“Dear Professor”: Exploring Lay Comments to Milton Friedman

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
M. Cottier
{"title":"“Dear Professor”: Exploring Lay Comments to Milton Friedman","authors":"M. Cottier","doi":"10.1017/S1479244322000245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While previous research on the rise of neoliberalism has focused on elite networks of economists, politicians, journalists, and business leaders, this article investigates the attractiveness of Milton Friedman's ideas at the time of the neoliberal breakthrough from a bottom-up perspective. A close reading of mostly favorable letters by two hundred viewers in response to the 1980 television documentary series Free to Choose indicates that neoliberalism's popular legitimacy was based on a broad yet fragile coalition. Four different and in many ways contradictory viewer narratives can be distilled from the letters: (i) a conservative narrative, (ii) a reactionary narrative, (iii) a left libertarian narrative, and (iv) a populist narrative. Although in 1980 Friedman was, and today still is, perceived as a conservative economist, the letters show that under the surface of public debate his reach as a public intellectual far exceeded the realms of postwar conservatism as Friedman was supported by people who were situated further to the right and the left. Perhaps more than the elite sources of the neoliberal project, Friedman's lay reception thus highlights neoliberalism's complex and contradictory history in a plastic manner.","PeriodicalId":44584,"journal":{"name":"Modern Intellectual History","volume":"20 1","pages":"512 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Intellectual History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244322000245","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While previous research on the rise of neoliberalism has focused on elite networks of economists, politicians, journalists, and business leaders, this article investigates the attractiveness of Milton Friedman's ideas at the time of the neoliberal breakthrough from a bottom-up perspective. A close reading of mostly favorable letters by two hundred viewers in response to the 1980 television documentary series Free to Choose indicates that neoliberalism's popular legitimacy was based on a broad yet fragile coalition. Four different and in many ways contradictory viewer narratives can be distilled from the letters: (i) a conservative narrative, (ii) a reactionary narrative, (iii) a left libertarian narrative, and (iv) a populist narrative. Although in 1980 Friedman was, and today still is, perceived as a conservative economist, the letters show that under the surface of public debate his reach as a public intellectual far exceeded the realms of postwar conservatism as Friedman was supported by people who were situated further to the right and the left. Perhaps more than the elite sources of the neoliberal project, Friedman's lay reception thus highlights neoliberalism's complex and contradictory history in a plastic manner.
“亲爱的教授”:探索对米尔顿·弗里德曼的评论
虽然之前对新自由主义兴起的研究主要集中在经济学家、政治家、记者和商界领袖的精英网络上,但本文从自下而上的角度调查了米尔顿·弗里德曼思想在新自由主义突破时的吸引力。近距离阅读200名观众对1980年电视纪录片《自由选择》的大部分好评信表明,新自由主义的大众合法性是建立在一个广泛而脆弱的联盟之上的。从这些信件中可以提炼出四种不同的、在很多方面相互矛盾的观众叙事:(i)保守叙事,(ii)反动叙事,(iii)左翼自由主义叙事,以及(iv)民粹主义叙事。尽管在1980年,弗里德曼被认为是一位保守派经济学家,今天仍然如此,但这些信件表明,在公开辩论的表面下,他作为一名公共知识分子的影响力远远超过了战后保守主义的范围,因为弗里德曼得到了更右翼和左翼人士的支持。因此,弗里德曼的通俗接受可能比新自由主义项目的精英来源更突出了新自由主义复杂而矛盾的历史。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
55
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信