Cromwell

So the debt ceiling crisis is done.

I can’t really say it was fun.

Fiscal chicken, I fear

Will be back in two years.

But for now, it was Biden who won.

According to the NYT, retail food prices are still soaring in Europe even though energy prices are down and commodity prices have stabilized.

So much for the theory that it is the uniquely excessive pandemic stimulus that is still driving inflation in America.

American social conservatives absolutely love Viktor Orban. They view Budapest as the new Jerusalem. Why wouldn’t they? He agrees with them on the virtues of illiberal democracy (he invented the term, after all), and he is on the front lines of the war on wokeness.

The difficulty here is that, while Orban may be on the right side of the wokeness wars, he is also relatively friendly with China, which is typically viewed as an existential threat by his right-wing allies. Whoops! That’s a bit embarrassing, no?

It is an article of faith among cultural conservatives that left-wing academics are brainwashing our children and leading them away from God, traditional moral values, and patriotism. As I’ve noted before, to the limited extent it is true, it is due to natural forms of self-selection. Academics tend to be liberal for the same reason that businessmen believe in tax cuts and deregulation.

Ron DeSantis wants to change this. He wants to tear wokeness out of our schools by the roots. As president, he would undoubtedly use the threat of the loss of federal funds as his principal weapon to accomplish this. The problem is that there simply aren’t enough reactionary academics and administrators to replace the woke ones on a national basis. DeSantis consequently would have the power to destroy our universities, but not to genuinely reform them.

The real question here is whether DeSantis would go so far as to deny federal aid to any student who wants to attend an institution he and his henchmen would consider woke, as opposed to directly assisting those institutions themselves. My best guess is that the answer is yes. I have seen no indication that he respects any limits in the woke wars. Just ask Disney.

There has been a great deal of angst recently about the role of men in contemporary society. The advent of the knowledge-based economy has devalued skills based on physical strength, thus threatening the historic male economic and social predominance. Some men responded by killing themselves with opioids; others have become angry Trump voters. What are we to do with them?

Men aren’t just physically stronger than women; they are by nature more linear and task-oriented, as well. There are advantages as well as disadvantages to this. If you want someone to help you sort out your feelings, men are not the answer, but if you need someone to climb a mountain or take a trench, you had better call a man.

The correct response to my question, therefore, is not “absolutely nothing;” it is quite a lot.

Karl Marx thought he had discovered a law of history–something akin to gravity. The political system and the cultural environment of any given society were driven by the class system, which in turn was dictated by the ownership of the means of production. Marx (incorrectly) believed that the Europe of the 19th century, the most progressive civilization in history, was dominated by a tiny group of factory owners (the bourgeoisie), who would inevitably be overthrown as the result of the weaknesses of the capitalist system and the vast numerical predominance of the working class. Communism–the rule of the workers, with no more class contradictions–was thus an historical inevitability.

Racial and gender-based woke thought, like Marxism, divides the world into groups of oppressors (straight white men) and the oppressed (everyone else). It does not, however, view this distinction as being based on any kind of law of history, and it does not forecast any kind of happy ending. It focuses on elements of identity that Marx would have considered to be part of the “superstructure,” and thus ultimately irrelevant. It is also based on fact; who can deny that straight white men have largely ruled the world over the past few hundred years?

Wokeness is clearly not a form of Marxism; the two are probably best described as estranged family members. DeSantis uses the term “cultural Marxism” for cynical political reasons; he seeks to discredit ideas that have some basis in American history by tying them to demonstrably false and unpopular ideas that have already been rejected by the vast majority of the electorate.

I have spent a lot of time and energy over the years trying to define what wokeness means, both in theory and practice. The more cynical, and probably realistic, approach is to say it is any idea Ron DeSantis dislikes. Fighting wokeness as he defines it is consequently the centerpiece of his campaign.

There are four threads of anti-wokeness, only two of which have deep roots in American thought and culture. The third has only been around for a decade or so, the fourth basically was invented by DeSantis. Here is the list:

1. RACIAL WOKENESS: The battle over racial wokeness revolves around the concept of systemic racism. To the woke, and to many who aren’t woke, it is impossible to look at the discrepancy of a myriad of outcomes for white and black people in this country and find a cause other than an embedded form of racism. To DeSantis and the right, however, no such thing exists. Yes, there were a few unfortunate blips in our country’s history, but they were overcome during the Civil Rights Movement, and since then, blacks and whites have been on a completely equal footing. Any discrepancy of outcomes can be accounted for by bad, paternalistic government policy which encourages black people to lounge in the hammock of dependency. Since racial preferences were probably never necessary, and certainly aren’t necessary now, they should be banned. Anyone who says otherwise is the real racist.
2. GENDER WOKENESS: There are a variety of different kinds of thought here, some of which can actually come into conflict, but the ultimate target is the same: the social and economic dominance of cisgender males. Feminists revolt solely against this dominance, whereas the LGBTQ community increasingly rejects the entire notion of sexual “normality” and insists that historical support for heterosexual behavior is solely a misguided cultural and political construct. DeSantis and the right support traditional ideas of gender and sexual behavior and seek to stamp out everything else. This involves actions directed both at government and private sector actors, such as doctors and Disney.
3. CLIMATE CHANGE WOKENESS: Climate change, in the eyes of the right, is a hoax that was devised to give the left a pretext to use the government to compel real Americans to change their cherished way of life. It is the thin edge of the socialist wedge, and its impacts will be felt mainly by rural Americans who eat lots of meat and rely heavily on their cars. In other words, cars and fossil fuels are freedom and prosperity; public transportation is a mechanism of social control. The target here, for the right, is both government at all levels and “woke capital” which seeks to mitigate climate change impacts and expedite the transition to clean energy.
4. PUBLIC HEALTH WOKENESS: This one was invented by DeSantis. In his telling, all public health mandates are invented by the woke, elitist left in order to restrict the economic and religious freedom of real Americans who rely on right-wing web sites and Fox News for medical advice. Both governments and businesses should be prohibited from imposing any such mandates. If people die as a result, well, give me liberty or give me death! I can tolerate the result either way.

In my next post on anti-wokeness, I will discuss DeSantis’ argument that wokeness, as he defines it, is a form of “cultural Marxism.” Following that, I will analyze what a DeSantis presidency might mean for the private actors at the center of the battle, including left-wing intellectuals, the MSM, Hollywood, and academia.

Due to the extreme circumstances of the pandemic, Biden began his term as a radical reformer–an aspiring FDR for the 21st century. He and the left thought they had an opportunity to move America from the dollar store economy to something more equitable for workers. It didn’t happen, partly because of inflation, and partly because he never had the votes for a more comprehensive reform agenda in the Senate. His legislative record was impressive in its way, but no one can seriously argue that he was the second coming of FDR.

In the second half of his term, with a Republican House, he will be struggling to keep the gains from the first half. He will be the wise old head–the true conservative in the room–protecting American freedoms from right-wing bomb throwers, not a frustrated radical reformer.

Given America’s innate opposition to change, it’s a good place to be.

If I were able to interview DeSantis, these are some of the questions I would like to ask him:

1. How do you square your unwillingness to admit that Trump lost the 2020 election with your argument that you are more electable than he is?
2. What is your ultimate objective in your feud with Disney? Are you trying to force Disney to make movies that show minorities and LGBTQ people in an unfavorable light? Are you trying to make minorities and LGBTQ people feel less comfortable in Disney parks?
3. Young LGBTQ people are frequently bullied and ostracized. What message are you trying to send to them and the bullies with your anti-gay and anti-trans legislation? What do you want them to do with their condition?
4. Would you bring back family separation at the border? If not, what would you do, given the limited resources available, to reduce illegal immigration?
5. Would you censor woke opinions on the internet to protect children? If so, how, and how would you make the case that your legislation complies with the First Amendment?
6. Would you deny federal funds–say, after a hurricane–to blue states until they eliminate all evidence of wokeness in public institutions?
7. Would you deny federal funds to all colleges and universities, including the use of Pell Grants by students, as long as they have DEI programs and courses you consider woke?
8. Is a woman who believes in abortion rights woke?
9. Would you use the overturning of New York Times v. Sullivan as a litmus test for judicial nominees?
10. The New Right clearly believes that America is a Christian nation, and that non-Christians should be banned from participation in government. Do you agree with that?
11. Should the January 6 rioters be pardoned?
12. Given your hostility to China, there is no hope of working with the Chinese to stop the North Koreans from putting a nuclear warhead on an ICBM. How, then, would you deal with the North Koreans?
13. As a result of Trump’s decision to scrap the Iran deal, the Iranians are much closer to getting the bomb than ever. Are you willing to go to war with Iran in order to prevent that from happening? Would your objectives in such a war include regime change?
14. What actions would you take if Putin escalates the war in Ukraine through attacks on NATO or the use of weapons of mass destruction?
15. Are you willing to go to war if Putin threatens Poland or the Baltic States?
16. Would you undo Biden’s diplomatic and military initiatives regarding the containment of China?
17. Do you believe that Trump’s Chinese tariffs were a success? If so, why?
18. What is your plan to deal with the financial problems facing Social Security and Medicare?
19. Do you believe climate change is a hoax? If you do, why did your government provide funds for climate resiliency to local governments?
20. How do you account for the vast discrepancy between the average wealth of white and black families if you believe that there is no such thing as systemic racism in America?

