3 ms·

You're absolutely right, so I was pleased to find a fairly low-political-content article, with little mention of Trump, adequate credit to Biden, and, mostly, a

You're absolutely right, so I was pleased to find a fairly low-political-content article, with little mention of Trump, adequate credit to Biden, and, mostly, a focus on the civil servants and government bureaucrats we rarely hear about -- who are arguably parts of the "Deep State" that Trump ran against, in fact -- and who the article lauds. And if > its editor eventually wrote that he regretted voting for Trump. then at least he's seen the light, right? The overall impression I get is that this particular author wants industrial policy, dammit, and he doesn't care if it's a Biden or a Trump who gives it to him -- or whether it's a "small government" Republican or a neoliberal Democrat who's getting in the way. Arguably Biden has taken some of these lessons (he may be the perfect Democrat for this), and has been attempting to enact them with Build Back Better (admittedly with some sops to the "progressives"). Which -- if "Trumpist" means "the principled stance of American Affairs" and not "the buffoon pandering to white grievance" -- would paradoxically make Biden more Trumpist than the Republicans and "moderates" who are now blocking his efforts. So how about I not call it "Trumpist" to begin with, given that Trump himself probably doesn't have many principles at all. It's simply: "Onshoring, Reindustrialization, and Industrial Policy". Or, "Make America Competitive with Germany and South Korea", you could say. The author's closing theme is also in direct contradiction of some talking points we've seen from Republicans recently. They've been talking about "government incompetence". Yet here, this article speaks of OWS as a display of competence. So if this guy is a Republican, I don't think he's a Republican who's "on message". The magazine does have its own ideological slant. But honestly, as it's begun to pivot away from Trump, it's not such a bad slant.

kunai 5y ago
> The overall impression I get is that this particular author wants industrial policy, dammit, and he doesn't care if it's a Biden or a Trump who gives it to him -- or whether it's a "small government" Republican or a neoliberal Democrat who's getting in the way. I thought much the same, and I lean further lefty than most on this forum. It was a great read.
jonstewart 5y ago
> The magazine does have its own ideological slant. Yes, that’s why I commented—it is easy to nerd out on long pieces like this, but the magazine that hosts it does not have a neutral and/or nerd POV (nerds aren’t necessarily neutral, but are perfectly willing to write long explainers out of sheer enthusiasm). There’s fine information to be had here, and interesting points to debate about industrial policy writ large. But the magazine’s an organized intellectual undertaking intended to influence, and so close reading and critical thinking are warranted.

kunai 5y ago

> The overall impression I get is that this particular author wants industrial policy, dammit, and he doesn't care if it's a Biden or a Trump who gives it to him -- or whether it's a "small government" Republican or a neoliberal Democrat who's getting in the way. I thought much the same, and I lean further lefty than most on this forum. It was a great read.

jonstewart 5y ago

> The magazine does have its own ideological slant. Yes, that’s why I commented—it is easy to nerd out on long pieces like this, but the magazine that hosts it does not have a neutral and/or nerd POV (nerds aren’t necessarily neutral, but are perfectly willing to write long explainers out of sheer enthusiasm). There’s fine information to be had here, and interesting points to debate about industrial policy writ large. But the magazine’s an organized intellectual undertaking intended to influence, and so close reading and critical thinking are warranted.