Second Myth of Politics on Display
The Second Great Myth of Politics states that 'Democrats care more about the little guy'. (BTW, the First GMP is that Republicans are more fiscally responsible.) This second myth is the first thing that comes to mind this AM having perused Michael Barone's take on the Lieberman/Lamont primary in today's WSJ and Greg Mankiw's inquiry into Ned Lamont's views on trade. From Barone we learn that the Lamont voter is an internationalist, a globally-minded soul that sees no particular exceptionalism in America versus the rest of the world. One would think then that such folks would feel no particluar passion about whether a Peruvian or a Paducahan got a particular job, say, building tractors or some such. Why does an American have any more valid a claim to work, receive a wage and avoid poverty than a non-American short of competing for that job via performance? Surely, with no view of American exceptionalism, an internationalist would agree our citizens have no more right to avoid poverty than citizens of other nations. One would think and one would be wrong. As Mankiw points out, Lamont seems to feel, and his voters no doubt agree, that Connecticut and by extension America are somehow especially deserving of the opportunity to work and avoid poverty. He decries that some of Connecticut's jobs have moved overseas (although, what he probably doesn't know is that more of CT's old jobs have been lost to places like Florida, Texas and Arizona rather than China and India) as a profound injustice. I can assure you it's not an injustice to the Chinese or Indian (or Texan or Arizonan) who nabs that job formerly performed in Connecticut. So, if you're an internationalist, what is your beef?
This is nothing new. When it comes to trade and economic policy, the supposed internationalists consistenly advocate protectionism and American isolationism and they are no more global citizens than you or I. Their motives for proclaiming this vaunted transnational attitude is purely to assert a false superiority over different-minded folks. It's pomposity. It's elitism. Don't buy it.
This is nothing new. When it comes to trade and economic policy, the supposed internationalists consistenly advocate protectionism and American isolationism and they are no more global citizens than you or I. Their motives for proclaiming this vaunted transnational attitude is purely to assert a false superiority over different-minded folks. It's pomposity. It's elitism. Don't buy it.
1 Comments:
brilliant job at connecting the dots!
Post a Comment
<< Home