Of Lightbulbs and Fascism
Politics
| March 28, 2007
| Tim
Nice non-sequitur! Next week: My Little Pony and the pliestocine era...
Irwin Stelzer in the Weekly Standard:
Consider the simple matter of incandescent light bulbs, which the European Union wants switched off by 2009, and Australia a year later. (I'll wager this policy comes to our Congress ere long.) The European Lamp Companies Federation is ecstatic. Its president hailed the move, "These [energy-efficient] bulbs have been on the market for 15 years. Price has been a factor. If the E.U. sets minimum energy-efficiency standards, people will have to buy them." No surprise that the industry is delighted to have government force people to buy a product consumers don't want, at prices they consider too high.
It's a myth that companies hate government regulation. In truth, they often love it, for many, many reasons. Regulation can give them a competitive advantage, open up new (generally unhelpful, but profitable) markets, can insulate them from lawsuits or technological change, and can stop new competitors from entering the market.
Established business love all these things, not to mention more direct kinds of subsidies and spending.
We've been fed this strange European idea that on "the far left" you have a system in which dictators absolutely control the means of production (Communism) -- and on "the far right", you also have a system of government in which dictators absolutely control the means of production (Fascism). And somehow, mysteriously, these extremes wrap around and connect -- such that some (including psychologist John Jost, whose "research" has been in the news lately) are now alleging Stalin was some kind of ring-winger.
It is also alleged that "Republican" politicians favor of big business. And often (as with Democrats!) that's entirely true. But their base -- we conservatives -- favor business itself -- meaning the consumer, employee, and entrepreneur, ultimately -- not this or that business in particular. To favor one particular business is to harm business as a whole, just as to enshrine one particular church is to harm faith as a whole.
So the American political spectrum has, on one side, a "far right" who wants a minimal government (fiscally, anyway -- they favor some moral regulation) -- and on the other side, people who want government to be both fiscally and morally pervasive -- they just want a different (and more expansive, in my experience) set of moral values enforced.
Well, the incandescent ban is hitting this country too, since North Carolina wants to ban incandescent bulbs also. Of course, this entirely has to do with saving the planet, and nothing, what-so-ever, to do with the fact that there is a North Carolina startup that is prodcing LED based replacements.
Unfortunately the "far right" originally referred to the monarchists in the French parliment, who were trying to "conserve" the old order of nobility. Somehow, however this label has gotten applied to people who are trying to keep values like freedom in place, conserving the ideals of the American constitution, in total opposition to the original implications of the word. However, America, in some kind of strange envy of Europe, is now repeating the mistakes that it made over the past ~250 years, while Europe is trying to change course for the better. (However, it has a lot of intertia to overcome)
The real difference, spanning both parties, is the amount of authortarianism that is present in the candidates, which is very different from the left/right dichotomy.
The funny part is that I remember some of the "Stalin as a rightist" stuff from being young. (My upbringing left me very confused for a while on what these terms meant...) He wasn't "really a communist", "communism can work", etc, usually from leftists who wanted to pull us down the same path. It looks like history is repeating itself again here... :-)
Of course, this entirely has to do with saving the planet, and nothing, what-so-ever, to do with the fact that there is a North Carolina startup that is prodcing LED based replacements.
... why, nothing at all, I'm sure!
He wasn't "really a communist", "communism can work", etc, usually from leftists who wanted to pull us down the same path.
Actually, I could accept that Stalin wasn't really a communist. Certainly Mao didn't seem to really believe it. But hey: that's the whole point, isn't it? The need for economic redistribution implies the need centralize power -- thus the philosophy provides moral cover for ruthless individuals who will do anything to rule. Who can then easily dominate morally relativistic "true believers" in the cause.
It is the attempt to achieve Communism which results in this situation. And, as you point out, "progressives" are drawn to the "light" like bugs to a zapper (preeetty! ... *ZRRRKTT*!), and want to try it over and over again.
"It's not a bug, it's a feature."
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.
« Helpful Tip for Politicians #37 |
Front Page |
Page Two
| You're Just Another (Lego) Brick in the Wall... »
|
Well, the incandescent ban is hitting this country too, since North Carolina wants to ban incandescent bulbs also. Of course, this entirely has to do with saving the planet, and nothing, what-so-ever, to do with the fact that there is a North Carolina startup that is prodcing LED based replacements.
Unfortunately the "far right" originally referred to the monarchists in the French parliment, who were trying to "conserve" the old order of nobility. Somehow, however this label has gotten applied to people who are trying to keep values like freedom in place, conserving the ideals of the American constitution, in total opposition to the original implications of the word. However, America, in some kind of strange envy of Europe, is now repeating the mistakes that it made over the past ~250 years, while Europe is trying to change course for the better. (However, it has a lot of intertia to overcome)
The real difference, spanning both parties, is the amount of authortarianism that is present in the candidates, which is very different from the left/right dichotomy.
The funny part is that I remember some of the "Stalin as a rightist" stuff from being young. (My upbringing left me very confused for a while on what these terms meant...) He wasn't "really a communist", "communism can work", etc, usually from leftists who wanted to pull us down the same path. It looks like history is repeating itself again here... :-)
Posted by: Michael Zappe on March 28, 2007 02:35 PM