Dumb GOP Propaganda Long Ago Conflated Essential Infrastructure With ‘Socialism’
from the absolutely-everything-I-don't-like-is-radical-socialism dept
There’s a routine assumption that U.S. partisan division is something that’s just inherent in the American DNA. In reality, the nation’s divisions are routinely and intentionally cultivated and encouraged by powerful and wealthy individuals and corporations to stall consensus and reform. Both parties are culpable, though it’s the GOP that has perfected the tactic as an art form.
Take broadband for example. A bipartisan majority of Americans hate Comcast or their local cable company and support any efforts to challenge that monopoly power. But any time anybody attempts to do absolutely anything to challenge that power you’ll notice a lot of rhetoric about how those efforts are “socialism,” “government run amok,” or “radically partisan.”
It doesn’t matter what we’re doing to hold telecom monopolies accountable. It could be encouraging net neutrality, blocking problematic mergers, holding AT&T accountable for fraud… it’s all very quickly framed through a partisan lens despite the fact it’s not at all actually partisan, and a significant bipartisan majority of Americans support the efforts to try something smarter and better.
The same dumb gamesmanship infects our national conversations about improving our failing infrastructure. Everybody wants their roads, bridges, airports, and utilities to function well, but key corporations often aren’t as keen. Comcast doesn’t want increased broadband competition. Oil giants don’t much care for solar power. The auto industry doesn’t much care for mass transit.
So again, they infect the discourse with claims that absolutely any effort to try and improve anything is somehow radically political. Corporate giants (see again AT&T and Comcast) prey on partisan disdain for taxation (despite they themselves being a massive beneficiary of wasteful taxpayer subsidization). They suggest that policies common across the world are themselves somehow partisan and radical.
And it almost always works, and has worked for the better part of fifty years. The GOP in particular has long been a useful marionette in this little game we play, and did so once again in the wake of the infrastructure bill — using partisan division to sow disdain among their base, while simultaneously taking credit for the very real improvements the bill will bring to the everyday lives of their constituents.
From Ted Cruz to Ron DeSantis, a vast majority of the GOP opposed and maligned the bill, then turned right around and took direct credit with their constituents for the benefits the bills created. In this way, they get to have their cake and eat it too; they get to rile up their base with sordid tales of radical “left wing” government policy (like, gasp, essential bridge repair), yet simultaneously benefit from the very obvious benefits the legislation transferred to real Americans.
It’s idiotic but effective artifice. The GOP didn’t just vote against the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, they used its passage to malign their political opponents, rile up the base, agitate and distract the public, and generally urinate in the discourse pool. Then they turned right around and wrote letters begging the Biden administration for their share of the essential funding for key projects:
Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar, a leading Biden critic who explained his vote against what he called a “phony” infrastructure bill by issuing a statement that “this bill only serves to advance the America Last’s socialist agenda, while completely lacking fiscal responsibility,” wrote three separate letters between March and July advocating for projects in his district. They’d enhance quality of life, Gosar wrote. They’d ease congestion and boost the economy. They’d alleviate bottlenecks and improve rural living conditions.
On one hand, their covert approval of the infrastructure bills still result in better outcomes for the constituents (the broadband bill alone is going to deliver more than $50 billion in improved service across the country). But the bad faith bullshit employed with the other hand creates untold damage in terms of trust in government, belief in policy, and any effort to actually get anything done.
It’s all an extension of the propaganda and culture war gibberish that has become a cornerstone of GOP power. All promoted by a AM radio/Fox News/Sinclair/YouTube propaganda apparatus it took the GOP and major corporations the better part of the last forty years to build. That, in turn, is an extension of corporate power, and its entire function is to agitate the public, sow distrust, and erode meaningful consensus and reform on the most foundational of issues that actually have widespread support.
And you see its “success” absolutely everywhere you look in policy. To the point where words like “socialism” have lost all coherent meaning. What you won’t see as much of are intelligent solutions to any of it. In large part because the dysfunction remains immensely profitable.
Filed Under: airports, broadband, disinformation, hypcorisy, infrastructure, mass transit, propaganda, socialism


Comments on “Dumb GOP Propaganda Long Ago Conflated Essential Infrastructure With ‘Socialism’”
Yes.
"It’s idiotic but effective artifice"
Is it though? If it’s stupid but it works, it’s not stupid.
Not to say that it’s good, or remotely acceptable, of course.
Re:
Gotta separate the content from the strategy. The content of the propaganda is stupid. Absent any other motive, the propaganda reference is idiotic tripe, lacking in intelligent discourse. By that measure, it is idiotic.
The strategy is not, at least in terms of continuing to make the life of the general populace worse in order to further enrich the pockets of a bunch of people who already have more than they could possibly ever need.
Re:
“If it’s stupid but it works, it’s not stupid.”
If I stick a knife into a power socket to dislodge something and don’t get electrocuted, that’s still very stupid even if I got lucky and didn’t connect live circuits down my arm.
The fact something works doesn’t make it not stupid, just effective in the short term. The problem is, all this dumb stuff does is create more issues further down the road, which tend to be bigger and harder to fix.
Opposing vital funding and maintenance might give Republicans the warm and fuzzies and more silly voters, but it’s stupid even after they were forced to accept a compromise with adults. The current work needed is way more extensive and expensive than it needed to be has things been funded and maintained properly, and they’ve taught their voters to reject further expenditure when needed, even though that would be way cheaper in the long term.
Re: Re: It's Not Stupid
It works in the short (and intermediate) term, and gets them votes and whatnot. And the cost is borne by others. By the time the bill comes due they have already reaped the profits.
So, while it may be more expensive, and less efficient, in the long run, they don’t care. It works for them. So, in that sense, it’s definitely not stupid.
Re: Re: Re:
Until it doesn’t, as with a number of “conservative” candidates who recently and suddenly learned that their constituents did not support their anti-abortion views. Similarly, as soon as Colorado passed a law allowing communities to opt out of their anti-municipal-broadband law, they overwhemlingly voted to do just that. The public may not be politically savvy overall, but as Karl writes, they are united in their hatred of the large monopolistic ISPs.
Re: Re: Re:
“while it may be more expensive, and less efficient, in the long run, they don’t care. It works for them. So, in that sense, it’s definitely not stupid.”
It’s a very old GOP trick. As Beau of the fifth column (youtube streamer) occasionally says when discussing GOP tactics, the cruelty is the point.
Here’s how it works;
1) Complain that [government function X] is ineffective, costly, and harmful.
2) Get into government. Render [Government function X] ineffective, costly and harmful.
3) Point at the democrats who’ve spent decades frantically trying to bolster [government function X] and scream loudly “See? SEE? We were right, those assholes are wasting your money!!”
4) Profit.
This is what the GOP does. They’ve found the magic recipe where they never need to build an actual platform beyond catering to angry and ignorant crowds who only want to know who to blame.
This isn’t short-term. The cruelty is the point. Once people begin to suffer from the broken mechanism introduced they project all blame on to their political opposition.
And if, somehow, one of their projects actually would pay off they find a way to make sure the opposition launches it instead so they can scuttle it and keep the population in a perpetual state of grievance – as they did with “Obamacare”…oops, I mean the ‘Republican Affordable Care Act’.
Don’t for one second believe the GOP of today is the GOP of the 60’s.
Re: Re: If I stick a knife into a power socket...
Touché
Re: Re: Re:
Different icon, same person – must’ve entered a different email address or something
Re:
If it’s stupid but it works it’s still stupid, it just also happens to work.
Re: Re: The SARS-CoV-2 Variant B.1.617.2/AY lineage "Karl-Marx"
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/7/1/2033990/-The-Republican-fight-against-high-speed-rail-in-Florida-exposes-their-grift The public transportation system above was once a TRUMP project, now Virgin, and just this last year it permanently blocked SpaceX’s rocket-building site in Cocoa, Florida.
Quoting George Will,
“The real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.”
Re: Re: Re:
“To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.
Time was, the progressive cry was “Workers of the world unite!” or “Power to the people!” Now it is less resonant: “All aboard!”
https://www.newsweek.com/will-why-liberals-love-trains-68597
Re:
Not really, because “clever” in the short run, can still be very “foolish” in the longer term.
Dumb GOP Propaganda
If it’s dumb and it works – it’s not dumb. The fools who believe it are.
Hypocrisy is a virtue and a tool for (mostly) Republicans. It allows them to do what they won’t allow others to do. It’s a tool to attain their only goal, which is getting and keeping power.
Too bad
It’s too bad that the people who need to see this won’t read it.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Seriously? How many times have you seen a socialist pointing to the commons calling it socialism? Neither extreme is correct but dont pretend socialists don’t call essential infrastructure socialism.
Re: GTFO
Just stop with your “both sides” BS. Your defense of the GOP fascist propaganda machine isn’t helping stop the march to authoritarianism here in the US or the rest of the world.
Re:
And you can stop pretending to be a “moderate”, NeoNazi.
Re:
I’unno, how many times have you laughed at the thought of someone being raped?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
From one LBGT to another you really really need to suck a dick.
Re: Re: Re:
Obsess over my sex life all you want, but I’m not going to fuck you or let you fuck me. (Not that you’d seemingly have a problem with fucking me against my will, Mr. Rape is Funny.)
Re: Re: Re: It puts the basic in basic bitch
Such projection Chodaboi.
Re: ...socialists don’t call essential infrastructure socialism
I have never seen a socialist call public infrastructure socialism. I have seen social democrats do so, and some of them call themselves socialists, because they either have bought into the very propaganda this article is about, or are sick of arguing against those who have. Responding to “that’s socialism” with “so what?” can seem like an stronger response than “no it’s not — socialism is when the workers control the means of production — that is the tools, resources, land, etc. needed to make things. This is taxation paying for the general good, not socialism” and so on.
That said, the latter response would be more accurate, and actual socialists often are frustrated that “socdems” like Bernie are making it harder to explain what socialism actually entails.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Not Real Socalism
Ah the classic that’s not REAL socialism argument.
Yes if you were in Lenin’s position you would have ushered in the god damn utopia because you understand the doctrine better than anyone else, you are that smart, and you are the Christ/Buddha like paragon of virtue.
Re: Re: Re:
…says Mr. Public House-ing.
Re: Re: Re:
Wel, Lenin and I agree on one thing, and one thing only.
It’s that the incumbents and their supporters (that is, people like you) have to be forcibly removed to usher in any sort of change.
(And before ANYONE asks, personally, communism is a one-way ticket to a dictatorship. It works especially well in entrenching the assholes in power.)
Re: Re: Re:
I’ve heard that line before, almost verbatim. Did you plagiarize that from Jordan B. Peterson, by chance?
When used against libertarian socialists, which are a thing, by the way, that argument is going to fall flat.
A libertarian socialist would never be in Lenin’s position. Libertarian socialists believe that top-down, authoritarian movements cannot bring about egalitarian ends.
The Soviet Union failed in the exact way predicted by anti-authoritarian socialists like Pëtr Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, Erico Malatesta, Rosa Luxemburg, George Orwell, and more. They predicted its authoritarianism would prevent it from achieving its stated goals of creating a genuinely worker-owned economy. All but one of them were communists. All but two of them were anarchists. All of them were socialists. All of them were anti-authoritarian. All of them were anti-Bolshevik and/or anti-Soviet.
There are a wide range of socialist philosophies, worldviews, ideologies, and movements with vastly different ideas. I fundamentally disagree with almost all of them, for various reasons. That does not mean that they are not socialist.
Re: Re: Re:2
It’s not the first time he has paraphrased or quoted Peterson.
For some people it’s easier to just reduce all those various variants to a simple boogeyman argument like he did above.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Did it ever occur to you that both Bakunin and Marx were correct about the other?
Re: Re: Re:3 Marx and Bakunin
Assuming you didn’t just look it up, the fact that you are familiar enough with socialist philosophy to name-drop Mikhail Bakunin makes it harder to believe you are simply ignorant rather than a bad-faith troll, and having been reading the TechDirt comments for a few months before jumping in the other day, it’s already pretty hard to be charitable.
That said, while I am more sympathetic to Bakunin than Marx, I absolutely believe that both of their criticisms of each other were at least somewhat reasonable, and I am neither a Marxist nor a Bakuninist. And I didn’t call out your plagiarism because I thought Peterson came up with the argument – it’s the particular phrasing that prompted that.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2 Peterson
You think Peterson was the first one to realize and articulate that socialism requires a level of intelligence and a level of virtue that human beings simply do not have? This critique goes all the way back to Diogenes criticizing Plato.
Re:
Somehow, I suspect you believe you’re being very “clever”, maybe even “insightful”…
(Narrator: He’s being neither.)
Re:
Honestly? Never. Maybe they have, but I’ve never seen that.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
And who do you think it is that blocks any attempts at building infrastructure?
Re:
The Republicans, duh. Not surprised you’re still living under that rock.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
How’s that California high-speed rail line between LA and SF doing?
