![]() |
Jefferson Review |
|
|
"Your Liberty is Our Interest" |
December 17th, 2001 | |
|
Home/ Archives/ Links / Quotes / Book Reviews/ Advertise /Contact us/ Calendar |
||
|
What
Price Fame? An
economist at George Mason University, Cowen blames the free market system
for the deterioration of cultural institutions and the separation of fame
and merit. "The modern world," he writes, "generates
fame without requiring consensus on which performers are most meritorious.
The decentralization of our market economy allows production-including the
production of fame-to proceed without an overall plan. As markets
distribute fame more widely and more diversely, most fame rewards will
stand apart not only from merit but from any particular standard." In
Cowen's judgment, markets should correct, or at least not exacerbate the
lack of individual tastes, values, and judgment responsible for the
separation of fame and merit. The market, however, should not be
expected to give people an appreciation for art, and it should not be
expected to compensate for people's propensity to adopt the likes and
dislikes of the crowd. The role of the market is to satisfy desires,
not parent against them.
In the United States and most other industrialized nations, the state has
a virtual monopoly on education at the grammar and high school levels and
a stranglehold on education at the university level. Insulated from
the competitive process, the state provides a substandard level of
education. People have blamed the state's education monopoly for high
levels of scientific illiteracy and poor English composition skills, but
have largely dismissed its role in driving down moral and esthetic
standards. In state run compulsory schools children are taught to reject
objective standards. For instance, children are taught that the
fantastic paintings, drawings and sculptures of Leonardo da Vinci are no
better or no worthier of Since
the state takes on the role of educating and cultivating the minds of
children, it must accept the responsibility for the decline in moral and
esthetic standards, just as it must accept the responsibility for high
levels of scientific illiteracy, and poor English composition skills.
Until or unless people are free of compulsory government schooling for a
long period of time, we cannot know how great of a capacity the average
person has to identify, appreciate and reward musical, literary, artistic,
scientific and business accomplishments. But
regardless of whether putting an end to compulsory government schooling
would improve our culture and polity, efforts to raise moral and esthetic
standards through subsides and tax deductions are not morally justified.
Groups and collectives do not have the right to use public money to
advance the careers of individuals they think are worthy of acclaim.
Furthermore, government fine tunings of the fame market, as Cowen
correctly points out, are unlikely to succeed. So for now, the
separation of fame and merit is the price we pay, not for democracy, or
for capitalism, but for the doctrine of cultural relativism and the
institution responsible for its inculcation. Read an excerpt of Charles Stampul's novel Progress at www.peerlesspress.net
|
![]() |
|
Weather (Louisville)/ Mapquest / White Pages / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN |