OlMMONS & VlI.WS TnBuilding with Broken ToolsnBarry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison:nThe DeindustrializaUon ofnAmerica; Basic Books; New York.nStephen Hilgartner, Richard Bell,nand Rory O’Connor: Nukespeak;nSierra Club Books; San Francisco.nWalter E. ^Kllliams: The State AgainstnBlacks; McGraw-Hill; New York.nby William R. HawkinsnProduction and distribution are twonparts of economic theory. They also designatena line of division between the politicalnright and left. The right has generallynconcentrated on production: business,ntechnology, economic growth. Thenright’s favored system of capitalism wasnthe engine of the Industrial Revolution.nCapitalism contains a distribution system,na production-based one. Thosenwho produce receive a share in proportionnto their contribution to the process.nSince people contribute unequally, theynreceive unequally. And since entrepreneurialnand managerial leadership is requirednto coordinate the division ofnlabor, a hierarchy of authority developsnin the economy as in other fields ofnhuman endeavor.nThe left has, in contrast, been obsessednwith distribution and redistribution.nMarx took for granted the industrial systemncreated by capitalism. The revolutionnwould only equal out the distributionnand level out the authority. Thisnconcept has run through all socialist andnmost liberal thinking since R. H. S. Crossman,na Labour Party leader, wrote in ThenFuture of Socialism in 1950 that Englandnhad solved the production problemnand only needed to worry about itsnproper distribution. Grossman livednanother quarter century and watchednhis country lose the production race tonProfessor Hawkins is with the departmentnof economics at Radford University.n6nChronicles of Cultarenits Asian and Continental rivals, so thatnits standard of living, regardless of how itnwas distributed, fell to become one ofnthe lowest in Europe. Keynesians concentratednon distribution for consumptionndemand rather than investment fornproduction. The 1960’s saw the creationnof an environmental movement, alliednto the left, which explicitly rejected asnevil both production and growth.nIn the 1974, 1979, and 1981 recessionsnthe U.S. was reminded of the benefitsnof zero growth: high unemploymentnand a lower standard of living for manynothers who were still working. Stagflationnpresented conservatives with annopportunity to gain public support sincenit was widely held that the nation’s problemsnwere production problems: inadequateninvestment, lagging productivity,ninferior technology, and foreign competition.nFrom this was bom “supply-sideneconomics,” promising revitalization.nUnfortunately, the slogan narrowednrather than broadened the issue as certainnpoliticians equated the entire ideanwith the simple solution of personal taxncuts. Conservative leaders thus chosenthe policy variable most likely to raisenthe issue of distribution and give the leftnthe chance to counterattack on the “fairness”nissue. Not that taxes did not neednto be cut. Taxes were too high. But thencuts were not presented in the properncontext of a larger reindustrializationnprogram, one that would have includednnntargeted funds and tax benefits for industrialninvestment, research, and development;nan educational shift toward vocationalnand scientific training; limitednprotection for key industries; and incentivesnfor foreign investment in U.S. production.nThis would have required anrole for government in redevelopment,na constructive role. Instead, tax cutsnwere oversold in isolation. What couldnhave been an active program for a conservativeneconomic and political revivalnbecame just another exercise in libertariannfaith healing which quickly lostnpublic confidence. The left is regroupingnwith reindustrialization programs ofnits own-nUnemployment is the most importantnsocial problem stemming from industrialndecline. In human terms, it means notnjust lost income but the severance of thensocial bond forged in the work-placencommunity and the loss of self-esteem.nThose who are forced to live on charitynsuffer a loss of spirit which can breed annunhealthy bitterness toward the socialnorder. A worker who loses his job throughnno direct feult of his own is fiindamentallyndifferent from the congenital idler whonis a permanent member of the welfarenunderclass. Unfortunately, conservativesnsometimes do not comprehend this differencenand adopt the same negative attitudentoward both.nBilly Joel, in his best-selling recordn”Allentown,” captures this mood of betrayalnwhen he sings that though “ournfathers fought the Second World War,”nthey and their sons are now “standing innline, filling out forms” for welfare rathernthan working. The rewards they werenpromised “if they worked hard, if theynbehaved” are not forthcoming. The videotapenproduced for this song (oftenntelevised on cable networks) playsnheavily on the coimection between thenmilitary veteran and the worker.nV-ionservatives are concerned withnthe work ethic and social order. Theyn