Chris Bertram writes:
Crooked Timber: Rawls against desert : Will Wilkinson has a column up at TechCentralStation on desert . This very fact is regrettable, since Wilkinson is smarter, saner, and more interesting that the average TCS columnist and hence will serve to cover-up — somewhat — the nakedness of this astroturf operation.
Is Chris Bertram simply saying that Wilkinson's article is harmful to social welfare, or that Wilkinson has committed a moral fault? And is there a difference? I cannot quite tell...
Posted by DeLong at August 13, 2004 09:05 PM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this post"...Wilkinson is smarter, saner, and more interesting that the average TCS columnist and hence will serve to cover-up — somewhat — the nakedness of this astroturf operation."
Is Chris Bertram simply saying that Wilkinson's article is harmful to social welfare, or that Wilkinson has committed a moral fault?
*****
I suppose we could ask a similar question about Colin Powell's presentation to the UN prior to the Iraq war. In both cases, I think the answer is that we care less about the soul of the speaker than about the effect of his words on our own skins.
Posted by: s_bethy on August 13, 2004 09:39 PM