Category Archives: emerging memes

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, euphemisms, sneers, and innuendoes in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Jan. 30–Feb 3, 2014.

Posted on by
Reply

America’s calming presence: it’s worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan–both part of the new Pax Americana.

bureaucrats: formerly known as public servants. Always an invidious condemnation in GOP rhetoric.

democratic freedoms: invoked as being endangered any time Democrats call for new laws on guns, voting rights, right to life, women’s health care, or campaign finance. (See “rights, liberty and justice”, below).

efforts to improve competition: any GOP reform that shield business from competition, regulation, scrutiny, or litigation.

evidence-based science:  any study that undercuts the ‘theory” of climate change. Doesn’t matter what the quality of the evidence is, just that there be the whiff of some.

extreme and muddled beliefs: climate change, women’s rights, voting rights, financial and environmental regulation, workplace safety, Endangered Species Act, immigration amnesty. “Extremism” is always portrayed as “muddled”, as in not clear or “rational”.

green indulgence: any environmental protection regulations or legislation. “Indulgence” does double rhetorical duty here, suggesting both naivete (as in indulging a child), and a nefarious payoff.

imperial presidency: Any attempt by Obama to act by executive order. Never mind that he has issued fewer executive orders or signing statements than any recent President.

private investment: doing anything to undermine this is always absolutely unacceptable.

protectionism (and poison pills): labor rights and woprkplace safety, environmental laws, minimum wage, childhood labor laws.

rationally balancing risks and benefits: hint: in this “rational” exercise, the benefits of deregulation always outweigh the risks. When the GOP uses the word “rational,” they have their thumb on the scale.

reform:  used to mean protection against harmful effects of unfettered capital markets, now, in GOP/Tea Party parlance, means removing those protections.

rights, liberty and justice: the core sustaining rhetoric of the libertarian-leaning, “don’t tread on me”  Right. Includes “freedom from” being told what to do and “freedom to” do whatever you want. No implicit sense of obligation, communitarianism or social contract. The “justice” dimension is derived from getting what is due you, not from a Rawlsian theory of distributed and balanced outcomes. Sometimes called “democratic freedoms”.

sacrifice: what the GOP pays lip service to but only the poor and middle class seem to actually have to make.

unilateral action: any Obama policy; the only way an “Imperial President” can govern.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, euphemisms, sneers, and innuendoes in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, New Year’s edition, January, 2014.

Posted on by
Reply

agitprop: any Democractic policy statement or any op-ed piece criticizing Tea Party positions. Anything the Dems say is propaganda; anything the Tea Party says is public policy and common sense.

anticapitalists: environmentalists.

card: any Democratic moral position. Always a cynical ploy, as in “playing the race card”. which currently characterized as being in the same suit and hand as other Democratic “cards”: fairness, victimhood, equality, justice. Away to demean all of these moral claims, and demote them to self-serving propaganda status.

civic courtesy: the indecent lack of grace Democrats exhibit every time they criticize the GOP.

consequences: often used by the GOP as a pejorative term for outcomes. “Consequences” are almost always connoted as negative–as in the phrase, “truth or consequences”. Thus, for example, the ACA is said to have nothing but “negative consequences,” whereas tax cuts have nothing but stimulative effects and positive economic outcomes.

cooperation: the new euphemism for competition.

crowd: any Democratic or liberal advocacy group,  always a nefarious, corrupt, and self-serving. e.g.: “the global warming crowd”.

disincentivizing: the overall effect of any government aid programs the GOP opposes, from unemployment benefits to food stamps. Government “handouts” are the opposite of the only force known to truly incentivize: the “free” market. Only regulation and social welfare are holding back a truly Darwinian social, moral and economic golden age.

envy: the main motivating force behind any attempts to raise taxes, regulate markets, bring charges or fines against financial institutions, or offer any form of social welfare.

favoritism:  the main motivating force for any policies helping unions and teachers. Tax breaks for Big Oil, on the other hand, are seen as neutral or even rational ways to stimulate the “free” market.

gambit: any Democratic policy initiative. Dem public policy is always propagandistic, thus nothing but a ploy.

