Via Will Wilkinson:
Wilkinson writes:
The stark contrast between this class act and the histrionics of conservatives today got me thinking about Friedman’s rhetorical style. What’s so compelling about Friedman is his winsome combination of logic, lucidity, confidence, and geniality. He behaves as though the attention of even a hostile audience is a generous gift to be repaid with respect. And respect is paid by taking for granted the listeners’ intelligence and good will in the search for truth. He gladly accepts the burden of laying out the case for controversial propositions and addressing seriously even badly mistaken objections. He never assumes an antagonistic or combative stance, no matter how antagonistic or combative the audience may be. He is neither apologetic nor defensive about his unpopular positions.
We have come a long ways, haven’t we? But alas! In the wrong direction….
Ironically, were it not for the AMA, we would likely have gotten a “socialized” single-payer system in the 1940s. Friedman was of course right that some form of monopolization, at least of basic and emergency medicine, inevitably would result from medical licensure.
But to state that this is somehow part of a wider trend toward “the collectivization of our society” is ludicrous, and I chortled at his line about how “people are becoming more sophisticated about what government can accomplish” because of failed welfare programs, given that it’s precisely that attitude which leads us to the likes of Rush Limbaugh.
A question on this point: how much influence does the AMA have over nursing degrees?Report
To clarify, I think that to the extent our society has, and continues to, become collectivized, it has done so largely in response not to government control but to the nature of capitalism and market pressures, supplanting the authentic person with the demographic identifier.Report