Saturday, November 29, 2008

The New World Order?

In a radio interview, Ronald Wright explained the thesis outlined in his book "What is America:  A short history of the New World Order".   

It isn't pretty.  His picture of how the U.S. rose to the status of superpower in two short centuries is convincing, if a little depressing.  First, the invaders from the European continent wipe out the existing indigenous population through a deadly combination of war and infectious disease, and take over their land and agricultural techniques.  Second, they institute a well-worn strategy of importing a ready-made workforce, otherwise known as slavery, to begin the process of building and profiting from this new world.  

From this inauspicious start, a new country was borne with an impressive mandate - to create a land where the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness must prevail over all.  The writers of the U.S. constitution meant to create a form of governance in which 'rational thought' would trump the inherent prejudice of a 'supernatural' belief system.

But this was easier said than done.   Religious institutions dominated the nascent American culture, and some politicians were quick to exploit this predilection.  Andrew Jackson was apparently the first populist president, but certainly not the last.  He promulgated a platform that disparaged intellectuals and secularism, pandering to the extremists who actually supported theocratic rule.  

This constant tension between rationality and religion continues to pervade the U.S. political systems - the present day split between right and left is starker than it has ever been.  Wright goes so far as to posit that a group he labels the 'neo-cons' have taken over the Republican party, in large part by exploiting the religious beliefs of its core supporters even though these politicians are not all religious.  According to Wright, they have an entirely different agenda.  These neo-cons began their latest putsch in the Reagan era, recklessly cutting taxes and racking up huge deficits, despite their claims of fiscal prudence.  Their goal was no less than to wreck the "New Deal" of FDR and the democrats, by rendering the government incapable of paying for these 'socialist' policies.  Apparently, some of these people were adherents of Objectivism, pursuing the Randian ideal of a government responsible only for policing and national security. 

I am always skeptical when claims are made of audacious conspiracies, when dogmatic incompetence or simple stupidity can adequately describe the obvious failures of policy.  The Bush legacy of out-of-control spending, unimaginable debt and egregious failure is so out of proportion, perhaps there was a hidden agenda.  A new world order unencumbered by any normal sense of ethical behavior or empathy for others.   


Prime Minister Dion, anyone?

Here in Canada, for some unfathomable reason, the ruling Conservatives seem intent on denying that the global recession will have any impact in the land of maple leaves, beavers and Alberta oil. As a consequence of Harper's magnificent arrogance, he may have opened to the door to a defeat of his six-week-old government, uniting the Liberals, NDP and Bloc together into an unlikely coalition of the left.

Canadians could end up with an interim Prime Minister by definition, a guy who's already resigned as the leader of his party in advance. A writer couldn't make this stuff up.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Top Ten Reasons not to argue with a republican supporter



10. Once provoked, republican supporters really don’t like it when the other side starts singing “Na na na hey hey goodbye” .


9. Be aware – they haven’t closed Guantánamo Bay quite yet.


8. Apparently it’s not okay to point out that the republican party desperately needs to rid itself of its ‘evangelical’ base and reinvent itself as relevant in the 21st century.


7. Most people seem to have noticed that Barrack Obama was just elected the first black president of the U.S., a noticeable and inspirational achievement in itself, to say the least – yet somehow, this is not obvious to some observers.


6. Audacious claims that the Bush presidency only went wrong in the “past couple of years” can cause one to doubt his conception of the universe.


5. Rational arguments can always been drowned out in the raucous din of failed ideology.


4. Underneath all that rancor, republican supporters can be nice, rational, even sane people with big, big hearts – really, it’s true!


3. Living in Canada – classified in some circles as a non-democratic, one-party-rule, socialist haven of liberal thought – tends to discredit one’s arguments.


2. Even though it’s tempting to point out that the only way for the Democrats to lose that election would have been to appoint the “Harold and Kumar” ticket, it’s hard to resist…


1. Sarah Palin in 2012 – that threat could render anyone speechless.


* Bonus Reason 0 – Risking one’s own credibility by using the first letter of the ten reasons to spell a cute message….