Frumtopia a Sanctuary for Intelligent Political Discourse

For anybody who ever wondered who is JG Bennet. He came into existence after reading David Frum’s article called Waterloo & is based on……

JG Bennet is a parody of James Gordon Bennett Jr., hence the one T in Bennett instead of two. . .  My goal on the Frum Forum was to try and get people on an intelligent political blog to react to my screed like they would have to JG Bennett Jr. back in the 1870’s & 80’s but still read it.  It was fun guys!

Who was James Gordon Bennett Jr.?  He ran the New York Herald and is one of the late 19th century’s most colorful and audacious characters.

My goal at the Frum Forum was to do this but with a political twist……  🙂  I hope I succeeded just a little…..

Gordon Bennett !  http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/articles/gordon-bennett.htm

The use of James Gordon-Bennett’s name as an expletive possibly bears relation to his outrageous lifestyle and involvement in newsworthy stunts. Imagine opening your daily newspaper and reading yet another news item telling you of his latest antics, and as you begin to express incredulity with a “God Almighty”, you restrain your publically unacceptable language and instead say….. GORDON-BENNETT!

“The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so.”
National Review 19 November 1955
 William F. Buckley Jr.

 

 

Lost in the flood of Ronald Reagan retrospectives and testimonials is a crucial fact with special relevance for all Americans today: To a great extent, Ronald Reagan was a trade realist.

When major American industries were on the ropes, a combination of national security fears, electoral concerns, and outrage at inequitable, illegal competition prompted Reagan to act, and American manufacturing was unquestionably the stronger for it. Tragically, this is a crucial aspect of his legacy that all three of Reagan’s White House successors have rejected, frittering away American manufacturing and jobs in one ill-advised free trade agreement after another.

The conventional wisdom about Reagan as free enterprise, free market champion is largely true. But on trade policy, Reagan acted decisively in five instances to save major American industries from predatory foreign competition. Moreover, the temporary import relief succeeded spectacularly, resulting in improved performance by these industries and avoiding the captive market prices that conventional economics teaches will always flow from restricting foreign competition.

Reagan’s tactics were flexible. In autos, machine tools, and steel, his administration subjected foreign producers to so-called voluntary export restraints. In semiconductors, Reagan officials negotiated an agreement to secure a specific share of the Japanese market for U.S. companies, and then imposed tariffs on Japanese electronics imports when Tokyo briefly refused to keep a promise to halt semiconductor dumping.

 

 

HOW THE SOUTH WON THE WAR BY TURNING THE GOP INTO SOUTHERN DEMOCRATS

One might make the argument that if you take the long view, the Confederacy actually triumphed. We can start with the Republican Party, founded in 1854 to oppose the Dixie way of life, but now a reflection of Southern attitudes. In capturing the Republican Party, the political descendants of the Confederates are accomplishing through politics what their ideological ancestors failed to accomplish on the battlefield.

To be sure, chattel slavery has long been abolished in this nation. But you could consider slavery a form of cheap labor with no legal protections for the laborers. Now consider the GOP current efforts to bust unions, cut wages and benefits, and reduce workplace safety regulations.
In other words, one essence of the antebellum South’s economic system is becoming part of the national economic system.

Lincoln and the Republicans of 1861 supported protective tariffs, not just to help finance the federal government, but also to support domestic industry and raise wages. The South supported free trade — South Carolina’s first secession threat came in 1832 in opposition to “the tariff of abominations” — and today’s GOP is a big supporter of free trade.

The Old South also opposed federal spending on “internal improvements” — canals, railroads, turnpikes and the like — in the first part of the 19th century. That is, investment in national infrastructure, and where does the anti-investment rhetoric come from today if not the GOP?

Nor was the South big on spending for education. Southern senators and representatives blocked early efforts to establish state land-grant colleges. As for the local common schools, the illiteracy rate in Dixie, even among whites, was much higher than in the North, which supported public education. The Southern heritage of poorly funding public education is now a national Republican policy, which also involves taking money from the public coffers to support private religious schools.

Add all this up, and there’s a strong argument that the Confederacy actually won the Civil War — not by force of arms, but by taking over the political party that had once been dedicated to its destruction.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: