If you hadn’t been paying close attention, the news that Fox News host Tucker Carlson practically endorsed progressive Senator Elizabeth Warren’s aggressive political agenda would be received as the breaking of a seal on the roll. judgment. In fact, Carlson often took the logic of “Trumpism” much more seriously than its namesake, so much so that he is often disagree with the executor of his new ideology. While this heel turn isn’t out of place, it’s a case study worth taking a closer look. If Carlson and those who share his populist predisposition believe that endorsing progressivism will produce a culturally more conservative nation, they are sadly wrong.
Carlson preceded what a source close to him told the Washington Examiner is tantamount to an “endorsement” of Warren’s progressive political program, citing at length his denunciation of the world market. According to Warren, the market is falling apart. It discourages autarky and compels nations to accentuate their comparative advantages over other nations, even at the risk of cherished indigenous industries. It sacrifices “economic patriotism” on the altar of capital without borders. Carlson couldn’t find an inappropriate word. “She looks like Donald Trump at his best,” he marveled. But it was more of a complaint than an assertion.
Warren is not a conservative, he sadly conceded. For Carlson, there is no political faction serving the interests of what he sees as the American milieu: socially traditional but economically nationalist. In Washington, he says, you are either “a bank-controlled libertarian fanatic, arguing about entrepreneurship and how we need to cut tariffs” or “a decadent trust fund socialist who wants to ban passenger cars and donate money. Medicaid to illegal aliens. . It’s easy to see how this caricature of the political class and the market leads its adherents to conspiracy theories, but there is no elite cabal bent on ignoring the will of the American majority. The marriage of economic populism and cultural conservatism has failed in part because they are largely incompatible.
Carlson’s latest expression of frustration with the GOP is the result of the party’s inability to adhere to Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexican goods until Mexico does. Something curb migrants crossing the US border, but its logic is confused. For him, this is an “innovative new way to protect American workers” from the “cheap labor of the Third World”, but the humanitarian crisis at the border is not the result of ‘a cascade of able-bodied young men looking for entry-level work. . The crisis was precipitated by a dramatic increase in the number of families and young children flooding the border, which is why negotiations between the Trump administration, Congress and their Mexican counterparts have modification-oriented the rules relating to detention and asylum.
For the Trump administration, restricting the access of Mexican goods to the U.S. market is one way to come to an end. For Carlson, it is an end in itself – an end that does not generally protect American workers but creates a host of new financial interests in Washington dedicated to preserving their protection from market competition. And in pursuit of his hunting horse, he would make common cause with the same progressives in Congress who have so far refused to ease the conditions precipitating this border crisis.
The Fox News Channel host also referred favorably to the plan backed by Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to create a federal usury law that would prevent credit card companies from charging exorbitant interest rates to people who represent a credit risk, but this is not at all clear. how it helps the noble American worker. The market for high interest credit cards and payday loans exists to serve people with bad credit or bad credit – for example, people who are struggling to recover from financial difficulties. As ReasonAccording to Peter Suderman, research on state-level usury laws shows that regulating this industry to cease to exist does not make financial difficulties go away. It only forces people to tap into more sordid sources of quick cash such as pawn shops or the shark infested black market. If cultural conservatives want to create strong communities characterized by ownership and investment, denying workers the ability to create credit seems like an unproductive way to do it.
The trend that you notice is not elusive. Progressive economic policies do not strengthen community ties but rather accelerate the atomization and dependence on the public sector that the Conservatives do not like. It is a tested proposition. The “universal basic income” proposed by progressives in rule like the senses. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, for example, was attempted in the United States in the 1960s in the form of a “negative income tax”, which offered recipients an income floor. income related. But the researchers found that the recipients had not used the aid to find a better job and that the program had increased the pressure on the nuclear family. “[T]The benefit reduction rate also reduced the value to the family of keeping an employee in the unit, ”the Stanford Research Institute report reads.
The “free college” also creates more social stratification, not less. State-level programs (and they are all state-level, because there is no federal college) “fail to solve the problem of affordability of colleges in our country,” according to Katie Berger, senior higher education policy analyst at Ed Trust, because they lack “realistic credit accumulation or GPA requirements” and “disproportionately impact students least served by higher education.” In other words, they create perverse incentives to pursue activities that the market would otherwise discourage.
In view of Carlson’s hostility to the economy “mercenariesHis name for capital managers who invest in entrepreneurship and liquidate trapped assets in less efficient sectors of the economy, it is not unreasonable to assume that he would look favorably on the primary mechanism of Warren to finance it all: a wealth tax. And if he doesn’t, the pro-Trump Political economics of course. But it’s not clear how promising Americans around the world (other than the Constitution did not stand in the way) are promoting traditional conservative values. Warren’s plan likely flies in the face of Congressional authority’s 16th Amendment provision to “impose and collect taxes on income” and the transfer of wealth – not the assets themselves simply because they exist. Moreover, his support for an inapplicable “exit tax” for Americans who would naturally seek to evade the tax by stationing assets abroad or moving with them recognizes the insoluble nature of the pursuit of profit in the country. human nature.
Carlson concluded his monologue by insisting that the GOP “keeps losing” because it refuses to embrace Trump’s platform, but the first election wave of this decade that the GOP lost has occurred. in 2018. And it happened in a political environment not characterized by a Republican schism. And traditionally conservative anti-poverty programs that reward hard work, such as earned income tax credit, are to win in bipartisan appeal.
The bond that has maintained social traditionalists with free market evangelists for decades is not a bond of convenience but of shared interests. The market can be perverted, as any system can, but the infinite number of inputs into the market and the external challenges to unfair competition make it more resistant to corruption than public institutions that maintain their primacy through a monopoly on the use of force. The market uproots, but it also strengthens the institutions that make civil society possible. Families, churches, civic associations, activist organizations, schools, community centers; all are ousted from public life by a constantly expanding state. The market does not cure all social illnesses, but no economic system does. And utopianism is not a conservative goal.