Saturday, January 30, 2010

Public Intellectual?.......Here!


In the midst of all the United States current economic crises, now, more than ever, we are in need of criticism, and lots of it. The best decisions are made when the decision maker is challenged from all angles because if nobody ever questions the decision makers, then the right decisions never get made. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that we all, to some degree, think inside-out. It is human nature, and more specifically, Darwinism. In American middle to upper class society, we have evolved from surviving on a day-to-day basis, to working hard in order to be content with our own lives. But because every person’s definition of being “content” or happy doesn’t necessarily coincide with the next, we have major differences of beliefs on how things should be run. The person who is currently at the top with the power has his or her idea on how things should be run, and more often than not, over 50% of the United States thinks differently. Does this constant opposition to legislation make it difficult for any tangible plans of action to actually happen? Absolutely! But, even though such opposition slows down the process, it also adds more points of view and helps each piece of legislation to appeal to a wider variety of people. This is where the Public Intellectual comes in.

In Stephen Mack’s blog post, The "Decline" of Public Intellectuals, he discusses the arguments for and against a possible decline in the Public Intellectual. Mr. Mack gives an interesting definition of the role of the Public Intellectual as those who “keep the pot [in our society] boiling.” The fact of the matter is that if at some point there are no Public Intellectuals to be found, our society would crumble. There would be nobody to challenge our decision makers and there would therefore be an absence of any checking mechanism for our law making and law enforcing bodies. Anybody who says that we are lacking Public Intellectuals needs to open their eyes. If we really were in the absence of true Public Intellectuals, the Obama administration wouldn’t be killing themselves to find ways to pass all the new legislation regarding health care and Medicare.

In an effort to stay within the realm of economics, I have looked to Paul Krugman to keep it real. Krugman received his B.A. in economics from Yale, his Ph.D from MIT, and he won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work with New Trade Theory, so there is no need to question his credentials. Identifying himself as a member of the left side of the political spectrum, Krugman would agree with most everything the Obama administration is trying to accomplish and how they are going about it, right? Wrong. And this is what sets Krugman and the general Public Intellectual apart from the rest of society. Just because you voted for that guy currently in the oval office doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything he says. And Krugman does just that.

With all the technology available to us, the general public finally has very accessible platforms where they can present their ideas and beliefs to the world. And because there is always a risk of somebody openly disagreeing with you, it forces those who blog to think twice about what they say (although this is a generalization). Now, everybody has the opportunity to be a public intellectual and doesn’t have to pay a dime. One can find millions of blogs all about the same topic, some written by professors at Harvard, and some by written by a 15-year old in high school. It doesn’t matter. There is no decline in the Public Intellectual because we have too many opportunities available to at least try to be one, and the public is trying. Nobody has been able to watch the news for more than an hour without watching a piece about Obama’s legislation regarding health care. As long as the President is unable to draft and pass a bill in the same day without anybody arguing, then we are on the right path and shouldn’t question the future of our society.

2 comments:

  1. A thought provoking piece to be sure, however I'm not sure I agree with the statement that if there were no public intellectuals our society would crumble and that there would be no one to check our law enforcing and governing bodies. Not everyone speaking out against Obama and his administration is a public intellectual, far from it in fact. Part of the reason the Obama administration is killing themselves is because we have a lot of false, agenda driven "public intellectuals" who are going beyond asking intelligent questions to the point of spreading rumors.

    I guess the point is that public intellectuals are a good thing...but I'm sure society can do without some of the self proclaimed high profile public intellectuals of today. As you said correctly, we have a lot of ordinary citizens doing the job just fine...I think we would be alright.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is in the nature of our society to pay less attention to the skeptics and rather "go with the flow," if you will. Public Intellectuals are out there, as you mention, but it is less common for them to reach the spotlight or for people to find their work without actually seeking it out.

    You can find this in the recent housing bubble and overheated bull markets that led to the recent financial crisis...or even the tech bubble that burst in 2001. People like to go along with what everyone else is talking about and avoid criticism. The markets were roaring, everyone was talking about it, and the large majority of people bought into it. However, as evidenced recently, there were a number of people who accurately predicted the crash and ensuing financial mayhem. If we as a society and investing community had paid better attention to what these skeptics and public intellectuals were trying to say to us, perhaps the crisis could have been avoided.

    ReplyDelete