A Dialogue on Reversing Neoliberalism

Reversing Neoliberalism A Dialogue

0:00

/781.32

1×

Between John Adams and John Rawls

Setting: A timeless space where two great political philosophers meet to discuss the current state of the American republic

Adams: [adjusting his cravat] Professor Rawls, I have observed with great alarm the transformation of our republic since the 1970s. This Powell Memorandum you speak of - it seems to have achieved precisely what I warned against: the dominion of commerce over the public good.

Rawls: Indeed, President Adams. The memo effectively orchestrated a systematic dismantling of what I would call the basic structure of justice. Corporate interests have captured not just the economy, but the very institutions meant to secure fair equality of opportunity.

Adams: [pacing thoughtfully] The merchants and speculators I warned about have evolved into these... corporations. They have corrupted the very notion of virtue I held essential to republican government. But tell me, sir, how does this situation appear through your "veil of ignorance"?

Rawls: If we were to design our institutions not knowing our place in society, we would never choose this current arrangement. The concentration of wealth has reached levels that violate both my difference principle and your conception of republican virtue. What troubles me most is how economic power has translated into political power.

Adams: On this we agree entirely! [becoming animated] But I fear your solution would rely too heavily on abstract principles and institutional arrangements. Without virtue in the citizenry, how can any system maintain justice?

Rawls: [leaning forward] Perhaps we can find common ground here. What if we were to combine your emphasis on civic virtue with my framework for just institutions? Let me propose a three-part solution:

Adams: Proceed, though I insist we address the moral education of citizens as fundamental.

Rawls: Very well. First, we establish what I call a property-owning democracy - but we implement it through local institutions you championed. This means breaking up concentrated economic power while building civic participation at the community level.

Adams: [nodding slowly] Yes... and we must restore public education to its proper role - not merely for employment, but for citizenship. The schools must teach virtue and critical reasoning, not just market skills.

Rawls: Second, we implement strict separation between economic power and political institutions. This means public funding of elections, but also - and here I think you'll agree - a revival of public deliberation and local governance.

Adams: Indeed! The town hall meetings of New England were precisely such forums of civic participation. But how do we overcome the current corruption?

Rawls: That's the third part - we create new institutions of economic democracy. Worker participation in corporate governance, community investment boards, public banks. But crucially, these institutions would be designed to foster the civic virtue you emphasize.

Adams: [standing] Now we approach a workable solution! But implementation... the monied interests will resist.

Rawls: Which is why we need to build what I call an "overlapping consensus" - different groups supporting these changes for their own reasons. Religious groups concerned with community, workers seeking economic security, conservatives worried about concentrated power, progressives pursuing social justice.

Adams: Yes! And we must emphasize that this is not mere reform, but restoration - of both republican virtue and basic justice. The young must be taught that their liberty depends not on markets, but on active citizenship.

Rawls: Precisely. Let me outline our specific recommendations:

1. Constitutional amendments to separate corporate and state power
2. Revival of local civic institutions with real economic and political power
3. Education reform emphasizing citizenship and critical thinking
4. Economic democratization through property-owning democracy
5. Public banking and community investment systems

Adams: [nodding vigorously] And all of this supported by a renewed emphasis on civic virtue and public good. But we must be clear - this requires not just institutional change but moral renewal.

Rawls: Yes, the institutions must be designed to foster that renewal. Justice and virtue must reinforce each other. This is where our philosophies can meet.

Adams: Then let us proceed with this plan. Though I maintain, sir, that without virtue, even your perfect institutions will fail.

Rawls: And I maintain that without just institutions, virtue alone cannot secure liberty. Together, perhaps, they can.

Adams: [extending his hand] On this, Professor Rawls, we are agreed. Let us hope our successors have the wisdom to implement such a program.

Rawls: And the courage, President Adams. And the courage.

[A figure in a toga approaches]

Aristotle: [speaking with measured wisdom] I have listened to your discourse with great interest, gentlemen. You both speak of virtue and justice, themes I explored extensively in my Politics and Nicomachean Ethics. However, I notice you may be overlooking some fundamental aspects of human political association.

Adams: [intrigued] Master Aristotle, your writings on mixed constitutions greatly influenced my own thinking. What insights can you offer to our proposed solution?

Aristotle: Your plan has merit, but it must be grounded in what I call "practical wisdom" - phronesis. First, you must understand that humans are by nature political animals. The neoliberal error was not just moral or institutional, but a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature itself.

Rawls: [adjusting his glasses] Please elaborate. How does this affect our proposed solutions?

