Comments on: Must… Destroy… Milton Freedman

By: Keelay

Keelay — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:52:06 +0000

Sorry - that comment was in reference to this

“I am more and more coming to the conclusion that National Greatness Conservatism, like all quasi-fascist movements, is based on a weird romantic teenager’s fantasies about what it means to be a grown up.”

By: Keelay

Keelay — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:51:12 +0000

That is precisely the reason I was originally drawn to it as an adolescent.

And I also had framed prints of Labrador retrievers with dead ducks in their mouths.

By: Joel

Joel — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:37:32 +0000

Will,

National greatness conservatives are like alcoholics who spike the near-beer with the real stuff, worst of both worlds, so I agree with you there.

Yet just as the neocons inappropriately place private virtues in the public sphere, you seem to be doing the reverse, when you celebrate the tasteful “functionalism” of liberal individualism. It may be admirable to caution restraint in government, but I’m not sure why this is a fundamental argument rather than a practical one.

At any rate, I’m more comfortable to calls for the “fundamental decency” of liberal individualism when it comes from someone who went through that over-romantic adolescent phase. Like Shaw said (I think it was him, and not Churchill) about being a liberal at 20 and conservative at 40 (or was it 30? 50? so many different versions of that anecdote…)

Anyway, wonderfully written piece even if I have some caveats.

By: Egypt Steve

Egypt Steve — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:25:42 +0000

Jason: Swedish modern. Upscale, not the Ikea version.

By: Egypt Steve

Egypt Steve — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:18:08 +0000

I’m a liberal, in fact, quasi-socialist and quasi-pacifist. I hate and reject National Greatness Conservatism and all other quasi-fascist movements. I have, however, read Aristotle in Greek. Does that make me a bad person?

By: Jay

Jay — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:42:46 +0000

Oh, my… This is the best exhibit they have in their argument against self-interest?

Recent congressional history has laid bare the fallacy of this argument. Republicans who proclaimed from the stump that greed was good turned out to believe it when they got into office, amassing earmarks and bridges to nowhere by means of their newfound powers. Why should we be surprised?

Really? It would seem that this example defeats — rather than supports — their own argument. What do earmarks and bridges to nowhere have to do with the free market? Nothing.

If anything, these examples highlight the danger of centralizing power, even if done supposedly to serve a higher purpose. As Hayek said, the worst always come out on top in this sort of system.

By: chris

chris — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:20:32 +0000

Very well done, sir. Succinct. You helped me put words to what I couldn’t.

“And the problem with most modernist buildings is that nobody could live in them.”

Modernist architecture was an attempt to draw *everyone* together into a simplified liberal individualism. Unfortunately, not everyone can live like that; some would rather go to war for a cause regardless of their apprehension of it. And some need to live/work in a building that pretends to give them meaning and culture. And a laundry room.

By: America Uber Alles

America Uber Alles — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:02:14 +0000

National Greatness Conservatives are like Kevin Spacey’s next door neighbor in American Beauty, standing in your garage with a rifle.

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:37:14 +0000

The least we can do for the memory of the late Milton Friedman is to spell his name correctly . . .

By: oddjob

oddjob — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:24:22 +0000

a grotesque wood-paneled den stuffed with animal heads, mounted swords, garish carpets, and a giant roaring fire. Only the most vulgar tuck in next to that fire, light a fat cigar, and think they’ve really got it all figured out.

LOL!

If you have not, the next time you’re in the NYC area you should visit Sagamore Hill, Teddy Roosevelt’s home in Oyster Bay, NY.

By: David

David — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 13:24:25 +0000

Overheard at CATO:

Mr. Wilkinson muttering in the hallway,

“DAMMIT, YOU CONSERVATIVES, ORNAMENT IS CRIME!”

By: Defending Corbu’s Honor | After Corbu

Defending Corbu’s Honor | After Corbu — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:43:07 +0000

[...] Right: The worse insult to modernism is made by Wilkinson who, apparently not familiar with CIAM, claims it for “liberal individualism” causing a generation of leftist architects to turn over in their grave. Forget “spare, [...]

By: mk

mk — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:42:47 +0000

As brilliant as the analogy is, I think National Greatness Conservatism (or “NGC” as it appears in rap songs) is just as self-congratulatory but not as static or navel-gazing as the analogy suggests.

Or I guess, it depends on what idea or practice is giving us greatness. Sometimes, I assume, it’s war. And while that’s kitschy, it also has real consequences such as death.

By: David Morris

David Morris — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:22:29 +0000

“National Greatness Conservatism is like a grotesque wood-paneled den stuffed with animal heads, mounted swords, garish carpets, and a giant roaring fire. Only the most vulgar tuck in next to that fire, light a fat cigar, and think they’ve really got it all figured out.”

Ha! What a great line! It’s like something out of a Wodehouse novel.

By: Wilkinson vs National Greatness Conservatism « Matt Zeitlin: Impetuous Young Whippersnapper

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:14:31 +0000

[...] Julian Sanchez already beat me to this post, but please, by all means, read Will Wilkinson’s post on National Greatness Conservatism. Here’s a taste: I sometimes think that liberal [...]