America is mired in it quadrennial pagan ritual claimed to be the shining example of the democratic process, a presidential election campaign.
The red team seems to be on a search and destroy mission of attacking everyone and everything including itself, a strategy of alienation and division. It seems to be an attempt at divide and conquer through a smokescreen, which hides real issues. The blue team quickly capitalizes of Red’s alienation an draws in the disenchanted with platitudes of inclusion and change, another smokescreen hiding challenges that will play out long after the election.
The country is in an expanding two front shooting war along with its economic melt down. Both the Red and Blue teams blame the current administration for the problems. It can be argued that the present administration contributed to the current tales of woe. The truth is, however, that the administration inherited years of bad Purple (Red plus Blue) policies and did little address the root causes. In the race for free lodging at the White House, neither team is adequately dealing with the real need of this campaign.
The country is ten trillion dollars in debt and expects to spend a trillion dollars above its income next year. While decrying Wall Street’s embrace of debt as the cause of the current economic crisis the government is in the same hole and still digging. Red’s traditional allies of financial institutions and corporate giants are drowning in a sea of “red” ink. That red ink is now beginning to wash over Blue’s working man allies with increasing numbers being laid off, Merry Christmas. The administration is dumping 800 billion down the hold without hitting bottom. According to financial reporting about ten percent of 800 billion bailout will be used to pay bonuses to those responsible for the debacle, Merry Christmas.
Voters are angry and frightened and neither team has so far provided what is needed most at the moment, Hope. During the Great Depression candidate FDR campaigned on hope. When elected he implemented the policies of his predecessor but continued to sell hope. The policies were to little to late and it was a long haul before the crisis ended but hopes of better times move the people forward.
What this campaign needs is to walk away from divisive electioneering for the electorate needs a large does of Purple hope, a Merry Christmas for all.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
October Surprise
In America electioneering has become a never-ending ritual. The smoke from campaign fireworks still floats in the air when the future candidates begin to position themselves for the next election. A campaign industry has grown up around American elections. The collective cost of one campaign season could be in the billions. College students can now get a degree in campaign management. Consultants of every discipline analyze and manipulate every thought, sign and utterance calling the resulting deceptions “spin.”
Whether incumbent or challenger, underdogs hope for an “October Surprise” to save their floundering campaign fortunes. October surprises come in three basic versions. The front runner makes an incredible blunder that melts down the campaign. The underdog stages a brilliant last moment coup that creates a campaign bounce as the voters go to the polls. The third version is when some external factor seizes the voters’ attention. The winning candidate will be the one with the best “Spin Doctors” who claim credit for the candidate or tag the most blame on the opponent.
To be effective the October surprise must occur in the last few days of the election so the voters have little time to think of issues and vote on an emotional response to spin rather than facts. The real October surprise is that the country has survived its electioneering for so many years.
It is said that the voters get the elected officials they deserve. This is not a positive statement for an electorate, which does not attempt to understand the issues and personalities or even vote is left with officials who have mastered spin. The victors are often incompetent and corrupt but win elections because of lack of interest in the electorate.
Such is American election history. The current election is marred by campaign strategies reminiscent of 19th century machine politics and 20th century civil rights battles.
The United States claims a democratic moral high ground but the world now watches real time television broadcast of American campaigns. America is exporting electioneering spin to Russia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Latin America to name but a few places. Their voters are proving more skeptical of election integrity.
The American democratic moral high ground is eroding, along with American legitimacy as the international leader. Voters need to provide an October Surprise of their own. They should demand to be treated as adults and by candidates demonstrating real honesty and integrity.
Whether incumbent or challenger, underdogs hope for an “October Surprise” to save their floundering campaign fortunes. October surprises come in three basic versions. The front runner makes an incredible blunder that melts down the campaign. The underdog stages a brilliant last moment coup that creates a campaign bounce as the voters go to the polls. The third version is when some external factor seizes the voters’ attention. The winning candidate will be the one with the best “Spin Doctors” who claim credit for the candidate or tag the most blame on the opponent.
To be effective the October surprise must occur in the last few days of the election so the voters have little time to think of issues and vote on an emotional response to spin rather than facts. The real October surprise is that the country has survived its electioneering for so many years.
It is said that the voters get the elected officials they deserve. This is not a positive statement for an electorate, which does not attempt to understand the issues and personalities or even vote is left with officials who have mastered spin. The victors are often incompetent and corrupt but win elections because of lack of interest in the electorate.
Such is American election history. The current election is marred by campaign strategies reminiscent of 19th century machine politics and 20th century civil rights battles.
The United States claims a democratic moral high ground but the world now watches real time television broadcast of American campaigns. America is exporting electioneering spin to Russia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Latin America to name but a few places. Their voters are proving more skeptical of election integrity.
The American democratic moral high ground is eroding, along with American legitimacy as the international leader. Voters need to provide an October Surprise of their own. They should demand to be treated as adults and by candidates demonstrating real honesty and integrity.
Friday, October 24, 2008
History
The past is past, where is the future? There may be more political lies about history than any other political issue. “History proves my policy is the only one that will solve our problems.”
The question is whose history are we talking about. Every event has several sides and a great deal of emotional involvement. In general what passes for history is political correctness carried to extremes. History texts are compromises that glorify and excuse vested interest. During World War II the Allies were shouting loudly about Axis war crimes when there were few definitions of an international war crime. Winston Churchill was asked if he were not afraid that he and the Allies would also be tried for committing the same crimes. Churchill replied that the history of victory would determine who the criminals were and that he (Churchill) would write that history. Churchill did write that history and Allied crimes were buried in dusty archives.
Serious historians do not like to begin researching history in those archives until all the participants have died and emotions cooled. They look past period public utterances to masses of obscure documents that support or refute popular period histories. The vast majority of the public and journalist never search for historical truth in dusty archives but parrot political correct versions of past events.
It is true that there is much to be learned from history, what worked and what didn’t and it requires critical thinkers to assess the pluses and minus of true history and reach the equals of future strategies.
It has been said that Generals always fight the last war, often to true. Politicians campaign on the last election and journalist measure past results against that current election. Both of these are examples of historical mis-direction of public perspective from policy failures.
In the current election both American parties, who are equally at fault, seek to obscure the fact that failed public policies have led into an American economic melt down. A Black Hole that is dragging the world into recession. Both parties are reaching back almost 80 years for historically politically correct solutions. Certainly there are some parallels between the causes of the Great Depression and the current situation, but this is a different world than that of the 1930s. Learn from history, it took ten years and a World War to recover from the Great Depression, that is to costly in today’s interactive world.
Campaign strategist should have searched for some politically incorrect critical thinkers who could have crafted a future public policy strategy. It is imperative that the election victor, not only addresses the current challenges, but also mobilized the politically incorrect to produce a visionary public policy for the future survival of the State.
The question is whose history are we talking about. Every event has several sides and a great deal of emotional involvement. In general what passes for history is political correctness carried to extremes. History texts are compromises that glorify and excuse vested interest. During World War II the Allies were shouting loudly about Axis war crimes when there were few definitions of an international war crime. Winston Churchill was asked if he were not afraid that he and the Allies would also be tried for committing the same crimes. Churchill replied that the history of victory would determine who the criminals were and that he (Churchill) would write that history. Churchill did write that history and Allied crimes were buried in dusty archives.
Serious historians do not like to begin researching history in those archives until all the participants have died and emotions cooled. They look past period public utterances to masses of obscure documents that support or refute popular period histories. The vast majority of the public and journalist never search for historical truth in dusty archives but parrot political correct versions of past events.
It is true that there is much to be learned from history, what worked and what didn’t and it requires critical thinkers to assess the pluses and minus of true history and reach the equals of future strategies.
It has been said that Generals always fight the last war, often to true. Politicians campaign on the last election and journalist measure past results against that current election. Both of these are examples of historical mis-direction of public perspective from policy failures.
In the current election both American parties, who are equally at fault, seek to obscure the fact that failed public policies have led into an American economic melt down. A Black Hole that is dragging the world into recession. Both parties are reaching back almost 80 years for historically politically correct solutions. Certainly there are some parallels between the causes of the Great Depression and the current situation, but this is a different world than that of the 1930s. Learn from history, it took ten years and a World War to recover from the Great Depression, that is to costly in today’s interactive world.
Campaign strategist should have searched for some politically incorrect critical thinkers who could have crafted a future public policy strategy. It is imperative that the election victor, not only addresses the current challenges, but also mobilized the politically incorrect to produce a visionary public policy for the future survival of the State.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Center of the world
Proof of the United States’ position as the center of the world requires only a look at a world map in any American bookstore. Don’t, however, check the world maps in European or Chinese bookstores where they take center stage.
Despite American pretension of supremacy the world is a matter of viewpoint. To the world the United States is just another developing region. The United States is unique in many ways and it may be the world’s most heterogeneous society. It was not always so leading up to the Civil War the country was primarily Anglo-Saxon living in either a northern or southern cultures.
In the post war years a flood of immigrants began to fill the vastness claimed by manifest destiny politicians. Joining the immigrants were migrations of those displace by the conflict and a new culture emerged that of the westerner. The three cultures remained distinct well into the 20th century. The newly arrived immigrants tried hard integrate into the cultures of the American dream. Moving up in society meant moving out of ethnic ghettos. It was the three cataclysmic events of the 20th century that insured cultural assimilation. The two world wars and the great depression brought the cultures together in common cause. Soldiers returned with broader perspectives and joined a now mobile workforce. Telephones and most of all television moderated regional differences, the future looked grand.
Minorities began to notice that they did not have “FDR’s chicken in every pot,” and began to campaign for a seat at the table. Ethnic awareness not became a goal. No longer did the minorities want to be just Americans, the cry now was to become hyphenated Americans. The minorities won seats at the table but created hyphenated social regionalism. This regionalism does not have common interest and form frangible points in the nation.
In the euphoric glee of Cold War victory the United States encouraged ethnic minorities of the former Soviet Union to break away into independent balkanized States. Precedents have been established for ethnic states’ right to secede with foreign support.
The ethnic riots of the late 20th century in the United States demonstrate that the American Dream is fragile. Local and national politicians now exploit the frangible point in order to establish their own power base.
It is way past the time for enlightened leadership to emerge with visions of inclusion and grand strategic goals for the nations. Failure to do so may well result in the nation fracturing along hyphenated lines with a gleeful world providing aid to a now balkanized America.
Despite American pretension of supremacy the world is a matter of viewpoint. To the world the United States is just another developing region. The United States is unique in many ways and it may be the world’s most heterogeneous society. It was not always so leading up to the Civil War the country was primarily Anglo-Saxon living in either a northern or southern cultures.
In the post war years a flood of immigrants began to fill the vastness claimed by manifest destiny politicians. Joining the immigrants were migrations of those displace by the conflict and a new culture emerged that of the westerner. The three cultures remained distinct well into the 20th century. The newly arrived immigrants tried hard integrate into the cultures of the American dream. Moving up in society meant moving out of ethnic ghettos. It was the three cataclysmic events of the 20th century that insured cultural assimilation. The two world wars and the great depression brought the cultures together in common cause. Soldiers returned with broader perspectives and joined a now mobile workforce. Telephones and most of all television moderated regional differences, the future looked grand.
Minorities began to notice that they did not have “FDR’s chicken in every pot,” and began to campaign for a seat at the table. Ethnic awareness not became a goal. No longer did the minorities want to be just Americans, the cry now was to become hyphenated Americans. The minorities won seats at the table but created hyphenated social regionalism. This regionalism does not have common interest and form frangible points in the nation.
In the euphoric glee of Cold War victory the United States encouraged ethnic minorities of the former Soviet Union to break away into independent balkanized States. Precedents have been established for ethnic states’ right to secede with foreign support.
The ethnic riots of the late 20th century in the United States demonstrate that the American Dream is fragile. Local and national politicians now exploit the frangible point in order to establish their own power base.
It is way past the time for enlightened leadership to emerge with visions of inclusion and grand strategic goals for the nations. Failure to do so may well result in the nation fracturing along hyphenated lines with a gleeful world providing aid to a now balkanized America.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
New Power
The western world continues to be torn by self-inflicted wounds of bad management both in the private and public sectors. In the private sector it is short sighted, debt laden get rich quick, schemes, which are driving economies into whirlpools of failure. The public sector has also focused on the short term rather than strategic futures. Since the end of the so-called “Cold War” American leadership has floundered between conflicting policies that encouraged both debt and alienation of friends and foes alike.
Through its alliances the United States’ ego has dragged its friends into unpopular conflicts and confrontations over resources, power and flawed perceptions. While its leadership continues for flounder in search of policies the eastern world is moving strategically into the 21st century.
Both China and India are modernizing their infrastructures and building world relationships. At the moment it appears that India is focused on regional development while China is reaching out for global relationships. Both are relatively new comers to independent power both emerged from the shadow of internal strife and colonialism only about sixty years ago. Both emerged into a world constrained by “For or against us” great power cold war struggles.
China tried to move on to the national stage by supporting nationalist movements of the 50s and 60s but its own political, social and economic development difficulties forced a retrenchment. The predictions at end of the cold war was that China would collapse but China open its economy, liberalized its structure, developed its infrastructure and again reached out to the world.
The vastness of China contains two major resources, natural and human. The human resource provides both skilled and unskilled resources as well as a highly educated pool of scientist, economist and strategist visionaries. It is probable that it is this latter group that is leading China’s growth as a world power.
While the western powers continue to follow policies of exploitation, constraint and alienation China is investing in growth of developing countries. Through foreign aid, direct investment and engineering assistance China is making friends in resource rich regions which will assist its own strategic economic and power growth.
Through its alliances the United States’ ego has dragged its friends into unpopular conflicts and confrontations over resources, power and flawed perceptions. While its leadership continues for flounder in search of policies the eastern world is moving strategically into the 21st century.
Both China and India are modernizing their infrastructures and building world relationships. At the moment it appears that India is focused on regional development while China is reaching out for global relationships. Both are relatively new comers to independent power both emerged from the shadow of internal strife and colonialism only about sixty years ago. Both emerged into a world constrained by “For or against us” great power cold war struggles.
China tried to move on to the national stage by supporting nationalist movements of the 50s and 60s but its own political, social and economic development difficulties forced a retrenchment. The predictions at end of the cold war was that China would collapse but China open its economy, liberalized its structure, developed its infrastructure and again reached out to the world.
The vastness of China contains two major resources, natural and human. The human resource provides both skilled and unskilled resources as well as a highly educated pool of scientist, economist and strategist visionaries. It is probable that it is this latter group that is leading China’s growth as a world power.
While the western powers continue to follow policies of exploitation, constraint and alienation China is investing in growth of developing countries. Through foreign aid, direct investment and engineering assistance China is making friends in resource rich regions which will assist its own strategic economic and power growth.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Great Powers
Since the turn of the 21st century global intellectual debate has focused on the historical Great Power paradigm. In general, the theory goes that a state rises to Great Power status remains there for a number of years and then begins to decline in status until it is replaced by emerging great power states, a cycle of approximately one hundred years.
The current debate is that the United States has had its one hundred-year and who will be the next great power to emerge. To understand the debate one must understand the nature of great power. Far to often people look at shiny armies as the measure of great power. Military power is only one element of great power. The Soviet Union had great military power but lasted less than 50 years on the international stage. The Soviets never balanced all the measures of power to be considered a truly great power. A state must not only possess military power but also economic power, mastering technology, natural resources, human capital and remain flexible enough to grow with the changing measures of power. Most of all a Great Power must have the respect of other states. Great Power may be shared among states, known as the balance of power. Great Powers are not defeated: they erode, unwilling to commit themselves to power responsibilities; or they commit suicide, focusing on past greatness rather than adjust to changing power dynamics.
The Americans are arguing that the United States is an exception as its manifest destiny is to be the global power doling out favors and punishment to the rest of the world. The Americans also argue that no other state is capable of great power. This argument fails to remember that the United States emerged as a Great Power in one generation.
Moving toward great power status are, Brazil, China, EU India, Russia. All have educated populations, resources and growing economies. The United States could be dropped into the jungles of Brazil with enough space left over for several smaller states. The EU alone has twice the population of the United States, China and India comprise over half the worlds population. It is true that Brazil and Russia have development and internal political issues. It is also true that the EU has limited natural resources and is still dealing with internal nationalistic issues. India must deal with religious issues as well as population divided by education and wealth. It is China that is most immediately prepared for Great Power status but it to has internal issues to settle. The American argument that none are capable of exercising world leadership rolls ignores that it may only take one generation of dynamic leadership to move a state to a Great Power.
The two most enduring measures of power are economics and international leadership. The United States is faced with unprecedented financial melt down from its “have it now” debt ridden life style. As U.S. financial institution began to drag down the global economies foreign banks and corporations stepped in to shore up the United States while picking up cut rate plums for themselves. It is unlikely that foreign governments will link themselves closely to the United States that it can again threaten the global economy.
At the end of World War Two the United States was the most respected nation on the planet. Momentum carried it to the top of the hill but “for us, or against us” leadership has lead to a steady decline in world respect.
In the 20th century the United States was instrumental in linking the world. In the 21st century that linked world now questions the value of following U.S. leadership. The coming American elections are far more important than the American public realizes. At stake is America as a Great Power or a struggling state clinging to past glories.
The new administration must lead the public away debt laden policies and toward shared power among equals. Only by enlightened leadership can the United States escape the historical long cycle decline as a great power.
The current debate is that the United States has had its one hundred-year and who will be the next great power to emerge. To understand the debate one must understand the nature of great power. Far to often people look at shiny armies as the measure of great power. Military power is only one element of great power. The Soviet Union had great military power but lasted less than 50 years on the international stage. The Soviets never balanced all the measures of power to be considered a truly great power. A state must not only possess military power but also economic power, mastering technology, natural resources, human capital and remain flexible enough to grow with the changing measures of power. Most of all a Great Power must have the respect of other states. Great Power may be shared among states, known as the balance of power. Great Powers are not defeated: they erode, unwilling to commit themselves to power responsibilities; or they commit suicide, focusing on past greatness rather than adjust to changing power dynamics.
The Americans are arguing that the United States is an exception as its manifest destiny is to be the global power doling out favors and punishment to the rest of the world. The Americans also argue that no other state is capable of great power. This argument fails to remember that the United States emerged as a Great Power in one generation.
Moving toward great power status are, Brazil, China, EU India, Russia. All have educated populations, resources and growing economies. The United States could be dropped into the jungles of Brazil with enough space left over for several smaller states. The EU alone has twice the population of the United States, China and India comprise over half the worlds population. It is true that Brazil and Russia have development and internal political issues. It is also true that the EU has limited natural resources and is still dealing with internal nationalistic issues. India must deal with religious issues as well as population divided by education and wealth. It is China that is most immediately prepared for Great Power status but it to has internal issues to settle. The American argument that none are capable of exercising world leadership rolls ignores that it may only take one generation of dynamic leadership to move a state to a Great Power.
The two most enduring measures of power are economics and international leadership. The United States is faced with unprecedented financial melt down from its “have it now” debt ridden life style. As U.S. financial institution began to drag down the global economies foreign banks and corporations stepped in to shore up the United States while picking up cut rate plums for themselves. It is unlikely that foreign governments will link themselves closely to the United States that it can again threaten the global economy.
At the end of World War Two the United States was the most respected nation on the planet. Momentum carried it to the top of the hill but “for us, or against us” leadership has lead to a steady decline in world respect.
In the 20th century the United States was instrumental in linking the world. In the 21st century that linked world now questions the value of following U.S. leadership. The coming American elections are far more important than the American public realizes. At stake is America as a Great Power or a struggling state clinging to past glories.
The new administration must lead the public away debt laden policies and toward shared power among equals. Only by enlightened leadership can the United States escape the historical long cycle decline as a great power.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Oil-igarchies
In “Blood Barrels”, a recent Foreign Affairs article, Michael L. Ross notes the links of oil production and regional conflicts. Ross correctly identifies some of the causations for petro-wars; there are ample case studies to support his thesis. He also makes a number of suggestions for reforms that could reduce oil-igarchies embrace of conflict.
Most commodities react to purely supply and demand dynamics; oil prices on the other hand are complicated by emotions. Most notable is the emotion of fear which oil-igarchies manipulate for corporate and individual greed. When the well-head cost of a barrel of oil goes up there is an immediate consumer price surge although products of that barrel of oil may not reach the consumer for two or more months. When the well head cost go down however the consumer price takes months to lower and never returns to the previous level.
