The Last Institutionist: John Kenneth Galbraith

Galbraith was a indeed a social spender -- at least he was NOT no return one way nuclear spender and a warmonger to the point of bankrupting the treasury...

.....capitalist USA as a welfare state as a classless society -- is more socialist than most socialists of the East and the West....combined -- if it did not turn into a garrison state before this Mongoloid descended from the Nariyal tree -- it was partly thanks to people like Ambassador Galbraith.

My understanding of John Kenneth Galbraith’s economics - like my understanding of many other topics, is highly shaky. But I have been fortunate to read his diary-book ``Ambassador’s Journal`` and really enjoyed it. The gentleman had a highly influential role in the JFK administration - and he had such a high profile that his very nomination to become ambassador to India made the Pakistanis mad - they wanted somebody of comparable caliber. When he was in Washington, he could just walk in virtually any time to see the US president and in New Delhi, it was the same way with Pandit Nehru for an evening tea. Later on, during the 1962 brief Sino-Indian war, he played a key role in helping Indians against the Chinese and at the same time, convincing the Pakistani president Ayub Khan to keep out of it - in those days, he was worried about the nightmare of a combined attack by Pakistan and China, with the possibility of defeat, collapse, and even anarchy in India! He was also simultaneously fighting with the Pentagon generals who invariably used to side with Pakistan (sounds familiar)! He was quite a remarkable man - this one - and he loved India and believed in it!

I have a personal anecdote about John Kenneth Galbraith. I had first met him at the marriage of Lal Bahadur Shastri`s son`s wedding when I was about 11 years old. He looked so tall, and gladly signed in my autograph book. I was simply awed by his height, and had no clue of who he was, other than the trivia that he was the U.S. Ambassador to India. About 25 or 30 years later I met him at Harvard Business School while I was studying there. We talked more intelligently over the glass of wine. Obviously he remembered that reception, but had no clue of that over awed boy. His contribution to India is very significant. His access to White House was not limited to JFK, but to all democratic administration.

Anil

Re: # 2
Dear bjkumar,
Thanks for your comments.You write so well. However you have totally covered up your identity! Why? We people who write and interact should better know each other and each other`s background. That is what I believe.Unfortunately, most intros of the interacting members are almost blanks. Maybe, the chowk editors should rectify this and ensure that some minimum information at least is available about a member.
Regards V.S.Gopalakrishnan

For a long time, my only knowledge of J K Galbraith was in that wicked Ali G video in which he interviews him and gives J K ideas on economy and business. For J K admirers that video would be a real fun watch.

As i learn more about him, the more i am impressed by the guy. im talking about J K here.

(An excerpt from the Ambassador`s Journal which reveals the funny JKG side as well as his problem-solving skills.)

The Feline Side of Diplomacy
In the spring of 1962, during an official visit to Governor Jung of the state of Gujarat our two sons were presented with Siamese kittens of some slight personality. The name of one can be lost to history. The other our offspring called Ahmedabad in honor of its birthplace.

Later in the same year, my wife was showing reporters over the newly opened Roosevelt House. They asked her if it presented any peculiar housekeeping problems. She replied that the kittens could pass with ease through the concrete screens that are an Edward Darrell Stone specialty and which served as interior walls of the house. And she added that one of them greatly preferred the bed then being occupied by Ambassador Averell Harriman, a guest in the house. Harriman, who was allergic to cats, she added, did not at all care for the intruder. The notion that Averell Harriman could be harrassed by anyone or anything, man or beast, was a story. The reporters asked for the kitten`s name. By now, it had been shortened to Ahmed.

Eventually, the story appeared in the international edition of The Times. It was at a moment of tension in Pakistan resulting from our aid to India in the recent border war with China. The effect was, to say the least, electric. The windows of our Consulate in Lahore were broken. A jeep loaded with either our soldiers or our bureaucrats was overturned. Mullahs inveighed against us and, in their prayers, arranged for me an extremely ghastly posthumous reception. A student strike was called. For Ahmed, alas, is one of the several hundred names of the Prophet. I do not think the Pakistanis were particularly sensitive. In the darker reaches of our Bible Belt, there would have been criticism of a Pakistan ambassador who, at a moment of friction between our two nations, had, however innocently, named his dog Jesus.

