wChap.3c

(9/7/98)

CHAPTER III. C

JOHN KENNETH GALBRAITH AND THE GOOD SOCIETY

John Kenneth Galbraith provides some seminal thinking on the good society in his book having that title[1]. He focuses clearly on the malaise of our time. For me that malaise is best captured by the image of a political majority assembled to support the affluent, the very affluent, and business interests to stand in opposition against the interests of the poor, the disadvantaged, and the environment. His breadth of vision, his good-will for all who deserve it, his wealth of experience makes him eminently qualified to speak on this topic. What he says is important and must be included in any significant discussion of ideas about the good society.

However, his approach is basically concerned with economics. He shares the belief of most other modern thinkers that if economic problems are solved, all relevant human problems are solved. But nothing that he said swayed me from my conviction that in reality all relevant human problems are religious in nature (even economic problems). There is an economic component, but those problems must still be approached and handled within a religious context based on true human needs and the social organization to deal with those needs.

Nevertheless, Galbraith raises numerous points to help focus thinking toward the development of a Wise Community made up of Wise Persons.

p. 3: "It is the achievable, not the perfect, that is here identified and described. To envision a perfect society...[is] alas, a formula for dismissal....In the modern economy, a slightly bizarre fact, production is now more necessary for the employment it provides than for the goods and services it supplies."

"Any useful identification of the good society must...take into consideration structure and the human characteristics that are fixed, immutable. They make the difference between the utopian and the achievable, between the agreeably irrelevant and the ultimately possible."

RESPONSE: It is very likely that Galbraith is absolutely correct on his point about discussing a perfect society. The modern mind seems to dismiss the idea of aiming for a "perfect society," or of thinking in terms of the true problems that confront humanity. One is considered impractical if they examine the problems we must overcome if we are to become our best self. To promote the idea that there might be ways to generate and focus social energy to make a true difference in human development is considered equivalent to exploring how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Certainly, if the issue is stated forcefully enough and often enough by those with sufficient stature to be listened to it becomes increasingly difficult to get a serious hearing for any ideas to significantly improve the lot of humanity. But unless such ideas can be discussed and considered where will new answers come from? Obviously, a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom can be categorized as an effort to build a perfect society. However, to me it seems the only approach to focus the achievable so it is on what is worthy of achieving.

However, it may well be that Galbraith's arguments do not in fact apply to a Science of Religion. He says that it is structure and fixed human characteristics that separate the irrelevant and the ultimately possible. Since the thrust of a Science of Religion is to develop falsifiable hypotheses and the empirical evidence to support or refute them, it then focuses entirely on the ultimately possible.

p. 4: "In the good society all of its citizens must have personal liberty...."

RESPONSE: Likewise with a Wise Community except that in a Wise Community the citizens must have sufficient knowledge and support to provide personal liberty rather than only the appearance of personal liberty.

p. 5: "It is the nature of privileged position that it develops its own political justification and often the economic and social doctrine that serves it best."

RESPONSE: This would be a primary challenge of a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom -- to find positions of such clarity, scope, fairness, and necessity that no individual or group will be able to adopt conflicting views that have nothing to support them except their apparent self-serving features. The empirical data of a Science of Religion must also make clear how self-serving positions ultimately defeat the individual and leave them morally and psychologically devastated.

p. 13: "Within the larger historical framework, what is the nature of the good society? How can the future be made safer and better for all?"

RESPONSE: And this is the true challenge. I still believe my Science of Religion is the most satisfactory response possible to this question.

p. 14: "An evident purpose of the good economy is to produce goods and render services effectively and to dispense the revenues therefrom in a socially acceptable and economically functional manner."

RESPONSE: Yes. However, the issue of allowing all persons to participate in the economy in such a way that they are not prevented from achieving a SFLIHM (Sustainable Feeling that one's LIfe Has Meaning) must also be dealt with. In the final analysis it is the quality of life of each individual person that is of paramount importance.

p. 18: "If socialism can no longer be considered the controlling framework of the good or even plausible society, neither can capitalism in its classical form."

RESPONSE: But finding clear guidance for what this means is a primary challenge of a Science of Religion.

p. 20: "In the good society there is in these matters one dominant rule: decision must be made on the social and economic merits of the particular case. This is not the age of doctrine; it is the age of practical judgment."

RESPONSE: And hopefully a Science of Religion will provide the motivation and direction to gather the kind of data that will guide these kinds of decisions.

p. 21: "Here is the lesson. In the good and intelligent society policy and action are not subordinate to ideology, to doctrine. Action must be based on the ruling facts of the specific case."

RESPONSE: And any ideology or doctrine of merit must help focus thinking and the making of choices on the best way to gather and use facts in specific situations.

p. 23: "If put in sufficiently general terms, the essence of the good society can be easily stated. It is that every member, regardless of gender, race or ethnic origins, should have access to a rewarding life."

RESPONSE: And "rewarding life" must be defined in relevant and supportable terms such as a SFLIHM.

p. 24: "The role of economics in the good society is basic; economic determinism is a relentless force."

RESPONSE: In a Wise Community more basic than economics is a SFLIHM. How the economy promotes this is a religious question.

p. 26: "A strong and stable economy and the opportunity it provides are...central to the good society....In the good society no one can be left outside without income -- be assigned to starvation, hopelessness, untreated illness or like deprivation."

RESPONSE: Likewise in a Wise Community. However, helping each person achieve a SFLIHM would be the mechanism to ensure these things.

p. 28: "The good society does not seek equality of economic return; that is neither a realizable nor a socially desirable goal. There are those for whom income and wealth and their public manifestation or private contemplation are the ultimate goal and satisfaction; there are others for whom they are not. The Wall Street operative measures the quality of life by his or her income; the poet, actual or aspiring, does not. It is the expense of liberty that these differences in motivation and reward be accepted."

RESPONSE: But in a Wise Community there would be more focus on helping citizens find the best path for them, possibly even one leading to a SFLIHM. In such cases different answers can be seen as better or worse.

p. 29: "The good society must distinguish between enrichment that is socially permissable and benign and that which is a social cost."

RESPONSE: This would also seem important for a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom to clarify and provide guidance on.

p. 31: "The good society...must honor the expectation of reasonable price stability."

"Finally, the good society must have a strong international dimension."

RESPONSE: Sounds like good advice.

p. 33: "There is no serious doubt as to the economic basis of the good society. As sufficiently noted, there must be employment opportunity for all willing members. This means, with a growing population and greater aspiration, a steady expansion of the economy and therewith a steady and reliable increase in the number of workers employed."

"The central problem with which the good society must here contend is the painful tendency of the modern economy to periods, sometimes prolonged, of recession and stagnation, accompanied, inevitably, by more unemployment. These recurrent episodes, not continuous vigorous expansion, are a basic feature of the market system. So in modern times is continuing unemployment, even in periods of marked growth and well-being."

RESPONSE: It seems clear to me that the government must take on the role of employer of last resort. When the economy cannot sustain adequate employment, the government must use this surplus labor to add to and repair the infra-structure to ensure that a strong foundation exists upon which to continue economic expansion. To allow a significant number of people to remain outside the realm of gainful employment is unacceptable. Such labor is not only a tragic loss to the individuals involved but to the whole society.

p. 47: "The choice between unemployment and inflation cannot be avoided; it must be faced. The good society cannot relegate some parts of its population to idleness, social distress and economic deprivation in order to achieve price stability. As necessary, the lessor evil of price increases must be accepted."

RESPONSE: Well said. Nevertheless, it seems possible to me that a Wise Community might be able to utilize more difficult mechanisms to achieve price stability. But if it cannot, then Galbraith's position must rule.

p. 51: "Life is always enhanced when one has others to do one's work and one's thinking."

RESPONSE: And this is a point of view that must be tested and corrected if necessary. A Wise Community must do everything possible to enhance the creativity and results of specially gifted individuals so they can give their maximum to humanity in general. At the same time it is critical that each person have their area of achievement where they can draw on the assistance of others to advance their thinking and their work.

p. 57: "The basic economic policy of the good society is public expenditure in step with future economic growth and well-being."

RESPONSE: Sounds good. As indicated above this must also include public employment as necessary.

p. 59: "The good society does not seek equality in the distribution of income....some of the energy and initiative on which the modern economy depends comes not only from the desire for money but also from the urge to excel in its acquisition."

RESPONSE: But a Wise Community's goal would be to help as many persons as possible achieve a SFLIHM. Such persons would see money in a more healthy way. Hopefully, this healthy way would not cut off energy and initiative essential to the maintenance and development of the modern economy which is necessary to sustain a Wise Community.

p. 60: "...the good society must accept men and women as they are."

RESPONSE: Probably, this is one of the points of greatest difference between Galbraith and me. It is a core assumption of a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom that individuals do not develop into their best self "naturally," or within existing societies. Each person needs a great deal of support and guidance to achieve a SFLIHM. This transcends any discussion of economics and the role of economics in improving the quality of life of individuals in general.

But at a deeper level the question is always, What does any word or phrase really mean? What does it mean to "accept men and women as they are"? In a basic sense obviously a Science of Religion "accepts" anyone as they are. What is not accepted is that they are as wise as they can be. It does not believe that they are OK the way they are. Etc.

A Wise Community holds that each person has unlimited, untapped potential. That every part of them would benefit from farther development. But of course this does not involve changing people "for their own good," but working with those who desire to change to do so in the ways that are congruent with who they want to become and who they "should" become.

p. 60: "...the good society must accept men and women as they are. However, this does not lessen the need for a clear view of the forces controlling the distribution of income and of the factors forming attitudes thereon. And of how, in a wholly practical way, policy on income distribution should be framed."

"There is, first, the inescapable fact that the modern market economy...accords wealth and distributes income in a highly unequal, socially adverse and also functionally damaging fashion....This the good society cannot accept."

p. 63: "What, then, is the right course as regards the distribution of income? There can be no fixed rule, no acceptable multiple as between what is received by the rich and what goes to the poor....What is necessary are strong ameliorating actions that reflect and address the inherent and damaging inequality."

"There is, first, the support system for the poor."

"There is, second, as also discussed, the need to deal with the dominant tendencies of the financial world.

p. 64: "There is, third, the need for stockholder and informed public criticism to address the personal income maximization of corporate management."

"There remain two lines of affirmative public action looking toward a more equitable income distribution, one of which is of decisive importance."

"The first is for the government to remove the present tax and expenditure concessions to the affluent."

p. 65: "However, the most effective instrument for achieving a greater measure of income equality remains the progressive income tax."

RESPONSE: Galbraith presents some important ideas and practices that need study and discussion. They must be considered. However, as mentioned earlier a Science of Religion must work at a much deeper level. A SFLIHM gets to issues deeper than how the economy is working. A Wise Community made up a Wise Persons is inspired by motivations far stronger and of deeper significance than those that Galbraith addresses. It functions in a role that Galbraith discards as dealing with the "perfect" and therefore not worth discussing.

p. 65: "The distribution of income in the modern economy derives ultimately from the distribution of power.

RESPONSE: And power is something a Science of Religion would address in ways never before done in human societies. The essence of a SFLIHM involves providing ways to help individuals come to grips with any "needs for power" that they harbor. Also, see Chapter XV, and Chapter One of VOLUME I.

p. 66: "The good society seeks, where possible, to reverse...decline in trade union power, for worker organizations remain a major civilizing factor in modern economic life."

RESPONSE: The role of trade unions in a Wise Community is a matter that deserves deep pondering. To the degree possible they might be incorporated into the organizations working to develop and support a Good Community. See VOLUME I, Chapter Two, "Other Support Organizations."

p. 66: "...direct action by the state on behalf of those in need outside the unions is required, including provisions for health insurance and unemployment compensation and, currently most important, a socially adequate minimum wage."

