An Opinion Worth Considering

Here's a pessimistic and/or perhaps realistic -- depending on one's optimism/pessimism quotient -- view of where we are in the recovery and what it's going to take to get out of it.  In a related matter Professor Brainbridge weighs in here on the California debt problem with many interesting POVs in the comment section.  California's issues are daunting and may involve repudiation of debt in order to get back on an even keel as a prelude to growth.  What a mess out-of-control spending has caused in this state.

What's wrong with Liberals (Progressives?)

It is a legitimate question to ask why Liberals (or Progressives, as they now choose to be called) always get everything wrong.   Could it be they have never read, understood, or cared what Adam Smith revealed to the world in his treatise, The Wealth of Nations? Or for that matter what other 18th century philosophers like Locke and Hume said about the then modern world, the rights of individuals, the evolution of free market and the limitations of the central government in the lives of citizens in nation states?  As far as liberals/progressives are concerned, it's as though the Age of Enlightenment never occurred and we simply skipped from The Middle Ages and Feudalism directly to the isms -- communism, fascism, socialism, totalitarianism -- of the 19th and 20th centuries.  Surely the lib/prog collectivist world view is much more aligned with that of all the isms than with freedom of the individual to pursue his own self interest and the attendant benefits accruing to everyone in the free enterprise system as it has evolved over time.

Smith's book was published in 1775, just as things were heating up between the English and their colonists over in America.  Most people associate Smith with the "Law of Supply and Demand", but in truth his tract covered much more than that simple but important aspect of human behavior.  Smith was a spirited critic of mercantilism, the reigning economic theory of his times, devoting many chapters of his book to debunking the perceived benefits of this practice by the nation-states of 18th century Europe.  He was an ardent proponent of free markets and free trade, at a time when there wasn't much of either, even proposing the dissolution of the colonial ties between England and the Americas was inevitable and would benefit all parties when indeed it occurred.  Smith, and the others, believed in and promoted the individual citizen as the prime mover of economies, debunking excessive taxation and governmental control of economic activities in general, all the while acknowledging the importance of the government in its proper role as level field playmaker, and as a defender of the safety of the individuals in their property and physical being.

Perhaps Smith's biggest contribution to the development of the world's economies was his promotion of self interest as an important motivator, along with free markets  in generating economic growth and the creation of wealth in societies.  His was a message of limited but effective central government doing things it could do well to promote private enterprise and then getting out of the way (sound like Reaganism?).  Development and construction of roads and canals for efficient movement of goods, a legal system that protected the rights of property owners, a rational banking system and a strong navy and military to defend citizens from predators were the essential functions of central authorities. Pointing to the failure of autocracies throughout Europe and the near east to improve living standards for their populations by over regulating and controlling all aspects of economic life it was Smith's view that the growth of the economy and the generation of wealth to benefit the entire population was best left to the invisible hand of self interest and free markets.  Ultimately his was a simple message: the freer individuals are to pursue their own self interest, the better it was for the nation state.

Muslim video

This video is worth watching to better understand the Islamic movement.  The key point is Islam is more, much more than just a religion. It is the combination of a religious, social and governing construct that ultimately controls all aspects of the individuals' life, much like the Nazi's National Socialism and Communism as practiced under the soviets in Russia, the North Koreans, the Cubans and the Chinese.  There are no individual rights ecept those conferred by the state, which can confer and remove these rights as it wishes.

Cornell's Dr. Baer

The lectures by Dr West are here.

Istanbul -- a Weimar city

The author of this piece, Claire Berlinski writes for City Journal, considered by many to be one of the finest commentary journals in the country.  She has lived in Istanbul for several years now and, as is obvious in her article, finds it an extremely fascinating city in flux.  The title suggests a comparison to the Weimar city of Berlin during the interregnum between WW I and II, when Berlin was in great cultural and economic ferment which of course ended badly with the rise of the Nazi.  Berlinski is careful to draw a distinction between Hitler and Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Istanbul, but there are some parallels that are worrisome.  Erdogan is an Islamist who has taken his country into a closer relationship with Iran and has been, on occasion, quite hostile toward Israel.  This is a long piece, most articles in the City Journal are, but for those of who have been to Istanbul and Turkey,  it is an interesting read.

C.S.Lewis's body of work

Scott at Powerline has produced a post that lists many of Lewis's works and he also points out the fatuousness of liberal pundit Richard Wolffe, who appears on MSNBC programs all the time as a savant.  He's also become the official chronicler of the Obama presidency and as such has full access to the WH in order to generate his propaganda on behalf of the one.  One needs a strong constitution to watch Wolffe perform on MSNBC and avoid gagging at the outrageous distortion of reality by a dyed-in-the-wool liberal.  Paraphrasing Scott, Wolffe he is both arrogant and a fool, like most liberals IMHO.

