Monday, February 4, 2019

An Immoral Equivalent

Mobilizing the public is an ancient technique used by politicians to solidify support and direction whether the target is foreign or domestic. It has nationalistic overtones which should make people cautious, but it rarely does. Some of the great irrational movements in the U.S. have appeared in military drag. The following is from a Goldberg article and has an interesting slant.

"The need to prepare for war marked the end of the New Deal. As FDR put it, it was time for “Dr. New Deal” to be replaced by “Dr. Win the War.”
Ironically, the New Deal itself was largely about war mobilization — without war. Roosevelt campaigned for president promising to adapt Woodrow Wilson’s wartime industrial policies to fight the Great Depression.


Even before Roosevelt was elected, his aides investigated whether they could use the Trading with the Enemy Act for a gold embargo. In his inaugural address, FDR proclaimed, “I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to the disciplined attack upon our common problems.”
Nearly the entire structure of the New Deal was copied from Wilson’s “war socialism.” The National Recovery Administration was modeled on the War Industries Board. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation was an update of Wilson’s War Finance Corporation.


The military buildup began not as a response to the Nazis but as a jobs program. The Public Works Administration paid for the aircraft carriers Yorktown and Enterprise, as well as four cruisers, many smaller warships, and more than 100 Army planes.
Even the workforce was militarized. On Sept. 13, 1933, stores in New York were ordered to close to honor the president’s NRA Day Parade, then the largest parade in the city’s history. Nearly a quarter-million workers, organized by trade, marched past the president’s rostrum as 49 military planes flew overhead.


Under the NRA, breaking discipline was a punishable offense, which is why a tailor, Jacob Maged, was sentenced to 30 days in jail for charging too little to press a suit.
I could go on, but the important point is that ever since philosopher William James coined the phrase the “moral equivalent of war,” American liberalism has been recycling the same basic idea: The country needs to be unified and organized as if we are at war, but not to fight a literal battle. The attraction stems from what John Dewey called “the social possibilities of war” — the ability to reorganize and unify society according to the schemes of planners and experts.

This was the through line of 20th-century liberalism, and now 21st-century liberalism, too. Wilson’s war socialism, FDR’s New Deal, Harry Truman’s Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy’s New Frontier, Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, Jimmy Carter’s declaration that the energy crisis was a “moral equivalent of war,” and Barack Obama’s “new foundation for growth,” with his Thomas Friedman-inspired talk about “Sputnik moments.”"

Sunday, February 3, 2019

Sunday/Mracles Among the Faithless


Today's Gospel is the continuation of the previous where Christ announces he is the Messiah in Nazareth. There is wonder first. Then Christ, in response to questions about miracles, says this strange thing:

"Surely you will quote me this proverb,
'Physician, cure yourself,' and say,
'Do here in your native place
the things that we heard were done in Capernaum.'"
And he said, "Amen, I say to you,
no prophet is accepted in his own native place."


Mark and Mathew write that Christ could not do miracles there because the people had no faith. What does that mean? There are limits of the power of God? That we humans must participate to have these great acts work? That there is a bond between us and God, that there is a necessary spiritual partnership between us?

Then he says something else, he compares the situation to that of Elijah and  the widow in Zarephath, and that of Elisha the prophet and Naaman the Syrian, both examples of where God's prophets preferred helping Gentiles to Jews. While this infuriated the locals, its context is particularly confusing. Does it mean the failure of miracles among the faithless is not that they are unreceptive but rather purposefully deprived by God?

 

Thursday, January 31, 2019

The Borg

"The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin

Discussions over Socialism are rare. Emotions and Hopes do not withstand much scrutiny. One element that has always been interesting is the Socialist's view of the Group, the Collective. The group seems to be an ideal but it is always the enemy in Socialism. Socialism always must overcome it, defeat it. That's what a revolution is.

So the decisions by the Group rarely support Socialism. Socialism must supplant the Group; then the new Group is created. But, like the first group, that new Collective is hard to trust; it might elect someone like Trump. So the Group needs a filter, a real control should the Group not fall in line and the ideals waver. Therefore, Red Guards. Gulags. And the new group can only be so accommodating; efficiency is important. So the actions of the group must be streamlined, sometime pruned. The very first thing that suffers under collectivism is deviation from the norm.

