Posted on 12/30/2020 6:16:29 AM PST by NOBO2012
I don’t know about anyone else in Congress but Rep. Jim Jordan is concerned about autocratic lockdowns in this country.
Well honestly, I think they were pretty clear on the subject.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Founding Father Benjamin Franklin
But never mind the founders, what would our great thinkers of today, like renowned NYT economist Thomas Friedman, say? I can’t say for sure but I can guess, given his 2009 wistful yearning for America to be a little more like autocratic China:
One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power.
China’s leaders understand that in a world of exploding populations and rising emerging-market middle classes, demand for clean power and energy efficiency is going to soar. Beijing wants to make sure that it owns that industry and is ordering the policies to do that, including boosting gasoline prices, from the top down.
The price of that one-party autocracy is a tad high in the human rights and civil liberties department -
Hong Kong: China jails 10 who fled by boat to Taiwan for up to three years
but hey! – small price to pay for enlightened leadership - as displayed during the Great Pandemic -
- and a Green New Deal, eh?
To be clear, Friedman thinks that urban, liberal, modern ‘thinkers’ (Democrats) ‘get it’ while rural, ignorant, children of the corn (Republicans) don’t. If we could just prevent the rubes from Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas etc. from voting to muck things up, we’d already be enjoying that Green New Deal that enlightened thinkers like him are so fond of.
And don’t think for a moment the ‘09 column was a one-off, he doubled down in his most inarticulate way a year later on Meet the Press:
“You know, that's really what, what it's come down to. So I don't—I, I—I'm worried about this, it's why I have fantasized—don't get me wrong—but that what if we could just be China for a day? I mean, just, just, just one day. You know, I mean, where we could actually, you know, authorize the right solutions, and I do think there is a sense of that, on, on everything from the economy to environment. I don't want to be China for a second, OK, I want my democracy to work with the same authority, focus and stick-to-itiveness. But right now we have a system that can only produce suboptimal solutions.”
Good grief Thomas, if your “optimal solution” is China’s “authority, focus and stick-to-itiveness” we’ve got a problem. As Matt Welch pointed out at the time:
You do not get the "stick-to-itiveness" of Friedman's authoritarian one-party fantasia without the violent, freedom-depriving assault on those (especially though not only activists and bloggers and journalists) who are seen as threats to the regime. Dreaming about removing checks and balances to impose a super-genius policy is not the work of a geopolitical thinker, but the tantrum of an impatient sloganeer.
We’ve seen what tantrums of impatient sloganeering gets us: fraudulent elections, ongoing shutdowns/lockdowns, permanent business closures and the destruction of massive amounts of capital. So what the heck, let’s have a little more of that autocratic "stick-to-itiveness."
Make that March 27, 2021…
Where would we be without our enlightened overlords who know so much more and are so much smarter than us?
Posted from: MOTUS A.D.
What would Brando do?
Thomas Friedman is the dumbest guy at the NYT.
We have tax-free holidays.
Why not have Constitution-free holidays?
One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power.
—
That sort of authoritarianism, in fact actual fascism, ensures future disruptive technological breakthroughs will be suppressed, because they would upset the status quo of the ruling class.
The 1951 Invention Secrecy Act is potentially already suppressing use of breakthroughs technologies.
I dunno...what about Krugman? Actually, that award may go to Maureen Dowd.
Speaking of which...rules...
Friedman is an unmitigated gasbag, stupid, narrow-minded, and arrogant on top of that. Typical for the NYT and since he has those two Pulitzers, he has validation for his genius. Shortly after 9/11, I heard Don Imus raving about him so I picked up one of his books, The Lexus and the Olive Tree. I did not make it past the second chapter. Nothing but recycled liberal tropes.
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.