Light Bulb Nihilism

Margaret Carlson thinks that some Republicans' opposition to the impending incandescent light bulb ban is evidence that the party has become "unmoored." This is just one more example, she argues, of how Republicans have come to identify themselves solely by what they are against.

Apparently for her, being in favor of freedom and choice is the same as being in favor of nothing at all.

Writers for the New York Times have similarly categorized opposition to the Obama agenda as nihilism. In other words, to oppose progressivism is to reject all notions of political reality and meaning.

Of course, most Republicans are hardly as anti-government as Carlson and the Times make them out to be. Take the recent debate between the two Republican front-runners as an example. Romney attacked Perry for calling Social Security a "Ponzi Scheme," and pledged to save the program. Perry, on the other hand, refused to stand unequivocally behind behind his previous rhetoric and backed away from the idea that Social Security should be a state responsibility. Add in the two candidates' similar positions on Medicare, their support for the police state, and their belligerent foreign policy views, and you have two solidly pro-government ideologies.

But Carlson is worried that some recent criticism of light bulb socialism is a sign that the Republican Party is embracing some kind of nihilistic anarchism. If any of the establishment candidates wins the presidency, she should rest easy.