It's been another very Rudy week in the blogosphere. A few weeks ago, liberal writers were worried that voters would forget that when Giuliani was Mayor of New York he was a crazy, mean, dangerous authoritarian. This week the concern is that the conservative base may nominate him for exactly that reason.

Responding to Josh's point that Giuliani's social liberalism is probably a deal-breaker, Matt Stoller argues that issues don't really matter to the Right. Giuliani, according to this theory, is popular because he demonstrates a "tribal authoritarianism":

What they are looking for is an authoritarian to look like he's taking charge, and the way an authoritarian takes charge is to attack liberals and stomp on people who aren't like them. Giuliani did this in New York, so he's a rock star in Alabama.

John Derbyshire half agrees, also citing Rudy's "tribal" appeal: his "Gestalt" "screams ANTI-LIBERAL! Rudy is the anti-Kerry—the very opposite of a mincing, apologetic, guilt-addled elite liberal." Matt Yglesias agrees that it's tribal as opposed to authoritarian, deeming it the "politics of resentment":

Read more »

The Wall Street Journal's "The Informed Reader" blog is doing my job for me.  Their summary of our debate on globalization:

The discussion was kicked off by Jeff Faux, an economist who says globalization has pitted the world’s poor against the rich, symbolized by the accords struck between American executives and Chinese “capitalist commissars.” Mr. Faux, who founded the Economic Policy Institute, which advocates environmental and labor safeguards in trade rules, contends that the expansion of trade has put an unfair burden on American working families who “sacrifice their future in order to raise up the living standards of poor Chinese.”

Read more »

Brad Delong has "A Question for Jeff Faux":

Is there a way to interpret Jeff['s argument] other than as a call to keep China a society of poor subsistence rice farmers as long as possible--keep them poor, barefoot, uneducated, and by no means allow them to work at any of the high-value manufacturing occupations we want to keep in the United States?

Update: Jeff Faux responds:

Let me ask Brad: Why is it that it is the responsibility of $40,000 year American working families to sacrifice their future in order to raise up the living standards of poor Chinese, when commissars turned capitalists ride around Shanghai in a different Rolls every day?

Jeff Faux, founder and senior fellow at the Economic Policy Institute, is joining us at TPMCafe this week to describe the emerging global economic overclass:

Call it the Party of Davos, after the annual elite bash in the Swiss Alps that resembles the big-donor receptions at a political convention –corporate CEOs and world class investors, the people who carry their bags, and the politicians, pundits and policy intellectuals who carry their water.

The Party of Davos, Faux argues, knows no national loyalty. As it pushes to mold American and global economic policies in its own interest, what institutions can counteract its power? Share your thoughts and follow the debate all week.