Sunday, January 17, 2010

Still Dominating the Debate

Obama won a sizable election a little over a year ago. He came into office with high popularity ratings and a desire by the country for change. And yet one year later, the tired old discourse on small government continues to dominate American politics (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/16/AR2010011602950_pf.html). The obstructionist party has been very effective at blocking major parts of Obama’s agenda, while the media continues to buy the rather absurd story that Obama is too partisan. He makes concessions and gets not one GOP vote. How could Obama be more conciliatory? Just accept the Republican position that we need small government, no new programs and no new regulation? Further privatize the economy? What exactly should he be doing to try to deal with the continuing financial crisis, a broken healthcare system that is draining resources from families and the economy and serious questions about the future competitiveness of America in the globe?

The Reagan revolution is still alive and well in the country, even as unemployment levels remain high, people lose their homes and the rich get richer at the expense of everyone else. Pride in ignorance has always been a part of American life, but the ahistorical nature of this position is hard to fathom given what is currently going on. As I have said so often, I believe the media has a lot to do with this by abrogating their responsibility as the fourth estate and failing to report facts that could alter the debate. Instead people somehow believe corporations and the “free” market can solve our problems better than the government. It seems there is still an undercurrent of populism in the country, but too much of it is anti-government rather than anti- those who caused the crisis in the first place (by pushing for the very deregulation at the heart of the problem). Is there a way to change American beliefs as the great depression did; leading to a long period of sustained growth where everyone was made better off. Do things have to get worse to get better, as Lenin once argued? Or like so many empires before, will we simply allow ourselves to fall as a country through inaction and the greed and intellectual laziness of those in power? I think if the democrats pull out the senatorial race in Massachusetts on Tuesday, they should simply push through their agenda and hope that positive results occur before 2012.

Sometimes the only way change can occur is through the force of will of an individual or small group that go against the tide of popular opinion and live by their ideals rather than polling numbers (Margaret Meade anyone). FDR was that leader, as was Martin Luther King and so many other great personalities throughout history. It is time for the president to take a stand for the country, even if it means risking his political future. Let’s hope he can find that resolve.

No comments: