. . . not that government in the US has been small in the past 150 years, but the Wall Street Journal’s columnist David Wessel announced (subscription required) in his September 8 column that the days of small-government rhetoric are over, too, and the reasons he cites (9/11 and Katrina) are indeed working much as he represents, and many Austrians fear.
Ironically, the name of his column is Capital. In the gloomy future that seems to face America and much of the rest of the world, we will no doubt have to understand that term as referring to something pretty much produced by the government, and certainly owned by it, at least in effect.
{ 3 comments }
Prefatorily, I don’t subscribe to the WSJ. But not having read the commentary there under discussion, I think Joseph Potts remarks speak for themselves.
I’ve been thinking about this general topic for years. It’s certainly evident that what pass for conservatives in the US have pulled back from the free-market rhetoric and agenda they once went in for.
One likely factor is that the Republicans are really in power, seemingly long term. I suspect most of the older rhetoric and agenda-setting was far more sour grapes than conviction (i.e. big government must’ve been no good, since the rival liberals and Democrats tended to dominate it). Also, it’s a tribute to the intrinsic intellectual firepower of free market economics that the conservatives found it advantageous to lean on during their outsider decades.
Another seeming factor is the infiltration and eventual virtual conquest of mainstream conservatism by the neocons. Few neocon leaders had or have much use for the whole business of liberty, except, similar to what was noted before, as something to draw on occasionally for sniping at the Left. Of course, the neocons were even more uneasy with liberty than the conservatives of the earlier style. Still, the neocons managed to cultivate their own little menagerie of free market intellectuals, like Thomas Sowell and Michael Novak, to front against Left-style big government when opportune.
Right now, the friends of liberty are pretty much on their own when it comes to the landscape of ideas and rhetoric. Worse yet, as big government creates ever more crises through its spiraling blundering, the masses are drawing all the wrong conclusions, thinking that even more government is needed to prevent the crises. The MSM, the educational institutions, and naturally the political class are all warring on freedom, and indoctrinate the sheeple at every turn.
You’re definitely right that “friends of liberty” are increasingly being left alone in the political world. Growing up as a conservative Republican, it’s most disappointing for me to see so many of my friends follow Bush like the pied piper. I know a number of good, well-meaning conservatives who are simply following the “mainstream” GOP ideology because they do not know any better. When I talk to them about Austrian economics and limited government ideas, they are strangled with an inability to conceive that something could be wrong with what we have now (and that it could be better solved with more freedom, NOT more regulation). Props to the Mises Institute for continuing to educate people… may their tribe and influence increase.
We’re back to real conservatism:
“we can manage big govt better than the liberals”
“slow the rate of growth of welfare programs for the poor bums on crack but not the middle class since we need their votes”
“expand the red white and blue military, especially since it means jobs jobs jobs”
“We’re against socialism. The private sector is our friend. So let’s give them lots of money. Especially the big companies that lobby us”
“nothing wrong with a little pork. But a lot is even better!”
and of course: “hell no we’re not giving away our power!”
Comments on this entry are closed.