-
Throw the Book at Him
June 13, 2013 | 196 comments
-
Testimonial to a Great American
June 6, 2013 | 39 comments
-
A Close Call at the Newseum
May 30, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Obama’s Imbroglios
May 23, 2013 | 45 comments
-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
The Current Crisis
What Next for Liberals? Friendly Fascism
The Liberals continue to labor under the assumption that nothing very bad happened in early November.
WASHINGTON — The Great Denial continues. The Liberals continue to labor under the assumption that nothing very bad happened in early November. They are still supreme. The columnists go on as though nothing is amiss. This week E.J. Dionne consulted with three defeated congresspersons whose advice he passed on to President Barack Obama on how to succeed during the next two years. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi continues as though she is Speaker for Life, though she is probably the last Democrat to hold the post for a generation. Mental illness can be amusing.
The fact is that the Democrats lost badly in the midterms and they are probably going to lose again in 2012. The Republicans picked up 6 seats in the Senate and over 60 in the House. They won 682 legislative seats nationwide and gained 6 governorships. That will give them a powerful say in redistricting. Moreover, in 2012 the Democrats have to defend 23 seats in the Senate and they will probably lose the presidency, unless the Republicans run a platypus.
In truth, the Democrats have been living on borrowed time for years. Their philosophy is Liberal, and outside of the academy, government employee labor unions, and a few enthusiasts wedded to identity politics, Liberalism is not very popular. In the last election Liberals accounted for 20% of the vote. Conservatives accounted for 42% of the vote, and Independents accounted for 29% and broke for the conservatives’ positions. These figures have been about the same for nearly three decades.
Most polls show a margin of 40% for conservatives and 20% for Liberals going back to the Reagan years. Even before that conservatives clearly outnumbered Liberals, which is why in the aftermath of the last two elections one had to wonder about the predictions of conservatism’s demise. Where were 40% of the electorate to go? How could a minority of 20% govern the country for long?
Actually, the Liberals have been hustlers for a long time. Remember in 2009 when Sam Tanenhaus wrote The Death of Conservatism? What did he have in mind? I read the book, it was not very obvious. Or James Carville, who wrote the similarly charnel 40 More Years: How the Democrats Will Rule the Next Generation. I did not read Carville’s mendacious book, but what could he possibly have said? Did he talk policy? Did either of these two con men consult the numbers out there among average Americans? Or how about considering their ideas? Americans are alarmed by high deficits and grand political schemes. Actually, the whole world is alarmed. Now the bills are coming due for the European welfare states’ entitlements, and there is not the money in Europe to pay for them. The street demonstrations of Greece are going to be Europe-wide before not too long, and we Americans want to avoid them. That is why we threw the big spending Liberals out in November.
Over the past two years the Liberals have shown their true colors. Faced with an entitlement crisis, they rang up trillion dollar deficits. We now face the aforementioned entitlement crisis and gigantic budgetary problems — and Liberals have no answer for it beyond the policy of tax and spend. They are going to be out of office for a long time. They lean toward calling themselves not Liberals but Progressives. I have a better title for them, Friendly Fascists. The alacrity with which they sprang to supporting the takeovers of the giant banks and the automobile industry over the last two years suggests their program for the future: corporatism. All they need is a Mussolini and a bankrupt America. I think there is enough vitality in the land to avoid the latter. As for the former, Americans do not like uniforms very well.
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (95) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/12/09/what-next-for-liberals-friendl
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
- A Panoply of Beauties
- Of Weiner and Women
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.9.10 @ 6:42AM
Mr. Tyrrell,
I wanted to alert you to a powerful article over at American Thinker.
One of your guys might want to follow up on those thoughts...WoW
http://www.americanthinker.com.....r_and.html
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 12.9.10 @ 7:07AM
MR Tyrrell: Do you have something against platypuses? Their great swimmers, who eat worms and grubs, have venom in their sharp little claws to defend themselves, and are known as hardworking, and self-reliant critters. What's wrong with that? Okay, so they're a little bit ugly, granted, but I can name at least a dozen Democrats that are even uglier, and I'm not even referring to their personal attributes. So I say, "President Platypus in 2012". But other than that, I agree with your article, the Democrats are done for a long time to come (and more I pray!!). We're sick (and tired!!) of all the venom spewing from their collective Commie mouths, and paying for their stupid, lazy, crazy, lawbreaking, entitlement grabbing, Commie base too!!
Tim the Enchanter| 12.9.10 @ 12:13PM
Tr. Tyrrell: In case you didn't notice, we DID run a platypus in 2008. Didn't work out to well, if I recall correctly.
Aqua Buddha| 12.9.10 @ 2:38PM
You hit the nail upon the head, Tim. The default GOP policy IS to nominate Sen/Gov Platypus. Next man up. The inarticulate IOU-collecting pol.
Always gracious in defeat. Please not again! What was Nov. 2 really all about?
BTW, I would still opt to elect a President Platypus over the current regime in a heartbeat.
Gretchen| 12.11.10 @ 3:49PM
I, too, would opt for an Ornithorhynchus Anatinus over the current incumbent.
Tom| 12.12.10 @ 9:35PM
We also ran a platypus in '96 and '76 and look where it got us... the "lucky" platypus in '88 had coat-tails (long ones from '80!
A.Men| 12.10.10 @ 6:11AM
I'm surprised drunken sailors were not insulted in this article. Drunken sailors spend their own money not taxpayers. When a drunken sailor spend all his own money he stops spending. The Democrats just print money and borrow more from the Chinese.
Hoosier Mike| 12.10.10 @ 8:30AM
I think we need to change the 'spending money like drunken sailors' saying to 'spending money like drunken senators,' although it appears that the senators don't have to be drunk to spend our money.
pat.duran| 12.13.10 @ 12:58AM
Well said and so very true.
Jacobite| 12.10.10 @ 1:19PM
Yep, Commies. There is no connection between fascism and Leftism. It's a close call as to whether there could be a Left-wing NAZIism, as the NAZIs were a unique blend of socialism and nationalism. Leftism's basic creed includes anti-nationalism. The Left invariably attempts to destroy the nation's culture, society, religion, traditions whenever they obtain power. I sometimes wonder if the whole ideology of Leftism is simply a rationalization of their desire to destroy their society. Anyhow, Fascist/rightist regimes are super-protective of all these things. That's a fundamental, defining difference bewtween Right and Left, regardless of their economic policies. Libertarianism obscures this difference, but as enemies of tradition and society, Libertarians are ultimately Leftists. Mman is a social animal -- humans do not live as individuals, but in families/tribes/societies. Destruction of a society is the destruction of the natural order in human life.
Dale on the left coast| 12.11.10 @ 3:43PM
WRONG Jacobite . . . Fascism is leftism/socialism/communism-lite . . . . Mussolini invented it, he was a huge fan of Marx and Engels and a devoted socialist. Mussolini was certainly slightly to the right of Stalin . . . . but he was far to the left of Churchill.
Dollface| 12.9.10 @ 7:43AM
I think platypusses are kind of cute.
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.9.10 @ 8:20AM
.....unless they are Mormon platypusses.
Kent Lyon| 12.9.10 @ 10:47AM
Do you mean Mormon polygamists? Or are platypusses polygamists?
Nunya| 12.9.10 @ 12:16PM
Being a resident of Utah, I can assure you that the polygamists I've seen are not platypusses. However, I cannot confirm or deny the reverse.
Akaky | 12.9.10 @ 4:32PM
Isn't the plural of platypus platypusi?
Deborah D | 12.9.10 @ 8:26AM
I like your long view, Mr. Tyrrell. If we can make it through the next couple of years without falling off the debt cliff, I'll breathe a sigh of relief. Republicans have much to do and roll back in order to keep the country stitched together -- amazing how in 4 years of Democrat control of Congress and two years of a leftist president can turn the United States from a thriving economy to verging on third-world status. Never again!
William Z| 12.9.10 @ 8:27AM
The Democrats should run a platypus—Agent P from the cartoon, Phineas and Ferb—cute, heroic, more importantly, intelligent, while looking good in a hat.
irish19| 12.9.10 @ 8:52AM
I like that idea. I'd vote for him. I'd vote for either Phineas or Ferb should it come to that.
Eric Cartman| 12.9.10 @ 9:51AM
I don't think even Phineas and Feb can save the Democrats. They would just stand there bleating the same Liberal BS like Timmy: "Bahhhh, bahhh. Capitalism bad. Bahhh, bahhh. Pelosi good looking. Bahhh, bahhh. Free heaalth care for vagrants. Bahh, bahhh. Free health care for illegals. " They're jsut too stupid to help.
Loshooligan| 12.9.10 @ 2:22PM
Too bad they aren't fainting goats. Oh the fun we could have then!
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.9.10 @ 3:57PM
.....come 2012 they will wish they were fainting goats. (or January)
Douglas Fletcher | 12.9.10 @ 4:25PM
I don't know much about platypusses but I have heard of Wile E. Coyote.
http://letsmakeobamaresign.blo.....actor.html
Louis Jenkins| 12.9.10 @ 8:29AM
For one, I'd like to know why we're in such a dither over J. Assange's leaks, when the New York Times released confidential data during the Bush Administration? Assange was not an American, so does that make a difference? The Democrats had a hey day over the NYT leaks, and had investigations thru 2009. What became of the NYT leaks? Nothing. If anything, Obama continued the policy only worse. And Assange is being prosecuted for sexual assault? The two women threw parties over their relationship(s) with the man. Sounds really dire doesn't it. I read the article from AmericanThinker.com and agree with everything it said. Cyber War Fare is real and it is here. There are some big players out there. Note to self: make my next pc an Apple.
Dan Hirsch| 12.9.10 @ 9:20AM
OH Please!
GW Bush and Karl Rove were working hard to eliminate the Democratic party for ever after the 2004 elections. They gave us all that "compassionate conservative" clap trap, moved to the center, gave us No Child Left Behind program and amnesty for illegals to try to corral some key Democratic constituencies.
Two years later we got Harry and Nancy.
Do not celebrate. The liberals have 80% of the judiciary, 90% of the media, 100% of the Executive Branch, and 110% of academia. The Constitution is not even close to safe.
The price of freedom is...
ETERNAL VIGILANCE.
Everybody back to work.
Don't tread on me!
Chalkdust| 12.9.10 @ 10:07AM
Finally.....some sanity. The November spear barely pierced the hide of the progressive Sasquatch. Besides 110% of academia (higher education) the progresives control Jimmy Carter's Dept. of Education, 90% of the K-12 teachers and their unions, 95 % of the movie industry, 90% of the publishing houses. This is not to mention 15%-20% of the current members of the Senate and House of Repersentives who are RINOs.
So we have our work cut out for us, keep your powder dry.
Pete| 12.9.10 @ 10:41AM
progressive Sasquatch...I like that. And I really think the education stats you cite are the biggest problem we face (beyond the election fraud infrastructure). They are literally manufacturing clone armies of idiots who are unable to think for themselves and aspire only to complain and not attain. (I sound like Rev. Jesse Jackson there)
Troy| 12.9.10 @ 9:12PM
Hey, whatever you have to say about his ideas, Jesse Jackson was one of the very few clasically focused speakers of our time. We'd be complaining about President McCain right now if he could express his ideas as well.
Phyllis Murphy| 12.9.10 @ 12:40PM
Thank you for the alarming information. I never though along those lines, but you are truly correct. Colleges are trying to mold our grand kids into little liberal marxists
GavInTucson| 12.10.10 @ 2:32AM
Trying? I think they're succeeding. One of their progeny currently resides in the White House.
MikeD| 12.9.10 @ 7:28PM
Unfortunately, I agree. While naturally an optimist, I have no faith that we will escape from this intact. There are just too many of the bastards in too many of the wrong positions. The republicans do not get it, yet; although I think they're starting to. We have too many RINOs that need to be purged. I'm not sure we have enough time.
Frankly, it will start with some innocuous event in some totally unexpected place, probably overseas. We could easily wake up one morning to $4,000 gold and a 20 cent dollar...before we even have our first cup of coffee!
We have two generations who have been totally indoctrinated, and know nothing about economics or history. The republicans will run in 2012 on a platform of cost cuts and business friendly policies; and the dems and the media will start screaming that the evil GOP are starving children and stealing food from granny's mouth and it will be over. I beg somebody, anybody, to give me good news. I sure don't see it today. Our bonds are dropping like a rock; and that moron in the White House has stopped us from developing our energy offshore while his policies and actions are destroying the dollar. Look for $5.00 gas and everything to jump 25 to 20% unless we do something MEANINGFUL! LIKE:
Close the Departments of Energy, Education, & Housing immediately. Cancel all federal union contracts and dissolve all government pensions. Cut the rest of the fed budget 20% ACROSS THE BOARD. Make ALL federal employees, both elected and appointed part of social security and medicare; no more 'cadillac' special pensions and privileges. Then, pull an Andy Jackson (The First Democrat Prez!) and tell the Supreme Court when they try to stop it all, as they assuredly will, to quote: "You made the decision; you enforce it!"
Somebody tell me I'm wrong and crazy; PLEASE!
218phil| 12.10.10 @ 1:03AM
You read my mind. It's sad to think that if things don't get worse we will slide right back into the same swamp. It will just be different lobbyists serving the same masters. When did cronies get to be called capitalists? I moved north in the 80's, scary times, price controls, Nixon, Ford, Carter! American Spectator saved me. Without the intellectual stimulation of American Spectator I would be brain dead. Keep it up guy's, we need you more than ever.
GavInTucson| 12.10.10 @ 2:37AM
When you say, "The republicans do not get it, yet; although I think they're starting to" I'm not so sure.
Sure, the people get it, but the Republican politicians inside the D. C. bubble, for the most part, don't. I don't foresee any future effort on their part to dig into the crevasses of government appointees, and start firing them.
They'll remain firmly entrenched.
simon templar| 12.9.10 @ 12:32PM
Thank you Dan! Great post! Mr.Tyrrell..I have two books you might want to purchase and read; the first is, Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg and the second, The Naked Communist, by W. Cleon Skousen. The American Progressive Globalist is clearly in control and has successfully moved its agenda forward over the last century an half. I have to be honest and blunt with you, however, and must say that I was a bit stunned by your article and the fact that you are a founder of the American Spectator. Perhaps my expectations are unrealistic but I was expecting a much more politically mature and educated opinion. You do not really believe in this punch and judy show about republican vs. democrat? Constitutional Republicanism and Liberty is in great danger and has been severely damaged after a century of Socialist Progressivism.
reasonable doubt| 12.9.10 @ 2:42PM
Excellent observation!!!!
Norman56| 12.9.10 @ 10:37PM
True! We need to keep the Weenies of the GOP from selling out the Conservatives yet again and again and again...as they have for years. Stand firm, stay the course as Gipper would have said, and keep your powder dry! remove RiNO's, and instill in our kids moral, historical American values!
Failing that, RELOAD!
Jack Olson| 12.9.10 @ 9:43AM
Tyrrell is right. The reason so many Democrats are angry with Obama over his concessions in the recent tax bill is that he understands better than they how firmly the voters rejected his policies last month. A good example of this denial is their retention of Pelosi as their leader in the House in spite of a disastrous electoral defeat.
PolishKnight| 12.9.10 @ 12:39PM
I don't think Obama really "got it" so much as his understanding that if he didn't concede, and taxes went up, it was his own blue and purple state electorates who stood to lose the most in tax increases. He recognized that this was a game of "chicken" he couldn't win.
Thanks to Zimbabwe monetary policies along with environment wackoness of the past few decades, gas prices are going up. How much does it cost to heat one of those luxury barns outside of Yale and Harvard? And for each dollar that gas prices go up, that's less money for buyers to blow on overpriced real estate.
Ironically, the left's argument that drilling is stupid because, hey, it takes a few years for oil to be produced in decent quantity has them trapped. Obama probably wishes he could drill his way out of this mess right now. He has to dig deeper and build more windmills. That'll do it! (Windmills made in Germany, of course).
Norman56| 12.9.10 @ 10:40PM
...and windmills that have to produce at a much higher cost than we are used to, in order to even break even. Looking at a 40% increase of the utility output for that to happen, minimum. That is because their base is screaming No Nukes! still, despite the fact it is cheap, safe, and reliable.
Bob K.| 12.9.10 @ 10:24AM
Stop calling them "liberals." The word retains too many good connotations from it's previous meanings.
The men and women running the Democratic party are members of the "Left" (and in the USA the leaders of the party occupy the outer reaches of the left) which is why the party got hammered this past election. The average democratic voter finally realized this and voted accordingly.
The definition of "leftwinger" still remains the same. Keep calling these people leftwingers! It defines them sharply. Calling them "liberal" only helps attract the softer headed members of the electorate to their causes!
Let the conservatives, members of the "Right," finally define who these people are!
St. Thor| 12.9.10 @ 10:25AM
I just wonder why Mr. Tyrell calls them "friendly" fascists. Is it because they feel up airline passengers?
Pete| 12.9.10 @ 10:37AM
I hope you are right. Nevertheless, I fear the Republican propensity for casting caution to the winds and making a bold play for the aquatic mammalian vote.
A. C. Santore| 12.9.10 @ 11:20AM
Dare I answer the title question differently?
"What Next for Liberals? Friendly Fascism or Compassionate Totalitarianism?"
Anthony| 12.9.10 @ 11:26AM
Right on Bob!! Our friendly fascists can't even get the postal service to operate at a modest loss, let alone get Amtrak to operate in the black and run on time. Where's conductor Joe Bitme when we need him? ALL ABOARD!!!, next stop: Obamaville and the summer of recovery.
Please watch your step as you depart the train, when you step over all those mortgage foreclosed homeless yuppies.
In the great state of NY, only the libs could manage to have off track betting run in the red, dead last, to complete the metaphor. These clowns can't even make a profit on gambling and they want to run health care!!!
If you want to end prostitution, put Ds in charge, in no time, bordellos will be boarded up.
Make jokes about Mussolini all you want, but ole Benito could teach Obozo and his allies a thing or two about keeping the trains and the bordellos running in the black, (randy gent that he was) and unlike Eliot Spitzer, Benito kept both socks and boots on, what a guy!!
Well here's to 2012: " Tippy canoe and platypus too!!
Peter V| 12.9.10 @ 11:38AM
I would not be too quick in putting the last nail in the liberal coffin. I've heard the funeral announcement for liberalism before, just as I've heard about the death of conservatism several times over the last five decades.
It is very likely that the Republicans will put a dud in the ring against Obama. Whether that sacrificial lamb is an undesirable Massachusetts Mormon, an unlikeable Gingrich or a Christine O'Donnell reincarnation doesn't matter. We could have 12 percent unemployment and Sarah would still lose to Barak by 10 points. The primaries are primed to for a Republican debacle unless a dynamic unknown can make an Obamanesque insurrection. Neither do I have confidence in a Republican takeover in the Senate. There are plenty of aspiring political perverts ready to grab a senate nomination for the Republicans. Then I can go to the Daily Kos and read the final epitaph for conservatism, again.
Bob Miller| 12.9.10 @ 12:01PM
None of us knows what's likely. Just do the best thing.
PolishKnight| 12.9.10 @ 12:24PM
It's a quibble, but a big one.
RET says: "[outside of] a few enthusiasts wedded to identity politics, Liberalism is not very popular."
That is just so wrong in so many ways. Let's start with the claim that there being a "few" enthusiasts wedded to identity politics. Race based preference entitlement groups vote overwhelmingly for the left including the ever-increasing Hispanic bloc. The hopes of GW Bush and other so-called "neo-cons" to embrace this electorate on "social issues" via looking the other way at illegal immigration and racist preferences is a massive failure. On the contrary, Hispanics are just behind African-Americans in the rate of unwed births.
That segways quite neatly into feminism. Most conservatives have swallowed the premises of feminism from the 1950's hook, line, and sinker. They agree that women are entitled to absolute legal equality with men but without those pesky responsibilities such as supporting a two parent family (or themselves if a man is absent via the welfare state or "child support" for bastard children.) Up until recently, women married to conservative men were about as likely to vote leftist as unmarried women but now that the supply of chivalrous men with big wallets is running short, they are slowly coming to realize that the gravy train is coming to an end.
The left's primary agenda is survival of the brand. Look at China. They're slowly moving to a so-called free market/crony capitalist economy but keep communism in name only. As much as the left rails against "evil corporations", they'll always dream of marrying into the right family and winning the lottery by getting a CEO position and make millions a year writing mission statements and hobnobbing with other wealthy crony capitalists at leftist events and having Bill Gates Sr. hide their assets in trust funds while preaching "taxing the rich."
In the meantime, well meaning but naive conservatives wage Stalingrad battles over abortion and gay marriage.
Oh, wait, I said I was going to criticize RET's statement in another way. Here it is: identity group beneficiaries, as seen above, really don't care about leftist ideology anymore than the poor going to a church soup kitchen are wedded to Christianity. (Not to demean the merit of Church soup kitchens!) Most identity group welfare-state race-entitlement beneficiaries don't even know who Karl Marx was. They wouldn't even recognize his picture. They don't even care about wealth class politics. To them, it's about race, gender, or keeping their entitlements and nothing more. And there are a LOT of them! So trying to fight this battle and convert them over by preaching free market economics and "raising all boats" isn't going to change their minds anymore than trying to lecture a looter at a riot that it would behoove him to put the TV back.
There is one small silver lining but it's wedded to a very nasty storm cloud: The left's love for the welfare state and it's beneficiaries makes it about as tenable as the former USSR but... look at the residents of the nations of the former USSR. Would you want to live in Moldavia? Few manufacturing centers still going, lots of worthless degrees handed out, jobs issued based upon political and family patronage, and crumbling infrastructure. But enough about Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Is there a way out? I think so but I doubt few here would buy it: The left has survived by warping and exploiting worthwhile issues: helping the poor, outsourcing, environmentalism, and even alternative energy. These rightly should be conservative issues but we're playing on defense. I have an idea... how about proposing a bill that eliminates offshoring and cracks down on illegal immigration AND is combined with a civil rights bill for workers that eliminates gender and race preferences? Watch the left sputter as they try to kill a bill with their favorite stuff inside while defending an Orwellian racist policy.
Sigh, instead, most conservative politicians will run on "tough on crime" and "ban gay marriage and abortion" platforms that don't resonate with the voters. Or maybe just an "anti-Obama" agenda which is reactionary by definition and won't get much more than a 52% majority...
JP| 12.9.10 @ 12:48PM
Polish Knight,
There is an old saying, "... and this too must pass." The global economy is living on borrowed time. Simply put, most nations are out of money. Even that tiger, China, is on thin ice. It continues to build huge towns that remain empty, build power stations that power empty factories; and in the mean time they are spending thier $2-3 trillion of surplus US securities. China's 10% annual GDP is built on sand. And just think when a large portion of China's 300 million workers get pink slipped.
There is much blame to go around; avarice, greed, a generation of cheap mortgage credit; unsustainable First World entitlements; birth control, you name it. The years 1983-2007 in the future will be known as the Golden Years.
PolishKnight| 12.10.10 @ 2:36AM
JP, I'm reminded of the scene in Monty Python's Life of Brian where the Judean Liberation Front's suicide squad kills themselves in front of Roman soldiers and proclaims: "We sure showed them, didn't we?"
For good or ill, the left has a plan. Sure, it's shallow and even contradictory and morally bankrupt, but they inspire their (remaining) elitist leftist followers who haven't yet taken themselves out of the gene pool with visions of a utopian future. We are just waiting for civilization to collapse. Oh, wait, they're basically just making that happen as soon as possible. I suppose that seems empowering in a way.
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 12:38PM
Mr.Tyrrell..I have two books you might want to purchase and read; the first is, Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg and the second, The Naked Communist, by W. Cleon Skousen. The American Progressive Globalist is clearly in control and has successfully moved its agenda forward over the last century an half. I have to be honest and blunt with you, however, and must say that I was a bit stunned by your article and the fact that you are a founder of the American Spectator. Perhaps my expectations are unrealistic but I was expecting a much more politically mature and educated opinion. You do not really believe in this punch and judy show about republican vs. democrat? Constitutional Republicanism and Liberty is in great danger and has been severely damaged after a century of Globalist Progressivism. You might also read, Mark Levins, Liberty vs Tyranny.
Anthony| 12.9.10 @ 1:10PM
Simon ole chap, your smarmy cant to RET is a bit over the top, don't you think? Do you honestly think RET hasn't read or has a copy of Liberal Fascism? Or even the Naked Communist, which I admit I have not heard of? The man has been fighting the good fight, can we admit that much? If you feel cheated, offer up some lucre to TAS for Bob's book collection.
And by the way, Levin's book is entitled Liberty and Tyranny.
simon templar| 12.9.10 @ 1:52PM
No. I don't not think it is over the top. If he had read Liberal Fascism he would not be framing the discussion of Liberalism as he does in his article. In fact he would not be using the word liberal in the first place. Given your comment, I would surmise that you have not read the book either. To make the claim that "Liberalism" is dead or has suffered a tremendous defeat is really out of touch with reality. A person making such a comment seems to be historically illiterate, does not truly understand the political players and movements of the last century, nor seems to demonstate understanding of what the good fight is really about. Yes, I lived long enough to know that age, experience, and degrees do not neccessarily equate with political maturity and astute understanding. Furthermore, I have met many conservatives and republicans that do not seem to grasp anything beyond the simple notions and pervailing opinions that circulate today as the conventional wisdom. This is dangerous. We can no longer afford to be ignorant, uninformed, or cling to old political paradigms. Thanks for the correction on the title of Levin's book..I lent my copy to a friend and did not have it in front of me. The content of his book, however, was remembered and had a great impact upon me.
Anthony| 12.9.10 @ 2:41PM
Say what??? You accuse RET of misapplying the word liberal when Goldberg himself called it Liberal Fascism, as opposed to say, Modern American Fascism.
Wow, you are a smarmy piece of work. And yes, I have read LIBERAL Fascism, and much more.
That said, I agree with your larger point, although you write in criptic phrases, like those of a musing academic. I think you take Bob's words too literally. I think we get the larger historical picture here as well.
But just today, Obozo made a huge admission against the lie called liberalism or socialism, that frankly, should have the new congress drawing up impeachment proceedings.
Obozo has admitted, after years and decades of lies and propaganda, that supply side economics actually works, by claiming that extension of the Bush tax rates have been and will continue to spur the economy. Conversely, he tells his kook base that failure to extend the tax rates will cause a double dip recession. This is huge.
Now, this does not mean that liberalism is dead, I agree, but this is a sure sign that liberalism has suffered a severe blow, if this gets further national play, in that a major tenant of liberalism has been exposed for the monstrous lie that it is. Same with AGW and the entire premise behind the left's One World Order.
All in all, I'd say world liberalism is not doing all that well. If we remain strong and resolute, we can put the stake through the heart of liberalism once and for all.
RET has been a soldier in the fight for a very long time, cut him some slack.
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 4:00PM
You never read the book. He uses the term Liberal Fascism as a teaser title because the conventional understanding of these two terms are that they are opposites. He then describes the true history of "liberalism" in all its forms and various names over the last century and a half. Particularly interesting is his analysis of how true american liberalism and liberal thought had been high jacked and infected with European collectivism and socialist philosophy starting in the 19th century. Believing that a little political dust up about the tax rates in Washington spells the demise or the very least a severe blow to liberalism, the democratic party, or globalist progressivism is ridiculous and immature. You need to wake up..you already live in a socialist/progressive society..what remains is mostly illusion and remnants of the constitutional republic that our founders created over two hundred years ago. What's dying here is the last vestiges of self government and liberty. I suggest you read, The Naked Communist, particulary the platform of the American communist party in 1958 and its objectives which is outlined by the author in the book. Ninety percent of these objectives have already been realized. There is a much larger picture here than Bush tax cuts, the Obama presidency, or the democratic party. No, I do not think that you see this larger picture. Nor do I think that you have an accurate and comprehensive understanding of history either. Yes, I can cut RET some slack. But I also think it is extremely important to identify the enemies of liberty and call them by their true names not the ones they would like for us to use in describing them. Most importantly it is vital to accurately describe just who they are and what their objectives are. It is also important to distinguish true American Liberalism which did exist from the false progressive, socialist, communist and international globalist prophets that have dominated political landscape for over a century. In the end it really not about parties, tax cuts, politicians, elections and who won them. Its about a clash of two philosophies that has been going on for thousands of years. Are you capable of self government and the free exercise of liberty with responsibility or do you need an elite to rule you?
LibertyAtStake | 12.9.10 @ 1:00PM
The good news, this time, is we are ahead of the curve re-discrediting the "Progressive" label. Who knows, maybe we can keep them distracted for a couple of generations in the search for a new label.
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
Howard| 12.9.10 @ 1:02PM
Why is it we are called "Right Wingers" and they are called "Progressive"? Why not call them "Leftists". If we can capture enough of the young generation and Hispanic voters, we will rule forever!
Wayne | 12.9.10 @ 1:47PM
I ask "progressives", what is their end game? What are progressing towards? And here they fail. It ends up with some kind of utopia. I then ask, if they mind if the rest of us decide to make up the rules and push our rules onto them. I am vegetarian, so how about we require everyone to be vegetarian. How about we make a decision that in order to become energy independent, we ramp up drilling and capture of natural gas and build nuclear plants till we finally produce all the energy we need. After all lets pass the authority around. No, these fools think only they get to make the rules.
Clinton Lovell| 12.9.10 @ 2:29PM
I remember well the media celebrating the death of conservatism just two years ago. Now we see a new wave and people think the tide has turned and we will be saved - Mr. Tyrell included.
All of these people are deluding themselves.
This is no longer about who controls Congress or the White House - that is playing the game for chump change. The Federal Reserve determines prosperity and the Federal Reserve gave out more than $12 trillion - an amount equal to three (3) times the total government spending on an annual basis - to favored nations, banks and other lucky ones who were well-heeled. The Federal Reserve did this without anyone's knowledge, anyone's approval or any debate, but each and every one of us is on the hook for the entire amount.
My point is that our reckless central banking system, haphazard way of managing our capital markets and failed commercial banking system will have a greater impact on the fortunes of conservatives than the Democratic Party ever will and anyone who disputes this is a prize fool of the highest order. Make no mistake, the policies of the Federal Reserve and the way we operate our markets and banking systems have everything to do with how much poverty there will be, how long the recession will last and how we will create prosperity in the future.
If you are watching Congress and rubbing your hands together with glee, do us all a favor and go look at the fool in the mirror. You and your money are going to be parted.
Seek| 12.9.10 @ 2:41PM
Actually, "Friendly Fascism" was the title of a popular book published 30 years ago by leftie sociologist Bertram Gross, excoriating the forces of dominant social control in today's America. He argued, in essence, that we live in a fascist society, but don't really know it. Think of him as the Naomi Klein of his time.
Unwittingly, Jonah Goldberg's book, "Liberal Fascism," echoes the same points made by Professor Gross, albeit from the opposite side of the spectrum. I consider both books to be highly dishonest, but the appearance of Mr. Goldberg's tome recalls Marx's line (one of the few good ones he got off) that history appears first as tragedy and the next time as comedy. Oddly enough, when I see Jonah Goldberg explaining his half-baked thesis on that idiot Glenn Beck's TV program, I'm not in a laughing mood.
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 2:47PM
Truth hurts, huh Seek?
I notice that you can't refute one fact in Mr. Goldberg's book.
Seek| 12.9.10 @ 3:35PM
Sorry, champ, if I don't have the hours or space to post a long critique. That hardly means Goldberg's book doesn't present itself with barn-sized targets. I read it carefully when it came out some three years ago and concluded that it's mainly dishonest. TAS Online isn't the place to rebut it at length.
The truth hurts: Conservatives -- I am among them -- can't stand to look at the mirror and see some serious flaws.
Fascism remains collectivism of the Right, just as Communism is collectivism of the Left. I oppose both.
Old Soldier | 12.9.10 @ 3:51PM
Only in Europe Sir.
Over here, we never had any use for socialists - Lenin or Mussolini's flavors. Flip sides of the same statist nonsense. Conservatism is the opposite of both. The Republican Party flounders when they forget it.
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 4:21PM
Well you did not read it nor apparently comprehend it either. If you had you would not be using terms like right and left and you would know where exactly this false dichotomy was created. It's a European political invention to describe the seating arrangement of the European parliaments that contained all its various political parties from the communist to the monarchist elitist. There is no right. Its a convenient straw man concept used by leftist and adapted to decribe a false political spectrum here in the US. American conservatism has no relationship, connection, nor history with Fascism. American conservatism is antithetical to fascism. You are misleading people and I suspect that you are deliberately trying to do so. You are not a conservative.
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 4:27PM
Seek,
Nice try. I didn't ask you to refute the whole book, sport.
I only asked you to refute ONE fact from his book. That should be easy for someone who claims to have "read it carefully," right?
Otherwise, you are admitting to having discomfort being confronted with the truth, as I stated.
Seek| 12.9.10 @ 4:52PM
Refute one point Goldberg made? Okay, I'll take an easy example.
Goldberg, not exactly a film critic, termed "Dead Poets Society" a fascist movie, something that Hitler could be comfortable with. I find that point to be so preposterous and illiterate that it calls into question everything else in the book. For a full-scale rebuttal from me, you'll have to wait. Perhaps in the meantime, you can dig up Bertram Gross' book and read it.
I feel no discomfort at reading "Liberal Fascism" because its "truths" were nothing of the sort. Your debating points, as an aside, leave something to be desired.
As the presumptuous Mr. Kishego, Marx was wrong on principle, but even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day. It hurts to say it, but he made a few telling observations. That doesn't constitute a de facto endorsement of his work.
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 5:07PM
Seek,
"I find that point to be so preposterous and illiterate that it calls into question everything else in the book."
That is not a refutation. That is a personal opinion. That is why you think it was easy, you didn't do anything.
I'm still waiting.
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 5:17PM
Nick..do not waste any more time on this idiot called Seek....the troll just wants to stir up trouble, distract, and mislead people. He does not want to be bothered by facts, history, reason, or honest argument. Hell, you could have the author provide absolute proof that Hitler actually wrote, Dead Poets Society, and he would argue that this was conservative lies. Of course, he did not. My God, why waste anymore time with these idiots or their lame post.
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 5:31PM
I know....I know....Mr. Saint.
But I can't help myself.
I just love showing the vapidness and ignorance of the stinking libs who post here.
Seek| 12.10.10 @ 6:27PM
Some people are worth debating and some are not. You fit into the latter category. If you insist on believing that there exists a clear kinship between John Dewey and Woodrow Wilson on one hand and Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler on the other (and that was precisely the main point of Goldberg's book), go ahead. Few will take you or Sadistic Simon seriously.
Nick| 12.10.10 @ 7:30PM
Seek,
"Some people are worth debating and some are not."
A typical response from a bleeding heart liberal with the intellectual prowess of Jethro Bodine.
Besides, Mr. Goldberg's main point was that fascism was just another form of socialism. And that many famous memebers of the left in Europe, and America, were very fond of it.
After WWII they had to rewrite history, like their hero Stalin. And Useful Idiots like yourself keep repeating the Big Lie.
Nick| 12.10.10 @ 7:32PM
p.s. Still waiting for that ONE fact Mr. Goldberg got wrong in his book.
Dale on the left coast| 12.11.10 @ 4:03PM
Fascism is leftism/socialism/communism-lite . . . . Mussolini invented it, he was a huge fan of Marx and Engels and a devoted socialist. Mussolini was certainly slightly to the right of Stalin . . . . but he was far to the left of Churchill. Neither Mussolini or Uncle Adolf had a "Right Wing" bone in their bodies . . . committed Socialists/leftists both . . . go read their speaches.
National Socialist German Workers Party = (NAZI).
Kishego| 12.9.10 @ 4:16PM
"(one of the few good ones he got off)" excuse me but, there was NOTHING good about karl marx, PERIOD. The man was evil. I suppose you think mao was a thoughtful philosopher with a few good ideas as well eh.
martin j smith| 12.9.10 @ 3:49PM
No, not fascism but Marxist-Lenenist revolutionary street rioting. That is more like what is in store for us. See riots in London today over increase in college tuition.
Perusha| 12.9.10 @ 4:01PM
Hope is for dopes.
The best attitude to continually abide in, and AS, is to work for the best outcome and be prepared for, or even EXPECT, the worst. Why?
Because the future may be unknown, by definition---it hasn’t happened yet!---in all its details. However, meta-understandings hide in bright light, in hoary expressions, like:
The trend is your friend.
Concomitantly, each of us humans in still somewhat free America, as self-interested beings, use whatever POWER we have to look out for number ONE---and not the ONE selected to be our “leader”.
Vested interest rules!
Therefore, ask yourseves where are the majority of stakeholders with the majority of POWER---who are these people?
We have met the enemy, and they are us---thanks, Pogo!
We like to use the fact that union membership, as a percentage, has declined to seemingly a rump portion of the labor force. However, we do worry that public unions are growing, STILL, and make up an ever-larger part of total labor unions.
Well, I think we should forget about OFFICIAL union numbers, and keep in mind that if over 50% of our workers are employed by entities whose income is TAXES, then our real problem is that the “union” of UNOFFICIAL public “workers” is already dominant.
In short, the labor force is under the thumb of an out of control monopoly, known as “government”.
In my leftwing state of Oregon, which continues to be ruled by majorities from Portland, Eugene and Salem, in the southern town of Medford, where I live, even as it looks and feels like a depression, the state government regularly finds the money to be repairing perfectly useable sidewalks NEXT TO the state offices.
This in-my-face abomination contrasts painfully, on my daily walks, with the unbelievable number of empty buildings in the downtown---there is no doubt in my observing eye that at least half of them are either for rent or for sale!
Another thing---traffic is almost nonexistent on weekends, unlike around four years ago.
Of course, for an old fart like me, who enjoyed playing outside with the 20 or so kids on my block, in the 50’s---in Portland---empty streets have long been the norm, anyway.
Basically, then, all the on-the-margin TODAY hype about this tax or that regulation misses the truth---Americans have ALREADY crossed the tipping point, and are ineluctably being drawn back to earth by the “gravity” of their choices.
Probably most emblematic of our situation is all things considering “money”.
Since money, power and sex dominate our daily “evolved” consciousness, and have for a long time, and indeed have reached obsessive heights of concern for the vast programmed majority, we resemble a fish in water, unaware of what we are swimming in.
What is “money”?
We must return to our most basic Reality, and it AIN’T “money”!
A dollar is a SYMBOL that society has agreed to use to RE-PRESENT truly useful stuff---we must eat FOOD. Just try to eat a dollar!
Actually, these days, the whole world seems to be trying to EAT the “dollar”, eh?
The “dollar”, aka the financial system, is a fractured banking house of cards, as can be witnessed in all the riot and rumpus amok in so many places where just reckoning is rightfully taking place---a trend, my friends, that is sure to continue.
Every previous new weapon in history was used, so mankind has long been concerned that the future inevitably would include setting off nukes. Still hasn’t happened, but, hey---time keeps on slippin’, slippin’ into the future.
NOW, it looks like the real “nuke” bomb that even this very instant is spreading across the world is: the cyber war!
Peter’s Principle meets the Information Revolution, flavored by the spice of deluded leftists in America’s ruling government.
An EMP to take out the noosphere!
Reality doesn’t “give” a s*it! It’s “taking” one, though, right NOW!
Liberal Reader| 12.9.10 @ 6:16PM
Fascism? Give me a break. What are you? A fuck nut? Do you know what fascism is? You need to get to a library and read some. It's a shame to see a man grow old before he's grown wise.
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 6:56PM
Yeah, We do. Fascism is an italian word derived from Latin, meaning a "bundle of sticks." It is a modern political philosophy largely invented by a Italian communist named Mussolinni who saw a third way for socialist revolution that would, unlike pure socialist theory, collude with Big Business rather than collide with it. All institutions of society would be bundled tightly together under a dictator that would direct the nation toward socialist goals and the advancement of the nation as a whole. Would you like to now throw some explicatives and name calling as a typical liberal response. Oh, don't forget some downright lies and historical revisionnism. Just trying to help!
