A Good Liberal and Inequality Today

I agree with Kyle...I didn't see this book coming, even though I really enjoyed it. In The Affluent Society, Galbraith's remarks spurred questions in my mind about whether or not I am really a "good liberal" as he points out on page 69 stating "The test of the good liberal is still that he is never fooled, that he never yields on issues favoring the wealthy" (69). That being said, I am definitely not a "good liberal" by Galbraith's definition. I think it is interesting, though, that it is so easy to go back and forth on liberal and conservative economic viewpoints depending on ones own place in society. Many young college students take a liberal standpoint as their future still remains unknown (especially in terms of their wealth). But as Galbraith argues, many young ones will be liberal now but will become more conservative as they get older...STOP TAXING US! WE EARNED THIS FOR OURSELVES!

I found Galbraith's chapter on inequality particularly interesting as he talks about how inequality has faded as an issue. He states that inequality has faded as an issue because "it has not been showing the expected tendency to promote violent reaction" and "The drastically altered political and social position of the rich in recent times." Overall, according to Galbraith when he wrote this, stated "we need only notice that, as an economic and social concern, inequality has been declining in urgency, and this has had its reflection in the conventional wisdom" (79). This is not necessarily true nowadays, which I think Galbraith would acknowledge. When Galbraith wrote The Affluent Society in 1958, this may have been the case, but since that time, inequality has been the reason for many social and economic movements. Think about the civil rights movement. That was strongly based on equality. Even today, Obama very passionately speaks of inequality and the injustice it does to our nation almost every time he gives a speech. I think inequality is something that conservatives see as a fact of life and liberals want to combat and because of this divide, it is still an issue today. I particularly liked this youtube video that, in my opinion, shows that inequality is an issue today http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YhZLtLGTIg. Galbraith and friends...let's keep making it an issue.

But what does inequality even mean in the United States and what facets of inequality should concern us? Is it inequality of wealth? Inequality of opportunity? Inequality of rights? Corey Brettschneider, in Democratic Rights, states that one of the core values of a democracy is equality of interests supporting the idea that democratic citizens (i.e. Americans) are free, equal and reasonable rulers. All people in a democratic society are equal in that they have substantive rights (i.e. life, liberty, happiness), but beyond that, Brettschneider makes no case for a society to be equal on material gains. The equality aspect is that everyone has the opportunity to advance in a democratic society, and thus, as a Social Darwinist may say, it is a case of survival of the fittest after that as to who gets more and who gets less. Thus, overall, inequality in terms of wealth and material gains is still an issue. In terms of democratic rights, as Brettschneider concerns himself with, we are all equal, therefore inequality would not be an issue in this regard. How to combat the issue of economic and social inequality is a question liberals want to concern themselves with while conservatives would rather sit back and watch it work itself out. Which way is better in a Democracy? Now that, is, as it always has been, up for discussion