FROM BROOKES NEWS
US economy, supply-side economics and Say's law The problem with the supply-siders is that they do not realise that their crude monetary views are dangerously subversive of free markets and that they bring about recessions for which the market always gets the blame.
Savings and money - what is the relationship? Most economists have no real idea about the nature of savings. That's why they think budget surpluses are savings.
Castro and Al-Jazeera indignant over Cuban-exile 'terrorist' Fidel Castro joins with Islamo-fascists and other terrorists while our media looks the other way
Australian economy, immigration and economic growth A great many misconceptions about immigration and the nature of economic growth abound, particularly in Australia.
The National Jewish Post & Opinion's Thought Police Self-hating Jews at the National Jewish Post & Opinion ban Arlene Peck for speaking out
*********************************
Friday, May 27, 2005
ELSEWHERE
Poor old Binning. He sent me quite a handsome apology for his abuse of me so I think he is a pretty decent sort, basically. I forwarded him the link to one of my recent posts on Majority Rights -- in which I outline the enormously unscientific way in which Leftists have "researched" the psychology of conservatism. The research concerned was summarized in 2003 by Jost et al and the summary was as unscientific as what it summarized (they only included findings they agreed with!). Binning, however, is still trying to defend the indefensible and has put up a comment on my post which summarized Jost et al as saying that “the best predictor of political conservatism is fear (death anxiety)”. Since I have done some very high-quality research (using random community sampling and proper psychometric methods) in conjunction with a very Left-leaning sociologist which showed that death anxiety is totally uncorrelated with current political attitudes, however, Binning might have to face the fact that the entire field he works in is one big con. I also sent him this link to ponder over.
More evidence that severe anti-social behaviour is caused by genes, not by "society": "Psychopaths are born anti-social, not corrupted by bad parenting, scientists reveal today. A study of twins showed that anti-social behaviour was strongly inherited in children with psychopathic tendencies. In children without psychopathic traits, being anti-social was chiefly the result of environmental factors. The findings support previous research indicating that children with psychopathic tendencies often remain an anti-social problem. Psychopaths are generally recognised by a lack of empathy and weak conscience. If a psychopath does something that hurts another person, he or she is less likely to feel remorse than other people. These tendencies are a recognised warning sign of anti-social behaviour in young children. To help identify the genetic components of anti-social behaviour, a team of British psychiatrists studied 3,687 pairs of seven-year-old twins.... The chief investigator, Dr Essi Viding, from the Medical Research Council's Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College, London, said: "The discovery that psychopathic tendencies are strongly heritable suggests we need to get help for these youngsters early on." The research is published today in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry."
Education matters little: "One puzzle about the U.S. economy is why it doesn't do worse when there are so many reasons that it should. Our students do fare poorly on international comparisons. In a recent study of math skills of 15-year-olds in 29 countries, done by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Americans ranked 24th. We do depend heavily on immigrants to fill science and engineering jobs. In 2000, immigrants accounted for 17 percent of U.S. scientists and engineers with bachelor's degrees, 29 percent with master's degrees and 38 percent with doctorates. And our savings and investment rates are low. In 2001, the U.S. savings rate ranked 22nd out of 25 OECD countries. The explanation is this: every complex economy is more (or less) than the sum of its parts. What matters is not just how much we save-but how well we invest. The Japanese have squandered much of their higher savings on unproductive investments. Similarly, many work skills are learned on the job... America's economic strengths lie in qualities that are hard to distill into simple statistics or trends. We've maintained beliefs and practices that compensate for our weaknesses, including: ambitiousness; openness to change (even unpleasant change); competition; hard work, and a willingness to take and reward risks. [And most education is little more than propaganda anyway. Read this]
Estate tax: "The tax cut law of 2001 included a slow phase out of the estate tax by 2010, but the tax is supposed to be reinstated in 2011 when the entire 2001 law expires. This strange political compromise on estate taxes presumably will not last, so it is a good time to consider what should be done about this tax. I believe taxes on estates should be permanently abolished since they do little to reduce income or wealth inequality, benefit a vast army of lawyers and accountants whose role is to find ways to cut taxes on the estates of the wealthy, create problems for some families with smaller businesses, and do not raise a lot of tax revenue. In April the House of Representatives rather strongly voted to repeal permanently the tax on estates, so the issue now goes to the Senate"
The therapeutic society: "Sigmund Freud's daughter, Anna, ran nursery schools in London during the Blitz of World War II. Very few of her charges needed psychiatric help. As Christina Hoff Sommers and Sally Satel relate in their new book, One Nation Under Therapy: How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance (St. Martin's Press), Freud found that even children who remained with their parents and were bombed repeatedly showed "no signs of traumatic shock.little excitement and no undue disturbance." What a long way we've come. Today, grief counselors rush in at the first sign of a "tragedy"-as when they comforted librarians upset over ruined books when the Boston Public Library was flooded in 1998. Sommers and Satel detail this and many other excesses of therapy in their well-researched and provoking book. They even coined a word for these immoderations: "therapism." "
Neville Chamberlain lives! "Officials negotiating Iran's nuclear future left the table in an upbeat mood Wednesday, with Tehran renewing its vow to refrain from developing nuclear weapons and signaling it will pursue talks with Europe toward a final agreement on its atomic program. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and other key European ministers met for three hours with Iranian negotiators under an implied threat that Tehran could be brought before the U.N. Security Council to face possible international sanctions over its suspected nuclear activities."
The Google cache is an amazing phenomenon. If you look here, you will find an entire blog that I deleted over a year ago. It's a bit like everlasting life! That reminds me: I wonder who posted this? The words are mine but I did not put them there.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Poor old Binning. He sent me quite a handsome apology for his abuse of me so I think he is a pretty decent sort, basically. I forwarded him the link to one of my recent posts on Majority Rights -- in which I outline the enormously unscientific way in which Leftists have "researched" the psychology of conservatism. The research concerned was summarized in 2003 by Jost et al and the summary was as unscientific as what it summarized (they only included findings they agreed with!). Binning, however, is still trying to defend the indefensible and has put up a comment on my post which summarized Jost et al as saying that “the best predictor of political conservatism is fear (death anxiety)”. Since I have done some very high-quality research (using random community sampling and proper psychometric methods) in conjunction with a very Left-leaning sociologist which showed that death anxiety is totally uncorrelated with current political attitudes, however, Binning might have to face the fact that the entire field he works in is one big con. I also sent him this link to ponder over.
More evidence that severe anti-social behaviour is caused by genes, not by "society": "Psychopaths are born anti-social, not corrupted by bad parenting, scientists reveal today. A study of twins showed that anti-social behaviour was strongly inherited in children with psychopathic tendencies. In children without psychopathic traits, being anti-social was chiefly the result of environmental factors. The findings support previous research indicating that children with psychopathic tendencies often remain an anti-social problem. Psychopaths are generally recognised by a lack of empathy and weak conscience. If a psychopath does something that hurts another person, he or she is less likely to feel remorse than other people. These tendencies are a recognised warning sign of anti-social behaviour in young children. To help identify the genetic components of anti-social behaviour, a team of British psychiatrists studied 3,687 pairs of seven-year-old twins.... The chief investigator, Dr Essi Viding, from the Medical Research Council's Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College, London, said: "The discovery that psychopathic tendencies are strongly heritable suggests we need to get help for these youngsters early on." The research is published today in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry."
Education matters little: "One puzzle about the U.S. economy is why it doesn't do worse when there are so many reasons that it should. Our students do fare poorly on international comparisons. In a recent study of math skills of 15-year-olds in 29 countries, done by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Americans ranked 24th. We do depend heavily on immigrants to fill science and engineering jobs. In 2000, immigrants accounted for 17 percent of U.S. scientists and engineers with bachelor's degrees, 29 percent with master's degrees and 38 percent with doctorates. And our savings and investment rates are low. In 2001, the U.S. savings rate ranked 22nd out of 25 OECD countries. The explanation is this: every complex economy is more (or less) than the sum of its parts. What matters is not just how much we save-but how well we invest. The Japanese have squandered much of their higher savings on unproductive investments. Similarly, many work skills are learned on the job... America's economic strengths lie in qualities that are hard to distill into simple statistics or trends. We've maintained beliefs and practices that compensate for our weaknesses, including: ambitiousness; openness to change (even unpleasant change); competition; hard work, and a willingness to take and reward risks. [And most education is little more than propaganda anyway. Read this]
Estate tax: "The tax cut law of 2001 included a slow phase out of the estate tax by 2010, but the tax is supposed to be reinstated in 2011 when the entire 2001 law expires. This strange political compromise on estate taxes presumably will not last, so it is a good time to consider what should be done about this tax. I believe taxes on estates should be permanently abolished since they do little to reduce income or wealth inequality, benefit a vast army of lawyers and accountants whose role is to find ways to cut taxes on the estates of the wealthy, create problems for some families with smaller businesses, and do not raise a lot of tax revenue. In April the House of Representatives rather strongly voted to repeal permanently the tax on estates, so the issue now goes to the Senate"
The therapeutic society: "Sigmund Freud's daughter, Anna, ran nursery schools in London during the Blitz of World War II. Very few of her charges needed psychiatric help. As Christina Hoff Sommers and Sally Satel relate in their new book, One Nation Under Therapy: How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance (St. Martin's Press), Freud found that even children who remained with their parents and were bombed repeatedly showed "no signs of traumatic shock.little excitement and no undue disturbance." What a long way we've come. Today, grief counselors rush in at the first sign of a "tragedy"-as when they comforted librarians upset over ruined books when the Boston Public Library was flooded in 1998. Sommers and Satel detail this and many other excesses of therapy in their well-researched and provoking book. They even coined a word for these immoderations: "therapism." "
Neville Chamberlain lives! "Officials negotiating Iran's nuclear future left the table in an upbeat mood Wednesday, with Tehran renewing its vow to refrain from developing nuclear weapons and signaling it will pursue talks with Europe toward a final agreement on its atomic program. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and other key European ministers met for three hours with Iranian negotiators under an implied threat that Tehran could be brought before the U.N. Security Council to face possible international sanctions over its suspected nuclear activities."
The Google cache is an amazing phenomenon. If you look here, you will find an entire blog that I deleted over a year ago. It's a bit like everlasting life! That reminds me: I wonder who posted this? The words are mine but I did not put them there.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Thursday, May 26, 2005
ARE IMMIGRANTS NECESSARY?
Lee Harris says a lot of sensible things but he seems to have forgotten his economics on this subject:
What Harris overlooks is that the market deals with shortages by driving up prices. So all necessary jobs would in fact get done without immigrants but it would cost more. Otherwise how does Australia get by? Our immigration is controlled so we have nothing like the Hispanics. So who are the building workers in Australia? I ought to know as I have employed many of them over the years. They are people of British and European ancestry. And they may cost a lot per hour but because they know what they are doing they work fast. And housing in Australia is generally a lot cheaper than in America! Silly old Lee Harris!
************************
Lee Harris says a lot of sensible things but he seems to have forgotten his economics on this subject:
"Successful societies produce people who begin to despise hard labor as beneath their dignity. Yet since this kind of work has to be done in any society, such societies must figure out where to tap into a supply of laborers of an inferior social status, who were still willing to do such work. In all societies up until quite recently, these laborers either came from an established class of peons, whose lower status was rigidly enforced by law or custom, as in Russian serfdom or else they were imported from other lands, and were called either indentured servants or slaves.
Today we are drawing these people from across our borders. They come here quite freely, and not on slave transports. All of us reap the advantages of their cheap labor and their hard work, but many of us want to pretend that, somehow, they are not necessary to us and that we can get along without them. Our educated class has deluded itself into thinking that the problem of hard labor no longer exists, simply because they and their children don't have to do it anymore. But someone does, and always will. What President Fox was trying to tell us, in his awkward way, was that those who argue that we can get along without illegal immigrants are living in a fantasy world, and that the sooner they wake up, the sooner Americans can begin working out a realistic solution to a problem that faces both our nations."
What Harris overlooks is that the market deals with shortages by driving up prices. So all necessary jobs would in fact get done without immigrants but it would cost more. Otherwise how does Australia get by? Our immigration is controlled so we have nothing like the Hispanics. So who are the building workers in Australia? I ought to know as I have employed many of them over the years. They are people of British and European ancestry. And they may cost a lot per hour but because they know what they are doing they work fast. And housing in Australia is generally a lot cheaper than in America! Silly old Lee Harris!
************************
ELSEWHERE
Just for fun, this is the highly intellectual objection that the mini-Chomsky, Brian Leiter, has to the appointment of judges who aim to apply the law rather than make it: "This is not the only time in American history that the independence of the judiciary has been under attack. Roosevelt, too, wanted to pack the Supreme Court with ideological compatriots, but his plan failed. But we also shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Roosevelt's "ideological compatriots" were on the side of justice, not evil. While the independence of the judiciary is a good in its own right, it is an especially important good when its independence is to be sacrificed to the forces of evil. And that is what is to be decided in Washington, D.C. in the next 48 hours." [Comment would be superfluous but I would like to ask the philosophical professor Leiter how come there is all that evil if there is no such thing as right and wrong?] Link via Conservative Philosopher
Constitutionalism in exile: "Originalism isn't about returning to a particular period of time in our history or jurisprudence, or achieving a certain set of results (even if most constitutional conservatives find some of the results of liberal rulings, such as the post-Roe abortion regime, particularly atrocious). It is more concerned with process, recognizing the Constitution as written law that sets down rules that political actors -- be they presidents, legislators or judges -- cannot change on their own. It's hard to see any other approach consistently yielding fidelity to constitutional law. But the people engaged in Constitution-in-exile fretting do have a point. Liberal anti-originalist jurisprudence has effectively exiled many provisions of the Constitution."
Democrats have selective amnesia on "rule of law": "Prof. Rebecca Brown's column of May 18, 'Bid to block filibuster flies in the face of a society of laws' paints too idyllic a picture of politics and the rule of law. First, it is not totally clear that changing the Senate rules would be a violation of the rule of law. Second, even if the 'nuclear' or 'constitutional' option is a violation of the rule of law, it is not without precedent on both sides of the aisle. ... Prof. Brown also implies that were the so-called 'nuclear option' to be employed by Senate Republicans, it would represent an unprecedented power play in American politics. ... These are the same folks who stood idly by as Bill Clinton attacked Serbia without U.N. authorization or a congressional declaration of war, yet sounded the shrillest of alarms when George W. Bush did the same in Iraq."
Jeff Jacoby makes the point that blacks are told that they will fail because of racism whereas Asians are told that they will succeed via hard work. The results are predictable. The Left have a lot to answer for.
This crazily anti-American woman is the elected representative of U.S. journalists! "Foley said, among other things, that she was angry that there was "not more outrage about the number and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq. I think it's just a scandal. It's not just U.S. journalists either, by the way. They target and kill journalists from other countries, particularly Arab countries, at news services like Al Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios, with impunity" "
Star Parker gets it: "The period of time during which class mobility in the United States has become increasingly sluggish has also been a time of unprecedented social legislation. During the last half-century, in which we've had a war on poverty, affirmative action and minimum-wage laws, income gaps have grown and the class into which one has been born has become an increasingly reliable predictor of the class in which one will die. Perhaps the chicken and egg are being confused here and the purported solution is actually part of the problem.... I would state it this way. No one can devise a formula for getting rich. But I can devise a formula for getting poor. Don't work. Convince yourself that your life reflects the decisions of others and not yours. Be the perennial victim. This is the toll that the welfare state has taken on blacks. It introduced a culture of poverty. Most Americans, regardless of race, trace their lineage to someone who was poor. Being poor is not a predictor of being in favor of government programs. However, thinking a government program is the answer to life's challenges is a good way to stay poor..... Freedom and capitalism do not reduce mobility. Mobility is lost as result of the belief that there is some path other than freedom and personal responsibility".
I have just transferred to here the latest lot of postings from Chris Brand. As usual, he has a good roundup of the various mentions of race and IQ that have leaked into the press.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Just for fun, this is the highly intellectual objection that the mini-Chomsky, Brian Leiter, has to the appointment of judges who aim to apply the law rather than make it: "This is not the only time in American history that the independence of the judiciary has been under attack. Roosevelt, too, wanted to pack the Supreme Court with ideological compatriots, but his plan failed. But we also shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Roosevelt's "ideological compatriots" were on the side of justice, not evil. While the independence of the judiciary is a good in its own right, it is an especially important good when its independence is to be sacrificed to the forces of evil. And that is what is to be decided in Washington, D.C. in the next 48 hours." [Comment would be superfluous but I would like to ask the philosophical professor Leiter how come there is all that evil if there is no such thing as right and wrong?] Link via Conservative Philosopher
Constitutionalism in exile: "Originalism isn't about returning to a particular period of time in our history or jurisprudence, or achieving a certain set of results (even if most constitutional conservatives find some of the results of liberal rulings, such as the post-Roe abortion regime, particularly atrocious). It is more concerned with process, recognizing the Constitution as written law that sets down rules that political actors -- be they presidents, legislators or judges -- cannot change on their own. It's hard to see any other approach consistently yielding fidelity to constitutional law. But the people engaged in Constitution-in-exile fretting do have a point. Liberal anti-originalist jurisprudence has effectively exiled many provisions of the Constitution."
Democrats have selective amnesia on "rule of law": "Prof. Rebecca Brown's column of May 18, 'Bid to block filibuster flies in the face of a society of laws' paints too idyllic a picture of politics and the rule of law. First, it is not totally clear that changing the Senate rules would be a violation of the rule of law. Second, even if the 'nuclear' or 'constitutional' option is a violation of the rule of law, it is not without precedent on both sides of the aisle. ... Prof. Brown also implies that were the so-called 'nuclear option' to be employed by Senate Republicans, it would represent an unprecedented power play in American politics. ... These are the same folks who stood idly by as Bill Clinton attacked Serbia without U.N. authorization or a congressional declaration of war, yet sounded the shrillest of alarms when George W. Bush did the same in Iraq."
Jeff Jacoby makes the point that blacks are told that they will fail because of racism whereas Asians are told that they will succeed via hard work. The results are predictable. The Left have a lot to answer for.
This crazily anti-American woman is the elected representative of U.S. journalists! "Foley said, among other things, that she was angry that there was "not more outrage about the number and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq. I think it's just a scandal. It's not just U.S. journalists either, by the way. They target and kill journalists from other countries, particularly Arab countries, at news services like Al Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios, with impunity" "
Star Parker gets it: "The period of time during which class mobility in the United States has become increasingly sluggish has also been a time of unprecedented social legislation. During the last half-century, in which we've had a war on poverty, affirmative action and minimum-wage laws, income gaps have grown and the class into which one has been born has become an increasingly reliable predictor of the class in which one will die. Perhaps the chicken and egg are being confused here and the purported solution is actually part of the problem.... I would state it this way. No one can devise a formula for getting rich. But I can devise a formula for getting poor. Don't work. Convince yourself that your life reflects the decisions of others and not yours. Be the perennial victim. This is the toll that the welfare state has taken on blacks. It introduced a culture of poverty. Most Americans, regardless of race, trace their lineage to someone who was poor. Being poor is not a predictor of being in favor of government programs. However, thinking a government program is the answer to life's challenges is a good way to stay poor..... Freedom and capitalism do not reduce mobility. Mobility is lost as result of the belief that there is some path other than freedom and personal responsibility".
I have just transferred to here the latest lot of postings from Chris Brand. As usual, he has a good roundup of the various mentions of race and IQ that have leaked into the press.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
CONSERVATIVE POLICY PREFERENCES: MICHAEL OAKESHOTT'S CONCLUSION
I have pointed out that conservatism is primarily a psychological syndrome -- with interrelated traits such as cynicism, wariness, realism, pragmatism, belief in compromise, satisfaction with the world and willingness to accept complexity and to accept a lack of cut-and-dried solutions to problems. But that psychology does very easily lead to distinct policy preferences as well. And conservative realism about the fallibility of others does routinely lead to an unwillingness to put themselves into other people's hands if it can be avoided. In other words, it makes them seek a high degree of individual liberty and makes them distrustful of governments. There are any number of quotations showing the high value that conservatives have always placed on liberty, with Ronald Reagan having been particularly emphatic about it, but I thought readers might like to see what one of the better-known conservative philosophers had to say about it:
****************************
I have pointed out that conservatism is primarily a psychological syndrome -- with interrelated traits such as cynicism, wariness, realism, pragmatism, belief in compromise, satisfaction with the world and willingness to accept complexity and to accept a lack of cut-and-dried solutions to problems. But that psychology does very easily lead to distinct policy preferences as well. And conservative realism about the fallibility of others does routinely lead to an unwillingness to put themselves into other people's hands if it can be avoided. In other words, it makes them seek a high degree of individual liberty and makes them distrustful of governments. There are any number of quotations showing the high value that conservatives have always placed on liberty, with Ronald Reagan having been particularly emphatic about it, but I thought readers might like to see what one of the better-known conservative philosophers had to say about it:
"Further it is said that a disposition to be conservative in politics reflects what is called an 'organic' theory of human society; that is tied up with a belief in the absolute value of human personality, and with a belief in a primordial propensity of human beings to sin. And the 'conservatism' of an Englishman has even been connected with Royalism and Anglicanism.
Now, setting aside the minor complaints one might be moved to make about this account of the situation, it seems to me to suffer from one large defect. It is true that many of these beliefs have been held by people disposed to be conservative in political activity, and it may be true that these people have also believed their disposition to be in some way confirmed by them, or even to be founded upon them; but, as I understand it, a disposition to be conservative in politics does not entail either that one should hold these beliefs to be true or even that we should suppose them to be true. Indeed, I do not think it is necessarily connected with any particular beliefs about the universe, about the world in general or about human conduct in general. What it is tied to is certain beliefs about the activity of government and the instruments of government, and it is in terms of beliefs on these topics, and not on others, that it can be made to appear intelligible. And to state my view briefly before elaborating it, what makes a conservative disposition in politics intelligible is nothing to do with a natural law or a providential order, nothing to do with morals or religion; it is the observation of our current manner of living combined with the belief (which from our point of view need be regarded as no more than an hypothesis) that governing is a specific and limited activity, namely the provision and custody of general rules of conduct, which are understood, not as plans for imposing substantive activities, but as instruments enabling people to pursue the activities of their own choice with the minimum frustration and therefore something which it is appropriate to be conservative about."
****************************
ELSEWHERE
Conservative fusionism lives: "Down somewhere in the deepest understanding of what America is for-somewhere in the profound awareness of what it will take to reverse the nation's long drift into social defeatism-there are reasons that one might link the rejection of abortion and the demand for an active and moral foreign policy.... The opponents of abortion and euthanasia insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in domestic politics. The opponents of Islamofascism and rule by terror insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in international politics. Why shouldn't they grow toward each other? The desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in one realm can breed the desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in another.... In the new fusionism, social conservatives and neoconservatives are not in any immediate contradiction. The wish to restore American patriotism, the struggle against abortion, annoyance at the dated elitism of an overweening judiciary, and the war in Iraq-these all seem to have become curiously interdependent issues... The goal in either case is to restore confidence in-well, what, exactly? Not our own infallible rightness, surely. But neither can we live any longer with the notion of our own infallible wrongness." [The author here seems to overlook one of the greatest commonalities between Protestant/Christian and conservative/libertarian views: Respect for the individual and the rights and liberties of the individual].
Straight talk: "Attacking US government policies on taxes, immigration and Internet access, Intel Corp chief executive Craig Barrett warned that the United States could be left behind when technology companies decide where to make their next big capital investments. With less than two weeks left as CEO of the world's largest chip maker, the outspoken proponent of free trade and low corporate taxes said in an interview that Intel could save as much as $1 billion in taxes over 10 years by building its next factory outside of the United States, in a country such as Malaysia.... Heaping scorn on policies that keep green cards out of the hands of foreign graduates of US universities and make truly high-speed Internet access a rare luxury, Barrett minced few words about his distaste for the federal bureaucracy. Turning away educated people who want to immigrate to the United States "has to be the dumbest thing in the world," he said. "We allow people in the United States who are either here illegally and at the lower level of the value-add or work-force chain - the weak, the sick, the infirm," he added. "We allow everybody in but the value-add people who have educational capabilities and the ability to contribute to the economy." "If we haven't got it bass-ackward I don't know what we're doing," he said."
Another switch: "Lawrence Davis, a former state Democratic Party chairman from Raleigh, has switched his registration to the Republican Party. Davis said he decided to switch parties because his personal beliefs on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriages and the lottery differed from the positions of the Democratic Party. "Basically, it's an effort to bring some coherence between my beliefs and my actions," Davis said. "I felt my [former] party was on the wrong side of right-wrong issues." Davis, a devout Christian, said the Democratic Party has been on the right side of such issues as civil rights. "But I see the Republican Party making some pretty good strides in that area," he said. "President Bush, whatever one thinks of him, has placed some African-Americans in pretty good positions. In the Senate leadership, we see a marked shift from Trent Lott to Bill Frist.""
A Democrat free-marketeer: "Today competition reigns in the U.S. in a way undreamed of 20 years ago--competition for markets, for labor, for capital, for time and, yes, for attention (just ask the newspaper industry). A lot of people have enriched themselves in the process, but no one feels safe from a new competitor sailing into view and sending shots across the bow, 24/7. You could argue that this free-for-all--even more than sound money and lower tax rates--is responsible for the stunning recent outperformance of the U.S. relative to other developed economies, with their more-regulated and rigid business ways. And that is basically what Paul A. London does in "The Competition Solution." But Mr. London is not, as one might suspect, another Republican acolyte. He is, according to his publisher, an "ardent Democrat," an economist who served in the Clinton administration from 1993 to 1997. His faith in markets reminds us why America's economy over the past 20 years, far from stalling when Democrats controlled Congress or the presidency, kept growing and even at times accelerated its pace".
Strange Justice has just put up an amazing account of crooked justice in Canada. Canadians will no longer be able to point the finger of scorn at Southern U.S. jurisdictions for "railroading" blacks. The Canadians will railroad anyone.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Conservative fusionism lives: "Down somewhere in the deepest understanding of what America is for-somewhere in the profound awareness of what it will take to reverse the nation's long drift into social defeatism-there are reasons that one might link the rejection of abortion and the demand for an active and moral foreign policy.... The opponents of abortion and euthanasia insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in domestic politics. The opponents of Islamofascism and rule by terror insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in international politics. Why shouldn't they grow toward each other? The desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in one realm can breed the desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in another.... In the new fusionism, social conservatives and neoconservatives are not in any immediate contradiction. The wish to restore American patriotism, the struggle against abortion, annoyance at the dated elitism of an overweening judiciary, and the war in Iraq-these all seem to have become curiously interdependent issues... The goal in either case is to restore confidence in-well, what, exactly? Not our own infallible rightness, surely. But neither can we live any longer with the notion of our own infallible wrongness." [The author here seems to overlook one of the greatest commonalities between Protestant/Christian and conservative/libertarian views: Respect for the individual and the rights and liberties of the individual].
Straight talk: "Attacking US government policies on taxes, immigration and Internet access, Intel Corp chief executive Craig Barrett warned that the United States could be left behind when technology companies decide where to make their next big capital investments. With less than two weeks left as CEO of the world's largest chip maker, the outspoken proponent of free trade and low corporate taxes said in an interview that Intel could save as much as $1 billion in taxes over 10 years by building its next factory outside of the United States, in a country such as Malaysia.... Heaping scorn on policies that keep green cards out of the hands of foreign graduates of US universities and make truly high-speed Internet access a rare luxury, Barrett minced few words about his distaste for the federal bureaucracy. Turning away educated people who want to immigrate to the United States "has to be the dumbest thing in the world," he said. "We allow people in the United States who are either here illegally and at the lower level of the value-add or work-force chain - the weak, the sick, the infirm," he added. "We allow everybody in but the value-add people who have educational capabilities and the ability to contribute to the economy." "If we haven't got it bass-ackward I don't know what we're doing," he said."
Another switch: "Lawrence Davis, a former state Democratic Party chairman from Raleigh, has switched his registration to the Republican Party. Davis said he decided to switch parties because his personal beliefs on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriages and the lottery differed from the positions of the Democratic Party. "Basically, it's an effort to bring some coherence between my beliefs and my actions," Davis said. "I felt my [former] party was on the wrong side of right-wrong issues." Davis, a devout Christian, said the Democratic Party has been on the right side of such issues as civil rights. "But I see the Republican Party making some pretty good strides in that area," he said. "President Bush, whatever one thinks of him, has placed some African-Americans in pretty good positions. In the Senate leadership, we see a marked shift from Trent Lott to Bill Frist.""
A Democrat free-marketeer: "Today competition reigns in the U.S. in a way undreamed of 20 years ago--competition for markets, for labor, for capital, for time and, yes, for attention (just ask the newspaper industry). A lot of people have enriched themselves in the process, but no one feels safe from a new competitor sailing into view and sending shots across the bow, 24/7. You could argue that this free-for-all--even more than sound money and lower tax rates--is responsible for the stunning recent outperformance of the U.S. relative to other developed economies, with their more-regulated and rigid business ways. And that is basically what Paul A. London does in "The Competition Solution." But Mr. London is not, as one might suspect, another Republican acolyte. He is, according to his publisher, an "ardent Democrat," an economist who served in the Clinton administration from 1993 to 1997. His faith in markets reminds us why America's economy over the past 20 years, far from stalling when Democrats controlled Congress or the presidency, kept growing and even at times accelerated its pace".
Strange Justice has just put up an amazing account of crooked justice in Canada. Canadians will no longer be able to point the finger of scorn at Southern U.S. jurisdictions for "railroading" blacks. The Canadians will railroad anyone.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
TUESDAY ROUNDUP
Once again I list what I think were the best posts on my various blogs in the preceding week.
On Dissecting Leftism I show that conservatives are happy people
On Political Correctness Watch I note that even bread and cheese is bad for you in California
On Greenie Watch I note that Greenies claim that cooking potatoes is bad for you
On Education Watch I note that Indianapolis public schools have an enormous drop-out rate
On Socialized Medicine I note how a boy died while waiting for a much-cancelled operation
On Gun Watch I show that gun opponents are bullies
On Leftists as Elitists I show that Leftists think that they alone have any rights
**********************************
Once again I list what I think were the best posts on my various blogs in the preceding week.
On Dissecting Leftism I show that conservatives are happy people
On Political Correctness Watch I note that even bread and cheese is bad for you in California
On Greenie Watch I note that Greenies claim that cooking potatoes is bad for you
On Education Watch I note that Indianapolis public schools have an enormous drop-out rate
On Socialized Medicine I note how a boy died while waiting for a much-cancelled operation
On Gun Watch I show that gun opponents are bullies
On Leftists as Elitists I show that Leftists think that they alone have any rights
**********************************
ELSEWHERE
There is a good article here on the way the media distort the results of public opinon polls -- always in the same direction, funnily enough. The author shows that filibuster and social security polls are being misrepresented at the moment. So this poll giving GWB low marks, is no surprise
Leftist professor thinks democracy is loopy: "Sunstein caused a good deal of grumbling by questioning the legitimacy of Roe v. Wade, and even went so far as to suggest that progressives should stop looking to the Warren Court and Brown v. Board of Education as their model for judicial intervention. Pamela S. Karlan, a Stanford law professor, was one of several at Yale who found that notion troubling. ''There are a lot of things that can't be done through the political system,'' she said in an interview. In the 1950s, it was impossible to get school desegregation through Congress, she said. ''The idea that we would have been better off waiting is, to me, kind of loopy.''"
There is a good reprise of the Tim Russert interview with Dippy Dr. Dean here. Will we be seeing the last of the mad doctor soon?
Red Cross virulently anti-American: "According to a Defense Department source citing internal Pentagon documents, the ICRC team leader told U.S. authorities at Camp Bucca: "You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards." She was upset about not being granted immediate access shortly after a prison riot, when U.S. commanders may have been thinking of her own safety, among other considerations." [The Red Cross have never liked Jews much either. They ARE European, after all]
ETS (authors of the SAT) on the slide: "ETS, it appears, actually requires its employees to "Tolerate no incidents of discrimination or harassment," "Embrace diversity of thought," and "Report cases of discrimination or harassment directly to my Strategic Workforce Solutions consultant." The point of the ad? That ETS thinks it has to meet ethnic quotas in hiring in order to make ethnic interest groups feel comfortable with the idea of taking ETS's tests. Only black test authors can write questions for black test takers. Only "Latino" test writers can pose questions to "Latino" test subjects. And so forth. Boy, is it hard. Landgraf, or his ghostwriter, wails that "In the 2000-2001 academic year, U.S. universities conferred only about 500 doctorates in educational psychology, evaluation and measurement. Of these, only 18 percent came from underrepresented groups, and included many international scholars who later returned home to take up their profession"
Another Left activist sees the light: "I'm leaving the left -- more precisely, the American cultural left and what it has become during our time together. I choose this day for my departure because I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives -- people who once championed solidarity with oppressed populations everywhere -- reciting all the ways Iraq's democratic experiment might yet implode. My estrangement hasn't happened overnight. Out of the corner of my eye I watched what was coming for more than three decades, yet refused to truly see. Now it's all too obvious. Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.
Shrinks want homosexual marriage: "Representatives of the nation's top psychiatric group approved a statement Sunday urging legal recognition of gay marriage. If approved by the association's directors in July, the measure would make the American Psychiatric Association the first major medical group to take such a stance. The statement supports same-sex marriage "in the interest of maintaining and promoting mental health." It follows a similar measure by the American Psychological Association last year, little more than three decades after that group removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. The psychiatric association's statement, approved by voice vote on the first day of its weeklong annual meeting in Atlanta, cites the "positive influence of a stable, adult partnership on the health of all family members." "
There is a good review here of Keith Windschuttle's book on the history of Australian immigration policy. He mentions what you are rarely told today -- that the main support for the White Australia policy came from the Left.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
There is a good article here on the way the media distort the results of public opinon polls -- always in the same direction, funnily enough. The author shows that filibuster and social security polls are being misrepresented at the moment. So this poll giving GWB low marks, is no surprise
Leftist professor thinks democracy is loopy: "Sunstein caused a good deal of grumbling by questioning the legitimacy of Roe v. Wade, and even went so far as to suggest that progressives should stop looking to the Warren Court and Brown v. Board of Education as their model for judicial intervention. Pamela S. Karlan, a Stanford law professor, was one of several at Yale who found that notion troubling. ''There are a lot of things that can't be done through the political system,'' she said in an interview. In the 1950s, it was impossible to get school desegregation through Congress, she said. ''The idea that we would have been better off waiting is, to me, kind of loopy.''"
There is a good reprise of the Tim Russert interview with Dippy Dr. Dean here. Will we be seeing the last of the mad doctor soon?
