Centrist on a White Horse

Ed Kilgore makes a good point about the decline of Unity '08 into a draft Bloomberg "movement":

These developments are depressingly predictable and familiar. History is replete with examples of extra-partisan, extra-ideological "populist" movements that take a turn towards the authoritarian desire for a Big Man who can squash the petty, squabbling parliamentarians and govern in the "true" national interest. Mr. Smith often yields to Mr. Bonaparte.

Right. It's worth saying that I think there's some real merit to this kind of thinking when it comes to local government issues. There's a reason why the prospect of a Rudy Giuliani administration is terrifying, but he was a fine mayor. Similarly, the brand of quasi-apolitical technocracy that Michael Bloomberg brought to the mayor's office made him an excellent mayor with most of Giuliani's virtues and few of his demerits, but it's silly as a program for national office. The issues change when you go national, elements of authoritarianism get more scary, the "petty, quabbling" parliamentarians become people of a lot more substance and in general the unit of governance becomes so large that the idea of a transcendent "national interest" becomes more than a little meaningless.

On top of that, something about the global warming issue seems to for whatever reason spawn a disproportionate quantity of weird, vaguely authoritarian anti-political talk -- suggestions that not only is this a serious problem which we must tackle, but that's it's somehow beyond bargaining or the ordinary cut-and-thrust of elections and interest groups.

Comments

Does anyone outside of New York give a shit about Mike Bloomberg? I don't. What sort of poll numbers does he get? Is he polling as well as Fred Thompson before he announced?

Posted by Just Karl | January 13, 2008 10:49 AM

Buddy Cianci Jr. for prez!

Posted by Unity 5-10 Years | January 13, 2008 10:56 AM

So, Giuliani's authoritarianism was fine as long as it was the black and hispanic people of New York bearing the brunt of it. But expanding it beyond that population is terrifying.

Posted by David | January 13, 2008 11:00 AM

Well, there's a bit of tension here, because MY is on record as not liking the checks-and-balances aspects of US constitutionalism that much - cf the legislative filibuster in the Senate and the mega-veto-points of US politics in general. Lots of other countries have "Bonapartism lite" or "Gaullism" if you prefer, with a very centralised democratic government where the petty, squabling parliamentarians are reduced to insignificance, like in the UK or France, without any drift away from democracy, and yes, it is in part exactly for that reason that European countries have more extensive welfare states, do more about global warming, etc. The US could usefully move as much as possible in that direction too.

Posted by otto | January 13, 2008 11:14 AM

Rudy was a terrible mayor.

Hard to believe you are a Wire fan when you write lines like that.

Posted by Armando | January 13, 2008 11:17 AM

"Does anyone outside of New York give a shit about Mike Bloomberg?"

Bloomberg had no political visibility in NYC before he ran for Mayor, yet he won easily. Financial industry was aware of his company, so he had support of the business community, but "regular" Dems and Independents were influenced by massive TV advertising campaign.
I would expect he'd do the same with a national TV advertising campaign - pretty much the opposite of the "getting to know you" process in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Posted by CParis | January 13, 2008 11:41 AM

Which mainstream candidate is calling for unity? Obama. His calls actually translate to:

"STFU and get on board with my ideas."

For people who think dissent is important - and I do - Obama is far more terrifying than Guiliani. Not as maddening as McCain, who would be a train wreck on the first amendment (and gosh knows what else), but still very, very bad.

Posted by James Robertson | January 13, 2008 11:52 AM

Quasi-apolitical?
He suspended habeus corpus for people arrested protesting the Republican National Convention.
He might speak the language of a politically disinterested technocrat, but he is extremely hostile to free speech and dissenting views.

Posted by Justaguy | January 13, 2008 12:09 PM

Citoyen Bonaparte goes to Paris (Via Mantua & Cairo), a film by François Capra . . .