RESPONSE: This issue is very important and will continue to be up until a Wise Community is developed that is universal in character. At some point these issues might begin to be dealt with in a more organic, automatic way as people become healthier and more nurturing to all other people, wealth becomes greater and available to all, and support of all kinds becomes more effective.

p. 68: Chapter 9: The Decisive Role of Education

p. 68: "That education does serve economic purpose is not in doubt. This has been long recognized. In the last century in the United States education and transportation, along with good government, were the first and often the only subject of any speech outlining the basic requisites of economic progress."

p. 69: "The good society cannot accept that education in the modern economy is primarily in the service of economics; it has a larger political and social role, a yet deeper justification in itself."

"For one thing education has a vital bearing on social peace and tranquility; it is education that provides the hope and the reality of escape from the lower, less-favored social and economic strata to those above."

RESPONSE: Galbraith and I are on the same wave length when it comes to education. As indicated in Chapter XXX, "Education in a Wise Community," education lies at the core of a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom. However, this is an education that actually incorporates what today is thought of as therapy. One cannot have a Wise Community without Wise Persons. And Wise Persons cannot exist except through well-grounded, in-depth education about all the things a Science of Religion requires. Without such education/therapy the whole thing falls apart.

p. 69: "A measure of social and economic stratification is inevitable in the good society; the complete elimination of a class system is almost certainly impossible."

RESPONSE: I would think that a class system would not exist in a Wise Community just because the citizens would be dealing with all concerns at such a high level, class couldn't receive any consideration. Class -- like focusing on making money -- is what people do with their life when they don't have anything relevant to do with their life.

p. 70: "A case could be made, and perhaps should be made, that the best in education should be for those in the worst of social situations. They are the most in need of the means of escape."

RESPONSE: This is a very good thought. However, as discussed in Chapter XXX there is a critical problem that is being overlooked here. Persons coming from the worst social situations are almost always unable to benefit from the current educational system even when it is enriched and provides special resources. Many of these young people have been physically and sexually abused. Many exist in an anti-education culture where learning is seen as something for wimps, sissies, and nerds.

They need something closer to therapy, social support, and the kind of direction in their life that a Science of Religion and Religion of Wisdom would provide. Therefore, they need the opportunities and experiences necessary to help them achieve a SFLIHM. Providing such resources would be a gigantic challenge, but is certainly one worthy of the most serious consideration.

p. 70: "In the good society there are two further and vital services of education. One is to allow people to govern themselves intelligently, and the other is to allow them to enjoy life itself to the fullest."

RESPONSE: And this goes double for a Wise Community.

p. 71: "Education not only makes democracy possible; it also makes it essential."

RESPONSE: In the same vein neither a Wise Person nor a Wise Community can exist in the absence of adequate education.

p. 73: "The poor do not have the same access to public institutions of higher learning because inferior, underfinanced elementary and secondary schools, especially those in the larger cities, deny them this opportunity."

RESPONSE: And this must be a primary concern to a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom. But again my working assumption is that there is a deeper issue then the quality of the teaching. Psychological health is a key issue.

p. 74: "There is no test of the good society so clear, so decisive, as its willingness to tax -- to forego private income, expenditure and the expensively cultivated superfluities of private consumption -- in order to develop and sustain a strong educational system for all its citizens. The economic rewards of so doing are not in doubt. Nor the political gains. But the true reward is in the larger, deeper, better life for everyone that only education provides."

RESPONSE: And likewise this is a test of those who have achieved a SFLIHM. A primary focus of such persons's lives must be to assist as many persons as possible to achieve a similar state. And the necessary investment to accomplish the foregoing is substantial. That is why it may never be possible to help every person achieve a SFLIHM.

p. 82: "The good society has three closely related economic requirements, each of which is of independent force. There is the need to supply the requisite consumer goods and services. There is the need to ensure that this production and its use and consumption do not have an adverse effect on the current well-being of the public at large. And there is the need to ensure that they do not adversely effect the lives and well-being of generations yet to come."

