![](http://macleans.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/100520_bono_wide.jpg?w=660&h=277")
Posted on 05/27/2010 6:08:48 AM PDT by Rummyfan
Back in 2008, when I was fulminating against multiculturalism on a more or less weekly basis, a reader wrote to advise me to lighten up, on the grounds that “we’re rich enough to afford to be stupid.”
Two years later, we’re a lot less rich. In fact, many Western nations are, in any objective sense, insolvent. Hence last week’s column, on the EU’s decision to toss a trillion dollars into the great sucking maw of Greece’s public-sector kleptocracy. It no longer matters whether you’re intellectually in favour of European-style social democracy: simply as a practical matter, it’s unaffordable.
How did the Western world reach this point? Well, as my correspondent put it, we assumed that we were rich enough that we could afford to be stupid. In any advanced society, there will be a certain number of dysfunctional citizens either unable or unwilling to do what is necessary to support themselves and their dependents. What to do about such people? Ignore the problem? Attempt to fix it? The former nags at the liberal guilt complex, while the latter is way too much like hard work: the modern progressive has no urge to emulate those Victorian social reformers who tramped the streets of English provincial cities looking for fallen women to rescue. All he wants to do is ensure that the fallen women don’t fall anywhere near him.
So the easiest “solution” to the problem is to throw public money at it. You know how it is when you’re at the mall and someone rattles a collection box under your nose and you’re not sure where it’s going but it’s probably for Darfur or Rwanda or Hoogivsastan. Whatever. You’re dropping a buck or two in the tin for the privilege of not having to think about it. For the more ideologically committed, there’s always the awareness-raising rock concert: it’s something to do with Bono and debt forgiveness, whatever that means, but let’s face it, going to the park for eight hours of celebrity caterwauling beats having to wrap your head around Afro-Marxist economics. The modern welfare state operates on the same principle: since the Second World War, the hard-working middle classes have transferred historically unprecedented amounts of money to the unproductive sector in order not to have to think about it. But so what? We were rich enough that we could afford to be stupid.
That works for a while. In the economic expansion of the late 20th century, citizens of Western democracies paid more in taxes but lived better than their parents and grandparents. They weren’t exactly rich, but they got richer. They also got more stupid. When William Beveridge laid out his blueprint for the modern British welfare state in 1942, his goal was the “abolition of want.” Sir William and his colleagues on both sides of the Atlantic succeeded beyond their wildest dreams: to be “poor” in the 21st-century West is not to be hungry and emaciated but to be obese, with your kids suffering from childhood diabetes. When Michelle Obama turned up to serve food at a soup kitchen, its poverty-stricken clientele snapped pictures of her with their cellphones. In one-sixth of British households, not a single family member works. They are not so much without employment as without need of it. At a certain level, your hard-working bourgeois understands that the bulk of his contribution to the treasury is entirely wasted. It’s one of the basic rules of life: if you reward bad behaviour, you get more of it. But, in good and good-ish times, who cares?
By the way, where does the government get the money to fund all these immensely useful programs? According to a Fox News poll earlier this year, 65 per cent of Americans understand that the government gets its money from taxpayers, but 24 per cent think the government has “plenty of its own money without using taxpayer dollars.” You can hardly blame them for getting that impression in an age in which there is almost nothing the state won’t pay for. I confess I warmed to that much-mocked mayor in Doncaster, England, who announced a year or two back that he wanted to stop funding for the Gay Pride parade on the grounds that, if they’re so damn proud of it, why can’t they pay for it? He was actually making a rather profound point, but, as I recall, he was soon forced to back down. In Canada, almost every ethnocultural booster group is on the public teat. Outside Palestine House in Toronto the other week, the young Muslim men were caught on tape making explicitly eliminationist threats about Jews, but c’mon, everything else in Canada is taxpayer-funded, why not genocidal incitement? We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.
Brilliant!
I keep asking myself how an entire government with no common sense gets elected...thats not it..its greed overiding doing the right thing. they all want their share before there is nothing left.
Simply dumbfounding......
Greece is the canary in the coal mine.....
Ping!
Steyn Ping
Ho Chi Bama and the Demo Cong are just preparing the Tet Offensive before November.
OUR MANTRA IS “THROW THE BUMS OUT”!
Ray Stevens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q59ZcFguUOo&feature=channel
After the $1-Trillion bailout, the dead canary has been replaced with a methane-resistant turkey.
If you are stupid long enough, you’ll end up broke.
“
Simply dumbfounding......
“
That “one-sixth” of families with no working member...
sounds like Detroit.
And some other Democratic-machine operated cities of America.
We don't have enough money to be this stupid...
With all due respect to the brilliant Mr. Steyn - WTF are they waiting for?
The beleaguered middle class appears to be terminally "that stupid."
What western nation features a government that is aggressively downsizing at the angry demand of the beleaguered voters?
Certainly not this one. Not anytime soon. The best we can hope for in this nation is to vote in some alleged "fierce rightwinger" who will give a half-assed attempt at slowing down the frenetic pace of government expansion.
Maybe we'll get a Palin or a Chris Christie and they fulfill that role, but nowhere is the politician that is going to shrink the size of the Federal government by the 90% that it should be shrunk.
And the reason that visionary hasn't appeared as a possible political player is because "the beleaguered middle class" doesn't want that visionary. They all want to go down with the ship rather than to appear callous or insensitive and demand that we do what needs to be done. Or they're all just too scared to live on their own, without the government teat poking at them all the time.
...the congress and the admins are too stupid to think or admit we’re broke...
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.