Saturday, January 1, 2011
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Response: What happened to the GOP (circa 2007)
OK Eleua, a few thoughts follow. Feel free to rebut my rebuttal.
1. You claim that The GOP lost its base and is proud of it and If you stray from the mold of the perfect Republican, you are not wanted, nor are you needed. I agree. Evidence follows. First, we had a fine GOP candidate for president in 2000, John McCain. He was soundly rejected by “the base” as being too moderate. In his place we got Bush junior. This was the new “base” voicing contempt for moderate views. The 2008 election was McCain redux. Having learned his lesson in 2000, McCain selected Sarah Palin for the sole purpose of appealing to the base. She did shore up the base, but also ensured that many moderate members of the GOP voted Obama or sat out the election. After Obama’s win (and let’s face it, after Bush/Cheney no GOP candidate had a chance) the prescription for the GOP by talking heads like Rush Limbaugh was to move farther right rather than recoup the moderate middle. Senator Arlen Specter was forced out of the GOP in 2009 for being too moderate. The congressional election in district 23 in New York went to a democrat due to right wing GOP meddling. Why? The initial GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafava, was too moderate. The democratic candidate won and the base rejoiced at its new purity, in spite of losing a seat in congress. So, which “base” are you talking about? Is it the uncompromising ultra-right wing base or the independent folks in the middle? It sounds like you’re saying that the GOP lost you (it certainly did me) by rejecting everyone that was not the perfect Republican. That means not conservative enough, which brings me to….
2. What are the qualifications for being “conservative?” You list how you qualify as a great Republican. Let’s see if I can recap it properly: You’re a white guy with a family, pro-life, pro-guns, anti-immigrant, and anti-affirmative action. The only thing you left out was putting God into politics and you could’ve won the GOP blue ribbon. That oversight notwithstanding, I agree, these do seem to be the current qualifications for being a “conservative” in today’s GOP. These are also the reasons I think the GOP has a limited life—a foundation of exclusion. My GOP qualifications are nearly identical. On the issues, however, I’m a bad Republican. I too am pro-life, like every person I’ve ever met, but I don’t think that a bunch of powerful white guys should make procreation decisions for every woman in the land. (I’m incensed by the pro-life label because the implication is that everyone else—exclusion again—somehow gleefully desires the ending of a pregnancy. I’ve never met a pro-abortion person, but I have met many people who don’t think that they should decide this issue for all women.) This single issue represents one of the fatal pitfalls of the conservative base—it has become the issue for the base, to the neglect of almost all others. (See What’s the Matter with Kansas by Tom Franks for a complete discussion of this phenomenon.) I’m also ‘wrong’ on the immigration debate. Illegal immigrants are here, and keep coming, because businesses seeking cheap labor employ them. Again, look at the incentive. Illegals wouldn’t come if there wasn’t a place for them to work and improve their lives. My real problem with the immigrant issue is that it is often ill-disguised racism. I think there are some serious issues with illegal immigration (think Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations), but I do not support an “us against them” mentality. We’ll explore this topic more in depth in the future.
3. In years past, I would have been a great Republican. Not so in the Neo-conservative movement. I’m not sure the Neo-con movement is the correct label for what has happened to the GOP. In general, the neo-cons provide the intellectual backstop for foreign policy and the wielding of American power. I’m talking about Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Richard Pearle, Paul Wohlfowitz, and company. I’ve actually been looking into this phenomenon for several years now—how a neo-con (neo=new and con=conservative) can embrace essentially liberal ideals of globalized meddling and call it “conservative.” I don’t believe that there is anything conservative about the neo-cons. Conservative thoughts on power are to have enough of it, but keep it home and ready until called upon to unleash a overwhelming can of whoop-ass. I’ll address this topic in greater detail in a full post later. In the meantime, check out The Forty Years War: The Rise and Fall of the Neocons, from Nixon to Obama by Len Colodny and Tom Shachtman.
4. With regard to our politicians’ being cozy in bed with Wall Street and embracing globalization with open arms and frenzied breathing, I completely agree. That's what I don't understand about the modern GOP, you say. I’m right there with you, but I think we can understand it. My method of truth in these days of nothing-but-spin-and-talking-points media “news” coverage is to rely on logic. My brain, and those of my fellow Americans, still works. A lot of our brains are rusty, but clean off the cobwebs and lubricate the creaky joints and we’ll all be better off for it. That is the purpose of this blog—to incite people to think for themselves. My simple method is to ask who has the incentive to take what action? So, we all agree that politicians are in bed with money. That’s their incentive and makes perfect sense (and it also won’t go away until money is taken out of politics—perhaps the only action that can save our sinking democracy. More on that in a later post.) So we know what the politicians will do each and every time—they’ll act in favor of those who have bought and paid for them. (For a fun intellectual exercise, go to http://www.opensecrets.org and see who owns your politician. Then, check their voting record to see how closely it matches the interests of those who own them. It’s an eye opener….) The business side of the equation is equally simple to assess. The incentive is profit (for the company/shareholders and the CEO/management). It follows that they want the freedom to increase their bottom line. This entails everything from keeping workers’ wages as low as possible (Wal-Mart), to moving money off shore in tax shelters that their politicians provide for them, to moving production (assuming that anyone produces material goods in America these days) to a poor country where wages are dirt cheap, thus taking care of the pesky workers’ wages problem once and for all. This is a serious issue and deserves its own post later. For now, however, interested parties can reference The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas Friedman. I have serious issues with his analysis, but he has been the major voice trumpeting the grandness and inevitability of globalization. It seems to be the paradigm of our time, but I fear that we’ve embraced it prematurely and are reaping some negative repercussions as a result of this headlong rush into the unknown. As you point out, there is an impact on American jobs, our economic base, and the future prosperity (or poverty) of our country.
1. You claim that The GOP lost its base and is proud of it and If you stray from the mold of the perfect Republican, you are not wanted, nor are you needed. I agree. Evidence follows. First, we had a fine GOP candidate for president in 2000, John McCain. He was soundly rejected by “the base” as being too moderate. In his place we got Bush junior. This was the new “base” voicing contempt for moderate views. The 2008 election was McCain redux. Having learned his lesson in 2000, McCain selected Sarah Palin for the sole purpose of appealing to the base. She did shore up the base, but also ensured that many moderate members of the GOP voted Obama or sat out the election. After Obama’s win (and let’s face it, after Bush/Cheney no GOP candidate had a chance) the prescription for the GOP by talking heads like Rush Limbaugh was to move farther right rather than recoup the moderate middle. Senator Arlen Specter was forced out of the GOP in 2009 for being too moderate. The congressional election in district 23 in New York went to a democrat due to right wing GOP meddling. Why? The initial GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafava, was too moderate. The democratic candidate won and the base rejoiced at its new purity, in spite of losing a seat in congress. So, which “base” are you talking about? Is it the uncompromising ultra-right wing base or the independent folks in the middle? It sounds like you’re saying that the GOP lost you (it certainly did me) by rejecting everyone that was not the perfect Republican. That means not conservative enough, which brings me to….
2. What are the qualifications for being “conservative?” You list how you qualify as a great Republican. Let’s see if I can recap it properly: You’re a white guy with a family, pro-life, pro-guns, anti-immigrant, and anti-affirmative action. The only thing you left out was putting God into politics and you could’ve won the GOP blue ribbon. That oversight notwithstanding, I agree, these do seem to be the current qualifications for being a “conservative” in today’s GOP. These are also the reasons I think the GOP has a limited life—a foundation of exclusion. My GOP qualifications are nearly identical. On the issues, however, I’m a bad Republican. I too am pro-life, like every person I’ve ever met, but I don’t think that a bunch of powerful white guys should make procreation decisions for every woman in the land. (I’m incensed by the pro-life label because the implication is that everyone else—exclusion again—somehow gleefully desires the ending of a pregnancy. I’ve never met a pro-abortion person, but I have met many people who don’t think that they should decide this issue for all women.) This single issue represents one of the fatal pitfalls of the conservative base—it has become the issue for the base, to the neglect of almost all others. (See What’s the Matter with Kansas by Tom Franks for a complete discussion of this phenomenon.) I’m also ‘wrong’ on the immigration debate. Illegal immigrants are here, and keep coming, because businesses seeking cheap labor employ them. Again, look at the incentive. Illegals wouldn’t come if there wasn’t a place for them to work and improve their lives. My real problem with the immigrant issue is that it is often ill-disguised racism. I think there are some serious issues with illegal immigration (think Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations), but I do not support an “us against them” mentality. We’ll explore this topic more in depth in the future.
