Sen (1970) and Peacock and Rowley (1972) have questioned the compatibility of liberal and Paretian principles. Sen asserts that they are inconsistent: "[I]n a very basic sense liberal values conflict with the Pareto principle. If someone takes the Pareto principle seriously, as economists seem to do, then he has to face problems of consistency in cherishing liberal values, even very mild ones.... Or, to look at it in another way, if someone does have certain liberal values, then he may have to eschew his adherence to Pareto optimality" (1970, p. 157). Peacock and Rowley agree with Sen and assert further that the Paretian principle "emasculates radical reaction to the status quo" (1972, p. 482). The published comments on Sen's article [see Hillinger and Lapham (1971) and Ng (1971)] are directed toward his formal characterization of liberalism. That characterization is indeed unsatisfactory. But even if we grant it for the sake of argument, it does not support the assertions quoted above. Those assertions are false.