I sensed the scale of the impending trouble within seconds after seeing a cable from Karachi reporting on the first demonstrations. I assembled a press coverage to explain that my children had acted in all innocence, that the name of the kitten was nonetheless now Gujarat. I then sought out the Pakistan High Commissioner, told him of my trouble and heard with relief that his government would do everything possible to dampen the indignation. It did. In all of this, I was alarmed by the damage that might be done to our relations with Pakistan. And I was almost equally distressed by the knowledge that even the friendliest Foreign Service Officers would point with honest joy to this further example of the awful risks, which a great nation runs when it entrusts its diplomacy to amateurs. Amateurs will never understand how much can turn on the name of a kitten.

As the result of my prompt action, the crisis, international and personal, was averted. But for months, the Indian newsmen continued to ask me to account for my mistake. It became rather wearying. Finally, on an incredibly hot and humid night in the spring of 1963, I gave a lecture at the University of Patna in the city of the same name on the lower Ganges Plain. It was followed by a press conference. The questions droned on into the night; my pressman dozed off leaving me with no one to bring the ordeal to an end. Finally came the inevitable question. A reporter rose: ``Mr. Ambassador, would you tell us about the name of your cat?``

With an effort, I got hold of my patience. I replied:

``I will answer once more but you must write the story very carefully, very systematically for it is the last time. Here are the facts:

``First, it was not a cat but a kitten.

``Second, it was not my kitten but my children`s kitten.

``Third: My children did not name the kitten Ahmed for the Prophet but Ahmedabad for its birthplace.

``Fourth: Ahmedabad was not named for the Prophet but for Sultan Ahmed Shah, its founder, in A.D. 1411. (I had looked it up.)

``Fifth: So that no one`s feelings could possibly be hurt, my children have renamed the kitten Gujarat.``

There was a moment`s silence while everyone scribbled. Then a tall dark man rose at the back of the room, waited a second for silence and then in a strongly formidable voice, said:

``Mr. Ambassador,. My name is Ahmed. I am a Mussulman. I find your explanation satisfactory.``

I was never asked about the kitten again. It was a complete exoneration.

An excellent and informative write-up. Capitalism/Communism are a ying yang relationship--each untenable alone. There is much work left to be done in ameliorating capitalism to reduce its deficiencies and its weaknesses. Perhaps a recognition of the same is long long overdue. Capitalism has flipped too strongly to the right in the West--and its weaknesses are considered necessities.

`` Galbraith was a qualified admirer of capitalism and a reasoned critic of the deficiencies in US capitalism. He identified the following as the major reasons for deficiencies in US capitalism: (a) Over-bureaucratization in big corporates, which he called “corporate sclerosis” (b) Failure of corporates to constantly innovate (c) Price-wage spiral in major industries such as steel and automobile (d) Diversion of capital and R. and D. to the military areas (e) Shifting structure of the economy towards media and entertainment and (f) Failure of supply-side economics that promise more investments and more supply when tax reduction takes place. ``

a) is a problem for corporations all over the world. But not in the USA. The Dow Jones has been completely redone in the past 50 years (27/30 companies are new ones). Most corporations have been surprisingly nimble.

remember meeting him as a schoolboy when I went to attend vikram sarbhai memorial lecture by him in ahmedabad some time in late 80’s. it was about imminent collapse of soviet style socialism and challenges confronting western capitalism. I can only vaguely remember what he spoke about, but I still remember vividly his description of Indian democracy as a “functioning anarchy,” a term that stuck me and made me think so much about the way my republic evolved and survived. I remember his tall frame and his gentle sense of humor, when I went to the stage to get my copy of “affluent society” autographed by him, he was still struggling to adjust the mike to his length, he told me , wait young man let me fix this marvelous piece of Indian engineering!. I still remember that grin nd the affectionate pat . I wonder who borrowed that copy of “affluent society” from me and never returned !