Posted by rea | January 13, 2008 12:57 PM

Can someone please explain to me why the need for a centrist government NOW is greater than in 2004 when these same people were (if I remember correctly) entirely quiet.

Posted by della Rovere | January 13, 2008 1:25 PM

"Can someone please explain to me why the need for a centrist government NOW is greater than in 2004 when these same people were (if I remember correctly) entirely quiet."

GOP was still in firm control of WH and Congress, with weak opposition from Dems. Business as usual.

Posted by CParis | January 13, 2008 1:29 PM

James Robertson,

From what you say in your comment, you probably should consider the idea that it is Populism that bothers you, and the attendant fear of tyranny of the majority thing.

Posted by artappraiser | January 13, 2008 1:44 PM

Yes, I dislike populists a lot. For that reason, I would never vote for McCain, Huckabee, Obama, or Edwards. If it were McCain against Hillary, I'd hold my nose and vote Hillary, on the grounds that the Republicans would grow a spine and try to stop the worst things. With McCain, we would have bi-partisan populist hell, where the first amendment (and lots more besides) would get flushed.

Posted by James Robertson | January 13, 2008 2:42 PM

I find this thought consoling: the only thing Bloomberg and Bonaparte have in common is that they are both very short.

Posted by David in NY | January 13, 2008 3:06 PM

something about the global warming issue seems to for whatever reason spawn a disproportionate quantity of weird, vaguely authoritarian anti-political talk

So, you've been reading n+1. Gonna write about the Gourevitch piece?

Posted by Wrongshore | January 13, 2008 5:16 PM

Was a fine mayor? Please, please rethink/respond to this (I hope) quick thoughtless comment.

He did some fine things as mayor, but I can't imagine giving his tenure as a whole as much as a C, but less the A that "fine" seems to imply.

Posted by Sandy Herrold | January 13, 2008 8:17 PM

"Please, please rethink/respond to this (I hope) quick thoughtless comment."

You must be new here.

Matt doesn't do rethinks or responses. Matt does quick thoughtless through away comments.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | January 13, 2008 8:32 PM

Argh! That's what I get for putting "thought" and "throw" too close together in the same sentence.

"throw away" not "through away"!

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | January 13, 2008 8:34 PM

A fiscal conservative social liberal, what's not like to like? Join the effort to Draft Mike Bloomberg for President! http;//www.uniteformike.com

Posted by Andrew MacRae | January 13, 2008 10:43 PM

Argh! That's what I get for putting "thought" and "throw" too close together in the same sentence.

And you know the robots are totally gonna leave you out of the Singularity for that one, dude. What kind of post-human gets tripped up by homonyms?

Posted by lemuel pitkin | January 14, 2008 11:29 AM

Also, for the record, Bloomberg has been a superb NYC mayor, especially for poor and non-white people. The constant harping on the RNC protests is just idiotic.

Sure, that was bad -- maybe even as bad as the treatment of protesters by cops in every other major city at every high-profile event ever. On the other hand he has:

* Ended the cronyism and corruption that was endemic in NYC government;
* Been willing, almost uniquely among American politicians, to unapologetically argue that progressive taxes are a perfectly acceptable price for public services;
* Almost completely halted the practice of tax giveaways to corporations;
* Absolutely refused to tap into racism for political advantage, in sharp contrast to Koch, let alone Giuliani;
* Made a mjaor investment in affordable housing, far more than Giuliani, Koch oir Dinkins;
* Enrolled half a million low-income New Yorkers in Food Stamps, Medicaid, and other forms of public assistance, a 180-degree reversal from Giuliani's policy of trying to minimize enrollment;
* And in general run the most honest, transparent, responsive administration in NYC's modern history.

No, Bloomberg should not run for president. But the notion that the treatment of a few hundred college kids at a demo trumps the interests of 8 million working New Yorkers is exactly the kind of narcissism that makes so many people hate liberals. Get over it.

Posted by lemuel pitkin | January 14, 2008 12:23 PM