Table Of ContentTheA mericEannt erpIrnissteif touPrtu eb lPiocl iRceys earecsht,a bliisn1h 9e4d3 ,
isa publisculpyp orntoendp,a rtriessaena,ar ncdeh d ucatioorngaaln iz.a Ittiso n
purpoisste oa ssipsotl imcayk erssc,h olabruss,i nesstmheepn r,e sasn,dt he
publbiypc r ovidoibnjge catniavley osfni ast ioannadil n ternaitsisounVeaisle. w s
expresisnte hdie n stitpuutbel'isc aatriteoh nosso eft haeu thoarnsdd on onte ces
sarirleyfl etchtev iewosft hes taaffd,v ispoarnye olffsi,c eorrts r,u stoefAe EsI .
CouncoifAl c ademAidcv isers
PauWl. M cCrackCehanir,m an, Edmund Ezra Day University Professor of Busi
ness Administration, University of Michigan
RobeHr.tB orkA,lex ander M.B ickel Professor of Public Law, Yale Law School
KenneWt.hD am,H arold ]. and Marion F. Green Professor of Law, University
of Chicago Law School
DonalCd.H ellmaPnronfe,ss or of Political Science and International Studies,
University of Washington
D.G alJeo hnsEolinak,im Hastings Moore Distinguished Service Professor of
Economics and Provost, University of Chicago
RobeAr.tN isbAedtju,nc t Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
Ht!b1e rStt eiAn. W,i llRiobser tson Professor of Economics, University of Virginia
JameQs.W ilsoHenn,ry Lee Shattuck Professor of Government, Harvard University
ExecutCiovmem ittee
RichaBr.Md a ddeCnh,ai rman of the Board RichaJr.Fd a rrell
WilliJa.Bm a rooJdryP.,re, si dent CharlTe.Fs i shIeIrI
HermaJn.S chmidt RichaDr.Wd o od
EdwarSdt ylDeirsec,to r of
Publications
ProgrDaimr ectors Periodicals
RussCehlalp iLengi,sl ative Analyses AEI Economist, HerbeSrtte in,
Editor
RobeBr.Ht e lmHse,al th Policy Studies
AEI Foreign Policy and Defense
ThomaFs.J ohnsEoconn,om ic Policy Studies Review, LawrenJc.Ke o rba nd
RobeJr.tP ran,gC eor-Editors
SidnLe.Jy o neSesm,in ar Programs
Public Opinion, SeymoMuarr tin
LawrenJc.Ke o rb, LipsBeetnJ, .W attenbCeorg,
Defense Policy Studies Editors; DaviRd.G ergen,
Managing Editor
MarvHi.nK osters/CJ.Ma imlelsIe IrI ,
Government Regulation Studies Regulation, AntonSicna lainad
MurraLy.W eidenbaum,
W.S .M oorLee,ga l Policy Studies Co-Editors; AnneB runsdale,
RudolGp.hP enneTarx ,Po licy Studies Managing Editor
HowarRd.P ennimAauns/t Riann ney,
Political and Social Processes WilliJa.Bm a rooSdry.,,
Counsellor and Chairman,
RobeJr.Pt r angIneterrn,a tional Programs Development Committee
THE
AMERICAN
VISION
ANESSAYON
THE FUTUROFE
DEMOCRATIC
CAPITALISM.
MICHAEL NOVAK
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Washington, D.C.
MichaNeolv aki st heL edden-WaDtissotni nguPirsohfeeds osfo r
ReligaitoS ny racUunsiev er(sointl ye avaen)da residsecnhto laatr
thAem ericEannt erpIrnisstei tute.
NoteA:ne arlvieerrs oifot nh ipsa pewra sw ritatteS ny racUunsiev ersity
ona consultatnott hseEh xixpo Cno rporaBtoitothnh .ea uthaonrdt he
AmeriEcnatne rpIrnissteia trugetr ea tteoft uhlEe x xoCno rporfaottrih oen
rigthort e proidtuR.ce es ponsifbotirhl oeip tiyn ieoxnpsr eisnsi etrd e sts
solweiltyth h aeu thor.
ISB0N- 8447-3324-5
AESIt ud2i2e2s
LibroafCry o ngrCeastsa ClaorgNd o .7 8-23794
Secopnrdi ntDiencge,m1 b9e7r9 .
Thiprrdi ntAiunggu1,s9 t8 0.
© 197b8yA meriEcnatne rIpnrsitsifeto Puru tbelP iocl Riecys earch,
WashingDt.oCAn.l, rl i grhetsse rNvoep da.ro tft hpiusb licmaatyi on
beu seodrr eprodiunac nemyda nnwehra tsoweivtehrpo eurtm ission
inw ritfirnogtmh Aem eriEcnatne rIpnrsitsieetx ucteiepnt t hc ea soef
briqeufo taetmiboondsi inne edw asr ticcrlietsai,rc tailoc rrl eevsi,e ws.
Thev ieewxsp reisnts hepedu blicoaftt hiAeom nesr iEcnatne rIpnrsitsiet ute
arteh oosfte h aeu thaonrddso n onte cessraerflitelhcvyeti eowfst hset aff,
advispoarnyeo lffsi,c oertr rsu,s otfAe EeIs.
"AmeriEcnatne rpIrnissteia tnudt@ e " arree gissteerrvemidac rek s
oft hAem eriEcnatne rIpnrsitsieft ouPrtu eb lPiocl iRceys earch.
Printientd h eU nitSetda toefAs m erica
CONTENTS
1
INTRODUCTION 1
PART ONE
The War of Ideas
2
DEMOCRATIC CAPITALISM BRIEFLY CONSIDERED 7
Strengths of Democratic Capitalism 7
Disadvantages of Democratic Capitalism 12
3
THE ATTRACTIONS OF SOCIALISM
15
THE CULTURAL SYSTEM OF DEMOCRATIC
4
CAPITALISM
19
Fraternity 20
Equality 23
Liberty 26
5
THE NEW CLASS
29
Characteristics of the New Class 30
The Old and the New Elites 32
PART TWO
Strategies
6
A NEW STRATEGY 37
Reversing the Trend
37
Taking the Offensive
38
7
THE NAME OF THE GAME
41
The Nature of the Competition
41
The Issue of Costs
43
8
THE STRATEGY
47
The Three Tasks
47
The Stages of Activism
49
The Role of the Media
50
Developing Corporate Strategy
52
APPENDIX 55
1
Introduction
Bernard-Henri Levy, one of the "new philosophers" of France, while
revolted by Marxism, nourishes a typical view of democratic capi
talism: "Capitalism says: men are pure things, abstract and equiva
lent, measured by their exchange value, in an infernal world that
deprives and diminishes them." 1 But this, of course, is not what a
democratic capitalist society is about at all. One can see how M. Levy
might have seized upon certain sentences in Adam Smith, Ayn Rand,
or Milton Friedman as a justification for his accusation. The theore
ticians of our system do make it sound more crass in theory than it
actually is in practice. Indeed, we do not actually have a theory that
expresses our vision of the good and just society. There is no single
book one would willingly place in the hands of a serious inquirer
and say: "Here is our full moral, political, and economic vision."
Granted that our system is complex, and granted that it is pluralistic,
encompassing many metaphysical and cultural visions rather than
one alone; still, it is, to say the least, awkward that we have no over
arching vision to express, no electrifying text to send into the world
wide ideological battle in which we are engaged.
One reason for this deficiency is that our system is a trinitarian
system. It is three systems in one. It is, at once, an economic sys
tem, a political system, and a cultural system. If any one of these is
injured, the others are injured, too. If any one is missing, the result
ing system falls short of our dreams.
Since our system is tripartite, specialists often miss its essence;
each gets only part of it. The economists, the political theorists, the
humanists each miss too much. Still, it should be possible, one
imagines, to articulate our dream-all of it.
