Ramona's picture

    My Country is Breaking my Heart

    Nearly every morning lately I wake up feeling as though my heart is ripping out of my chest.  My loves are still my loves, my health is okay, and it looks like there's a chance my measly but adequate bank account may outlive me, so for a while there the cause of these major palpitations was a bit of a mystery.

    I'm slow sometimes, I admit, but I've had my suspicions.  Now it's official:  it's my country that is breaking my heart. My country has nearly lost her mind.  She falls for any smooth-talking con man who promises eternal prosperity but who's actually reveling in finding new ways to rob her blind.   For quite a few decades there, I thought she was big enough and bold enough, with a heart strong enough (and a memory long enough) to see past the big bucks and slick facades and recognize the same old deviltry that has plagued her so often before. But it's no use pretending. She has lost her sizzle and maybe even her will to live.  She's giving up.

     
    What a blow to those of us who've been desperately trying to think of ways to stop this madness.  (And what madness to think we actually could.)  We've hammered, we've hollered, we've cajoled, we've used humor when nothing was funny.  We've marched, we've sung, we've preached, we've even tried voting.  Nothing has worked.

    Now a number of sovereign states have moved in for the kill and it's likely they'll be the ones big enough to put the final nails in the coffin.  Even the states you would think should know better* have been seduced  into voting against their own best interests by the big money power-mongers.  One by one, they're giving control over to "small-government" campaigners who, once in office, are enjoying the hell out of yanking off the wool they've pulled over so many eyes.  (*Read my own besieged Michigan, expected to be the first of the 50 states to turn wholly and officially private.)

    Much time and energy is spent citing articles and providing links to some brilliant arguments against what's been happening to our country. (Joseph Stiglitz has a chilling rundown of the takeover in the May Vanity Fair.) But frankly, words -- even brilliant words-- can't save an entire nation.  Words can anger us and encourage us and enlighten us, but being aware is a far cry from being in charge.  Ask any prisoner or slave.

    Stiglitz writes in Vanity Fair:   "Alexis de Tocqueville once described what he saw as a chief part of the peculiar genius of American society—something he called “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words were the key. Everyone possesses self-interest in a narrow sense: I want what’s good for me right now! Self-interest “properly understood” is different. It means appreciating that paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest—in other words, the common welfare—is in fact a precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being. Tocqueville was not suggesting that there was anything noble or idealistic about this outlook—in fact, he was suggesting the opposite. It was a mark of American pragmatism. Those canny Americans understood a basic fact: looking out for the other guy isn’t just good for the soul—it’s good for business."

    Even 180 years ago it was wishful thinking on de Tocqueville's part. We've always had the self-interest groups among us and they've rarely been in danger of properly understanding.  They've always dreamed of taking over and running things their way. They've always tried to pretend that the "Democracy" tag doesn't exist.  But we've always had clearer heads prevailing, knocking them sideways before their power and greed got completely out of hand.  Up until now.  Now it appears their ruthless tenacity has finally paid off. 

    We know who they are.  They operate out in the open without fear of incarceration or retribution or even of losing the least little bit of their fortunes. They can't lose.  Their big money is safely kept far from these shores and there's nothing we can say or do that will hurt their feelings or make them think any less of themselves.  These are the people bent on forcing our country to her knees in order to line their own pockets and feel the power.  These are the people Jim Hightower describes in his must-read column:

    Funded and orchestrated by such hard-core, anti-laborite billionaires like the Kochs, DeVoses, Bradleys, Scaifes, Coorses, and Waltons, the right wing has declared open season on public employees. But don't think that the assault by corporate extremists stops there. Using the GOP and the tea partiers as their political foot soldiers -- they intend to dismantle the public sphere, crush all unions, downsize the entire middle class, and banish egalitarianism as an American ideal. Ready or not, our nation has devolved into a new and nasty civil war, with moneyed elites now charging into legislatures and courts to separate their good fortunes from the working class and to establish themselves as a de facto plutocracy.


    My country is breaking my heart.  What hurts the most is how easily she gave up.  I never thought I would see this once-proud nation lying in a rusted heap, bankrupt and riven and the laughingstock of the world.  I thought she was as much a fighter as the men and women who worked so long and so hard to keep her strong.  I never once thought she'd forget where she came from and let us down.
    *
    (Cross-posted at Ramona's Voices)

    *

    Topics: 

    Comments

    The Sunday news shows always favor having Republicans or strong Conservatives as the bulk of their guest roster. Even during a Democratic Presidency, the bias towards Conservatives persists. Instead of balancing the shows with an equal number of elected Democratic officials or strong Liberals, the "balance" is provided by journalists. Since journalists tend to take a more Centrist point of view, the public does not get  strong sense of what Liberals are proposing or believe.Liberals get defined by Conservatives, with very little opposition from journalists.

    Even on a show like "Real Time", Bill Mahrer boasts of his friendship with Ann Coulter which he notes "Drives the Liberals crazy". Mahrer also had Andrew Breitbart as a gust. When a Female Liberal began attacking Breitbart for his role in the ACORN "pimp" scandal and the Shirley Sherrod smear, Mahrer stopped the woman from continuing to address Breitbart's tactics. The woman was told it was "not the time."

    The public is not outraged because it is not being presented with facts in a clear and precise manor. Unfortunately, misinformation is not new. If Jesse James is mentioned, the image of a man who was fighting against Union carpetbaggers who were abusing Southerners comes to mind. We don't conceive of the real Jesse James who was a pro-slavery advocate who would be considered a terrorist in today's world. We have been misinformed about a great deal of the course of our lives.

    Given the fact that traditional media provides the bulk of information, I don't know how we get around this roadblock. There is the Liberal block at MSNBC and Stewart/Colbert, but most of the media is waiting for the next GOP soundbite to define a complex issue. Do you really belive that Trump would have gotten the birther traction he did without a comliant media?

    Do you belive that the traditional media is giving the attention to Michigan or Wisconsin that it gave to the royal wedding?


    I read the book "Jesse James the Last Rebel of the Civil War" which details the true story of Jesse James by a Native American friend who told me about how Kit Carson is viewed as a savage murderer by the Navajo.He was reading "Blood and Thunder", a biography of Carson and felt I might be interested in the book on Jesse James. We get a santized version of history that perpetuates falsehoods.

    Even modern falsehoods are hard to break. Republicans are viewed as fiscally conservative despite the fact that Republican Presidents have raised the debt by a much higher percentage than Democratic Presidents.


    All is propaganda!



    When I was in Saudia Arabia years ago, I had a Saudi tell me this story.

    You're in  the middle of no where. It's hot and dry and you have little food and water with you. The nearest village is miles away and you have to walk. You have a scratch on your little finger that has become infected. You do your best to treat it and move on.

    After a few days, you make it to the village. The local medic gives you a quick look over and notices that infected cut looks to be gangrene.

    You have a choice to make.

    You can take the treatment and medicine he has available, or you can have the medic cut the finger off.

    And he tells you the medicine he has isn't strong enough, but if you can get to the next major city, 500 miles away, they may be able to save it.

    The next bus for the big city will depart tomorrow evening and it will take 3 days and the medic is worried that if you decide to go, by the time you get to the big city, it will be too late to arrest the spread.

    It's a hard choice.

    So my question to your post is simply...do we try the medicine then head for the major city and hope things don't get any worst than they already are or go under the knife, get it over with and learn to live the decision?


    As for ... this once-proud nation lying in a rusted heap, bankrupt and riven and the laughingstock of the world ...

    Seems it was choice by the majority. Everyone worried about getting ahead of their rivals, neighbors and their friends. Focus was more on the Me than on the We.

    A good example is myself.

    I thought by purchasing foreign, that would make the US industry take notice and force them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. What it did was make them consider re-locating off-shore to take advantage of extremely low wages in industrial poor nations to produce the same shitty product. While their lines remained crappy, prices began to get competitive. However, the significant savings in reduced labor costs and benefits created a flood of cash to sate Wall Street expectations and significantly boost share-holder equity.

    In other words, my defiance had the exact opposite affect I was expecting. Now, I see I should have actively engaged industry by refusing to make any purchases. Seems the correct method to get industry attention is to stifle the flow of consumer capital for products. If people were sitting on cash and making do with what ever was available instead of purchasing new, it would have sent the message the public wasn't buying what they were selling and they needed to make the necessary changes. So moving over to a foreign product line only forced the US industry to marginally adapt to consumer preferences, thus saving them a fortune in wages, benefits and pensions, rather than retool their product lines to meet consumer expectations...they made more money doing the same thing, it didn't cost them a penny to make the change, and they don't have any union, environmental or government interference to financially tie them down.

    And just to prove my point look at how Europe handles public health care when compared to the US. Rather than grasp the essence of the best of all the European health care systems and create something the world would envy, the US would rather keep the old system intact even though it's way too expensive for what you get and many have to forgo procedures simply because they can't afford the cost. Such as having a tooth pulled because one can't afford a root canal and crown.

    url : http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_health_of_nations

    And one thing you will find in Europe you won't see in the US are high individual taxes coupled with high salaries to pay for those taxes. That's why we became run-down and flea-bitten...WE allowed our Senators and Representatives in Congress give industry incentives to ignore passing on portions of the profits earned by their employee's hard work as increased wages, better benefit packages and secured retirement pensions.

    And as you well know from living in Michigan, those who control the reins of power have no care or concern about the people...it's all about business and how to create the perfect environment without the worry of government controls or taxes.

    WE have only ourselves to blame.



    Saddest to me is that most of the rhetoric about "Restoring our Nation's Greatness", is being made by the very people that destroyed it.  Their idea of restoration has more to do with bringing back robber barons and the social mores of the 19th century and dismantling every Liberal policy put into place over the last 80 years than reviving the spirit of 'looking out for the other guy' and creating a nation in which all individuals can thrive.


    At least the girl in this cartoon has the option of going home for "something else". If things keep going in the current direction of corporatocracy, we may not have that option.


    Hey, Ramona; I'm sorry you are suffering such heart-break.  The Stiglitz piece is great, isn't it?  I stuck it up on the In the News section (I think it was there) and we discussed it a bit maybe a week or so ago.

    The Hightower piece was pretty good, too, but I did want to point out the differences I see between the two.

    Hightower frames the problem as a Dem v. Republican one, and it sure is in those states.  Stiglitz, however, if you read it again, frames it as an Elites v. Everyone else scenario, and in that, I think he's right.  If you notice, he mentions the lack of anti-trust enforcements during the Bush years, but many of the other trends were down to this administration as well.  Other economists use a 4%-ers as the Elites Ruling and ratcheting the power upwards, as well as the wealth, but they also remind us that once you've rubbed elbows with supremely rich and powerful (like Congresspeople have) you tend to want more if you're of that ilk, which nost of them seem to be, too.

    Anyhoo, that's how I read the two pieces, and for my money, the Stiglitz take is more useful to the national debate.  I do think the various states' populations are kicking back hard, though undoing some of more ungodly moves like selling off public infrastructure to private entities will be longer-term problems not easily fixed.

    I put up a blog about Galbraith and Auerback writing of some solutions to the state and municipal financial straits they find themselves in now, and how Giethner is making it worse.  Hope Obama hears them.


    “self-interest properly understood.”

    Americans caring for Americans

    For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations.......Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.  G. Washington

    SELF INTEREST


    Oh for cryin out loud, Ramona, you too? This country gives up every damn recession. Pack of spoiled fair-weather patriots, if you ask me. And I include liberals with the conservatives in that regard.

    And by the way, the Koch's and the Coors and the rest are not The Rich. They are just a few nutty right-wingers who happen to have money.


     

    tanka haiku: America lies
    Dazed and bleeding on the mat
    Its greatness drained by
      Greedy corporations that
      Pledge allegiance to themselves.


    Latest Comments