The Winds of Change. It Takes a Village (and the right inhabitants)

I've been thinking about social change. In a system where people are free to participate, it takes a wave, a critical mass, to bring about change. Leadership is very important too, because it articulates the need for change. What we're witnessing with OWS is a grass-roots movement that has spread from NYC to the rest of the US and now the globe.

Many people are instinctively conservative, in that they want stability, the prefer the devil they know to the unknown. This is the first hurdle a successful movement has to overcome--that change won't lead to chaos or something worse than the status quo. When people feel threatened or unsure, they don't want change.

But, the OWS without leadership and concrete laid-out proposals for reform has played a crucial role in raising awareness about the unfairness and terrible outcomes of our political-economic system. Most Americans don't know how much the top 10% own but they realize it's "too much." They have experienced the bad effects while the elites are bragging who's got the biggest bonuses--some of which came after their failed companies got a public bailout!

This is a good visual, I found:

Change by Public Consensus

Change also comes when the public moves in certain direction. For example, what was radical a generation ago--same sex marriage, gays in the military, etc--is mainstream today. The political parties usually move to cover the public sentiment. Traditionally, one of our two major parties is more progressive but, up until the mid to late 1980s, the Republican party became more conservative. The reason is the influx of very religious conservatives.

Today, the Tea Party has made the Republican party even more conservative, to the point of extremism. It's extremism, because this is not where the bulk of the country is nor where it's heading. Unfortunately, even the GOP leadership, and now the presidential candidates seem to care more about this extremist element because they think this is where the votes are in the party's primaries.

There have been several polls that demonstrate the increasingly conservative bend of many Republicans today. Here's one by Research 2000:

• 63% think Obama is a socialist ("not sure" 16%)
• only 42% believe he was born in US ("not sure" 22%)
• 39% want Obama impeached.
• 53% think Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Obama
• 23% want to secede from US
• 24% believe Barack Obama wants the terrorists to win ("not sure" 33%)
• 31% believe Barack Obama is a racist who hates White people
• 73% think gay men and women shouldn't be allowed to teach in public schools
• 31% want contraceptives outlawed

Note the "unsure" category.

Going Backwards

In other words, if the village wants a witch hunt, the leadership will oblige. Poor John Huntsman who called himself crazy for believing in science, like evolution, climate change, age of the earth, etc. Here's a "reasonable" conservative who can't get any traction. Maybe if the Republicans suffer another big defeat, they'll finally turn their ship around and become a party of the 21st century. It'd be good for the country. Then, hopefully, the Democratic party will become more progressive.

Election 2010 and the Aftermath. Much Will Depend on the Learning Curve of President Obama in the Next 2 Years

Probably you've heard that the GOP took control of the House in Congress in a "historic" collapse of the Dems. Nothing unusual really. In the last 80 years, in the first midterm elections the party in the White House always loses seats in Congress. Only twice there was an exception: FDR in 1934 (Great Depression), and GWB in 2002 (War time). 


The opposition is always more energized and it shows at the polls. This election was decided primarily by turnout. The economy and the perception of ineffectiveness/weak leadership were the other reasons.

Did you watch Obama's speech/analysis of this election? “We were in such a hurry to get things done that we didn’t change how things got done,” What?! No, Mr. President, the Democrats lost because:


1. The economy still sucks even though Wall Street is doing fabulously well. More importantly, you didn't explain to the public that 8 million jobs were lost before you took office; that another 3/4 of a million were lost in the first 3 months after you got into office--before your policies went into effect; that 40% of the stimulus money went to save jobs like school teachers, firefighters, and police. Needed projects to shore up our crumbling infrastructure also helped with keeping unemployment down and stimulating the economy. Same for extending unemployment benefits. Many economist have argued that your stimulus wasn't big enough.


2. That you failed to pass a health care reform bill as you had promised, because you wasted one year trying to convince Republicans to support a watered-down bill (none of them did anyway), and you gave your electoral winnings to DINOs (like Max Baucus) to gamble away. You failed to explain that even this health care bill gives coverage to millions more Americans, prevents insurance companies from capping coverage and dropping people for pre-existing conditions, and allowing students to be under their parents insurance until 27 years old. But, where's the public option? Also, most of the already insured saw their coverage premiums go up.


3. You alienated your progressive and most active political base by scorning groups that raised lots of money for you, hoped you'd end DADT, DOMA, take the country out of 2 wars and bring the troops home.  You took bad advice from people like Rahm Emanuel, who don't understand that progressives may not go to the other side but they can stay home on election day.


4. You didn't push for immigration reform. Hispanics are heavily pro-Democratic but they have to see someone fight for good, sensible, and practical reform of our broken immigration system. 