Price controls aren’t the answer to greedflation, because the bureaucracy that would be involved wouldn’t be justified by the limited magnitude of the problem. Better consumer choices are the best antidote available to us. That said, inflation is obviously unpopular, and price controls would be a simplistic answer that would appeal to many populists. Is it possible that one or more of the principal GOP contenders would support them?

It is unlikely, but not impossible. You can imagine Trump getting ahead of his skis on the issue in a debate if the crowd eggs him on. DeSantis–not so much. He may not like woke capital, but his concerns about business are not going to extend that far.

Lindsey Graham is back at Mar-a-Largo. Trump is feeling good about his position, so he lets Graham wait an hour this time.

T: Linseed! Good to see you again!

G: Last time, you said you would talk about DeSantis once he had declared. It’s time.

T: Right! It’s time to kick his DeSanctimonious butt!

G: What’s the plan?

T: it has multiple parts. The first part, of course, is to keep pressing him about the rigged election and January 6. He will just keep on refusing to answer, which will make him look like an unprincipled wimp to the base.

G: Makes sense. What else?

T: Attack him as an ungrateful tool of the establishment who is trying to trick the base into abandoning their true champion. We can even say George Soros is behind it. Who knows, anyway?

G: How do you do that?

T: Talk about his education. He went to Harvard and Yale. He says he didn’t inhale. Sure! He also supported the war in Iraq, and he’s weak on Ukraine. Very weak. The base won’t like that.

G: What else?

T: Call him an opportunistic wimp on issues relating to wokeness. He didn’t say anything about the border or crime or vaccines or fossil fuels or the educational establishment for years; it only came up when he decided to run for president. I’ve been talking about those issues for years. He’s just following my lead.

G: OK. So far, so good. Anything else?

T: Keep up the personal insults. Get him to roll in the mud with me. Make it a referendum on crazy. I can’t be beaten in a battle like that. You know it as well as I do.

G: Sure do. Anything else?

T: He’s starting to run as Ted Cruz in 2016. I say, go for it! I beat Cruz like a drum, and Pence is already in that lane. They’ll split up the anti-abortion extremists and let me back in.

G: Sounds like a plan. Count me in. (He leaves)

The record will show that I was writing about a likely debt ceiling crisis even before the 2020 election, and that I initially predicted that a deal would be struck that would involve mostly cosmetic cuts to spending. In the end, that is exactly what happened. More recently, however, I changed my position and suggested that Biden would be forced to rely on the Fourteenth Amendment in the face of a united and unreasonable House GOP. What happened, and what does it mean for us going forward?

My later prediction was based on the accurate assumption that a large number of GOP House members would vote against an acceptable deal (I said it would be 50-100; it was 71) and that McCarthy would never put forth a proposal that would substantially divide his caucus and put his gavel in jeopardy. I was wrong on the last point; McCarthy did not negotiate in the manner of a man who is willing to take the nation off the cliff in order to keep his side united and his job completely safe. That in turn means either that he is more public-spirited than I thought, based on his record, or that he believed the GOP would be punished by donors and voters for the chaos that ensued. Either way, it is good news for the vast majority of us who don’t want to burn it down. We can breathe a sigh of relief until November 2024.

DeSantis clearly wants to force the woke left to shut up. But what if he succeeded? Where would the right-wing outrage machine go for material? How can you own the libs if the libs can’t say or do anything the right can ridicule?

Trump understands this perfectly. It is the basis for the Fox News business model. DeSantis hasn’t grasped it yet.

In 2016, Chris Christie made unpopular cuts to Social Security and Medicare the centerpiece of his campaign, which went nowhere. It appears that he plans to run again in 2024. Will he take the same position on entitlements?

I think he will, even though GOP orthodoxy on Social Security and Medicare has changed, because he has less to lose. Entitlements are popular with the reactionary base, but he has no chance of winning those people over, anyway. Entitlement cuts are popular with business; that is where his opportunity exists.

You can say that again.