Red Cross virulently anti-American: "According to a Defense Department source citing internal Pentagon documents, the ICRC team leader told U.S. authorities at Camp Bucca: "You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards." She was upset about not being granted immediate access shortly after a prison riot, when U.S. commanders may have been thinking of her own safety, among other considerations." [The Red Cross have never liked Jews much either. They ARE European, after all]
ETS (authors of the SAT) on the slide: "ETS, it appears, actually requires its employees to "Tolerate no incidents of discrimination or harassment," "Embrace diversity of thought," and "Report cases of discrimination or harassment directly to my Strategic Workforce Solutions consultant." The point of the ad? That ETS thinks it has to meet ethnic quotas in hiring in order to make ethnic interest groups feel comfortable with the idea of taking ETS's tests. Only black test authors can write questions for black test takers. Only "Latino" test writers can pose questions to "Latino" test subjects. And so forth. Boy, is it hard. Landgraf, or his ghostwriter, wails that "In the 2000-2001 academic year, U.S. universities conferred only about 500 doctorates in educational psychology, evaluation and measurement. Of these, only 18 percent came from underrepresented groups, and included many international scholars who later returned home to take up their profession"
Another Left activist sees the light: "I'm leaving the left -- more precisely, the American cultural left and what it has become during our time together. I choose this day for my departure because I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives -- people who once championed solidarity with oppressed populations everywhere -- reciting all the ways Iraq's democratic experiment might yet implode. My estrangement hasn't happened overnight. Out of the corner of my eye I watched what was coming for more than three decades, yet refused to truly see. Now it's all too obvious. Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.
Shrinks want homosexual marriage: "Representatives of the nation's top psychiatric group approved a statement Sunday urging legal recognition of gay marriage. If approved by the association's directors in July, the measure would make the American Psychiatric Association the first major medical group to take such a stance. The statement supports same-sex marriage "in the interest of maintaining and promoting mental health." It follows a similar measure by the American Psychological Association last year, little more than three decades after that group removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. The psychiatric association's statement, approved by voice vote on the first day of its weeklong annual meeting in Atlanta, cites the "positive influence of a stable, adult partnership on the health of all family members." "
There is a good review here of Keith Windschuttle's book on the history of Australian immigration policy. He mentions what you are rarely told today -- that the main support for the White Australia policy came from the Left.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Monday, May 23, 2005
WHAT IS CONSERVATISM?
There has always been a fair amount of debate about what conservatism is. Lots of people define it in terms of a particular set of ideas (belief in individual liberty, Christianity etc.) But I don't think you can do that. As Feiling, a great historian of the British Conservative party, points out, the ideas vary too much from era to era. So I, like many past and present observers of conservatism, think that you can only define conservatism psychologically. I do think that a conservative psychology tends to lead to preference for individual liberty rather regularly and it is certainly compatible with at least some forms of Christianity but I don't think that such ideas DEFINE what a conservative is. There are many overlapping and interlocking accounts of conservative psychology but the extract from Joseph Sobran that I put up a few days ago should give you an idea of the sort of thing that I (with many others) am talking about. Below is another example -- from Jonah Goldberg. Jonah sees "comfort with contradiction" as basic to conservatism
So Goldberg is very much in accord with those many prior English and American conservative thinkers (e.g. Norton & Aughey, 1981; Gilmour, 1978; Feiling, 1953; Kirk, 1993, Scruton, 2002, Standish, 1990) who see conservatism as an adaptive, pragmatic, "trimming" approach to the problems of the world -- i.e. conservatism as rational balance or the true "middle way".
References:
Feiling, K. (1953) Principles of conservatism. Political Quarterly, 24, 129-133.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Kirk, R. (1993) Ten conservative principles. Russell Kirk Center.
Norton, P. & Aughey, A. (1981) Conservatives and conservatism. London: Temple Smith
Scruton, R. (2002) A question of temperament. Opinion Journal, Dec. 10th.
Standish, J.F. (1990) Whither conservatism? Contemporary Review 256, 299-301.
********************************
There has always been a fair amount of debate about what conservatism is. Lots of people define it in terms of a particular set of ideas (belief in individual liberty, Christianity etc.) But I don't think you can do that. As Feiling, a great historian of the British Conservative party, points out, the ideas vary too much from era to era. So I, like many past and present observers of conservatism, think that you can only define conservatism psychologically. I do think that a conservative psychology tends to lead to preference for individual liberty rather regularly and it is certainly compatible with at least some forms of Christianity but I don't think that such ideas DEFINE what a conservative is. There are many overlapping and interlocking accounts of conservative psychology but the extract from Joseph Sobran that I put up a few days ago should give you an idea of the sort of thing that I (with many others) am talking about. Below is another example -- from Jonah Goldberg. Jonah sees "comfort with contradiction" as basic to conservatism
"I mean this in the broadest metaphysical sense and the narrowest practical way. Think of any leftish ideology and at its core you will find a faith that circles can be closed, conflicts resolved. Marxism held that in a truly socialist society, contradictions would be destroyed. Freudianism led the Left to the idea that the conflicts between the inner and outer self were the cause of unnecessary repressions. Dewey believed that society could be made whole if we jettisoned dogma and embraced a natural, organic understanding of the society where everyone worked together.... Liberals and leftists are constantly denouncing "false choices" of one kind or another. In our debate, Jonathan Chait kept hinting, hoping, and haranguing that - one day - we could have a socialized healthcare system without any tradeoffs of any kind. Environmentalists loathe the introduction of free-market principles into the policy-making debate because, as Steven Landsburg puts it, economics is the science of competing preferences. Pursuing some good things might cost us other good things. But environmentalists reject the very idea. They believe that all good things can go together and that anything suggesting otherwise is a false choice....
Now look at the arguments of conservatives. They are almost invariably arguments about trade-offs, costs, "the downside" of a measure. As I've written before, the first obligation of the conservative is to explain why nine out of ten new ideas are probably bad ones. When feminists pound the table with the heels of their sensible shoes that it is unfair that there are any conflicts between motherhood and career, the inevitable response from conservatives boils down to "You're right, but life isn't fair."
Any ideology or outlook that tries to explain what government should do at all times and in all circumstances is un-conservative. Any ideology that sees itself as the answer to any question is un-conservative.... Contrary to all the bloviating jackassery about how conservatives are more dogmatic than liberals we hear these days, the simple fact is that conservatives don't have a settled dogma.... we all understand and accept the permanence of contradiction and conflict in life. Christians and Jews understand it because that's how God set things up. Libertarians understand it because the market is, by definition, a mechanism for amicably reconciling competing preferences. Agnostic, rain-sodden British pessimists understand it because they've learned that's always the way to bet. Conservatism isn't inherently pessimistic, it is merely pessimistic about the possibility of changing the permanent things and downright melancholy about those who try".
So Goldberg is very much in accord with those many prior English and American conservative thinkers (e.g. Norton & Aughey, 1981; Gilmour, 1978; Feiling, 1953; Kirk, 1993, Scruton, 2002, Standish, 1990) who see conservatism as an adaptive, pragmatic, "trimming" approach to the problems of the world -- i.e. conservatism as rational balance or the true "middle way".
References:
Feiling, K. (1953) Principles of conservatism. Political Quarterly, 24, 129-133.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Kirk, R. (1993) Ten conservative principles. Russell Kirk Center.
Norton, P. & Aughey, A. (1981) Conservatives and conservatism. London: Temple Smith
Scruton, R. (2002) A question of temperament. Opinion Journal, Dec. 10th.
Standish, J.F. (1990) Whither conservatism? Contemporary Review 256, 299-301.
********************************
ELSEWHERE
The wisdom of Dr. Howard Dean, Democrat chairman: "But the thing that really bothered me the most, which the 9-11 Commission said also wasn't true, is the insinuation that the president continues to make to this day that Osama bin Laden had something to do with supporting terrorists that attacked the United States. That is false". [Odd that Osama himself thinks he ran the 9/11 attack!]
Amazing news from Germany: Prime Minister Schroeder's socialists have just lost an election in Germany's biggest STATE and Schroeder has announced that he wants to bring the FEDERAL election forward by a year as a result. Instead of clinging to power for as long as he is legally entitled to do, he wants to return his fate to the people. I thought that sort of thing -- where moral concerns override legal powers -- only happened in the Anglo-Saxon world. It puts me in mind of the time when an Australian conservative Prime Minister (John Gorton) voted himself out of office. But Germany and the Anglo-Saxons are closely related nations and it is little more than a carryover of wartime propaganda that portrays Germans as not democratic. Even Hitler gained power by democratric means. See here for more on German democracy and here for more on Hitler's rise to power.
Justice coming in Washington State? "Prosecutors, attorneys and state officials agree that the judge who will decide whether to nullify the 2004 Washington governor's election is hardworking and fair.... On Monday, Bridges will begin presiding over a trial to decide Washington's contested governor's election, which focuses on problems involving human error in vote counting that are similar to allegations raised in the presidential vote in Ohio last year and in Florida in 2000. Republican Dino Rossi has challenged Gov. Christine Gregoire's 129-vote victory, alleging problems including illegal votes cast by felons and dead people".
There is some excellent satire here about recent anti-American demonstrations in Afghanistan.
Some wise comments from 1955: "Fidel Castro and his group want only one thing: power, and total power at that. And they want to achieve it by means of violence, so that total power may allow them to thoroughly destroy every vestige of the Constitution and the law in Cuba, to install the most cruel, most barbaric tyranny; a tyranny that would teach the people the true meaning of tyranny, a totalitarian, unscrupulous, thieving and murderous regime that would be very difficult to overthrow for at least 20 years. Fidel Castro is nothing but a fascist psychopath who, in power, would make pacts only with the forces of international communism, because fascism already was defeated in World War II, and only communism would give Fidel the pseudo-ideological garb to murder, rob, violate all rights with impunity and destroy outright the entire spiritual, historic, moral and judicial heritage of our republic".
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
The wisdom of Dr. Howard Dean, Democrat chairman: "But the thing that really bothered me the most, which the 9-11 Commission said also wasn't true, is the insinuation that the president continues to make to this day that Osama bin Laden had something to do with supporting terrorists that attacked the United States. That is false". [Odd that Osama himself thinks he ran the 9/11 attack!]
Amazing news from Germany: Prime Minister Schroeder's socialists have just lost an election in Germany's biggest STATE and Schroeder has announced that he wants to bring the FEDERAL election forward by a year as a result. Instead of clinging to power for as long as he is legally entitled to do, he wants to return his fate to the people. I thought that sort of thing -- where moral concerns override legal powers -- only happened in the Anglo-Saxon world. It puts me in mind of the time when an Australian conservative Prime Minister (John Gorton) voted himself out of office. But Germany and the Anglo-Saxons are closely related nations and it is little more than a carryover of wartime propaganda that portrays Germans as not democratic. Even Hitler gained power by democratric means. See here for more on German democracy and here for more on Hitler's rise to power.
Justice coming in Washington State? "Prosecutors, attorneys and state officials agree that the judge who will decide whether to nullify the 2004 Washington governor's election is hardworking and fair.... On Monday, Bridges will begin presiding over a trial to decide Washington's contested governor's election, which focuses on problems involving human error in vote counting that are similar to allegations raised in the presidential vote in Ohio last year and in Florida in 2000. Republican Dino Rossi has challenged Gov. Christine Gregoire's 129-vote victory, alleging problems including illegal votes cast by felons and dead people".
There is some excellent satire here about recent anti-American demonstrations in Afghanistan.
Some wise comments from 1955: "Fidel Castro and his group want only one thing: power, and total power at that. And they want to achieve it by means of violence, so that total power may allow them to thoroughly destroy every vestige of the Constitution and the law in Cuba, to install the most cruel, most barbaric tyranny; a tyranny that would teach the people the true meaning of tyranny, a totalitarian, unscrupulous, thieving and murderous regime that would be very difficult to overthrow for at least 20 years. Fidel Castro is nothing but a fascist psychopath who, in power, would make pacts only with the forces of international communism, because fascism already was defeated in World War II, and only communism would give Fidel the pseudo-ideological garb to murder, rob, violate all rights with impunity and destroy outright the entire spiritual, historic, moral and judicial heritage of our republic".
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Sunday, May 22, 2005
CHURCH ROUNDUP
Christian Left can't convince its own students: "Professor David Hoekema couldn't believe his ears when news spread in April that President George W. Bush would deliver the commencement address at Calvin College. He's thankful for the national attention focused on the 4,300-student Christian liberal-arts college in Grand Rapids, Michigan. But that doesn't mean he's happy with the visit.... Hoekema and about 100 other Calvin professors plan to publicize their protest of Bush administration policies with a letter to The Grand Rapids Press on the date of his visit, Saturday, May 21. Roughly one-third of the college's full-time faculty endorsed the letter. In addition to the Iraq war, the signatories fault Bush for burdening the poor, fostering intolerance, and harming creation..... In straw polls during the 2004 election, more than two-thirds of Calvin students supported President Bush .... significant historical and theological factors at Calvin cut against the grain of popular evangelicalism. In particular, the high-church tradition of the Christian Reformed Church looks skeptically on revivalism and independent congregationalism."
Dishonest Christian Left slimes conservative Christians as anti-environment: "On Feb. 14, the National Council of Churches issued a statement "in an effort to refute" what NCC theologians "call a 'false gospel' . . . and to reject teachings that suggest humans are 'called' to exploit the Earth without care for how our behavior impacts the rest of God's creation. . . . This false gospel still finds its proud preachers and continues to capture its adherents among emboldened political leaders and policymakers." If such a body of belief exists, I would totally reject it, as would all of my friends. When asked who believed such error, where adherents to this "false gospel" might be found, the NCC turned to its theological sources, Moyers and a magazine called Grist, which had also apologized to me. I then contacted the chairman of the NCC task force and asked him about the "some people" who believe this false gospel and the "proud preachers" advancing this false gospel. He could not name such persons."
For those who take an interest in pretend-Christians, there is a good article here on American Anglicanism's senior atheist bishop -- John Shelby Spong. Spong's "ideas" (if you can call them that) are very old stuff now. They are essentially the same ideas as those of England's Bishop John A. T. Robinson, author of Honest to God, who proclaimed in the 1960s (like Nietzsche in the 19th century) that "God is dead". Robinson thought there was a sort of God called "the ground of our being" -- whatever that might mean -- and Spong is similarly vague. "Spong" is a good name though: Spong, spong, spong, spong!
Australian Anglicans try again: "A Victorian touted as someone who could heal problems created by sexual abuse in the church has been elected as Adelaide's new Anglican Archbishop. Bishop of Gippsland, the Right Reverend Jeffrey Driver, was elected "overwhelmingly" yesterday by the 280-member Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Adelaide. After the election Bishop Driver, 54, said he "hoped to be a builder of community and bring healing" to the church... "In regard to the sexual abuse issues ... there clearly are some things that have to be dealt with. "We are well on the way to dealing with them appropriately," he said as he was driving to Orange in country New South Wales for the church's 150th anniversary celebrations. Bishop Driver was elected almost 12 months after former Archbishop Ian George was forced to resign over his handling of child sex abuse allegations."
There is a very good article by David Gelernter on the historical centrality of the Bible to Anglo-Saxon culture generally and to American culture in particular.
No mention of torture by Muslims: "In a May 10 letter to its one-million members, the president and chief executive of the United Methodist Women's Division urge constituents to take a stand against United States-sanctioned torture."
More for the Methodists to ignore: "More than 300 mass graves have been excavated in Iraq so far. The most recent discovery was made by American investigators in early May when they found a grave with 1,500 Kurdish people. Recovery and identification of Saddam's victims, however, is an arduous process. The pictures are the same no matter where you go in Iraq, whether it's the northern town of Kirkuk, Al-Mahawil near Baghdad or the Kurdish town of Erbil. People digging in the dirt with crude tools, kitchen knives or even their bare hands. The more they dig, the worse the stench of rotting flesh gets. Sobbing and silent prayers accompany the gruesome process. Skulls are usually unearthed first, followed by shreds of fabric or plastic sandals as Iraqis look for the remains of their dead relatives. Earlier this month, for example, investigators discovered a grave filled with the bodies of 1,500 Kurds in southern Iraq."
****************************
Christian Left can't convince its own students: "Professor David Hoekema couldn't believe his ears when news spread in April that President George W. Bush would deliver the commencement address at Calvin College. He's thankful for the national attention focused on the 4,300-student Christian liberal-arts college in Grand Rapids, Michigan. But that doesn't mean he's happy with the visit.... Hoekema and about 100 other Calvin professors plan to publicize their protest of Bush administration policies with a letter to The Grand Rapids Press on the date of his visit, Saturday, May 21. Roughly one-third of the college's full-time faculty endorsed the letter. In addition to the Iraq war, the signatories fault Bush for burdening the poor, fostering intolerance, and harming creation..... In straw polls during the 2004 election, more than two-thirds of Calvin students supported President Bush .... significant historical and theological factors at Calvin cut against the grain of popular evangelicalism. In particular, the high-church tradition of the Christian Reformed Church looks skeptically on revivalism and independent congregationalism."
Dishonest Christian Left slimes conservative Christians as anti-environment: "On Feb. 14, the National Council of Churches issued a statement "in an effort to refute" what NCC theologians "call a 'false gospel' . . . and to reject teachings that suggest humans are 'called' to exploit the Earth without care for how our behavior impacts the rest of God's creation. . . . This false gospel still finds its proud preachers and continues to capture its adherents among emboldened political leaders and policymakers." If such a body of belief exists, I would totally reject it, as would all of my friends. When asked who believed such error, where adherents to this "false gospel" might be found, the NCC turned to its theological sources, Moyers and a magazine called Grist, which had also apologized to me. I then contacted the chairman of the NCC task force and asked him about the "some people" who believe this false gospel and the "proud preachers" advancing this false gospel. He could not name such persons."
For those who take an interest in pretend-Christians, there is a good article here on American Anglicanism's senior atheist bishop -- John Shelby Spong. Spong's "ideas" (if you can call them that) are very old stuff now. They are essentially the same ideas as those of England's Bishop John A. T. Robinson, author of Honest to God, who proclaimed in the 1960s (like Nietzsche in the 19th century) that "God is dead". Robinson thought there was a sort of God called "the ground of our being" -- whatever that might mean -- and Spong is similarly vague. "Spong" is a good name though: Spong, spong, spong, spong!
Australian Anglicans try again: "A Victorian touted as someone who could heal problems created by sexual abuse in the church has been elected as Adelaide's new Anglican Archbishop. Bishop of Gippsland, the Right Reverend Jeffrey Driver, was elected "overwhelmingly" yesterday by the 280-member Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Adelaide. After the election Bishop Driver, 54, said he "hoped to be a builder of community and bring healing" to the church... "In regard to the sexual abuse issues ... there clearly are some things that have to be dealt with. "We are well on the way to dealing with them appropriately," he said as he was driving to Orange in country New South Wales for the church's 150th anniversary celebrations. Bishop Driver was elected almost 12 months after former Archbishop Ian George was forced to resign over his handling of child sex abuse allegations."
There is a very good article by David Gelernter on the historical centrality of the Bible to Anglo-Saxon culture generally and to American culture in particular.
No mention of torture by Muslims: "In a May 10 letter to its one-million members, the president and chief executive of the United Methodist Women's Division urge constituents to take a stand against United States-sanctioned torture."
More for the Methodists to ignore: "More than 300 mass graves have been excavated in Iraq so far. The most recent discovery was made by American investigators in early May when they found a grave with 1,500 Kurdish people. Recovery and identification of Saddam's victims, however, is an arduous process. The pictures are the same no matter where you go in Iraq, whether it's the northern town of Kirkuk, Al-Mahawil near Baghdad or the Kurdish town of Erbil. People digging in the dirt with crude tools, kitchen knives or even their bare hands. The more they dig, the worse the stench of rotting flesh gets. Sobbing and silent prayers accompany the gruesome process. Skulls are usually unearthed first, followed by shreds of fabric or plastic sandals as Iraqis look for the remains of their dead relatives. Earlier this month, for example, investigators discovered a grave filled with the bodies of 1,500 Kurds in southern Iraq."
****************************
ELSEWHERE
Democrat beliefs: "According to the Pew Center, the less you like to fly the American flag, the more likely it is you are Democrat. The more you think hard work and personal initiative aren't the ticket to the good life, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. The more you believe the United Nations is a better steward of international relations, while America is a negative actor on the world stage, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. The more you believe that the government is there to help, the more likely it is you are Democrat. The less seriously you take religion, the more likely you are to be a Democrat."
Leftist misery: "Here, then, is the root cause of the Left's chronic depression and the irresolvable problem at the core of the Democratic Party: America's success is their failure. And here is the corresponding cause of the good humor and vitality of conservatives: So long as America succeeds, they cannot fail".
An illustration of what is possible: "Border agents using gamma-imaging technology on an incoming freight train apprehended two Brazilian nationals trying to illegally enter the United States from Canada, authorities said Monday. Nilson Giusti, 41, and Agiles Bezerra, 23, were found in two separate cars on the Black Rock Rail Bridge on Saturday, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Both had entered Canada as temporary visitors earlier this month."
There is a recent article in Slate by Jacob Weisberg headed "Interest-Group Conservatism" that has much truth in it -- as any libertarian will tell you. It points out the lack of interest in cutting back government that is at present being displayed by the GOP. Some of Weisberg's examples are tendentious but he is broadly right. Sadly, I think the reality is that cutting back government is very difficult to do so Republicans have decided to make the system work for them rather than banging their heads on a brick wall by trying to cut it back. The belief in government as the solution to all ills that the Democrats have fostered for so many years will be hard to wean people away from.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Democrat beliefs: "According to the Pew Center, the less you like to fly the American flag, the more likely it is you are Democrat. The more you think hard work and personal initiative aren't the ticket to the good life, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. The more you believe the United Nations is a better steward of international relations, while America is a negative actor on the world stage, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. The more you believe that the government is there to help, the more likely it is you are Democrat. The less seriously you take religion, the more likely you are to be a Democrat."
Leftist misery: "Here, then, is the root cause of the Left's chronic depression and the irresolvable problem at the core of the Democratic Party: America's success is their failure. And here is the corresponding cause of the good humor and vitality of conservatives: So long as America succeeds, they cannot fail".
An illustration of what is possible: "Border agents using gamma-imaging technology on an incoming freight train apprehended two Brazilian nationals trying to illegally enter the United States from Canada, authorities said Monday. Nilson Giusti, 41, and Agiles Bezerra, 23, were found in two separate cars on the Black Rock Rail Bridge on Saturday, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Both had entered Canada as temporary visitors earlier this month."
There is a recent article in Slate by Jacob Weisberg headed "Interest-Group Conservatism" that has much truth in it -- as any libertarian will tell you. It points out the lack of interest in cutting back government that is at present being displayed by the GOP. Some of Weisberg's examples are tendentious but he is broadly right. Sadly, I think the reality is that cutting back government is very difficult to do so Republicans have decided to make the system work for them rather than banging their heads on a brick wall by trying to cut it back. The belief in government as the solution to all ills that the Democrats have fostered for so many years will be hard to wean people away from.
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Saturday, May 21, 2005
FROM BROOKES NEWS
US economy, monetary policy and recession: Supply-siders are getting it dangerously wrong about the US economy and the money supply
Australian economy: budget surplus myths meet the "China Syndrome": Once the credit crunch finally bites in China what does Peter Costello think will happen to the demand for Australia's minerals, not to mention all that lovely tax revenue?
Recession signals for the Australian economy: The Australian Reserve is not only facing a slowdown but growing net foreign debt and a deteriorating current account deficit that already stands at about 7 per cent of GDP. What does this say about Costello's budget?
Chinese economy heading for a recession?: It looks like the Chinese economy and the political system might have to go through the wringer again
Pro-Choice radical feminists give their money: Many of those who loudly talk the pro-life talk, don't very faithfully walk the pro-life walk. At least, not where their charitable dollars are concerned
US social security: funding the ownership society: The Democrats and their media allies are lying to the American public about the state of social security
***********************************
US economy, monetary policy and recession: Supply-siders are getting it dangerously wrong about the US economy and the money supply
Australian economy: budget surplus myths meet the "China Syndrome": Once the credit crunch finally bites in China what does Peter Costello think will happen to the demand for Australia's minerals, not to mention all that lovely tax revenue?
