Politics is becoming politicized. Ideology ideologized. There is disagreement in the land. Rumbles! Portents! Where will it all end?
In the minds of those with infinite faith in their infinite wisdom to hammer out a better world by thwocking the rest of us into meek serfs of their edict-spewing will, it’s supposed to end with their unchallenged ascendancy over us. Why not? After all, they’re enacting not any ideology but only Scientific Truth. Anyone who opposes this Scientific Truth on the grounds of (different) political principles is being unscientifically Ideological.
It’s obvious that we can dispute the exact meaning and proper role of ideology — political ideas and programs — in human affairs. But the ideologues of interventionism are being coy and obfuscatory when they decry criticisms for being “ideological.”
The latest manifestation of the syndrome comes to us courtesy of a nominee to the Federal Reserve Board, who says his nomination is being thwarted on — yes — ideological grounds. He won a Nobel! He’s studied labor markets! Analysis of unemployment is “crucial to conducting monetary policy”! And: “Skilled analytical thinking should not be drowned out by mistaken, ideologically driven views that more is always better or less is always better”!
Hasn’t the Fed proved umpteen times already that its skilled analytical manipulation of economic life is perfect, infallible, and un-blundering? Couldn’t it benefit from the services of yet another smug, credential-wielding seer?
What? You doubt it! What are you, some kind of ideologue?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.