"In theory Socialism may wish to enhance freedom, but in practice every kind of collectivism consistently carried through must produce the characteristic features which Fascism, Nazism and Communism have in common. Totalitarianism is nothing but consistent collectivism."--Hayek

Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Trade, Oil Production

According to a January 2018 report by the Pew Research Center, “in the four decades since the current system for budgeting and spending tax dollars has been in effect, Congress has managed to pass all its required appropriations measures on time only four times: in fiscal 1977 (the first full fiscal year under the current system), 1989, 1995 and 1997.”
So the Congress seems to be unable to perform its basic functions, functions essential to the running of the State. So, why should we have confidence they can improve complicated things?

In 2017, the value of international U.S. exports of services amounted to 780.8 billion U.S. dollars.  In 2017, U.S. exports amounted to 1.55 trillion U.S. dollars. So the  service-sector outputs account for nearly 80 percent of U.S. GDP and 34 percent of U.S. exports.

Some charts:

The record is clear that when America’s total trade is increased, American jobs have also increased, and when our total trade has declined, so have the number of jobs


Two startling charts on the growth of U.S. oil production:

Tuesday, January 29, 2019

Magic Medicines for the Ills of Centaurs and Mermaids



One quality the recent Covington High School fiasco highlighted about the country is how much of the intense reactions in the country are to intense problems that do not exist. A silent, stoic (and probably confused) teenage boy becomes not a symbol but rather a Rorschach Test. The Great American Problem is.....(you fill in the blank).....

But there are some truths, regardless of belief. The country has 3.9% unemployment; that is astonishingly good. Poverty has been declining and middle incomes have been increasing since 2013. Jobs are everywhere. Median household income reached $61,372 in 2017, which is higher than comparable countries like Canada, Germany, France, Britain and Denmark, and exceeded only by a handful of tiny oil-rich or banking nations like Norway, Switzerland and Lichtenstein. U.S. median household size, meanwhile, has declined, so individual wealth has increased even more than the income numbers reflect.
Economic revolution, regardless of how satisfying to one's bloodlust, does not make much sense.
On the other side of the popular alarmism, immigration apprehensions at the border are at an eighteen year low, illegals have a lower crime rate than native or naturalized citizens, immigration has not caused job loss but automation has, and globalization has diverted some low-level jobs overseas but supplied cheap goods which has raised the standard of living even further.
But there are problems. We have had mediocre leaders--some heartfelt, some cynical--but all mediocre. Our political debates rest on fantasies so our solutions are fantastic, too. We will turn to technologies that do not exist by taxing people who do not exist. We have fueled a lot of our success with unsustainable debt. For a people with suspicions about domestic government built into our constitutional DNA, we are remarkably confident in our ability to create benign and powerful governments for foreign nations. And our sensibilities have followed our technology: All our beliefs have progressed from analog to binary. Everything is Black or White.
We have become an intense, incautious people.

Monday, January 28, 2019

Make Government Great Again



A common criticism of modern liberalism is that it brings an increasingly centralization of power to complex systems, another way of saying concentrating decision-making to deal with unknown causes and effects. But there is a significant practical concern as well: The world is becoming more and more decentralized, more diffuse and diverse. The model of the centralized power having its will ripple through the community pyramid from the top down may not be an adequate reflection of the world as it now is. For example, powerhouse governments are having a hard time managing the resistance of small, disparate guerilla groups. Large but fragmented  entrepreneurial drug cartels are as impervious as Tupperware parties to the powerful Washington hand.
We may be dealing with modern problems with outmoded techniques.

Sunday, January 27, 2019

Sermon/Theophilus




Today is the beginning of "Ordinary Time" in the Church. There is something funny about that. The Old Testament reading is a long review of the history of Israel and reads like  history of Man  with war, slavery, abuse and resilient recovery. The average guy stumbles through his life in the Old Testament as the Sport of Kings.

The Gospel is the opening of Luke's letter to the "most excellent Theophilus" (Lover of God). After explaining that he is writing down the results of his research into the life of Christ, Luke writes of Christ's initial entry into his public life (presumably after his mother pushes him into a miracle at the marriage at Cana.) This is what Luke writes after Christ in the synagogue opens a scroll of the writings of the prophet Isaiah:

He unrolled the scroll and found the passage where it was written:

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring glad tidings to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord.

Rolling up the scroll, he handed it back to the attendant and sat down,
and the eyes of all in the synagogue looked intently at him.
He said to them,
"Today this Scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing."


Laconic. The world's shortest sermon. And hardly the beginning of "Ordinary Times."