Recession signals for the Australian economy: The Australian Reserve is not only facing a slowdown but growing net foreign debt and a deteriorating current account deficit that already stands at about 7 per cent of GDP. What does this say about Costello's budget?
Chinese economy heading for a recession?: It looks like the Chinese economy and the political system might have to go through the wringer again
Pro-Choice radical feminists give their money: Many of those who loudly talk the pro-life talk, don't very faithfully walk the pro-life walk. At least, not where their charitable dollars are concerned
US social security: funding the ownership society: The Democrats and their media allies are lying to the American public about the state of social security
***********************************
ELSEWHERE
Jeff Jacoby has a good perspective on the infantile nature of Islam: "The *real* desecration of Islam is not what some interrogator in Guantanamo might have done to the Koran. It is what totalitarian Muslim zealots have been doing to innocent human beings in the name of Islam. It is 9/11 and Beslan and Bali and Daniel Pearl and the USS Cole. It is trains in Madrid and schoolbuses in Israel and an ''insurgency" in Iraq that slaughters Muslims as they pray and vote and line up for work. It is Hamas and Al Qaeda and sermons filled with infidel-hatred and exhortations to ''martyrdom.""
Amid economic decline, antisemitism and anti-capitalism is again rampant in Germany: "Franz Muentefering, the chairman of Mr Schr”der's Social Democratic Party (SPD), has managed to combine the three big As in a single campaign for the forthcoming state elections in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany's largest state. He compared foreign financial investors to 'locusts' - the kind of language that the Nazis used to describe Jews. This was no slip of the tongue. He repeated it. Even worse, he drew up a list, the 'locust list', of financiers of mostly Jewish-American origin, whom he accused of making exorbitant profits by asset-stripping German companies. Publishing lists of Jewish names was a hallmark of Nazism.... After his first 'locusts' remark, an opinion poll suggested that two thirds of Germans agree with him in principle. The latest polls put his support at 80 per cent". Shades of the 1930s!
An amusing survey of what others think of the French: "Language, history, cooking and support for rival football teams still divide Europe. But when everything else fails, one glue binds the continent together: hatred of the French".
Freakonomics have a very strong defence of their claim that legalized abortion reduces crime. Since American crime is so heavily black and black females are very heavy users of abortion it makes a lot of sense. If abortion is ever re-restricted, allowing an exception for single mothers would make considerable sense.
Uzbekistan: "If the Bush administration has failed to denounce the massacre in Uzbekistan, it is not because Bush and his advisors are hypocrites, but because the Uzbek uprising has offered a profound challenge to the administration's policy of bringing democracy to Muslim societies, such as Uzbekistan. The Uzbek uprising was, from all appearances, a spontaneous and popular one, a genuine manifestation of the people's will. Yet the Uzbek uprising was sparked off by a people whose sympathies lie not with the United States, but with Islamic extremists and militants. The uprising itself, according to reports, began with an attack on a prison where 23 Muslim businessmen were being held for trial as terrorists -- an attack that ended not only in freeing the 23 Muslim businessmen, but everyone else who was being held in the same prison".
A good comment from Sowell: "It was perhaps appropriate that Dan Rather received the prestigious Peabody award in journalism at the same time when Newsweek magazine was finally backing away from its false story about Americans flushing the Koran down the toilet at the Guantanamo prison.... Abraham Lincoln said that you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The steady erosion of the audience that watches CBS, ABC, and NBC television news, and the declining circulation of the leading newspapers, all indicate that more and more people are unwilling to be fooled. The swift rise of talk radio, Fox News and the bloggers all reinforce the conclusion of a growing disillusionment with the mainstream media that once had a monopoly and abused it. A reader recently suggested this formula: Monopoly plus discretion minus accountability equals corruption. That kind of corruption can be found not only in the mainstream media but also in two of our most important institutions, the public schools and the federal courts. Both the schools and the courts flatter themselves that their job is to change society. So does much of the media. But what qualifies these people to be world-changers? They are usually poorly informed about science, uninformed about history and misinformed about economics."
I have just received rather a good email about the French "No" vote in the forthcoming EU constitutuional referendum. I have posted it here. Excerpt: "The constitutional text, which occupies no less than 474 pages of the Official Newspaper of the Union, contains numerous contradictions and ambiguities, and therefore it is no surprise that vast sectors of the French center and the right give weighty reasons to vote for the "No.".... In administrative and economic matters, the Constitution establishes a gigantic supranational bureaucracy with headquarters in Brussels, a species of neo-totalitarianism with powers to intervene in all economic life, with regulations without end, of which not even the famous French Camembert and "foie gras" will be saved. An omnipotent Leviathan, capable of suffocating with its regulations all free initiative, but at the same time useless for promoting authentic economic progress". Media comment here.
The enviers lose in Maryland: "Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. vetoed a bill yesterday that would have forced Wal-Mart to pay a mandatory amount of employee health insurance or potentially cancel plans for a distribution center with 1,000 jobs."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Jeff Jacoby has a good perspective on the infantile nature of Islam: "The *real* desecration of Islam is not what some interrogator in Guantanamo might have done to the Koran. It is what totalitarian Muslim zealots have been doing to innocent human beings in the name of Islam. It is 9/11 and Beslan and Bali and Daniel Pearl and the USS Cole. It is trains in Madrid and schoolbuses in Israel and an ''insurgency" in Iraq that slaughters Muslims as they pray and vote and line up for work. It is Hamas and Al Qaeda and sermons filled with infidel-hatred and exhortations to ''martyrdom.""
Amid economic decline, antisemitism and anti-capitalism is again rampant in Germany: "Franz Muentefering, the chairman of Mr Schr”der's Social Democratic Party (SPD), has managed to combine the three big As in a single campaign for the forthcoming state elections in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany's largest state. He compared foreign financial investors to 'locusts' - the kind of language that the Nazis used to describe Jews. This was no slip of the tongue. He repeated it. Even worse, he drew up a list, the 'locust list', of financiers of mostly Jewish-American origin, whom he accused of making exorbitant profits by asset-stripping German companies. Publishing lists of Jewish names was a hallmark of Nazism.... After his first 'locusts' remark, an opinion poll suggested that two thirds of Germans agree with him in principle. The latest polls put his support at 80 per cent". Shades of the 1930s!
An amusing survey of what others think of the French: "Language, history, cooking and support for rival football teams still divide Europe. But when everything else fails, one glue binds the continent together: hatred of the French".
Freakonomics have a very strong defence of their claim that legalized abortion reduces crime. Since American crime is so heavily black and black females are very heavy users of abortion it makes a lot of sense. If abortion is ever re-restricted, allowing an exception for single mothers would make considerable sense.
Uzbekistan: "If the Bush administration has failed to denounce the massacre in Uzbekistan, it is not because Bush and his advisors are hypocrites, but because the Uzbek uprising has offered a profound challenge to the administration's policy of bringing democracy to Muslim societies, such as Uzbekistan. The Uzbek uprising was, from all appearances, a spontaneous and popular one, a genuine manifestation of the people's will. Yet the Uzbek uprising was sparked off by a people whose sympathies lie not with the United States, but with Islamic extremists and militants. The uprising itself, according to reports, began with an attack on a prison where 23 Muslim businessmen were being held for trial as terrorists -- an attack that ended not only in freeing the 23 Muslim businessmen, but everyone else who was being held in the same prison".
A good comment from Sowell: "It was perhaps appropriate that Dan Rather received the prestigious Peabody award in journalism at the same time when Newsweek magazine was finally backing away from its false story about Americans flushing the Koran down the toilet at the Guantanamo prison.... Abraham Lincoln said that you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The steady erosion of the audience that watches CBS, ABC, and NBC television news, and the declining circulation of the leading newspapers, all indicate that more and more people are unwilling to be fooled. The swift rise of talk radio, Fox News and the bloggers all reinforce the conclusion of a growing disillusionment with the mainstream media that once had a monopoly and abused it. A reader recently suggested this formula: Monopoly plus discretion minus accountability equals corruption. That kind of corruption can be found not only in the mainstream media but also in two of our most important institutions, the public schools and the federal courts. Both the schools and the courts flatter themselves that their job is to change society. So does much of the media. But what qualifies these people to be world-changers? They are usually poorly informed about science, uninformed about history and misinformed about economics."
I have just received rather a good email about the French "No" vote in the forthcoming EU constitutuional referendum. I have posted it here. Excerpt: "The constitutional text, which occupies no less than 474 pages of the Official Newspaper of the Union, contains numerous contradictions and ambiguities, and therefore it is no surprise that vast sectors of the French center and the right give weighty reasons to vote for the "No.".... In administrative and economic matters, the Constitution establishes a gigantic supranational bureaucracy with headquarters in Brussels, a species of neo-totalitarianism with powers to intervene in all economic life, with regulations without end, of which not even the famous French Camembert and "foie gras" will be saved. An omnipotent Leviathan, capable of suffocating with its regulations all free initiative, but at the same time useless for promoting authentic economic progress". Media comment here.
The enviers lose in Maryland: "Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. vetoed a bill yesterday that would have forced Wal-Mart to pay a mandatory amount of employee health insurance or potentially cancel plans for a distribution center with 1,000 jobs."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Friday, May 20, 2005
JOSEPH SOBRAN ON CONSERVATISM:
More (much more) here. It might be noted that it is a common finding from survey research that conservatives are happier. See e.g. here. One might perhaps ask how conservatives could be both wary and happier but I think that to ask that question is almost to answer it. Wary people are more likely to avoid the heartbreaks and disappointments that overconfident people experience. And who is more overconfident than a Leftist with his insouciant prescriptions about how the whole world should be re-organized? Because they tend to be better at dealing with the world realistically, conservatives are happier with the same world that deeply dissatisfies the Leftist -- who blames the world for his own failures at comprehending and dealing with it.
***************************************
"More and more I find myself thinking that a conservative is someone who regards this world with a basic affection, and wants to appreciate it as it is before he goes on to the always necessary work of making some rearrangements. Richard Weaver says we have no right to reform the world unless we cherish some aspects of it; and that is the attitude of many of the best conservative thinkers. Burke says that a constitution ought to be the subject of enjoyment rather than altercation. (I wish the American Civil Liberties Union would take his words to heart.)
I find a certain music in conservative writing that I never find in that of liberals. Michael Oakeshott speaks of "affection," "attachment," "familiarity," "happiness"; and my point is not the iname one that these are very nice things, but that Oakeshott thinks of them as considerations pertinent to political thinking. He knows what normal life is, what normal activities are, and his first thought is that politics should not disturb them....
"He who is unaware of his ignorance," writes Richard Whately, "will only be misled by his knowledge." And that is the trouble with the liberal, the socialist, the Communist, and a dozen other species of political cranks who have achieved respectability in our time: they disregard so much of what is constant and latent in life. They fail to notice; they fail to appreciate.
For some reason, we have allowed the malcontent to assume moral prestige. We praise as "ideals" what are nothing more than fantasies--a world of perpetual peace, brotherhood, justice, or any other will-o'-the-wisp that has lured men toward the Gulag. The malcontent can be spotted in his little habits of speech: He calls language and nationality "barriers" when the conservative, more appreciatively, recognizes them as cohesives that make social life possible. He damns as "apathy" an ordinary indifference to politics that may really be a healthy contentment. He praises as "compassion" what the conservative earthily sees as a program of collectivization. He may even assert as "rights" what tradition has regarded as wrongs".
More (much more) here. It might be noted that it is a common finding from survey research that conservatives are happier. See e.g. here. One might perhaps ask how conservatives could be both wary and happier but I think that to ask that question is almost to answer it. Wary people are more likely to avoid the heartbreaks and disappointments that overconfident people experience. And who is more overconfident than a Leftist with his insouciant prescriptions about how the whole world should be re-organized? Because they tend to be better at dealing with the world realistically, conservatives are happier with the same world that deeply dissatisfies the Leftist -- who blames the world for his own failures at comprehending and dealing with it.
***************************************
ELSEWHERE
Claims of low social mobility debunked: "Major newspapers are in the throes of Mobility Mania: who "makes it" in America, and why; who doesn't, and why not. The Wall Street Journal began a series last week titled "Challenges to the American Dream." The New York Times followed suit with a multiparter on "Class in America," which aims to disparage the notion that the U.S. is a land of opportunity by claiming that "new research on mobility, the movement of families up and down the economic ladder, shows there is far less of it than economists once thought and less than most people believe." Yet the scholarship commonly cited in support of such assertions--new research by Gary Solon of the University of Michigan, David I. Levine of Berkeley, and Bhashkar Mazumder of the Chicago Fed, among others--says no such thing. A paper last fall by Mr. Solon observed that several of the newest estimates, including two from Messrs. Levine and Mazumder, suggest that it has become substantially easier to move from one economic class to another"
America will stay on top: "developments in the U.S. and world economies are such that America's preeminence is assured for decades to come. Start with Europe. The continent's leading economies are bedeviled by double-digit unemployment that is a result of rigid labor markets and excessive regulation. Their leaders' solution? More rigidity, more regulation, and an attack on what Franz M_ntefering, head of Germany's Social Democratic party, calls the "growing power of capital" in the hands of foreign investors, or "locusts." As if to show that there is no regulation too ludicrous for adoption, Spain's stock market regulators now require all company directors to disclose related-party transactions with anyone with whom they have "affectionate relationships," interpreted to mean lovers. Spain's gossip columnists are set to become avid readers of corporate annual reports. Then there is Great Britain. Not to be outdone by Spanish regulators, the town council of Blackpool last week granted a 48-hour week to the 228 donkeys that carry children for rides along the town's beaches."
Fat cats targeted: "A number of governors around the nation are taking aim at the benefits paid to public employees -- which, in many cases, are far richer than those offered to workers in private industry. Warning that his state is heading for a pension crisis, Rhode Island Governor Donald L. Carcieri wants to boost the age at which teachers and state workers can draw pensions and trim the cost-of-living adjustment retirees get annually. ... In Alaska, Illinois and California, governors are coming to the same conclusion. ... Like the current debate on Social Security, the fight over pensions revolves around a basic question: How much does society want to spend to support retirees? But some governors insist there is a fairness issue involved, too. At a time when fewer employees in the private sector have traditional pensions and retiree health insurance, most workers in the public sector have both."
Irish bloggers "Freedom Institute" have some coverage and commentary about the visit of British far-Leftist George Galloway to the U.S. Senate. See here and here
There are two big articles here and here pointing out that the German Left is once again heavily antisemitic. "The more things change.... "
John Stossel has an hilarious article here about bottled water. I guess you know what he is going to tell you. Some people in Australia call it "Wanker's Water" -- but the supermarkets are full of it. Amazing.
There is a report here which says that kids with "black" names are expected by their teachers to be dumber while kids with Asian names are expected to be brighter. Which just shows that teachers recognize reality too, Leftist and politically correct although they generally are.
Carnival of the Vanities is up again with a big range of good reading
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Claims of low social mobility debunked: "Major newspapers are in the throes of Mobility Mania: who "makes it" in America, and why; who doesn't, and why not. The Wall Street Journal began a series last week titled "Challenges to the American Dream." The New York Times followed suit with a multiparter on "Class in America," which aims to disparage the notion that the U.S. is a land of opportunity by claiming that "new research on mobility, the movement of families up and down the economic ladder, shows there is far less of it than economists once thought and less than most people believe." Yet the scholarship commonly cited in support of such assertions--new research by Gary Solon of the University of Michigan, David I. Levine of Berkeley, and Bhashkar Mazumder of the Chicago Fed, among others--says no such thing. A paper last fall by Mr. Solon observed that several of the newest estimates, including two from Messrs. Levine and Mazumder, suggest that it has become substantially easier to move from one economic class to another"
America will stay on top: "developments in the U.S. and world economies are such that America's preeminence is assured for decades to come. Start with Europe. The continent's leading economies are bedeviled by double-digit unemployment that is a result of rigid labor markets and excessive regulation. Their leaders' solution? More rigidity, more regulation, and an attack on what Franz M_ntefering, head of Germany's Social Democratic party, calls the "growing power of capital" in the hands of foreign investors, or "locusts." As if to show that there is no regulation too ludicrous for adoption, Spain's stock market regulators now require all company directors to disclose related-party transactions with anyone with whom they have "affectionate relationships," interpreted to mean lovers. Spain's gossip columnists are set to become avid readers of corporate annual reports. Then there is Great Britain. Not to be outdone by Spanish regulators, the town council of Blackpool last week granted a 48-hour week to the 228 donkeys that carry children for rides along the town's beaches."
Fat cats targeted: "A number of governors around the nation are taking aim at the benefits paid to public employees -- which, in many cases, are far richer than those offered to workers in private industry. Warning that his state is heading for a pension crisis, Rhode Island Governor Donald L. Carcieri wants to boost the age at which teachers and state workers can draw pensions and trim the cost-of-living adjustment retirees get annually. ... In Alaska, Illinois and California, governors are coming to the same conclusion. ... Like the current debate on Social Security, the fight over pensions revolves around a basic question: How much does society want to spend to support retirees? But some governors insist there is a fairness issue involved, too. At a time when fewer employees in the private sector have traditional pensions and retiree health insurance, most workers in the public sector have both."
Irish bloggers "Freedom Institute" have some coverage and commentary about the visit of British far-Leftist George Galloway to the U.S. Senate. See here and here
There are two big articles here and here pointing out that the German Left is once again heavily antisemitic. "The more things change.... "
John Stossel has an hilarious article here about bottled water. I guess you know what he is going to tell you. Some people in Australia call it "Wanker's Water" -- but the supermarkets are full of it. Amazing.
There is a report here which says that kids with "black" names are expected by their teachers to be dumber while kids with Asian names are expected to be brighter. Which just shows that teachers recognize reality too, Leftist and politically correct although they generally are.
Carnival of the Vanities is up again with a big range of good reading
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Thursday, May 19, 2005
BELINDA BOARD, JOHN BOLTON, THE NYT AND PSEUDO-SCIENCE
I have not so far said anything about the piece of pretend-science by a Belinda Board run in the New York Times (repeated here and here) of just over a week ago which claimed that ambassador-elect Bolton was psychologically disturbed. For good measure, the article also claimed that businessmen are psychopaths. There were plenty of scornful reactions from others (e.g. here and here) so I did not feel any need to waste time on such nonsense. There are some points that I think need more emphasis, however, so I thought I might summarize them briefly.
As far as Bolton is concerned, the article shows a pre-adolescent level of logic. Things that are said about Bolton by his enemies are compared with findings about various clinical populations as if the two sorts of data were comparable. I will offer a 100% guarantee that if I compared things said about Ms Board by her enemies with findings about various clinical populations that I would be able to show (using her logic) that she is a raving nut too.
The fact that the "research" was done in 2001 but has not been published in an academic journal suggests that it must be very low quality indeed. Academic journals will publish almost any rubbish if it is favourable to the Left (see here and here). Possible scientific reasons why it is not publishable centre on sampling and lack of control. There appears to have been no representative sampling of any known population of businessmen so therefore no conclusions about any population of businessmen can be drawn from the findings. And was the scoring of the businessmen done "blind" and compared with a general population sample of similar socio-economic and intellectual level that was also scored "blind"? If it was not (and I don't think we need to guess that it was not) we have a second reason why no conclusions about businessmen, as such, can be drawn. I could say more but that particular horse is not only dead but smelling. I wonder how low the NYT can go? The Belinda Board article would not have been out of place in a supermarket tabloid.
*********************************
I have not so far said anything about the piece of pretend-science by a Belinda Board run in the New York Times (repeated here and here) of just over a week ago which claimed that ambassador-elect Bolton was psychologically disturbed. For good measure, the article also claimed that businessmen are psychopaths. There were plenty of scornful reactions from others (e.g. here and here) so I did not feel any need to waste time on such nonsense. There are some points that I think need more emphasis, however, so I thought I might summarize them briefly.
As far as Bolton is concerned, the article shows a pre-adolescent level of logic. Things that are said about Bolton by his enemies are compared with findings about various clinical populations as if the two sorts of data were comparable. I will offer a 100% guarantee that if I compared things said about Ms Board by her enemies with findings about various clinical populations that I would be able to show (using her logic) that she is a raving nut too.
The fact that the "research" was done in 2001 but has not been published in an academic journal suggests that it must be very low quality indeed. Academic journals will publish almost any rubbish if it is favourable to the Left (see here and here). Possible scientific reasons why it is not publishable centre on sampling and lack of control. There appears to have been no representative sampling of any known population of businessmen so therefore no conclusions about any population of businessmen can be drawn from the findings. And was the scoring of the businessmen done "blind" and compared with a general population sample of similar socio-economic and intellectual level that was also scored "blind"? If it was not (and I don't think we need to guess that it was not) we have a second reason why no conclusions about businessmen, as such, can be drawn. I could say more but that particular horse is not only dead but smelling. I wonder how low the NYT can go? The Belinda Board article would not have been out of place in a supermarket tabloid.
*********************************
WINSTON CHURCHILL: THE ORIGINAL "COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVE"
Perhaps I have missed it but I have not seen any comparisons between GWB and Winston Churchill. Yet their policies and views are strikingly similar. Note the following speech by Churchill to the Conservative Party Conference, on 5 October 1946 (From The Sinews of Peace, ed. Randolph S. Churchill, London, 1948, p. 213-215). I have highlighted a few points in red:
"It certainly would be an error of the first order for us to plunge out into a programme of promises and bribes in the hopes of winning the public favour. But if you say to me: `What account are we to give of the policy of the Conservative Party? What are we to say of our theme and our cause and of the faith that is in us?' That is a question to which immediate answer can always be given.
Our main objectives are: To uphold the Christian Religion and resist all attacks upon it. To defend our Monarchical and Parliamentary Constitution. To provide adequate security against external aggression and safety for our seaborne trade. To uphold law and order, and impartial justice administered by courts free from interference or pressure on the part of the executive. To regain a sound finance and strict supervision of national income and expenditure. To defend and develop our empire trade, without which Great Britain would perish. To promote all measures to improve the health and social conditions of the people. To support as a general rule free enterprise and initiative against State trading and nationalisation of industries.
To this I will add some further conceptions. We oppose the establishment of a Socialist State, controlling the means of production, distribution and exchange. We are asked, 'What is your alternative?' Our Conservative aim is to build a property-owning democracy, both independent and interdependent. In this I include profit-sharing schemes in suitable industries and intimate consultation between employers and wage-earners. In fact we seek so far as possible to make the status of the wage-earner that of a partner rather than of an irresponsible employee. It is in the interest of the wage-earner to have many other alternatives open to him than service under one all-powerful employer called the State. He will be in a better position to bargain collectively and production will be more abundant; there will be more for all and more freedom for all when the wage-earner is able, in the large majority of cases, to choose and change his work, and to deal with a private employer who, like himself, is dependent upon his personal thrift, ingenuity and good-housekeeping. In this way alone can the traditional virtues of the British character be preserved. We do not wish the people of this ancient island reduced to a mass of State-directed proletariats, thrown hither and thither, housed here and there, by an aristocracy of privileged officials or privileged party, sectarian or Trade Union bosses. We are opposed to the tyranny and victimisation of the closed shop. Our ideal is the consenting union of million, of free, independent families and homes to gain their livelihood and to serve true British glory and world peace.
