I had been waiting for the neocon reaction to the spectacular new Lucas film, Star Wars, Part 2: Attack of the Clones. Here we have an aggressive allegory of the current American problem (actually a problem that dates back, perhaps, two centuries): a once-free Republic has become an increasingly evil Empire. As the Empire grows it both inspires and foments rebellion, here and abroad, which provides a further excuse for consolidating power in the center.
In a recent article, New York Times writer Paul Krugman puts out a clever analysis of state demographics. He alleges that the pro-Bush states have more crime, divorce, single moms and net-tax eaters than the pro-Gore states. Krugman's analytic knife, however, doesn’t cut deeply enough to get to the truth of the matter.
"The only possible merit here, once you get behind all the pretension and infantile psychobabble, is to show readers just how craven, shallow, unprincipled, and deluded Washington conservative activists are."
Mark Thornton shows that George Lucas is taking bits and pieces of our own historical experience to retell a battle between good and evil that also touches on themes in political economy, particularly the choice between self-determination (essential to freedom) and imperialism (linked to war and state expansion).
To demonstrate the symbiotic relationship between the modern political classes and journalism, one has only to see the current "revolving door" in Washington, D.C. From Chris Matthews to George Stephanopolous, the gaggle of former government staffers working as "journalists" demonstrates beyond a doubt what is happening in journalism today.
Richard Ebeling writes: The rejection of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes around the world has represented a rebirth of the ideal of the democratic order. It is important to remember, however, that "self-government" can mean and has meant two different, but complementary ideals.
Germany today, argues Frank Vogelgesang, is a country marked by often suffocating regulation, a social security system that lies like a wet blanket over the private sector, and a labor market in desperate need of breathing room. This goes against the kind of market economy envisioned by Ludwig Erhard after World War II, based largely on ideas of the Freiburg School with its intellectual roots in the Austrian School.
For those who have seen A Beautiful Mind, be assured that the strategizing--in which Russell Crowe instructs his friends that the only way to success is for them all to ignore the pretty girl and focus instead on her plainer friends--does not constitute a true Nash equilibrium. Even if all the boys would be better off if they all ignored the pretty blonde, there would still be an incentive for each one to deviate from the pact and approach her.
By the 1890s, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt, Frick, Harriman, and many others amassed spectacular fortunes. To progressives and other redistributionists, their wealth, and the income inequality it implied, was unacceptable. An income tax, its advocates argued, was the fix.
Why is there so much religious passion in the tone of the Microsoft critics? Why is it so difficult to understand that the marketplace is a far better evaluator of Microsoft's product than a federal judge who tries to synthesize, express, and enforce the whims of 20 million consumers whom he's never talked to?
