Skip to comments.When the Last Republican Leaves
Posted on 07/04/2014 5:36:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
I dont usually write about political parties and when I do, I dont make broad statements about their intelligence, character, etc. This is in contrast to Paul Krugman at The New York Times, who routinely tells us that Republicans are cruel, heartless, selfish and responsible for almost all our public policy problems.
If only they would go away well hmmmm what would happen if all the Republicans went away?
There are places where there arent any Republicans or at least there are very few. And Ive noticed that one of two things happens. Fearful of how bad things might get, voters in some Democratic cities vote for Republicans anyway. That is, they elect mayors who either are Republicans or at least govern like Republicans.
This has been the pattern in New York City for the past 40 years (up until the last election) and in almost all cases the mayor the city elected had the endorsement of the Gray Lady herself. There are other examples. When Republican Bret Schundler was elected mayor of Jersey City there probably werent more than five Republicans registered to vote there. Chicago has always had mayors who govern like Republicans.
But there are other times and places where this doesnt happen. In these cases, Democrats elect mayors and city council members who think just like they think.
Thats when you get . Detroit.
An unconstrained legislative process is completely free to take from Peter and give to Paul. Or to take from Paul and give to Peter. What you will get is a slew of taxes and a slew of subsidies. There will be minimum prices here, maximum prices there and barriers to entry everywhere. Government will intervene in the marketplace in all manner of ways in order to create benefits for some at the expense of others. Think of sharks in a feeding frenzy.
The trouble with cities run amok is that its so easy to pack up and move to some other city. And thats what many productive people apparently did in Detroit.
What Detroit looks like today. I previously described how the city of Detroit was managed like a Bernie Madoff scheme. Half the people who once lived there are now gone. What they left behind is described in this article from The New York Times:
A task force convened by the Obama administration recommended that the city spend at least $850 million to quickly tear down about 40,000 dilapidated buildings, demolish or restore tens of thousands more, and clear thousands of trash-packed lots.
It also said that the hulking remains of factories that dot Detroit, crumbling reminders of the citys manufacturing prowess, must be salvaged or demolished, which could cost as much as $1 billion more.
It gets worse:
The blight study, which is perhaps the most elaborate survey of decay conducted in any large America city, found that 30 percent of buildings, or 78,506 of them, scattered across the citys 139 square miles, are dilapidated or heading that way. It found that 114,000 parcels about 30 percent of the citys total are vacant. And it found that more than 90 percent of publicly held parcels are blighted.
The political philosophy that gave us Detroit. So how would you describe the political philosophy of the voters in Detroit? The most important thing to ask about any political philosophy is: Who gets what and why? If you ask a conservative Republican (at least one in the classical liberal tradition) that question, he or she probably wouldnt hesitate. People are entitled to whatever they produce themselves or obtain through voluntary exchange with others. That was easy.
But if you ask a liberal Democrat that question, the answer is far from easy. Almost all liberals believe there should be virtually no constitutional restraint on the ability of government to intervene in the marketplace. Which is to say: government should be almost completely free to intervene in ways that take from Peter and give to Paul or vice versa. They also believe that Peter should be able to use any legal means to try to get government to rob Paul for Peters benefit. Ditto for Pauls attempts to rob Peter.
In other words, conservative Republicans tend to believe in an unconstrained economic marketplace, with government only making sure that everyone plays by the rules. Liberal Democrats tend to believe in an unconstrained political marketplace in which there are very few if any limits on governments ability to hand out favors. Although the term dog eat dog competition was originally applied to the economic marketplace, it more aptly applies to the competition that arises under liberal government. In the conservative world view, people should only deal with one another only using reason, persuasion and voluntary exchange. In the liberal world view, almost everything that happens is the result of coercion. One mans gain is invariably another mans loss.
So to return to our original question, what liberals believe you are entitled to is whatever the political system gives you after the shark fest is complete.
Social insurance. But dont liberals profess to at least some higher minded purpose? Yes. They believe in social insurance. So do most conservative Republicans, by the way. But the conservative approach to social insurance is to make it as much like private insurance as possible. That is, create private accounts with firm property rights for Social Security. Do the same for Medicare. If they could, conservatives would privatize the welfare state. The liberal approach is to have as few restraints as possible on what government does with these programs. As a result, under liberal governance the social insurance programs become as much a part of the shark fest as everything else the government is doing.
Instead of having worker payroll taxes put aside in a secure place so that they can pay benefits in retirement, in the liberal world the Social Security and Medicare trust funds are candidates for looting. They are no more off limits than any other candidate for looting. And this of course is what has happened.
Think of the pension funds for city workers in Detroit as one more extension of the liberal belief in social insurance. They got looted too.
Am I missing something? Here is a confession. I have never actually seen a liberal say what I just said. So is there a kinder, gentler way of saying it? Or perhaps a completely different explanation of what liberals actually believe? Ive never seen one.
I think I know why. Liberalism isnt a political philosophy at all. Its a sociology. For the past 80 years, what we call modern liberalism has been one continuous apology for whatever government was doing to intervene in the ecnomy. In all that time, I believe you can find only one consistent principle: people should have no economic rights vis-à-vis government.
Just in case I am wrong, here is my challenge to readers: Where can I find an explanation by a liberal of what you and I are entitled to?
To hell with them. We've got it from here.
Liberals believe that you can bring Utopia on earth by social engineering using coercive methods. Conservatives believe that Utopia is a dream but that governance is a more dangerous master than fire and IT MUST BE CONSTRAINED to remain a servant. The US Constitution reflects the latter view and it is the intent of the former to make it a dead letter document.
Nice article. John Goodman would so well to describe a city that is completely run by Republicans, just for contrast.
Outstanding article. Best one I’ve read in months. Thanks for the post!
Outstanding article. Best one I’ve read in months. Thanks for the post!
Maryland is a great example over 6,000 fortune 500 countries have picked up and left , a millionaires tax has sent the wealthy running for shelter and 47% of Marylander’s would leave if they could afford to . When the current govenor took office there was a surplus in the state treasury , today after 8 yrs. this govenor 0’mally of ours has put us $48,000.000.00 in debt. and created 40 new taxes including a tax on rain . God save us from the libs because the dependent , uninformed minority voter believes this can go on forever . Send troops and save our once proud state .
The democrat/government/labor union/administrative state/media complex are well on their way to eliminating all effective, national opposition.
Unless things change, and fast, America will be Detroit within a generation . . . with one difference.
While the rats intend take and never give up the levers of power in our emerging police state, they cannot allow the GOP to disappear.
Just as Stalin needed Kulaks, the rats require an opposition party to blame for their failures.
While the rats intend to take . . .
Liberals enforce their ideas as a State Religion. They adore their leader’s emperor’s or those anointed by God to be lord and master over the surfs.
It all comes down to this: who has the superior claim to the fruits of my labor — me or government?
Any government that can lay claim to one cent of my property in the name of the public good can lay claim to it all under the same guise. At that point, I am no longer a free man. My freedom depends on the whim of some bureaucrat, not the grace of God.
yes! Just imagine if Republicans started behaving like republicans for a change.
Call liberalism any thing you want. There are dozens of definitions on what liberalism is.
My take on it is, Liberalism is nothing more than a tool of a criminal enterprise to keep people compliant while the treasury is looted. There are always two pieces to liberalism that have happened throughout history. The first is any individual or organization that can shut the enterprise down is eliminated. And the second is all the money disappears.
It’s a cage. To put it another way, liberalism is the Matrix.
With self employment, we have tried to secure a steady income in our retirement years by investing in real estate, rentals. We are very afraid of what is going to happen to our properties when someone decrees that having more than one real estate holding is "not fair", and they take everything from us. We are trying to sell off what we don't need in our retirement years, I am very afraid of what happens to the makers when the SHTF.
Seriously contemplating moving from the US.
“Just as Stalin needed Kulaks, the rats require an opposition party to blame for their failures.”
So true! My problem is that it seems that that is the ONLY purpose the GOP now serves and it seems to be a role that is assumed WILLINGLY.
“Any government that can lay claim to one cent of my property in the name of the public good can lay claim to it all under the same guise.”
Ain’t it amazin’ how tha simplest facts is the hardest fer sum peeple tuh unnerstan’?
let’s not forget GOP tends to eat their own, in turn, helping the Rats.
The RATS, protect their own at all cost....
For the purpose of argument the city of Detroit is low hanging
fruit. I would like to see Goodman explain San Francisco, a city
that is very successful yet firmly controlled by liberals who
don’t appear to govern conservatively. Or, are the conservative
aspects just hidden from plain view?
Over 6000 Fortune 500 companies have left? That doesn’t make sense - are there extra zeroes somewhere?
Successful? At what, serving as homosexual central for the nation? At welcoming the homeless? At supporting politicians whose destructive policies hurt the state and nation?
Nice attempt at a cheap shot and if you had bothered to understand
the context you would understand the ECONOMICS nature of my
post rather than the dubious social aspects of San Francisco. My own
conservative credentials are quite clear from my posting history. But
if we as conservatives are to successfully argue against liberalism
at the local level we must be able to respond to liberals who may
claim that there are successful economic models among liberal led
cities. You need not preach to me about the moral depravation of
San Francisco and other communities.
Yes you are SO right ,, but even I could figure this one out,, there is no such thing as a Fortune 500 countries BUT !!! ,,, there are fortune 500 companies and 6000 have left Md.
,,,, are you my 6th grade grammar teacher Ms. Dooley ???
Sounds like a leftist “solution” for Detroit.... $2 billion just to clean up the eyesores. Make it look better, hide the decline, but fixes absolutely nothing.
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.