29 Comments

Torenberg is completely correct- we are increasingly producing nothing but bureaucrats at every level of our society. There will be a reckoning at some point.

Expand full comment

"And one strongly suspects they would rather see public school reform, bigger retirement accounts, and lower property tax bills"

Sure, but are any of those possible? Seriously.

What do parents mean by "public school reform"? I think they mean that somehow the schools will teach something, something called education, and by so doing will cause their children to be prosperous after they leave school. But the schools can't. But the schools can't. At the most basic, nobody knows what makes someone prosperous, and a fortiori, how to teach that. Redoing how you teach Algebra Two or American History isn't going to do squat for making students prosperous. Both parties honestly believe they can "fix" the schools to do something like that. They are delusional, as the history of the past sixty years pretty strongly suggests.

In the long run, "bigger retirement accounts" come from economic growth. But in the short run, it's "animal spirits" and asset inflation, the latter often from policies that have long-term harm. Policies that promote long-term growth don't show results until the, um, long-term. Which doesn't help at the next election.

"Lower property tax bills" either mean the local government does less, or the state or federal government pays for more local expenses. Which eventually means higher sales and income taxes. Or the inflation of consistent deficits. As far as I can tell, there is very little constituency for "cut local spending", which means there is probably not much serious constituency for "lower property tax bills". When the local government says, "If we lower property taxes, we'll have to cut X, Y, and Z services", the people who called for lower property taxes will fold.

Expand full comment

So De Santis, despite literally being the embodiment of "The New Right", isn't the New Right.

No True Scotsmen Indeed.

He flies illegal immigrants to Martha's Vineyard, but he's not a chauvinist.

He picks culture war fights against powerful institutions people like the author wouldn't touch with a ten foot poll, but he's not a culture warrior.

He's insanely pro growth, low tax, and low regulation...but the New Right is basically SOCIALISM.

All of these mixed use white collar neighborhoods are being built in Red States. When built anywhere else they are built in the reddest possible area within commuter distance. I live in one. I drive past them all the time. The statistic bear this out.

Zombie Reaganism lost California. It made the coasts non-competitive. It squandered all its victories.

These people should make up their minds. One minute De Santis is a mini-Trump just as bad as him and maybe even more dangerous. The next he's really been their guy all along.

Expand full comment

The republic needs law & order and common sense leadership. This message won in Virginia and Florida and even pushed the needle in New York state. The foolish pundits can agitate about political labels. I don't care. If people vote for insanity then they deserve to get it. "Good and hard".

Expand full comment

Harsanyi remains an elite globalist, but most GOP voters increasingly are not.

"My friends believe the Republican Party establishment is incompetent and cowardly. Maybe. Thankfully, we don’t have a binary choice. May both factions fail."

Democrats or Republicans will win - 99% binary choice. (Sanders independent? Ventura was Reform).

If the GOP wants 100% free and fair elections, the GOPe (Rep establishment) is incompetent - but if the GOPe wants to talk, like Dems, of "free and fair" but actually wants rigged elections with censorship against politically inconvenient news, they got what they really wanted. Dishonest, but not incompetent. Many, most?, GOPe would rather lose races with Trump supported candidates than have MAGA guys win and reform their club. (Shown objectively by spending in races]

Trump barely won with 62 million votes; lost an arguably rigged election with 75 million votes. Any, and every, analysis that fails to address Trump's genuine popularity, with known and relevant numbers, is offering some level of BS. [Mail-in ballots are subject to fraud, not used in most democracies. In a Free and Fair election, true news is not censored - news of H. Biden's laptop and Biden corruption was censored, 2020 election was NOT 100% Free and Fair]

The New Right is increasingly non-college workers. That's a less binary thing, so far: college grads go Dem, workers go Republicans who don't want to outsource US mfg jobs to commie China running semi-slave camps, and making CCP billionaires, who compete with US globalist billionaires. Very much white workers, but increasingly Hispanic, Asian, and even black workers, tho still far more men than women.

Trump has declared, Trump will win the GOP primaries where only registered Republicans can vote; Trump will be the 2024 Rep candidate. College educated Reps who don't like Trump's ego-driven personality will try to rationalize their dislike of him. Maybe the new kangaroo court special counsel will indict him. [...and even get a (unfair) DC conviction on something that he'll appeal and eventually win a not guilty].

I'll support him, again; and he'll probably lose again due to Dem demonization and the failure to have 100% Free and Fair elections, because so many Dems are so fraud friendly. And because college grad GOP folk can convince themselves he is somehow terrible DESPITE 4 years of him office without any clearly terrible policy. He was not so good on COVID, but not clearly worse than average OECD leader.

Christian Nationalism is not quite the same as the NatCons, but will become as important to Republican victories, when they happen, as the black vote has been for Democrats. Their often single issue voting on pro-life policies were crucial to reversing Roe, after 50 years of losing -- which unsurprisingly caused an increased intensity of the pro-choice (/abortion) who had been winners for so many decades. Losers have to try harder if they want to win later.

Neo does a fine job describing how hard it is to change voting rules with fraud friendly Dems in power. https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/11/25/what-has-kept-election-security-reform-from-happening-in-many-states/

She correctly complains that many NatCons, and Christian Nationalists, and both GOPe Reps and other Republicans don't know many of the details of the failed attempts to reduce fraud.

She notes how little publicity these efforts have gotten - part of Dem media power is to censure, or ignore, the good stuff Reps do or try to do.

She also thinks Reps should choose to dump Trump; one of the few times I think she's wrong, as is Harsanyi (and Arnold). Or is it me?

Expand full comment

Harsanyi is going to learn the awful truth in 2024 when DeSantis (or Youngkin or Kemp, or a combination of any two of them) runs and loses in the general election. I predict, when that happens, he will call DeSantis/Youngkin/Kemp a losing National Conservative. In short, I doubt there is a coalition that can elect a Republican of any stripe any longer. The only way to get there is probably to let the Democrats burn the country to the ground.

Expand full comment

Great piece from Harsanyi. Natcons are electoral losers except in deep red states, that is very well established now. Trump barely managed to be less of a loser than everyone's least favorite person Hillary Clinton in 2016, and that razor-thin "success" fooled everybody into thinking that what works in deep-red primaries can also work on the national stage.

Expand full comment

Harsanyi: But Republicans do not, as far as I can tell, actually HAVE any ideas about how to reform public schools, promote freer trade, improve municipal finances, incentivize larger retirement accounts or reduce costs of health care. Democrats ought to be vulnerable for not promoting high-value immigration and for not reducing the deficit, for not choosing the lowest cost ways to reduce climate, for jut not being very interested in inclusive growth. Unfortunately, Republicans seem no more or even less interested.

Torenberg: There is more than enough work for these administrators gradually chipping away at regulations and administrative practice that are not guided by growth-promoting, cost benefit considerations. Politicians have not created the demand for them.

Expand full comment

"overproduction of elites" was common parlance at least going back to 2019 and I'm quite sure I was late to the party back then.

Expand full comment