04 August 2011

Raise High the Debt Ceiling, Carpenters

It pains me not in the slightest to open up this little discussion by entirely neglecting the point. I wish in the first place to apologize for its title. I suppose the apology should be squared directly at two people, really. First, J. D. Salinger himself. Mr. Salinger, I trust you will forgive the profaning of one of your perfectly good stories, as well as my voice, which, the more I write, seems more lifted from them all (although it really is a matter of debate whether I first heard myself through your writing, or if the writing taught me how to be heard). Courtesies aside, you are in fact dead, and if you were not, would certainly consider the benefits of being so if you found out anyone was blogging a word about you. Second, Mr. J. D. Weichhand. Josh, I'm going to be honest: I just really want you to read everything I write and give me your approval. You are the Seymour to my Buddy Glass. Having said that, I'm thinking about it more and it's remarkable how true that is in so many ways. Just don't kill yourself.



There is no political subject matter which consistently enthuses me less than finance. I think part of this is related to the fact that most financial issues deemed political, to me, should be more accurately classified as moral questions. Case-in-point perhaps being the classic: Is it okay for some hard-working people to be outrageously rich while others who work just as hard are in poverty? Does anyone have the right to tell the rich they are too rich? If this is a simple political question, then one's answer places him or her somewhere on a scale between Bleeding Socialist and Heartless Capitalist Banker. St. Paul perhaps urges us to expand the conversation. 

The other reason it is so hard to care about the debt ceiling, inflation, or the stock market is because the whole thing is so artificial to me. Wall Street invents money out of thin air by betting on a company's failure, literally getting paid for doing nothing. Meanwhile, the government is fighting a multi-trillion dollar war, and all that's needed for both absurdities to continue is the printing of more money. So why shouldn't the economic elite who know the game be able to amass personal fortunes like a slight-of-hand magician with an ace up his sleeve, when our entire monetary system is just as deceptive and slanted?

Let us also remember that this entire 'debate' is an ideological sideshow. The government spending in question has already been approved by the same phonies standing up on the Hill telling the other side to cut back. Having this debate now only determines whether or not the country will pay those bills. The only purpose of this whole charade of the Right's is to rub the bellies of their tea party supporters. Regarding these, a few words may be appropriate. In its current embodiment, the tea party movement is the worst thing to happen to American politics in my lifetime. It's not that I disagree with every single thing they stand for (which I do). It's not that people who tote guns, dislike foreigners, and hate the idea of everyone being able to go to the doctor scare me (which they do). It's not even that many of them lap up every word of a bona fide crazy person like Glenn Beck (which they do). (Dear reader, this is all starting to sound mean-spirited, but please remember that it's not mean if it's true.) (I apologize for the recent mean-spirited parenthetical disclaimer.)

What frightens me about the tea party is that they have successfully taken the entire Republican party by the throat. Any of us who follow Conservative politics for five minutes will know that the current modus operandi is: Raise taxes, you're gone. Spend money on any program but warfare, you're gone. I think to some extent all these Republicans are trying to do here is keep their jobs. What the tea party has created is a political system entirely contrary to what their dear founding fathers intended; a political system in which compromise is out of the question and one is tricked into believing that every choice is a choice between two ideological extremes. Remember when Mitch McConnell proposed a perfectly sane compromise deal at the beginning of this whole debacle? The man was practically crucified in the conservative media. Trying to see where the other side is coming from, give-and-take are tantamount to treason. A few weeks ago Glenn Beck flat out said that what our nation is facing is a choice between fascist Communism and Libertarian freedom. In other words, there is no middle ground. Wouldn't you rather be a tea-partier than a Communist??

I remember a while back, after the recent health-care bill passed (typically referred to as 'Obamacare'), I was really disappointed in Dennis Kucinich for voting for it. Kucinich is a man I have a deep respect for and one of the only people in Washington I trust. How could he sell out like this? He promised to fight for single-payer, but now has voted for a bill that effectively hands over thousands of new customers to the insurance companies! I was impressed when he sent out a letter to his supporters explaining his vote. The short of it comes down to the fact that he saw a 'yes' vote on that less-than-stellar bill as at least a tiny baby step away from the current system. After speaking with the president at length the day before the vote, he realized that a 'no' vote would be much more damaging in that it would halt the debate altogether and no one knew at that point how long it would be before they would have the majority votes necessary to pass any kind of reform again. So he compromised. He looked at the bigger picture and said, "This is too important to take an ideological stand and cast a meaningless vote." As I look back, I don't think Dennis sold out at all. His ideological stand was the countless hours he spent educating people on socialized care, working the House floor, and never arguing for anything less than what he knew to be the best thing for America.

This is exactly where the Republicans are a complete and utter failure right now. The American people aren't hearing arguments for why tea party policies are the best thing for the country. We are simply being scared into believing that the country is on the verge of apocalypse unless the tea party has its way (and I say that with complete seriousness). We are being told that compromise is out of the question because one side and one side alone has access to the divine revelation of what the United States is and how to save it. No deviation from the straight and narrow can be afforded.

If we all walk away from this glorified Lebron-announcement with anything, it should be a recognition that the only way we are going to stop our country from walking down an extremely scary path is to refuse the hand we are dealt.

2 comments:

  1. I don't think your assertions about the Tea Party as a whole are as accurate as you believe them to be. Stating that you believe the movement to be, "the worst thing to happen to American politics in my lifetime" ignores the very principles around which the movement has been formed - awareness and involvement. I view it as a stark contrast to the mindless sycophants from the 2008 campaign who, when asked why they were supporting Obama, couldn't give any clearer answer than "hope and change" and "yes we can!" I believe that we can have a healthy debate over the nature of our economic system in the global context. I'm rather an economic nationalist myself, in contrast to the neo-conservative establishment against which the tea party presently rails. I sympathize with those Americans left behind by the drain of industry just as they were on the verge of "moving on up." I would also offer a word of caution - be careful what you wish for. It's easy to become passionate about spending other people's money, or to embrace a global social justice perspective out of a sense of guilt. It's more difficult to accept that in any such revolution, there is one guarantee - we lose. Whether you're talking about material wealth or individual liberty, we lose. Any form of redistribution requires state intervention and enforcement. People are self-interested by nature, more often than they are generous (I'm speaking at an aggregate level). I still believe that the best we can do as a society, given America's extremely diverse array of values and beliefs, is to establish a framework in which these self-interests are checked by other self-interests in a system which encourages innovation and improvement, while protecting a meritocracy (a system in which hard work is truly and consistently rewarded with success).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ben, that might have been the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.

    I think Glenn has a point in that American self-interest on the citizen level has become so individualized, that at this point, we may have to settle for a system of checks and balances aimed at restoring order through less obvious means (although every issue has become so politicized in this current congress, I don't know what those means would be).

    The Tea Party phenomenon really is fascinating to me, if for no other reason than that it's provided evidence that minor, ignorable shifts in structure can truly change momentum in a political debate. I think the Tea Party was originally seen as a xenophobic response to America's first black president, which could be waved off as a fleeting blip (I say this not only because of the signs you tend to see at TP rallies, but also because their most vehement disagreements with Obama were targeted at laws or ideas that either hadn't or wouldn't come into being: i.e., raising taxes, healthcare reform, our president's "communist, fascist Islamism"). But after Obama's election, the electorate that voted him into office stayed home during the mid-terms, allowing the Tea Party to effectively shape the debate how they saw fit, sweeping districts across the country. This wasn't a major shift in seats from Democrat to Republican, this was a drastic shift from center-left or center-right to extreme right.

    I don't blame the Tea Party and I don't blame Republicans for putting self-preservation above the greater needs of our country. I blame Americans in general for apathy, for getting their news from CNN and Fox News and for ignoring politics on their local level (where they actually influence your life directly).

    Americans used to have imagination, which I had thought begot a sort of creativity for how we could solve our problems. But now that imagination seems to be used instead to craft an alternative reality absent of responsibility. We believe in all sorts of things that have no factual basis in the real world, from standard rhetorical fallacies to creationism and trickle-down economics. The facts are right in front of our face, but we're too lazy to grasp beyond it.

    We deserve the congress we have. We elected them. They're a reflection of our carelessness – our self interests.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for contributing to the conversation!