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 12.9.10 @ 7:14PM
We took a shellacking, Liberal Reader. Long time no read. I see you haven't lost that keen wit. This isn't the politics of the moment. This has to do with what can we get done right now. Now this is wit and you can see what a pro is capable of. I needed you to sell the summer of recovery and the Chevy Volt and you were no where to be seen. Now that it is obvious that this summer was all the recovery we are going to get with me as President here you are again trying to encourage Republicans. I have to make an exception for you. No you can't. You are willing to be dishonest but you are not smart enough to pull it off. Just turn the TV on and leave the brilliant politics to me. Don't ask, don't tell about Cap and Trade, Gitmo, rendition, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bush tax cuts, etc., baby.
Alan Brooks| 12.9.10 @ 8:05PM
"Fascism? Give me a break. What are you? A fuck nut?"
These Rightwing extremists only care about themselves. They put us on notice November 2nd: "we own this country."
Dale on the left coast| 12.11.10 @ 4:07PM
The nation was in shambles.
A previous ruler had led the country into an unnecessary war, the economy was failing, and a sense of depression filled the air.
Then, a new leader emerged. He was a powerful speaker, offering hope, change, and a fix to the economy.
He wrote two books about his experiences and used his literary work to propel him to success.
He called for unity and considered himself an advocate of peace.
Some of his political opponents cast him as naive and inexperienced.
He also had a lot of radical ties, but the media, and ultimately the voters, were willing to overlook that.
His Party slogan was "Common Good Before Inidividual Good".
His Party made these demands:
"Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed."
"We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood."
"We demand the nationalization of all trusts."
"We demand profit-sharing in large industries."
"We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose."
"We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare."
This man had NO business experience, this man was primarily a 'Community Organizer' and was a motivator.
This man gave his first speech to a gathering of 2000 people - the speech he gave that day changed the world forever.
The answer is of course Adolf Hitler the leader of the 'National Socialist German Workers Party' (NAZI).
Darren | 12.9.10 @ 8:10PM
Yes, it's a good thing they threw the big spending liberals out & replaced them with big spending conservatives! Fools.
PCP Smoker| 12.9.10 @ 9:13PM
"Sam Tanenhaus ...The Death of Conservatism"
As much as I liked his biography of Whit Chambers, this dumb motherfucker ended up, out of his own volition, as the dude who gets caught with his pants down while holding his willy.
He had his head so far up Liberalism's ass that he completely missed the reawakening of the conservative majority.
I thank Socialist Hussein for exposing this creep. Tannenhouse, pull up your pants and get off the stage, you moron!
Simon Templar| 12.9.10 @ 10:10PM
Wow. I think we just got hit with a stinky non-sensical lib bomb in the last 6 posts. Alan and his duck freind I see are back but dropping Acid this time. Well, what are they going to do...the revolution is falling apart by the seams..all they got left is word salad...
MacAoidh | 12.10.10 @ 1:47AM
What sheer claptrap!
MacAoidh | 12.10.10 @ 1:48AM
There are many fine conservatives in the platypus community capable of landslide victories over the president in 2012.
Margie| 12.10.10 @ 11:36AM
Couldn't have said it better myself, MacAoidh!
Robert Morrow| 12.10.10 @ 7:43PM
Look around, we all ready have Fascism. There is the FDA, which has just been given an great increase in power over the citizens. The FDA is corrupt and approves poison Drugs which the Pharmaceutical with there billions of dollar bought the uncontrolled Dictators. The FDA leaders help kill/murder 100 citizen every 22 minutes with approved drugs. Yet your corrupt bought and paid off Elected Official just increases the Power of The FDA, EPA, FCC, TSA and the list goes on. These Agency are Prosecutor, Judge, Jury and Executioner. You are guilty in their Kangaroo Court and will be punished because you want to grow your own vegges, milk you own cow or be self sufficient. The FDA has already sent their Gestapo Storm Trooper in to harass small family and bring terror to their children, just because they want to have healthy foods instead of poison food produces by the big food processor. Another do not do not grow to many Vegetables in your Garden as big brother will come after you. If you do not believe what I write, just look it on search. I have videos clips of these terror actions and OH Yes, Obama does lie as I have Videos clips of that too. Stop big brother NOW.
Yosemeti Sam| 12.11.10 @ 1:46PM
" What Next for Liberals? ...."
Hopefully, political cannibalization.
Tom| 12.12.10 @ 12:12PM
I do not understand how the left can be considered liberal or progressive. What is liberal or progressive about a party that wants a dictatorship form of gevernment? We have had them since the strongest man became chief of the clan.
The dictator of Italy that wanted to raise up Rome was a socilaist who was kicked out of the party. He formed his own party and named it fascism but in reality he was a socialist.
Hitler was also a socialist the therm Nazi was never the official name of his party. Nazi was first in a newspaper article and thus the nickname of the National Socialist Party. His aim was world domination.
Engles, Marx were socialist and Lennen brought socialism to Russia. Stalin was not a socialist but a communist and was after world domination as was Lennen. It was Stalin that declared socialism dead in the U.S.S.R. and was now a communist form of government or a dictatorship.
All socialist know that socialism is but a step toward communism and the aim of the communist is world domination thru a dictatorship form of government.
Now will someone explaine to me how a socialist, commonist can be progressive and a liberal.
Theodore D. Davis| 12.13.10 @ 5:20PM
For those of you who can not clearly differinciate between what is "Left" and what is "Right"; watch the following U-Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y43a6BsNQb4
weddingdress | 7.15.11 @ 5:17AM
Yet your corrupt bought and paid off Elected Official just increases the Power of The FDA, EPA, FCC, TSA and the list goes on. These Agency are Prosecutor, Judge, Jury and Executioner. You are guilty in their Kangaroo Court and will be punished because you want to grow your own vegges, milk you own cow or be self sufficient. The FDA has already sent their Gestapo Storm Trooper in to harass small family and bring terror to their children, just because they want to have healthy foods instead of poison food produces by the big food processor. Another do not do not grow to many Vegetables in your Garden as big brother will come after you. If you do not believe what I write, just look it on search. I have videos clips of these terror actions and OH Yes, Obama does lie as I have Videos clips of that too. Stop big brother NOW.