Thomas Sowell Reviewed
It’s probably a good idea to write my next review on somone about whom I have generally positive feelings, if a few criticisms – and God bless him, economist Thomas Sowell certainly counts.
A perfectly publishable 500-750 word opinion piece isn’t difficult to write. I can write one in ninety minutes. But to write a good one, one needs either a specialized perspective or a unique voice with which to communicate one that’s unremarkable. Ann Coulter is a good example of someone with the latter (yes, she’s a lawyer by training, but that almost never figures into her commentary anymore).
Mr. Sowell possesses the former due to his background as a working economist; the almost constant theme of his column is what people think and say versus what the reality of a situation is, form versus substance. Yet the thought process he earned from that same background enjoyably imbues him with a style, too; I’d be willing to bet money that no other conservative commentator uses the question mark to punctuate his sentences as much as Mr. Sowell does. His string of them from “Listening to a Liar” (Sept. 8 of this year) is just one of numerous examples:
"If the urgency to pass the medical care legislation was to deal with a problem immediately, then why postpone the date when the legislation goes into effect for years-- more specifically, until the year after the next Presidential election?
If this is such an urgently needed program, why wait for years to put it into effect? And if the public is going to benefit from this, why not let them experience those benefits before the next Presidential election?
If it is not urgent that the legislation goes into effect immediately, then why don't we have time to go through the normal process of holding Congressional hearings on the pros and cons, accompanied by public discussions of its innumerable provisions? What sense does it make to "hurry up and wait" on something that is literally a matter of life and death?
If we do not believe that the President is stupid, then what do we believe?
And that’s why Mr. Sowell is one of few Townhall.com columnists I still recommend: Everyone is offering answers, but far more often than most Sowell will point out for you factors you might not have noticed and demonstrate the line of inquiry he used to unearth them, thus actually educating you.
About those “few criticisms” I mentioned at the beginning, though: personally I chalk it up to the bad influence of other successful columnists, but occasionally Sowell does mimic their unattractive habit of using disparaging terms for Leftists – “limousine liberals”, “feminazis”, and the like. For many columnists this habit doesn’t make any difference, since only a dyed-in-the-wool Republican would ever be caught dead reading their vitriol anyway (Ann Coulter, again), but Sowell’s logic is so universally applicable and appealing that it’s a real shame when he provides statists with a big notice that he is their enemy and hence should be dismissed.
And speaking of statism, Sowell’s occupation as an economist and his accompanying love of free markets sometimes seems to take a backseat to his Republican identity. Despite his understanding of how unrestricted trade across borders benefits all and competition improves any industry, he accuses those darn illegal immigrants of taking our jobs (“‘Vigilantes’ on the border?”, May 3rd, 2005). There are cultural and safety arguments against illegal immigration, but labor competition?
But if I were to ask Mr. Sowell why he wrote it – and he had time to answer - I am sure I would receive an intelligent and interesting reply, whether I agree with it or not. That confidence, finally, is why Mr. Sowell is the Republican you should read.
This entry was not tagged.