Re: Re: Re:
I’unno, how’s that trying to drive trans people out of society (and possibly into a grave) for the sake of assuaging your own personal comfort going?
Re: Re: Re:
How’s being a neo-nazi piece of shit going?
Re: Re: Re:
If you mean the old plans for a monorail, that got abandoned due to a number of concerns, including environmental, financial, and practical concerns with doing so. Basically, the whole thing was overhyped and wouldn’t have been as good as originally thought given why it was to be built in the first place. (Honestly, monorail as a technology was overhyped a lot back then.)
More to the point, there’s a difference between failing to build such infrastructure and blocking attempts to build infrastructure. Unless you can show Democrats actively blocking attempts to build infrastructure similarly to how Republicans do, this is comparing apples and oranges: they have some similarities, but they are still materially different enough that the comparison is inapt.
Re: Re: Re:2
Well, there was the whole don’t “divide cities” hyper partisan crap they pulled. That stopped projects cold.
Both parties are full of it!
Re: Re: Re:3
But only one party is actively trying to stifle any kind of social progress, revoke the civil rights of marginalized people, and install fascists into public office. I’ll give you a hint as to which one that is: It’s the one that still supports Donald Trump.
Depends on the receiver of course
“Fool me once, shame on you
Fool me twice to infinity, I’m a Trumpanze.”
“Dumb GOP” That’s all you need to say these days. What a dumpster fire.
Re:
You don’t need the adjective; it’s redundant.
Re: Re:
One fact that the American left seems incapable of understanding is that there are honest, honorable, intelligent and caring republicans. What the majority of the republican party seem incapable of understanding is that these decent republicans, though they exist, are in seriously short supply in their party.
Re: Re: Re:
It’s the 99.9% that make the 0.1% look bad.
Re: Re: Re:
However, by hitching their carriages onto the NeoNazi horse, they’ve proven that the only thing they deserve is nothing but a one way ticket to Hell.
Re: Re: Re:
“One fact that the American left seems incapable of understanding is that there are honest, honorable, intelligent and caring republicans.”
The same way there were honest, honorable, intelligent and caring members of the nazi party, possibly.
That ship has sailed. After Trump showed his colors, everyone who still voted for him declared they were OK with a fascist for a president. Anyone still claiming they’re republican has chosen sides.
And as A.R. Moxon had it;
If you’re a republican today you’re with the horse paste pushers and anti-vaxxers who cost the US a cool half million more lives than ought to have been lost to Covid. You’re on the same side of the barricades as the Qanon crowd and the “Better russian than democrat” zealots. You’re wearing the colors of the klansmen and fascists. And you’re voting for the power structure which stripped half the US citizenry of their bodily autonomy.
You don’t get to take the side of the republican party today and lay claim to honor or caring. Not anymore than the original very fine people did.
Re: Re: Re:2
And let’s not forget about the Christian nationalists who want to inflict their specific set of regressive religious beliefs onto everyone by enshrining those beliefs into law.
Re: Re: Re:3
Those are the same people who will find themselves on the wrong side of things come judgement day, based on the Bible itself. Even that subsect of them that have decided to erase every single part of the Bible except for the words of Jesus Christ have this part staring them in the face, if only they would look. Emphases added by me:
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be assembled before him, and he will separate people one from another like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the king will answer them, ‘I tell you the truth, just as you did it for one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine, you did it for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels! 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink. 43 I was a stranger and you did not receive me as a guest, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they too will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not give you whatever you needed?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘I tell you the truth, just as you did not do it for one of the least of these, you did not do it for me.’ 46 And these will depart into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
The “Christian” nationalists are blasphemous group, ignoring the actual instructions of their supposed holy book and choosing to discard it in favor of their own religion of tribalism and hate. The actual instruction of the Bible is dramatically more aligned with socialism and communism than it is with anything the vocal hatemongers are trying to put into place.
They’re a blight on the face of the planet.
Re: Re: Re:4
And they’ve managed to push their blight to outside of America.
Re: Re: Re:4
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
― Mahatma Gandhi
Re: Re: Re:2
You mean like John Rabe best known for his efforts to stop war crimes during the Japanese Nanjing Massacre. The Nanking Safety Zone, which he helped to establish, sheltered approximately 250,000 Chinese people from being killed.
Re: Re: Re:3
No one is wholly evil which is why they in some circumstances can be honest, honorable, intelligent and caring. History tells us that he loved the Nazi party and from that we can infer that he approved of the final solution or at least thought it wasn’t a deal-breaker.
Re: Re: Re:4
Let us also not forget that Hitler also was helping the Chinese modernize their nation…
So uh.
Stopped clock is useful twice a day.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2 Not Real Fascism
Fascism is Hegelian philosophy taken to the nth degree. Fascists are not lying when they say that the state is the god that lives within us all. There is a reason Fascism sprouted up in Italy, Germany, and Spain. That is because Hegelian philosophy is rooted in those cultures. Anglo culture is its own path rooted in Locke. But that is not to say that Hagel or Locke created this culture. They reflected the existing cultures that had been evolving on their own evolutionary paths for centuries and put it into words. Fascism and American Conservatives are no more alike than a dogs are to cats because they are both on the order carnivora.
Re: Re: Re:3
You know how modern American conservativism is different from conservativism in other countries? And how modern liberalism is different from classical liberalism? And how big ℓ “Libertarian” is very different from small ℓ “libertarian”? Same thing applies to the original Fascism that originated in Italy and the modern, colloquial term of fascism. The latter is basically a catch-all term to rightwing totalitarianism.
Re: Re: Re:
It doesn’t matter that they exist because within their party they have no power, so they might as well not exist.
A “respectable republican” would still be conservative therefore, still believe in a hierarchical society as determined by their property ownership/religion/blackness/ethnicity/class position.
Re: Re: Re:2
And reminder, they went all in on Trump.
They atopped wearing the mask the momwntbTrump got elected in, and probably even earlier, when Obama was elected.
The only discussion acceptable to those folks are those involving a ton of violence.
Re: Re: Re:2
This is why it is a moral imperative to shame theists for not doing enough to stop the worst of their kind from getting into positions of power. They must be humiliated and driven into obscurity, never again knowing the light of day.
Re: Re: Re:3
Now you are as bad as those you oppose, in that you want to eliminate those with whom you disagree.
Re: Re: Re:4
How do you think we got homosexual marriage in place, that which we were entitled to if not for bigots who got in the way? Did we conceal who we were and take down the freak flags? Eventually we decided enough was enough and took what was rightfully ours. We can do it again.
Re: Re: Re:3
Yes, shaming people who have a religion with a built-in ‘if you’re being persecuted it’s a sign you’re doing it right’ will be sure to work, and definitely not just show what a jackass you are and ensure that no-one on either side cares to listen to you.
If what the public wants is the opposite of what big corporations want, the big corporations will get what they want every time, and the public will get fuck all. That is the hallmark of capitalist dictatorship.
I think that there’s a pretty good argument to be made that government-owned, government-built, government-managed, government-maintained infrastructure is socialism. The interstate highway system? Socialism. State parks? Socialism. The emergency broadcast system? Socialism. The fire department? Well, there are some private ones, but most of them are public, which is socialism. Sanitation? Ditto.
Americans fucking love socialism. They just don’t like it when people call something socialism.
Except social security. People are okay with that for some reason even though it’s got “social” right in the name.
Re:
See also: police departments, public libraries, public colleges/universities
Re: Re:
The American right loves police, no matter how corrupt or illegal their behaviour. Unless those police interfere with said American right’s own illegal behaviour.
Re: Re:
Sure, but I omitted those because they’re not exactly universally beloved at the moment.
Re: Re: Re:
That you can say such a thing about public libraries is a damning indictment of modern American society. 😔
Re:
The Republicans are NOT ok with Social Security. Just this week Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) promised to put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block. They’re willing to shut down the government and even default on debt if they don’t get their way.
In short, extort Biden into complying with the GOP agenda and then blame him for the toxic effects.
Re: Re:
No shit. Not sure where you think I said they were. Unless you think “Americans” refers exclusively to congressional Republicans, which is a pretty weird definition.
Re: Re: Re:
In my not so humble opinion, there’s a strong case to be made that Republicans are no longer American…
insofar as “American” requires you to actually care about the nation itself, and not to work towards its destruction for personal gain or for the benefit of foreign powers.
Re: Re: Re:2
Ah, you’re one of those guys who defines “American” aspirationally.
Re: Re: Re:3
Well, when the bare minimum for being a citizen involves “don’t commit treason” and the Republicans do it often enough…
Re: Re: Re:2
“In my not so humble opinion, there’s a strong case to be made that Republicans are no longer American…”
Google “Rather Russian than Democrat”. Look at the red hat wearing people proudly displaying those at Trump rallies.
Re: Re: Re:3
Yes, that was in fact the image I had in mind.
Re: Re:
The Republicans are NOT ok with Social Security.
They really are. They know being against funding it is a losing argument, except for the most mentally challenged members of their army of simpletons.
The minions able to hold a job know they’ve paid enough into it where if it goes away, that includes what they’re going to be expecting at 62.
The other ones are dumbfucks who already vote against their own interests across the board anyways, and likely will Darwin themselves out of existence long before they’re able to collect anything.
Re: Re:
“In short, extort Biden into complying with the GOP agenda and then blame him for the toxic effects.”
This is what they’ve been doing for decades though. The cruelty is the point. The toxic effects are the primary goal.
That way tghey don’t have to come up with a platform, they’ll just keep pissing in the punch bowl and blame the dems for the bad drinks.
Re: Re: Re:
It seems more likely to me that money and power are the goal, and cruelty and toxicity are means to that end.
Re:
americans are the most propagandized people on the planet
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
“I think that there’s a pretty good argument to be made that government-owned, government-built, government-managed, government-maintained infrastructure is socialism. ”
That was called “the commons” before anyone came up with the term socialism. Care for the commons is one of the main reasons we have government in the first place. Locke never said the commons were not important.
There is one cohort of the GOP who are actually anarchists. When it’s an article of faith that actually having the government provide any service to the public without 100% cost recovery is ‘socialism’ and evil, what is left for government to do?
And that’s the point. Government small enough to drown in a bathtub is no government at all. The GOP assumes that its donors will be able to fund their own services, and everyone else is disposable. They take Hobbes’s Leviathan as an instruction manual.
Re:
theyre libertarian maximalists who want to return to a pre-20th century, pre-New Deal, pre-taxation version of the state. Arguably they would want a return to a feudal or semifeudal mode of production.
Years ago I Laughed
There was a proposal to Privatize all federal roads. Turn them into TOLL ROADS. Think about that. Every few miles (10-20) you would have to pay a fee to run on the freeways.
Then EXPECT the corps to take Good care of them.
There are problems here all over hell and back. I dont understand totally how the Fed will do this, but in states, there will be 3-5 levels of corruption. From materials to delays. In the last 10 years, the section of FEDERAL roads I live near, were FIXED 4 years in a row, after paying a company to do the work. FINALLY the state got involved, TORE it all up and fixed everything, and its almost perfect. The Money came from the Fed, but no one mentions that.
Good article, and has Most of what needs said. There is tons more.
Re: Except
You clearly never drove in northern IL.
Where the tolls are collected but rarely make it to iDOT.
'Government subsides (to other people) is socialism!'
So again, they infect the discourse with claims that absolutely any effort to try and improve anything is somehow radically political. Corporate giants (see again AT&T and Comcast) prey on partisan disdain for taxation (despite they themselves being a massive beneficiary of wasteful taxpayer subsidization). They suggest that policies common across the world are themselves somehow partisan and radical.
Unless that involves throwing huge piles of money at major companies or their personal area anyway, in which case suddenly they are huge fans of government subsidies and government support.
Funny how all that screaming over the evils of ‘socialism’ goes right out the window the second it benefits them, only to start right back up the next second, rather like free speech (when used by anyone but them) and the free market (when it’s not aligned in their favor).
Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar, a leading Biden critic who explained his vote against what he called a “phony” infrastructure bill by issuing a statement that “this bill only serves to advance the America Last’s socialist agenda, while completely lacking fiscal responsibility,” wrote three separate letters between March and July advocating for projects in his district. They’d enhance quality of life, Gosar wrote. They’d ease congestion and boost the economy. They’d alleviate bottlenecks and improve rural living conditions.
This is something his political opponents should never not be bringing up. Any politician running against him or even just people who want him out of office should hammer again and again on the fact that if their ‘representative’ got his way they’d be screwed, with nary a cent available for all those improvements he’s begging the government for.
Re:
That is essentially why we say the elites want “socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor”.
Re: Re:
Dave,
It’s WELFARE for the rich in my circles…
Re: Re: Re:
Those same wealthy who are always agitating for tax cuts, as well … so with one hand out for the taxpayer to fill it, and the other giving the tax man the finger/flipping the bird.
Guess who the real welfare queens are.