Aristotle: Your property-owning democracy, Rawls, resembles what I called a "polity" - a mixed constitution that balances different social elements. But you must understand that economic arrangements should serve the cultivation of virtue and the good life, not merely distribute goods justly.

Adams: [eagerly] Yes! This is what I've been attempting to convey!

Aristotle: However, Adams, virtue is not merely moral character but also practical wisdom and the ability to deliberate well about the good life. Your civic education must include what I call "political friendship" - the capacity to deliberate together about the common good.

Let me propose three additions to your plan:

1. The revival of what I call "practical wisdom" in political life:
   • Training in deliberation and judgment
   • Experience in practical governance
   • Understanding of both universal principles and particular circumstances
2. The creation of what I termed the "middle class":
   • Not just economic redistribution
   • But a class of citizens with enough security and leisure to participate in politics
   • Neither too wealthy to become oligarchic nor too poor to be dependent
3. The cultivation of "political friendship":
   • Institutions that foster genuine dialogue about the good life
   • Practices that build trust and understanding across social divisions
   • Recognition that politics is about more than rights and distribution

Rawls: This adds a crucial dimension to our institutional framework. But how do we cultivate such wisdom in modern conditions?

Aristotle: Through practice and habituation. Your institutions must provide opportunities for citizens to exercise practical wisdom in real decisions. Local governance, as Adams suggests, is crucial. But also:

• Mandatory civic service
• Community deliberation councils
• Apprenticeship in governance
• Revival of public festivals and ceremonies

Adams: [thoughtfully] This would help address the moral decay I've observed...

Aristotle: Yes, but remember - virtue is not just moral but intellectual. Your citizens need not just good character but the wisdom to deliberate about complex issues. This requires:

• Training in rhetoric and logic
• Experience in practical problem-solving
• Understanding of human psychology and social dynamics

Rawls: Could we incorporate this into our property-owning democracy?

Aristotle: Yes, but your economic institutions must explicitly serve the development of practical wisdom and political friendship. For example:

• Worker cooperatives as schools of practical governance
• Community investment boards as training in deliberation
• Public banks that consider both profit and common good

Furthermore, you must understand that different regimes require different virtues. Your solution must cultivate the specific virtues needed for democratic self-governance:

• Moderation in wealth acquisition
• Wisdom in public deliberation
• Courage in facing common challenges
• Justice in distributing both burdens and benefits

Adams: [standing] This completes our solution! Virtue, justice, and practical wisdom combined!

Rawls: Indeed. The just institutions I propose could be vehicles for developing the practical wisdom Aristotle describes.

Aristotle: Remember, gentlemen, the goal is not just good institutions or virtuous citizens, but eudaimonia - human flourishing. Your solution must help citizens live genuinely good lives, not just secure their rights or distribute goods fairly.

Adams and Rawls: [together] Agreed!

Rawls: [turning thoughtfully] But we must address a critical question: How could these changes be expedited as efficiently as possible? Time seems of the essence given the deepening crisis of democracy.

Aristotle: [stroking his beard] Ah, the question of speed versus stability. Remember that natural growth cannot be excessively hastened without risk. However, I see three parallel paths for swift yet stable change:

1. Start with the cities - what I call "polis." Local communities can implement these changes faster than national governments. Create model cities that demonstrate our principles in action.

Adams: [excited] Yes! Like the laboratories of democracy I envisioned! We could begin with cities already showing inclination toward civic virtue.

Rawls: [nodding] And we could use what I call "public reason" to build quick consensus. Start with policies that appeal to multiple comprehensive doctrines - both religious and secular moral views.

Aristotle: 2. Focus on the young and education. The young mind is most malleable, and they will shape the future:

• Reform universities first - they train future leaders
• Create new forms of apprenticeship in civic leadership
• Use modern technology to spread practical wisdom

Adams: But what of the immediate crisis? Education takes a generation...

Aristotle: 3. Therefore, we must also target what I call the "efficient cause" - in this case, the sources of concentrated power:

• Break up concentrations of economic power through antitrust
• Establish public banks and local currencies swiftly
• Transfer corporate ownership to worker-community trusts
• Create immediate opportunities for civic participation

Rawls: We could use existing crises - environmental, economic, social - as catalysts for rapid change. People are more open to new arrangements during crisis.

Adams: [concerned] But without descending into demagoguery or mob rule...

Aristotle: Precisely. The key to speed is working with nature, not against it. Like a skilled physician, we must:

• Identify the natural lines of fracture in the current system
• Build on existing virtuous practices and institutions
• Strengthen what is healthy while treating what is sick
• Move decisively when opportunity presents itself

Adams: And maintain balance - between speed and stability, change and tradition.

