Political automobiles

People nowadays like to make political statements with their cars (witness the hybrids) but there was a time when the very name of the car was politically charged.

The interwar ideological struggle between democracy and tyrrany somehow played out in the marketing department of Studebaker, where they made Dictators, Commanders, Dominators, Champions (enemies of Dominators?), and Presidents. They showed a taste for executives of all persuasions.

The People's Car, on the other hand ("Volkswagen") left no doubt that one identified with the masses from either a red or brown standpoint.

For parliamentarians, the Premier auto company made Premiers, but not enough to survive the rising tide of fascism.

After the war, there seems to have been a monarchist boomlet: you could express these tendencies in an Austin Princess or with a Ford Monarch. (I like the ones with the giant crown in the grill.)

Nowadays, Asians have developed a taste for republicanism: Australia's HSV makes a Senator and Nissan makes its own President (with no nod to Studebaker).

The Red Chinese you would expect to name cars "Liberator" but this name has been taken by bourgeois Greens naively playing at revolution. In fact, China is set to export cars made by Chery to the US and these lack political nomenclature. Like Chery itself, they seem to have been named by Pee Wee Herman. There's Karry and Tiggo and Riich. (A car named Riich might be a political statement for a Red automaker - can't rule that out.)

The best Chery auto name transcends politics. It transcends everything. It's the "Eastar Cross."

(That's its picture topside.)

The serials: Talk radio ruining the right?

An editor of National Review, of all people, is moaning about talk radio ruining the right. In other words, the dumbed down, culture-free, newspaper-quality, middlebrow National Review represents a standard to which lowbrow talk radio should aspire.

I was reading a back issue of Modern Age this weekend, marvelling at its eternal excellence while lost in a piece about Germany's biedermeier literature - literature I last enjoyed as a teenager and with which I associate many happy memories.

There was a day when a shorter version of the same piece might have appeared in the NR. No more: Buckley's creation has relentlessly moved downmarket. "Don't let them immanentize the eschaton," once NR's proud rallying cry is mere gibberish to the middlebrows cranking out a short ration of two-syllable analysis for what must surely be the upper tier of talk radio listeners.

In that they are much less adept than say Rush Limbaugh who harnesses not merely verbal skills but an admirable literary sensibility to his enormous analytic capacity. He does this live, in real time, putting out the same "product" as NR but of a higher quality, more copiously, and cheaper.

This comparison is apples-to-apples despite what any of today's NR editors may think. The editors currently in charge have made of NR a single product company and their product competes with talk radio. It competes poorly, in fact, because Rush and the better talkers understand their medium much better than NR understands print magazines.

Have you ever picked up a copy of the venerable Spectator? I don't mean the American Spectator (which should out of decency revert to its original name of the Alternative), I mean Britain's Spectator. Just look at the ads to understand the difference in audiences. Gallery reviews; composed music; serious books discussed seriously.

Recently, Standpoint appeared on American newsstands, an excellent new British conservative magazine that the American conservative political movement would find baffling and esoteric. (I'll devote a little space to it soon.)

National Review consciously engineered a downward shift in its appeal to a wider audience. This happened just as Rush appeared on the scene. There should be enough institutional memory at NR to recall there is a conservative highbrow market as surely as there is a lowbrow market and that NR itself is splitting the difference, not out of choice, but because it is staffed by people of limited culture and insight who do not understand their own medium, much less others'.

A leader spams his people

Endless junk mail from the chief executive of the United States. Empty, meaningless "communication." More on the way.

Creepy behavior from the new president.

Truth and reconciliation in the Madoff affair

When bad things happen, there is a bureaucratic drive to limit the scope of the story to the narrowest possible definition of the event.

In the case of the Madoff swindle, Madoff's many financial accomplices have been shielded from scrutiny. Hat tip to Valdis Krebs who is reconstructing the channels that delivered clients into the inferno. As journalism takes its rest, bloggers must step in.

Do not do business with Madoff's accomplices.

Excommunicating the Pope

When politicians demand of the Pope various Roman Catholic excommunications, we should at last understand that nothing is allowed to fall outside of the realm of politics. The government will determine who is in communion and who is not just as it determines who is using too much oxygen or releasing too much carbon dioxide.

