maybe you're saying we should throw anything and everything at the wall and see what sticks. Which I admit has some appeal. I mean, I wouldn't have bet on "99% vs. 1%", but as a slogan it's been very powerful. But the 99% vs. the 1% is pretty analytically rigorous compared to stuff about moral hazard, individual responsibility, etc. It at least roughly identifies classes, vs. referring to idealist nonsense.

^^^^^ CB; Yes We can call it political. But it is foolish to follow Carrol's lead in disdaining moral arguments to the 99% in the political discourse. The 1% make moral arguments concerning moral hazard and individual personal responsibilty, work ethic as to why the 99%ers should not be bailed out of debts in the way Wall Street was bailed out to the tune of $7.7 trillion. We should take up that moral hazard argument in that case. And otherwise we should take up moral arguments to win the political argument. We should make artistic arguments if they will sway people. Religious arguments in some cases: Jesus threw the moneychangers out of the Temple. Jesus said take care of the poor. We should make those arguments to Christians.

-- -- Chris Sturr Co-editor, Dollars & Sense 29 Winter St. Boston, Mass. 02108 phone: 617-447-2177, ext. 205 fax: 617-447-2179 email: sturr at dollarsandsense.org



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list