Thomas Friedman claims that “One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages.”
Back in 2000, Friedman began an article, “Yup, I gotta confess, that now-famous picture of a U.S. marshal in Miami pointing an automatic weapon toward Donato Dalrymple and ordering him in the name of the U.S. government to turn over Elian Gonzalez warmed my heart.”
Walter Duranty thought Joseph Stalin was just swell in the 1930s, as did the Timesman who wrote Stalin’s necrophilic obit in 1953.
Back in his college days, Pinch Sulzberger thought the Communist North Vietnamese were pretty darn groovy himself.
Add Paul Krugman to the New York Timesmen who wishes he was dictator as well:
In an afternoon panel on Krugman’s new book End this Depression Now!, Hayes asked what economic policies Krugman would recommend to help the economy.
“What are the things we should be doing if we waved a magic wand, made Paul Krugman dictator for a period of time?” Hayes asked.
Enough of the crowd responded with shouts and applause that a clearly uncomfortable Hayes had to calm them by clarifying, “Dictatorship meant as a thought experiment, it’s not something to cheer.”
Krugman responded, “Right.”
I think I reached escape velocity just in the nick of time:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member