Almost everyone knows that C.S. Lewis, known to his friends and family as Jack, was a remarkable man of letters. For a serious writer of quality, he was incredibly prolific and incredibly popular. Almost everything he wrote is still in print, and almost everything he wrote is worth reading. Amazon lists 157 or 160 titles under his name. I mention here only a few items of interest.

Every high school senior should read The Abolition of Man. In it Lewis makes a powerful case for a version of natural law that belies the relativism in which students are inculcated in one way or another in school, especially in college. The problem is not strictly American or of recent vintage. Lewis was prompted to write the lectures that make up the book by a British high school English textbook. The Abolition of Man was published in 1943.

As a scholar teaching literature at Oxford and then Cambridge, Lewis wrote such influential scholarly works as The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition and Poetry and Prose in the Sixteenth Century, an installment in the comprehensive Oxford history of English literature series. As a college English major I used Lewis's Preface to Paradise Lost with pleasure. Other distinguished books deriving from Lewis's scholarly pursuits include The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature, Studies in Words, An Experiment in Criticism, and Selected Literary Essays.

Lewis loved fable, myth, and allegory. He even tried his own hand at them. Among his works in this vein are The Pilgrim's Regress and Till We Have Faces.

It would only be a slight exaggeration to say that every educated person is familiar in one way or another with Lewis's Christian apologetics. He told the story of his own journey back to Christianity from atheism in Surprised By Joy. Lewis's defense and elucidation of Christian faith took form in books too numerous to mention here. Among the most prominent are Mere Christianity, The Problem of Pain, and Miracles. Closely related are The Four Loves and A Grief Observed, the book Lewis wrote following his wife's death from cancer.

Lewis's faith also found expression in fictional form. Who doesn't know The Screwtape Letters? It has become a modern classic. Educated readers should also be familiar with The Great Divorce.

Lewis's popular science fiction trilogy for adults gave expression to his philosophical and religious concerns as well. Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength are the novels that make up the trilogy. Lewis's Chronicles of Narniahas become a children's classic.

Richard Wolffe is a charter member of the Obamamania media. He is the author of the Chronicles of Obama, now comprising the two books Renegade: The Making of a President and, most recently, Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House.

In an appearance on Hardball last week (video below), Wolffe demonstrated his intellectual daring with critical words about Sarah Palin. Palin had cited C.S. Lewis as an author to whom she turns for divine inspiration. Wolffe thought this was absurd. Wolffe expressed incredulity that Palin turned to the author of children's books for inspiration.

Matthews interrupted Wolffe: "I wouldn't put down C.S. Lewis."

"I'm not putting him down," Wollfe responded. "But you know divine inspiration? There are things she could've said to divine inspiration. Choosing C.S. Lewis is an interesting one."

Palin's citation of C.S. Lewis is interesting, though not in the sense that Wolffe means. I would be interested to know in which of Lewis's books Palin has found inspiration. Palin's citation of Lewis in any event makes perfect sense. Even more interesting than Palin's citation of Lewis is the fact that, at the time of his appearance on Hardball, Wolffe had no knowledge of Lewis as anyone other than the author of the Narnia books. Anyone who combines arrogance and ignorance in these proportions is a fool. Wolffe is hardly special in this respect, but he is a good example of the phenomenon.

UPDATE: Joe Malchow says that I should promote this post under the heading: "Every C.S. Lewis Book You Need to Read." It's that too!

The right approach to governing

Mitch Daniels may just be the ideal executive for the public sector. He understands the fundamental role of government is to help those who for one reason or the other cannot help themselves and provide infrastructure that allows the private sector to thrive.  To this end he has created priorities, leaned out budgets making government more efficient, and created a culture of trust in government among the people.  This is really not a complicated formula and it is one that clearly works wherever it is applied.  Unfortunately Democrats do not believe in this kind of governance. Their priorities are quite different.  They want a larger role for government in the economy because that approach suits their lack of confidence in the free market and individual freedom.  Theirs is a philosophy of command and control and seemingly no matter how many times this formula is tried and fails, there are those who believe it will if you just get the details right.  Democrats have never come to grips with the basic truth Adam Smith revealed 235 years ago that self interest and freedom are the driving forces behind economic success.  Why they can't and wont see this obvious truth is mysterious.  Perhaps the most logical explanation is they are fundamentally followers who don't really want or appreciate freedom and the risks associated with it.  Like the serfs on the manors they are willing to trade their freedom for security.  Mona Charon writes an enlightening story here of Daniels' governance in Indiana.  This is the model for the rest of the country.  Think it will be tried in states where democrats are entrenched?  Not on your life.  So those states will continue on the path to bankruptcy and the rest of us better move to Indiana or somewhere else where the dems haven't gotten control yet.