Click Here to see more reviews about: Vote Your Conscience: The Last Campaign of George McGovern (Hardcover)
3/30/2010
Review of Vote Your Conscience: The Last Campaign of George McGovern (Hardcover)
Click Here to see more reviews about: Vote Your Conscience: The Last Campaign of George McGovern (Hardcover)
2/19/2010
Review of Ronald Reagan (Hardcover)
We are frequently told that Reagan was a doting "pawn" of other more intelligent powers. But D'Souza reminds us of 1976 when Reagan challenged the incumbent president - a bold move within either party. Having lost the first five states his campaign manager unilaterally established a withdrawal meeting with Ford. But Reagan, under tremendous pressure to pull out, even from his wife, refused, stating he would take his ideas all the way to the convention, even if he lost every state. Then he started to win and Ford narrowly escaped. In `82 Reagan was vilified with media prejudice (see Bernard Goldberg's "Bias") as Paul Volker (a Carter appointee) restricted the money supply, while Reagan himself signed the biggest tax cut in history. Keynesian's - advocates of centralized government intervention - shouted for Reagan's head. These actions would produce nothing they said, as tax cuts provided money to spend while shrinking the supply took it away. Who would not have changed course given the economic downturn from already depressed levels? Reagan defied pressure again with defense spending - accepting enormous deficits, as Democrats and Republicans were not willing to exchange their social programs (and associated votes) for his defense promise. Clear about financial and political costs, to Reagan, defeating the Soviets with technological strength vs. weakness was worth the price. Finally, Reagan refused Gorbachev when he tried to trade away Star Wars at Reykjavik - a deal Reagan nearly bought with his strong desire to end the Cold War, eliminating nuclear weapons. Again Reagan took a terrible beating in the media.
We find Reagan a simple and practical man. He saw the world in uncomplicated ways that our elite emphatically state the world can no longer be seen in. To Reagan there was good and evil, right and wrong. He focused on larger pictures of his intent with little or no concern for details, infighting, insults, meetings or defections. While Billy Graham pronounced he had caviar everyday in Russia and John Kenneth Galbraith, among so many intellectuals, noted the success and permanence of the USSR, Reagan could not believe it. To him it simply violated common sense to think that the communist system would motivate, inspire and succeed with human nature better than capitalism and democracy. Even the master international diplomat, Richard Nixon, derided Reagan for not accepting the USSR as it was and always would be, writing insultingly about Reagan for years.
Actions noted do not match the definition of "pawn". Nor was Reagan simply stubborn. Reaganomics worked, reducing Carter's inflation from 12% to 3%, interest rates from 21% to 9%, leading to the greatest economic expansion since World War Two. (Unable to disconnect the economic rocket from Reagan's guidance, the next tactic, now so worn, was to snivel, "but not all Americans are doing equally well."They were supposed to be?) In ten years of Détente nine nations fell into the Soviet sphere and seventy percent of South America was communist or socialist. By the close of Reagan's administration 90% of South America was democratic and nine other countries fell out of Soviet influence with Berlin's Wall tumbling down under the hammers of freedom. Reagan and Thatcher changed the world into the global economy we see today - with all its problems they are not that of dictators, KGB and nuclear holocaust.
As we discover, contrary to fashion, Reagan was focused with a determined conviction. His ideas were no accident or implant. After years of writing, meeting people across America through his position at GE and a life experience showing how hostile big government was (is) to everyday Americans, Reagan sensed the country was ready for his message. Reganomics turned out to be a revolutionary insight, not irresponsible idiocy. Time after time he defied pressure and won the biggest prize since World War Two. The economic impacts of Reagan's defense debt, according to economist Lawrence Lindsey, has been a "fantastic payoff - the best money we ever spent".
Apparently, today's vogue position on Reagan is intended to discount him, adopting politically correct propaganda promoted by his opposition. The same opposition he kicked out of university buildings commandeered by force and violence by the hypocrisy laden 60's "peace" generation. The same opposition who rode 20th century orthodoxy, stating that government should regulate, escort and pamper its citizens. Reagan ran against the 20th century and fundamentalist movements born in the 60's. For that they never forgot him, determined to bury his success under the suffocation of revisionist history. Fortunately for some, still open enough to challenge modern dogma, D'Souza has a book to read.
Click Here to see more reviews about: Ronald Reagan (Hardcover)
1/24/2010
Review of Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown (Hardcover)
Brown has dropped the Labour Party's rhetorical commitment to state-led modernisation of our manufacturing industries. He has embraced the City of London's liberalised financial markets and the domestic property market, increasing our vulnerability to global shocks.
As a result, Britain lost a million manufacturing jobs under his Chancellorship. Monthly deficits in trade in goods average £6.5 billion. From 1966 to 1994, we had more assets than liabilities; since 1995, vice versa. Outward investment was £5279 billion at the end of 2006, inward investment £5544 billion: a net loss of £265 billion, 20% of GDP.
Average houses are now unaffordable for first-time buyers in 93% of towns, as against 37% in 2001. The housing market now drives increasing inequality and in turn is driven up by increasing immigration: 2.54 million new NI numbers were issued to overseas nationals between 2002/3 and 2006/7.
Inequality has soared: in the 1980s the richest 1% owned 17-18% of the wealth; by 2007 they owned 20-24%. Directors' pay rose by 28% in 2005 alone. The average pay of a Tesco's worker fell from £12.7K to £11.6K while Tesco's CEO got £5.4 million, 466 times the average worker's.
Private and public debts are growing. Training, transport and communications still lack investment. His PFIs and PPPs mean that we taxpayers subsidise firms to run public services badly.
His Foreign Secretary Miliband vaunts `the hard power of economic and military incentives and interventions' - i.e. sanctions and wars. Brown is raising military spending from £34 billion in 2008/9 to £36.9 billion in 2010/11, including two aircraft carriers costing £3.9 billion with 36 Joint Strike Fighters on each, another £5 billion.
Brown said, "We should be proud ... of the empire." Thabo Mbeki reminded us what empire meant - `genocide, vast ethnic cleansing, slavery, rigorously enforced racial hierarchy and merciless exploitation'. Brown's `outward-looking internationalist patriotism' is sanctimonious code for identifying Britain with past, present and future aggressions.
Brown wants above all to enforce trade liberalisation - which has cost sub-Saharan Africa $272 billion in the last 20 years, far exceeding the aid Brown promised (but did not deliver). His proposed International Finance Facility would pay out $500 billion and cost $720 billion, due to interest payments to bondholders profiting from aid. Brown wants profits from climate change too. His key environmental goal is a global carbon market centred on the City.
He wants a Global Europe, an `outward-looking, globally-oriented EU', meaning, again, more wars. The Lisbon Agenda is Brown's agenda - making the EU even more Thatcherite, more like the USA, by making the Single Market more liberalised, deregulated and privatised. The European Commission says that in `Enterprise Europe', "Entrepreneurship is the key to the new economy."
His commitment to Britain is just rhetorical. He is actually breaking up Britain by devolution and regionalisation (unelected regional assemblies and ministers), under EU orders.
Lee indulges in some wishful thinking about the supposed benefits of devolution and about Brown's breaking with Blair's war policies and opposing the revived EU Constitution. But overall, this is a most useful and well-researched book, giving us the evidence to prove that Brown's policies are pro-capital and anti-Britain.
Click Here to see more reviews about: Best for Britain?: The Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brown (Hardcover)