By Jonah Goldberg
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Can government spend so much money on a white elephant,
even Uncle Sam can’t lift it?
Why, yes, yes it can.
You see, the omnipotence paradox doesn’t really work on
government. What’s the omnipotence paradox you ask? (“Seriously, no one asked”
— The Couch). It’s the old conundrum that goes back at least to Averroës, the
great Islamic philosopher and champion of Aristotle who, today, would surely be
beheaded by ISIS either for his advancement of secular thought, or maybe just
because he liked two sugars in his coffee. ISIS’s standards for beheading are
pretty lax.
Basically the omnipotence paradox asks if an omnipotent
being can put limits on Himself. The most famous version of this is “Can God
create a rock so heavy even He can’t lift it?” Some people think, “Can Mitt
Romney have a bad hair day on purpose?” is a variant of this, but they are
wrong.
I’ve never liked this question for the simple reason that
it tells us very little — if anything — about the nature of God and a good deal
about the limits of logic and reason. A God that is the Master of the Universe
— and I’m not talking about He-Man & Co. — isn’t going to be comprehensible
in totality for beings limited to a three-, or four-, dimensional understanding
of reality. It’s a fun verbal game, but utterly useless, not only because it is
an abstraction but because of our limited ability to abstract things outside of
our conceptual horizons.
Behold, the God That Writes Checks
But you can see how this way of thinking falls apart when
you apply it to government. The State is a human institution, run by humans who
are all too human. The problem is that many people want it to be more.
Progressives used to be much more honest about their aspirations for the State.
Richard Ely, the founder of the American Economic Association and the most
important and influential of the “Wisconsin school” progressives, declared that
“God works through the State in carrying out His purposes more universally than
through any other institution.” It “is religious in its essence,” and “a mighty
force in furthering God’s kingdom and establishing righteous relations.” For
Ely, redemption wasn’t an individual religious experience, but a collective one
orchestrated by the state. (See Liberal Fascism or my magazine piece “Richard
Ely’s Golden Calf” for more.)
Herbert Croly, the George Washington of American
progressivism, was literally — and by “literally” I don’t mean “figuratively”
the way Joe Biden means “literally” — baptized into the cult of the State. From
Liberal Fascism:
Croly was a quiet man who’d grown up with noisy parents. His mother was one of America’s first female syndicated columnists and a dedicated “feminist.” His father was a successful journalist and editor whose friends dubbed him “The Great Suggester.” Their home was something of a “European island in New York,” according to one historian. The most interesting thing about the senior Croly — if by “interesting” you mean really loopy — was his obsession with Auguste Comte, a semimystical French philosopher whose biggest claim to fame was his coinage of the word “sociology.” Comte argued that humanity progressed in three stages and that in the final stage mankind would throw off Christianity and replace it with a new “religion of humanity,” which married religious fervor to science and reason — even to the extent of making “saints” out of such figures as Shakespeare, Dante, and Frederick the Great. Comte believed that the age of mass industrialization and technocracy would pluck the human mind from the metaphysical realm for good, ushering in an age where pragmatic managers would improve the plight of all based upon man-made morality. He anointed himself the high priest of this atheistic, secular faith, which he called positivism. The elder Croly made his Greenwich Village home into a positivist temple where he held religious ceremonies for select guests, whom he would try to convert. In 1869 young Herbert became the first and probably last American to be christened in Comte’s religion.
Longtime readers of this “news”letter might know that my
favorite quote of any Progressive Era clergyman is from Walter Rauschenbusch.
This famous man of God believed socialism was an idea whose time had come. “Our
disorganized competitive life must pass into an organic cooperative life,” he
insisted. “Unless the ideal social order can supply men with food, warmth, and
comfort more efficiently than our present economic order, back we shall go to
capitalism. . . . The God that answereth by low food prices, let him be God.”
This isn’t an argument for God, but Baal. Whichever deity
delivers the material stuff we want may be called “God,” but that doesn’t make
Him God. If you think God ceases to be God if circumstances require “going back
to capitalism,” then you don’t really believe in God.
