I Am Not Alone In My Opposition To The PermaGov. Not By A Long Shot

After an seemingly endless…and as usual totally fruitless…colloquy between myself and centerfielddj in the comments section of Booman’s apparent Arthur Gilroy callout Rand Paul is Just Like the Others (The first sentence of which was “I’m just paging Arthur Gilroy here. Any response?”), ol’ centerfield admitted intellectual defeat by posting yet another in a long line of name-calling.

Arthur, your impenetrable cynicism makes you appear as an increasingly sad man. Nothing means anything to you.

My answer follows. There as well as here.
Centerfielddj, my “impenetrable cynicism” regarding U.S. politics is simply the truth of the matter as I…and millions of other Americans…see it. (The following is from the supposedly left-centrist Atlantic, by the way. Yeah, I know. It sounds more like The Washington Times except the prose is better. That’s where we’re headed, bubbelehs. Deal wid it. Rand Paul is way out front on this trend. In point of fact, his efforts…and those of his father’s before him…are one of the things that are driving this anti-PermaGov movement. Is he just another cynical, vote-grabbing pol? Maybe, maybe not. We shall soon see, won’t we. We were all surprised by the depth of Obama’s commitment to the PermaGov, were we not? Our capacity at surprise regarding the perfidy upon which this system is presently based should be wearing thin by now.)

Have Americans Officially Given Up on Washington?

Poll results reveal an overwhelming preference for stronger local leadership, and less federal input.

Michael Hansen, age 45, is not alone in thinking that national politics has become “almost like a slow-motion car wreck.” Every week brings another seeming crisis from Washington, D.C.–the congressional showdown over the continuation of funding for the Department of Homeland Security was just the latest. It’s enough to turn off ordinary Americans from the down-to-the-wire negotiations and theatrics.

“After 10 years of paying attention to politics, I just prefer state and local government,” says Hansen, an independent voter who works in food sales and lives in Idaho, just outside of Sun Valley. “I think local and state politicians actually listen more. They have to live within the same rules that they create.”

The most recent results of the 22nd Heartland Monitor poll, sponsored by Alllstate and National Journal, bear out Hansen’s assessment of who is best suited to lead the U.S. Years of federal gridlock and dysfunction have left the public favoring state and local institutions over the federal government as the places best equipped to offer solutions to the country’s ongoing economic and social challenges.

—snip—

The preference for governance that is closer to home carries across people of various ages and genders. Sixty-seven percent of men favored state and local institutions over national ones, compared to the breakdown among women of 61 percent for local and state level versus 27 percent for national. Poll participants who identified as Republicans expressed some of the least regard for leadership at the national level. Just 14 percent of Republicans said the national level was marching ahead toward its goals; Republicans, who have long advocated for a smaller footprint for the federal government, overwhelmingly favored the activity of state and local institutions.

—snip—

The polling did not just show the lack of faith in national institutions and leadership; it also shows that people increasingly feel that the best solutions for the country’s problems will come from local communities, state governments, and institutions. Sixty-nine percent of respondents said that state and local institutions–from governments to businesses to community groups and volunteers–offer the best new ideas because they were closer to the problems, more adaptable, and had a greater stake in finding solutions. Just 22 percent of respondents thought the federal government and big business were better equipped to solve the country’s challenges.

To varying degrees, that attitude remained constant across gender lines, age, race, and party affiliation–reflecting respondents’ strong preference for state and local institutions and solutions. “The federal government is too big and too slow. I think it needs to be cut down,” says Luke Roberts, a 30-year-old Republican from Littleton, Colorado, “I just think that less is more right now with the federal government.”

Overwhelmingly, poll respondents said that state and local governments, nonprofits, and institutions were best equipped to handle the majority of problems that the country faced: everything from making neighborhoods more attractive places to live to improving education, helping poor people, and developing new products and services to create jobs. Respondents even believe that fair regulation of businesses would fare better under local and state oversight, according to the polling data.

—snip—

Deal wid it.

6 Comments

Arthur Gilroy on March 11, 2015 at 11:28 am

Feel free. The tarpits of history are equal opportunity destroyers. They’ll take leftinesses as well are rightinesses. Watch.

Marie2 on March 11, 2015 at 1:41 pm

Rand Paul is way out front on this trend.

Oh, for god’s sake. For a pretty old guy, you don’t seem to know much history and completely ignore the social/cultural/economic factors that permit the creation of all “Perma-govs” throughout the world and over time.

It’s as if for you Left-wing populism never existed, much less exists today.

Lefties reject the Pauls and the roots of their so-called libertarian schtick. The racist isolationists, Ayn Rand, the Austerian economists, etc. Were you shilling for Pat Buchanan a couple decades ago? (As the great Molly Ivins once pointed out Pat’s words sounded better in the original German.) The Pauls are merely recycled, right-wing, states’ rights folks.

In case it has escaped your attention, they are official Republicans. Bernie Sanders has bigger cajones than the Pauls because he runs and wins his elections as a leftie, independent and doesn’t compromise his personal integrity by being dependent on the Democratic Party infrastructure and money. Would Rand be a KY senator today if he’d run as a “libertarian” independent? How many Congressional races would his daddy have won as a “libertarian” independent?

“Macho, libertarian-sounding, politico-speak is appealing to every new generation of young adults. Most grow up. Quickly if they attempt to read the dreck like Ayn Rand and the Austerians.

Arthur Gilroy on March 11, 2015 at 7:44 pm

It’s as if for you Left-wing populism never existed, much less exists today.

Oh no, Marie. I know about “populism.” So-called left-wing and equally so-called “right-wing.” It’s been with us for a long time and it remains with us now. You know the only thing that’s really wrong with “populism?” It doesn’t win. Ever. Not here in the U,S, for sure. Not on the national level and thus not enough to actually change things. The U.S. took a flyer on FDR, but he wasn’t really a “populist.”

Here’s a fairly good definition and pocket history of the term:

Populism is a political doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general people, especially contrasting those interests with the interests of the elite.

Populism is a political doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general people, especially contrasting those interests with the interests of the elite.[1] For much of the twentieth century populism was considered to be a political phenomenon mostly in Latin America. Since the 1980s populist movements and parties have enjoyed degrees of success in First World democracies such as Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, and Scandinavian countries.

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or “unrealistic” proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy)

Like dat.

Y’know what’s wrong with “populism?” It’s misnamed. Why? ‘Cuz it’s never really been very popular.

Soi it goes.

Later…

AG
- Quentin on March 12, 2015 at 11:57 am
  
  Did you invent the term PermaGov or did you come across it somewhere? I’m curious to know (otherwise I wouldn’t have asked, of course).
  - Arthur Gilroy on March 13, 2015 at 1:14 am
    
    It’s mine as far as I know.
    
    AG

Quentin on March 12, 2015 at 11:56 am

Could All State be laying the ground for its new Division of State Militias, I wonder, paid for and stocked by the Federal Government?

Arthur Gilroy on March 11, 2015 at 11:28 am

Feel free. The tarpits of history are equal opportunity destroyers. They’ll take leftinesses as well are rightinesses. Watch.

AG
Marie2 on March 11, 2015 at 1:41 pm

Rand Paul is way out front on this trend.

Oh, for god’s sake. For a pretty old guy, you don’t seem to know much history and completely ignore the social/cultural/economic factors that permit the creation of all “Perma-govs” throughout the world and over time.

It’s as if for you Left-wing populism never existed, much less exists today.

Lefties reject the Pauls and the roots of their so-called libertarian schtick. The racist isolationists, Ayn Rand, the Austerian economists, etc. Were you shilling for Pat Buchanan a couple decades ago? (As the great Molly Ivins once pointed out Pat’s words sounded better in the original German.) The Pauls are merely recycled, right-wing, states’ rights folks.

In case it has escaped your attention, they are official Republicans. Bernie Sanders has bigger cajones than the Pauls because he runs and wins his elections as a leftie, independent and doesn’t compromise his personal integrity by being dependent on the Democratic Party infrastructure and money. Would Rand be a KY senator today if he’d run as a “libertarian” independent? How many Congressional races would his daddy have won as a “libertarian” independent?

“Macho, libertarian-sounding, politico-speak is appealing to every new generation of young adults. Most grow up. Quickly if they attempt to read the dreck like Ayn Rand and the Austerians.
- Arthur Gilroy on March 11, 2015 at 7:44 pm
  
  It’s as if for you Left-wing populism never existed, much less exists today.
  
  Oh no, Marie. I know about “populism.” So-called left-wing and equally so-called “right-wing.” It’s been with us for a long time and it remains with us now. You know the only thing that’s really wrong with “populism?” It doesn’t win. Ever. Not here in the U,S, for sure. Not on the national level and thus not enough to actually change things. The U.S. took a flyer on FDR, but he wasn’t really a “populist.”
  
  Here’s a fairly good definition and pocket history of the term:
  
  Populism is a political doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general people, especially contrasting those interests with the interests of the elite.
  
  Populism is a political doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general people, especially contrasting those interests with the interests of the elite.[1] For much of the twentieth century populism was considered to be a political phenomenon mostly in Latin America. Since the 1980s populist movements and parties have enjoyed degrees of success in First World democracies such as Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, and Scandinavian countries.
  
  Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathising with the public, (usually through rhetoric or “unrealistic” proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy)
  
  Like dat.
  
  Y’know what’s wrong with “populism?” It’s misnamed. Why? ‘Cuz it’s never really been very popular.
  
  Soi it goes.
  
  Later…
  
  AG
  - Quentin on March 12, 2015 at 11:57 am
    
    Did you invent the term PermaGov or did you come across it somewhere? I’m curious to know (otherwise I wouldn’t have asked, of course).
    - Arthur Gilroy on March 13, 2015 at 1:14 am
      
      It’s mine as far as I know.
      
      AG
Quentin on March 12, 2015 at 11:56 am

Could All State be laying the ground for its new Division of State Militias, I wonder, paid for and stocked by the Federal Government?

I Am Not Alone In My Opposition To The PermaGov. Not By A Long Shot

About The Author

Arthur Gilroy

6 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments