Well, Hellooooo There!

MILLENIUM has come

and far gone if were to see a lovelier trinity than this in 1966. For- give the underdog neurosis, but be- lieve me: a book about Free Enter- prise would on the odds be more likely to praise the Wise Statesman- ship of Partnership With the Gov- ernment than to do what Rogers has done; and an essay on labor arbitra- tion, anno Domini 1966, would, you’d think, come up on their side? .. . and an economic history of the U.S. is of course! a neck-deep mudbath in Josephsonian muck, hm? Donald Rogers, the financial colum- nist sans peur et sans reproche, walks into the boardrooms of the mightiest corporations and tells the tycoons that they are failing in their primary func- tion, which is to defend the social system under which the enterprise system can flourish. It is disconcert- ing to hear in Mr. Rogers’ phrases the echo of the criticisms most fully developed 130 years ago by Tocque- ville—disconcerting because Tocque- ville’s analysis leaves us less reason to be hopeful, and shows us why we should not hope. According to Toc- queville, what we would call Big Business today is always tempted to join forces with a dirigiste govern- ment, and it is fruitless to take one’s protests to the offices of the merchant princes. I think Tocqueville is cor- rect; Big Business will belong to whatever faction runs the govern- ment; and although I admire Mr. Rogers for his forthright and informa- tive attack on the delinquencies of the tycoonery, I must admit that the chances are heavy against his having picked the right target for his exhorta- tions. He is right when he blames Henry Ford IJ-ism for complicity in neo-fascist economics; he wastes his time, I submit, in appealing to the good nature or common sense of Henry Ford II et cetera. Paul Hays is a U.S. Judge, Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit. For 23 years he was a labor arbiter. (The word, damnit, is arbiter; not arbitrator.)

WR

About the Author

William F. Rickenbacker

MILLENIUM has come

and far gone if were to see a lovelier trinity than this in 1966. For- give the underdog neurosis, but be- lieve me: a book about Free Enter- prise would on the odds be more likely to praise the Wise Statesman- ship of Partnership With the Gov- ernment than to do what Rogers has done; and an essay on labor arbitra- tion, anno Domini 1966, would, you’d think, come up on their side? .. . and an economic history of the U.S. is of course! a neck-deep mudbath in Josephsonian muck, hm? Donald Rogers, the financial colum- nist sans peur et sans reproche, walks into the boardrooms of the mightiest corporations and tells the tycoons that they are failing in their primary func- tion, which is to defend the social system under which the enterprise system can flourish. It is disconcert- ing to hear in Mr. Rogers’ phrases the echo of the criticisms most fully developed 130 years ago by Tocque- ville—disconcerting because Tocque- ville’s analysis leaves us less reason to be hopeful, and shows us why we should not hope. According to Toc- queville, what we would call Big Business today is always tempted to join forces with a dirigiste govern- ment, and it is fruitless to take one’s protests to the offices of the merchant princes. I think Tocqueville is cor- rect; Big Business will belong to whatever faction runs the govern- ment; and although I admire Mr. Rogers for his forthright and informa- tive attack on the delinquencies of the tycoonery, I must admit that the chances are heavy against his having picked the right target for his exhorta- tions. He is right when he blames Henry Ford IJ-ism for complicity in neo-fascist economics; he wastes his time, I submit, in appealing to the good nature or common sense of Henry Ford II et cetera. Paul Hays is a U.S. Judge, Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit. For 23 years he was a labor arbiter. (The word, damnit, is arbiter; not arbitrator.)