Dodaj artykuł  


Inne artykuły

Apel o wszczemiężliwość w interpretacji historii 
8 styczeń 2020     
Państwo da... 
24 marzec 2020      Artur Łoboda
The Crime of The Partitioning of Poland Led to Both World Wars 
19 maj 2012      Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Obłuda Bożego Ciała 
24 czerwiec 2011      Artur Łoboda
Polityczna Tusko - banda sama się pogrąża 
10 padziernik 2009      Artur Łoboda
Prawdziwy stosunek PiS do rolników 
14 marzec 2019      Artur Łoboda
Przemyślenia z 20 listopada 2014 
20 listopad 2014      Artur Łoboda
Kto się boi Magdaleny Ogórek? 
14 styczeń 2015      Artur Łoboda
Zrozumieć stalinizm 
9 maj 2019     
Trzy razy przegraliśmy tą wojnę. Czy po raz czwarty się uda? 
23 lipiec 2016      Artur Łoboda
Buzek na przewodniczącego Parlamentu Europejskiego 
15 czerwiec 2009      Artur Łoboda
Оборонна доктрина Польщі в 1939 р.:  
27 padziernik 2010      Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Próba interpretacji sondaży poparcia politycznego Polaków  
10 listopad 2012      Artur Łoboda
Pierwsze uwagi na temat wyborów 
11 maj 2015      Artur Łoboda
Assange i Przecieki Sekretów USA 
8 grudzień 2010      Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Polskie kolędy po raz pierwszy w języku angielskim 
8 grudzień 2014
Druga Japonia 
6 grudzień 2009      Artur Łoboda
Kto ma problemy w zdefiniowaniu racjonalizmu 
25 kwiecień 2013      Artur Łoboda
AYA RL - "Skóra" 
16 sierpień 2015      Artur Łoboda
50 rocznica encykliki Papieża Pawła VI – Humanae vitae 
24 lipiec 2018      Paweł Ziółkowski


How Today's Conservatism Lost Touch with Reality

How Today's Conservatism Lost Touch with Reality
By Fareed Zakaria Thursday, June 16, 2011

Read more:,8599,2077943,00.html#ixzz1QnRywOBv

• "Conservatism is true." That's what George Will told me when I interviewed him as an eager student many years ago. His formulation might have been a touch arrogant, but Will's basic point was intelligent. Conservatism, he explained, was rooted in reality. Unlike the abstract theories of Marxism and socialism, it started not from an imagined society but from the world as it actually exists. From Aristotle to Edmund Burke, the greatest conservative thinkers have said that to change societies, one must understand them, accept them as they are and help them evolve.
Watching this election campaign, one wonders what has happened to that tradition. Conservatives now espouse ideas drawn from abstract principles with little regard to the realities of America's present or past. This is a tragedy, because conservatism has an important role to play in modernizing the U.S. (See "The Heart of Conservative Values: Not Where It Used to Be?")
Consider the debates over the economy. The Republican prescription is to cut taxes and slash government spending — then things will bounce back. Now, I would like to see lower rates in the context of tax simplification and reform, but what is the evidence that tax cuts are the best path to revive the U.S. economy? Taxes — federal and state combined — as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest level since 1950. The U.S. is among the lowest taxed of the big industrial economies. So the case that America is grinding to a halt because of high taxation is not based on facts but is simply a theoretical assertion. The rich countries that are in the best shape right now, with strong growth and low unemployment, are ones like Germany and Denmark, neither one characterized by low taxes.
Many Republican businessmen have told me that the Obama Administration is the most hostile to business in 50 years. Really? More than that of Richard Nixon, who presided over tax rates that reached 70%, regulations that spanned whole industries, and who actually instituted price and wage controls?
In fact, right now any discussion of government involvement in the economy — even to build vital infrastructure — is impossible because it is a cardinal tenet of the new conservatism that such involvement is always and forever bad. Meanwhile, across the globe, the world's fastest-growing economy, China, has managed to use government involvement to create growth and jobs for three decades. From Singapore to South Korea to Germany to Canada, evidence abounds that some strategic actions by the government can act as catalysts for free-market growth. (See a dozen Republicans who could be the next President.)
Of course, American history suggests that as well. In the 1950s, '60s and '70s, the U.S. government made massive investments in science and technology, in state universities and in infant industries. It built infrastructure that was the envy of the rest of the world. Those investments triggered two generations of economic growth and put the U.S. on top of the world of technology and innovation.
But that history has been forgotten. When considering health care, for example, Republicans confidently assert that their ideas will lower costs, when we simply do not have much evidence for this. What we do know is that of the world's richest countries, the U.S. has by far the greatest involvement of free markets and the private sector in health care. It also consumes the largest share of GDP, with no significant gains in health on any measurable outcome. We need more market mechanisms to cut medical costs, but Republicans don't bother to study existing health care systems anywhere else in the world. They resemble the old Marxists, who refused to look around at actual experience. "I know it works in practice," the old saw goes, "but does it work in theory?" (See "When GOP Presidential Candidates Skip, They Quickly Stumble.")
Conservatives used to be the ones with heads firmly based in reality. Their reforms were powerful because they used the market, streamlined government and empowered individuals. Their effects were large-scale and important: think of the reform of the tax code in the 1980s, for example, which was spearheaded by conservatives. Today conservatives shy away from the sensible ideas of the Bowles-Simpson commission on deficit reduction because those ideas are too deeply rooted in, well, reality. Does anyone think we are really going to get federal spending to the level it was at under Calvin Coolidge, as Paul Ryan's plan assumes? Does anyone think we will deport 11 million people?
We need conservative ideas to modernize the U.S. economy and reform American government. But what we have instead are policies that don't reform but just cut and starve government — a strategy that pays little attention to history or best practices from around the world and is based instead on a theory. It turns out that conservatives are the woolly-headed professors after all.

2 lipiec 2011

przysłał ICP 





Pod presją
sierpień 12, 2003
Robert Popielewicz
Ślepa "wyrocznia" Jan Nowak Jeziorański
listopad 19, 2002
Artur Łoboda
czerwiec 29, 2003
Historia, która niczego nie uczy
maj 6, 2004
Artur Łoboda
"Wyprawki Maturzysty",
luty 3, 2003
Artur Łoboda
Jak przegrać „wojnę przeciwko terrorowi?”
kwiecień 2, 2006
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
2009.02.13. Serwis wiadomości bez cenzury
luty 13, 2009
Projekt ustawy o upowszechnianiu tolerancji i zwalczaniu homofobii
sierpień 28, 2006
O naszym obecnym Starszym Bracie, przez poprzedniego. About our Big Brother, by the previous one. (1)(2007.09.20)
wrzesień 20, 2007
To boli
styczeń 10, 2003
Artur Łoboda
Polska ofiarą walki o globalne imperium?
czerwiec 14, 2007
prof. Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Tabu polityczne
sierpień 8, 2006
Stanisław Michalkiewicz
To nie kryzys, to już patologia....
styczeń 13, 2007
Marek Olżyński
Kontrakt na Podboj Serc i Umyslow
grudzień 20, 2005
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
lipiec 2, 2003
prof. Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
Pacyfikacja ale nie wojna w Iraku
luty 2, 2006
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
luty 13, 2007
Konstytucja i Sprawa Nadzoru w USA
padziernik 26, 2005
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski
True fact złodziej story
listopad 19, 2006
Andrzej Reymann
USA Jako Panstwo Nadzoru i Wybory w Iraku
luty 4, 2005
Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski, USA


Fundacja Promocji Kultury
Copyright © 2002 - 2012 Polskie Niezależne Media