Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Please be sane
Today's two op-eds at the NYT are a perfect illustration of the present divide in American politics. The two sides used to be called liberal and conservative, but those monikers no longer capture the real division, which is between the sane and the mad.
Paul Krugman writes a standard Social Security piece, which, like so many I've read in the last month, points out that improving Social Security's fiscal position has nothing to do with private accounts, and everything to do with net national saving. He points out that the deficits Bush's current fiscal policies and proposals will likely create could bring about an Argentina-style crisis. I get the feeling that while Krugman would prefer that Bush preserve the nation's commitment to its retirees, he above all wants Bush to have a sane fiscal policy. If you're going to rob us blind by pillaging the trust fund and/or giving Wall Street a cut of the Social Security pie, at least do it without bankrupting the country. (Let's put it another way, Mr. Bush. How much would it cost to get you and your crew to leave us alone. $500 billion? An even trillion, cold hard cash? It'd be a bargain for the country.)
David Brooks writes a truly bizarre article that as much as admits that Iraq is beyond hope and doomed to a bloody civil war, then does an about face to assert that because most Iraqis want security (he goes so far as to say democracy; I find it dubious that most Iraqis know what it is), therefore they will find a way to control the small percentage who want chaos. Wow. Now that they have all the power, they don't even put the slightest effort into convincing us things will be okay.
First, if "majority for peace brings peace" were an empirically supported principle, world history would look very different. I think most people in pretty much every society are decent folks who would like to live peaceful, secure lives. Yet history is full of civil wars, genocides, and other conflagrations. Clearly, a minority can create violence and instability in some cases, and the peace-loving majority can be persuaded that violence is the only way. Paging Dr. Pangloss---you've just been one-upped.
Second, WTF---aren't conservatives endlessly bleating on about the age of terror, and the power of small, fanatical groups to threaten superpowers? Isn't that why the Bush administration insists on being allowed to invade countries at the first hint of a future threat? And now we're to believe that any small group dedicated to violence and terror is doomed because it lacks a majority? I guess 9/11 doesn't change anything after all.
I haven't posted in a month, but I've been reading, and Jebus is it depressing. I've seen three main news stories: Bush-engineered economic decline; Bush-engineered chaos and death in Iraq, and natural disaster around the Indian Ocean. Nature trumps Bush for destructive power, but give him another year in Iraq, and he'll catch up. I've also seen three main propaganda themes in the conservative press: 2+2=5 level falsehoods, especially regarding Social Security; increasingly fantastical hopes of a turn-around in Iraq; and ominous mutterings that it is time to really "get tough" on the insurgents by training death squads to foment terror in the Sunni triangle (no doubt the new Torturer General can help out).
In the Bush era, the formerly-conservative Republicans have a single media goal: keep their image positive and their enemies under fire while they grab everything that isn't bolted down. Formerly-liberal Democrats have given up on seeing progressive aims realized, and increasingly just want sane policies. Sane conservative policies would be fine. But please, don't burn down the country while you're pilfering the Treasury; don't bleed the army white to make your opponents look like cowards; don't turn us into a nation of torturers, terrorists, and thugs because you lack the creativity to solve the problems you've created; and don't throw out two centuries of democracy just to hold on to power through our national descent into poverty and despair.
We former-liberals in the Sanity Party know you are morons, monsters, and madmen. We tried to stop you; we tried to tell the people, but you've won every round. Now just take what you want and go. We won't press charges, and you can pardon yourselves on the way out. Just leave something standing.
Paul Krugman writes a standard Social Security piece, which, like so many I've read in the last month, points out that improving Social Security's fiscal position has nothing to do with private accounts, and everything to do with net national saving. He points out that the deficits Bush's current fiscal policies and proposals will likely create could bring about an Argentina-style crisis. I get the feeling that while Krugman would prefer that Bush preserve the nation's commitment to its retirees, he above all wants Bush to have a sane fiscal policy. If you're going to rob us blind by pillaging the trust fund and/or giving Wall Street a cut of the Social Security pie, at least do it without bankrupting the country. (Let's put it another way, Mr. Bush. How much would it cost to get you and your crew to leave us alone. $500 billion? An even trillion, cold hard cash? It'd be a bargain for the country.)
David Brooks writes a truly bizarre article that as much as admits that Iraq is beyond hope and doomed to a bloody civil war, then does an about face to assert that because most Iraqis want security (he goes so far as to say democracy; I find it dubious that most Iraqis know what it is), therefore they will find a way to control the small percentage who want chaos. Wow. Now that they have all the power, they don't even put the slightest effort into convincing us things will be okay.
First, if "majority for peace brings peace" were an empirically supported principle, world history would look very different. I think most people in pretty much every society are decent folks who would like to live peaceful, secure lives. Yet history is full of civil wars, genocides, and other conflagrations. Clearly, a minority can create violence and instability in some cases, and the peace-loving majority can be persuaded that violence is the only way. Paging Dr. Pangloss---you've just been one-upped.
Second, WTF---aren't conservatives endlessly bleating on about the age of terror, and the power of small, fanatical groups to threaten superpowers? Isn't that why the Bush administration insists on being allowed to invade countries at the first hint of a future threat? And now we're to believe that any small group dedicated to violence and terror is doomed because it lacks a majority? I guess 9/11 doesn't change anything after all.
I haven't posted in a month, but I've been reading, and Jebus is it depressing. I've seen three main news stories: Bush-engineered economic decline; Bush-engineered chaos and death in Iraq, and natural disaster around the Indian Ocean. Nature trumps Bush for destructive power, but give him another year in Iraq, and he'll catch up. I've also seen three main propaganda themes in the conservative press: 2+2=5 level falsehoods, especially regarding Social Security; increasingly fantastical hopes of a turn-around in Iraq; and ominous mutterings that it is time to really "get tough" on the insurgents by training death squads to foment terror in the Sunni triangle (no doubt the new Torturer General can help out).
In the Bush era, the formerly-conservative Republicans have a single media goal: keep their image positive and their enemies under fire while they grab everything that isn't bolted down. Formerly-liberal Democrats have given up on seeing progressive aims realized, and increasingly just want sane policies. Sane conservative policies would be fine. But please, don't burn down the country while you're pilfering the Treasury; don't bleed the army white to make your opponents look like cowards; don't turn us into a nation of torturers, terrorists, and thugs because you lack the creativity to solve the problems you've created; and don't throw out two centuries of democracy just to hold on to power through our national descent into poverty and despair.
We former-liberals in the Sanity Party know you are morons, monsters, and madmen. We tried to stop you; we tried to tell the people, but you've won every round. Now just take what you want and go. We won't press charges, and you can pardon yourselves on the way out. Just leave something standing.
