the money shot-
Whereas classical liberalism saw government as a necessary evil whose involvement in social and private affairs needed to be limited wherever practicable, progressivism saw the state as the rightful overseer and regulator of significant portions of American social and economic life. To compensate for the inequities of capitalism in industrial-age America, Progressives favored a government empowered to redistribute private property under the banner of social justice. R.J. Pestritto compares and contrasts progressivism and socialism:
"Since the Progressives had such a limitless view of state power, and since they wanted to downplay the foundersÂ’ emphasis on individual rights, it is only natural to ask if they subscribed to socialism....
This construction seems to presuppose that in the absence of state intervention on behalf of (say) middle class workers, the market is free and competitive - as if large corporations don't exert massive forms of 'extra'-market control.
Regardless: A deeper question arises which you never see asked on the Right: one wonders if there is such a thing
in practice as a political economy which is so pure that it does not protect one set of interests over another.
For instance, our current system makes it very easy for American companies to hire non-American citizens - either in this country, through lax enforcement, or overseas, through laws which have bestowed incredible mobility upon capital. On the other side of the coin, there are rigorous protections for doctors and lawyers and owners of drug companies, all protected against foreign competition. Meaning: the workers of Eli Lilly must compete with 3rd world sweatshop labor, whereas the owners are protected to the hilt by a dynamic, interventionist state, i.e., free competition my ass. The cheerleaders of free market capitalism are not getting a full picture from their information sources. They have been fed an
extremely biased view of Government intervention by the corporate powers which have captured our once vital information sources.
Indeed, we don't hear much about the trillions of lobbying dollars poured into politics. Nor do we hear about the culture of subsidies and bailouts which socializes the costs and risks of business. All of these things imply an upward distribution of wealth which could be far greater than the New Dealers ever intended for the middle class. (I say "could be" because the structures of "socialism" which benefit business is largely invisible, that is, the folks who pay Sean Hannity's salary have no interest in directing the serf's gaze at the real loci of power)
A question arises. Why is the Right so selective on which forms of state intervention and re-distribution they expose? It's almost as if the main benefactors of Government intervention have sent a massive portion of voters on a wild goose chase . . . as they loot the country through risk mismanagement and monopolization of every major sector, only to get bailed out for their crimes by both parties, whom they generously fund.
(At least they share a portion of their profits with FOX News, Talk Radio, Think Tanks, university econ departments, publishing groups, and the blogosphere ... for the purpose of keeping the serfs agitated with stories about persecuted billionaires. Attention serfs: it's no longer the 30s. Business now owns government, and they pay handsomely for unprecedented subsidies, bailouts, and regulatory favors a.k.a. redistribution)
(How did we raise an entire generations of conservatives - many of them really, really bright - to be so fooled by their information sources?)
You make some Great points, unfortunately, they are incomplete giving only one side of the story when in reality, your action is the equivalent of dropping a grenade amongst your own Ranks. For Example:
This construction seems to presuppose that in the absence of state intervention on behalf of (say) middle class workers, the market is free and competitive - as if large corporations don't exert massive forms of 'extra'-market control.
Yes they can, through flooding Markets for one. Using unfair Government Sanctioned tricks to unfairly undercut Competition, like the Hamilton scheme that triggered the Whiskey Rebellion, or starting rumors to devalue Government War Bonds, and them buy them up for pennies on the Dollar. The Government Sanctioned Monopoly is Another, Government Subsidies Another, Government picking Winners steering Government Purchases to otherwise unqualified ans sometimes incompetent bidders. Yeah, there is a Shit Load of games played where Big Money is concerned. None of it has much to do with Free Market Principle.
What is the New Middle Class Worker to You? "We The Living", by Ayn Rand? The Government Civil Servant? The Union Management and Their Ranks, while you throw the rest of us to the dogs and bleed us dry? Like Post Russian Revolution? Where is the Impartial Referee?
Regardless: A deeper question arises which you never see asked on the Right: one wonders if there is such a thing in practice as a political economy which is so pure that it does not protect one set of interests over another.
Not true at all. You are looking for a Utopia now?
