The President Speaks, the Crowd Goes Wild
by
Anthony Gregory
by Anthony Gregory
Watching
President Bush’s speech on Thursday, and the GOP reaction, was one
of the most disturbing political experiences I’ve ever had.
Bush’s
convention speech had everything that should raise red flags
for those concerned about the decline of liberty in this country.
The president’s words had the worst of everything in American politics.
He seemed to be trying to appeal to everyone whose main political
goal is to see the government expand in one way or another. Looking
at different elements in his speech, you can see how Bush is reaching
out to conservatives, moderates, liberals and even some libertarians
in order to be reelected. He did this by being all kinds of politicians
at once. Taken together, the Bush program is a frightening one.
Bush
the Compassionate Conservative
Bush,
in a neo-Clintonian style, took credit on behalf of the federal
government for every possible good thing that has happened in America.
He took credit for children "making sustained progress in reading
and math," for the fact that "seniors are getting immediate
help buying medicine," and for an economy that "is growing
again and creating jobs."
Bush
promised that he would make sure that "every senior will be
able to get prescription drug coverage," and that his administration
would "lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor
children who are eligible but not signed up for the government’s
health insurance programs." He said he plans to "level
the playing field to sell American goods and services across the
globe" and pursue the goal of "7 million more affordable
homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able
to open the door and say, ‘Welcome to my home.’"
This
is welfare statism at its very worst. And yet this is the man that
conservatives elected to keep Big Government Al Gore out of office.
When
Bush took credit for all good in America and made these utopian
promises, the convention went wild. The Republican Party – the party
of smaller government, supposedly – ate it all up.
I’m
sure that a few fiscal conservatives listening to Bush’s socialist
rhetoric found it distasteful. Bush had other things to say to sound
like he believes in economic liberty. Bush voiced his sympathy for
"reducing regulation and making the tax relief permanent."
He promised a "bipartisan effort to simplify and reform the
tax code." He promised "health savings accounts"
and he vowed to allow every young American to keep part of his social
security in the form of "a nest egg you can call your own [that
the] government can never take away." He talked about government
creating an "ownership society" and "American opportunity
zones."
This
all sounds like free-market talk, but in reality it is something
else entirely. What he is proposing are in fact government programs
masquerading as free-market reforms, and they are hardly steps in
the right direction. The government still maintains control over
all these economic matters; it only allows "zones" and
"societies" and "accounts" in order to create
the illusion of private property and enhanced liberty.
There
is a term for when the government maintains control of the economy
and yet "allows" people to maintain private ownership
of property on a superficial level. It is called fascism.
Bush
says this is the "compassionate conservative philosophy: that
government should help people improve their lives, not try to run
their lives." This is a charade, all to unite both the welfare
statists and conservatives under one ideology and program: Compassionate
Fascism.
Bush
the Progressive, Cultural Conservative
Bush
loves talking about liberating the women in the Middle East and
letting them go to school. (No Afghan Child Left Behind.)
He
also loves walking the tightrope between cultural conservatism and
cultural progressivism. On Thursday night he referred favorably
to the fact that "two-thirds of all moms also work outside
the home."
There’s
nothing necessarily wrong with working mothers, especially if there’s
a father or another guardian at home. But the fact that 66% of moms
are working is neither the result of a great economy nor something
that might enthuse Bush’s cultural conservative base.
So
what does Bush do? He makes himself sound socially conservative,
which is why in his speech he said:
"Because
a caring society will value its weakest members, we must make
a place for the unborn child.
"Because
religious charities provide a safety net of mercy and compassion,
our government must never discriminate against them.
"Because
the union of a man and woman deserves an honored place in our
society, I support the protection of marriage against activist
judges."
These
statements alone will snag Bush many votes. Although the two parties
have virtually identical abortion policies, the Democrats get their
votes by saying they are for "a woman’s right to choose"
and Republicans get them by saying they care about "the unborn
child." Never mind the fact that Democrats impose socialism
against women’s choices all the time, and that Mr. "Pro-Life"
George Bush has the blood of thousands on his hands. These slogans
sound good, don’t they?
By
talking about not discriminating against "religious charities,"
Bush creates another conservative cover for his socially destructive
welfare state, and by giving a perfunctory statement that is "pro-marriage"
he has solidified himself as the more conservative in the minds
of millions of voters who care more about words than deeds, more
about familiar rhetoric than their lost liberties and the murderous
War on Terrorism.
