Month: August 2020

Cancel culture warriors will typically defend themselves against accusations that they are trying to limit speech by arguing that, in fact, they want to provide additional opportunities for the right kind of expression. The argument runs like this:

1. Every society recognizes that there are opinions which are simply beyond the pale, and should be suppressed wherever possible;
2. The decision on where to draw the line is made by parties in power;
3. Historically, this has meant that oppressed people have been unable to speak in public;
4. The opinions of members of oppressed groups, simply by virtue of their victimhood, are presumptively correct;
5. In many cases, they are so self-evidently correct that any opposition to them is clearly an affront to civilization as we know it;
6. Putting a limit on this kind of indecent speech is necessary to give the members of oppressed groups the confidence to speak; so
7. Therefore, putting limits on indecent speech, as we define it today, actually has the overall effect of increasing speech.

#1 is clearly a correct statement. #2 and #3 may be true in some respects, but they treat moral and cultural questions purely as functions of power relationships, which is not accurate. All of the other premises are, in my opinion, false. No one’s ideas are entitled to any special deference simply due to the identity of the speaker; it is outrageous to suggest, for example, that Judeo-Christian ideas on homosexuality which are supported by scripture and which have been nearly universally accepted for thousands of years are not even worthy of debate; everyone who wishes to participate in a public forum has to be willing to accept a reasonable level of criticism; and moving the window of decency to eliminate the opinions of tens of millions of Americans will only increase anger, not speech.

Strictly speaking, “cancel culture” refers to efforts made by members of the hard left through social media to enforce what they view as unassailable positions through the shaming of people who openly disagree with their orthodox (for the left) views. This can go as far as calling for boycotts of products and even the firing of the individual in question. Realistically, it only applies to members of the center left, as right-wingers have their own separate safe spaces on the internet and Fox News; to them, being attacked by the left is a badge of honor, not a source of shame.

Following Trump, however, many GOP candidates are running commercials attacking “cancel culture.” What do they mean by that, and are they right?

What they mean by “cancel culture” is attempts, as they see it, by the left to smear white Christian American history and culture. They fiercely resent efforts to depict America as an evil, racist state run by ignorant bigots who oppress people of color and heterodox sexuality as naturally as they live and breathe. They view themselves as an endangered minority threatened with extinction by a vengeful majority, with the support of the MSM and Hollywood. In their eyes, the only way to prevent the destruction of their heritage is to win and keep political power, by fair means or foul.

This is a completely inaccurate description of liberals in general, but it probably has a degree of justification as applied to millions of woke millennials. That day of reckoning is probably a decade away.

As it stands today, the Democrats can’t lose on the stimulus issue. If a deal gets done, it will have to be on their worker-friendly terms, and they will take the credit for it; if not, Trump and the GOP will get the blame for the disastrous results. How did this happen? Why would the Republican leadership be so stupid?

Part of it is the supply side ideology that blinds them to actual facts on the ground, of course, but part of it is just their constituency. When Republicans go home, they listen to what businessmen are telling them, because businessmen, not workers, are their donors, peers, and friends. In this case, it is clear that business interests are telling them that their workers would rather lounge in the hammock of dependency than work for low wages. Hence, the GOP recovery plan.

For business interests, this is a classic tragedy of the commons. The owners all want low wages for their own workers, but if they all succeed, only dollar stores will have any consumers, and the economy as a whole will falter. Do they really understand this? Probably not.

On the Democrat candidate Joe.

His lead’s around nine points or so.

He’s kicking Trump’s butt.

The unkindest cut

‘Cause Trump still insists he’s too slow.

To an economist, or even a businessman, there is no meaningful difference between a government spending program and a tax expenditure. Either way, the recipient winds up with more money in his pocket, thanks to the government. Money is money. It spends just as well either way.

To the average GOP voter, however, there is an enormous difference. A tax expenditure is just the government returning money that it never should have taken anyway to the pocket of its hardworking rightful owner; a spending program is a misguided attempt to redistribute income from a productive person to a lazy one–in all likelihood, a minority whining about racism and demanding cuts in line.

This is why deficits created by tax cuts are OK, while deficits created by spending are to be avoided like the plague. It’s the foundation for the CL/Reactionary coalition commonly known as the Tea Party, which is already starting to rear its ugly head again, and which will be in full throat if Biden is elected.

