fundamentalisms-of-the-left-and-right
Excellent article . Just
a few reservations, otherwise it deserves to
be printed-out and framed
and hung on the wall.
John Stewart as "leader"
of a political cause is an absurdity, it is the
mirror image of Glen Beck
as political leader. In Stewart's case
it is his really
offensive brand of Atheism that is the problem :
Treat all religion as
demented, ridicule everyone who is
not an Atheist, and be
completely unself-conscious
about the gross
limitations of Atheism. NO THANKS.
What are you going to do
about "Libertarian religion" ?
There is no way to debate
a Paulista, it is like debating a Jesuit.
Political doctrine is
front and center in close to 100 % of cases,
with little room for
give-and-take. Present company may be
excluded as an exception,
but we all have had such experience
at times in the past.
Many, many Paulistas are "true-believers"
and there is no way to
have an actual conversation, all that
is possible is to listen
to their spiel and discuss Paul's ideas.
This is not how any of us
think how political discussion
should be carried out. It
is counter-productive. Libertarian
insights may be one
factor but this is hardly the crux of RC,
which, by definition,
seeks ideas from a variety of sources.
Yet there they are, in
the political mix. How do we deal with this ?
So far, no good answer.
But these are lesser
issues. The gist of the article is right on the money.
Billy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
fundamentalisms-of-the-left-and-right
http://www.viewshound.com/politics-usa/2011/11/19/fundamentalisms-of-the-left-and-right
Rigid, dogmatic thinking dominates both the left and
right wing's philosophies. There has to be a major
change in people's thinking.
In an otherwise excellent book, The Myth of The Rational
Voter, libertarian economist Bryan Caplan strongly
objects to the use of the phrase “market fundamentalism”
to describe hard-core libertarians. This term may sound
harsh and even a little offensive, but I think Caplan
here doth protest too much. There are many politicians
and voters today who deserve this label. Liberal New
York Times columnist and economist Paul Krugman puts it
well: “It’s literally a fundamental article of faith in
the G.O.P. that the private sector is always better than
the government, and no amount of evidence can shake that
credo.” Not convinced? Here’s just one (prominent)
example of this dogmatic thinking: numerous Republican
politicians have made the preposterous and false claim
that government spending cannot create jobs. The phrase
market fundamentalist seems like an appropriate term for
these politicians and their libertarian/conservative
supporters.
Ron Paul is the perfect, if extreme, example of a market
fundamentalist. He sees every problem in America as the
fault of government; he never seems to admit there could
be such a thing as a market failure. If you think I
exaggerate, go back and examine his ridiculous answer to
Wolf Blitzer’s question in one of the debates. Blitzer
asked him about the man who voluntarily doesn’t get
health care and then gets sick. Paul’s answer was:
“That’s what freedom is all about — taking your own
risks.” This dogmatic answer was the reduction ad
absurdum of extreme libertarianism. Paul would not
openly say what any decent human being would say: We
can’t let him die, he has to be admitted to the
emergency room; instead he evaded the question. The
supporters of Paul who yelled “let him die” were widely
criticized, but they were simply taking Paul’s doctrine
to its logical, if inhumane, end.
Another group that can safely be called market
fundamentalists are advocates of “supply side”
economics. They claim that tax cuts pay for themselves,
or even more absurdly, increase revenue! This long
discredited theory led to the massive deficits of the
1980s. Even conservative economists like Greg Mankiw (a
top Bush economic adviser) have denounced supply side
economics as economic quackery. Yet, somehow, the
supply-siders are still taken seriously by many
conservative publications. For example, Stephen Moore, a
supply side advocate, writes op-eds for the Wall Street
Journal editorial page. Bad ideas sometimes just don’t
go away.
However, rigid ideology is not the exclusive province of
the right wing. Leftists have their own fundamentalist
philosophy as well. I call it simply government
fundamentalism. Every article written by a leftist I’ve
ever read has a common, but ultimately absurd theme:
government spending (other than the military) should
always be higher than its current level. I have yet to
meet a leftist who will say, “Once social spending
reaches x amount of dollars or x % of GDP, we’ll be
satisfied.” Government spending is higher than it ever
has been in American history—but it isn’t enough. It
never will be.
The leftist Occupation on Wall Street movement is the
perfect example of this ideological dogma. They take as
a self-evident fact that the top 1% control the country
and rig the rules to their benefit. The fact that the 1%
pay over 28% of their income in taxes and the top 0.1%
pay over 30% of their income in taxes is completely
ignored, as it contradicts their party line that the
rich are exploiting the other 99%. Source: Tax Policy
Center. Another example of dogma over evidence.
Another complaint I have with many leftists is that they
rarely, if ever, acknowledge any legitimate limitations
on the powers of the federal government. This is not a
straw man argument. In fact, there was an example of
this misguided thinking on display at a town hall held
by liberal Democrat Pete Stark. He openly proclaimed
that there was nothing the Federal government is
forbidden from doing.
This is a hope more than an expectation, but maybe some
thoughtful people on both sides will realize that their
ideologies are rigid, impractical, and yes, downright
absurd. Perhaps a movement like John Stewart’s March for
Sanity will sweep the nation and change the way many
Americans think about politics. I remain pessimistic. As
a song (I think it was Civil War by Guns and Roses) once
said: Some people just can’t be reached.
Article category: USA
Article tags: Down with Dogma!
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group:
http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog:
http://RadicalCentrism.org
