How the GOP helped paved the way for Democratic socialists, AOC, Zohran Mamdani, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and other DC economic illiterates.
Zohran Mamdani’s win the New York City Democratic party mayoralty primary should be a wakeup call to free market advocates.
The meaning of America First, and here as well.
The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists. Ernest Hemingway
The government and its chiefs do not have the powers of a mythical Santa Claus. They cannot spend except by taking out of the pockets of some people for the benefit of others. Ludwig von Mises
MAKE AMERICANS FINANCIALLY INDEPENDENT
New essay about MAFI: From Professor to Public Advocate
Republicans have done nothing to stop the growth of the welfare state since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the creation of the Federal Reserve (1913), and the leap forward with the New Deal and the Great Society.
Ever since the federal government got the power to tax incomes with the addition of the income tax amendment to the Constitution, the tax code has become not only a political football but also has made possible federal government spending not authorized by Article I, Section 8.
Murray Rothbard documented how the ideology of the Progressive Era rose from the late 19th century to become the rationale for the modern welfare state. His essay, “Origins of the Welfare State,” puts in perspective how an “alien” idea was imported to America by graduate students who studied in Prussia and then spread the ideas of welfarism step by step to become a mainstream policy.
In short, the Progressive Era built the foundation for President Hoover and then FDR to expand the welfare state, so that today virtually all Republicans do not object to the federal “safety net”—making them as complicit as Democrats for unconstitutional spending.
After 20 years of FDR and President Truman (1933-1953), the election of Dwight Eisenhower (1952) and his eight years in the White House was a disappointment to the “Old Right.”
According to this summary of Eisenhower and the Old Right, the former Supreme Commander in World War II.
Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidency (1953-1961) was characterized by a push towards"Modern Republicanism", a middle ground between liberal Democrats and the conservative wing of his own Republican Party, often referred to as the "Old Right".
The Old Right:
This faction of American conservatism was prominent from approximately 1910 to the mid-1950s.
They were characterized by their defense of traditional values, limited government, free enterprise, and skepticism towards expanding federal power.
Many were Republicans, but it also included a conservative Democratic element, particularly in the Southern United States.
They opposed both the New Deal programs of Franklin D. Roosevelt and, prior to U.S. entry into World War II, were non-interventionists (isolationists) in foreign policy.
A key figure associated with the Old Right was Senator Robert Taft.
Eisenhower's "Middle Way":
Eisenhower, although sharing some conservative beliefs in limited government and free enterprise, believed that government intervention was sometimes necessary to preserve liberty.
He favored a more moderate course that he termed "Modern Republicanism" or "Dynamic Conservatism," which aimed to balance individual freedom and the market economy with government provision of necessary assistance.
Eisenhower's philosophy was an attempt to find a "middle way" between the extremes of the political left and right.
His domestic policies reflected this, including the expansion of Social Security, raising the minimum wage, and the creation of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW).
He also oversaw the development of the Interstate Highway System.
Conflict with the Old Right:
Eisenhower's embrace of government intervention, even in limited ways, often put him at odds with the Old Right in his own party.
They viewed his support for social welfare programs as "creeping socialism" and felt he was continuing the policies of the Democratic Party.
Some Republicans, such as Senator Barry Goldwater, were critical of Eisenhower for what they saw as compromising too much to get legislation passed.
Eisenhower, however, believed his policies would ultimately strengthen the Republican Party and prevent the breakdown of the two-party system.
In summary, Eisenhower's presidency was marked by a constant interplay between his "Modern Republicanism" and the demands of the Old Right within his party. While they disagreed on the proper role of government, especially concerning social programs, Eisenhower remained committed to his "Middle Way" approach.
In a prescient 1950 talk, “The Middle of the Road Leads to Socialism,” Ludwing von Mises warned how so-called moderate policies would led to less economic freedom and a call for more statism.
The eight-year Eisenhower administration cemented the New Deal in America. There was no attempt to repeal any of the New Deal’s welfare state policies.
Future Republican presidents—Nixon, Ford, Reagan, the Bushes, and now Trump—also made “peace” with the progressive agenda.
The self-described socialist Mamdani’s win on Tuesday has its roots in Republicans embrace of the welfarism and crony capitalism, instead of pursuing the wisdom of the Old Right.
In short, GOP criticisms about Mamdani’s rise as well as that of AOC and the other statists in American politics ring hollow, because of their 70-year failure to be the party of fiscal discipline, personal responsibility, and free enterprise, and be an advocate for economic freedom and financial independence.
*************************************************************************************************
Perry Atkinson and I recently discussed the unfolding economic events.
James Bovard on protectionism.
Recent interviews discussing the state of the economy with Perry Atkinson, Jim Peters, and Randy Durham.
********************************************************************************************
Dave Campbell and I discuss MAFI on the Clarity and Chaos podcast.
Col. Mike and Dr. Mike and I discuss Trump and his promises on the National Security Hour.
*********************************************************************************************************
Restoring free enterprise, medical freedom, and a constitutional federal budget.
The insufferable Jim Cramer reveals his economic ignorance in a recent CNBC rant.
*********************************************************************************************
Tom DiLorenzo’s pamphlet, Axis of Evil, is now available at the Mises Institute.
Order a free copy of Rothbard’s money and banking classic monograph. Or, you can read it online here.
My December 10 talk on medical care.
Bob Murphy interviews Dr. Keith Smith of the Surgery Center of OK.
****************************************************************
Murray Sabrin, PhD, is emeritus professor of finance, Ramapo College of New Jersey. Dr. Sabrin is considered a “public intellectual” for writing about the economy in scholarly and popular publications. His book, The Finance of Health Care: Wellness and Innovative Approaches to Employee Medical Insurance (Business Expert Press, Oct. 24, 2022), and his other BEP publication, Navigating the Boom/Bust Cycle: An Entrepreneur’s Survival Guide (October 2021), provides decision makers with tools needed to help manage their businesses during the business cycle. Sabrin's autobiography, From Immigrant to Public Intellectual: An American Story, was published in November, 2022. He is also the author of Why the Federal Reserve Sucks.
Worse. The so-called "income tax" requires sworn confession of being under penalties of perjury, is not uniform (euphemistically called "progressive"), does not define "income" (indeed, is antithetical to previous definitions), and is not apportioned. In short, the (unratified) "16th" amendment provides no new power of taxation. It's all a ruse.
By their very nature, politicians need to be buying votes and thus pumping up the socialist spending conduits. Politicians cannot do much of anything without money and once money comes their way, they go haywire. Witness NGOs and USAID of which retardicans are as much responsible for as the leftists.
In a free market, there is little room government heavy-handed policies. If markets be free, that diminishes the power of the government to control and surveil. The DC Swamp hates that idea.