Kimberly Hendrickson wrote this article for a special issue of Publius devoted to Conservative views on federalism.
Those with subscriptions to Publius and those at libraries that subscribe to JSTOR and Oxford journals can view it by clicking here.
Full citation: Kimberly Hendrickson, “Edward Banfield On the Promise of Politics and the Limits of Federalism,” Publius, vol. 34, issue 4, Fall 2004, pp. 139-152.
Before Edward C. Banfield left the University of Chicago for Harvard University, he was feted. The famed political philosopher, Leo Strauss, who thought well of Banfield, delivered these remarks.
As the neo-progressive wave in politics rises higher and higher, Banfield’s Government Project provides a cautionary tale of the challenges that well-intended policymakers and public administrators face in tackling social problems.
It is an easy reading book that nearly anyone can read and enjoy. (Dry, academic treatise it most certainly is not.)
So what’s the book about? Well, it describes and analyzes one of the federal government’s attempts to help poor farmers during the Great Depression.
But that’s not all it is about. As Banfield put it:
The most characteristic feature of modern society, perhaps, is the great and increasing role of formal organizations of all kinds. Primitive societies were (and are) held together chiefly by the nonlogical bounds of custom and tradition; in modern society the relations of individuals are to a large extent consciously and deliberately organized by the use of intelligence, and the rules of logic. . . . This attempt to organize society along rational lines is a stupendous experiment. Nothing in history promises that it will succeed. But like Faust we are bound by our bargain, and so the study of formal organization and planning—of the techniques by which control may be exerted deliberately and intelligently—is a matter of profound importance. If it is placed in the widest possible framework, then, Government Project may be regarded as a study of one of mankind’s countless recent efforts to take command of his destiny.
Edward C. Banfield, “Policy Science as Metaphysical Madness,” in Robert C. Goldwin, ed., Statesmanship and Bureaucracy (Washington: American Enterprise Institute, 1977), pp. 1-35.
Edward C. Banfield, “The Zoning of Enterprise,” Cato Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, Aut. 1982, pp. 339-349.
For a full list of Edward C. Banfield’s articles, see James Q. Wilson, “A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court: A Biography,” Charles R. Kesler, ed., Edward C. Banfield: An Appreciation (Claremont, CA: Henry Salvatori Center for the Study of Individual Freedom in the Modern World, 2002), pp. 31-80.
Edward C. Banfield Collection, City Planning and Landscape Architecture Collection, University of Illinois, Champagne-Urbana. Repository of Edward C. Banfield, ed., Reports on American Cities, (Center for Urban Studies at MIT and Harvard: 1960-1963).
In late 1977, Stephen Smith, a journalist, interviewed Edward C. Banfield and many persons who knew him, for an article intended for Esquire magazine. Smith kindly gave the tapes of his interviews to the Banfield family. Below are selections from these tapes.
Recording #1 (32+ minutes)
With the family dog, Sashi, at his side, Edward C. Banfield speaks of his farm, his childhood, neighbors, early employment, how he ended up attending the University of Chicago and studying planning and cities, Rexford G. Tugwell, Martin Meyerson, James Q. Wilson, and his first books.
Recording #27 (22+ minutes)
Edward C. Banfield speaks of his Harvard colleagues, problems America may face (hedonism, loss of virtue, nihilism), liberalism as theory and policy, human nature, “Policy Science as Metaphysical Madness,” free markets, his desire to research new topics, and Bonnie Bluestein (a student who disrupted his classes at both Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania).
James Q. Wilson, “A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court: A Biography,” Charles R. Kesler, ed., Edward C. Banfield: An Appreciation (Claremont, CA: Henry Salvatori Center for the Study of Individual Freedom in the Modern World, 2002), pp. 31-80.