Rawls: Yes, and between ideal theory and practical necessity. We need what I call "realistic utopia" - radical change within practical limits.

Aristotle: Remember, the fastest path is not always a straight line. Sometimes we must:

• Build strength in one area before moving to another
• Allow some tensions to ripen before resolving them
• Create new habits before removing old structures
• Prepare the ground before planting seeds

The key to expedient change is wisdom in timing - knowing when to move quickly and when to wait, where to push hard and where to let natural processes work.

Rawls: [reviewing the MAAA document] Interesting - this proposed act would institutionalize Adams' moral principles through a formal review process. What do you think of your words being transformed into law this way, President Adams?

Adams: [studying the document intently] I am both pleased and concerned. The principle is sound - using my moral algorithm as a check against private interests corrupting public good. However, the implementation through an AI system... this requires careful consideration.

Aristotle: [thoughtfully] This could be what I call an "archē" - a first principle or starting point. But let us examine it through the lens of practical wisdom:

1. Benefits:

• Creates immediate institutional accountability
• Provides clear metrics for public good
• Enables systematic review of existing laws
• Has enforcement mechanisms with real teeth

2. Potential Issues:

• The AI system might lack practical wisdom (phronesis)
• The scoring system could become overly rigid
• Risk of creating a new form of unaccountable power
• Might lack flexibility for context-specific judgments

Rawls: From my perspective, this could help ensure the basic structure of society remains just. The retroactive review is particularly powerful - it could help dismantle unjust accumulations of power.

Adams: Yes, but I worry about Section 4.4 - making the MARB's decisions final with no checks or balances. Even in pursuit of virtue, we must avoid creating new forms of tyranny.

Aristotle: Perhaps we could modify it to include what I call "deliberative wisdom" - require the MARB to include citizens trained in practical governance, not just ethics experts and AI.

Rawls: And add provisions for public reasoning - the scoring criteria should be developed through democratic deliberation.

Adams: [nodding] Yes, and perhaps add requirements for civic education about the Moral Algorithm itself. The people must understand and embrace these principles, not just be subject to them.

Aristotle: So, is this a valid first step? I would say yes, but with modifications:

1. Add requirements for practical wisdom in the review process
2. Include citizen participation in scoring criteria development
3. Create checks and balances on the MARB
4. Add provisions for civic education
5. Build in flexibility for context-specific judgments

Rawls: Agreed. It could be a powerful tool for restructuring basic institutions, but it needs more democratic elements.

Adams: [standing] Yes - let this be the first step, but not in isolation. It must be paired with the civic education and virtue development we discussed earlier.

Aristotle: And remember - no law alone can create good governance. This must be part of a broader revival of practical wisdom and political friendship.

Rawls: A vital question presents itself - what form of civic education would best facilitate this transformation? Would a simple handbook of principles suffice, or do we need a complete reimagining of education?

Aristotle: [leaning forward intently] This requires systematic change. Remember, education is not merely about knowledge, but about habituation and practice. Let me outline what I envision:

1. Early Education (Ages 7-14):

• Training in practical reasoning through problem-solving
• Community service integrated with learning
• Study of exemplary citizens and actions
• Practice in democratic deliberation
• Basic ethics and moral reasoning

2. Middle Education (Ages 14-18):

• Practical governance experience
• Participation in mock assemblies
• Study of political history and theory
• Training in rhetoric and debate
• Economic literacy and analysis

3. Advanced Education (Ages 18+):

• Apprenticeship in governance
• Direct participation in community decisions
• Advanced study of political philosophy
• Practice in conflict resolution
• Leadership development

Adams: [nodding vigorously] Yes! But we must add specific training in detecting and resisting corruption. The young must learn to recognize when private interests attempt to override public good.

Rawls: I agree with systematic change, but we must ensure equal access. The education system itself must embody the principles of justice. I propose:

• Public funding to ensure equal access
• Integration of different social classes
• Focus on developing public reasoning
• Training in recognizing structural injustice
• Understanding of rights and responsibilities

Aristotle: Essential to this system would be what I call "practical wisdom laboratories" - spaces where students:

• Practice real governance
• Manage actual community projects
• Resolve genuine conflicts
• Allocate real resources
• Face authentic ethical dilemmas

Adams: And we must integrate this with family and community life. Parents and community leaders must be involved in:

• Modeling civic virtue
• Providing practical examples
• Creating opportunities for service
• Supporting youth initiatives
• Reinforcing moral principles

Rawls: The curriculum must also include:

