Comments on: Re: Public

By: Nathan Freeman

Nathan Freeman — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 13:51:10 +0000

Actually, Julian, I think setting this distinction might be more plausible than you think. Observe the software communities adherence to the “free as in beer” meme.

Maybe you can get something started on these lines. “Public as in forced” versus “Public as in social.”

By: David

David — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 06:41:23 +0000

Note the conflation at work: To suggest that there ought not to be public (governmental) endorsement of religion is apparently tantamount to saying that there ought not be public (cultural, social) expression of religious sentiments.

I think you’re reading him to literally. When I read the column, I understood him to be arguing that eliminating religion in the public (governmental) sphere has the effect of hindering cultural and social expressions of religion by making a statement in favor of the secular.

By: Joe's Little Sister

Joe's Little Sister — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:23:18 +0000

p.s. sorry I didn’t read the rest of your entry before I commented on it. it’s clear from my comment that i wasn’t really paying attention. and it’s too bad because you make a really interesting point that would have been interesting to comment on.

oh well too late now i guess…

By: Joe's Little Sister

Joe's Little Sister — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:16:12 +0000

interesting that you bring this up – this Orwellian obfuscatory doublespeak stuff. I was just thinking today about switching my thesis topic (again) to something about that…and relating it to anthropology somehow. hm.

well, nice to meet you julian. drop me a line anytime. hope to hear from you!

By: Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:49:21 +0000

Aha! Julian, I knew you were a librul ever since that piece on the University of Michigan case. Now you actually admit it!

[Insert obligatory smiley here.]

By: digamma

digamma — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:41:04 +0000

In Orwell’s country, a “public school” is what Americans would call a “private school”. What Americans call a bar, they call a “public house”. If your theory were correct, Brits would be quicker to regulate these institutions than Americans. Whether that is the case or not is beyond me.

By: Julian Sanchez

Julian Sanchez — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:54:15 +0000

I actually don’t think getting “liberal” back is that big a stretch. Outside the U.S. (and as a result among many educated folks here… the Economist readers, anyway) “liberal” still carries the connotation of a free-marketeer. Those who used to call themselves “liberal,” restyled as “progressives,” are running like hell from the term, and in political philosophy it’s still generally used in a big-tent way that covers both egalitarians and libertarians. I’m about as likely to describe myself (and others with similar views) as “liberal” as I am to use the word “libertarian”–the former’s actually the one I use more often if I know the people around will know what I mean.

By: Scott Scheule

Scott Scheule — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:24:36 +0000

Fair enough, but public has a long history of being used to refer to government — one of the strongest critiques of classical liberalism is the critique of the public-private distinction, with public referring to government action.

One could attempt to reclaim the term, but one might as well make a go for retaking “liberal” while he’s at it.

By: Grant Gould

Grant Gould — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:55:06 +0000

I’ve made a conscious attempt to stop using the term “public” to refer to the government, to train myself out of that bad habit. I think that speaking like that is just the sort of fundamental sloppiness that Orwell decried — a word usage that implicitly endorses a political view and neuters opposition.

We can say all we want that society and the government are different, that the government is not the community, but when we then turn around and speak of “the public sector,” we undo that. Letting the term “public” come to include the government — one of the least public institutions around — was a rhetorical error from the start, and it’s time that we start fighting it.
–G