So you concur, then, that this is not an argument but an attempt to pre-empt argument?

Unfortunately, that hasn't worked so well in the past, which is why they were turned into government functions in the first place.

But let's not let history intrude on our economic fantasizing, eh?

don't you think that when you need four words, two slashes and a hyphen to define an ideology, that you might be reaching just a teensy bit?

I think things like Social Security and Philadelphia public schools are a pretty good argument against government-provided goods and services. -- kdwmson

And an argument for free-market provided goods and services would be what, Love Canal?

It's clumsy, I know, but I resent the appropriation of the word "liberalism" by the partisans of illiberalism. I've been searching for a good substitute for a long time and haven't really come up with one. "Socialism" is really the best description, but that word implies something more extreme that what American-style "liberals" have in mind. Your suggestions are welcome. (Then again, I describe myself as a right-wing Catholic anarcho-capitalist from Texas, so I do try to be precise.)

The people are who they are

And, I , kdwmson, am sure they're dumber than stumps:

...Progressives need to believe that "the people" are on their side or that the people have been duped [...] rather than acknowledge that "the people" are eccentric and myopic and as likely to be motivated by bigotry or rent-seeking or superstition as they are to be enlightened citizens. -- kdwmson Monday, May 7, 2007 07:08 PM

...Americans like getting checks from the government and they don't like gay marriage. They like the war, they hate the war. Bush has huge approval ratings, Bush has dismal approval ratings... There's no secret elite pulling their strings.

Ah, no there isn't. There is nothing secret about the biases, funding, ownership and success of America's most well heard propagandists. Why do you equate this lack of secrecy with an absence of opinion pushing in the "news"media? Is it that you believe "the people" to be so inherently vulgar that they take naturally to hatemongering appeals to their lowest impulses?

But I have to assume there's a reason that smart liberals in politics are afraid to call themselves liberals, and it's not because Rush Limbaugh is doing a massive Jedi mind trick on the electorate.

Right. No Jedi mind trick. It's just that propaganda works, and all of the people can be fooled some of the time. But your notion that stupidity & cupidity are the defining characteristics of the electorate -- what a charming bias! It goes hand-in-hand with such an inflated sense of your own insight. As Timberman mentioned, you are an eloquent sophist. So what. The contempt for your fellow man that soaks through your letters makes it hard to respect even the better tidbits in your writings. after all, we are your fellow men.

How can that be? I thought Catholic social thought argued against unfettered capitalism (although, of course, it argued against Marxism for allegedly spiritual issues and the notion of class warfare - not entirely to my liking, but at least acknowledging the fact that capitalists routinely exploit workers). Some amount of "socialism," at least according to the Church, is necessary and desirable, to keep people from becoming too miserable.

You know, when you italicize Love Canal like that, it makes it look like a movie title. I think I saw that movie.

Love Canal was a city-owned chemical dump, the industrial equivalent of public schools. And the local government ended up being the principal antagonist of the litigants and the principal enabler of Hooker Chemical. How again does that make your case for trust government authorities with environmental protection? Would not restitutive system of justice rather than an ineffectual regulation regime have done a better job of protecting the rights of the people in the Love Canal neighborhood?

Glenn,

excellent piece! I work in the belly of the beast; every day I witness the double standards, the dissembling, the feigned obtuseness and sophistry of our press heroes ... Retch.

Keep up the good work.

Holly:

There's left-propaganda media and right-propaganda media and I suppose other kinds, too. I don't think many people pay much active attention to much of it. I can't say that I share popular enthusiasms like NASCAR or "American Idol" or "The Daily Show," but so what? People can watch what they like. I just don't think that they should be treated like witless victims by people who say "If they really knew, if they weren't so ignorant, they'd support us." Maybe they know something about what's best for themselves that their would-be champions don't? I think it's bad manners to deputize "the people" for your cause without asking them.

IngSoc:

Catholic social teaching on economics and justice is complex and sometimes seems contradictory. One of the main tenets is the "preferential option for the poor." I argue that capitalism is the preferential option for the poor, i.e. the best way to raise real material standards of living, dignity, and opportunity for people who start off without a lot of resources. I don't want to present that as something that's widely accepted in Catholic thinking, because it isn't. It's an ongoing discussion.

@kdwmson

@jvoelzow

So you concur, then, that this is not an argument but an attempt to pre-empt argument?

No sir. An "argument" is "a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal."

I believe that you have adequately "argued" your position; but I submit that you are now, in the face of overwhelming argument to the contrary, engaged in a (somewhat desperate) pronouncement of opinion. That's all.

But hell, I'm hardly an expert. I'm just watching the ebb and flow.

City government, KD. Hooker Chemical. The usual mismatch. It's the principal reason why corporations love state's rights as much as they hate federal regulation. Countervailing power is the principle here. Ain't gonna be no meaningful regulation without it, and as for restitution, it is to laugh. Not without a gun to their heads, and maybe not even then.

This much I'll give you, the content of your arguments may be from West of the Pecos, but the form is clearly Jesuitical. I wonder if Bill Bennett knows he has a soul-mate duking it out here with all these liberal/progressive/lite-lefties. You could get a Medal of Freedom for this.