Jonah Goldberg has an interesting political theory about dairy states.
Two possible partial historic explanations (i.e. guesses) come to mind. First, the sorts of people who historically went into dairy production were Scandinavian socialist types while the people who went into meat production were Scotch-Irish cowboy types.
Two: Perhaps dairy regulation occurred a lot earlier than meat regulation. This generated a culture of state-intervention and therefore a politics to match (or vice versa). Dairy also seems to be more about small-farmers and lots of labor, making it more prone to Populist appeals, while meat is run by wealthy ranchers and rugged cowboy types who have a more leave-me-alone ideology.
There’s also a more metaphorical – i.e. b.s. – theory: dairy is nurturing. It’s about sustainability. Dairy farmers can afford to fall in love with their cows. Making cows into steak, handburger and wallets requires more tough-mindedness. Dairy is soft America. Meat is hard America. Or Something Like That.
Why is this not a bigger story? Particularly in light of all the calls among many for the UN to do something about the current situation in the Middle East?
The Tongsun Park case has gotten remarkably little press, but it is both an important and a cautionary tale. It illustrates how easily the U.N., behind its veils of secrecy and diplomatic immunity, can be exploited by the most unscrupulous tyrants on the planet. And Mr. Park’s conviction is a warning to beware any “back channels” now running between the U.N. executive suite and such rogue states as North Korea and Iran.