Further, when the Pope fails to excommunicate on political command, he is in breach of the public trust and may himself be politically excommunicated by various elected leaders. Such an attack on religious institutions is perfectly in keeping with the scope of Europe's parliamentary dictatorhips.

Don't worry about the Pope or the Church; the political psychosis of the age is the greater concern.

A trade called "journalism"

From the indispensible Politico:

A reporter was escorted out of a White House event by Secret Service agents on Wednesday afternoon after he approached President Obama to seek an autograph.

Politico was founded to deliver the political reporting not available from major U.S. newspapers. This story is archtypical in that the press at large is pleading for autographs and the Politco is observing and reporting on them.

More please.

Best Totalitarian headline of the day

For yesterday from the Kansas City Business Journal: Obama plan will create or save 73,000 jobs in Missouri, 35,000 in Kansas

Hard to pick out a "best totalitarian line" from the "story." The piece presents a White House press release as news with no additional reporting whatever. Claims made in the handout are presented without qualification.

Down with obstructionism!

For today from the Chicago Tribune:

Joliet artist works on behalf of proposed labor law

Best totalitarian line from the story:

The Joliet artist recently completed a painting depicting President Barack Obama holding a copy of the Employee Free Choice Act—complete with his signature. The act has yet to be passed by Congress, but Farrell and union leaders hope that day will come soon.

Soon the workers will triumph.

Taking the oath

As every schoolchild in America knows, the end quickly came for Wallenstein when he had his officers take an oath to him personally rather than the Hapsburg emperor or Holy Roman Empire. The emperor understood the significance of the act immediately and responded.

In this U.S. polity, the people are sovereign and the equivalent offense would be an oath given to a person to the exclusion of the institutions of the people (the collective sovereign).

The end of Wallenstein having been immortalized in theatre, opera, literature, and painting, would-be oath givers like Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, et al, had to walk softly. Thus the Hitler oath for civil servants contains caveats:

I swear: I will be faithful and obedient to Adolf Hitler, Führer of the German Reich and people, to observe the law, and to conscientiously fulfill my official duties, so help me God.

The law and duties make this more than just about Hitler, you see. Likewise, Franco and the clerics:

I swear and promise to respect and make my clergy respect the chief of the Spanish State and the government established according to Spanish laws.

This kind of circumspection is not present in the current celebrity oath for Obama. Currently on viral video it reads:

I pledge to be a servant to our president and all mankind because together we can, together we are, and together we will be the change that we seek.

It is a simple oath: I pledge... because...

This is even more trouble than Hitler and Franco were willing to ask for.

Best totalitarian headline of the day

From Time magazine, "Barack Obama's Inaugural Address: Humility, Gratitude, Sacrifice."

Best totalitarian lines from the same story:

And then he brought it all together, the challenge and the duty and the promise: "What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility — a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task." This was the day's catechism and call to arms.

We will perform our assigned duties gladly. There is nothing so satisfying as giving our all to the government's tasks.

The Serials: changes in news reporting

A popular meme on the right is that liberalism is losing newspapers their circulation. If it was ever true, it's not true now.

The slimmed down circulations have left papers with their core audience: middlebrows who buy bestsellers; who learn about trends from feature articles; who buy things based on lists and rankings; who search out tips on what to eat, to wear, and of course what to believe.

These middlebrow masses, listening to NPR, watching PBS, reading their newspapers and newsweeklies, are the bread and butter of an entire sector of the economy. The corporations who own and run big daily newspapers are very interested in pleasing this core audience. Expect papers to become more liberal as outlying demographics fall away. As costs are trimmed, one must serve the essential reader.

This dynamic is showcased in the changes happening at the newsweeklies Time and Newsweek. It's interesting to hear editors describe their patrons:

Meacham [a Newsweek editor] , wearing a dark sweater in his office overlooking Central Park, says that "we don't edit with the idea that there is a poor and uninformed reader out there who somehow needs illumination." He sees his audience as "the virtual Beltway," which he defines as people who watch Sunday talk shows, read newspapers and buy hardcover books.

