Making Plans for Edward

Who would've guessed agricultural collectivization doesn't work?

Published February 8, 2024

If you’ve never been a resident of the Washington egghead-osphere, you’re probably not familiar with the 20th-century political scientist Edward Banfield. But Kevin Kosar—a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and noted KISS fanatic—thinks that you should be. In 1951, Banfield published Government Project, an account of the U.S. government’s attempt to remake the lives of some of its citizens by establishing a cooperative farm in Arizona during the Great Depression. The project didn’t go so well, and Kevin believes it holds vital lessons about the limits of government planning that Americans across the political spectrum would be wise to recall today. Tune in for neocon nerdery, but stick around for some more contemporary wonkery on what’s gone wrong with Congress.

Show Notes:

– Kevin’s page at AEI

– Kevin’s podcast, Understanding Congress

– Edward Banfield’s Government Project, reissued with a new introduction by Kevin

– Kevin on Banfield’s The Unheavenly City

– Banfield’s The Moral Basis of a Backward Society

– Kevin and Phil Wallach: “The Case for a Congressional Regulation Office”

Listen on your player of choice

Jonah Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief and co-founder of The Dispatch, based in Washington, D.C. Prior to that, enormous lizards roamed the Earth. More immediately prior to that, Jonah spent two decades at National Review, where he was a senior editor, among other things. He is also a bestselling author, longtime columnist for the Los Angeles Times, commentator for CNN, and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. When he is not writing the G-File or hosting The Remnant podcast, he finds real joy in family time, attending to his dogs and cat, and blaming Steve Hayes for various things.

Please note that we at The Dispatch hold ourselves, our work, and our commenters to a higher standard than other places on the internet. We welcome comments that foster genuine debate or discussion—including comments critical of us or our work—but responses that include ad hominem attacks on fellow Dispatch members or are intended to stoke fear and anger may be moderated.