Sometimes I wonder what this guy is thinking. Another great moment from the wizards of smart (copyright 2009 Rush Limbaugh).
MR. BROKAW: Tom, are we at a kind of turning point in America in terms of being able to make this a functioning country again or are we dysfunctional?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Well, this is what worries me, that, you know, I’ve been saying for awhile, Tom, there’s only one thing worse than a one-party autocracy, the Chinese form of government, and that’s one-party democracy. You know, in China, if the leadership can get around to an enlightened decision, it can order it from the top down, OK? Here, when you have one-party democracy, one-party ruling, basically, and the other party just basically saying no, every solution is suboptimal, you know. And when your chief competitor in the world can order optimal and you can only produce suboptimal, because what happens, you know, whether it’s health care or the energy bill, votes one through 50 cost you a lot, votes 50 to 59 cost you a fortune, and vote 60, his name’s Ben Nelson. And by the time you’ve made all those compromises, you end up with the description David had of the healthcare bill, which is this Rube Goldberg contraption. I really hope–I hope, personally, I hope it passes, I hope it works, but I can’t tell you I think it’s optimal.
Remember this is the same guy who thought there was something to be said for China’s form of government. The Chinese have a way of just getting things done.
One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.
Reasonably enlightened? Just ask Tibet.