Stengel [a Time editor], wearing a dark sweater in his office with a view of the Hudson River, says his philosophy, especially online, is "news for smart people. . . . We are arguably the best-known news brand in the world, and we want to leverage that."

Teaching point: Smart people buy hardcover books.

You have to translate "smart" here as brand-conscious consumers "who think they are smart," e.g. people of limited culture who are compensating with "must read," "must see," and "must hear," consumption. These tend to be high achievers, woefully overspecialized, whose hardcovers adorn some a prominent coffee table or bookshelf.

I remember during the last campaign, former Time editor Strobe Talbot's special friend, Hillary Clinton, stumbled over the pronunciation of President Medvedev's name settling on national TV for "Whatever." Mr. Whatever. Mrs. Clinton is that reader newsweeklies and newspapers must hold on to - someone not likely to have ever heard Medvedev's name in natural conversation, someone relying heavily on a trusted guide, an interpreter to help negotiate politics, culture, art, and technology.

Consider ever-increasing leftiness the beginnings of a long circulation drive:

Stengel says his goal is to "make Time lead the conversation, not follow it. To speak stronger with a point of view. To mix more analysis with reporting. Not to ask questions, but to answer them on the cover"

Any attempt to shame news organs into professionalism by references to their conduct during the Obama-McCain race misses the changes taking place.

This is "the new normal." "Professionalism" means serving the news corporation's customers better.

Best totalitarian headline of the day

From the Toronto Star: "Obama touches every base for the masses."

Best totalitarian lines from the same story: "A hush fell. More words – 17 minutes of words. And the Poet-in-Chief hit every mark."

Runner up: "Where the teeming masses stood, the passing of power came as crescendo, with fluttering flags and frenzied joy."

News bulletin: The poet-in-chief inspires frenzied joy.

Natural conservatives

Judge Bork was being interviewed on C-Span this week when the president of the Federalist Society tried to pin the Burkean tag on him.

In his (usual) brusque way he shrugged it off opting for something else. Don't ask me what he called it because I became distracted by his example of what it is not. The current debate over "true conservatism" - an ideological construct - he noted is not for him and probably not for Burkeans or conservatives.

If you go to the newer election-inspired "conservative" blogs, you see a lot of this non-conservative paradigm hunting going on with all the jiggery pokery that calls up.

Ayn Rand's taunt, "Conserve what?" is germane here. Either you go down the path of philosophical analysis with Objectivist-like rigor and face the consequences or you declare yourself, as I do, someone who feels himself conservative. You don't split the difference by producing a half-baked paradigm (Libertarian Party) or by negotiating lists of "principles" that are platform planks (conservative splinter groups).

Unlike Ayn Rand or her target Bill Buckley or today's "true conservative" discussants, most of us are not building, defining, or even joining a movement. We are just being ourselves and "feeling conservative" is as far as many need to go. In arguments with the paradigm hunters, I am told that this attitude lets all sorts of Lincoln Chaffees lurk within the movement.

This is a "top-down" view of the issue. The bottom-up view is to let like minds associate for political benefit, then deal with trouble as it comes.

Bork's point, if I extrapolate a little here, is that there may be something we could call a natural political conservative.

We encounter so many natural (non-political) conservatives in daily life that I wonder why movement-minded people don't do something with them, as many of them are already affiliated or organized by interest. Think of those who own classic cars; who collect antiques; who restore buildings, who raise "heritage" breeds, who restore paintings. The list could go on. (Obviously in this matter, gun owners and shooters have already found their political voice.)

So there is real work available for those arguing out definitions of "true conservative." Why not organize natural conservatives instead?

What next?

The meme among refuseniks just now is that the Obama charm offensive is prelude to the boom being lowered. The policy boom, the tax boom, the agenda.

There is an implied change: Obama gets ugly.

I disagree. Based on this man's love of political theatre and the rewards he gets playing this way, the grandstanding, the "healing" gestures, the conservative outreach, all that stuff that generates a honeymoon for him will continue. The real dirty work will be done by the overt partisans in House and Senate. The White House will keep its distance. The inauguration will continue for four years.