Rauschenbusch popped into my head last week when I heard
that Al Gore said he might become a Catholic because the Pope has taken Gore’s
position on global warming. That’s better than Howard Dean, who left his Church
over an argument about bike paths, but theologically, it’s not much more
sophisticated. Let the God who answereth with carbon taxes (or bike paths) be
God!
Born at the Wrong Time
Today, liberals talk around their ambitions for the State
in the same way that very ambitious people rarely state their real agenda or
the way that some salesmen hold off talking about the actual price until very
late in the conversation. They adorn their rhetoric with technocratic verbiage
and jargony economic buzzwords like “competitiveness,” because that is the
language of the new clerisy.
None of this would be news to Eric Voegelin. “When God is
invisible behind the world,” he wrote, “the contents of the world will become
new gods; when the symbols of transcendent religiosity are banned, new symbols
develop from the inner-worldly language of science to take their place.”
I would love it if one day it was revealed that the whole
Journolist/Vox crowd were members of a secret religion, like the Osiris
cultists in Young Sherlock Holmes. In the movie, the fanatics are all elite,
foppish technocrats, financiers, and statesmen by day but behind closed doors
they wear robes and sacrifice young girls to the Egyptian god of the afterlife.
I’ve never bought the idea that Barack Obama is a secret Muslim, but I could
totally see him being a secret member of Comte’s Religion of Humanity.
Among the reasons the elite Left will never talk about
its real agenda, alas, is that it would require a level of self-awareness
today’s liberals are incapable of. My friend, the brilliant teacher Peter
Schramm, once wrote a beautiful essay about his father and their emigration
from Hungary to America. He writes:
My mother tells me, though I don’t remember saying this, that I told my father I would follow him to hell if he asked it of me. Fortunately for my eager spirit, hell was exactly what we were trying to escape and the opposite of what my father sought.“But where are we going?” I asked.“We are going to America,” my father said.“Why America?” I prodded.“Because, son. We were born Americans, but in the wrong place,” he replied.
Today’s liberals were born progressives, but in the wrong
time. We live in a secular age, where technical language and scientific
concepts have invaded the space traditionally reserved for religion. It’s not
that science no longer exists, it’s that people have put it on pedestal
claiming it is something it isn’t. One need only follow the vapid Twitter
fatwas of people like Neil de Grasse Tyson to see what I mean.
If you pay attention, today’s liberals talk around their
faith in a way that discloses its location in their internal cosmography. It’s sort
of like the way scientists figure out where black holes are by studying how
other objects move around them. You can’t see the black hole because, well,
it’s a black hole. But you can tell it’s there by how all sorts of things get
sucked into its maw. Similarly, you can see how the trajectory of liberal
rhetoric and ideas are bent toward this unspoken, unacknowledged, un-fillable
void at the center of their universes. (It can’t be filled, because utopias
cannot exist in this life, no matter how much money we spend on them.)
As Kevin Williamson recently wrote, Paul Krugman talks as
if he has oracular knowledge of the “science” of economics, and yet he lets
slip the fact that “conscience” — not facts — is his lodestar. “There are some
very hot disagreements in the sciences, such as the dispute over the question
of measurement in quantum mechanics,” Kevin writes. “However that gets sorted
out, it seems likely that conscience will play at most a minor role in it.”
I for one have spent precious few sleepless nights
agonizing about whether to view quarks as particles or waves but, hey, that’s
just me.
Hillary Clinton has argued that the government must work
to redefine what it means to be a human being. Barack Obama has proclaimed we
can create a Kingdom of Heaven here on earth (once the rallying cry of
progressives like Ely). He defined sin as being out of alignment with his
values.
As I’ve written many times, this phenomenon is most
obvious in the realm of environmentalism, where some acolytes are occasionally
willing to testify to their faith. Prominent environmental lawyer Joseph Sax
describes environmentalists as “secular prophets, preaching a message of
secular salvation.”
In 2008, Al Gore was on NPR. He mocked — rightly — Joseph
Hagee’s claim that Hurricane Katrina was God’s punishment for New Orleans’s
sexual depravity. But then, almost in the same breath, he cast Katrina as
Gaia’s punishment for our environmental depravity. It’s the same theodical
impulse under a different flag.
God’s Passenger Rail
What got me going on all this was a nice piece by the
great Mollie Hemingway on the Amtrak crash. She writes:
The theodicy of federal government requires an explanation that defends the goodness of government control or subsidies into the given sphere. So just as some religious groups might blame a weather event on insufficient fealty to the relevant god, some progressives blame — before the National Transportation Safety Board has even shown up on site to investigate the cause of a crash — insufficient fealty, sacrifice and offerings to the relevant god of federal government.Yes, it’s annoying how some progressives politicize everything. But if it’s understood as a sort of primitive religious reaction to confusion about holy government’s many failures, it at least helps explain why they do it.
Republicans Are Why We Can’t Have Nice Things
From the moment I saw the craven response to the calamity
on Morning Joe, I was furious about the way the disaster was instantaneously
exploited without the benefit of relevant facts about the crash or knowledge
about the issues. If I was at all unfair to the
Morning Joe crew, it was to the extent I singled them out. It turns out that
they were simply moving with the Beltway herd. I listened to a Diane Rehm Show
discussion about the crash and it was arguably even worse. But at least they
had the saving grace of having Representative Andy Harris (R., Md.) on to throw
cold water on the bonfire of indignation that we don’t have high-speed rail and
“Positive Train Control” — a technology almost none of the indignant liberals
had heard of five minutes before the crash.
About 20 minutes into the show, guest host Frank Sesno —
a normally sensible guy, I think — had to bring up the other side of the
argument. Here’s how he tried to ask Ed Rendell (D., Porkbarreltopia) about the
charge that Amtrak is poorly run and wastes lots of money.
Governor Rendell, let me ask you this question, and I’m going to bring in, in a moment, Congressman Andy Harris, who is a Republican, who voted against this appropriations measure yesterday. But before I do, there are those who say, with some justification — and let me point out, by the way, that I was on Amtrak the day before this accident took place, going up to New York, getting jostled and bounced around as you do when you take one of these trains because the tracks are not in great shape, not going at the speeds that we should be going if we had a proper high-speed rail system in this country, as virtually every other industrialized country has.
It is an embarrassment, okay. And then when something like this happens, it is a tragic reminder, whether it’s human error or whatever, of where we are in our train travel and what that says about our larger infrastructure. But there are those in the Congress, Governor Rendell, as you well know, who says wait a minute, Amtrak is poorly run, poorly managed, and the investments and the billions that we’ve put in in the past have been poorly spent. What do you say to taxpayers and to that?
Words on a page can’t quite capture Sesno’s angst over
having to suggest that Amtrak is a s*** show. He first had to get it in how
embarrassed he is by our rail system. He asserts that “virtually every other
industrialized country” has high-speed rail, which is both (a) untrue and (b)
irrelevant.
Meanwhile, Rendell swats away this unraveled softball by
saying, “Well, first of all, I’m not sure that’s true, but if it is true, the
congressional oversight has been lacking, severely lacking.” You know what you
call a national spokesman on boosting infrastructure — who considers himself an
expert on the issue — who says he’s not sure it’s true that Amtrak is poorly
run? Well, you have three choices: A liar, a fool, or both. (See Ian’s piece for edification on this point.)
What rankles about this liberal bout of St. Vitus Dance
over the “underfunding” of Amtrak is, well, everything. It’s almost like they
were waiting for it, with their charts and talking points and pre-booked
talking heads; as if a super-villain had sabotaged the train only when he
already had everything else in place. If this had been a terrorist attack and
the “neocons” responded with such coordinated alacrity, we’d be reading about
“inside job” and “false flag” conspiracy theories for years. Obviously I don’t
think it was a conspiracy, it was almost certainly human error — a fact that
serves as only the shallowest of speed bumps in the rush to open the fiscal
granaries and let the money pour forth. “Let the God who answereth with high-speed
rail be God.”
No comments:
Post a Comment