3. In years past, I would have been a great Republican. Not so in the Neo-conservative movement. I’m not sure the Neo-con movement is the correct label for what has happened to the GOP. In general, the neo-cons provide the intellectual backstop for foreign policy and the wielding of American power. I’m talking about Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Richard Pearle, Paul Wohlfowitz, and company. I’ve actually been looking into this phenomenon for several years now—how a neo-con (neo=new and con=conservative) can embrace essentially liberal ideals of globalized meddling and call it “conservative.” I don’t believe that there is anything conservative about the neo-cons. Conservative thoughts on power are to have enough of it, but keep it home and ready until called upon to unleash a overwhelming can of whoop-ass. I’ll address this topic in greater detail in a full post later. In the meantime, check out The Forty Years War: The Rise and Fall of the Neocons, from Nixon to Obama by Len Colodny and Tom Shachtman.
4. With regard to our politicians’ being cozy in bed with Wall Street and embracing globalization with open arms and frenzied breathing, I completely agree. That's what I don't understand about the modern GOP, you say. I’m right there with you, but I think we can understand it. My method of truth in these days of nothing-but-spin-and-talking-points media “news” coverage is to rely on logic. My brain, and those of my fellow Americans, still works. A lot of our brains are rusty, but clean off the cobwebs and lubricate the creaky joints and we’ll all be better off for it. That is the purpose of this blog—to incite people to think for themselves. My simple method is to ask who has the incentive to take what action? So, we all agree that politicians are in bed with money. That’s their incentive and makes perfect sense (and it also won’t go away until money is taken out of politics—perhaps the only action that can save our sinking democracy. More on that in a later post.) So we know what the politicians will do each and every time—they’ll act in favor of those who have bought and paid for them. (For a fun intellectual exercise, go to http://www.opensecrets.org and see who owns your politician. Then, check their voting record to see how closely it matches the interests of those who own them. It’s an eye opener….) The business side of the equation is equally simple to assess. The incentive is profit (for the company/shareholders and the CEO/management). It follows that they want the freedom to increase their bottom line. This entails everything from keeping workers’ wages as low as possible (Wal-Mart), to moving money off shore in tax shelters that their politicians provide for them, to moving production (assuming that anyone produces material goods in America these days) to a poor country where wages are dirt cheap, thus taking care of the pesky workers’ wages problem once and for all. This is a serious issue and deserves its own post later. For now, however, interested parties can reference The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas Friedman. I have serious issues with his analysis, but he has been the major voice trumpeting the grandness and inevitability of globalization. It seems to be the paradigm of our time, but I fear that we’ve embraced it prematurely and are reaping some negative repercussions as a result of this headlong rush into the unknown. As you point out, there is an impact on American jobs, our economic base, and the future prosperity (or poverty) of our country.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
What Happened To The GOP (circa 2007)
(The following was written back in 2007 when the GOP lost the Congressional elections and was left wondering how that happened. Some of the rantings below are not as realistic as they seemed at the time of the writing, but the larger point survives. How the GOP deals with this phenomenon will determine their success at the polls in next three cycles. It is my opinion that their response will also determine the direction of America.)
Now that Nancy Pelosi is going to be Speaker of the House, Republicans can take this time to figure out just why they no longer are the majority party.
I'll save everyone the hassle. The GOP lost its base, and is proud of it.
Conservatives are getting harder and harder to find. Not that America is getting any more liberal, it's just harder for conservatives to find space in that 'big tent' we all thought was the GOP. If you stray from the mold of the perfect Republican, you are not wanted, nor are you needed.
Take me for example. In years past, I would have been a great Republican. Not so in the Neo-conservative movement. Here are reasons the GOP would normally love to have me voting for them:
-30 something
-Married - first wife
-Three kids
-Northern European ancestry
-English speaker
-High School graduate
-College graduate
-Former delegate to the California State GOP Convention
-Young Americans for Freedom chapter officer.
-Pro-life
-Very pro gun
-10 year naval officer
-Combat veteran
-Anti-affirmative action
-VERY, VERY, VERY anti-illegal immigrant
-Rush Limbaugh listener for the last 17 years
-Advocates abolishing the Federal Income Tax in every form
-Advocates abolishing most federal welfare assistance
Here is why the GOP hates me:
I'm a union member (Allied Pilots Association).
I hate the Wal-Martization of America.
Yep. The GOP has essentially aligned itself with the Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street, and told anyone that opposes the unholy alliance between Wall Street/Globalization/Government that they are not "true conservatives" and only want our economy to suffer.
Really? Is that so? Every time I turn on Limbaugh/Hannity/Medved, I hear about how this economy is the best in human history - not just recent times in America, but the best in human history. We don't have to infer that we owe all our gratitude for living in this Horn of Plenty to the modern GOP and its business puppet masters.
First off, the economy isn't the best ever. It's not bad, but bubble economies are always good on the upslope. It's that downdraft that is the stinker. The economy is riding on the bow-wave of the national Housing Bubble, and as it unwinds, the first consumer recession since 1991 will get underway. Pointing this out to a national talk show host will only get you smeared into "wanting" the economy to crumble. It's the logic of saying in mid-October that winter is on the way and being accused of wanting crappy weather.
Such is the dialogue on national talk radio. I was listening to Rush's stand-in, Rodger Hedgecock, and he would not entertain any conservative calling in to point out that globalization is killing American industry. Rather than agreeing to the obvious, he said - and I am not making this up - that those Goodyear workers that are on strike in Kansas because their wages are being cut from $25/hr to $15/hr are "sucking the last drop of blood" from their employer. Their employer wants to move to Mexico, where they don't have to pay American-class wages and benefits, but still want access to American-class consumer dollars.
He went on to say that San Diego found the solution. As aerospace went into decline, bio-med and Qualcomm stepped in to save the day. All of this was due to their investment in the UCSD. That's the future of America. Great. We are now so tone-deaf to middle America that we are telling them to go to college and play with test tubes and cell phones.
That works if you have the mental firepower and finances to go to a nice school, but how are we going to get 300,000,000 people through universities so they can have these sexy jobs? Doesn't someone have to build a tire?
That's what I don't understand about the modern GOP. I guess the model for America is we will be a nation of holding companies, insurance sales, and financial engineers. We will import just about the entire Third-world to do our laundry, mow our lawns, paint our houses, and work retail. Somehow, employers that have off-shored their workforce will save enough money to pay taxes to support the enormous social welfare benefits these underpaid, Third world workers will need to survive.
I wonder how the peasant workforce votes? I wonder how someone who makes $50K/yr with decent benefits votes? I wonder how they will vote if they are making $30K/yr with no benefits?
Yes, the GOP is the only party stupid enough to drive through the barrio and see the throngs of gangsta-fied Mexican males and think "Wow! Look at all those social conservative Republicans," while looking at union members that want a living suitable to raise a family without government welfare and think, "What a bunch of anti-American, communist, lazy sacks-of-crap."
The question comes down to "why?" Why are Republicans so stupid about their base? Easy - MONEY. Who pays for the GOP? Business interests. Business hates unions, as every dollar that goes into an employee's pocket, is one less dollar that goes into the owner's pocket. In the case of Wall Street, the amount of graft a chieftain can extract from the corporation, in the form of options, is multiplied from savings on the bottom line.
Also, how dare an uneducated union member stand up to the mighty management team. Who do they think they are? After all, the middle manager went to UCSD, and was discovering the wonders of the beer bong, wet T-shirt contests, and war protests, while the union member was serving his country in Kuwait, or working the graveyard shift at that same company, while starting a young family.
