Progressive Ponderings: Contradictions

09/29/2005

by Joe Mayer
Sept. 28, 2005

In the Sept. 22 Pondering, “Green Bay Packers,” I highlighted this statement: “The problem with conservative political thought is that the actuality it produces refutes the values it proclaims.” Today I offer just three examples and progressive alternatives.

War – The fraud that war brings peace rears its ugly head whenever another country disagrees with, challenges, or shuns our “economic” system.  Once political leadership identifies a target country, multiple fears are dramatized, the flag becomes a sacred object, and foreign citizens are heaped with ugly characterizations, - all designed to trip the fear and hate factors in Americans.  Congress then passively assents, and our poor youth are sent off to protect and expand the profits of the wealthy.  (Recall 2002 and 2003.) The reality is that in the most recent past up to the present, the United States is the most war-prone country in the world and peace is projected only in the distant future.

The progressive response must center on removing foreign policy from corporate control.

Tax cuts stimulate the economy resulting in higher revenue.  Bush’s tax cuts have had little effect on “real” unemployment, deficits have been at historically high levels, real wages for the majority have, at best, stayed the same, and the income/wealth gap continues to grow.  As I’m writing this the conservatives on TV are talking of the necessity of pushing permanent tax cuts and ending estate tax.  Their solution to every adversity and every period of overall wealth is tax cuts for the wealthy.

Progressives need to remember that one of the principles of fair taxation is the “ability to pay.” American citizens will realize that extreme wealth is a threat to democracy if progressives voice the truth of taxation.

Government is the enemy.  This fraud began in the Reagan administration and continues.  Business interests, especially, advocate this deception.  If the people in the “government of the people” believe that government is the problem, it becomes very easy for business interests to buy control of the government.  Then all progressive issues – renewable energy, environment, campaign finance reform, health care for all, global citizenship, etc. – are damned as socialism or communism.  Name calling is more effective than discussion if you own the media.

Do welfare moms drive Cadillacs as accused?  No!  Do corporate welfare Haliburtons drive Cadillacs?  Yes!  If you own America you can sway and redirect opinion.  Progressives can start by pointing out that conservatives who supposedly want to export democracy around the world would do better by first promoting it at home.  Our founders did not intend for corporations, i.e., non citizens, controlling government.  If leading democrats cannot make a case for democracy here at home we either remove them or forget about saving our people’s government.

These are only three extremely important issues that conservatives falsely pursue where the results differ from their proclaimed objectives.  How often do we hear our elected Democratic leaders challenge these fallacies?

Thirteen months before the 2006 elections is not too early for progressives to seek out forward-looking candidates.  Thirteen months before the 2006 elections is the right time for progressives to influence their local political party.  Thirteen months before the 2006 elections is the proper time to make progressive issues the agenda for this 2006 election.