Bob Wire Has a Point (It's Under His Cowboy Hat)
Democracy Is All Washed Up
By Bob Wire, 12-22-10
 |
|
 | |
| The first Jheri curls, circa 1776. | |
|
The 235-year-old experiment called “democracy” is definitely nearing the end of a long and crazy run. Hey, nobody thought it was going to last forever, any more than the Colts were going to keep winning 12 games every year. Democracy is done.
You want proof? Look no further than the 2008 Presidential election and the ensuing, utterly predictable response from the testy losers. Like a bunch of pug-nosed neighborhood brats, Congressional Republicans threaten to take their ball and go home every time a bill is proposed by a Democrat. They told President Obama they’d do exactly that just days into his first term. Why do these stubborn, myopic “leaders” insist on reducing their public service to the effectiveness of a doorstop? It’s not because they’re pursuing the best idea, or even, in many cases, what they think is right. They either have to vote in a manner that will please their corporate overlords, or they mindlessly oppose the Democrats simply because they want their party to prevail.
A good friend of mine (who is every bit as deep and focused as I am broad and shallow) recently reminded me that the Founding Fathers, the framers of our faltering democratic construct, were all rich fat cats just like they are today. The difference, he said, is that back in the 18th century, the country’s leaders were free to serve at the pleasure of their conscience. They weren’t toadies to the huge corporations that shape our government today. Look at what drives their every move now: money. Money and power. Money and power and Johnny Walker Black. With corporations pouring tsunamis of dough into various war chests that fund the politicians who do their bidding, the voice of the real electorate, you and me, has been drowned in roiling sea of greasy cash.
Naïve? Simplistic? Overly cynical, you say? Indulgently metaphorical? Whatever. I like to look at the Big Picture. Trends, polls and statistical minutiae can be manipulated and cherry-picked to reflect whatever you want them to, so in the long run the short-term stuff is largely small. Kind of like the contradictory reports that come out every few months that say coffee is good/bad for you. The devil may be in the details, but I’d rather focus on the forest than the trees.
Narrow ideologies make it easy (if not entirely proper) to generalize. The Republican doctrine holds that money is more important than people, and their voting pattern bears that out. The same geniuses who couldn’t wait to dole out hundreds of billions of fictional dollars to bail out their exec buddies on Wall Street and in the auto industry are balking at providing health care coverage to 9/11 first responders. That is some cold, heartless shit. Thomas Jefferson must be spinning in his grave so fast that he’s affecting the rotation of the earth.
But the touchy-feely Democrats have screwed things up in their own inimitable way. Despite the overwhelming optimism and good faith engendered by the election of our first black President, a liberal Democrat, no less, Harry Reid could not marshal the support to back him up. Democrats need to dig in against Republican opposition to their legislative proposals, but tug-of-war is a difficult game when you have no spine. They should change their party symbol from a donkey to a picture of Barney Fife.
Granted, President Obama has achieved some major objectives, from averting a global financial crisis to crafting a national health care bill, but it’s all been watered down and compromised and earmarked so heavily that true effectiveness is largely an illusion. The Health Care reform bill, for example, fell victim to the Republican knife when they insisted on performing a last-minute single-payer-ectomy, even though two-thirds of the country wanted it in there. But Republicans were adamant that doctors keep making as much money as failed financial CEO’s.
Obama’s election was our best shot. Many voters supported Obama because he promised to end the war(s). So we finally pulled out of Bush’s Excellent Iraq Adventure (don’t forget to tell the 48,000 soldiers still there), but then offset that progress by redoubling our efforts in Afghanistan. And for what? To establish a democracy and shut down the Taliban and Al-Qaeda? When are we going to stop being the democracy Avon Lady and let other cultures fight their own battles? We have our own Al-Qaeda here in the U.S. It’s called Poverty. How about reining in the ludicrous military-industrial complex that’s sucking up half our budget, and focusing our resources inward? When Obama said “Yes we can,” a lot of us thought that’s what he was talking about. Not, “Yes we can cut taxes while funding two wars” or “Yes we can let corporations openly buy elections.”
Even though Obama has put through more worthwhile legislation in his first two years than any president since FDR, how much of this forward progress will be undone by future Republicans who treat our mandate like a game of air hockey? House Republicans are already working hard at repealing health care reform. What the hell is the use of electing representatives to carry out our will if the laws will only be reversed by the succeeding party? The writing on the wall could not be more clear—we’ve reached perpetual gridlock. Turn out the lights, the parties are over.