This is neither a unique or a recent trend. Oil has been the center of greed economics and politics for thousands of years. Consider olive oil as fueling the Greek and Roman wars, Competing whale oil fleets of 19th century led into the Great oil wars of the 20th century.
Scholars have noted that the Middle East was ignored by the world until oil was discovered in 1901 in what is now Iran. These discoveries coincided with oil fired technological advances. Britain locked up the oil fields of Iran, which they held on to until mid-century. Germany, twisting Ottoman arms and possibly using bribes as grease, pushed a rail line to the prospective oil fields of (now) Iraq. It was international oil-igarchies that led to the Middle-East campaigns of World War I. In the post war era the British and French divided the Ottoman region and locked out the Germans. A late comer to the great oil grab America had to pay a premium to play in the international oil puddle but it to soon converted from an oil exporter to an importer of cheaper foreign oil for greater profits. In World War 2 Germany reached for Soviet (Russian) oil fields while locked out Japan headed to Southeast Asia. Allied powers “protected” oil producers from the axis but not from their own exploitation.
In ruins of World War 2 protectors exploited producers but the times were changing as nationalist movements swept Africa and Asia. The overt explanation was to throw off colonial exploitation but the elites of the oil producers had learned their lessons well, oil produced great wealth. Great wealth enabled high ideals and low. There was much promised to the people of the newly independent nations but little delivered as income was diverted and negotiated away by new oli-igarchies.
The flaw in free market economies is that greed is insatiable and the greedy are experts in rationalizing self-interest as the greater good, manufacturing fear as a means to their end. The present conflict is justified by an obscure “Energy Security Initiate” which held that the powerful are entitled to “protect oil” anywhere in the world. The problem is that the measures of power are shifting and while oil remains supreme for the foreseeable future it will be alternative energy sources that will ultimately reduce petro-wars.
Most commodities react to purely supply and demand dynamics; oil prices on the other hand are complicated by emotions. Most notable is the emotion of fear which oil-igarchies manipulate for corporate and individual greed. When the well-head cost of a barrel of oil goes up there is an immediate consumer price surge although products of that barrel of oil may not reach the consumer for two or more months. When the well head cost go down however the consumer price takes months to lower and never returns to the previous level.
This is neither a unique or a recent trend. Oil has been the center of greed economics and politics for thousands of years. Consider olive oil as fueling the Greek and Roman wars, Competing whale oil fleets of 19th century led into the Great oil wars of the 20th century.
Scholars have noted that the Middle East was ignored by the world until oil was discovered in 1901 in what is now Iran. These discoveries coincided with oil fired technological advances. Britain locked up the oil fields of Iran, which they held on to until mid-century. Germany, twisting Ottoman arms and possibly using bribes as grease, pushed a rail line to the prospective oil fields of (now) Iraq. It was international oil-igarchies that led to the Middle-East campaigns of World War I. In the post war era the British and French divided the Ottoman region and locked out the Germans. A late comer to the great oil grab America had to pay a premium to play in the international oil puddle but it to soon converted from an oil exporter to an importer of cheaper foreign oil for greater profits. In World War 2 Germany reached for Soviet (Russian) oil fields while locked out Japan headed to Southeast Asia. Allied powers “protected” oil producers from the axis but not from their own exploitation.
In ruins of World War 2 protectors exploited producers but the times were changing as nationalist movements swept Africa and Asia. The overt explanation was to throw off colonial exploitation but the elites of the oil producers had learned their lessons well, oil produced great wealth. Great wealth enabled high ideals and low. There was much promised to the people of the newly independent nations but little delivered as income was diverted and negotiated away by new oli-igarchies.
The flaw in free market economies is that greed is insatiable and the greedy are experts in rationalizing self-interest as the greater good, manufacturing fear as a means to their end. The present conflict is justified by an obscure “Energy Security Initiate” which held that the powerful are entitled to “protect oil” anywhere in the world. The problem is that the measures of power are shifting and while oil remains supreme for the foreseeable future it will be alternative energy sources that will ultimately reduce petro-wars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)