Saturday, October 31, 2009

Blame It On Halloween



It must be the general darkness and creepiness of the season (as some choose to characterize it, that is), but I am in one foul mood right now. Either that, or the collective weight of the crummy news this week has finally overwhelmed me. I had thought that President Obama's election was a new beginning for America, a revival of the America that the Founders envisioned, an America with a system of government unique in the history of the world. This week, however, I have decided that America's decline is irrevocable, and we are sliding down to an ignominious end.

There are no truer words in the Bible: the love of money is the root of all evil. And the love of money is what has done in America. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a country where merit and objective standards determined our fate, but what we have wound up with is the same thing that has brought down most, if not all, other great experiments in human self-governance: an oligarchy. Only the minute details differ. America is not an oligarchy based on birth. America is not an oligarchy based on intelligence. America has become an oligarchy based on money. To put it less delicately (and as I have noted before): them what has the gold makes the rules. Or even less delicately: the only thing that trickles down to people like me in a trickle-down economy is pee.

The ingredients? Keep as many people as possible out of good housing. Since public school budgets are based on property values, this preserves inequities in the educational system. Moreover, work at dumbing down the public education system and move all the rich kids into private schools. "No Child Left Behind"? Hardly. More like "Every Child Except the Child of Millionaires Left Behind." The educational inequities produce a less skilled workforce, which will work for lower wages and no benefits (especially once you convince them that unions are evil), which can be led around by the nose by propaganda masquerading as news. Truth doesn't matter. Facts do not matter. The only thing that matters is how much money you can throw around to drown out the voices of those who disagree with the desire of the rich to keep those riches for itself.

The only thing that can fight money is more money--and for those who have barely enough to cover their basic expenses every month, it's impossible to contribute (monetarily) to even the most worthy of causes. I admire and respect what True Majority does, but if I have to choose between paying for prescription refills and giving money to True Majority, guess where the money is going? To my prescription refills. As a matter of survival, I literally have no other choice.

Money in politics is as corrosive and corrupting and disruptive as are illegal steroids in sports. Right now, health insurance companies are running an ad designed to frighten our senior citizens into crying out against health care reform, on the grounds that "a government takeover of health care" will result in reduced Medicare benefits to them. I'm not even going to get into the irony that Medicare is itself a government-run program. I'm not even going to get into noting that the allegation that Medicare benefits are going to be reduced is simply untrue.

I am going to note only that the health insurance companies have the money to air these ads around the clock, on every channel, and especially on channels identified [rightly or wrongly--Ed.] as "liberal" outlets. My own reaction, when I first saw that ad running on MSNBC, was where the heck are the MSNBC bigwigs? Why are they allowing this? It's an implicit endorsement of what the ad is saying. And then I thought maybe the powers that be at MSNBC are "taking the money and running." That thought was amusing at first. It also reaffirmed my belief that people who tend to pay attention will get the irony of the ad airing on MSNBC and will see it for what it is, an outright lie. But now that that ad has pummelled me for a week, at all hours of the day and night, I think the true purpose is what has,in fact, happened to me. I am tired and overwhelmed. I no longer have the mental energy to push back. I am suffering from issue fatigue, and, compounded by my illness, I am no longer able to mount anything other than this most feeble protest. In short, I am on the verge of giving up.

About one percent of the people in this country hold well over half the total wealth of this country. And that one percent is not just able, but willing, to spend whatever it takes to drown out the rest of us. I could even live with that if the rest of us were holding our own, but we aren't. Purchasing power and standards of living for the traditional "middle class" in this country have declined, frighteningly so, in the past decade. Yet the überrich are not content to keep what they have. They are intent on amassing ever more of the country's total wealth for themselves. Their focus is their own short-term economic gain. They are trying to undo every single thing that this country has done in the past 150 years that put ANY kind of limit on them at all. And the rest of us can just go hang, as far as they are concerned.

