|
May 28, 2008
In this review of Paul Edward Gottfried's After Liberalism: Mass Democracy in the Managerial State that managerial liberalism, by which is meant the the practice and ideology of contemporary Western societies bears little resemblance to historical liberalism and in many ways have its opposite.
Where, after all, is the division and limitation of power, the protection of private property, and recognition of an nviolate private sphere where the state has no business? How can an order be “liberal,” in which social planners reconstruct the human soul, or “democratic,” in which government feels itself entitled to reconstitute a people it finds lacking? Nevertheless, what Gottfried describes is managerial liberalism, which hasbecome the engine of the managerial state.
According to Gottfield the regime now common to all Western societies follows a well-defined pattern marked by entitlement programs, sexual and expressive freedoms, and the disappearance of self-government. Politics is inspired by the view that government exists to promote individual gratification, and with that ustification administrators dominate the whole of life. Managers run everything, appealing to expertise, equity, and the need to battle prejudice by sensitizing and re-educating citizens. Social welfare programs divert resources to government and reduce the need for institutions other than the state bureaucracy and various contractual arrangements.
“Inclusiveness” abolishes all connection between the workings of society and any specific cultural heritage, so that only rational formal institutions that the state can easily control remain important. The drive to eliminate prejudice establishes a comprehensive system of control over social life, and destroys the attitudes and habits — sex roles, religious ties and standards, ethnic and cultural loyalties — on which independent and especially non-market institutions rely for functioning and strength. The personal has been transformed into the political.
|
