November 28, 2005
IMAGINE THE DEMOCRAT WHO RUNS ON THE PROMISE OF BEING OUR CHIRAC?:
Toward Europe? (Michael Barone, 11/28/05, Real Clear Politics)
Will the United States become more or less like continental Europe? That's one way to frame the central question of domestic policy. In Europe much higher percentages of gross domestic product are absorbed by government; welfare state protections and restrictions on labor markets are greater, health-care and pension provisions are dominated by the central government. The result, say advocates of the European model, is greater leisure and greater protection against risk. The result, say advocates of the American model, is economic stagnation and high unemployment. Over the last 25 years, the number of jobs has increased by 57 million in the United States. The figure for Europe is 4 million. Unemployment is around 5 percent in the United States. In France and Germany it tops 10 percent.Given those numbers, Americans, through the workings of the political marketplace, are not likely to choose the European model.
The question can be pared down to the point where it answers itself: as demographics shift power from Blue areas to Red, is there any likelihood that America will deviate from the rest of the Anglosphere (- Canada), in order to become more like France and Germany? Posted by Orrin Judd at November 28, 2005 9:08 AM
We work harder (and smarter) than the Europeans so that we can support our war machine. We wouldn't trade it for anything.
Posted by: Lou Gots at November 28, 2005 9:47 AMLou:
I wish I had your faith. The reasons for my doubt is that for twenty years, through five administrations, four men (Bundy, Rostow, Kissinger, Zbig B.) pursued just such a goal. They never were overt and explicit about their aim, but pursue it they did. Only after the dual Carter disasters of inflation and the Iranian hostages did we get a reversal with RR, both triggers being off point but sifficient to elect a man whose approach to the USSR was not detente and peace but "We win and they lose."
The last election Kerry had his "global test" but otherwise created such a smog of policy recommendations that he presented no defined target, unlike say McGovern who while utterly wrong was nevertheless admirably forthright.
So in a sense you are very right: we would not trade. However, what if the trade were masked?
Posted by: Luciferous at November 28, 2005 2:15 PMIt seems to me that we are in a very different world than that of the Vietnam era. The sky is a different color.
The big reason, the obvious one, of course, is the absence of a military draft. Another cause is that, after 9-11, the threat is much more visible than it had been when we merely facing nuclear annihilation.
Back in the days when cowardice and treason were alive and well there were many, many internal enemies of our way of life.
Does anyone remember the "Little Red Book" of Mao Tse Tung? College students were buying, carrying and maybe even reading, the "thoughts" of a monster whose crimes dwarfed those of Hitler and even Stalin.
That world is gone--gone with the wind, farther than the Antebellum South. There are so many causes of hopefulness. We see a spiritual rearmament, springing from deep within our culture.
These matters have been debated here before, and many of us to not see it, but from the perspective of a veteran of the Dolchstoss and of the age of Malaise, we have started to move up again.
Posted by: Lou Gots at November 28, 2005 9:01 PMLou: You've written some lovely comments the past few days, including that one. I think OJ should promote you to Brother 2d Class.
Posted by: Mike Morley at November 28, 2005 9:04 PM