The National Intelligence Estimate made headlines because of its blindingly self-evident conclusion that the Iraq aggression was worsening the threat of terrorism.
One of the lesser reported parts of the report was to equate those who question the globalization with terrorists. According to The Progressive:
"Anti-U.S. and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fueling other radical ideologies," the document states. "This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack U.S. interests."
I do not oppose globalization whole hog. I think it has many good aspects. It allows activists from all over the world to communicate with each other. It allows people in a small upstate NY town to eat Thai food and easily obtain books by African authors.
It has its well-documented flaws too. You can't make omelettes without breaking eggs. Except the eggs are the lives of ordinary, hard-working people.
This doesn't necessarily mean you should throw out the baby with the bath water. I still think globalization is a good thing overall, unlike many of my fellow progressives. But I also think its pernicious effects on ordinary people ought to be dealt with by the government, since it was the government that imposed this system on the ordinary people in the first place. If the government's role is to protect only corporate interests, then let it be funded by only corporate taxes, let me keep my personal income taxes.
What I most object to is how globalization has been presented as a fundamentalist religion where you must agree with it 100 percent. If you have the audacity to point out that it has some negative effects on ordinary people or worse yet, dare suggest that such problems ought to be addressed by the government or otherwise mitigated, you're labelled a heretic and burned at the stake.
Well, you used to be a heretic if you recognized such nuance. Now, you're a terrorist.
Such is 'progress' in Bush's America.
I've long believed the Bush administration is completely out of control. Not because they're wrong on the issues. Lots of administrations get it wrong on the issues. Being part of democracy means that your guys aren't going to be in power all the time.
Any administration tends toward consolidating as much power as it can, Republican or Democrat. But usually, Congress steps in to try to limit that power. When it doesn't, that's when the disastrous problems occur. Lyndon Johnson did the same thing under a Democratic Congress and that's what sent us headlong into the Vietnam nightmare.
For several years following 9/11, Congress abdicated this constitutional responsibility. It offered no checks and balances against the excesses and abuses of power. So by the time Congress realized that maybe this abdication wasn't a good idea, the trend had been set and the Bush administration was used to acting like an absolute monarch. The Pandora's Box had already been opened.
As a result, you now have those who question globalization being talked about in the same breath as Osama bin Laden. It reminds me of how only a month after 9/11, one of the president's advisors said Congress ought to pass a tax cut for the rich in order to send a message to the terrorists. Again, talk about being completely out of control.
Mostly, I blame the Bush administration itself for this since they're the ones perpetrating the abuses of power. But I also place a lot of blame on Congress, both Democratic and Republican members who acted as a blind rubber stamp for so many years.
Democracy only works when someone has the guts to stand up and point out flaws in what the government wants to do. This is called self-correction and it's essential for a properly functioning democracy. It's why democracies work better in the long-term than dictatorships. Until recently, no one (except those evil, troop hating, terrorist loving, Saddam embracing, America-hating anti-war types) had the guts to say the emperor had no clothes.
But I suppose this is probably yet another thing we can find a way to scapegoat someone completely irrelevant. It must be the fault of celebrities. Or the UN. Or the Dixie Chicks. Or the French.
No comments:
Post a Comment