The Negativism of Political Goals

U Like many of Professor George Geiger's readers, I have been grateful to him for forcing me to face an issue, even though I did not completely agree with his conclusions. A case in point is Geiger's advocacy of positive political goals. In his I947 book, Philosophy and the Social Order, Geiger defends "the positive state," a political order that does not limit itself to peace-keeping activities. He agrees with an early Laski view of the state as a public service corporation. On this view the most important task of government is the development of programs that will assure individuals a chance to realize their best powers. Such is Geiger's rationale of state planning for better employment, education, housing, and medical care. Geiger recognizes the possibility of oppressive state action, but (except in the sphere of personal liberty) he suggests that the eighteenth century fear of tyrannical state planning was justified by conditions that have now disappeared. Geiger has chosen an interesting word to characterize contemporary "liberals" and to distinguish their attitudes from the attitudes of "old-fashioned" liberals. The "new" liberals have programs that are "positive," in contrast to the "negative" agenda of the physiocrats and early Utilitarians. That the "positve-negative" contrast has some justification is obvious, if the two sorts of liberals confront such an issue as public