Friedman framed interventionists as paternalists and intellectuals as self-interested in power
Evidence
Friedman’s constant emphasis on choice was a refl ection of his approach; he sought to represent freemarket economists as possessors of respect for the manifest preferences of average consumers, and supporters of government intervention as paternalists imposing their beliefs on those less enlightened than themselves. He told Playboy that “what the critics really complain about” is “that under capitalism, consumers get what they want rather than what the critics think they should have.” Intellectuals were sympathetic to collectivism, he asserted, because it presented a social model in which they would have more power than they would under free enterprise. — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 486
Categorization
- DEFINE: Illustrates Friedman’s rhetorical move of recasting the pro-market/anti-market debate as one about consumer respect versus paternalist imposition.
- XREF: Relates to the reader’s interest in how neoliberal ideas were packaged as pro-democratic, against the austerity critique literature. — connects to: Friedman argued ordinary people, not intellectuals, preserved freedom in America — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free…, 486; Intellectuals’ self-image as autonomous shapes ideology and politics.; Ordoliberal and public-choice strands of neoliberalism explicitly reject Friedman’s natural-liberty rhetoric — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 353
Broader Connections
- Ordoliberal and public-choice strands of neoliberalism explicitly reject Friedman’s natural-liberty rhetoric
#contradicts(0.85) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 353 - Intellectuals’ self-image as autonomous shapes ideology and politics.
#expands(0.72)