Usually I get Krugman’s jokes, but this one is unclear to me. I’ll just give the whole blog post:
Mike Konczal has a post about Ron Paul’s first hearing on monetary policy, in which he points out that the lead witness is a big Lincoln-hater and defender of the Southern secession.
And it’s true! I went to his articles at Mises, and clicked more or less idly on the piece about American health care fascialism — I guess that’s supposed to be a milder term than fascism, although he seems to equate the two. And sure enough, he ends:
This is not likely to happen in the United States, which at the moment seems hell-bent on descending into the abyss of socialism. Once some states begin seceding from the new American fascialistic state, however, there will be opportunities to restore healthcare freedom within them.
I presume that Amity Shlaes is already working on her Lincoln assessment, The Even More Forgotten Man.
I know Robert Wenzel has posited an elaborate shape shifter / CFR connection, but I’m not sure that’s it. I think it’s possible that it is a joke fired from the hip, with the general tie-in being right wing morons who write books about presidents that get other right-wing morons all fired up.
But I’m saying, even working within that analogy, I don’t get the joke. So can the resident Krugman apologists explain it please?