1 Bernard-Henri Levy, The New Republic, February 11, 1978.
1
I propose to attempt this articulation in several stages. The essen
tial method is to think concretely, staying quite close to actual ex
periences we all share. The air is already thick with ideology. The
several factions seem to be shooting past each other. Writers talk
about a "capitalism" and a "socialism" made of frozen blocks of
theory. They seek out hidden "contradictions" in the logic and struc
ture of each oppodng system. But in fact we do not live in theories
but in real, concrete systems. Since World War II, we have gained
sufficient evidence to be able to argue in a down-to-earth and ex
periential way; the number of both capitalist and socialist systems
has multiplied. Many aspects of our experience have never been
articulated in any theory. There are many surprises, many paradoxes,
many things that "shouldn't" be as they actually are. Since each of
us has only one life to live, and not an excessive amount of time
for sorting out the endless complexities of rival theories, it seems
entirely appropriate, and even a matter of a certain sort of intellectual
integrity, to hold fast to the evidence of one's own actual experiences,
even in the face of theoreticians who tell us what we "ought" to
think. Clear thinking accepts no loyalty tests, except to the evidence
of its own experience and its own standards of judgment.
In thinking about "our own experience," we are bound to think
historically about our own families. In the year 1900, over half of
all Americans were living below the level of subsistence. In 1932, the
families of many of those who are now the writers, intellectuals, and
business and civic leaders of the nation experienced bitter poverty.
Most of the persons I have worked with professionally over the years
are of such families. In speaking about "systems," we cannot help
noting what the system into which our families were inserted-often
fewer than one hundred years ago-has made possible. We do not
imagine that there is, or can be, a perfect social system. Systems are
relative. Any American can compare his or her lot now, however,
with the lot of others of like class in their coun "Y of origin. This is
true of Africans and Asians, Latin Americans, and Europeans. The
United States is not now, and never has been, a nation of full justice,
equality, fraternity, or opportunity. It has often been harsh and un
fair. But compared with what? One may be quite cleareyed about
the inadequacies of our system. One must be equally cleareyed about
its relative performance.
Some writers are intimidated by the charge that they are "middle
class intellectuals," and do not speak for the poor of America or of
the Third World. The very notion that whole populations may be
upwardly mobile, and that free persons might speak freely and ac-
2
curately about their own circumstances, is not universal in human
experience. Intellectuals here continue to rise out of the ranks of the
poor. How faithfully intellectuals continue to maintain contact with
their own origins is part of the theme of this paper.
My proposal, then, is to proceed by small steps. First I would
like to consider some of the advantages, as they appear to me, of
having been nourished in a democratic capitalist system; next, some
of the disadvantages of same, and some of the reasons why socialism
exerts so powerful an attraction upon the mind and heart. Thirdly,
I analyze the emergence of a new adversarial class in American
society and the reasons-buried deep in its own intellectual history,
and even more so in its present political and economic interests
why an influential portion of this new class is so determined in its
opposition to the business class and so hostile to the project of demo
cratic capitalism. Finally, I return to the task of looking at our own
system with fresh eyes, as far as possible escaping the blinders of
available theories, and attempting to see our actual experiences
straight. In Part Two, I offer strategies which the leaders of the
democratic capitalist system might follow in the war of ideas with
its adversaries.
There are ideals within our system which we seldom articulate.
These ideals, which spring up from within our system, are trans
cendent. They enable us to criticize our system quite effectively. In
order to be critical and cleareyed, it is not necessary to go outside
our system. Most critics of our system, however, scandalized by cer
tain of its deficiencies, conventionally turn to socialism. For reasons
to be enumerated below, this turn to socialism is intellectually self
defeating. Socialism is no longer a dream or a vision to be found only
in books; some fourscore or more nations have built themselves
firmly upon its ideals. One can nc,w, as one could not thirty years
ago, study socialism as it actually functions in actual experience and
practice. The results do not accord with expectations.
3
PARTO NE
ThWea ro fI deas
