Economism, nation, and the Univision debate

In another entry, I pointed out that Mary Jackson, while calling for an end of immigration in Britain, gave as her only reason the desire to prevent crowding. Defending Britishness did not enter the picture for her. (Miss Jackson has modified her position; see the linked entry.)

Howard Sutherland replies:

Good point! Too many people who are on the way to doing the right thing never get all the way there because they forbid themselves to think in terms of what is real: culture and society. The only harms they are willing to see and discuss are economic.

The current American example, I think, is the difference between Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo (aside: why can’t even conservative Republican presidential candidates use their proper names?). Ron Paul was willing to participate in the disgraceful Univision quasi-Spanish debate; for him the big issues are libertarian and economic. Paul thinks America, properly understood, is a free-market society that is faithful to a blueprint, the Constitution, that can apply to anyone. Accordingly, he appears unworried about America’s having an alternative political marketplace running in a foreign language.

Tom Tancredo refused to participate, and denounced the quasi-Spanish debate as an attack on the cultural nature of America. Tancredo understands that America is a real country, with real people who are Americans not merely because they happen to have found their way across the border. Tancredo understands that Americans are American in the same way Mexicans are Mexican, Englishmen are English and Chinamen are Chinese. Tancredo is capable of defending a nation because he understands what a nation is and what defending it means. The lesson of the Univision debate, and it’s depressing for me, is that Paul’s view of America is far too close to propositionalism for comfort. As for all the other Republican candidates, I could not vote for any of them—including Hunter—based on what they said in this debate alone.

P.S.: I say “quasi-Spanish” debate because, while Univision gave them the chance to pander to Hispanics, the candidates did not have either to understand questions in Spanish or speak Spanish.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 11, 2007 12:01 PM | Send