Short-sighted? Yes. Ultimately stupid? Indubitably. It's not unlike the situation from a few decades ago when the loggers in the northwest wanted unrestricted access, to cut down all the old-growth forest, and to hell with the spotted owl. Yes, the loggers and their families would have more work and more money . . . for a while. But when the old growth is gone, it's gone. Forever. Then what? Likewise, once we lose everything and can no longer subsidize the lifestyles of the very rich, what will they do? They don't even think about that. They don't care. Their only concern is to top their previous quarter's record-breaking earnings. Gordon Gekko has won. Even people who don't share in the bounty think that greed is good, for they HOPE to share in that bounty someday. That "that ain't gonna happen" doesn't even occur to them. They've bought into the propaganda. They'd eat their children if they thought it would help them gain the keys to the kingdom.

At times like this, I am glad I am so sick, for I do not want to live through what this trend, continued unabated, inevitably will cause. I weep for the America that could have been. I mourn for the average citizens of the America that is to come. Then again, if the Mayans and the Chinese and Nostradamus and all the other prognosticators are right (according to the History Channel, that is), we're all going to die in 2012, so at least our continued suffering will be short.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

MY OMG Moment For This Week



In case you are not familiar with it, please go and check out the web site www.delanceyplace.com. You can sign up to receive daily excerpts from significant works of history, culture, and science. You can also make suggestions for publication, if you've read something that you think deserves wider dissemination. It's a great way to fulfill your need to "learn something new" every day.

Toward the end of last week, www.delanceyplace.com sent out excerpts from notes describing the debate at the convention of delegates who created our Constitution. My OMG moment while reading this was as follows: if you put the language into contemporary syntax and usage, you will find you are describing the tea-baggers, conspiracy theorists, and other assorted nut cases who are encouraged to spew their ignorance by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox "News." I now see the Founders' point--and agree with it.

What really distresses me about my change of mind is that I used to be totally against those of the Founders who spoke in favor of limiting direct democracy, seeing as how I'd probably be one of the ones disenfranchised due to my social standing as based on my birth. I now find that I am not opposed to a "meritocracy" when that merit is judged by one's education and capacity for rational thought. I am opposed to it only when its criteria are things like (1) being a white male of a certain age who (2) owns a certain amount of real estate. By those criteria, the tea-baggers and the other crazies might still qualify to vote, thus leading the country straight into the toilet of stupidity down which they today are still trying to flush us.

Anyway, with no further ado, here is the text of the excerpt emailed out to www.delanceyplace.com subscribers:

In today's excerpt - because of the inherent distrust of pure democracy that existed in the 1780s, only the members of the House of Representatives were to be elected directly by the people in the original U.S. Constitution; Senators were chosen by their state's legislature, and the President was to be chosen by electors. The comments below come from the notes of the debate of the Constitutional Convention itself, and show there was considerable opposition even to allowing the people vote directly for representatives:

"ROGER SHERMAN [of Connecticut]: Election [of the members of the House of Representatives] should be by the state legislatures. The people immediately should have as little to do as may be about the government. They lack information and are constantly liable to be misled. If the state governments are to be continued, it is necessary in order to preserve harmony between the national and state governments, that the elections to the former should be made by the latter. The right of participation in the national government will be sufficiently secured to the people by their election of the state legislatures.

ELBRIDGE GERRY [of Massachusetts]: The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not lack virtue, but are the dupes of pretended patriots. In Massachusetts it has been fully confirmed by experience that they are daily misled into the most baneful measures and opinions by the false reports circulated by designing men. One principal evil arises from the want of due provision for those employed in the administration of government. It would seem to be a maxim of democracy to starve the public servants.

CHARLES PINCKNEY [of South Carolina]: The people are less fit judges in such a case than the legislatures, and the legislatures will be less likely to promote the adoption of the new government if they are to be excluded from all share in it.

WILLIAM PATERSON [of New Jersey]: If the sovereignty of the states is to be maintained, the representatives must be drawn immediately from the states, not from the people.

