Iraq could reduce America's taste for fundamentalism, laissez-faire economics and militarism

[marmar]

from TomPaine.com:


From Quagmire To Progressive Victory
Thomas I. Palley
May 17, 2007


Thomas Palley runs the Economics for Democratic and Open Societies Project. He is the author of Plenty of Nothing: The Downsizing of the American Dream and the Case for Structural Keynesianism. His weekly economic policy blog is at www.thomaspalley.com.

It is widely recognized that the debacle in Iraq has contributed importantly to disenchantment with the Bush administration and Republican Party. However, less recognized is its potential long-term political impact, which has opened the door to moving beyond the red state-blue state division that has marked U.S. politics for the past generation. That in turn could create a lasting progressive majority.

American electoral politics has operated historically along two dimensions of “values” and “economics.” The values dimension concerns issues of abortion, guns, religion and flag. The economics dimension concerns the perceived efficiency of markets, corporate power and trade. For the past 25 years economics has played second fiddle to the values dimension, which has dominated politics and defined the division between red and blue states.

This political ordering reflects the triumph of Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman, who captured middle America’s political imagination and established a new laissez-faire consensus. That consensus lowered the electoral traction of economic argument and raised the traction of values, which helps explain the convergence of New Democrats with Republicans on matters of economic policy and globalization.

Now, America’s searing experience in Iraq has unexpectedly opened the door to reversing this ordering. The brutal intolerance of Islamic fundamentalism has provided a mirror for reflecting upon Christian fundamentalism and what it might mean for American society. In a sense, Iraq has discredited all religious fundamentalisms by showing what happens when religions try to enforce their views on all. That stands to reduce support for the Christian right’s agenda and strengthen support for separation of church and state and the right to privacy.

...(snip)...

The success of new populism is driven by two factors: first, growing willingness of red-state voters to see through the veil of values-based identity politics; second, recognition that red states share common economic challenges with blue states. Once the veil of identity is pierced, it becomes clear that farmers, factory workers, and urban white-collar workers share many similar problems.

Those problems are loss of livelihood, be it the family farm or a manufacturing job; economic insecurity, be it due to outsourcing or agricultural price volatility; and exploitation due to unequal economic power. Manufacturing workers must negotiate with multi-national corporations and face low wage competition from the global sourcing practices of retail firms like Wal-Mart. Service sector workers also increasingly confront global out-sourcing.

Farmers face similar problems. Corn and grain farmers confront the power of Archer Daniels, Cargill and Monsanto; beef, chicken and pork growers must deal with Smithfield and Tyson; dairy farmers confront Dean Foods, while all purchase equipment from John Deere and use the railroads to ship product to market. Up and down, the farm economy is dominated by economic power concentrated in massive agro-businesses.

Just as global sourcing has squeezed manufacturing workers and shifted profits to large retailers and brands such as Nike, so too small farmers are receiving less of the value created in the farm-to-food production chain. In effect, workers, small manufacturers and farmers all compete on a tilted playing field, which calls for new policies that restore a balance of power. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/05/17/from_quagmire_to_progressive_victory.php

[unpossibles]

1. interesting idea.

I would like to think it's true, but perhaps I have less faith than Mr. Palley that we as a nation exhibit the kind of societal/cultural empathy required to see Christian Fundamentalism mirrored in Muslim Fundamentalism. I fear that because I know a several hard core religious conservatives who cannot (or refuse to) see any parallel between Islam and Christianity or even within religious fundamentalism in general. Sadly, they have been blinded by propaganda the same way past generations were blinded by anti-communist Cold War propaganda, where the "other side" is dehumanized into a mindless mass of chaos which wants nothing but to destroy the earth. The Bad Guys, if you will.

Until we have an honest media - and not just pockets of honesty, but more across the board - that is not in the back pockets of the War Merchants, this will never change even if the name of The Enemy changes. We've always been at war with Eurasia.

Add to this that many do not seem to want to look deeper behind the curtain to try to understand the motives of The Enemy or even the context in which both sides operate. We as a culture, are semi-content with being told who we are to hate without wanting to know the real reasons or motivations, and unless people suddenly become fascinated with history and politics in general, I don't foresee this changing.

It's not always easy to grasp even if you are aware of these things, and with the right propaganda, people can be convinced that the atrocities of the past which cause the atrocities of the present and future were good things. This creates a disconnect. Instead of seeing some act of terrorism and thinking, "ah, they are responding to our cultural dominance and colonialistic machinations, our militaristic and corporate mastery, and our covert plotting in the only way that makes sense," we see the same act of terrorism as insane, or a jealousy of our freedoms.

While I do not think it is impossible for our culture to get over these things, I also do not feel that the simple act of a failed war - especially one which not everyone will admit has failed or even why it is not going as planned - will do that.

On the bright side, I do think that there is hope that we can ally and heal as a nation over the other part mentioned in the editorial - that of shared misery and economic downturn. I would rather it not take catastrophe to heal ourselves, but sadly that may just be what is required. More and more are being harshly awakened from the dream of prosperity into the harsh reality of corporate serfdom, and not liking what they see.

The challenge here will be again mediated by the media and how they play the causes of such problems. If the problems are simply blamed by both sides, then I doubt any healing will occur. In other words, it is far easier to find a scapegoat for our problems, such as is (and has been for over 100 years) being done with immigration.

I do have faith that we will eventually come to our senses, but I think it will take some time to heal the damage the far right has done over the past 50+ years.