Displaying the most recent of 90433 posts written by

Ruth King

Life after Capitalism By George Gilder

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2021/11/01/life-after-capitalism/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=top-of-nav&utm_content=hero-module

The information theory of economics

Anyone determined to provide a “new economics” must haul a heavy burden of proof up a steep slope of professional resistance. At the summits of academic prestige, economics presents a Delphic façade of math and marble.

A still higher barrier faces anyone suggesting major modification to the entrenched system of reasonably free markets and economic incentives associated with “capitalism.” Within recent memory, exponents of free markets — myself included — were celebrating a triumphalist “end of history.” Even China’s “Communist Party” and “Middle Kingdom,” self-consciously central in the order of the universe, were thriving as a self-evidently capitalist regime. China’s entrepreneurs were as “free to choose” as any “robber baron” of yore, particularly if their field was sufficiently technical to baffle the bureaucracy and so long as they didn’t under any circumstances compare their rulers to Winnie-the-Pooh.

With the U.S., Europe, and China all essentially organized by markets, dissenters retreated to government-funded universities, cranky leftist redoubts such as Harvard and the New York Times, and green movements thriving on money and lawyers from the disgruntled families of penitent or deceased entrepreneurs.

As autodidact supply-side paragon Jude Wanniski put it in 1980 — with credit to economists Arthur Laffer and Robert Mundell — to most observers, capitalism is simply “the way the world works.” And Wanniski was proved right. I long had criticized him for his judgment that Communist regimes were merely capitalist in a disguise of incompetence. But even this view may prove prescient, as today market-oriented regimes are blithely donning the same disguise.

With banks essentially nationalized and stultified by regulators and no longer making loans to entrepreneurial companies; with the nation recently locked down and masked because of COVID at the caprice of germophobic governors; with energy usage regulated, subsidized, priced, and litigated by bureaucrats around the globe out of a demented fear of CO2 emissions; with education run by manipulative ideologues with lifelong tenure and government appointments, funded by $1.5 trillion in guaranteed student loans; with money pumped up and propagated like gilded gas — we live in a new twilight zone beyond capitalism and freedom.

Thomas Sowell is lapidary: “Freedom is not simply the right of intellectuals to circulate their merchandise. It is, above all, the right of ordinary people to find elbow room for themselves and a refuge from the rampaging presumptions of their ‘betters.’”

Still, for all the complaints in the air, let us give tribute to the far from dismal accomplishments of economic science.

America Enraged An interview with Peter Wood the author of a new book on our culture of political wrath. Mark Tapson

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/10/america-enraged-mark-tapson/

One thing Americans can presumably all agree on in our current cold civil war is that civility, mutual if grudging respect, and rational if testy debate in our political discourse have all been replaced by a hair-trigger performative outrage, the scorched-earth warfare of cancel culture, and even occasional violence. It’s difficult to remember that there was a time when even acerbic antagonists like William Buckley and Gore Vidal could trade barbs onstage without hurling chairs at each other and inciting nationwide rioting. What has happened to us? How did we come to this point? And is this state of rage destined to be a permanent feature of our cultural and political landscape?

Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars and author of the essential 1620: A Critical Response to the 1619 Project, has addressed these questions incisively in a must-read, brand new book titled Wrath: America Enraged. He agreed to answer some questions about the book.

Mark Tapson: Mr. Wood, what is the “new anger,” and what is the difference between anger and wrath in a political context?

Peter Wood: “New anger” is show-off anger, the display of someone who expects to be admired for the performance or to boast about it afterwards: anger mixed with self-delight.  New anger contrasts to the older ethic of trying to master your anger and not to let it master you.  Through much of American history, giving free vent to anger was regarded as a sign of weakness and immaturity.  We admired the man or woman who, when provoked, found ways to handle the situation without descending into rage.  Of course, that kind of self-control often failed, at which point brawls erupted.  Those who brawled in public or in private, however, were not regarded as good people.  Those who turned to anger too quickly or too often were shamed.

“New anger” became a recognizable force in American life in the 1950s, though it was at first a trend confined to avant garde parts of society:  the beat generation, early adepts of Freudian psychoanalysis, and people reading French existentialist novels. From these seeds grew the counterculture of the sixties, and then the disillusioned anger of the Big Chill 1970s.  I am collapsing a lot of history into a few sentences.  The breakdown of the older ideals of emotional self-control and their replacement by a new ethic of emotional expressiveness didn’t happen overnight or all at once or equally in all sectors of society.  Fifteen years ago I spent a whole book (A Bee in the Mouth: Anger in America Now) to describe the slow progression of new anger into the position it now has of cultural dominance.  I’m mindful that whole generations have grown up for whom there is nothing “new” about “new anger.”  It is all they have ever experienced unless they have been immersed in the world of Turner Classic Movies, where you can glimpse a world ruled by different emotional norms.

