By: David Olson
When the stimulus package passed into legislation early this year President Obama had one major objective in mind: remediating the continuing slide of our economy and beginning the processes of turning around this “Great Recession”. Yet as the bill passed through the House and the Senate something happened along the way and H.R.1 of the 111th Congress lost sight of its true goal. What was this great “something”? It was the same thing that seems to happen every day now Congress: your and my Representatives and Senators bickered like school children until each had made their own mark on H.R.1; what came out was an act no longer strong enough to repair our failed markets. When we needed Hercules we were given Sisyphus.
Partisan politics is “politics-as-usual” and don’t be fooled by your candidates, change doesn’t come from just one side. The blame doesn’t rest just with the Democrats or the Republicans, the Libertarians or the Independents, blame rests in every citizen who holds onto their values without question and won’t give the time to listen to the opposition. Why is it that when our economists and political scientists tell us to do one thing we seem to do another? The failures of fisheries and greenhouse pollution provide fair examples: we just don’t want to listen to the other side of the argument.
Our federal policies overseeing the management of our natural resources are not sustainable when they so easily could be. To ensure the preservation of our forests, our arctic, our rivers and water, our soil and our atmosphere we need to stop seeing ourselves as Republicans and Democrats and start seeing ourselves as citizens of this country and of the world.
To understand what solutions are needed to overcome the crises we face success can only come when we are open to understanding all aspects of the problem. Ignorance comes when one is too unwilling to seek out the whole truth, and that is why I gladly keep myself as a non-affiliated voter.
8 comments:
I believe that the lack of sustainability seen in our policies overseeing the management of natural resources stem from the roots of Christianity found in the politics of the United States. No matter how many times we say "separation of church and state", we cannot break the ties that Christianity and in turn, its "dominion ethic" have on our policies. What I mean by dominion ethic is the philosophy, prevalent in Christianity, that the world and its resources are here for humans to exploit. Until we eradicate this, we will not be able to effectively implement environmental and natural resource policies that are sustainable.
I definitely agree that a shift away from party affiliation and towards seeing ourselves as citizens of this nation is much needed. I believe the whole American way of thinking needs to be overhauled before real environmental and economic progress can be made. I also agree with Nick in that Christianity, or religion in general, is a constant thorn in the side of logical thinking and sustainable policy.
A grad student buddy of mine wonders what the evidence is for the alleged policy failure. Is there evidence that pork-barrel politics have driven the decreased effectiveness of stimulus etc.?
On another note, I wonder if the religious origins of our polity have an effect on environmental outcomes. If our environmental policies are explained by our religious orientations, what explains the widely diverging environmental outcomes in places like Russia and NE Europe--equally secular with similar religious histories?
While religion does play a large role in general social thought, I would argue that the conspicuously Western extractatory concept grew out of a very anti-religious, democratic, and ultimately 'modern' philosophy of industry, and the subsequent practice of it in a revolution of the same name. Adam Smith, far before the tides of biological racism lapped the world's shores, made this categorical: those who worked to improve the land to increase its productivity were granted right of ownership according not to Heavenly law, but to the statues of Nature. Conversely, those who did not, he termed 'barbaric' and thus they had no claims on the land, least none that nature honoured.
Yes, very little is actually teleological, but the general pattern of this development in society is very apparent, and certainly helps us understand other controversial (at the least) policies such as forced resettlement of civilisations.
In response to the fact that partisan politics is business as usual on capital hill, I wonder why no one in educational or ideological circles seems to think it important for this problem to be addressed at the root. Religion is one way to see this, but that in itself is an ideology. Why not teach our future politicians and representatives that ideologies are just that, a set of beliefs held by certain individuals and groups, and not scientific or natural facts. This seems to me to be a big part of why our government works the way it does, and why as Glenn said, change doesn't happen from only one side.
I definitely agree that blindly choosing a opinion about anything is stupid, no matter if party affiliation has anything to do with it or not. I would hope people generally make decisions based on personal values, but know that the two primary parties have lots of influence and have extreme believers on both ends. I believe this extremism in the bipartisan system is being self destructive at the moment, primarily from the lobbying that goes on with both sides. This is one example and health care is another. As Senators and Representatives add their "own marks", where I would suspect the special interest propositions to be exposed, lost sight of the fact that our country badly needs a sustainable economy soon, and better oversight of the natural resource system and would be a good issue for these parties to come together on. They could at least give everyone hope that politicians actually care about the wellbeing of our country and planet and we would like our children to inherit a world where there are no resource wars. Sustainability should not be a bipartisan issue, it is an American issue. These bills get so wordy and are always susceptible to the power of the English language, and as a result are highly controversial in some areas. And unfortunately as they continue to bicker and refuse to see the bigger picture, the American people will continue to struggle for no reason.
Good Luck...
My roommate went back home to Wisconsin, was picked on for voting for Obama [by family], and had to hear the N word way more times than he was okay with. The divide starts with uneducated ignorance, gets widened with a bit of bigotry, stir in a bit of socio-economic gap growth; and voile... you get our stuck-ass can't get with the times country. Conservatives in the heartland, and liberals at the coasts. How can you reconcile the culture of being raised on a farm with that of being raised in LA?
There are still those that believe global warming is a hoax (although none are reputable scientists).
There are still those that think "business as usual" is best... I.e. the world is our toilet, so lets just shit everywhere!
I is very regressive the amount of time and energy that is spent by those who pledge a complete allegiance to one political party or another and the bickering and finger pointing that goes on because the other side simply cannot be right, ever. I share your frustration, and support the idea that differences in parties and political outlooks should produce beneficial results, and not cause so much friction that we have a hard time accomplishing anything.
David McKinley
Post a Comment