JOHN RUTLEDGE [of South Carolina]: Election by the legislatures would be more refined than an election immediately by the people, and more likely to correspond with the sense of the whole community. If this Convention had been chosen by the people in districts, it is not to be supposed that such proper characters would have been preferred. The delegates to [the Continental] Congress have also been fitter men than would have been appointed by the people at large.

JOHN MERCER [of Virginia]: The people cannot know and judge of the characters of candidates. The people in towns can unite their votes in favor of one favorite, and by that means always prevail over the people of the country, who, being dispersed, will scatter their votes among a variety of candidates. ...

PINCKNEY: The first branch should be elected by the people, in such mode as the state legislatures shall direct.

GERRY: The people should nominate a certain number, out of which the state legislatures should be bound to choose. Experience has shown that state legislatures drawn immediately from the people do not always possess their confidence. An election by the people should be so qualified that men of honor and character might not be unwilling to be joined in the appointments. The people could choose double the requisite number, the legislature to appoint out of them the authorized number of each state.

MERCER: Candidates should be nominated by the state legislatures and elected by the people, who should not be left to make their choice without any guidance."

Jane Butzner (Jacobs), Constitutional Chaff, Copyright 1941 by Columbia University Press, pp. 8-9.

Friday, October 09, 2009

OMG Moments of the Week



From the ridiculous to the sublime:

OMG moment the first (the ridiculous): Mattel, for a few decades now, has made and marketed a series of dolls based on the popular (to pre-teen girls, anyway) "American Girl" series. Fair enough. But within the past week or so, Mattel made a HUGE mistake, because it has put itself in a no-win situation. It has released for sale one "Gwen," the latest American Girl . . . and she's homeless.

Mattel says the doll will teach "valuable lessons about life." Given the general response, I beg to differ. The doll costs $95, an irony apparently completely lost on Mattel. Advocates for the homeless and for battered women are offended by the concept of a company making profit off the worst miseries of others. And the girls to whom the doll is marketed have totally missed Mattel's putative point. On the American Girl website, the girls are posting complaints that Gwen doesn't have accessories or other outfits.

OMG!!!!!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OMG moment the second (the sublime): I awoke this morning to the news that President Obama has been awarded this year's Nobel Peace Prize, largely for the change in tone he has bought to world affairs, his focus on engagement, consensus, and getting rid of nuclear weapons. He's the 4th American president to be given the award (and the 3rd to receive it while still in office). The Nobel Committee has acknowledged that the award this year is based more on aspirations than on actual accomplishments, but it's their award, and they can give it to whomever they please.

It was a total shock, however, given the list of other worthy candidates, such as past winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been using the power of the bully pulpit for decades now to encourage a peaceful change in government in Burma (Myanmar) despite being kept under "house arrest" for virtually all that time.

My own OMG reaction was surprised delight. Even if reactionary forces here are driven to cheering when America gets an international rebuff, such as losing the bid for Chicago to host the 2016 Summer Olympics, and even if this brings still more howls of outrage from the self-emaciated Right, it's a huge win for America and the world-wide understanding of what America offers and can be when at her best. It's not a personal triumph for Obama, though he can rightly take pride in it. The Right will try to cast it as another loss for Obama, however, probably claiming that it shows how he kowtows to others in the world. If it weren't so sad, I'd laugh out loud. The ONLY people in the whole world who do NOT get what America is really about are those on the far Right, who claim to be the only ones who DO get it.

OMG!!!!!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OMG moment the third (sublimely ridiculous): I should have bought a PowerBall ticket last night. Every channel change I made while surfing cable TV sports events last night was at the absolutely perfect moment. I switched to the Dodgers game just as they started their improbable, bottom-of-the-ninth-with-two-out comeback victory over the Cardinals. I then bounced mostly between the Red Sox-Angels game and the Nebraska-Missouri football game. I was back to baseball just as Torii Hunter hit his three-run homer that gave the Angels the lead, and ultimately a 5-0 win; I saw a couple of really bad NU plays during the football game (like the safety and the defense yet again giving up a huge gain on a deep pass), but I came back to football just as NU took control of the game in the 4th quarter, on its way to a 27-12 win.

OMG!!!!!