Pope's Puppets swing and miss in defending UNC BOG

When Libertarians try to rewrite history:

In the 2012-13 academic year, the center hosted members of the AFL-CIO to discuss “the legislature’s war on labor”; screened clips from a “Story of America: A Nation Divided,” about “the fundamental divisions and the political struggle throughout America”; screened “The American Winter,” which “highlights the human impact of budget cuts to social services, a shrinking middle class, and the fracturing of the American Dream”; discussed “Wage Theft in North Carolina”; and invited people to projects sponsored by the Durham People’s Alliance and the N.C. Justice Center.

Where were the success stories of combating poverty through limited government and economic freedom – the approach that has saved millions from poverty in countries such as Taiwan, Estonia and South Korea? They weren’t mentioned, as far as one can tell from the archives.

To their main underlying complaint, that Conservative and/or Free Market proponents are not "invited" to such seminars: When you refuse to acknowledge that poverty and wage inequality and workplace discrimination and a bunch of other problems even exist, much less need to be addressed, why should you be included in these discussions? And we wouldn't be having many of these discussions if your bent ideology hadn't permeated the Legislature already, encouraging massive cuts to the social safety net. So thanks, but no thanks. And as far as your "missing" examples of small government success stories, you've (as usual) overlooked the obvious:

U.S. assistance to Korea, which began in 1952, was vital to Korea’s survival as a nation and its initial post-war recovery. During the early years following the armistice, the Republic of Korea was almost entirely dependent on the United States for food and consumer goods. From 1953 to 1962, U.S. aid financed an average of 69 percent of imports.

That's American taxpayer funding, in spite of all the Conservative howling about "wasting" valuable resources "propping up" another country. But it was more than just food and clothing we helped them with:

USAID’s Lasting Impact: Food aid and infrastructure assistance during the initial reconstruction allowed the country to get on its feet in the 1950s, and prepared a strong foundation for growth. U.S. support for infrastructure projects—electric, rail, and ports—also laid critical groundwork for the country’s recovery and, according to one study, “enabled Korea to become a major exporter of construction services to the Middle East in the 1970s and early 1980s."

And as far as the "freedom" aspect of the formula, there are some serious questions about that, as well:

Also in 1961, Park Chung-hee came to power in a military coup. President Park subsequently made economic development the country’s overriding priority. So important was economic development to President Park that he visited the powerful Economic Planning Board (EPB), the “nerve center” for Korean development, at least once a month and fully reviewed the country’s economic progress at each visit.

Bolding mine. He may have been a "soft" dictator, but he wasn't chosen by the people. Or by the "free enterprise system." He was enabled by a small group of military leaders, and one of his main goals was to curb the influence of private businessmen on the developing government. He did so in a brutal fashion, but the end result was a more subservient business class as well as nationalized banking. Did that set the stage for stable future economic growth? Possibly, but I'm not going to try to rewrite history here.

Tags: 

Comments

Where were the success stories?

Where were the success stories of combating poverty through limited government and economic freedom? They were in the imaginations of Art Pope, Hoodie and the Locked-in-the-John crowd.

Just because they're delusional doesn't mean that the scholars at our universities need to be.

-------------------------------------------------------
"I will have a priority on building relationships with the minority caucus. I want to put substance behind those campaign speeches." -- Thom Tillis, Nov. 5, 2014

Delusional is right

And every time they try to legitimize their delusion, they get their historical wires crossed. It's a good thing for them I majored in History in college... :)