Freedom of enterprise and freedom of service are not possible without elaborate systems of safeguards against failure, accident or misfortune. We do not seek to pull down improvidently all structures of society, but to erect balustrades upon the stairway of life, which will prevent helpless or foolish people from falling into the abyss. Both the Conservative and Liberal Parties have made notable contributions to secure minimum standards of life and labour. I too have borne my part in this. It is 38 years ago since I introduced the first Unemployment Insurance scheme, and 22 years ago since, as Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer, I shaped and carried the Widows' Pensions and reduction of the Old Age Pensions from 70 to 65 - We are now moving forward into another vast scheme of national insurance which arose, even in the stress of war, from a Parliament with a great Conservative majority. It is an essential principle of Conservative, Unionist, and Tory policy - call it what you will - to defend the general public against abuses by monopolies and against restraints on trade and enterprise, whether these evils come from private corporations, from the mischievous plans of doctrinaire Governments, or from the incompetence and arbitrariness of departments of State. Finally, we declare ourselves the unsleeping opponents of all class, all official or all party privilege, which denies the genius of our island race, whose sparks fly upwards unceasingly from the whole people, its rightful career reward and pre-eminence alike in peace and war."
*********************************
Perhaps I have missed it but I have not seen any comparisons between GWB and Winston Churchill. Yet their policies and views are strikingly similar. Note the following speech by Churchill to the Conservative Party Conference, on 5 October 1946 (From The Sinews of Peace, ed. Randolph S. Churchill, London, 1948, p. 213-215). I have highlighted a few points in red:
"It certainly would be an error of the first order for us to plunge out into a programme of promises and bribes in the hopes of winning the public favour. But if you say to me: `What account are we to give of the policy of the Conservative Party? What are we to say of our theme and our cause and of the faith that is in us?' That is a question to which immediate answer can always be given.
Our main objectives are: To uphold the Christian Religion and resist all attacks upon it. To defend our Monarchical and Parliamentary Constitution. To provide adequate security against external aggression and safety for our seaborne trade. To uphold law and order, and impartial justice administered by courts free from interference or pressure on the part of the executive. To regain a sound finance and strict supervision of national income and expenditure. To defend and develop our empire trade, without which Great Britain would perish. To promote all measures to improve the health and social conditions of the people. To support as a general rule free enterprise and initiative against State trading and nationalisation of industries.
To this I will add some further conceptions. We oppose the establishment of a Socialist State, controlling the means of production, distribution and exchange. We are asked, 'What is your alternative?' Our Conservative aim is to build a property-owning democracy, both independent and interdependent. In this I include profit-sharing schemes in suitable industries and intimate consultation between employers and wage-earners. In fact we seek so far as possible to make the status of the wage-earner that of a partner rather than of an irresponsible employee. It is in the interest of the wage-earner to have many other alternatives open to him than service under one all-powerful employer called the State. He will be in a better position to bargain collectively and production will be more abundant; there will be more for all and more freedom for all when the wage-earner is able, in the large majority of cases, to choose and change his work, and to deal with a private employer who, like himself, is dependent upon his personal thrift, ingenuity and good-housekeeping. In this way alone can the traditional virtues of the British character be preserved. We do not wish the people of this ancient island reduced to a mass of State-directed proletariats, thrown hither and thither, housed here and there, by an aristocracy of privileged officials or privileged party, sectarian or Trade Union bosses. We are opposed to the tyranny and victimisation of the closed shop. Our ideal is the consenting union of million, of free, independent families and homes to gain their livelihood and to serve true British glory and world peace.
Freedom of enterprise and freedom of service are not possible without elaborate systems of safeguards against failure, accident or misfortune. We do not seek to pull down improvidently all structures of society, but to erect balustrades upon the stairway of life, which will prevent helpless or foolish people from falling into the abyss. Both the Conservative and Liberal Parties have made notable contributions to secure minimum standards of life and labour. I too have borne my part in this. It is 38 years ago since I introduced the first Unemployment Insurance scheme, and 22 years ago since, as Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer, I shaped and carried the Widows' Pensions and reduction of the Old Age Pensions from 70 to 65 - We are now moving forward into another vast scheme of national insurance which arose, even in the stress of war, from a Parliament with a great Conservative majority. It is an essential principle of Conservative, Unionist, and Tory policy - call it what you will - to defend the general public against abuses by monopolies and against restraints on trade and enterprise, whether these evils come from private corporations, from the mischievous plans of doctrinaire Governments, or from the incompetence and arbitrariness of departments of State. Finally, we declare ourselves the unsleeping opponents of all class, all official or all party privilege, which denies the genius of our island race, whose sparks fly upwards unceasingly from the whole people, its rightful career reward and pre-eminence alike in peace and war."
*********************************
ELSEWHERE
Attack Machine (post of 18th.) has a good comment on the absurd Newsweek story about American troops flushing a Koran down the toilet. Apparently they fell for the Hitler Diaries hoax too!
NYT hates religious reality: "It appears that there are limits to the liberalization of biblical religion. The more the Bible is treated as a historical document, the more its message is interpreted in universalist terms, the more the churches sanctify the political and cultural order, the less hold liberal religion will eventually have on the hearts and minds of believers. This dynamic is particularly pronounced in Protestantism, which heightens the theological tension brought on by being in the world but not of it. Liberal religion imagines a pacified order in which good citizenship, good morals and rational belief coexist harmoniously. It is therefore unprepared when the messianic and eschatological forces of biblical faith begin to stir..... No one can know how long this dumbing-down of American religion will persist."
Catholic universities lose the plot: "The poet Robert Frost once described a liberal as someone who refuses to take his own side in an argument. He could have been speaking about all too many Catholic universities today, where you'd have about as much chance of hearing a commencement address delivered by a prominent Catholic who loves the traditional faith as you would Ted Nugent doing a public service announcement for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. For decades, Catholics have wondered why, on truth-in-advertising grounds alone, such institutions continue to be permitted to identify themselves as Catholic."
Media blackout on Social Security: "Last week, the Cato Institute issued a new advertisement listing 450 economists, including 5 Nobel laureates, from across the country who have publicly endorsed personal accounts for Social Security. This may be the first time you've heard about this because the Washington Post and the New York Times haven't reported it. Neither has USA Today or the LA Times. According to a spokesman at Cato, it hasn't been reported on any of the major TV networks, either. No one is reporting this story. All of this, of course, is completely unconscionable. Would it be newsworthy if 450 climatologists signed a joint petition saying that the ozone layer was being depleted? Or, to stay on point, would it be newsworthy if 450 economists jointly agreed that President Bush was WRONG to endorse personal accounts? Would the liberal media report it then? Of course they would. They would report the story even if 450 Hollywood actors agreed that personal accounts were wrong, and they aren't even experts".
There is a very good-humoured new online magazine out (sourced from Finland!) called Ovi. Have a look at it here
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Attack Machine (post of 18th.) has a good comment on the absurd Newsweek story about American troops flushing a Koran down the toilet. Apparently they fell for the Hitler Diaries hoax too!
NYT hates religious reality: "It appears that there are limits to the liberalization of biblical religion. The more the Bible is treated as a historical document, the more its message is interpreted in universalist terms, the more the churches sanctify the political and cultural order, the less hold liberal religion will eventually have on the hearts and minds of believers. This dynamic is particularly pronounced in Protestantism, which heightens the theological tension brought on by being in the world but not of it. Liberal religion imagines a pacified order in which good citizenship, good morals and rational belief coexist harmoniously. It is therefore unprepared when the messianic and eschatological forces of biblical faith begin to stir..... No one can know how long this dumbing-down of American religion will persist."
Catholic universities lose the plot: "The poet Robert Frost once described a liberal as someone who refuses to take his own side in an argument. He could have been speaking about all too many Catholic universities today, where you'd have about as much chance of hearing a commencement address delivered by a prominent Catholic who loves the traditional faith as you would Ted Nugent doing a public service announcement for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. For decades, Catholics have wondered why, on truth-in-advertising grounds alone, such institutions continue to be permitted to identify themselves as Catholic."
Media blackout on Social Security: "Last week, the Cato Institute issued a new advertisement listing 450 economists, including 5 Nobel laureates, from across the country who have publicly endorsed personal accounts for Social Security. This may be the first time you've heard about this because the Washington Post and the New York Times haven't reported it. Neither has USA Today or the LA Times. According to a spokesman at Cato, it hasn't been reported on any of the major TV networks, either. No one is reporting this story. All of this, of course, is completely unconscionable. Would it be newsworthy if 450 climatologists signed a joint petition saying that the ozone layer was being depleted? Or, to stay on point, would it be newsworthy if 450 economists jointly agreed that President Bush was WRONG to endorse personal accounts? Would the liberal media report it then? Of course they would. They would report the story even if 450 Hollywood actors agreed that personal accounts were wrong, and they aren't even experts".
There is a very good-humoured new online magazine out (sourced from Finland!) called Ovi. Have a look at it here
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftist movers and shakers is perfectly shown by the 2004 Kerry campaign. They put up a man whose policies seemed to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though the Left have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.
Leftist ideologues are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions and can con "the masses" into giving them power.
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"
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
THE HIGH INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS AT UCLA PSYCHOLOGY
The official blurb: "The department of Psychology, one of the largest and most productive departments in the nation, is housed in Franz Hall. Its state-of-the-art facilities, numerous resources and renowned faculty provide ample opportunity for innovative research. Many departmental faculty and researchers are recipients of over $14 million in annual extramural funding, and are acknowledged leaders in their fields. Their scientific contributions, combined with the campus' remarkable growth and Los Angeles' cultural vibrancy, have hastened the University's emergence as a world-class research institution - the anchor of Southern California's intellectual and scientific achievement."
One of the people whom UCLA employs to teach "non-experimental methods" (meaning mainly questionnaire research) is Kevin Binning (kbinning@ucla.edu). Binning is the author of the piece of "research" that I alluded to on 16th. I made some perfectly proper scientific criticisms of it and forwarded the link to Binning. The result was a stream of emails from him that showed virtually no interest in discussing any academic or scholarly issues but which were heavily laden with ad hominem abuse and aspersions. In one such gem he called me a "dirty old man". What a high-powered intellectual! But readers don't have to take my word for Binning's intellectual level. The link to his work that I originally put up now leads to new content. It now says: "To Dr. Ray: I can just imagine you sitting there pathetically trying to ruin my research to help compensate for your own failures in the field. What a joke you are" -- which is pure abuse: No argument, no attempt to answer my criticisms and nothing else of an intellectual character. How Leftist!
There is another comment on standards at UCLA psychology here
*************************************
The official blurb: "The department of Psychology, one of the largest and most productive departments in the nation, is housed in Franz Hall. Its state-of-the-art facilities, numerous resources and renowned faculty provide ample opportunity for innovative research. Many departmental faculty and researchers are recipients of over $14 million in annual extramural funding, and are acknowledged leaders in their fields. Their scientific contributions, combined with the campus' remarkable growth and Los Angeles' cultural vibrancy, have hastened the University's emergence as a world-class research institution - the anchor of Southern California's intellectual and scientific achievement."
One of the people whom UCLA employs to teach "non-experimental methods" (meaning mainly questionnaire research) is Kevin Binning (kbinning@ucla.edu). Binning is the author of the piece of "research" that I alluded to on 16th. I made some perfectly proper scientific criticisms of it and forwarded the link to Binning. The result was a stream of emails from him that showed virtually no interest in discussing any academic or scholarly issues but which were heavily laden with ad hominem abuse and aspersions. In one such gem he called me a "dirty old man". What a high-powered intellectual! But readers don't have to take my word for Binning's intellectual level. The link to his work that I originally put up now leads to new content. It now says: "To Dr. Ray: I can just imagine you sitting there pathetically trying to ruin my research to help compensate for your own failures in the field. What a joke you are" -- which is pure abuse: No argument, no attempt to answer my criticisms and nothing else of an intellectual character. How Leftist!
There is another comment on standards at UCLA psychology here
*************************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
