Goldwater’s 1964 campaign made Friedman a public figure but tainted his reputation

Evidence

Friedman did not want to abandon his academic work to participate actively in the daytoday campaign, and Goldwater liked to maintain some distance between himself and his advisers. Nevertheless, Friedman’s prominent affi liation led him to become a widely known public fi gure for the fi rst time in his career. He arrived at Columbia as a visiting professor at the height of the campaign in the fall of 1964, and found that he was just about the only “respectable intellectual in New York who was willing to defend Goldwater.” He then entered into a “blur of one meeting or interview or talk after another, leaving barely enough time for me to meet my professorial obligations.” Economists were describing Goldwater’s positions as “pure Friedman,” and the media were increasingly referencing him as an ideological architect of the campaign. It was a dubious entrance into the public sphere. “In academic circles, admitting to Goldwater leanings has come close to wearing the scarlet letter,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “Even many parts of the more- Republican business and professional community have tended to look down their noses at Goldwater fans.” — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 506

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes how MPS members later navigated public notoriety; connects to the broader narrative of when free-market ideas gained mainstream legitimacy despite an ignominious political debut. — connects to: Friedman endorsed Goldwater’s states’-rights framing of civil rights — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free…, 508
• SEED: Angle: the ‘scorched’ public debut of ideological architects — when early political sponsorships set back an idea’s legitimacy for years before it resurged.