Fire Marine Corps Commandant David Berger America needs a Marine Corps that wins battles instead of building woke safe spaces. Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/10/fire-marine-corps-commandant-david-berger-daniel-greenfield/

11 Marines came home in boxes after the bombing at Kabul airport carried out by an Islamic terrorist freed from a prison near Bagram Air Base that had been abandoned by Biden. Other Marines were seriously wounded and hospitalized for months after the attack.

All across America there are recruiting billboards for the Marine Corps with the message, “For Marines There Are Only Battles Won”. But in the runup to the disastrous retreat from Afghanistan, the only things the Marine Corps really cared about were wokeness and race.

In April, Biden announced that he would be pulling all American forces out of Afghanistan. That same month the Taliban launched their offensive that would end with a takeover of the country.

When General David H. Berger, Commandant of the Marine Corps, testified before the House Subcommittee on Defense at the end of April, he did not refer to Afghanistan. Even while a skeleton force of hundreds of Marines remained in Kabul, Berger made no mention of them.

Instead, Berger spoke about racism.

Bizarrely enough, Berger began his presentation, not with the threats to the United States that the Marine Corps existed to fight, but by declaring that, “our nation has engaged in a long overdue conversation on race and social justice sparked by several visible incidents of institutional racism”. By that, Berger meant that Black Lives Matter mobs had torched a number of cities and their leftist allies had purged everyone who disagreed from every institution.

Berger assured House Democrats that he was happy to lead the purge of dissenting Marines.

“We have and will continue to actively work to identify recruits and Marines who hold extremist views and we look forward to participating in the Secretary of Defense’s new Countering Extremism Working Group to develop additional methods of keeping extremists from within our ranks,” Berger vowed, declaring war on fellow Marines instead of on America’s enemies.

When is an insurrection not an insurrection? By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/when_is_an_insurrection_not_an_insurrection.html

During the Kavanaugh hearings, hundreds of hysterical leftist activists stormed the Capitol and even managed to break into the Senate chamber. They were arrested and that was the end of it. On January 6, crowds of pro-Trump people, along with undoubted provocateurs and, almost certainly, FBI agents, entered the Capitol. Once in, they wandered around reverently and left—except for Ashli Babbitt, whom a Capitol Police Officer killed in cold blood. January 6 was called an “insurrection,” and Biden’s DOJ is using it as an excuse to hold political prisoners and terrorize into silence those who oppose Trump. And no, it’s not just a new, stricter standard, as Thursday’s “climate justice” riot showed.

Admittedly, the climate fanatics didn’t head for the Capitol. Instead, they besieged the Department of the Interior. Dozens of people managed to enter the building and, as you can see, a “riot”-ous time was had by all, including cops who used tasers to fend off the mob:

And that’s pretty much the beginning and the end of it.

When I check the New York Times’s home page in the wee hours of Friday, there’s no mention of the violent attack against a government agency, although there is a little headline (no link because the Times doesn’t deserve it) that the January 6 panel wants to press criminal charges against Steve Bannon. I don’t see anything about the climate protest on CNN’s home page either, although it has the usual hysteria about a “climate crisis.” I’m willing to bet the same will be true no matter which drive-by media outlet I check.

A healthy, free society cannot exist when there are two legal standards, one for the “in” crowd and one for the alleged “insurrection” crowd. Such blatant double standards mean that we are becoming a country without a rule of law. Instead, as is the case with any tinpot tyranny, the law exists solely to police people who oppose the ruling class.

Bill Ayers, a Familiar Face in the Birth of Critical Race Theory By Jack Cashill

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/bill_ayers_a_familiar_face_in_the_birth_of_critical_race_theory.html

After Attorney General Merrick Garland sicced the FBI on unruly parents protesting Critical Race Theory (CRT) at school board meetings, it came to light that Garland had a dog in the fight.

That dog is son-in-law Xan Tanner, co-founder of Panorama Education, a leading distributor of CRT materials.  Among the materials Panorama has recommended for educators is an essay by terrorist emeritus and Obama pal Bill Ayers.

Titled “I Shall Create! Teaching Toward Freedom,” Ayers’s essay is the first in a 2019 collection by left-wing activist Lisa Delpit. If nothing else, Ayers has been consistent.  He has been pumping out frenetic anti-white cant long before it was cool, let alone mandatory.

Writes Ayers in this recent essay, “We must face reality and courageously confront history, tell the truth, and then destroy the entire edifice of white supremacy: metaphorically speaking it means burning down the plantation.”  The problem now is that Ayers is no longer an outlier.  The same FBI that hounded him and his fellow bombers is now hounding parents who protest his subversive nonsense.

What Ayers thinks would matter less were it not for his outsized influence on the educational philosophy of former president Barack Obama.  Were Obama merely a former president, his thinking would not matter much, either.  But Obama may be more than that.  Even Tucker Carlson has openly speculated that Obama is the guy running the show at the White House.  What seems clear is that Joe Biden is not.  

Equally clear is the mind meld between Ayers and Obama on educational issues.  In Obama’s 1995 memoir Dreams From My Father, the thoughts on educational reform are channeled through the soulful voices of two older African-Americans.  One goes by the name “Asante Moran,” likely an homage to the Afrocentric educator Molefi Kete Asante, whom Ayers knew.  In Dreams, Moran lectures Obama and his pal “Johnnie” on the nature of public education:

“The first thing you have to realize,” he said, looking at Johnnie and me in turn, “is that the public school system is not about educating black children.  Never has been.  Inner-city schools are about social control.  Period.”

When Politicians Panicked: The New Coronavirus, Expert Opinion, and a Tragic Lapse of Reason Hardcover – by John Tamny (Author), George Gilder (Foreword)

When Politicians Panicked tells the tragic story of how, in response to a spreading virus, global politicians mindlessly pursued economic desperation, starvation, and death as the cure.

The global economy was booming as 2020 dawned, but within a few short months wreckage, death, and desperation borne of economic contraction were the new normal. What happened? 

In When Politicians Panicked, economic commentator John Tamny tells the heart-wrenching story of a time when politicians were tragically relieved of basic common sense in their response to the new coronavirus. 

In March of 2020, the virus quickly became a major news item as political panic about it traveled around the world. Even though anecdotal and market-based evidence from the virus’s epicenter indicated very low lethality, politicians quickly imposed economy-crushing lockdowns on the rather specious assumption that unemployment, bankruptcy, and starvation would somehow halt the virus’s spread. 

Tamny methodically dismantles the political consensus by showing how economic growth has long been the first and last answer to death and disease. He then shows how politicians, having mindlessly crushed a growing economy, proceeded to double down on their mistakes by throwing taxpayer money at their shocking errors. 

Throughout When Politicians Panicked, Tamny makes a relentless case that free people don’t just produce the wealth that renders today’s killers yesterday’s news. They also produce crucial information about health threats that shine a light on that which threatens us. Lockdowns suffocate economic progress, but they also blind us to how we can progress—as Tamny makes plain in what will go down as an essential history for anyone seeking to understand the coronavirus panic of 2020.

Will Biden’s Vaccine Mandates Tank The Economy?

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/10/14/will-worker-resistance-to-bidens-vaccine-mandates-tank-the-economy/

President Joe Biden’s command that private businesses require their workers to be vaccinated against COVID-19 is a shocking abuse of presidential power. Just as bad, by discouraging workers from staying on the job, it might tank the economy, which is already reeling from COVID-related shortages and soaring inflation.

On Sept. 9, Biden announced that businesses with 100 or more employees would have to require them to be vaccinated or take weekly COVID tests to prove they don’t have the Wuhan bug. This edict will affect as many as 100 million American workers.

One big problem: Cities, states and counties have in the past had authority to mandate things such as vaccines, not the federal government. Biden is literally creating a new authority for the presidency out of thin air, the kind of thing that authoritarian dictators do.

What’s more, Biden’s “order” is nothing of the sort. He announced it in early September, but has never released written rules for the government to enforce. So as of today, there is no “rule” or “order” to follow. Just a statement to the media.

The problem is, businesses, local and state government agencies, health providers, hospitals and others are forging ahead with their own plans to force workers to take one of the vaccines. And they’re using Biden’s phony “order” for cover.

The city of Boston, for instance, just suspended 812 workers for non-compliance. Boeing says it will require its workers to get vaccinated, or be suspended.

US rejoins UN Human Rights Council, reversing Trump exit By Laura Kelly

https://thehill.com/policy/international/576797-us-rejoins-un-human-rights-council-reversing-trump-exit

“The Human Rights Council is often lambasted for the election of members who hold the worst records for human rights violations and for a disproportionate focus on condemning Israel for alleged human rights abuses compared to other countries. ”

The U.S. on Thursday was elected to serve on the U.N. Human Rights Council beginning next year, rejoining the highly scrutinized international committee after leaving it in 2018 under then-President Trump.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken welcomed the move, saying the council plays a “meaningful role” in protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, but suffers from “serious flaws,” including disproportionate focus on condemning Israel. 

“Together, we must push back against attempts to subvert the ideals upon which the Human Rights Council was founded, including that each person is endowed with human rights and that states are obliged to protect those rights,” Blinken said in a statement.

The secretary had announced in February that the U.S. would return to the council as an observer, part of President Biden’s push to reengage on the global stage in general and among international forums, in particular.

Trump withdrew the U.S. from the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2018, part of a series of withdrawals from international bodies. Then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Niki Haley criticized the council as exercising a “chronic bias against Israel” and a “hypocritical” body that “makes a mockery of human rights.”

America’s state of malaise We have become cynical as Biden starts to blend with Jimmy Carter Peter Van Buren

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/americas-current-malaise-biden/

The word malaise, a general feeling of uneasiness whose exact cause is difficult to identify, is creeping into discussions. It’s a politically loaded word, following its use by President Jimmy Carter in 1979 to describe the country he could not figure out to how lead.

Carter’s specific use of the term focused on the energy crisis, when OPEC monkeyed with America’s oil supply. But Carter saw that something much deeper was wrong. There wasn’t just an oil shortage to manage, but a recession of hope, a crisis of confidence that someone would have to lead America out of. He perceived that we were tired, worn down, unable to come together in common purpose and fix something.

It would be interesting to hear what Carter thinks about 2021, when things once again don’t work well. Flights don’t fly. Inflation has returned. Gas is expensive. Supply chain problems mean Americans for the first time since World War Two are rationing and getting used to hearing ‘we don’t have any and aren’t sure when we will’. Unemployment plagues us as COVID tore the wool off of many Americans’ eyes about how little meaningless jobs for sub-living wages contributed to their piggy banks or their sense of self-worth. Nurses who were last year’s heroes for working unvaccinated are fired today for being unvaccinated.

There appears no end to COVID. The promised conclusion, the vaccine, proved as rich a lie as two weeks to flatten the curve. Even fully vaccinated people are prisoners to restrictions and mandates that often make no sense, or at the very least vary so much from state to state as to challenge their usefulness. There is little faith that the economic devastation caused by mismanaged restrictions will ever be addressed; the poor will just get poorer. There is a declining sense that COVID is a problem that can be managed as it has been in much of the world (see Europe, especially Scandinavia). The conclusion is that no one is really in charge.

The 2020 Election Wasn’t Stolen, It Was Vandalized By Democrats, Big Tech, And The Media by John Daniel Davidson

https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/14/the-2020-election-wasnt-stolen-it-was-vandalized-by-democrats-big-tech-and-the-media/

Mollie Hemingway’s new book, ‘Rigged,’ explains how the 2020 election was corrupted by the concerted efforts of America’s most powerful institutions.

Hillary Clinton said Monday in an appearance on “The View” that we’re “in the midst of a concerted, well-funded effort to undermine American democracy.”

She’s half-right. There is indeed a concerted, well-funded effort to undermine American democracy, but it doesn’t come from Donald Trump, whom Clinton claims is responsible for the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and ongoing efforts to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election. (Clinton would know all about questioning the legitimacy of elections; as recently as 2019 she was still repeating the outrageous accusation that Trump was an “illegitimate president” who seized the office by colluding with Russia.)

The former secretary of state and 2016 Democrat presidential nominee is wrong that Trump and GOP leaders are undermining election integrity — they have nothing on her when it comes to that — but she’s right about efforts to seize elections and thwart the will of the voters. Those efforts aren’t coming from Trump but from her own Democratic Party, which colluded with corporate media and Big Tech to tip the scales in favor of Joe Biden and actually undermine the 2020 election.

That’s the subject of an important new book out this week by my colleague, Mollie Hemingway. “Rigged: How The Media, Big Tech, And The Democrats Seized Our Election,” which grew in part from reporting we did at The Federalist in the months before and after the November 2020 election, which chronicled unprecedented changes to election laws in key swing states, as well as appalling abuses of power by local election officials in the days and weeks after Election Day.

“Rigged” doesn’t argue or allege that the election was stolen, but that it was corrupted by corporate media, Big Tech censorship, the courts, and Democratic activists. Taken together, it all amounted to heavy-handed election interference of a kind we have never seen before.