Operas and Citizens: Mitchell Cohen Responds

Operas and Citizens: Mitchell Cohen Responds

Bruce Ackerman and I are both passionate about opera; we both have egalitarian commitments. We both, I suppose, are “secular humanists.” We both would separate religion and state. And we diverge—markedly. Is it because Bruce Ackerman is a “liberal” and I am a “social democrat”? Only in part. These designations are not absolute nowadays. He is a liberal who is concerned for social justice; I am a social democrat who values liberal precepts. Still, I want to press distinctions because our disagreement is not solely about access to culture; it is also about how to conceive the relations of individuals to society. Ackerman has a certain “liberal” notion of those relations, and this underlies his opposition to public subsidy of opera; my argument is inevitably with this notion. So it is as a social democrat—as someone committed to an “equality-friendly” society—that I would justify the principle of public subsidy of the most “elite” domain of culture.


Socialist thought provides us with an imaginative and moral horizon.

For insights and analysis from the longest-running democratic socialist magazine in the United States, sign up for our newsletter: