Michelle Malkin is undoubtedly highly educated and
demonstrably literate. Having said that, one wonders at some of outrageously illogical things she writes in
her op-ed column. Her most recent discusses the Brooklyn Bridge, its
construction and its architect, John Augustus Roebling. All she states regarding
Roebling's ability as an engineer and innovative bridge designer is true. All
things Brooklyn Bridge can be read,
written in far more entertaining prose, in "The Great Bridge" by
Pulitzer Prize winning author, David McCullough.
Ms. Malkin's
point, if there is one, is entirely missing from the first half of the essay,
which simply chronicles Roebling's journey from German genius to American
Bridge builder. Halfway through, we get the message: "Did he have
"help" along the way? Plenty -
from other capitalists, that is."
And then we get to the reason for all this Roebling love in. She is
trying to make a point; that point being
that numerous American innovators benefitted the public by benefitting
themselves. She claims then, as an aside cheap shot, that "White House progressives and 'Common Core Historians' " won't teach this history. Balderdash and
poppycock!! Ms Malkin apparently has
never read the common core standards, or she'd know that there is zero guidance
therein regarding what to teach in the History area. None, Zip, Nada! The only common core relevance to History is
that related to reading for comprehension, main idea, etc, etc.
Her other
point, would seem to be that the Brooklyn Bridge was the private idea and
product of entrepreneurs and capitalists. In this she is also dead wrong. Without government interface
the bridge would never have been built.
The charter originally and
provisionally fixed the capital at $5,000,000 (with power of increase), and gave
the cities of New York and Brooklyn authority to subscribe to the
capital stock of the company such amount as their Common Councils respectively
should determine. By the time the
foundations of the towers had been, however,
there much concern over public
funds being controlled by private investors. Proponents of the bridge then prepared a bill to that effect, which was
approved by the Legislature and accepted by the city governments. Under the
charter thus amended, the bridge is public property, 662/3 per cent. to be paid
for and owned by the city of Brooklyn and 331/3 per cent. by the city of New York,
the actual payments by the private stockholders having been reimbursed and
their title extinguished. In other words concern over the greed of the
capitalists originally involved, caused the city government to take over and
see the project through to completion. This is in direct contravention to Ms.
Malkin's thesis.
A bit of
examination shows Ms Malkin to be fiercely Roman Catholic, anti-feminist, and apparently not a
student of history. She is a frequent Faux News talking head. From the tone of
this op-ed piece one is puzzled regarding the question of for whom Ms Malkin has respect. Donald Trump, capitalist
loudmouth, should be a fave, but he has bankrupted several
corporations while demonstrating that benefitting him and his family has benefitted
very few others. The same is true of the Kochs, Adelsons, and Waltons.
Of course none of the three true 20th century
entrepreneurs would appeal much to the arch conservative Ms Malkin. Bill Gates
has an annoying habit of giving his money away, frequently to some people of
whom MS Malkin wouldn't approve. Steve
Jobs was notably liberal, even proposing to President Obama that any foreign student who got an engineering
degree at a U.S. university should automatically be offered a green card. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg rode on a
float with employees in a San Francisco LGBT parade and supports Corey Booker.
I'll bet it
makes her head hurt trying to sort it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment