(Editors note: Read part two and three and four) Consistency is the bugbear of small minds, and the Bush administration’s policies in many areas, the “War on Terrorâ€, the environment, energy, entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, taxation, deregulation and a host of others are all perfectly consistent and fall within a narrowly defined ideology. Everyone of its proposals and actions can be understood as a move to further enhance the wealth and consolidate the power of the large corporations and the super-rich.
At times, the program is effected by the wholesale direct transfer of government revenues to these corporate giants, such as the non-competitive war contracts, and Medicare Part D – both practically outright gifts to the defense industry and the big pharma, respectively; and, then, the scandalous reduction of taxation on those with very large incomes, and efforts to eliminate taxes on estates of over two million dollars (the first $2 million has been tax free for years) ought to give ordinary citizens pause.
If this is not enough to stimulate thought and action, we should not forget that this administration loathes entitlement programs, such as Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment Insurance, and has done everything in its power to undermine them with a goal of their eventual elimination. Do I need to mention the wholesale giveaway, with little or nothing asked in return, of our patrimony? Virtually every resource in the public domain was handed over, such as the electromagnetic spectrum to media and communications giants, timber and minerals to resource mega organizations, such as GP and Exxon.
On top of this there are the shameless subsidies to corporate farms and Cargill and ADM. In the area of regulations, the Bush administration has been super-friendly to the corporate hegemons. It has gone to great lengths to ensure that the laws on the books to protect the environment and population against corporate predation are not enforced, and it has invited them to rewrite regulations more to their satisfaction. The electric power industry was given leave to expand polluting coal-fired generation facilities in clear violation of law, and Detroit was permitted to continue the production and the tax-credit subsidized sale of huge gas guzzling SUVs. After years of no fuel efficiency standards for these vehicles, the 2007 standard has been set at 22.2 mpg, while the current European standard is 40 mpg.
As the intended consequence of all these efforts, to make our money their money, has succeeded we are now in the iron grip of a medical system that is bleeding us dry, a mass media whose content is every bit as controlled as that of China’s media, and an ever widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. The value of the Gini coefficient, a single number that measures economic inequality among citizens, for the US reached 45 in 2004, according to the CIA estimate. This value is exceeded only by the kleptocracies in Africa and Latin America. The much more egalitarian European nations average about 25. Worse, our environment and that of the rest of the world has been laid waste by this rapacious pursuit of profit.
But, why am I bothering to tell you what you already know, dear reader? Because, that you know these things yet continue living without political passion is the great enigma. What’s Wrong with Kansas? went far to explaining how voters had been persuaded to vote against their own interests in recent elections. I agree that the social issues that religious fundamentalists hold dear goes far toward explaining why poor people will vote Republican, but I think this explains only a little of the data. The most recent election, it may be argued, represents an arousal and a turning point, but it had nothing to do with the economic issues; it was all about the Iraqi war.
How does one explain the passivity of the Democatic party, the party that supposedly represents the middle-class and workers, in the face of the Republican program to steal everything? How does one explain the silent acquiescence of almost all Americans to being ripped off in broad daylight by a Republican Congress and President? How is it that the citizens of a democracy would fail to rouse themselves to turn out of office a governing cabal that lacked even a fig leaf of legitimacy? Why weren’t we so appalled that we did not take to the streets to get rid of office holders who represented no one but themselves and their rich friends? I think the answers to these questions have profound implications for our future and the future of the world, particularly in the question of whether the positive changes needed to solve the global warming crisis are politically possible. We’ll explore this issue further in part 2 of this series.
Nice diatribe. A couple of issues:
“efforts to eliminate taxes on estates of over two million dollars (the first $2 million has been tax free for years) ought to give ordinary citizens pause.”
When I die and leave the family farm to my children they will be responsible for taxes incurred by my untimely death. Not all inheiritance value is liquid. Not all intergenerational wealth accumulation is evil. You would have the very gov’t you decry take my money away from my family and give it to someone else.
“such as the electromagnetic spectrum to media and communications giants”
The companies involved bid for that spectrum and ended up paying billions of dollars – perhaps more than is economically reasonable (a side effect of the bidding process). Perhaps one of the reasons the cost of renting a cell phone hasn’t come down more that it has.
“you know these things yet continue living without political passion is the great enigma”
There is no political passion because people are comfortable and selecting a politician is like deciding between dumb and dumber.
“explaining why poor people will vote Republican”
Beware of labels. If you vote a straight party ticket you are taking the lazy way out. By not considering all candidates you are abdicating your power of choice. Thinking that one party is different than the other is like thinking there is a difference between blacks and whites – everyone is human and subject to the same weaknesses.
“Why weren’t we so appalled that we did not take to the streets to get rid of office holders who represented no one but themselves and their rich friends?”
We take to the polling booths, not the streets. Inciting mob mentality benefits only anarchy, not democracy. Streets are for show, dialog is for results.
Many of your points are spot on, others aren’t worth quibbling about (close but in need of refinement). It will be interesting to see what you offer in the way of solutions.
Russell, I think your first line would have been more powerful had you used the first part of that famous Emerson line “A FOOLISH” consistency. Ahh, and ‘staying the course’ has brought us so far! Rt, dialog is nice, but somehow I am losing trust daily of believing that these elected officials represent the views of the masses. Let us not forget the ‘mobs’ of people that participated in MLK events across the country in January of 2003 demonstrating their disagreement with the then faint glimmer that our troops would be sent overseas. However, I do agree that we all should ‘beware of labels’. …and of course, Russell, welcome to the fold!
dew, You really want to put a vitriolic assessment of one political administration on the same level as MLK’s rebuttal of institutionalized racism? This post was meant to incite, MLK was explanatory not inflamatory. In contrast to MLK’s peaceful speaches where he eloquently made the case for racial equality there were others who incited riots. The list is too long to mention but here are two lists (not all racially related) US Civil Unrest and the world where people turned to violence to air their griefs. This specific violence was between two political parties organized gangs. The end does not justify the means – that’s why I was waiting for proposed solutions from Russell.
Ghandi, allegedly MLK’s role model, made it more direct. He had an eloquent argument for the British, but he also had a simple instruction for the masses. If you don’t like British rule then don’t buy their stuff. “Economic rebellion” is a very powerful tool.
You said “dialog is nice, but somehow I am losing trust daily of believing that these elected officials represent the views of the masses.”. People get the government they deserve. If the pols are not delivering on promises then they have to be held accountable by the people who elected them. If someone else’s electected official isn’t doing what you want they may be doing what their constituants want – that’s why we all get to elect our own.
This is post, as it stands, is just a list of complaints about one administration. That’s why this country is better than you give it credit for, we get to complain openly. If you think control of the press is bad now you should have been around in the 1950s. I really think this administration would like to have lived in that time. Not so much George, he’s just a puppet, but the cabal who wish to remain anonymous. The problem is we are evolving into a plutocracy. We have not arrived but there are disturbing signs of us heading that way.
Hi Russell, welcome to The Sietch. I think you have just the right amount of passion to find solutions. I wrote a very similar article called “Why The Public Won’t Change”, which made similar points to yours, except I don’t believe this is a political issue, it goes far deeper to what we do (or don’t ) care about.
The solutions are complex, but I have made a placeholder, which I will be building on over the next few months. It’s partly based on “4 Essential Ways To Save The Earth”, with a lot more soya to the bones. Have a glance at http://www.thegreenprint.org.
Keith
Just give me my Football, NASCAR, and Beer and I’ll go along with almost anything.
Thanks fir asking.
Great post, looking forward to reading the rest of the series.
You said: “How is it that the citizens of a democracy would fail to rouse themselves to turn out of office a governing cabal that lacked even a fig leaf of legitimacy? Why weren’t we so appalled that we did not take to the streets to get rid of office holders who represented no one but themselves and their rich friends? ”
As an outside observer, I have been asking myselef those very same questions for years…