A just government governs by the consent of the governed.
Which, in a pluralistic society (shaddap about Denmark), it’s not a high school civics class platitude. It’s not easy. Few large, pluralistic societies pull it off well.
And we’re getting worse at it.
I’m going to pullquote the conclusion from this Kevin Williamson piece on the subject – but I suggest reading the whole thing:
It is hardly surprising that, as we have seen in recent weeks, the two major tribes of American life cannot achieve widespread consent to a policy consensus during a time of acute national emergency — because there is no consensus about the facts of the case, which is itself the result of there being no consensus about who it is we can trust to document and adjudicate those facts. The falling dominoes of institutional failure and intellectual malfeasance have left standing very little of the institutional credibility we need to develop and implement useful and necessary public policies. The dangers and harm resulting from that are obvious even to a fringe libertarian like me. I do not want government to do very much, but I want government to do the things that we need it to do, and to do them effectively.
With the economy cratering, unemployment at unthinkable highs, tens of thousands dead and thousands more to die, it is almost impossible to write this, but: We are lucky that this epidemic is not a great deal worse than it is, because we are not ready for it and do not seem to have the capacity to get ourselves ready for it.
The whole point of politics – the very root of the word – is the art and craft of getting people to agree well enough on what needs to be done.
And we’re doing very badly at it.
The lion’s share of blame goes to the media. Think of Chuck Todd’s deceptive edit last Sunday or the ‘gotchya’ questions at White House briefings. This kind of petty partisan manipulation has always been with us – but probably since 2016, it is all the news has been.
And it is not just politics. The Covid coverage has been just as bad.
The press is not doing its job and the public knows it.
Greg;
To your point, I seem to recall that every broadcast network, used to air a blurb that informed their viewers; “this station is granted a license by the FCC to serve the public good”. Granted, I haven’t seen that blurb in awhile and don’t recall ever seeing it on a cable channel, most likely due to the fact that left wing appointees control it. I submitted a complaint on all of the networks (and for good measure, Fakebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google) for violating their licenses, by distributing false and/or biased information and censoring opposing positions. It will be interesting to see their response, if they even do respond.
Forgot that the blurb also said that if you could file a complaint with the FCC if you believed that they were in violation.
“Leadership is more than finding an angry crowd and agreeing with it.” – Mike Moore, former New Zealand prime minister
Williamson has gotten soft since he became a #nevertrumper.
He tries to forge a path between the Left and the Right, but he finally admits that the Left’s political power comes from the elite institutions it has captured — academia, the courts, and the media.
No one should fear populism. Populism is just another word for democracy, and what is the alternative to democracy?
Some folks are so pre-programmed politically, they don’t read or think. That’s a big problem.
Words fail me
It is obvious that dealing with a pandemic requires a nation-wide and world-wide strategy.
This “administration” can’t even understand a concept of the former, and forget about the later.
This isn’t Middle East peace, people. There is an obvious, indisputable, known solution to an epidemic: a nation-wide program of testing and screening. Those who are found to carry the virus and their household are to be quarantined, and rest can return to work.
This is what was supposed to be put in place in the past two months. Nothing was done. Nothing. This time was wasted on listening to Trump’s self-adulation briefings.
And now we are back on Square 1, opening the doors into the same place we were in March — except now we have millions of infected people instead of hundreds.
I’ve thought that we ought to phrase things in terms of “consent” more often for a while. Things like “by what moral logic do you think it’s OK for you to require your pro-life neighbors to fund Planned Parenthood?”, “by what ethics do you think it’s appropriate to require your neighbors to fund petroleum/alternative energy/etc..?”
“It is received doctrine among con artists that every mark participates in the con — those who have been, and remain, blind to that are willfully blind.” ~ Kevin D. Williamson
Emery Idiot;
Stick this up your back side! That is, if you can get it past your head which is firmly lodged in there.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/03/29/the_medias_top_lies_and_spins_about_covid-19.html#!
And this;
https://drrichswier.com/2020/04/12/after-four-years-of-democrat-treachery-i-smell-a-corona-virus-rat/
And the mark never believes that he is blind; on the contrary, the mark is led to believe that others are blind, and his eyesight is 20/20.
So Williamson’s observation is essentially worthless. He believes that it applies to everyone not named Kevin D. Williams.
Who do we know has been conned in the last few years?
-The people who believed that Hillary would win in a landslide.
-The people who believed the “Russian collusion” hoax.
Emery, I believe in evidence-based reasoning.
Where is the evidence that the epidemiologists models are better than random guesses?
It isn’t there.
Where is the evidence that stay at home decrees saves lives?
It isn’t there.
Where is the evidence that shifting from stay-at-home orders to protecting vulnerable populations would have saved lives?
Voluminous and growing.
Between the Trump Depression™️ and Woolly’s (death panels) “we want grandma to die a horrific solitary death by suffocation” policy — who would have thought this to be a good electoral strategy in swing states?
Have you ever made an honest argument, Emery?
Or do you somehow believe that “protecting vulnerable populations” == “death panel?
You are a nut case.
And you will see the shift from stay-at-home decrees to protecting vulnerable populations. It is as inevitable as the sunrise.
Williams and his fellow #nevertrumper Jonah Goldberg have been sliding away from conservatism to doctrinaire “classical liberalism,” aka libertarianism.
The problem they have is that libertarianism does not explain the way the world works.
In classical liberalism, in the medium and long term, societies grow wealthier only as individual freedom increases. The US is wealthy only insofar as it has embraced the policies preferred by libertarians.
Goldberg has said that the problem with classical liberalism is that it does not explain China. China is an economic success, and yet it lacks all of the things that libertarians are required for economic success; secure property rights and secure rights to individual expression.
What kind of government does Williams want to see? It is certainly not like any government that has ever existed. That is hard to reconcile with “conservatism.”
And you will see the shift from stay-at-home decrees to protecting vulnerable populations. It is as inevitable as the sunrise.
That Stay at Home order sure has protected the most “stay-at-home” amongst us – those in nursing homes and care center.
They have had the same issue in Britain — sick people in care homes being returned to the care home by the hospital.
Imagine a world where our political leaders made wise decisions about the allocation of resources instead of issuing unconstitutional orders that cripple the economy . . .
Has Minnesota met the White House guidelines yet?
Imagine how much better we would all be as a nation if we had leadership in DC that even approached the job Walz is doing for Minnesota.
Perhaps 250K mortality just before the November elections will wake up American voters.
But what about the VENTILATORS, Emery?
WHAT ABOUT THE VENTILATORS!! AND THE TESTING!!
Lol.
“Jared [Kushner] had been arguing that testing too many people, or ordering too many ventilators, would spook the markets and so we just shouldn’t do it,” says a Trump confidant who speaks to the president frequently. “That advice worked far more powerfully on him [Trump] than what the scientists were saying. He thinks they always exaggerate.”
Advising Trump is like bringing fruits to the volcano, you’re trying to appease a great force that’s impervious to reason.
The most fascinating element of all this is how easily a collection of the best and brightest ca be morphed into a cast of yes-men (and women) making themselves publicly ridiculous by propagating life- threatening absurdities that they no doubt know make no sense.
If a lab in China was really interested in inventing something that would destroy the West it would clone Trump.
Emery I;
“The most fascinating element of all this is how easily a collection of the best and brightest ca be morphed into a cast of yes-men (and women) making themselves publicly ridiculous by propagating life- threatening absurdities that they no doubt know make no sense.”
Yea. That is funny and the DemocRATs have been masters at doing that for at least 45 years.