As IF Times

link Thomas Frank: The Rise of the Reactionary Right – WSJ.com.

Again, a simplistic summary of conservative, free market positions.  You would think by now, arguments against free markets would have some validity, some new revelation about why this economic model doesn’t work.  Instead we get the same old chestnut we’ve heard for years, which is, ” conservative policies have brought us to the brink of economic disaster”.

This argument is specious and your basic ideological drivel.  Whatever the shortcomings of economies, free market philosophies are not to blame.  In fact, it is exactly the opposite that’s true.  Whereas free market principles engender confidence among it’s citizens to go forth and be productive, the grafting of non free market policies on top of them is what makes things go horribly wrong.

With very few exceptions, when governments are charged with the oversight of any part of the economy, that sector is doomed for incompetence, waste and a one way descent into byzantine mazes of bureaucracy with departments often working at cross purposes to one another.  An apt analogy would be chewing gum in your hair.  It is such a mess that the only way to be rid of it is to cut off some hair.   Many government programs start off in  the same way that chewing gum gets on to the hair of kids;  someone thought it was a good idea at the time.

Conservative policies are not about every man for himself, this is the imagery that’s offered to convince people that progressivism and collectivism are more civilized philosophies.  The recent resurgence of conservative voices are about pushing back against cultures of entitlement and waste entrenched in governments and propagated by them.  At its core, conservatism is about not ceding to government control what you can do for yourself.  It is about being dependable and responsible rather than dependant and responsive.

I would invite anyone to point out any part of the economy that governments have control over which can be considered to be a success.  It’s amusing and maddening that politicians continue to propose large scale agendas which are for “the good of everyone” when there is no historical data for any efficacy of policies in the past.   When you purchase a mutual fund, there is printed in large letters on the prospectus, “Past performance are not an indicator of future returns”.  In the case of governments, there actually IS no history of past performance, certainly not for the good!  One more thing is worth mentioning from this article, an technique used which is common to all progressive pundits.  They obliquely compare conservatives to cavemen.  The GEICO guys are going to be annoyed.

link Book Review: Supernormal Stimuli – WSJ.com.

Interesting premise.  If the theory of Supernormal Stimuli which postulates that our genetic proclivities can override our conscious efforts, then much activity in western society is a waste of time and money.  The obvious things jump out as useless: weight loss programs, sex addiction therapy, heck even the prison business for repeat offenders.  For criminals, the plea of   “the devil made me do it”  may gain credibility,  just blame it on that guy Darwin.  If we are predisposed to act or respond a certain way because of our evolutionary roots, a lot of things will have to be rethought.  This may be good news for Tiger Woods.

This article ties in somewhat to my last piece regarding genetic predisposition.   There appears to be more articles surfacing regarding the dominance of our factory wiring versus  environmental stimuli in determining why we do things.  This itself has  been and will continue to be topics for PhDs to cover and not really the point here.  What does occur to me is that the wiring of brains of people who consider themselves liberals versus those who see themselves as conservatives may have been set at birth.

The amusing on-going partisan bickering which is US politics,  has been entertaining because of the laugh out loud claims and accusations made by both sides over any particular issue.  Clearly, I think  the left are much more skilled at claiming preposterous and irrational positions than the boring conservative guys.  The issue hogging the headlines now is proposed health care reform.  The real  issue surrounds not if but how to fix the system.  But consider this passage from the linked article:

“…One might even argue that supernormal stimuli—or perhaps our reactions to them—are the biggest problems faced by affluent societies. The best available estimate is that 45,000 Americans die annually because of a lack of health insurance. Yet a recent study found that easily 20 times that number are dying every year from the effects of smoking, over-eating, excessive drinking and other bad habits, many of them arising from such supernormal stimuli as addictive tobacco, refined sugar and distilled spirits…”

So they estimate that almost a million people a year die from the effects of other bad habits annually as compared to the lack of insurance issue.  To be sure, no one encourages avoidable death, but considering the amount of money involved in this debate and the overwhelming opposition to the program as pushed by the Democrats, you would think rational heads would back off forcing it into law.

Liberals flock to the “for the good of the people” causes like the goose to the painted volleyball. The common tactic when logic and reason don’t sustain their arguments is to paint any opposers as ice hearted demons, or as the obviously unhinged Keith Obermann stated recently, “subhuman”.   It’s as if the forces of genealogy are competing  with the forces  of intellect and the brain side is greatly outmanned.  The left do themselves no favours by propagating the utterances of the Obermanns, the Shultz’s, the Matthews’, the Behars and the Garafalos.  If the theory of Supernormal Stimuli proves valid, then the out of reality ravings of these people can be excused because as we saw earlier, the devil made them say it.  But it should be made clear that what they say should be considered for what they are, primeval rants,  not intelligent discourse.

If I had a nickel for everytime a personality on the right made disparging ad hominem comments about personalities on the left, well, I may have change for a dime.  Instead, labels of stupid, racist, divisive,evil, retarded, subhuman, hateful, greedy and stupid again seem to be standard language for the left.  Fortunately, according to viewer ratings, it appears as if such wizards of wit are losing their audience.  People must be evolving.