At the same time, Obama has taken control of the party at the secondary level. The Clinton retreads may look influential but in true politruk style they have Obamans working under them, watching them, waiting to replace them. Count Clinton teamsters still in place a year from now.

And we know a new party-building effort is about to begin at the grassroots level using recent campaigners as its core. It promises a cult of personality that will cut out the political middlemen and place a vast political/cultural force directly at the disposal of our new boss.

As Obama plows through rosy accolades, we refuseniks will be getting the Rodney King treatment off to the side. Harry and Nancy have the truncheons ready as do the state Democrats.

This is really going to smart. We'll be fingering our achey lumps while meditating on those purists who sat out the last election.

Best totalitarian headline of the day

From today's Boston Globe, a New York Times Company: "Masses share in Obama's reward."

Best totalitarian line from the story: "Obama's declaration that his own historic rise is as one with America's past is an act of generosity - one that will give his country a new burst of strength."

The leader gives his people strength. The leader shares his rewards.

A trade called journalism

A front page article in today's Washington Times (written by Julia Duin) opens with, "A variety of religions will be whooping it up this weekend ..." It's part of a series called "Waiting for Obama."

Get your whoop on, holy man: Obama's coming to town.

In the Great Chain of Newspaper Being this remark about whooping religions passed through the desk editor, copy editor, and front page editor without incident before landing in the print shop.

Unfortunately, the print shop does not apply quality control to newspaper content. Perhaps that needs to change.

Nutshell department

From today's Daily Reckoning:

Finally, thanks to the worldwide financial meltdown that the U.S. central bank helped bring about, the politicians can take control of America's most important industries. The dreams of central planners, meddlers, world-improvers, collectivists, Bolsheviks, corporatists and fascists are all being realized - right in the United States of America. All industries need money. And the U.S. Treasury department has it. And what it doesn't have, the Fed will supply.

From Saturday's Valleywag:

Incompetence and infighting are endemic to nonprofits, of course. But Wikipedia's bureaucracy is distinctly, fearsomely awful. The site, which dictates the online reputation of countless living people and companies, itself operates by rules that are completely incomprehensible, determined by a self-appointed group of volunteer editors who can seldom stop arguing over obscurities to explain their ways to outsiders.

And some sure signs of recession: counterfeit Bentleys and Rollers on eBay.

"Stupid" corruption

There is a kind of comment that keeps popping up in corruption coverage.

The corrupt, or indecent, or illegal act is labeled as "stupid." "Stupid" is -with some people - the only pejorative they'll use, along with perhaps "inappropriate". Pay close attention to the people making a display of how offended they are at the "stupidity" of the "inappropriate" act. They're telling us something about themselves.

Can we classify folks focused on the stupidity-of-risking -detection as being of the same ilk as the perps?

I do. Without exception. Try it yourself.

p.s. I notice just now some are on a "crazy" bender. Advice to international media conglomerates: when your on-air talent (or your ink-stained wretch) declares Blago "crazy" instead of immoral mark the speaker or writer down for an expense report audit. You won't be disappointed.

Gossip mongers take the lead

The political blogs and pundits have been asleep today (probably hanging back to keep everything responsible), so this Illinois corruption reporting and analysis has fallen to gossip columnists - and it may be their finest hour. (See here, here, here and here to start.)

Tip for the political blogs and pundits: all you have to do is read an affadavit to develop your material.

Go Gawker. Thank you, Smoking Gun.

The bone-chilling voice of pragmatism

A Republican denounces conservatism:

My experience is that conservatives do not ... see that peoples ... always seek someone to offer them a vision of how and why to live. They will seek this from whatever institutions happen to exist near them. And they won't be concerned that the documents that facilitated the formation of a particular institution might not have set forth that role as being a role for that institution to perform.

A professional conservative denounces small government: "Small isn't beautiful".

Help for the dispossessed

From today's copy of The Hill newspaper, page 46, a classified ad:

Change Can Be Difficult

Psychotherapy for the Politically Displaced

By appointment only in Bethesda, MD; Completely Confidential

Aliza Lerner, LCSW-C, [telephone number]

(Capitalization as per the original.)