Limbaugh/Hannity/Medved all carped about how dumb the electorate was. The talking heads couldn't figure out that just because Wall Street was on a rip, doesn't mean that Joe Six-pack wasn't fearful that his job was going to China or to a Mexican. "Gas Prices! Record DOW JONES! Only 2700 dead G.I.s! Saddam got the death penalty! Record low unemployment!" Such is the perspective of someone in Palm Beach, New York, or Mercer Island. When you are at the top of your profession, and make the money that many "conservative" talk-show hosts make, you don't care if gas is $2/gallon or $20/gallon, but if you are making $50K and staring down the gun at a 40% pay cut, $2.20 gas isn't much better than $3.00. If you and your children never served in the military, 2700 dead servicemen is a punch line, but if your son is in Iraq, because he can't afford the college education that Hedgecock says is necessary for the future of America, it is an ulcer inducing nightmare.
Then there is the war. Yes, the war...You know, the war of liberation of Iraq. The war where we were going to be greeted with throngs of Arabs that were grateful their dictator has been deposed. It is the war of the Neo-con dipsticks that actually believe campaign rhetoric of the universal yearning of mom, apple-pie, and Chevrolet among the world's peasant miscreants.
Junior sold us on the Eternal Global War on Terrorism, and somehow we are still allowing Saudi Arabia to blow in our ear. Weapons of Mass Destruction (post WW2 weapons) are in the hands of an unstable, anti-American dictator that is starving his people and threatening our allies (and it's a real threat), but Kim Jong Il is being protected by the massive economic and military umbrella of the Communist Chinese, which is being supported by the massive economic infusion from corporate America.
I guess the war plan was supposed to go like this:
We invade.
Have a nation-wide celebration and election (Iraq).
Have a world-wide Triumph and ride the orgasm all the way to election season (America).
Hope the Iraqi ethnic troubles are better than the ones in America and don't divide the country.
Hope Iran doesn't take advantage of the chaos to its west.
Hope all that oil stays in stable hands.
I guess Junior didn't understand that while Iraqis hate Hussein, they hate us more. Iran hated Hussein, but they kept their distance. Now, they are using the display of American lack of resolve as a golden invitation to develop their own WMD. My guess is they have Putin in their back pocket, and know that if they make a move, and we attempt to counter, Putin will step in and we will retreat. This will result in permanent American impotence in the world's most important region during the petro-chemical era.
The reason the Iraq war is a failure has nothing to do with military competence, but a failure of leadership and vision. One area is troop strength. We don't have enough to occupy the country, resulting in a futile game of Whack-a-mole.
Second, we lack a long-term vision of the country. Iraq is a construct without respect to ethnic concerns. This is not a matter of busing inner-city schools, but ethnic divisions that go back centuries. This is a deadly hatred. Iraq is three nations that were pacified by a ruthless dictator, much like Yugoslavia under Tito. We had to replace that force with another. Right now, that force is the US government. Wonder why we are hated? Our successor will either be killed, or will be as ruthless as Saddam. There is no other way.
Third, the rest of the Arab/Persian world is just waiting for a power vacuum to exist, and if it exists in the context of flaccid American resolve, all the better.
Americans know when their leadership sucks. Bankrupt, humiliated, and insulted isn't exactly the mindset of a confident GOP voter.
Now that Nancy Pelosi is going to be Speaker of the House, Republicans can take this time to figure out just why they no longer are the majority party.
I'll save everyone the hassle. The GOP lost its base, and is proud of it.
Conservatives are getting harder and harder to find. Not that America is getting any more liberal, it's just harder for conservatives to find space in that 'big tent' we all thought was the GOP. If you stray from the mold of the perfect Republican, you are not wanted, nor are you needed.
Take me for example. In years past, I would have been a great Republican. Not so in the Neo-conservative movement. Here are reasons the GOP would normally love to have me voting for them:
-30 something
-Married - first wife
-Three kids
-Northern European ancestry
-English speaker
-High School graduate
-College graduate
-Former delegate to the California State GOP Convention
-Young Americans for Freedom chapter officer.
-Pro-life
-Very pro gun
-10 year naval officer
-Combat veteran
-Anti-affirmative action
-VERY, VERY, VERY anti-illegal immigrant
-Rush Limbaugh listener for the last 17 years
-Advocates abolishing the Federal Income Tax in every form
-Advocates abolishing most federal welfare assistance
Here is why the GOP hates me:
I'm a union member (Allied Pilots Association).
I hate the Wal-Martization of America.
Yep. The GOP has essentially aligned itself with the Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street, and told anyone that opposes the unholy alliance between Wall Street/Globalization/Government that they are not "true conservatives" and only want our economy to suffer.
Really? Is that so? Every time I turn on Limbaugh/Hannity/Medved, I hear about how this economy is the best in human history - not just recent times in America, but the best in human history. We don't have to infer that we owe all our gratitude for living in this Horn of Plenty to the modern GOP and its business puppet masters.
First off, the economy isn't the best ever. It's not bad, but bubble economies are always good on the upslope. It's that downdraft that is the stinker. The economy is riding on the bow-wave of the national Housing Bubble, and as it unwinds, the first consumer recession since 1991 will get underway. Pointing this out to a national talk show host will only get you smeared into "wanting" the economy to crumble. It's the logic of saying in mid-October that winter is on the way and being accused of wanting crappy weather.
Such is the dialogue on national talk radio. I was listening to Rush's stand-in, Rodger Hedgecock, and he would not entertain any conservative calling in to point out that globalization is killing American industry. Rather than agreeing to the obvious, he said - and I am not making this up - that those Goodyear workers that are on strike in Kansas because their wages are being cut from $25/hr to $15/hr are "sucking the last drop of blood" from their employer. Their employer wants to move to Mexico, where they don't have to pay American-class wages and benefits, but still want access to American-class consumer dollars.
He went on to say that San Diego found the solution. As aerospace went into decline, bio-med and Qualcomm stepped in to save the day. All of this was due to their investment in the UCSD. That's the future of America. Great. We are now so tone-deaf to middle America that we are telling them to go to college and play with test tubes and cell phones.
That works if you have the mental firepower and finances to go to a nice school, but how are we going to get 300,000,000 people through universities so they can have these sexy jobs? Doesn't someone have to build a tire?
That's what I don't understand about the modern GOP. I guess the model for America is we will be a nation of holding companies, insurance sales, and financial engineers. We will import just about the entire Third-world to do our laundry, mow our lawns, paint our houses, and work retail. Somehow, employers that have off-shored their workforce will save enough money to pay taxes to support the enormous social welfare benefits these underpaid, Third world workers will need to survive.
I wonder how the peasant workforce votes? I wonder how someone who makes $50K/yr with decent benefits votes? I wonder how they will vote if they are making $30K/yr with no benefits?
Yes, the GOP is the only party stupid enough to drive through the barrio and see the throngs of gangsta-fied Mexican males and think "Wow! Look at all those social conservative Republicans," while looking at union members that want a living suitable to raise a family without government welfare and think, "What a bunch of anti-American, communist, lazy sacks-of-crap."
The question comes down to "why?" Why are Republicans so stupid about their base? Easy - MONEY. Who pays for the GOP? Business interests. Business hates unions, as every dollar that goes into an employee's pocket, is one less dollar that goes into the owner's pocket. In the case of Wall Street, the amount of graft a chieftain can extract from the corporation, in the form of options, is multiplied from savings on the bottom line.
Also, how dare an uneducated union member stand up to the mighty management team. Who do they think they are? After all, the middle manager went to UCSD, and was discovering the wonders of the beer bong, wet T-shirt contests, and war protests, while the union member was serving his country in Kuwait, or working the graveyard shift at that same company, while starting a young family.
Limbaugh/Hannity/Medved all carped about how dumb the electorate was. The talking heads couldn't figure out that just because Wall Street was on a rip, doesn't mean that Joe Six-pack wasn't fearful that his job was going to China or to a Mexican. "Gas Prices! Record DOW JONES! Only 2700 dead G.I.s! Saddam got the death penalty! Record low unemployment!" Such is the perspective of someone in Palm Beach, New York, or Mercer Island. When you are at the top of your profession, and make the money that many "conservative" talk-show hosts make, you don't care if gas is $2/gallon or $20/gallon, but if you are making $50K and staring down the gun at a 40% pay cut, $2.20 gas isn't much better than $3.00. If you and your children never served in the military, 2700 dead servicemen is a punch line, but if your son is in Iraq, because he can't afford the college education that Hedgecock says is necessary for the future of America, it is an ulcer inducing nightmare.
Then there is the war. Yes, the war...You know, the war of liberation of Iraq. The war where we were going to be greeted with throngs of Arabs that were grateful their dictator has been deposed. It is the war of the Neo-con dipsticks that actually believe campaign rhetoric of the universal yearning of mom, apple-pie, and Chevrolet among the world's peasant miscreants.
Junior sold us on the Eternal Global War on Terrorism, and somehow we are still allowing Saudi Arabia to blow in our ear. Weapons of Mass Destruction (post WW2 weapons) are in the hands of an unstable, anti-American dictator that is starving his people and threatening our allies (and it's a real threat), but Kim Jong Il is being protected by the massive economic and military umbrella of the Communist Chinese, which is being supported by the massive economic infusion from corporate America.
I guess the war plan was supposed to go like this:
We invade.
Have a nation-wide celebration and election (Iraq).
Have a world-wide Triumph and ride the orgasm all the way to election season (America).
Hope the Iraqi ethnic troubles are better than the ones in America and don't divide the country.
Hope Iran doesn't take advantage of the chaos to its west.
Hope all that oil stays in stable hands.
I guess Junior didn't understand that while Iraqis hate Hussein, they hate us more. Iran hated Hussein, but they kept their distance. Now, they are using the display of American lack of resolve as a golden invitation to develop their own WMD. My guess is they have Putin in their back pocket, and know that if they make a move, and we attempt to counter, Putin will step in and we will retreat. This will result in permanent American impotence in the world's most important region during the petro-chemical era.
The reason the Iraq war is a failure has nothing to do with military competence, but a failure of leadership and vision. One area is troop strength. We don't have enough to occupy the country, resulting in a futile game of Whack-a-mole.
Second, we lack a long-term vision of the country. Iraq is a construct without respect to ethnic concerns. This is not a matter of busing inner-city schools, but ethnic divisions that go back centuries. This is a deadly hatred. Iraq is three nations that were pacified by a ruthless dictator, much like Yugoslavia under Tito. We had to replace that force with another. Right now, that force is the US government. Wonder why we are hated? Our successor will either be killed, or will be as ruthless as Saddam. There is no other way.
Third, the rest of the Arab/Persian world is just waiting for a power vacuum to exist, and if it exists in the context of flaccid American resolve, all the better.
Americans know when their leadership sucks. Bankrupt, humiliated, and insulted isn't exactly the mindset of a confident GOP voter.
Final Days of American Democracy?
This blog seeks to encourage Americans to rediscover the art of thinking. I am astounded each and every day to hear political discussions that contain very little truth. Specifically, those on the right of the political spectrum regurgitate whatever they've heard Fox "News" broadcast in the past few days while those on the political left pay similar homage to MSNBC's latest propaganda. Our "news" media have failed us on a monumental scale, but more on that at a later time.
Most of the people I know proclaim some level of independence of thought and action. Unfortunately, however, many of them do not exercise that freedom of thought. They think they do, they want to, but the demands of daily life get in the way. A bumper sticker I saw says it all, 'Thinking is Hard.'
Well, this is a call for Americans to begin challenging the accepted wisdom because the evidence is overwhelming that the accepted wisdom isn't very wise. A small list of current affairs illustrates what happens when accepted wisdom isn't intellectually challenged. People tend to believe (with incredible passion, mind you) that:
1. A free market founded on greed alone will somehow serve all Americans rather than just those with enough money to buy political favors via campaign contributions (or direct bribes).
2. This free market doesn't need regulation because it can regulate itself--with greed, America's driving and most treasured principle...apparently.
3. Any sort of government action is "socialism," "communisim," "Naziism," etc. In spite of how much people benefit from common laws, regulations for safety, and infrastructure that we all use daily.
4. America can only be safe through a position of military strength and global adventurism. All who disagree with an imperial America are "traitors" or not "patriots." There is no room for discourse (like our founding Fathers engaged in). "You are either with us or against us," to use a quote that will likely (hopefully) go down in infamy.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. While it sounds initially like an indictment of the Bush/Cheney era, there is plenty of critical thought to go around. The current democratic party controlled government suffers from many of the same problems. In the days ahead, I hope to challenge Americans to start thinking again. My very pointed challenge to all who will accept it is to begin looking for truth behind the story. Ask yourself who has what incentive (sort of a "follow the money" approach). When Anne Coulter claims that she can somehow devine who is or is not a "patriot," ask why that is. (Treason by Anne Coulter. I can't recommend this book to anyone--straight propaganda that flies in the face of all scholarly work.) What if our country has gone terribly astray and everyone is trying desparately to be a "patriot?" Do we give a president cart blanche to go to war with whomever he chooses? (We did.) What if Keith Olberman levels charges that a recently elected Republican Senator is racist, sexist, etc? (He did.) Should we accept that at face value because it came to us through something called a news channel on television?
Of course not. We should think. We must think. Otherwise, our democracy is in its final days.
Suggested reading:
1) What's the Matter with Kansas by Thomas Frank--A must read for anyone who has ever wondered why people vote against their own interests (although they don't seem to think or know that they're voting against their own interests.) The theme of this book really gets at the heart of what this blog is about--how to get our fellow Americans to start thinking with their minds, not their passions.
2) Moral Minority by Brooke Allen--What everyone should know about "Our Skeptical Founding Fathers" (the subtitle of the book). Challenges the dubious claim that this is a "Christian" nation. Rather, our founding fathers had a healthy fear of religion in politics--something I think we need to revisit.
3) Nemesis by Chalmers Johnson--I disagree with the anti-military tone, but a critical evaluation of his evidence is revealing, and alarming.
Most of the people I know proclaim some level of independence of thought and action. Unfortunately, however, many of them do not exercise that freedom of thought. They think they do, they want to, but the demands of daily life get in the way. A bumper sticker I saw says it all, 'Thinking is Hard.'
Well, this is a call for Americans to begin challenging the accepted wisdom because the evidence is overwhelming that the accepted wisdom isn't very wise. A small list of current affairs illustrates what happens when accepted wisdom isn't intellectually challenged. People tend to believe (with incredible passion, mind you) that:
1. A free market founded on greed alone will somehow serve all Americans rather than just those with enough money to buy political favors via campaign contributions (or direct bribes).
2. This free market doesn't need regulation because it can regulate itself--with greed, America's driving and most treasured principle...apparently.
3. Any sort of government action is "socialism," "communisim," "Naziism," etc. In spite of how much people benefit from common laws, regulations for safety, and infrastructure that we all use daily.
4. America can only be safe through a position of military strength and global adventurism. All who disagree with an imperial America are "traitors" or not "patriots." There is no room for discourse (like our founding Fathers engaged in). "You are either with us or against us," to use a quote that will likely (hopefully) go down in infamy.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. While it sounds initially like an indictment of the Bush/Cheney era, there is plenty of critical thought to go around. The current democratic party controlled government suffers from many of the same problems. In the days ahead, I hope to challenge Americans to start thinking again. My very pointed challenge to all who will accept it is to begin looking for truth behind the story. Ask yourself who has what incentive (sort of a "follow the money" approach). When Anne Coulter claims that she can somehow devine who is or is not a "patriot," ask why that is. (Treason by Anne Coulter. I can't recommend this book to anyone--straight propaganda that flies in the face of all scholarly work.) What if our country has gone terribly astray and everyone is trying desparately to be a "patriot?" Do we give a president cart blanche to go to war with whomever he chooses? (We did.) What if Keith Olberman levels charges that a recently elected Republican Senator is racist, sexist, etc? (He did.) Should we accept that at face value because it came to us through something called a news channel on television?
Of course not. We should think. We must think. Otherwise, our democracy is in its final days.
Suggested reading:
1) What's the Matter with Kansas by Thomas Frank--A must read for anyone who has ever wondered why people vote against their own interests (although they don't seem to think or know that they're voting against their own interests.) The theme of this book really gets at the heart of what this blog is about--how to get our fellow Americans to start thinking with their minds, not their passions.
2) Moral Minority by Brooke Allen--What everyone should know about "Our Skeptical Founding Fathers" (the subtitle of the book). Challenges the dubious claim that this is a "Christian" nation. Rather, our founding fathers had a healthy fear of religion in politics--something I think we need to revisit.
3) Nemesis by Chalmers Johnson--I disagree with the anti-military tone, but a critical evaluation of his evidence is revealing, and alarming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)