We are a Constitutional Republic by design, with the means to correct misdirection through sound Leadership and Law, with the ability to change that Law for the better through Due Process. I don't see a System better than that throughout History. It is not about the Interests, it is about the Weight of the Interests and how Justice is served. To what degree would you serve Justice? What part would you abandon?
For instance, our current system makes it very easy for American companies to hire non-American citizens - either in this country, through lax enforcement, or overseas, through laws which have bestowed incredible mobility upon capital. On the other side of the coin, there are rigorous protections for doctors and lawyers and owners of drug companies, all protected against foreign competition. Meaning: the workers of Eli Lilly must compete with 3rd world sweatshop labor, whereas the owners are protected to the hilt by a dynamic, interventionist state, i.e., free competition my ass. The cheerleaders of free market capitalism are not getting a full picture from their information sources. They have been fed an extremely biased view of Government intervention by the corporate powers which have captured our once vital information sources.
Privilege = Protection. Courtesy of the Federal Government.
What will change this in a single day would be the Importation of Civil Servants. Give up Your Job for Someone Else, it's Your turn now. Flood Your Areas of Expertise with People willing to do the job for less. Open Bidding, No Tenure, no Seniority. We are all interchangeable in your mind, Right? Why shouldn't You be Interchangeable too?
Cop's Firemen, Teachers, Bureaucrats. You would scurry like Rat's if what You imposed on us was imposed on you. Your Immigration Policies have corrupted the Middle Class since Kennedy was President, by Manipulating Immigration. You have devalued Physical Labor by Over Flooding, pretty much every Craft, Trade, Enterprise, with cheap competition, that undermined a whole Culture.
Indeed, we don't hear much about the trillions of lobbying dollars poured into politics. Nor do we hear about the culture of subsidies and bailouts which socializes the costs and risks of business. All of these things imply an upward distribution of wealth which could be far greater than the New Dealers ever intended for the middle class. (I say "could be" because the structures of "socialism" which benefit business is largely invisible, that is, the folks who pay Sean Hannity's salary have no interest in directing the serf's gaze at the real loci of power)
You want the Contributions, yet you don't want to hear about it. You demand the contributions. yet It's never about that now is it. How much to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom? Simplify the Tax Code. Stop with the unfair advantage. Why Monopolies at all? Why Subsidies? Why special advantage? Why not just be the Referee? Maintain the Playing Field, Maintain the Integrity of the Game. You are not God. Predetermined outcome serves no Justice, You don't get to decide who wins, it is a corruption of Principle.
A question arises. Why is the Right so selective on which forms of state intervention and re-distribution they expose? It's almost as if the main benefactors of Government intervention have sent a massive portion of voters on a wild goose chase . . . as they loot the country through risk mismanagement and monopolization of every major sector, only to get bailed out for their crimes by both parties, whom they generously fund.
Let Conscience Dictate, through Reason. State your cause, see what kind of support you get from the related Parties. Take it to Forum. We are a Nation of Laws, that are supposed to be based in part on Impartiality. Again, ask Government, why the Monopolies? Why Government Selective Protection? Maybe we need to start looking at Stock Portfolios? Where the Pension Plans are invested, and why?
(At least they share a portion of their profits with FOX News, Talk Radio, Think Tanks, university econ departments, publishing groups, and the blogosphere ... for the purpose of keeping the serfs agitated with stories about persecuted billionaires. Attention serfs: it's no longer the 30s. Business now owns government, and they pay handsomely for unprecedented subsidies, bailouts, and regulatory favors a.k.a. redistribution)
So Google, MSN, and Apple aren't good enough for your list? Do you have a Right to put your money where you want to? How much do you want that controlled? You are attacking a Fundamental Right to Possess Property, We Revolted from England in part, for the failure of Government to Respect that, both Rich and Poor. Do you think that by your many words, you are justified in abandoning that Principle, and scorning those that still adhere to it? Is Extortion your only avenue to maintain?
(How did we raise an entire generations of conservatives - many of them really, really bright - to be so fooled by their information sources?)
Take the Plank out of your eye.
