That was fast: Has David Brooks, who only three weeks ago was proclaiming the death of neoliberalism, revealed himself as a ... neoliberal? I think so. In his recent bigthink column (on the death of Goldwaterism**) Brooks wrote
Normal, nonideological people are less concerned about the threat to their freedom from an overweening state than from the threats posed by these amorphous yet pervasive phenomena [e.g. Islamic extremism, global competition]. The ''liberty vs. power'' paradigm is less germane. It's been replaced in the public consciousness with a ''security leads to freedom'' paradigm. People with a secure base are more free to take risks and explore the possibilities of their world. [E.A.]
That seems like the familiar neolib take on the relation between the welfare state and capitalism--that providing some material security isn't just a way to compensate the random blows and bonanzas of the market, but it's a way to actually encourage greater entrepreneurial risk taking (and that this approach is preferable to trying to dampen the volatility of the market itself through, e.g., subsidies, guilds, trade barriers, union job protections, etc.). [ Discussed on bloggingheads ] ... P.S.: Brooks also declares that shifting to a
"'security leads to freedom" paradigm doesn't end debate between left and right, it just engages on different ground.
It does? Why shouldn't it end the debate between left and right? Example, please. ...
**-He's killing these ideologies off left and right. Soon all that remains will be ... [John McCain?--ed You said that.] 1:01 P.M. link
73 is the new ...: If you're Larry King, isn't there something vaguely ominous about having CNN president Jon Klein call your hospital room after you've had an artery clearing operation, in Klein's words
"just [to] make sure he was doing O.K., and that it was as minor as he said it was"?
Or is it just that everything Jon Klein says is vaguely ominous? ... P.S.: Larry King is only 73? ... 12:36 P.M.
Semi-Reality Journal: From Brad DeLong's blog:
A correspondent writes, asking where is my quarterly post reminding the internet that Donald Luskin--National Review's contribution to the grand coordinated right-wing Paul Krugman-trashing enterprise ably reported by Nicholas Confessore--more often than not simply doesn't know what he is talking about.
Now it is true that the right-wing campaign has collapsed--even its two original leaders, Mickey Kaus and Andrew Sullivan, now admit that Paul Krugman's batting average since he started at the New York Times has been above 90%.