First appeared in the Boston Globe
By Harvey Blume
"I GOT LOST in philosophical
abstractions," writes 75-year-old billionaire philanthropist George Soros,
about his attempt, decades ago, to compose a philosophical treatise. "I
decided to quit and devote myself to making money."
That Soros succeeded in the latter
endeavor--making a fortune in financial markets--is common knowledge. But
readers of his new book, "The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War
on Terror" (PublicAffairs), will discover quickly that he never abandoned
philosophy. If you have a taste for such things, you will almost certainly be
impressed, for example, by his deft juxtaposition, in a single paragraph, of
Leo Strauss, guru of the neoconservatives, and Karl Popper, a social theorist
whose profound impact on Soros can't be overstated.
In fact, much of Soros's philosophizing is
spurred on by his desire to hone ideas that so impressed him, when, as a young
man fleeing Communist Hungary after World War II, he studied under Popper at
the London School of Economics. Before the Communists took over, Soros's Jewish
family survived the Nazi occupation of Hungary. Popper's writings--especially
his 1945 book, "The Open Society and Its Enemies"--gave Soros an
enduring framework for understanding totalitarian regimes.
According to Soros, the surest way to grasp
the meaning of an open society is to come to one from a closed society--the
difference hits you in a flash. But he does offer hints for those without that
experience. "In my definition," he writes, "an open society is
an imperfect society that holds itself open to improvement."
Imperfection is a keynote for Soros. In human
affairs, he says, people are simultaneously observers and players, which makes
objectivity impossible and error inevitable. In a sense, philosophy and finance
have converged for
SOROS: His analyses of how investors'
expectations shape financial bubbles and boom-bust cycles helped him make his
fortune.
The new book is a passionate plea for us to
accept our fallibility. The alternative--whether expressed in political dogma
or religious fundamentalism--makes for a closed society. Soros thinks that
America--the world's exemplary open society, in his view--shows worrisome signs
of closing under the current administration, which led him to spend a lot of
money trying to defeat George W. Bush in the last election. That, along with
other controversial interventions (support of needle exchange programs in New
York and the legalization of marijuana, to name two) by his Open Society
Institute, have made him the billionaire philosopher the right-wing most loves
to hate.
IDEAS: Do you see yourself as an unusually
reasonable person?
SOROS: Yes, though I see that our grasp of
reality is fundamentally flawed. Given that we are observers and participants
at the same time, we can never reach ultimate truth.
So I don't have faith in reason. I have faith
in critical thinking. That's why I believe in democracy--so that governments
can be changed if they don't perform--and in market economies, to give us
feedback so we can correct our mistakes.
IDEAS: You seem apologetic about the
philosophical section of "The Age of Fallibility." Why?
SOROS: Because of how little the general
public here is interested in philosophy. It's amazing that in China, people
really respond; the philosophical discussion is really important to Chinese
intellectuals. American intellectuals tend to skip it.
IDEAS: Are you unique in being a billionaire
whose philanthropy consists of pinpoint political interventions? Are there
other versions of you--right-wing versions?
SOROS: There are several billionaires who have
devoted considerable amounts of money to political purposes using philanthropic
drives. Richard Mellon Scaife, for example, is a Pittsburgh billionaire who
devoted large amounts of money to persecuting the Clintons, and is doing the
same, though possibly not with the same amount of money, to me.
IDEAS: There are times in the book when it
seems you are opposed to the global economy and to what is often called
globalization. Is that so?
SOROS: No. I'm not opposed to globalization.
But I consider the current form of globalization flawed. It's flawed because we
have global markets but don't have political institutions to match.
People who believe in what I call market
fundamentalism think that the common good is best served by everybody pursuing
their own self interest. This thesis happens to be false, because there are
common interests that are not taken care of by markets. You need separate
institutions to take care of common interests in a national economy. Now we
need them in an international economy.
IDEAS: Do you favor some sort of global
government?
SOROS: I'm against global government. Now
[laughing] if you don't like a national government, you can move someplace
else. A global government would probably interfere with our freedom more than
national governments.
But you do need international law and
international institutions, and today, international law is very weak. The
American supremacists argue that international relations are relations of
power, and that international law merely recognizes what power has wrought.
IDEAS: You attribute that view to Dick Cheney
and Donald Rumsfeld, and say that they have "successfully manipulated a
born-again president and a feel-good public."
SOROS: They gave President Bush very bad
advice, and it has turned out badly.
IDEAS: Do you think they see the invasion of
Iraq as a failure?
SOROS: Cheney and Rumsfeld continue to take a
very anti-international approach and want to use force. They are actively
agitating for military action against Iran, which has really terrified the
uniformed military. There's no question that they are disappointed that Iraq
wasn't easier, and so you'll find neocons who have turned against that policy.
But the hard core, Cheney and Rumsfeld, want to push on.
IDEAS: It's hard to see the American people
supporting a war with Iran.
SOROS: The danger cannot be discounted.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has more influence than his predecessor
in Iran, Mohammad Khatami. And here we have Cheney. Extremists on both sides
are playing off each other, and the moderates are shut out by the escalation.
IDEAS: You have one thing in common with the
right--the belief that American leadership is essential to the world.
SOROS: If we want to be the leader of the free
world, we have a unique responsibility not only to protect our relative
advantages but to the common problems of humanity. Solutions to problems like
global warming require cooperation. That cooperation cannot be successful
without the United States. But for the right, American leadership is just
military leadership.
IDEAS: You describe the war in Vietnam as an aberration
from America's fundamentally sound leadership style, and argue that the war on
terror is much worse, nullifying our global leadership status.
SOROS: It dismays me to come to that
conclusion.
DEAS: How do you defend against pessimism?
SOROS: I am rather pessimistic. But I'm
optimistic, too, because it's possible to do something about it. We are a
democracy, and can correct our mistakes. We can change our policy. We still are
an open society. That makes me hopeful.
Harvey Blume is a writer based in Cambridge.
His interviews appear regularly in Ideas. E-mail hblume@globe.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment