[Paleopsych] TLS: (John Gray) New Labour and global laissez-faire
Premise Checker
checker at panix.com
Mon Jun 20 00:32:27 UTC 2005
New Labour and global laissez-faire
The Times Literary Supplement, 1.4.27
http://the-tls.co.uk/archive/story.aspx?story_id=2103894&window_type=print
Sir, - Let me first of all reassure anyone who might care that I have
not, as John Gray asserts when reviewing my book Equality (April 20),
"abandoned Marxism for the more mundane pieties of Anglo-American
liberalism". I lack the suppleness that has allowed Gray to spring so
rapidly from one intellectual and political position to another. I
remain an unrepentant Marxist, but this does not prevent me from
appreciating other traditions. The egalitarian liberalism that takes
as its starting point A Theory of Justice by John Rawls has developed
a rich and sophisticated understanding of distributive justice from
which those able to listen can learn much.
Gray doesn't think much of egalitarian liberalism, or indeed of my own
discussion of equality, which he dismisses as "pedestrian in the
extreme". I would be more crushed by this judgment, had he shown much
understanding of the philosophical issues involved. Among other
egregious errors, he attributes to me a method of testing egalitarian
conceptions against common-sense intuitions that I specifically
criticize in Equality. In standard New Labour fashion, he counterposes
Gordon Brown's version of equality of opportunity to the ideal of
achieving a "fixed pattern" of distribution, ignoring my careful
effort to demonstrate that no serious egalitarian supports the latter
ideal.
The unifying idea of contemporary egalitarianism is that everyone
should be provided with the resources required for an equal chance to
pursue the good life in her own way.
Gray accuses me of having written a "ranting attack on Labour".
Ranting is one of his special subjects, so I bow to his authority. All
the same, it is interesting that he helps himself to some of my
criticisms of Brown's strategy for re- ducing inequality by pushing
the poor on to the labour market - namely that providing employment
isn't the right way of meeting many people's needs, and is vulnerable
to capitalist economic fluctuations. But, faithful to Treasury
doctrine, Gray denies that the cycle of boom and bust is among "the
inherent evils of capitalism", thereby revealing a utopianism at least
as ambitious as any he claims to have discovered in my book.
In his preferred guise as a realist, Gray declares that radical
egalitarianism has no political purchase today. But one of the main
motivating forces behind the international protest movement that most
recently swept through Quebec City is revulsion at the obscene and
growing gap between rich and poor that capitalist globalization is
producing. In some moods Gray shows himself aware of these concerns.
Perhaps the vulgarity of his attack on my book is a sign of the
strains felt by a thinker who somehow manages both to criticize
"global laissez-faire" and to support a New Labour government that
relentlessly seeks to impose neo-liberal policies in Britain, within
the European Union, and on an international scale.
ALEX CALLINICOS Department of Politics, University of York,
Heslington, York.
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list