TOP NAV
BOOK
BLOGS 15
BLOGS 14
BLOGS 13
BLOGS 12
BLOGS 11
BLOGS 10
BLOGS 09
BLOGS 08
BLOGS 07
BLOGS 06
BLOGS 05
BLOGS 04
| Anger and Politics | Anyone for Tipping Points? |
by Christopher Chantrill
September 12, 2004 at 3:00 am
IN THEIR EMERGING Democratic Majority, John Judis and Ruy Teixeira conjure up a future political coalition, an alliance between the progressive centrists and the traditionally marginalized that will take power from the present Republican majority. They see the ranks of creative professionals and working women increasing and benefiting the Democrats.
One hopes that they wont, for the progressive vision goes profoundly against the grain of the American experiment. The Union was intended, after all, as an experiment in self-government not an opportunity for an educated, progressive elite to save the poor and helpless from a fate worse than death.
Progressive elites seem to harbor a distaste for self-government. You could tell that from the acid response among the chattering class to President Bushs proposed ownership society. On PBS after the presidents acceptance speech in New York Republican David Brooks was giggly with pleasure. But Old Democrat Mark Shields was cranky and unbelieving. To him it was all window-dressing, and anyway there wasnt any money for major new programs. And you can see why. A nation of owners is a nation much less in thrall to government compulsion and expert supervision. Why would progressive centrists encourage that?
Its not surprising that the Mark Shields of the world remain in denial about the seriousness of the Bush agenda. Thoughtful journalists successfully protect them from its corrosive pollution. You could read The New York Times for months and months without reading much in the way of analysis of the presidents program. A recent analysis of media bias found that mainstream media outlets cite Democratic-leaning political think tanks much more than Republican-leaning think tanks. In fact, based on think-tank citations, they read pretty well like a Democrat making a speech in Congress.
This careful screening of political ideas in the media has a consequence. Liberals remain happily ignorant of the goals and the program of the political movement that has risen to power in the United States over the last twenty-five yearsâ€â€and they like it that way. They hate Christian fundamentalists with a passion; they rail at tax cuts for the rich; they sneer at President Bushs heartland persona; they defend the sanctity of Social Security and Medicare. What else do they need to know about evil Republicans?
But suppose that the ownership society turns out to be a radical idea that captures the imagination of Americas voters? What would happen then? Maybe the United States would return to its roots in Anglo-American of self-government in which people are assumed competent to govern themselves unless proven otherwise and experts serve as advisers to the citizenry rather than their supervisors.
Its about time that top-down government got its comeuppance. It has had an astonishing run. Considering that it had its out-of-town tryout with the emergence of the big city political machine at the end of the Civil War, had a boffo run in the New Deal years of the 1930s, and then had a record-breaking return engagement in 1965 with President Johnson and his top-down Great Society, surely its time for American political theater to move on to something else.
Some Americans have always hated top-down government, for it undermines the ability of a competent people to provide for each others welfare. Today, these people are called Republicans and they have learned to sing a new song of self-government to the American people, one that begins with a trenchant critique of top-down government: from its one-size-fits-all pension program to its one-size-fits-all education program. It is to these Americans that the administration of George W. Bush wants to appeal with its ownership society program that pushes against the one-size-fits-all edifice with new symbols of self-government: tax advantaged savings accounts for pensions, education, and health care that assume that the average American is a self-governing actor capable of making responsible decisions about his life.
Democrats dont believe the show will ever open. Maybe they are right. Its hard to legislate political changes, and it will be especially hard to push against the great interests that have grown up in the years of Democratic ascendancy. But maybe the Republican ownership society will create owners out of renters, employers out of employees, and rock-ribbed Republicans out of Democratic little people, just as the GI Bill and FHA home loans created Republican suburbanites out of Democratic urban working stiffs.
Maybe Democrats will wake up one day to a United States Senate with a comfortable Republican majority, a determined House of Representatives led by a former high school wrestling coach, and a reelected Republican President. They will realize with horror that the Republicans have a mandate from the American people to implement change.Supposing all this happened on the morning of November 3, 2004?
Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.
Buy his Road to the Middle Class.
Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism
For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008
Imagining that all order is the result of design, socialists
conclude that order must be improvable by better design of some superior mind.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values
Seeckt: "to make of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier."
MacGregor Knox et. al., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050
But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family.
Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[T]he way to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,
Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop
discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District
A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is merely relative, is asking you not to believe him. So dont.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy
Paul Dirac: When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated
by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that
I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion.
However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and
inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he
suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.
John Farrell, The Creation Myth
Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization
No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, Letter to Lord Lytton
In 1911... at least nine million of the 12 million covered by national insurance were already members of voluntary sick pay schemes. A similar proportion were also eligible for medical care.
Green, Reinventing Civil Society