> The key issue, on the other hand, is the power of the rich & powerful vs.
> the power of working people and other oppressed people. Cato Institute
> studies are used as weapons by the former. If they're not good weapons,
> they're not used.
>
> It should be mentioned that (1) there are a lot of fatcats besides Murdoch
> on Cato's board and (2) Cato chose Murdoch, indicating a clear ideological
> convergence.
A further point that converges with these is the reductionist thinking which Cato pushes.
Murdoch, now owner of the Dodgers, will continue to try to squeeze out public subsidies on the basis of (doctored) market economics. (Stadiums are no longer as easy a sell as they once were, but compared to food for the poor...)
In which case, he benefits from the Cato-libertarian covering fire that suppresses even the hint of thinking about direct governmnet investment. This fire isn't just aimed at politicians, it's aimed at the minds of the public as well. What can't be imagined can't be fought for.
This highlights a fundamental aspect of rightwing ideological funding. They see ideas simply in military terms--in terms of their strategic deployment. Of COURSE liberatarian ideas could destroy religious right ideas, and visa verse. But they're both YOUR weapons. You don't go around pointing them at each other. That would be ridiculous!
After all, Murdoch, who's made a good deal of his fortune on trash sex, is a rather keen moralist as well. It's not hypocritical if one takes a purely insturmantalist view of ideas and ideology. In which case, "hypocrisy" is just one more weapon to deploy.
-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at gte.net
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"