gliding:  the aloof, “lazy” trait of Obama (when he isn’t actively trying to overturn the capitalist system). In foreign policy, Obama is said to be “gliding” when he refrains from potentially counter-productive  interventions, as in “leading from behind”. In political policy terms. he is accused of this whenever he defers to Congress, takes a vacation, or uses any of the perks of office.

hand wringing: any criticism of aggressive, interventionist foreign policy, or of any “sentimental” attempts to help the poor or needy.

lesser mortals: always used sneeringly in reference to Obama’s  hauteur. Obama is always accused of aloofly “talking down” to us “lesser mortals” whenever he makes a moral assertion, especially when pointing out inequalities. Synonyms in this word family include aloof, grandiose, preening, and arrogant.

moral relativism: a perennial GOP rhetorical meme, still employed to attack government policies protecting free speech, religious diversity, and human rights. Thus, for example, the so-called “War on Christmas” is seen as a leveling attempt at relativism, whereas Christmas itself is an absolute–just as Santa is, of course, a white man. The current debate over mandating birth control insurance coverage by Catholic  employers is also contextualized as a form of moral relativism, as if a belief in a woman’s right to choose is not a “moral” position.

narcissism: one of academia’s main character traits, (along with “an obsession with victimhood” and the drive to reduce everything to race and class politics). Rhetorically linked to “moral relativism”. What society’s “takers”are indulging in when they try to redress “oppression”.

rogue: an adjective used to describe any deviation from Tea Party orthodoxy.

steadfast resistance, refusal: any principled moral stand on an issue opposed by Democrats. Called recalcitrance or a “gambit” or “hand wringing” or “agitprop” when the Dems do it.

unrestrained growth:   a very bad thing when it comes to things the GOp opposes (such as entitlements), but a very good thing when it comes to the “animal spirits” of corporate profits and unfettered market.

victimhood: said to be one of the main Dem rhetorical meme or “card” (as in, “the race card”).  Linked in a complex semantic web to “envy”, “redistribution, “oppression”, “grievance”, “obsession with race and class,” and “fairness”.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Dec. 19-20, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

big government:  any government. “Big” serves a mandatory modifier of neutral-sounding “government”. “Big government” leads to a “federal takeover” (see below); also is he opposite of “self government” (see below)

college education as an investment: the reductionist view of education that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. This is the wedge strategy for doing away with tenure, academic freedom, and the social sciences.

commitment: what Republicans value in sexual behavior. Democrats, on the other hand, prefer one-night stands, promiscuity and, and irresponsibility.

federal takeover: any government

guilt:  Obama’s core emotional appeal, said to be ” vast, vague, and unanswerable”, also insatiable. Always used derisively, as when belittling “crippling white guilt”. Without guilt, and its sense of moral obligation, no social mitigation of inequality is necessary.

honorable self-government:    Ideally the equivalent of no government in the perfect libertarian state in which individuals would be entirely self-determining.The modifier is a key part of this equation when it refers to states’ power (as opposed to federal power) because the states (or certain states) are inherently honorable and can be trusted with power.

identity politics: (see the “race, class and gender industry” entry, below). A card played whenever Dems address issues of social equity. When the GOP appeals, say, to Tea Partiers, it’s called “playing to the base.”

man’s work: timbering, mining, drilling

the political class: used derisively to refer to any democratic-leaning journalists or analysts.

the productive engines of the economy:  nurturing  (i.e., “coddling”) undermines these; only the “unfettered” free market releases these animal spirits. Overt attempts at equity or qwlfare re automatically defined as “unproductive”.

the race, class, and gender industry:  the social sciences in higher education. As if the only motive for addressing discrimination and inequality is an economic one.

reeducation:  In true Stalinist fashion, the technique the so-called liberal “thought police”  use to silent dissenters and force them into  ideological compliance.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Dec. 11-13, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

corrosive: all-purpose intensifing adjective for all Dem policies, laws & initiatives; most often used to alliteratively modify “controls”.

famous: a term of derision and ironic deflation for a largely mythic Democratic claim, as in “the famous Keynesian multiplier”.

the Greater Good: in Ayn Randian terms, the pernicious and ludicrous shibboleth/fantasy that undermines individual initiative, self-interest, and success.

hammering: any Democratic attack on GOP laws, policies or politicians.

market pricing: whatever business can get away with–or, rather, could get away with if government restraints (“shackles”) were “unleashed”. This is of course a core mantra of the Right.

passivity: in foreign policy, anything short of boycotts, invasions, bombings or assassinations. Also used as a translation for “restraint,” which in foreign policy is always a euphemism for passivity.

stranglehold: any Democratic attempt to govern or legislate. Since total government, all the time, is seen as Obama’s ultimate aim, any domestic policy –be it health care, energy, financial regulation or education–is a smokescreen for a total power grab.

trample: what Obama’s policies do to human rights, the free market, personal liberty or religious freedom. Strangleholds are especially prone to trampling.

the war on men: The GOP answer to the Dem’s War on Women. Especially applicable to rape and sexual assault & harassment cases in which women’s testimony leads to conviction or censure.

Washington gimmicks and games: any Democratic political maneuvering or policy making. GOP law- and policy-making, on the contrary, is always transparent and based on bedrock principles of the free market and individual initiative. Note: “Washington” gimmicks are the most virulent kind; in general, “Washington” serves as a shorthand pejorative, much like “trial” in “trial lawyers”.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Dec 7-10, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

apologist: anyone who defends the Obama administration or the Senate. Aka, “sycophant”.

dignity and purpose: The very qualities the spineless, profligate, illegitimate President lacks.This is a kind of master trope, trotted out to defend pro-life activists, the military, free marketeers, and non-freeloading, working Americans.

false narrative: any claim about Obama administration successes–always of course manufactured by the Democrats. Recent “fale narratives” included: the ACA as being afforable and offering Americans choices in health insurance; Obama as successfully countering terrorism, and the economy as in any way better than it was when Obama took office.

firm response: bellicose GOP foreign policy initiatives–the opposite of “rewarding terrorism”–see below.

nannies: any government official. Aka, “self-appointed experts”.

power grab: any law or administrative policy or procedure originating anywhere in the Executive Branch or the Senate. Republican laws or policies are, on the other hand, always “reasonable” or “legitimate” exercises of governing. Aka, “fiat”.

resentment: the predominant ruling humor of all of the “dependent” classes, the “freeloaders,” etc. The only reason people sign up for food stamps, unemployment benefits, disability claims and welfare. Somehow, though, those on other forms of federal aid–Medicare, for example–are deserving and not all resentful of the accomplishments of the wealthy.

rewarding terrorism: any sign of a diplomatic olive branch, rapprochement, softening or reconciliation toward Syria, Iran, China, Russia  or any “othered” country. Aka, “romancing” tyrants or jihadis; “retreat”, “capitulation”.

tax simplification: lowering taxes and making them more regressive. Much like “regulatory reform,” this is a pure euphemism for drowning government spending in a bathtub, as Grover Norquist once put it.

true school reform: vouchers and privatization.

turning attention away from Obamacare: basically, discussing any other subject, such as inequality, Iranian nuclear disarmament, immigration reform, or gun control. Did Mandela die to turn attention away from Obamacare?

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Dec. 1-3, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

abdication of power: any Obama administration foreign policy initiative that does not include invasion, bombing, sanctions or coups.

blank check: any Democratic Congressional spending. According to the GOP, Democrats have carte blanche to write “blank checks” for immigrant benefits, birth control, food stamp recipients, and other forms of social parasite.

censorship: any GOP-spun meme, such as Benghazi, that the media doesn’t ceaselessly report on. Also referred to “underreporting” or “muzzling” by the Democratic “media pimps”.

crackdown: any regulatory or legal action taken against GOP-favored corporations, PACs or individuals. When the GOP does this, it’s jst a matter of enforcing the law. When the Dems enforce the law, their “crackdown” is always the result of “neuluous and arbitrary enforcement.”

executive fiat: anything Obama does that the GOP doesn’t support. When Bush did the same things, it was called “Presidential leadership”.

knockout game: the latest meme/metaphor for any Obama policy–how he has “mugged” the American people by “lying” about Benghazi, the IRS, the ACA, etc. Also shorthand for the libidinally-transgressive, ever-present baleful threat of the black man.

resentment: the root motivation for all Democratic social programs. Aka, “playing the race card,” “reverse discrimination,” and  “victimhood”.

statistical ploy: any Democratic use of statistics to support policy positions, social service provision, or regulatory reform.

utopian blather: anything and everything that Obama talks about.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in the Wall Street Journal and other GOP language factories, Nov. 19-26, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

abject; mandatory intensifier for any Obama policy outcomes: abject failure, abject surrender, abject fraud.

feckless: trusty GOP catch-all descriptor for any Obama initiative; almost always used in the vicinity of its cousin-epithet, “weak”.

innovative: an inherent quality of any “pro-market” economic or political reform.

managerial liberalism: much worse than mere liberalism because of its Command and Control overtones. The rhetorical move here is to make a neutral term–like management–into an invidious one. Akin to using “trial lawyers” rather than just “lawyers”.

naked: much like “abject”, an intensifier used to magnify the painful effects of an Obama policy, as in a “naked power-grab”, or in the sentence, “Obamacare is a naked takeover of one-sixth of national economy”.

regulatory uncertainty: a kind of redundancy in the sense that all regulation–or, rather, the mere possibility of regulation–creates uncertainty. Oddly enough, in this tried-and-true rhetorical move, something “regular” is characterized as a source of radical instability.

serfdom: what Obama has put America on the road to, as explained by Friedrich von Hayek.

servility: what is leading America– suddenly a “servile nation”– to serfdom, under the spell of Obama the Charlatan, Obama the Liar.

sucker-punch: Obama’s devious and unscrupulous way of prevailing in foreign or domestic policy. Both the ACA and the Iran agreement are now routinely referred to as “sucker punches” to the trusting American public.

thinker: Paul Ryan. NOT Rick Perry.

Glossary: an anatomy of key memes, phrases and obsessions in Wall Street Journal editorials and other precincts of the GOP blogosphere, Oct 25-29, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

horror stories: any accounts of what is purportedly happening to people opposed to the ACA; almost always based on partial information, distortions of facts, lack of context, or outright lies.

mugging: what the government is doing to J.P. Morgan and the Bank of America, even though both banks continue to cover up bad subprime loans (or not carry them on their books), stonewall home owners wanting to re-finance, and claim that there was no systematic investment fraud during the financial/housing meltdown. Mugging is actually what any government regulation does to the “true market”. Also variously called a “shakedown”, “confiscation” or “ex post facto punishment”. Part of ther mythologizing cover story that “bad government policy: and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caused the financial meltdown.

political masters:  the puppeteers behind the vast Democratic redistributionist conspiracy. Obamacare is only the latest redistributionist scheme to expand government until it rules every aspect of Americans’ lives.

skyrocketing: as ubiquitious as “train wreck,”; use to describe ANY ACA premiums.

socializing: a near-cousin of “mugging”: what the government did when it bailed out the major banks at the height of the financial meltdown. In both instances, government action gets in the way of an unfettered “true market”.

sticker shock: whatever the premiums cost under the ACA–always more than people paid before, even for inferior coverage, “previous conditions” weeding out, lifetime caps, etc. Always comparing apples and oranges.

true market: an Eden-that-never-was, that Republicans continually nonetheless harken a return to. You know, the place where there is a price that satisfies everyone, where the market always clears in rational ways, where information is perfect and complete, and where there is no lobbying, price-rigging, weeding out expensive customers, monopolies,  or unnecessary procedures. In other words, in the current context of health care coverage in the US, pretty much the opposite of the status quo. Aka, “market forces”. The famous “invisible hand,” which is actually amazingly visible in terms of lobbying, political advertising, spin doctoring, and political advocacy.

Parallel GOP Universes: Hyperbolic and Counter-Intuitive Myths, Claims and Canards, September 10-11, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

1. Republicans are calling the possible diplomatic solution to the Syrian chemical weapons issues a “gaffe” at best and a hoodwinking by Putin and Assad at worst. In other words, they, as usual, are scripting an event as the opposite of what it really is. In this case, a peaceful solution is said to fatally weaken us and will only lead to our eventual destruction. Rather than acknowledging Kerry’s and Obama’s brilliant diplomatic move, they see it as the final disaster, and you have to wonder how long it will be until they start calling for a military incursion into Syria.

They even go all the way to Crazytown by claiming that Obama’s “gaffes” somehow justify the foreign policy positions of Bush and Romney:

But I’d bet that Bush and Romney aren’t actually laughing. That’s because they’re both serious men who understand international politics and who care for the future of the country. They no doubt understand that, as fun as it is to watch a political opponent twist in the wind due to his own ineptitude, the price will ultimately be paid not by Obama, but by the people of America.

Our diplomacy is a joke, our president is a laughing stock, our enemies are emboldened, and we’ve still got over three years of this to go. Nothing funny there at all, alas.

Glenn Reynolds, “Obama Is a Laughing Stock”, USA Today

2. Even though the Syria situation seems to be shifting every hour as a US military strike looks increasingly unlikely, the Tea Party wing of the GOP maintains their narrative that Obama is the worst US President ever and has completely bungled foreign affairs. Conrad Black pushes the “failed administration” meme further by comparing its disastrous effects to the fall of the Soviet Union. (Warning: hyperbole bomb about to be detonated):

Not since the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, and prior to that the fall of France in 1940, has there been so swift an erosion of the world influence of a Great Power as we are witnessing with the United States.

Collapse of American Influence Recalls Disintegration of Soviet Union, Fall of France

3. Over at Breitbart, Obama’s quest for a deal with Putin and Assad on weapons inspections is now being called “Obama’s Munich,” even though just last week the Obama administration was being savaged for pursuing a military rather than a diplomatic solution:

A mere five days ago, the Obama administration suggested that any UN investigation into the Syrian chemical attack was irrelevant. “The UN investigation will not affirm who used these chemical weapons,” Kerry said. “By the definition of their own mandate, the UN can’t tell us anything that we haven’t shared with you this afternoon or that we don’t already know.”

Now, however, Assad is reasonable, the UN is hunky dory, and Harry Reid has cancelled a planned Senate vote on action in Syria. The Obama administration’s diplomatic genius has somehow emerged victorious. All America left behind was its credibility and any semblance of coherent foreign policy.

Thanks to President Obama’s statements in August 2012 regarding a Syrian “red line” on chemical weapons use in Syria, the United States was faced with three choices in Syria: depose Assad; do nothing in order to prevent al Qaeda from taking over the country (likely the best option); or, as Kerry advocated, push for an “unbelievably small” action in order to reinforce America’s credibility. The third option was the worst. But in a truly awe-inspiring display of his foreign policy genius, President Obama has found a fourth option: appeasement, complete with international weapons inspections it rejected just a week ago. Welcome to Barack Obama’s Munich.

“Peace In Our Time: Obama Caves In to Putin, Assad, Iran”

4. You can’t make this stuff up: Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) now suggests that our former consulate in Benghazi is somehow linked to arming Syrian rebels:

A top congressional appropriator suggested on Monday evening that the State Department and CIA might have been stockpiling weapons for Syrian opposition fighters when they came under attack by jihadists in Benghazi, Libya.

“I firmly believe that whatever the State Department and CIA were doing in Benghazi had a direct connection to U.S. policy in Syria—a policy that to date has not been fully revealed to the American people or Congress,” Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.) said on Monday evening during a discussion focusing on “unanswered questions” surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans.

“Were these rebels being armed with weapons collected in Benghazi?” Wolf asked, according to a copy of his prepared remarks. “Again, there is reason to believe this may be the case and a clear explanation is warranted.”

5. And if you’re going to play the Benghazi card, why not the race card as well? First, Rush Limbaugh called Obama’s Syrian policy “Operation Shuck and Jive”, and then Anne Coulter went on Fox News to call Obama “Putin’s monkey”.

6. Just after the Wall Street Journal called Obama a “junior camel trader” based on his speech on Syria, John Podhoretz, in the New York Post, went a wee bit over the top in villifying the speech:

“Thanks to Pres. Obama’s strength,” tweeted House Democratic honcho Nancy Pelosi, “we have a Russian proposal.” The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein tweeted, “Kind of amazed I’m saying this, but the White House may really be about to win on Syria.”

Ah, yes, winning. Which is to say, being humiliated, acting weak, behaving in vacillatory fashion, making a mockery of your office, destroying your country’s credibility, making your own words look desperately foolish, and ceding foreign policy to the Machiavellian machinations of a gangster regime in Moscow.

That’s what you call “winning” when what you mean by “winning” is “losing.”

Jimmy Carter can rest easy now. There’s another Democratic president worse at foreign policy than he ever was.

Parallel GOP Universes: Hyperbolic and Counter-Intuitive Myths, Claims and Canards, September 4, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

1. The GOP, split over our next move in Syria, continues to produce some furious attempts at Politiscripting the moment. In this case, Eric Erickson of Red State manages a triple word score: likening Obama to a homeless schizophrenic, an “effete liberal ninnie”, and the destroyer of the US military. Thus “effete” makes its return to the rhetorical stage, having last been the main rhetorical battering ram of Spiro Agnew:

A strike now is nothing more than the President trying to salvage credibility he dithered away over several years of ignoring Syria to focus on Libya only to see it blow up in his face. Striking now in an act of war the President refuses to call an act of war and making it known that the act is designed to hurt, but not end, the Assad regime, is an effete response only a liberal ninny could come up with….This Administration’s foreign and military policies make all the sense of a homeless schizophrenic off his meds running down the Washington Mall. They make even less sense when coupled with Administration rhetoric on the sequestration making it impossible for the military to do anything with the military….Words mean things and this Administration has yet to seriously put honest words together to explain what it intends and desires.

2. From Tea Party LaLaLand, a Tennessee state representative manages an even more impressive rhetorical flourish, linking the potential bombing of Syria with every failed GOP attempt to “scandal”-monger:

Tennessee state representative Joe Carr (R.), who is mounting a tea-party challenge against incumbent Senator Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.), also cited a lack of trust in explaining his opposition to military intervention. “This is an administration that has been cloaked in secrecy since [Obama’s] first inauguration,” he told National Review Online, before reeling off a list of administration scandals — NSA spying, IRS targeting, Fast and Furious, Benghazi. “We can’t get a straight answer out of the president. I don’t believe we’re getting accurate information out of the president now, and I don’t believe we should go to war because he drew an arbitrary red line.” The White House has yet to provide a compelling national-interest argument for intervention, which the vast majority of Tennesseans oppose, he added.

3. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) upped the ante even more with a truly-inspired piece of hyperbole, virtually calling Obama’s looming bombing of Syria a treasonous act, turning the US military into “Al Qaeda’s air force”:

“Nobody wants to see another Benghazi in Syria, and that’s really the fear, isn’t it?” Pags wondered.

“That’s exactly right,” Cruz agreed. “But there’s a broader problem. This administration, when it conducts foreign policy, it doesn’t do so based on U.S. national security interests… It appears what the president is pressing for is essentially protecting his public relations because he drew a red line, and essentially the bluff was called.”

“We’re not going to resolve the tensions over there and the last thing we ought to be doing is sending our sons and daughters into harm’s way to get into the middle of this sectarian civil war,” he added. “We should be focused on defending the United States of America.”

“That’s why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to — as you know — you know, serve as Al-Qaeda’s air force.”

4. The American Spectator also piles on, astonishingly linking a Syrian missile strike with abortion:

The justification for this war, from the vantage point of vital American interests, is nil. It makes about as much sense as Assad announcing that he will launch military strikes on the U.S. because Obama supports the killing of over a million unborn babies a year.

It is sad to see Republicans like Boehner join in this phony harrumphing about evil abroad. Fix your own country. Address America’s moral evils. Pols who can’t stop chemical abortions in America won’t stop chemical bombing in Syria.

5.  In a classic “they don’t know what’s good for them” moment, Richard Epstein of the libertarian Hoover Institute ridicules the “living wage” campaign of Bill de Blasio in NYC. After all, Epstein modestly proposes, who ever said that a person’s wages should amount to “anything they can live on”?

What is characteristic about these and other similar attempts is how little effort they make to understand anything about the underlying principle. For example, de Blasio’s stunt makes it appear that the test of a good minimum wage law is whether people can live on that salary. In so doing, he ignores all the non-pecuniary benefits that a job can give people: exposure to business, professional skills, networking, and the like. College seniors are eagerly seeking unpaid internships to gain experience in the work force. Why deny that opportunity to those from less privileged backgrounds who must contend with unemployment rates of 41.6 percent in the case of black teenagers aged 16 to 19?