Think about it: In the Founding Father days, a knot of wealthy individuals with idealism and consciences had to foment an honest-to-god revolution in order to start a system of government that would supply fair representation to its constituency. In the last 50 years or so, this system has been bent over, reamed, twisted and milked to the point where it’s doing more harm than good. Nowhere is this more obvious than with our Do-Less-Than-Nothing Congress.
The downfall of our system of government is hastening, but who knows what will take its place. There may be a revolution, a large-scale terrorist attack, population centers decimated by bedbug infestation, or simply a massive collapse into the vacuum created by a national lack of intelligence. But whatever happens to replace it, what we’ve got now just ain’t workin’.
Socially, on the other hand, it would seem that we as a culture are showing signs of evolution. With the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (which will probably be reinstated after the 2012 elections under the name No Gays No Ways), and the spreading decriminalization of marijuana, our society has recently taken some huge steps in the right direction.
These two issues basically fight against the same Federal mindset: denial. Hey, Uncle Sam, guess what—the military is full of gays. Also, half the country is getting high. Why do you think Sony is selling so many PS3s? It’s wasteful and foolish to put so many resources toward fighting these expressions of human nature. I’d love to see the Obama administration fully legalize pot using the same flourish with which they killed DADT. Regulate that devil weed, tax the hell out of it, and get out of the way. Hell, the Governator has decriminalized the sweet leaf in California, and ex-N.M. Governor Gary Johnson says we should just cut the crap and legalize it already.
Naturally, it won’t be too long before Big Marijuana begins installing its own puppets into Congress. We’re close to the tipping point on this one. It’s just a matter of time before we swear in Senator Cheech and Congressman Willie.
So there you have it: the two-party system is on the way out, important social issues are starting to gain some righteous resolution, and we’re caught in the middle like toddlers lost in the mall, wondering where the hell we’re going as a society and as a nation. And as a toddler.
My advice is to ignore all advice and go with your gut. Trust in the god of your choice, and keep your powder dry. Hang on tight, brothers and sisters, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
[Thanks, Geoff and Steve, for the input.]
Bob’s Maximum Honky Tonk Website
Join the Bob Wire Appreciation Society
Stumble It!
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Inordinate wealth and power--whether in business corporations, religion, or government--has the ability to do both great good and great harm. You are right, I think, to see that it is up to people--not institutions--to demonstrate good character and virtues. People of good will, more than anyone, are going to be the ones to proscribe the limits of institutions of inordinate wealth and power. They have no reason to limit themselves.
Maybe we start in areas where we can all find common political genetic material--the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution (as amended to include our citizen sisters and citizens of all creeds and colors.). Neither of these documents mentions political parties--Democratic, Republican, Tea, Green, Independent or Birthday--so they are common ground upon which we can re-invigorate our civic culture. We have a lot of work to do.
[By the way, why do we pledge allegiance to a flag, which is a symbol, instead of to the Constitution, which is the real deal? How would our political culture be deepened if we pledged our loyalty to our founding principles rather to a symbol that stands for our nation? "I pledge allegiance to the United States Constitution and to the liberties it protects, etc." Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue but maybe there are some poets reading who could take the idea out for a spin and make it something to be said with inspiration.]
I remember the warnings that too much government, and too much government entitlement paid to individuals would someday take all the money the middle class could reasonably raise, and that from what were then considered very liberal educators in the high school with a predominance of university employee children in attendance. Too much government, and too many government "chicken in every pot", Townsend Plan type programs, would discourage initiative, the work ethic, and endanger democracy as we know it.
Has that predicted end come to pass?? I read an economic report that followed the state economic summit here a week or so ago, that was mostly about an "economic death spiral" and "stagnation" and "deflation", none of which will bolster tax revenue, that said if the average wage in Oregon were that of the state of Washington, we would have no funding crisis in Oregon. We have too few taxpayers (over 10% unemployment), too many low income earners (less income taxable), to support government at its present level. Then we add to that the very real need to raise health insurance rates to address expanded coverage, a significant rise in utility costs to address the legislated mandates to raise the amount of "green" renewable power provided (at costs anywhere from double to fifty times as expensive as hydro power which is, by administrative edict not "renewable"--go figure that one!), imported fossil fuels impacted by currency devaluation, and food prices on the uptick due to increase fertilizer costs, powerfully cold weather last growing year in South America (think global warming in reverse) and biofuel use (another "green" mandate) taking food acres and commodities and putting them in the auto gas tank.
So renters are paying more for apartments because banks won't lend to build more apartments (knee jerk econ 102) as there is a housing surplus, and people who are pushed out of their homes by inability to pay variable rate mortgages while not working look for shelter that is increasingly not available. Meanwhile, empty homes are everywhere, and the ones being rented are fewer than the ones standing empty. Mortgage holders are not capable of managing rentals. Go figure. Meanwhile, Habitat for Humanity wants you to give money and time to build another house for a deserving client. Another new home?? Why? Are not there millions in foreclosure?? Are those who lost a home to foreclosure precluded from being "needy" and in a home of their own?? Left hand to right hand communication is lacking.
WE, the citizens, have asked too much from our government, and have now elected a President to provide even more although we don't have the resources or need for more. We don't need programs. We don't need another year of unemployment. We don't need more entitlements. We need jobs and people who can do them. Is the problem that there are not enough jobs or is it there are not enough people to man the jobs that potentially could be there?? Have we dumbed down so far as to not have the corps of potential employees to man the kinds of jobs the country can provide?? Too few, way too few, math majors and engineers, which immigration limits preclude from being filled by foreign nationals, to fill the US need right now. Do we improve our education system, and how we bring kids to being educated, or do we as we now do, just forfeit the jobs to China and India...
Our government is our picture. It is our portrait. It is who we elect and who we are. It is not the institutions that are lacking, it is us. We lack the personal imperative and dignity to bring ourselves up to the level we once held as the absolute bottom of expectations. We lowered those expectations, generationally, and now we see ourselves as lacking. No shit!!!
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Physics and political science. Denigrate the "tea party", the "rednecks" all you want, but you push hard to the left and you create a vacuum on the right to be filled with a more radical version of conservatism. Hard left liberalism, progressives, call them what you want, create the right as the equal and opposite reaction. Take some responsibility. If I can't temper the hard charge to the left within the Party, then I have to address it by support of some aspect of the right. I don't embrace the far right, but I know that it is important to temper the push too far to the left.
I am a farmer. We have to farm with the knowledge that plants have to be electrically neutral. Cations and anions. Plus and minus. Balance. Too much, the "Moron Farming" mentality, where if some works, you put "more on", seems to be the mantra of the left. If some help is good, we need to have universal help and just like in farming, the "more on" or moron mind set just spends money and ruins social responsibility and personal initiative. Uncle Sam is not the universal problem solver. Uncle Sam is there to provide a way for you to solve the problem free from suffocating government regulation and endless impacts on the time you need to create products and wealth. The left increasingly wants all your money, your time, and they will provide you with what you need. Not what you want. What they think you need. Our current failure to thrive economically, to thrive in universal education, health care, is all about how much it costs to take care of the last very small percentage. The political reality of the law of diminishing returns. We now cannot afford our government to the tune of $1.8 Trillion a year.
Bob, we are at the point where a guy like you books a gig, for a $1000 a night, and every night you get a check for $300 because the IRS took the rest. After all, at $1000 a night, you are a $365,250 a year earner. And as a high earner, you have to pay to support all the people who don't work, so you are taxed at 70% by the government to pay for those who don't. Sort of like the widow woman whose farm, bought in 1945 for $20,000, had town grow towards it, and her husband drilled a well which made the land irrigated, and the soil was number one, and when her husband died, the farm was worth $1 million dollars and if she sold it, she would be a millionaire that day, for one day only, and would pay 60% capital gains taxes on the "windfall" value of the farm improved over sixty years. The Death Tax as it is called. So she rented it instead, and lived nicely but not rich. Now the farm is worth $2 million in a bad market. And she died. Her children did not have to sell it to pay the death tax. They will keep it in the family, and distribute the rents to an education fund for grandchildren. The left hates that. The right thinks that is fair and honorable. Who is wrong?
You don't have to like our political system, and you are justified. I only wonder what would replace it. And if we would be better served by any other type of governance. I personally think the problem is that not enough people actually participate, attend hearings, town halls, go to the legislature to testify for or against a proposal. "Government," a young logger from Montana once said at a meeting I was at, "is run by the people who show up." If you don't like the direction, show up. You can work to effect change. You will meet fellow travelers. Form coalitions. You will become the people who run government. And for that to happen, we don't need to change government. We need to change ourselves.
The less "government" had to offer, the less people would spend trying to divert the offerings their way. Something to think about.
I used to give Jonathan Weber a hard time about this being NewLeft Magazine. Now that his editorial hand is gone I think I was prescient.
You say you do not support the far right, yet are spouting the standard party line. You side-step the pertinent issues and provide misinformation to push conservative dogma. I believe the points that you make in your comment are:
Old time educators taught us to be afraid of the communists.
Communism did not prevail. Its failure was not due to McCarthyism, the John Birch Society or Regan. It failed of its own accord. You will be hard pressed to find anyone supporting a communist agenda. In the conservative view, any government is considered socialist and therefore evil. "Just keep your government hands out of my Medicare".
Econ 102
You point out problems in the mortgage industry and apparently it had nothing to do with banking deregulation and the "free" market. It was a lack of communication and Habitat for Humanity that caused it. Remember, Habitat for Humanity does not give houses away. They are built using community volunteers and sold to a qualifying owner who has a mortgage.
Government is just too big and must be cut.
The issue that you sidestep is WHERE we spend our money. Mr. Wire points out that (nearly) half of our tax money goes to the military. The last administration railroaded us into two useless wars and kept the funding off of the books. I would rather have a great healthcare system than another carrier battle group.
As a farmer, I would guess that you will not give up agricultural price supports (corporate welfare), your Social Security or Medicare.
We seem to be in agreement on the need for additional funding for education and the need to address trade issues with China (particularly currency valuation). The current administration is making some progress with these issues.
Our government is a reflection of the American people.
Well it should be, but, I have been embarrassed by president Bush and the current Republican "Party of No" still, my expectations of this great country have not been reduced. Our current president was elected on the slogan of "Hope and Change". I look forward to a day that dignity reigns over cynicism and misguided self interest.
The current movement to the right is a reaction to excessive liberalism.
If you say it over and over it still won't be true. The Neo-Cons have held sway for three decades. The conservative movement is a bunch of scared baby boomers led by Fox News saying, "I got mine, screw everybody else".
Income tax rates are 70%, capital gains are 60%.
If Mr. Wire was in the highest tax bracket (talented as he is, I doubt that), it would be 35%. Please be factual. The current capital gains rate is 25%. Poor granny would only get $750,000 as a return on her capital investment (Boo -Hoo).
Government of the people by the people and for the people.
You are absolutely right. We all need to be more active. I have heard rumblings from the far right and left that there will be a revolution in this country. In roman times the emperor provided bread and circuses to calm the masses. Today our corporate overlords give us Big Macs, Bud and NFL on a Chinese flat screen. I fear that we are just too fat dumb and happy.
Very well put and to the point.
I fear your fears are well founded.
" The result of a very cool enquiry into the probable effects of the new Constitution in my mind---in a few Words, is that it is adequate to every beneficial consequence for which Governments are or ought to be instituted---whilst at the same time the Checks are so ingeniously interposed between the Rulers and Citizens as to leave all power---in the hands of the people---and therefore it is impossible that it shou'd ever continue perverted to bad purposes until it is dangerous---unless the great mass of the people shou'd become corrupt! ignorant of their Birthright---and regardless of their posterity. Shou'd such at any time period be the unhappy Characteristik of My Fellow Citizens---they will then deserve---& must inevitably wear the Yoke of slavery---it will not be in the power of Folios of Bills of rights to maintain their Liberties. The rights of Freemen are only to be maintain'd by Freemen---and when the Spirit of Freedom (that has ever elevated those who felt its influence amongst mankind) becomes extinct in the bosoms of men Liberty itself will be a curse to them."
" Experience the parent of Wisdom has already taught us that unanimity amongst us can be successful---& that an attempt to Tyrannize hath already given unanimity to America. Each state will still have a Legislature possessing its confidence as effectually as the old Assemblies did---as adequate to the purposes of calling forth the forces and resources of the states, and as free to commune with the assemblies of the sister states. Have we any reason then to suppose that an Act of Oppression wou'd pass unnoticed when issued by the New Congress? that the states wou'd not be unanimous in their opposition? or that the general government which depends for support upon the individual states wou'd be enabled to triumph over the Liberties of America---when the fleets and Armies of the British King supported by the Wealth of Britain were inadequate ?"