The passing of John Kenneth Galbraith is a real loss. His works made major contributions to public debate over the entire post-World War II era, and continue to have an impact. The New York Times had a mostly fair commentary today on Galbraith's life and work. (Brad DeLong does a good job pointing out the ways in which it is not fair.) The Post apparently did not learn the news in time for the Sunday edition, or alternatively it had not prepared an obit in advance.
Any assessment of Galbraith's life invariably includes the comment that his work had more influence outside of economics than within the profession. This is unfortunate for the economics profession. While we can benefit from mathematical modeling and new econometric techniques, I believe that Galbraithian insights will ultimately prove far more important in advancing our knowledge of the economy and society.
Unlike many news organizations, the Prospect has remained staunchly committed to keeping our journalism free and accessible to all. We believe that independent journalism is crucial for a functioning democracy—but quality reporting comes at a cost.
This year, we’re aiming to raise $75,000 to continue delivering the hard-hitting investigative journalism you’ve come to expect from us. Your support helps us maintain our independence and dig deeper into the stories that matter most.
If you value our reporting, please consider making a contribution today. Any amount helps secure our future and ensure we can continue holding power to account.
