But the quotation does point out one of the foundational myths of the progressive self-delusion—that their response to events and problems is nuanced and sophisticated.

In fact, the progressive/collectivist/statist block is invariably drawn to the only response they ever actually propose: a big, new government program. They’re about as nuanced as a sledgehammer.

Economy booming? We need these new atate programs. Economy tanking? We need these new state programs. Health care? Transportation? Industry? Finance? The climate? Agriculture? Guess what we absolutely, positively must have.

Give up? Here’s a clue—it involves lots of tax money, lots of new bureaucrats, and lots of new rules and regulations.

Kolakowski was talking about different people in a different time and place. But the direction they want to go is the same, and the critique he offered has the same force.

I think your post is insightful.

I would go further. The “Chinese model” appeals to American statists for a lot of reasons. As China rises, its model will carry more prestige. The idea that an oligarchy of experts and self-selected managers should run things without too much concern about the subjects of their ministrations is very much what we see in both the EU and China. American politicians and intellectuals lust to have that same kind of power and influence. Mr. Obama has politely suggested that everyone who disagrees with him should shut up. Mrs. Pelosi has said that people who disagree with her carry swastika signs, that only she can see, but which must be there.

Rather, we have instituted socialism with Chinese characteristics, an unexpected case of the “new core setting the new rules” [1]

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2009/08/08/obama-the-socialist.html