By Kevin D. Williamson
Wednesday, February 13, 2019
The bullet train is dead.
Mostly.
California’s new governor, the prim and grim Gavin
Newsom, announced that the project would be taken off its $650-million-a-month
life-support apparatus and euthanized. The end of the project leaves
Californians with no way to travel between Los Angeles and San Francisco except
a 90-minute, $149 flight.
(Or driving.)
For perspective, if you went to Starbucks 35 times for a
venti latte, you’d spend more money — and more time — than you would on round-trip air travel between Los Angeles
and San Francisco. This is the “problem” that California has tried to solve
with a $77 billion boondoggle.
At the time of its demise, the bullet train was years
behind schedule, had spent more than seven times its originally allocated
budget, and, of course, carried no passengers.
Governor Newsom — and this is the truly hilarious part —
apparently intends to finish up the little bit of the project that already has
been started, meaning that there will be a high-speed bullet train connecting
Bakersfield with Merced, 100 miles away. This will come at a cost that is
simply astonishing.
The same people who brought you this ingenious plan want
to take over the majority of the U.S. economy — agriculture, transportation,
manufacturing, utilities, and more — and put those commanding heights under
political discipline deployed in exactly the same immeasurably stupid way for
exactly the same immeasurably stupid reasons. They are calling it the “Green
New Deal” this time around.
But it has been called many other things. Sing along if
you know the words:
“We’re at war with the Germans!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“There’s a Great Depression!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“We’re at war with the Germans again!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“Stagflation!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“Some people make a lot more money than others!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“Global warming?”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“I have this weird pain in my right shoulder. I think it
may be the rotator cuff, but I’m not entirely sure. Makes a funny clicking
noise when I do bench presses.”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
“Colorless green ideas sleep furiously!”
“The government
must take over the economy!”
Etc.
Progressives love trains. They hate cars. There’s a
reason for that.
The fundamental progressive idea is central planning. In the progressive imagination, society is a
puzzle to be solved, a grand Rubik’s Cube that can be adjusted and readjusted
and experimented with until — perfection!
The progressive looks at society the same way a child looks at a model railroad
set or an ant farm — which is to say, from a point of view that is effectively
godlike. Human beings, their families, their desires, their pleasures, their
dreams, their businesses, their associations, their communities — all of these
are only chessmen to be moved around in pursuit of utopia.
A car can go basically anywhere its driver wants. A train
can go only where the central planners have preordained. It is for this reason
that trains have long been at the center of the progressive vision. And not
only the progressive vision: Such modern utopians as Ayn Rand find in the
railroad the model of the kind of society they desire: a society that is designed, that proceeds according to
plan. Whose plan? Preferably one of their own, of course, but they’ll get on
board for almost any old plan if the alternative is no plan at all.
There is another vision of society: that it is organic,
that many of its best and more effective institutions are spontaneous orders,
that all sorts of magnificent and enriching things are the result of systems
that have no one in charge of them at all.
That isn’t a manifesto for anarchism, but for what conservatives call
“well-ordered liberty.” What is that? Aren’t ordered and liberty
mutually exclusive? As conservatives understand things, the purpose of
government is to govern: enforcing contracts and protecting property, rights,
and liberty, which provides the security that is necessary for spontaneous
orders to thrive.
Progressives sometimes point out — correctly — that many
of these rules and protocols appear to be fundamentally arbitrary. Some of you
probably know the story (which is not the whole story) of how the capacity of a
compact disc (kids, ask your parents) originally was determined: a Sony
executive wanted a single CD to be able to handle all of Beethoven’s glorious
Ninth Symphony, specifically the leisurely version of it recorded at Bayreuther
Festspiele in 1951 under the baton of Wilhelm Furtwängler. It mattered less
what provided the standard for CDs
than that there was a standard, which
enabled any ordinary CD to be played in any ordinary CD player. Picking a
different piece of music might have yielded different dimensions or a different
sample rate (44.1 kHz was not ordained by any deity) or other technical
differences. A different set of rules for intellectual property would have
changed the way Silicon Valley technology companies and pharmaceutical
manufacturers are organized. This or that change in the way labor markets are
organized and regulated would result in different wage distributions.
From that, progressives conclude — also correctly — that
these institutions are subject to change and renegotiation. But human beings
and their relationships are not infinitely plastic, and even arbitrary
standards and procedures may provide great value by simple virtue of the fact
that they enable social cooperation. There is no existential mandate that
gasoline pumps in Amarillo are in form and operation identical to those in
Boston, but it does making filling the car up easier. American Express and Visa
help to simplify complicated legal and financial issues related to doing
commerce across national borders. These things develop over time, with input
from many different people and institutions (no single person or entity
invented the CD or the internal-combustion engine); sometimes, government is
one of those institutions.
A healthy society with an intelligent politics never
falls for the illusion of Year Zero, that we rational and enlightened moderns —
each generation of which always imagines itself to be the first of its kind —
can begin anew, building from the foundations up. Under the auspices of the
Green New Deal, a group of ordinary people with no special knowledge or ability
believes that it can deputize itself to radically overhaul — from first
principles of its own distillation — everything from the way soybeans are grown
to how people get from New York to Los Angeles. That they couldn’t even figure
out how to get people from Los Angeles to San Francisco while burning through
$77 billion — an amount that exceeds by many billion dollars the market
capitalization of BlackRock, Inc., a financial behemoth that is — take note,
here — the world’s largest asset manager.
Ordinary market processes (in air travel, a heavily
regulated industry) created the system by which anybody who wants to travel
between Los Angeles and San Francisco can do so in less than two hours for the
cost of a few dozen cups of coffee. The central planners failed to create an
alternative even with enormous sums of money at their disposal and enormous
power to command.
With the state of California and all its splendid glories
as their model-train set, they couldn’t even best Alaska Airlines.
Put these po-faced generalissimos
in charge of reinventing the U.S. economy from the ground up?
Hard pass.
No comments:
Post a Comment