RESPONSE: As elsewhere Galbraith raises critical issues, but a Science of Religion would address them at a deeper and more basic level.

p. 95: "...a liberal immigration policy in the good society serves those who seek to come, and it serves no less substantively those who are already there."

RESPONSE: And this point has been conveniently overlooked in the recent public debate and action on this issue. However, for a Science of Religion there are two more basic questions. How can every nation be helped to become a Wise Community where all its citizens will live as Wise Persons and not need to immigrate. And, related to the foregoing, how can each person fit into the Wise Community in a way that sustains and supports it without having to live at the level of a beast of burden. Many will say this is not possible. And, maybe it is not. But it seems to me we must try. Certainly, we shouldn't assume defeat before we even try!

p. 99: "The authority of the military establishment [over their own budgets] has thus become complete, a circumstance that is generally conceded....Democratic control has been effectively set aside."

RESPONSE: And this would be a primary concern to a Science of Religion for it impacts all aspects of society.

p. 100: "The good society does not concede authority to the military power."

RESPONSE: Amen!

p. 110: "The ultimate objective of the good society is in the field of foreign policy. There, it seeks lasting peace between nations."

RESPONSE: Lasting peace among all nations is critical to a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom, but this must be based on a well grounded understanding of human needs and behavior.

p. 130: What does economic progress demand? "good government, good education and possibly good transportation."

RESPONSE: And I would add, what is of even greater importance is good religion.

p. 134: "Given an educated population, economic advance becomes, in some measure, inevitable. Only then comes the truly effective use of more general development aid."

RESPONSE: The essence of a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom is education. But it is an education of such depth and such breadth that the results must be truly transcendent. Those persons who successfully pass through the system will produce a true utopia on this earth.

p. 140: "Money, voice and political activism are now extensively controlled by the affluent, the very affluent and the business interests, and to them much political talent is inevitably drawn."

RESPONSE: One must hope that a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom will provide better guidance than folk religions have done so that all persons will understand their fundamental connectedness and be able to be guided to work collectively for the good of all.

p. 142: "...the central flaw of the good society is not democracy but that democracy is imperfect."

"It is inevitable that critics who have survived to these final pages will say as with one voice that what is here written is out of step with the times. The fortunate, including those who speak for them and those allied in politics, are securely in command. They are the political reality; so they will be for the foreseeable future."

RESPONSE: If Galbraith's writings are out of step with the times this says more against the times than his ideas. The aim of his writing is right on and focused in the right direction. My only criticism is that they don't go far enough. A good society is aimed in the proper direction. However, a Science of Religion would tackle all these issues in a new way. It is easy to believe that this new way is too grand and too grandiose. Many will say that such a vision can never be actualized, at least not until a far future millennium. This criticism may in fact be valid. But unless those of us who see the answers -- see clearly where humanity needs to go -- speak out for this rather than some watered down "salable" version the necessary steps may never be taken.

p. 143: However, Galbraith takes issue with his critics who might say his writings are out of touch with the times. His response is, "Not necessarily. Let there be a coalition of the concerned and the compassionate and those now outside the political system, and for the good society there would be a bright and wholly practical prospect. The affluent would still be affluent, the comfortable still comfortable, but the poor would be part of the political system. Their needs would be heard, as would the other goals of the good society. Aspirants for public office would listen. The votes would be there and would be pursued. As now with the safety net, health care, the environment and especially the military power, the good society fails when democracy fails. With true democracy, the good society would succeed, would even have an aspect of inevitability."

RESPONSE: And this inevitability is also true of a Science of Religion. However, since each human life is of infinite value, it is a tragedy of epic proportions that until a Science of Religion and a Religion of Wisdom are available to all persons they will die without becoming Wise Persons and thereby fulfilling their best possible potential and this is an irreplaceable loss to humanity.

.

.

.