By
sounding "conservative," and also referring to the recently
sainted Ronald Reagan as "a great American," Bush can
do whatever socialist things he wants without losing most of his
conservative base.
Bush
the Humble World-Building Crusader
Bush
said in 2000 that the United States should have a more "humble
foreign policy." Although in his speech on Thursday he joked
about his English skills, his Texas swagger, and his folksy approach
to politics – thereby humbling himself to help voters identify with
him as a human being – Bush is anything but humble, in any real
sense.
The
man who once eschewed nation building promises now to "build
a safer world" with his wars. An unambiguous Wilsonian, Bush
explained that "the story of America is the story of expanding
liberty, an ever-widening circle, constantly growing to reach further
and include more. Our nation's founding commitment is still our
deepest commitment: In our world, and here at home, we will extend
the frontiers of freedom."
And
he will extend this freedom with bombings and slaughter. Bush said
that because of his death and destruction, "today, the government
of a free Afghanistan is fighting terror" and "the army
of a free Iraq is fighting for freedom." Of course, the freedom
in Iraq and Afghanistan of which he speaks is not without its censorship,
curfews, gun bans, torture, taxation, military occupations, collective
punishment, and indiscriminate killing.
At
the convention, Bush unveiled his ultimate plans in the War on Terror:
"[W]e are working to advance liberty in the broader Middle
East, because freedom will bring a future of hope and the peace
we all want. And we will prevail."
Bush
wants to take over the Middle East! And the crowd went wild.
Bush
glorified war in a most morbid manner when he said, "My fellow
Americans, for as long as our country stands, people will look to
the resurrection of New York City and they will say: Here buildings
fell, and here a nation rose."
And
the crowd went wild. The idea that a country rises when it is attacked
and thousands die is pure nationalism.
Throughout
this convention, Bush has been compared to Franklin Roosevelt, and
the War on Terrorism has been compared to the World Wars and the
Cold War.
On
every occasion, the crowd went wild.
Even
though millions of people died in each of those foreign wars – even
though world peace and freedom was never attained – the GOP crowd
in New York went wild to hear Bush and company glorify war and mass
death, and speak excitedly and proudly about how we are in a great
new era of worldwide killing and constant fear.
Tens
of thousands have so far died in Bush’s wars, which any decent
news source reveals as total failures. We are not safer. Neither
is the world.
Bush
the National Uniter
The
crowd went wild every single time Bush opened his mouth to promise
a chicken in every pot, a literate in every house, freedom in every
nation and prescription drugs in every medicine cabinet.
Although
Bush’s words were dangerously idealistic, dishonest, collectivist,
nonsensical, and violently arrogant, I could see how many Americans
at home would see his speech as reasonable, sincere, patriotic,
determined, and modest.
Bush
promised that the federal government can do everything in the world,
and his convention ate up everything he said. So did Americans throughout
the country – some of them conservatives, some moderates, some liberals.
A conservative might dislike Bush’s social programs, but love the
war. A liberal might be a bit uncomfortable with the war and the
anti-abortion talk, but find his education proposals quite reasonable.
What bothers me the most is that I can now see how even a libertarian
might think Bush is the best chance for a free America, given his
hollow "savings accounts" and tax-cut rhetoric.
No
one agrees with all of Bush’s agenda, but as Bush said, "Even
when we don't agree, at least you know what I believe and where
I stand." On Thursday the president shined like never before
in his ability to unite people of all types and opinions under a
banner of hyper-patriotism, perpetual imperial war, and growing
government at home with only the façade of liberty intact.
There’s
a term for the program that harkens back to tradition and that makes
people think they still own themselves and their property, all while
incorporating imperialist nationalism and domestic socialism.
The
term is National Socialism. And the crowd goes wild.
September
4, 2004
Anthony
Gregory [send him mail]
is a writer and musician who lives in Berkeley, California.
He earned his bachelor’s degree in history at UC Berkeley, where
he was president of the Cal Libertarians. He is an intern at the
Independent Institute
and has written for Rational Review, Strike the Root, the
Libertarian Enterprise, and Antiwar.com. See
his webpage for more
articles and personal information.
Copyright
© 2004 LewRockwell.com
Anthony
Gregory Archives
|