Let
Bush Rule (His Fans)
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
I'm as happy
as the next guy to see the latest polls showing that I, and the
next guy, and the guy after him, oppose Bush and his policies. But
then I'm also one of those who would tell a pollster that any and
all presidents ought to be impeached immediately, even if there
is no compelling reason other than to put the next inhabitant of
the office on notice.
But there is
something very bothersome about the level of aggregation of presidential
opinion polls. If two-thirds of people polled like him, he is said
to be riding high. If two-thirds do not, he is said to be in big
trouble. Not that any of this is worked out scientifically. We just
have some sense that if two of three people don't like the president,
he and his party are suffering and will pay a big price.
To be sure,
not to like Bush these days is perfectly fashionable. But what if
the polls were reversed? What if these were the days after 9-11,
when Bush enjoyed a 90 percent approval rating, and I told a pollster
that I couldn't stand him? Well, that would put me on the fringe,
a person on the margin, someone to dismiss, and maybe expose me
as a lunatic or even a threat to society. I would certainly be on
a list of some sort.
Such is the
nature of politics: there is a systematic tendency to compel everyone
to think like everyone else. This is one good reason not to trust
polls. People are not idiots. Americans have a good sense of what
they can say and what they cannot, so the revealed opinions tend
to hover around public perceptions of what is already accepted as
public opinion.
It's interesting
how we don't seem to question the system. When it comes to music
we listen to, movies we watch, food we eat, and clothes we wear,
we are all happy to be idiosyncratic. To each his own, live and
let live, free to be you and me, de gustibus non disputandum,
and all that.
If my next
door neighbor, having observed me eating dinner, informed me that
two in three people can't stand steamed broccoli, I would thank
him for his opinion but otherwise tell him to mind his own business.
What matters is what the buyer, the consumer, wants, not what public
opinion demands.
People sometimes
decry the mass culture of the market-driven society but this is,
in many ways, misleading. What drives the market, and what makes
for high profits, especially in our times, is finding a peculiar
niche to fill.
Wired
editor Chris Anderson, in The
Long Tail, has even written an entire book that traces out
the implications of this insight. He says that as the costs of reaching
people continue to fall, the real money comes by reaching people's
most narrow and peculiar demands.
Under the market
system, what happens to people when they hold opinions different
from the rest? They aren't denounced as the fringe, as marginal,
or dangerous. They are sought out, celebrated, courted, and adored.
If you want
to own an Eddie Cantor cookie jar, there is a merchant somewhere
who loves you. If you think house shoes ought to be puffy, pink,
and shaped like pigs, there is some retailer who stands ready to
obey your every command.
This is one
reason that people tend to revel in their idiosyncrasies when it
comes to commerce "I will not eat meat"; "I will only eat
meat" but hide their oddities when it comes to politics and
pretend to believe everything that the government tells them to
believe.
If you don't
like a particular kind of food, music, or fabric, the answer doesn't
have to be banishment. You just don't need to consume it, and that's
all.
There is another
problem with political opinion polls. People aren't actually demonstrating
a preference for anything when they talk to pollsters. They are
only mouthing off some empty words.
This would
never fly in the marketplace. It is not enough for a merchant to
find out who wants a yacht; the merchant must find out who is willing
to give up some other form of consumption and make the necessary
sacrifice to actually shell out for a yacht. That is something different
entirely.
So let's say
that we put our politics on the market model. Everyone who is still
nuts for Bush would be entitled to be so. They should not be belittled
or dismissed or called crazy. They should be permitted to be ruled
by him completely and without question.
But there must
be a few conditions: his rule must not be allowed to impinge on
the person or property of anyone who does not want to be ruled by
him. Also, the Bushians must demonstrate a willingness to do more
than talk the talk; they must also be willing to pay the bills.
As
for the rest of us mainstreamers (no longer on the fringe!) who
are against Bush, we should be free to completely ignore his desire
to rule over his fans. Neither should we be on the hook to pay for
his rule of others. We should be able to choose our preferred systems
of governance, and they should be able to choose theirs.
It's this crazy
system that forces us all to merge our preferences that causes such
conflict. The market, on the other hand, permits us all to live
peacefully together while holding radically different perspectives
on just about everything under the sun.
A
good and necessary step toward a market society is the quick impeachment
of Bush, and the president after him, and the one after that…
May
12, 2006
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|