The Economist:
In a blog item on Saturday, before any significant details about Mr Loughner's motivations had come to light, Paul Krugman wrote:Espada:
You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.
This struck me as irresponsibly premature, and one might have thought that, given a little more time and information, Mr Krugman would change his tune, or at least turn down the volume. Nope. In today's column on America's alleged "climate of hate", Mr Krugman reports that he's been "expecting something like this atrocity to happen" since 2008, conjures in his fevered imagination a "rising tide of violence", and spots his hated political foes behind it all:
[I]t’s the saturation of our political discourse—and especially our airwaves—with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence. Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right.
What's more, unless the ranting right reins in the kind of talk that leaves Mr Krugman "with a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach", "Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning." Welcome to crazytown, my friends, where it does not seem crazy to disgorge toxic, entirely evidence-free rhetoric about the mortal threat of toxic rhetoric. Does the man honestly think he's helping?
La matanza de Arizona ya no se puede desvincular del Tea Party. Pero sólo porque Krugman lo ha dicho. Este es el hecho. El asombroso hecho. Por el momento no hay ningún otro hecho que vincule a Jared Lee Loughner con el clima de odio que denuncia Krugman. No debe de serlo, por ejemplo, el que la Policía haya descubierto que el jovencito ya preparó una matanza hace años, cuando el Tea Party era (¡sólo!) una sublevación fundacional de la nación americana. El hecho que construye Krugman pertenece a una extraña categoría de hechos no falsables: los que resultan de combinar las opiniones con el argumento de autoridad. Paradójicamente su carácter infalsable no los fragiliza. ¡Quia!: los blinda. La opinión de Krugman ya ha alcanzado el estadio plácido, invulnerable y amniótico de las opiniones del astrólogo. Y su devastadora influencia. Krugman. La inteligencia de la nación.
