We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 January 2009
Is capitalism inimical to community? Yes, say communitarians, a large part of whose body of writing is given over to the elaboration and defense of various forms of this thesis. The aim of the present essay is to contest this answer. Not only, I will argue, is there no good reason for supposing capitalism inimical to community, but there is reason to think it more conducive to community than are the feasible alternatives to it.
1 Canonical communitarian texts include Maclntyre, Alasdair, After Virtue, 2d ed. (London: Duckworth, 1985)Google Scholar; Sandel, Michael, “Democrats and Community,” New Republic, February 22, 1988, pp. 20–23Google Scholar; Taylor, Charles, “Legitimation Crisis?” in Taylor, Philosophy and the Human Sciences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Walzer, Michael, Spheres of Justice (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983).Google Scholar To this chorus of communitarian critics of capitalism may now be added Gray, John, The Undoing of Conservatism (London: The Social Market Foundation, 1994).Google Scholar
2 See, for example, Harris, David, Justifying State Welfare: The New Right versus the Old Left (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987), p. 27.Google Scholar
3 See, for example, Sandel, Michael, “Morality and the Liberal Ideal,” New Republic, May 7, 1984, pp. 15–17Google Scholar; and Walzer, Michael,“The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism,” Political Theory, vol. 18, no. 1 (February 1990), pp. 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Such measures have been argued for by, among others, Kymlicka, Will, “Liberal Individualism and Liberal Neutrality,” in Communitarianism and Individualism, ed. Shlomo, Avineri and Avner, De-Shalit (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 165–85Google Scholar; and Walzer, “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism.”
5 See Gray, The Undoing of Conservatism.
6 Among notable of writers on capitalism to define the term in this way are Friedman, Milton, Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1962)Google Scholar; and Berger, Peter L., The Capitalist Revolution (Aldershot: Wildwood House, 1987).Google Scholar
7 One notable writer on capitalism who defines the term in this way is Seldon, Arthur, Capitalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990).Google Scholar
8 One notable writer on capitalism who defines the term in this way is Albert, Michel, Capitalism against Capitalism (London: Whurr Publishers, 1993).Google Scholar
9 Novak, Michael, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism (New York: Touchstone Books, 1982), p. 15.Google Scholar
10 For reviews of this evidence, see Whitehead, Barbara Dafoe, “Dan Quayle Was Right,” Atlantic Monthly, vol. 271, no. 4 (April 1993), pp. 47–84Google Scholar; Dennis, Norman and Erdos, George, Families without Fatherhood, 2d ed. (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1993)Google Scholar; and Wilson, James Q., “The Family-Values Debate,” Commentary, vol. 91, no. 2 (April 1993), pp. 24–31.Google Scholar
11 Wilson, “The Family-Values Debate,” pp. 26–27.
12 See Henry Sidgwick, The Elements of Politics (London: Macmillan, 1891), p. 213.
13 Gray, The Undoing of Conservatism, p. 22. See also Taylor, “Legitimation Crisis?” pp. 283–84.
14 Gray, The Undoing of Conservatism, p. 22.
15 Ibid., p. 19.
16 Walzer, “The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism,” p. 13.
17 Sandel, “Democrats and Community,” pp. 22–23.
18 Gray, The Undoing of Conservatism, p. 44.
19 Walzer, Spheres of Justice, pp. 37–38.
20 See ibid., pp. 61–62. See also Scruton, Roger, “In Defence of the Nation,” in Scruton, The Philosopher on Dover Beach (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990).Google Scholar
21 Taylor, “Legitimation Crisis?” pp. 284–86.
22 Gray, The Undoing of Conservatism, p. 28.
23 See Barber, Benjamin, “Strong Democracy,” in Communitarianism: A New Public Ethics, ed. Markate, Daly (Belmont: Wadsworth, 1994), pp. 213–24.Google Scholar
24 See Hayek, Friedrich A., “Individualism: True and False,” in Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948), pp. 1–32Google Scholar, esp. p. 23; Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1976)Google Scholar; and Nisbet, Robert, The Quest for Community (New York: Oxford University Press, 1953).Google Scholar
25 For a discussion of illegitimacy, see Himmelfarb, Gertrude, The De-moralization of Society (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1995), pp. 223–24.Google Scholar For statistics on divorce in the U.K., see Goodman, Paul, “The Future of the Family,” Salisbury Review, vol. 10, no. 3 (March 1992), p. 15Google Scholar; for U.S. divorce figures, see Whitehead, Barbara Dafoe, “Dan Quayle Was Right,” Atlantic Monthly, vol. 271, no. 4 (April 1993), p. 50.Google Scholar
26 Cipolla, Carlo M., The Economic History of World Population, 7th ed. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974), pp. 87–89.Google Scholar
27 Sowell, Thomas, Ethnic America (New York: Basic Books, 1981), p. 5.Google Scholar
28 Rothbard, Murray, For a New Liberty, 2d ed. (New York: Collier Books, 1978), p. 209.Google Scholar
29 See Nisbet, Robert, The Twilight of Authority (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 64–70.Google Scholar
30 For accounts of some of this evidence in relation to the United Kingdom, see Green, David, Reinventing Civil Society: The Rediscovery of Welfare without Politics (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1993)Google Scholar; and Seldon, Capitalism, ch. 11. For accounts of some of the evidence in relation to the United States, see Olasky, Marvin, The Tragedy of American Compassion (Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1992)Google Scholar; Murray, Charles, In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988)Google Scholar; and Beito, David T., “Mutual Aid for Social Welfare: The Case of American Fraternal Societies,” Critical Review, vol. 4, no. 4 (Fall 1990), pp. 709–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31 Beito, “Mutual Aid for Social Welfare,” pp. 711–14 passim.
32 Starr, Chester G., The Aristocratic Temper of Greek Civilization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33 McDougall, William, The Group Mind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1920), pp. 190–91.Google Scholar
34 See Murray, Charles, Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950–1980 (New York: Basic Books, 1984)Google Scholar; Murray, , The Emerging British Underclass (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1990)Google Scholar; and Murray, , Underclass: The Crisis Deepens (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1994).Google Scholar
35 For a good discussion of the impact of no-fault divorce upon divorce rates, see Barry, Norman, “Justice and Liberty in Marriage and Divorce,” in Liberating Women… From Modern Feminism, ed. Caroline, Quest (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1994), pp. 38–58Google Scholar; and Campion, John, “Marriage, Morals, and the Law,” Salisbury Review, vol. 13, no. 2 (December 1994), pp. 25–28.Google Scholar
36 Murray, Losing Ground, p. 115.
37 Dennis, Norman, Rising Crime and the Dismembered Family (London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, 1993), p. 1.Google Scholar
38 Murray, In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government, p. 279.
39 See Schlesinger, Arthur M. Jr, The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society (New York and London: W. W. Norton and Company, 1992).Google Scholar
40 For the classic argument for this thesis, see West, E. G., Education and the State (London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 1965).Google Scholar
41 This remark is attributed to Dean Inge in McDougall, The Group Mind, p. 181n.
42 Nisbet, The Quest for Community (supra note 24).
43 Ibid., pp. 97–98.
