104 The Crucial Value Problems 



from basic and could, like the restrictions of liberty represented by 

 traffic signals, even increase welfare and perhaps life itself. The choice 

 of values offered here, "freedom" vs. "control" offers an endless plat- 

 form for debate, but not in this context if you are a converted conser- 

 vationist. Galbraith argues that you cannot be both a conservationist 

 and have the freedom of unrestrained appetite. 



In pursuing the matter of social control. Professor Galbraith does 

 not hesitate to deal with another major value question, or more accu- 

 rately a whole series of value questions, in respect of the instruments 

 of social control of consumption. His references to "taxation," "pro- 

 hibitions," "education and other hortatory methods," "subsidies" and 

 the like make it apparent that control, if agreed upon, is possible, even 

 if unpalatable. He is probably correct in linking the avoidance of the 

 question of control of appetite to consume with the fear of govern- 

 ment interventionism. I believe it desirable to emphasize that his brief 

 reference to the fact that today "the masses of the people might have 

 more than a minimum" is a major reason for the difference between 

 the need for conservation in contemporary life as compared with that 

 in earlier periods, and a basic factor in the need for government inter- 

 vention. 



Not content with forcing these issues, Galbraith proceeds to push 

 the question of control into specific areas, thereby inviting specific as 

 well as general opposition. His observations about automobiles at 

 least show his courage if not audacity; and his references to food, 

 tobacco, and clothing show his insistence on dealing with the big 

 issues first and the little ones later, if necessary. 



A fourth major question is made explicit in Galbraith's considera- 

 tion of "growth," another of the sacred values on the American eco- 

 nomic and political scene. This is in a sense the most difficult of all 

 of his questions to face. For we have never as a nation seriously con- 

 sidered the alternatives to growth, even though I suspect there is no 

 one who would not be forced to admit that on a finite globe (or in a 

 finite solar system shall we say now in the post-Sputnik era) there 

 must be some limit to "growth." Galbraith's insistence that there are 

 alternatives to growth other than "stagnation," and consideration of 

 the implications of alternative patterns of growth, must necessarily, I 