5. Do you know why you lost the independents' vote? About 20-25% of the independents are "floaters"--move from party to party within a short span of time. Some 10% can be moved by rational arguments, like reasonable people who evaluate the evidence and make a rational decision. Unfortunately, most voters aren't moved by rational arguments. They are moved by impressions, perceived results, and strong leadership.

A Different Electorate

This electorate was older, richer, and whiter. Blacks didn't come out to vote like they did in the past--their percentage in the voting public dropped precipitously. Hispanics didn't vote either in big numbers--except in Nevada! They had a reason there: Sharon Angle and her racist, xenophobic ads.


As for compromise the Dems  and the president are ready to accept, it's a dubious thing. The Repubs aren't interested; their number one priority is to make Obama one-termer! The latter already bought into their talking point: extend the Bush tax cuts. These tax cuts will go to the top 2% of Americans and will cost $1 trillion. Sure, cut the government, they say to balance the budget. First, it can't be done--enough of these deficit peacocks. Secondly, what are they going to cut? Seriously? What part of the discretionary budget will they cut? Is the defense budget on the table too? 

Compromise is part of politics. Our own political system is partly the result of a compromise. However, facts are pesky things that get in the way of an opinion. A conversation and possible compromise between rational parties should start on a factual basis. Compromising with the flat earthers by agreeing that the earth is a ..square serves no good purpose.


There are positive outcomes from this election too: The Tea Party as the spoiler to the GOP hopes of capturing the Senate. There will be a fight now between the teabaggers, their supporters and the pragmatists like Olympia Snowe (R-ME). Also, the "blue dogs" Dems were disseminated. If Obama plays it smart--like FDR did in the 1930s--he can blame the conservatives for gridlock and, more importantly, he can point out who's on whose side. Who's is promoting the interest of the people and who's promoting the interests of big business and the rich. Can't wait for another government shutdown... 


I've talked with many people who are disgusted by politics, who believe that our two corporatist parties have the same agenda and it doesn't really make a difference. I share their frustration but I don't share their conclusion. It's beyond obvious to me that elections matter. A preliminary analysis by Think Progress shows:

Here is a snapshot of the GOP Class of 2010’s extremism:

ENVIRONMENT

- 50% deny the existence of man-made climate change
- 86% are opposed to any climate change legislation that increases government revenue

IMMIGRATION

- 39% have already declared their intention to end the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship
- 32% want to reduce legal immigration

TAXES/SPENDING

- 91% have sworn to never allow an income tax increase on any individual or business – regardless of deficits or war
- 79% have pledged to permanently repeal the estate tax
- 48% are pushing for a balanced budget amendment

To be continued.....

Tea Parties + Republican Morass = More Disfunctional Politics

It seems that the tea parties have some success in the Republican primaries this year, producing nominees that are way out of where most Americans are politically. The teabaggers may represent a growing movement but I think such reactionary and rather extreme groups don't have much lasting effect once crises subside. Unfortunately, the Republican Party is being pulled further to ultra-conservatism and to a political base that's small and shrinking.

Irresponsible leadership, careless rhetoric, and promoting crazy ideas eventually comes back to bite you. The GOP will not compete for control of the Senate this year because of the teabaggers. Moderate Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) said today that if the moderates are endangered in the GOP, the party cannot be a majority party. In the northeast, ME has the only Rep Senators, while in the House there are zero from New England, and only 2 if NY is included. This may change in this election and the next, but this region--and for that matter most of the country--is not moving in the GOP's direction.


Think of the major policies, ideological stances, and the candidates on the Republican side. Do you see the majority of Americans being attracted to them in the future? I want a modern Republican party, one that promotes science, is tolerant & cosmopolitan. If it promoted fiscal responsibility in an honest way, it could be helpful. Please, don't tell me about Repubs being for fiscal responsibility since Nixon..  All have been big spenders and deficit peacocks... all show but no substance.

The budget cannot be balanced by cuts alone. Revenue is needed too. And, giving a trillion dollar tax cut to the rich isn't right and won't help either.  As long as the GOP runs on an anti-government platform, it should remain out of government. In a free and advanced country, the government is of-by-for the people. The "for" means the government serves the interests of the people not the elite's.


Did you hear about a country that 1 in 7 people live in poverty? Where the middle class wages have remained stagnant (adjusted for inflation) since 1973? Where almost 50 million people are still without or limited health care?... That's 1 in 6 with no health care insurance. Where infant mortality in some states is much higher than Cuba's and Iran's? Where the gap between the rich & every one else has increased and now it's bigger than the so-called Gilded Age?


Ah, freedom! It's a nice thing to have. But, it has to be connected to meaningful choices and opportunities.

Now let's observe how the Dems will screw this up once again. They should take the fight to the Republicans. Despite the former being played like a rag doll by the GOP during the first year of the Obama administration, they have to remind the voters who's responsible for this mess, that a wrecked economy can't be fixed in 18 months, and that this ultra-nutty GOP cannot be trusted with the keys to the government.