Posted on 08/04/2010 6:49:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
So maybe Americans aren’t so different from Europeans after all? If you read a lot of the opinion press—poor lamb—you might be getting the idea that we’re all social democrats now. This would be sad news for Republicans.
Since the dawn of the Obama Tyranny, they have been hoping to frame a stark political contrast between themselves on the one hand, as guardians of American exceptionalism—the spirit of entrepreneurship, small government, self-reliance, individualism, robust commerce, and all the rest of it—and, on the other, Democrats who, while perfectly nice people and terrifically patriotic, have tendencies in the opposite direction, toward an expansive, European view of government intervention, stricter regulation of business, a more lavish provision for the poor, a preference for public over private action, and all the rest of that.
The contrast would flatter Republicans, Republicans reasoned, because Americans themselves are great examples of American exceptionalism, and believers in it. Thus the election this fall and the one two years from now would be a clash of world views, with contending ideas about America’s uniqueness and its place in the world, about what kind of country we all want to have. It would be exhilarating! If true.
And now come many people willing to tell us it isn’t true—even people who wish it were. The notion has been in the air for a while, but I first picked up its scent in a review of The Battle, a new book by Arthur C. Brooks, in the liberal magazine the American Prospect. The theme of The Battle is this same clash-of-world-views idea—the battle of the title is the national argument over American exceptionalism that Brooks thinks is fast approaching. The reviewer, Brink Lindsey, works for the Cato Institute, the libertarian hothouse. A small government guy himself, he might have been thought to be sympathetic.
But no. Lindsey mocked Brooks’s argument by caricaturing it: “Supporters of free markets are defending a unique and precious American heritage, while [their Democratic opponents] have thrown in with the foreigners—worst of all, with effete, decadent Europeans.” In rebuttal Lindsey cited polling data showing that average Americans, when they’re given a pop quiz on economics, are not nearly as amenable to free market ideas as even liberal economists are. A New York Times poll this spring, moreover, found that “76 percent of Americans think ‘the benefits from government programs such as Social Security and Medicare are worth the costs of those programs.’ ” Even Tea Partiers, the Times reported, gave overwhelming support (62 percent) to Big Government programs. Americans are statists at heart.
Lindsey didn’t use the word “hypocrites” to describe a populace that flatters itself for its rugged individualism while panting after the cushy life promised by collectivism—for talking American and living European. The charge of mass hypocrisy came from a columnist for the Washington Post, Anne Applebaum, who wrote a column picking up where Lindsey left off. “Hypocrisy is hypocrisy,” she wrote. “Look around the world and we don’t seem as exceptional as we think.” In fact, we’re worse. “We not only demand ludicrous levels of personal and political safety, we reserve the right to rant and rave against the vast bureaucracies we have created . . . to deliver it.”
This is an old argument, and it never goes away for long. It’s usually revived when articulate people with strong political convictions suddenly see the public, which moments before had been agreeing with them, veering off in a seditious direction. Only a little more than 18 months ago, American voters elected a well-schooled sophisticate to the presidency and thereby demonstrated a long overdue spiritual maturity. Now, having turned on him, they are demonstrating their bad character. Today’s Tea Partiers are up-to-date versions of the Angry White Males who fomented the Republican takeover of the House 16 years ago. One fed-up pundit back then described his feelings about these ingrates with unusual heat: “They are, in short, Big Babies.” Nyah, nyah, nyah. From the wisdom and sophistication they had shown only two years before in electing Bill Clinton and strong Democratic majorities in Congress, they had regressed to the crib, like Benjamin Button.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST
To summarize his article in one sentence, the author says this :
“Despite what liberal pollsters say, we don’t secretly worship big government.”
A huge percentage of freepers are closet statists.
They only oppose the social control that they don’t like.
NO
I generally enjoy Ferguson’s writing because he doesn’t play favorites... But for a slightly more uplifting version, see George Will’s remarks to that notorious libertarian hothouse, entitled “Not a State-Broken People”
I’ve met many Europeans in my day. Brits, Germans, Italians, Spaniards, Poles, Romanians, etc. And one thing I noticed from most of them is how they want to be coddled; how they want to be given a life of leisure from the government for the rest of their days.
On the other side of the pond, here I sit wanting to work, wanting to make money, wanting to upgrade my home, buy things, and intermingle my fun with my work. It’s been completely possible to balance this up to this point, but lately, I’m being forced to do more for less. I’m working later hours, spending more time telecommuting, busting my hump to finish my thesis, while gaggles of people are crying poor despite never even trying to work or study or do anything positive for themselves.
I’m glad this article speaks what it does. I do NOT want to be Europe. I don’t want to be China. I don’t want to be Russia. I want to be America. I want to be a hard working, fun loving, God fearing, gun toting American, and I don’t want any level of government getting in my way!
Why can’t we get this country back on track, guys? We’ve lost God, regardless of your faith background. We’ve lost our kids and our schools. We’ve lost our small businesses. Government needs to go away.
I think most people in the US are statists in one form or another. Liberals are at least honest and overt about it. But there are many “conservatives” who have no problem with having the government regulate private behavior provided that it suits their ends.
Government is too big, too intrusive, too controlling, too expensive.
Americans are over taxed, over regulated, over monitored.
It is time to shut down many bureaucracies in government and repeal some of these insane laws that do nothing more than steal our freedoms.
Are we really free?
Yes, for now, but when big brother governments (local, state, county, federal)dictate how one behaves, what one eats, what you will utilize on a day to day basis.....your freedoms have eroded.
Some laws are good, many are just unnecessary or burdening.
Republicans say they are for smaller government / less regulation........where is the proof of this?
Even under Pub leadership, government has continue to grow larger and larger every decade that passes.
“You and I are human beings; mostpeople are snobs.” - Ed Cummings
Go to any of several threads where local authorities are seizing the home of some crippled widow for not mowing the grass, and you will find that a majority here thunk the neighbors have the right to pass ordinances on property that severe.
When I was a kid, the neighbors would have mowed her lawn.
If they had talked to the sheriff, or the mayor... the sheriff or the mayor would have asked them if THEY had a lawn mower.
The description fits RINOs, they secretly worship big government and pay lip service to limited government.
So true.
Go on any thread about the Insane War on Some Drugs for proof.
Mike Huckabee comes to mind. He came out in support of Medicare and government-run schools, among other things. However, given his Christian background, he would prefer that these programs be run from that perspective, as opposed to a secular perspective.
I also see people on this website who seem to have 0 problem with the government regulating the content on broadcast TV or radio stations, even though such regulation abridges free speech, and the liberals have made no secret of their desire to outlaw conservative free speech by way of such regulation.
I know this post doesn't entirely answer your question, but as I'm on vacation, and I have not had enough coffee, I haven't been able to effectively google for social conservatives who take similar positions.
Huckabee, Bush, Bush, and most people in Real Estate, Accounting, Law, Medicine, anything that has government regulated monopoly or licensing. Home building...the list goes on and on.
Nicely done.
Either that or too young to have experienced such things as riding a bicycle without wearing a helmet, buying a ticket after boarding an airliner--without going through a "security" gauntlet--and getting paid in cash for mowing a neighbor's lawn.
Freedom can't be taken in one fell swoop short of war or revolution. It gets eaten away in increments as the government grows in size and power, providing more services that "the people" have requested through their elected representatives.
A lot of voters are. They love it when a politician promises spending cuts but when cuts to specific programs are mentioned they get angry. So we get a situation where spending keeps to go up and up regardless of which party is in power. We saw that under Bush who loved new entitlements and we sure as hell see it now. Thats what voters go for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.