Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Fallows Falls Low

James Fallows has a piece in The Atlantic with a general thesis that's quite reasonable, but is, alas, full of foolish detail.

His theory is that people are talking about America falling apart, but then, they're always talking about that, so it's hard to be too concerned. So far, so good. I thought perhaps he'd be able to rise above his own politics, but it turns out we don't have to worry so long as we follow the same sort of prescriptions James Fallows is always pushing.

Spoiler: His solution is mostly massive investment in larger government.

Looking at the failure of California, where we have a bigger state government than most, pay our public employees more than average, and have one of the highest tax burdens, he explains we're falling apart because the citizens aren't taxed enough. (He also doesn't like that we can vote directly for our own laws--apparently government officials, who generally support most referenda that call for more spending, would be able to run things much better if we'd just shut up.)

But at least that's a consistent argument. Sometimes he doesn't even bother to check basic facts. Look at this paragraph:

Garry Wills listed his concerns about the militarization of American public life (the subject of his recent book, Bomb Power ) and the vitriol of today’s political/cultural divisions. But he added: “When people say how bad things are, I always emphasize that we have never in our history been so good on human rights. The rights of women, gays, the disabled, Native Americans, Hispanics—all of those have soared in the last 40 years.” Even the “birther” and “tea bag” movements are indirect evidence of progress, Wills said. “They are reactions to a really great achievement. We did elect a black president. Not many people thought that was possible, even two or three years ago.” Of course Wills’s list of achievements is, for some, evidence of what has been “taken” from them in recent history. The point for now is that their concern is part of a strong national tradition, as is the fluidity that gave rise to it. If we weren’t worried about our future, then we should really start to worry.

This is the article writ small. Fallows start out quoting Wills approvingly, noting that things aren't that bad, and are, in fact, considerably better than they used to be on some levels. Absolutely right. But then he (through Wills) sees clouds on the horizon, such as the "tea bag" movement. Just calling them tea baggers is repulsive enough, but, apparently, both Wills and Fallows are so blinkered that they believe a widespread popular movement that openly describes its purpose as opposition to wasteful spending and larger government must be a reaction to the election of a black President. This isn't just wrong, it's despicable. (I guess we shouldn't expect any better from people who think so little of America that just a few years back they didn't believe we could vote in a black President.)

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Just calling them tea baggers is repulsive enough"


This comment is inexplicable - for a group that made such much hullabaloo on Fox on having a million tea bags objecting to being called teabaggers or demonizing the opposition because of the movement's failure to perform basic due diligence in the vetting of its name is beyond belief.

Maybe teabagger can grow into respectability like Whig and Tory but based on their antics, its hard to see how.

6:36 AM, January 19, 2010  
Blogger LAGuy said...

They're Tea Party protestors. "Teabaggers" is a cheap, sniggering sexual slur that their enemies--and only their enemies--use. It's as if James Fallows were saying "why are all these Repubes so racist?"

11:28 AM, January 19, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter