Saturday, June 18, 2005
The Informationist Defense of Neocons Continues in Uzbekistan
Matt Yglesias posted a glib observation about the incoherence of U.S. Policy in Uzbekistan. I saw an opportunity to resume my hopeless quest for a rapproachement between liberal internationalists and neocons in a setting less charged than Iraq.
more...Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Friday, June 17, 2005
Wading Further Into Controversy
A couple of days ago, Ivo Daadler launched an important discussion asking What Now in Iraq? He listed a few possibilites, but in my opinion he omitted the critical one--admittign the truth and building forward from there. I humbly submitted a discussion of The Missing Option, figuring that it was time for me to wade even further into the waters of controversy:
more...Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
The Candidate We Deserved
Joshua Michael Marshall found some polls that led him to wonder whether Kerry could win a “do over” election held today. I saw an opportunity to continue expressing my distaste for the direction that the Democratic Party has taken since Bill Clinton handed the baton to Al Gore.
Can we do over the primaries while we’re at it?
I spent time volunteering for the Kerry campaign, but I never for a moment believed that he would be a good President. When a Republican friend commented that she believed that Kerry would be a disaster, I could reply only that it was possible to be both a disaster and an improvement.
Kerry did not deserve to win that election. He ran a campaign premised entirely upon the idea that Bush deserved to lose. An additional eight months worth of data might have convinced a few more voters that he was right--but he still wouldn’t have deserved to win and he still wouldn’t make an effective President.
The Democratic Party went into the primary season with one goal in mind: Don’t offend anyone who already dislikes Bush. We got the milquetoast candidate we deserved--a Senator with a long and undistinguished career. Until we’re prepared to do better, we don’t deserve a do over.
I volunteered for the Kerry campaign, even though I wasn’t certain that I was working for the right guy. Were a do-over held tomorrow, I still wouldn’t be sure.
Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Neoconservatism, Liberal Internationalism, and Informationism
Lots of good stuff on TPM Cafe’s America Abroad blog the past couple of days. First Jim Lindsay resumed his discussion about the best future course for our Iraq policy. I added my two cents:
Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Freedom to Tinker
Another lead into the blog world. I spoke to Fred von Lohmann over at EFF. He pointed me towards Ed Felten’s Freedom to Tinker blog.
He was right. Felten’s got consistently interesting post. But his main reason in pointing me there was to meet JD Lasica, who is in the midst of a virtual book tour promoting Darknet. While I was poking around, I noticed that Ed also has a book club going; I left a note suggesting that he take a look at Digital Phoenix.
I also exchanged thoughts with JD about our respective books. I discovered, though, that Freedom to Tinker doesn’t let commenters include links in their posts. A bit of a deterrent, I’d say, but perhaps an intentional one. Seems to violate what I think I’ve been learning about blogging.
more...Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Thursday, June 16, 2005
Perhaps I Missed the Point, or Digital Phoenix Emerges
A couple of days ago, I realized that I’d been having so much fun blogging about politics that I’d forgotten to hawk my book. Turns out that TPM Cafe has a books table (that seems to get almost no traffic). So I started my first discussion thread, introducing Digital Phoenix and urging people to read it.
I actually got some responses. Well, two to be precise, and both from Petey. He posed a couple of interesting questions; I replied. Somehow, I fell that if I started a thread, I really should see it through.
Now let’s see if anyone else is interested.
Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
In Which I Fail to See a Difference
Apparently, yesterday’s NYT ran an article about young interns enjoying the good life as summer interns at the Heritage Foundation. Matt Yglesias thanked an attentive reader for calling his attention to what he saw as an apalling diference between conservatives and liberals (or Republicans, and Democrats, if you will). One of the interns apparently expressed a desire to work as a pharmaceutical industry lobbyist. Matt saw this as an expression of the ideological bankruptcy on the rights, and as evidence that its ascendancy would be short-lived.
more...Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend
Monday, June 13, 2005
More Ragging on Democratic Party Leadership (or lack thereof)
What the Republicans have that Democrats lack is coherence, not ideas. The governing ethos of the contemporary Republican Party hinges on two key beliefs: (i) Wealth didn’t get where it is by mistake. As a result, those who have earned it deserve to keep at least most of it; and (ii) A specific set of ethical beliefs and cultural norms made America what it is. We must preserve these norms.
These central beliefs give the Republicans a framework within which to evaluate all issues and all proposals. Growth--which benefits all--is most likely when society’s most capable people control the bulk of the resources. Institutional strength grows from a well defined moral center. And so on and so on. You can agree with some, all, or none of their conclusion, but the approach is coherent.
Democrats, on the other hand, are a notoriously incoherent lot. Personally, I believe in free trade, free markets, free choice, personal responsibility, and muscular liberalism. I have about as much in common with Naderite Greens as I do with Buchananite Paleoconservatives. And quite frankly, neither of these groups is any more concerned about offending me than I am about offending them. (And bravo to them for refusing to be embarassed by their own beliefs). The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is paralyzed by the thought of offending either me or the Greens--precisely because we both dislike the Paleos (not to mention the social conservatives).
That paralysis makes it seem that there are no ideas in the Democratic Party. Democrats have many, many ideas. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is afraid of embracing any of them because to do so would risk alienating some faction that the Republicans have already alienated.
If the Deomocratic Party wants to shed this reputation of being an idea-free zone, it’s going to have to take some risks. Personally, I advocate following the New Democrat line and reaching out to Republicans who have been alienated by their own party--those who believe in social libertarianism, fiscal responsibility, tax simplification, free trade, and effective muscular liberalism. That means essentially telling the Naderites that we welcome their votes but not their influence. Alternatively, let the party go the other way. Let them embrace leftists and alienate the New Democrats. Perhaps we can align with like-minded Republicans to help them wrest their party back from the social conservatives. The former approach would turn the Democrats into a majority party, the latter into a minority party, but either would enhance party coherence--and coherence will always let ideas flow to the fore.
I’m sure that says it all.
Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend