shows how ‘these people’ think inndifferent forms, act in different patterns,ncling to different values, seekndifferent goals, and learn differentntruths. Which is to say that they arenstrangers, barbarians, savages.”nBecause of his audacity Ryan was ablento transcend the cant of both left andnright and to announce boldly the hypocrisynof the culture-of-poverty writersnwho “dismiss with self-righteous contemptnany claims that the poor man innAmerica is plainly unworthy or shiftlessnor enamored of idleness. No, they say,nhe is ‘caught in the cycle of poverty.’nHe is trained to be poor by his culturenand his family life, endowed by his environmentn… with those unfortunatelynunpleasant characteristics that makenhim ineligible for a passport into thenaffluent society.” Ryan, because his credentialsnas a leftist were in order, wasnable to speak plainly, and what he said,namazingly, was an encapsulation of thensentiments of every classical economist:n”The simplest. . . proposition in understandingnpoverty is that it is causednby lack of money. The overwhelmingnmajority of the poor are poor becausenthey have, first: insufficient incomen. . . The facts are clear, and the solutionnseems rather obvious — raise theirnincome and let their ‘culture,’ whatevernit might be, take care of itself.”nThis confusion on the left has not yetnbeen resolved; unfortunately, it isnmatched by schizophrenia on the right.nL he latest contribution to the rightwingnculture-of-poverty literature (innthe tradition of Banfield, I dare say) isnGeorge Gilder’s Visible Man. The titlenis meant to convey the idea that publicnpolicy since the mid-1960s has focusednexcessively on appeasing the unemployednyoung black male who is allegedlynresponsible for the looting and riotingnand, more generally, the barbarism, thatnseems to be endemic to the archipelagonof “Indian reservations” that is UrbannAmerica. The protagonist of Gilder’snbook, a young black welfare father—annSOinChronicles of Culturen”unrelated individual,” in the lexiconnof the Census Bureau—named Mitchelln”Sam” Brewer, is as spiritually twistednand lives in a world as sordid and brutaln— as subhuman, really — as anythingnimaginable. Sam is the classic cultureof-povertynvictim; he is portrayed — itnis characteristic of the genre—as havingngobs of potential; as being bright andntalented, articulate in his own way,ncompetent enough to get by in thenworkaday bourgeois world—if he reallyncared to. But he doesn’t care to; hendoesn’t need to. Why.-* Enter the villainnof the piece (drum rolls, please): becausenof the welfare state. How doesnHEW work its mischief? By encouragingnyoung black males to live off thenADC checks sent to welfare mothers.nOf course certain services must benperformed in return; according to Gilder,ncompetition for the attentions ofnthese welfare mothers—especially whitenwelfare mothers—is intense. In anynevent, the upshot of this strangely sexistnstory is that this is bad because itn”castrates” young bucks like Mitchelln”Sam” Brewer.nI doubt it. But more to the point, Inwonder if it serves any useful purposenBooks in the Mailnto document—once again, and for thenumpteenth time—the depravity andnviciousness of the “culture of poverty.”nIt might make sense to flesh outnthe bill of particulars if Gilder werenbent on making the same recommendationnas Banfield: that the lower-classnpoor be institutionalized, or, better yet.nsterilized. Short of that, what is thenpoint.-* The fact is that it contributes tona kind of mindless romanticism thatnpermeates the poverty literature. (Onenwould think that Gilder would be morensensitive to this point: the “visiblenman” is visible, as Gilder knows, preciselynbecause of this tendency on thenpart of the mass media to depict thenAngry Young Man—e.g., Billy the Kid,nClyde Barrow, James Dean, EldridgenCleaver—as folk-hero/victim.) Howevernworthy the cause to which VisiblenMan is meant to contribute, it may bensaid, insofar as it manifests a style thatnmay be called reverse-sensationalismn(Midge Decter’s calling card: she isnGilder’s editor at Basic), to shed preciousnlittle light on the problem of povertynin America. As a sage once observed,n”you seen one slum, you seen ’emnall.” DnThe Right and Wrong of Compulsion by the State, and Other Essays by Auberon Herbert;nLiberty Fund, Inc.; Indianapolis. Brings back works and thoughts on the principlesnof individual freedom by a British XIX century conservative.nYou Can Trust the Communists (to be Communists) by Fred Schwarz; Christian Anti-nCommunism Crusade; Long Beach, California. An exposition of communist tactics fornexpansion and how to combat them.nThe Faith of the Pilgrims: An American Heritage by Robert M. Bartlett; UnitednChurch Press; New York. A social history of the Pilgrims and an examination of theirnreligious faith.nArator by John Taylor, edited by M. E. Bradford; Liberty Fund, Inc.; Indianapolis.nA comment on politics and agriculture by one of early Virginia’s strictest republicans.nBusiness Speaks Up.’by C. Wendel Muench; The Richard B. Cross Co.; Oxford, Indiana.nA thorough examination of capitalism’s possibilities for businessmen.nIsrael at the Polls: The Knesset Elections of 1977; edited by Howard R. Penniman;nAmerican Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; Washington, D.C. A valuablenstudy on this topical subject.nU.S. China Policy Today by David Nelson Rowe; University Professors for AcademicnOrder; Washington, D.C. An insightful look at the background behind the U.S.-Chinanproblem.nFreedom and Independence: The Hillsdale Story by John Chamberlain; Hillsdale CollegenPress; Hillsdale, Michigan. The story behind Hillsdale College and its determinationnto stay free from the entanglements involved in accepting federal funds.nnn