I’ve seen enough commercials featuring hard right doctor candidates in Florida and Tennessee to think it is a trend. What’s going on here?

It makes sense, from the perspective of both the Republican Party and the candidates. The GOP gets a candidate with plenty of his own money and good connections within the donor class; he can also be used as evidence that the party doesn’t really reject science. The candidates typically view themselves as hard-working, self-made men who have a right to deference from the public (call it “I built this” syndrome); self-interest also causes them to oppose M4A and even the public option.

How many of these guys will win? We’ll see in the next eight days.

Two things I’ve noticed about the GOP commercials in Florida:

1. Mitt Romney is a hate figure here comparable to Pelosi and the Squad. A variety of candidates are being accused of supporting his presidential campaign. What were they supposed to do–give money to Obama?
2. One of the commercials indicates that the candidate will help drain the swamp in Tallahassee. Given that Florida state government has been completely dominated by the GOP for over a decade, this makes no sense whatsoever. What it tells you is that the virtuous, angry outsider theme is so pervasive in the party, it even prevails over logic.

Anyway, everyone knows that the swamp is in Gainesville, not Tallahassee.

Ignore Stormy Daniels. Ignore Michael Flynn. Ignore Roger Stone. Ignore Michael Cohen. Ignore the failure to release his taxes. Ignore Mueller. Ignore his efforts to move the G-7 to Doral. Ignore the Trump hotel close to the White House. Ignore the attempts to hold the British Open at Turnberry.

Ignore his weird relationship with Putin. Ignore his sucking up to dictators. Ignore the failed attempt at regime change in Venezuela. Ignore his tariffs. Ignore his complete lack of direction with regard to China. Ignore his gratuitous attacks on NATO. Ignore the removal of troops from Germany. Ignore the betrayal of the Kurds. Ignore his failure to do anything to help our other friends in Syria. Ignore his pointless showboating with Kim. Ignore his new arms races.

Ignore Ukraine and impeachment. Ignore the deficits that his tax cut caused, and the lack of investment that followed. Ignore his trashing of environmental regulations. Ignore his racism. Ignore his attacks on American heroes. Ignore his failure to observe the rule of law. Ignore the revolving door around him, and the departure of the adults in the room. Ignore his failure to propose anything like a convincing substitute for Obamacare. Ignore Barr and Betsy DeVos. Ignore the attacks on the press. Ignore his lies and his narcissism. Ignore Stephen Moore and Judy Shelton. Ignore the inept response to the pandemic. Ignore his support of ineffective drugs, and his proposal to eat bleach. Ignore his unjust attacks on civil servants, judges, the intelligence community, the FBI, the Fed, elections officials, and most professional sports. Ignore his suggestion that the election should be postponed.

Hey, he gave us lots of conservative judges and tax cuts, right? He fights for our side in the culture wars, too. What more could you possibly ask?

All I can say is, that’s a whole lot of ignorance.

In 2008, John McCain was behind; he needed to take some risks to turn things around. He was consequently persuaded to pick a figure who was untested on a national level as his running mate. The decision was a disaster: Palin proved to be totally unqualified for the job on substance, but she was also far more popular with the GOP Reactionary faction than he was, which meant she overshadowed him on the campaign trail on a daily basis. In the end, the risk was not worth taking.

Unlike McCain, Biden is ahead, but he still faces the same kind of choice. If he picks Warren or Harris, he will be running with someone with national experience–for better or worse, a known commodity. If he doesn’t, who knows?

To me, it’s a simple decision. Why take risks now?

Assume, for purposes of argument, that Trump is soundly beaten in November. What, in the eyes of the potential GOP contenders in 2024, will be the lesson? Here are four possibilities:

1. THE MESSAGE WAS RIGHT, BUT THE MESSENGER WAS TOO FLAWED: The theory here is that the combination of regressive tax cuts for wealthy businessmen and divisive, provocative tweets and conservative judges for the reactionary base was exactly right, but that Trump’s indiscipline, narcissism, corruption, and ignorance were just too big a hurdle to overcome. A better candidate with the same message could prevail. LIKELY CANDIDATE WITH THIS MESSAGE: Tom Cotton.
2. THE MESSAGE WAS WRONG. WE NEED A BIGGER TENT. BRING BACK THE CDS AND STOP THE RACIST STUFF!: This is a call for a revival of the PBP/CD Romney Coalition. LIKELY CANDIDATES WITH THIS MESSAGE: Larry Hogan; Nikki Haley.
3. TRUMP JUST WASN’T POPULIST ENOUGH: “National conservatives” want a populist (i.e., reactionary) economic policy focusing on white Christian workers, not more tax cuts for rich people. The rest of Trump’s message is on point. LIKELY CANDIDATE WITH THIS MESSAGE: Josh Hawley.
4. TRUMP DIDN’T CARE ENOUGH ABOUT CONTROLLING SPENDING AND CUTTING DEFICITS: Bring back the Tea Party! This time, the GOP really, really means it about reducing spending. Trust me. Trust me. LIKELY CANDIDATES WITH THIS MESSAGE: Ted Cruz; Rick Scott.

For the record, my money is on Cotton, but the world can change a lot between now and then. Let’s just hope it doesn’t change a lot between now and November.

Today’s NYT features a lengthy article advocating a multi-platform media event, lasting weeks or even months, addressing the plight of black people in America. The event would include documentaries, panel discussions, cultural events, and drama. Would it work?

No, because unlike the Germans after World War II, there is no power in this country that can force people to watch. Fox News would never participate. I would guess that 30 percent of the population would watch every minute of it, 30 percent would quickly tire of it, and 40 percent would make a point of never tuning in. The 40 percent, of course, is where the worst of the problem lies.

The idea is not completely stupid. The MSM have made a great effort to portray minorities in greater number and more sympathetically over the last decade or so, and its efforts have been reasonably successful. Using the media to create empathy is much more likely to change hearts and minds than the bulldozer of legislation. Reconciliation is a process, however, not an event. It will take many years, not weeks or months, and it has to be done with gentle persuasion, not a sledgehammer.

Imagine that you are a Never Trumper. You despise the man on golf cart for all of the reasons that the left does. You view him as a corrupt, inept, would-be authoritarian who is rotting the foundations of the American political system. He has to go. You agree with large parts of Trump’s domestic agenda, however. So how do you resolve this problem? By rooting for the GOP to retain control of the Senate. That will put an end to the legitimacy crisis without giving free rein to the left. It sounds like a perfect solution.

Except that it leads to a different kind of roller coaster. It doesn’t just mean that the progressive agenda is dead in the water, and that the government’s ability to deal with the pandemic and the recession will be hobbled; it means gratuitous shutdowns and debt ceiling crises on top of that, as McConnell reverts to his favorite game of taking hostages for partisan gain at the expense of the public interest. In addition, one can easily imagine McConnell being emboldened to the point of refusing to confirm any Biden judges–period. Instead of one Merrick Garland, we could have a hundred. Is that what we really need, if we’re looking for decency and stability?

(Donald Trump is alone in the Oval Office. He’s way behind in the polls, the pandemic is out of control, and the economy is on its knees. In desperation, he does something he’s never done before–he tries to pray. To his surprise, God answers immediately.)

G: Mr. President! I haven’t heard from you in a really, really long time. What do you want from me?

T: I need your help, Lord. I need you to win the election.

G: You’re a liar and a narcissist. You don’t care about anyone but yourself. You’re deliberately tearing your country apart. You don’t even really believe in me. Why would I help you?

T: Because I stand with your people, of course.

G: What, you mean that stunt where you held the Bible as a prop? That was embarrassing and offensive.

T: But I was just sending a message to your people that I love and support them. What’s wrong with that?

G: All people are my people. Even the ones who say they don’t believe in me. How would they really know? I didn’t make them omniscient, so I can’t very well blame them if they get things wrong.

T: You just can’t let Biden beat me. I’d be a loser! I can’t live with that. It wouldn’t be right.

G: I help those who help themselves. You could start by actually doing something to help your country instead of trying to tear it apart. Try telling people to wear masks, for example.

T: Masks are for wimps. I’m not going to tell people to be wimps.

G: That’s the best I can do for you.

T: So you won’t help me?

G: I don’t take sides in elections. If the American people are stupid enough to vote for you, they deserve you. If not, so much the better. Biden may not be perfect, but he’s a good and decent man, and America has suffered enough.

T: Please! I’m desperate here! You can’t just leave me here to lose!

G: Goodbye, Mr. President. With luck, this is the last time I will have to call you that.

(God leaves. Trump is still alone in the Oval Office.)