This is a quote noted by commentator Mike Parr this morning:
These are the days when men of all social disciplines and all political faiths seek the comfortable and the accepted; when the man of controversy is looked upon as a disturbing influence; when originality is taken to be a mark of instability; and when, in minor modification of the scriptural parable, the bland lead the bland.”
John Kenneth Galbraith
1908-2006
The Affluent Society (1958), Chapter 1
The Affluent Society was one of the first book on economics I read as a teenager. I still have my well worn edition. It was published in the year I was born. The quote seems even more relevant today.
Whatever one does now one must not rock the boat of the rich and the comfortable. And so the bland lead the bland.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Will the bland ever make a serious effort to understand morality? I think not, you have to vote into power the party you think has the best understanding and they will legislate or nudge for it. Currently that appears to be the Greens because saving a planet for life to live on requires a strong moral stance which logically extends into other areas of human need although beware eco-terrorism. Tactically, however, such voting may not make sense so it’s obviously a matter of deciding the next best party from a morality viewpoint.
From Wikipedia:-
“Morality (from Latin moralitas ‘manner, character, proper behavior’) is the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are distinguished as proper (right) and those that are improper (wrong). Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion or culture, or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal. Morality may also be specifically synonymous with ‘goodness’ or ‘rightness’.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
Many political philosophers take issue with the idea that politics comes from our moral values. It is because we have moral disagreement that we need politics to force us to do the right thing. Morality is not enough. The one who is in the political wrong and being coercive (climate denial) will turn the moral
argument on its head and proclaim he is being repressed.
The bland leading the bland.
Or as Tim Snyder calls it ‘The Politics of Eternity’ – TINA forever and the make believe threats about bankruptcy if we dare to try to improve anything about our situation, the Project Fear of our post BREXIT times.
We are stymied.
Might this be another example of the ever dangerous engineered inertia of power?
“Whoever does not want the existing state of affairs to be changed, is a good citizen.”
(Augustus/Octavian quoted from “The Collapse of Antiquity” by Michael Hudson which is most informative on the (mis) handling of debt)
Morals Cover Up operation now in full swing by Tory government:-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/01/government-to-launch-legal-action-in-attempt-to-retain-johnson-whatsapps
I can also recommend “The New Industrial State” – prescient, exquisite writing, coruscating. It must have been very distressing for Galbraith to see how badly things have gone wrong – much as he foretold.
He pretty much said so in his last book – written in his 90s
I was always taken the piss out of for reading JKG when I was younger. Now in my ’70’s I still read his work from time to time. It keeps me young and grounded.
He got it when most economists really did not
Galbraith’s comments about public squalor and private wealth resonates even more today than when he wrote it then (1960s?)
One of our collective, which I will label “Cassandra” (the collective not the individual) will soon meet with a very very senior Commission official. This will be to discuss what we have predicted over the past 4 years (energy & energy markets) & how/why events have shown us to be right and most EU institutions wrong. This leaves an open question about humanity: why is it at a collective level it often finds it impossible to “change direction”. I am certain Galbraith ask himself the same question: what’s so difficult?
The Greek “legends” combined with the plays of the 5th century BC provided a comprehensive mental profile of humanity (as a collective entity) – which does not seem to have changed much in 2500 years (or indeed 3500 years if you choose 1500BC as the rough date of the Trojan wars.). Cassandra …the gift of prophecy…..but no one would ever believe her predictions – even when they proved to be right. Her combination of deep understanding and powerlessness exemplify the tragic condition of humankind. […]
Indeed