• Understanding of institutional structures
• Analysis of power dynamics
• Study of successful reforms
• Practice in coalition building
• Development of public policy

Aristotle: [standing] A mere book would be insufficient. True civic education requires what I call "lived wisdom" - the integration of:

1. Theoretical understanding
2. Practical experience
3. Moral habituation
4. Social engagement
5. Political participation

Adams: Yes! And it must be lifelong. Even adults need ongoing civic education through:

• Community forums
• Public debates
• Citizen assemblies
• Continuous learning opportunities
• Practical governance experience

Rawls: This comprehensive approach would support the MAAA by creating citizens capable of:

• Understanding the Moral Algorithm
• Participating in MARB processes
• Evaluating legislation
• Proposing reforms
• Maintaining democratic institutions

Aristotle: The goal is not just knowledge, but what I call "civic excellence" - the ability to:

• Think critically about public issues
• Act virtuously in public life
• Deliberate effectively with others
• Make wise political decisions
• Serve the common good

[End of dialogue]

Archē (ἀρχή) is a fundamental concept in Greek philosophy, particularly in Aristotle's thought. Let me break it down:

1. Basic Definition:

• Literally means "beginning," "origin," or "first cause"
• Can also mean "first principle" or "fundamental truth"
• Represents both a starting point and a governing principle

2. Aristotelian Usage:

• First Principles: fundamental truths that cannot be deduced from other truths
• Source of Motion: the primary cause that initiates change
• Authority: legitimate source of power or governance
• Foundation: the basis upon which other things depend

3. Political Context (as Aristotle would see it):

• Legitimate Source of Authority: proper foundation for political power
• Starting Point for Change: initial action that can lead to broader transformation
• Guiding Principle: fundamental rule that shapes political decisions
• Natural Order: alignment with the natural principles of justice and good governance

4. Applied to the MAAA:

• It could serve as a First Principle: establishing fundamental criteria for legislation
• Acts as a Starting Point: initiating broader systemic change
• Creates New Authority: establishing moral standards for governance
• Sets Foundation: providing basis for future reforms

5. Important Aspects in Aristotle's View:

• Must align with natural justice
• Should promote the common good
• Needs to be grounded in practical wisdom
• Should lead to virtuous outcomes
• Must be stable yet flexible

The concept is crucial because it suggests that getting the first principle right is essential for everything that follows. In political terms, establishing the correct archē can either set a society on the path to justice and flourishing or lead it astray from the beginning.

In suggesting the MAAA could be an archē, Aristotle would be saying it could serve as both:

1. A starting point for reform
2. A fundamental principle guiding future governance
3. A source of legitimate authority
4. A foundation for building just institutions

However, he would emphasize that its success depends on whether it truly aligns with natural justice and promotes genuine human flourishing (eudaimonia).

Eudaimonia is a central concept in Aristotelian ethics and political philosophy that's much richer than its common translation as just "happiness." Let me break this down:

Eudaimonia represents:

1. Human Flourishing

• Not just subjective happiness or pleasure
• The realization of human potential and excellence
• Living a life of meaning and purpose according to reason
• The development of both moral and intellectual virtues

2. Key Components in Aristotle's View:

• Excellence in rationality (both practical and theoretical wisdom)
• Development of character virtues (courage, temperance, justice, etc.)
• Engagement in meaningful relationships and political community
• Having sufficient external goods to enable virtuous activity
• Achieving one's natural purpose or function as a human being

3. Political Implications:

• The purpose of politics is to create conditions for eudaimonia
• Good political systems enable citizens to develop virtues
• Economic arrangements should support human flourishing, not just wealth accumulation
• Education should aim at developing full human potential, not just job skills

4. Why This Matters for the Neoliberal Critique:

• Neoliberalism reduces human flourishing to consumer satisfaction
• It prioritizes GDP and market metrics over genuine human development
• It undermines the conditions necessary for true eudaimonia by:
  • Reducing education to job training
  • Weakening political community
  • Prioritizing consumption over virtue
  • Treating humans as primarily economic agents

5. Modern Application:

• Measuring success by quality of life, not just economic metrics
• Designing institutions that develop human capabilities
• Creating spaces for meaningful political participation
• Ensuring economic arrangements serve human flourishing
• Supporting cultural practices that develop virtue and wisdom

The key insight is that human life has a natural goal or purpose (telos) that goes beyond material prosperity or subjective pleasure. A good political system must enable people to achieve this fuller sense of human flourishing. This challenges both the materialist assumptions of neoliberalism and narrower conceptions of justice or virtue.