Monday, April 09, 2007


Old hands will recognize that I am using a favourite Marxist term above. "Contradictions" were supposed to be the fatal flaws in capitalism. There never were in fact any such contradictions, merely tensions. Leftism however is replete with REAL contradictions. Projection at work again

The left, liberals and the academy are schizophrenic. One half of the split personality applies to epistemology, aesthetics and culture. In these areas "progressives" adopt a radically skeptical viewpoint, rejecting the importance of tradition, standards and culture. The ESR blog argues that this is due to Stalinist influence. However, this explanation does not explain the staying power of progressives' disdain for American culture more than a decade after the Soviet Union's fall and more than five decades after Stalin's death.

The other half of the split personality is that when it comes to public policy, the "progressives" adopt an aggressively rationalist stance, arguing that their managerial problem solving skills can solve all problems: from predicting the outcome in the war in Iraq; to running the New York City subway system; to understanding global warming; to understanding abortion; to understanding the optimal way Wal-Mart ought to run itself; to understanding how income taxation will influence capital formation. When it comes to culture, the left, liberals and the academy argue that nothing can matter and that everything is a matter of power, not reason. When it comes to public policy, the left, liberals and the academy argue that their reason is infallible.

Of course, the left's opinion that its reason is infallible is a delusion of grandeur. Hayek called this the left's "fatal conceit". In reality, most everything that the left has attempted to do has failed. Putting aside the mass murder and environmental destruction in the Soviet Union and China, even just limiting the discussion to their influence in the United States, virtually everything that liberals and the left have touched has been destroyed. New York is a shadow of its former self. The welfare system destroyed millions of lives. The health system is a pathetic joke. The education system graduates illiterates. The Federal Reserve Bank caused the depression of the 1930s...

An important reason for liberalism's, the left's, and the academy's fatal conceit is its failure to integrate time into its thinking. Economists tend to use cross sectional or limited time series-based studies to derive conclusions that may depend on many decades' worth of data. Government budgets are based on annual cycles. Decisions made in one year are forgotten only one year later. Revenues can be raised in year one without contemplating the costs in future years. For example, public sector pension funds have tended to use overly aggressive assumptions because such assumptions reduce contributions in year one while others bear the costs in future years.

Liberalism, then, is based on short term thinking and that is a critical difference between those who advocate laissez faire , i.e., those who value individual rights, and advocates of state-based solutions who favor the collective over the individual in the economic realm. The costs of state-based solutions are borne over many decades, in the end destroying the social fiber, the economy, wealth and the community. However, the benefits are typically short run.

Post above lifted from Democracy Project. The writer does not understand why Leftists are so short-sighted and contradictory. Such Leftist characteristics are however diagnostic of a psychopathic personality -- which also features the moral blindness mentioned above



Corn-based ethanol a crock: ""Good news: President Bush and Congress have found an energy policy they can agree on. Bad news: They both want to expand the use of ethanol. ... This mutual enthusiasm for the corn-based fuel may be good for the political environment, but not for the physical one. A new paper by The Heritage Foundation's Ben Lieberman road-tests the latest boondogglefrom Washington and finds that its earth-friendly claims are seriously overblown."

The ethanol alliance: "Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's visit to Camp David last weekend was meant to seal what is being dubbed as 'the ethanol alliance' between the United States and the South American giant. I have no idea whether ethanol will eventually deliver the grandiose promise of a clean environment or the bankruptcy of oil-rich despots. But I do know that there is a huge disconnect between the objectives of the ethanol alliance and current policy. If the United States wants to boost ethanol consumption and reduce oil-dependency, it needs to make a simple decision -- eliminate its 54-cents-a-gallon tariff. Experts tell us that corn-based ethanol, the kind being produced in the United States, is eight times less efficient than Brazil's sugarcane version of the biofuel."

Democrats still weakening America: "On Friday night, Rep. Duncan Hunter, former chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and now its ranking Republican member, appeared on the Hannity and Colmes show on Fox, and I was astonished to hear him castigated for failing to see that our troops in Iraq needed equipment. He was specifically challenged on matter of the alleged lack of body armor for our troops in Iraq, and the administration's alleged failure to ensure that our troops had the protection the armor affords them. Ignored were certain inconvenient facts such as the amount of body armor that was available under Bill Clinton, which was zero. Today under President Bush and thanks to Duncan Hunter's work in the Armed Services Committee, which authorized the funds to purchase the body armor, the armed services have one million sets of body armor. That's one million! It's puzzling to see the media ignore the disastrous cutbacks in our armed services that took place under Bill Clinton, and the extraordinary efforts of the Bush administration and Hunter's committee to beef up our military. Under Clinton, for example, the number of armored Humvees available to the military was a pitiful 1,300. Under President Bush it's over 26,000. And it was not just Clinton who sapped our strength -- Congress under the Democrats has just turned thumbs down on the Pentagon's request for $4.75 billion for the mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles that can safeguard our troops from the IED explosions which are responsible for a large part of the deaths and wounding of our soldiers and Marines. Instead of funding that vital request in the $124 billion supplemental bill passed this week, the Democrats were able to find billions for such things as subsidies for spinach farmers and the shrimp industry, but not a dime for a vehicle that could save the lives of thousands of our troops in Iraq"

Revolting Brits?: "The government is predicting that some 15m people will revolt against Tony Blair’s controversial ID card scheme by refusing to produce the new cards or provide personal data on demand. The forecast is made in documents released by the Home Office under the Freedom of Information Act. The papers show ministers expect national protests similar to the poll tax rebellions of the Thatcher era, with millions prepared to risk criminal prosecution. Opposition MPs said the new documents proved their case that the programme would never work. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: “This will cripple the system. Fifteen million is a massive number. What the Home Office is accepting in private, but refuses to accept in public, is that a massive number of ordinary law-abiding citizens simply will not go along with their scheme.” Davis, whose party’s policy is to scrap the cards, added: “This will render it completely useless as a security or check mechanism of any sort.” The documents, quietly released during parliament’s Easter break, also show that the government is planning to make ID cards compulsory in 2014, despite the expected revolt."

China Hand has just put up a new post. Blogspot blogs are once again blocked in China so there is a backup available here.



"Why should the German be interested in the liberation of the Jew, if the Jew is not interested in the liberation of the German?... We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time... In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.... Indeed, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism over the Christian world has achieved as its unambiguous and normal expression that the preaching of the Gospel itself and the Christian ministry have become articles of trade... Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist". Who said that? Hitler? No. It was Karl Marx. See also here and here.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party".

Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here


No comments: