With an unimaginable rudeness on Sept
11 history revealed it was not over.
Unfortunately we have an administration that while speaking in
Churchillian rhetoric about those lessons, have Henry Ford’s eye for history. “History is bunk,” declared that American
icon. Generations of MBA’s, accountants and lawyers have heeded that Buffetian
advice as the canyon between rich and poor grew ever larger. In the world trade
centre people became the victims of repeated historical mistakes.
Most
have seized upon the obvious, “be prepared”. The US spends 1000 times more on
security than any other nation. Networks sizzle with retired military types
linking Sept 11 with under funding or limits from liberal handcuffs. Sept 11 should have proved that just like
love, security couldn’t be bought at any price. Therefore devoting our scarce
resources to building walls and punishing offenders will bring little more
success than the war on drugs. The law of unforeseen consequences tells us
operation Infinite Justice will bring surprises. Short term they are likely to
be unpleasant but in the long term history assures us they will be beneficial.
The unlearned lesson, the historical trap we spring upon ourselves time and
again is ideological.
As
Sting said “ I hope the Russians love their children to”. Our similarities are
so great. A basic ideological failure to
manage our differences is the historical mistake that keeps on bleeding. History is littered with failure, but the
last century drew to a close with most of the first world on the verge of
success. Satisfy the basic needs of humans, and most will follow that ideology
into the jaws of death. To loud applause every president has given the answer;
freedom. Realpolitic has forced American presidents to take freedom “a
la carte”. While every president has understood that freedom must be earned,
Republicans in general refuse to understand that every man must be
unconditionally be given the tools of freedom. But even more they need a secure
place to practice and develop until they are capable of survival. Dont get hung
up on the fact that a few that never leave the nest, but celebrate the
universal human spirit that spurs the majority to seek more.
Everyone
needs, freedom from hunger, freedom from the elements, and freedom to learn and
express opinions without fear. The first world has taken different routes to
achieve these basic needs, with varying success. In every case a veneer of
democracy was the prerequisite for success.
The stronger the democracy the greater the success. If you measure a
society by its ability to provide for its citizens, a good argument can be made
that European democracy is stronger and more effective provider than the
Anglo-Saxon brand. However semantic arguments are not going to stop wide body
jets from coming through the window. Truly applying democracy to the bleeding
hatreds that are the third world is our only hope.
We
had a chance in Kuwait, maybe in Saudi as well. It was to be expected that in
an oil war, that gas consumption would be the calculus of freedom. In Pakistan
and Afghanistan, America should not make the same miscalculations. Iran shows
the promise of the future, and the beauty of mans best idea in action. What’s
needed is not NMD or MADD but TD (turnkey democracy). A social democratic model
designed for the people, not for the corporations.
The
failure of American democracy to provide for all citizens is complex. Nevertheless American democracy is by many
measures is unbeatable. In the third world the American way is a prescription for
disaster. Democracy and the third world seem incompatible. Fighting ingrained
nepotism, tribal loyalties and massive ignorance would tire even Hartio Alger.
Afghanistan and other third world countries will never develop a true democracy
under a two-tier system. These factors have outflanked democracy in most of the
world. What if the problem has not been with democracy but with the application
of the Anglo-Saxon model of democracy?
In
Afghanistan the people are open to anything better. Lets learn from history and
give them a real chance to succeed, unbridled by our own ambitions and
ideology. Bind Afghani citizens to a powerful constitution. The US constitution is certainly the starting
point. Let the mullahs and tribal elders make it more their own without
diluting the essential elements.
Integrate this strong constitution with strong district governments like
in Switzerland or to a lesser extent Germany and Austria. The goal of these
fledgling governments should be to feed their people, not expand GNP. As in
Europe economic growth and prosperity will flow when every citizen has attained
basic freedoms. After these baby democracies have been force fed into achieving
a “nanny state” they can find their own
democratic destiny.
The
answer is be prepared, be democracy.
The horror perpetrated on the US and by
extension the civilized world by the fanatic Islamic deviants is beyond the
imagination. Now after a month of bare emotions it is time to calmly reformat America’s
worldview, and vice versa.
No other nation has ever
held such a potent combination of, cultural influence, economic power,
scientific discovery and raw might. Compared to other unbridled empires the US
has behaved in an exemplary fashion. The
problem is the world does not view America in historical context. We see a
blizzard of enticing but contradictory snapshots. From the torrent of
information we build our own distorted pictures of America. Conversely
Americans view the world with an American prism that mostly reflects the
incorrect message. It’s not true that
most would rather be like, live in, or actually be Americans given the chance.
The success of Pokeman, does not mean we wish to become Japanese. Compounding
the misunderstanding is the blending of the actions of the American people and
the actions of the government of the USA. There are very few actions of the
American government that are supported by the majority of the American people.
Now is the time for the world and America to respect each other.
First, America is not always
first. There is more to being number one
than GNP or force projection. The UN evaluates top spot by trying to include
measures like infant morality rate, life expectancy, and the ever intangible “
quality of life”. By these measures the US is often in the top ten, but never
the winner. Given this is about as accurate as reporters picking the top
college football team, but it would be helpful for Americans to step back and
question why their self perception runs counter to the rest of the world. The
pre 911 tensions between the US and the first world were similar to arguments
between sports enthusiasts. All love the game; they are only debating about the
best way to play. The third world and in particular the Moslem world does not
accept our game, or due to USA support of autocratic governments can not even
play.
Doubtless hard power states like
France, England and America are essential. The rest of the first world is happy
to support the USA lead and play a soft power game. Fundamentally Americans
should understand like the USA does, that the first world admires respects and
relies on the USA to be the leader in supplying the infrastructure that keeps
civilization moving forward. Problematically the USA often does not respect the
cultures and societies that form the alliances so necessary for Americans and
the USA. It is this lack of respect, this ignorance that infuriates
non-Americans. Hopefully 911 will open American minds to the possibility that
some other countries can do things better than in the USA.
For example most the first world uses
about 50% energy per capita than the USA. There would be a minority of
Americans that would respect the achievement of living with a smaller
footprint. Due to taxes energy prices are double the USA. A vast majority of
Americans would be fundamentally convinced that taxing energy to reduce
consumption was un-American. Looked at from the European or Japanese
perspective the USA’S gluttony and waste are at the least impolite and at worst
a planetary death sentence. Americans should be grateful and respect that at
least temporarily some of the most indefensible positions are forgotten as its
under appreciated friends heart fully offer unlimited aid.
It is the third world that the
government of the USA, and the all the peoples of the first world face an
unfulfilled challenge. 911 raised to new levels the amount of astonishment
humanly possible. Perhaps most disturbing is the middle class, well educated
terrorist’s ability to live amongst us for years without being affected. No
hearts and minds program is going to reach these people. USA has poured more
than $50 billion into Egypt. Given the feeling on the streets, there is scant
appreciation.
President Bush is desperately trying to
walk the tightrope between anti-terrorism and anti Moslem. Islamics are going to be no more convinced
than IRA supporters in America were. The muted reaction of the Islamic world is
the first sign that we have a failure to communicate. Che Gevarra is a good example from our past of
what to expect Osama to become in the future. However by any measure Che was a
largely ineffectual figure when compared to the Al Capone of terrorism. Therefore Osama’s impact will be cataclysmic
among the next generation Muslims. Nothing the west does now will change that.
Victory can only come by reaching Moslems not yet born.
No one questions the $50
Billion per year expenditure to secure Middle East oil supplies. Knowing this
there is no bigger hypocrisy than a
politician using America dependence on imported oil as a reason to despoil more
of a diminishing environment. Under the Bush energy plan use of imported fossil
fuels can only increase. Even though most pollution leaks from poorly
maintained refineries, the Bushies want to do an end run around the clean air
act. The only significant reserves are under OPEC control or in politically or
environmentally fragile areas. Unless radical action is taken America will have
no choice but to become further embroiled in messy alliances. American wealth
will continue to flow to regimes who to say the least do not embrace democratic
ideals. Cheney said, “ we like oil at
$25 a barrel, if it gets to cheap we stop exploring for more.” If another well
was never drilled current reserves of oil will last for a hundred years or
more. My question is why waste resources with any more risky exploration?
Instead of working to further damage the planet, initiate a revolution that
will give the world, as we know it a chance to survive. America is the only
country in a position to speed the solution into action.
Americans consume about
30% of the energy used every year. This buying power can transform the globe.
Like anyone addicted to a destructive substance the first step is to
acknowledge the danger. A majority of Americans including some of its finest
companies accept global warming is a real phenomenon. We are about where tobacco was during the
1980s. By that time the majority had enough data and common sense to realize
that inhaling clouds of smoke was not healthy.
Bodies may be resilient but now even the tobacco companies admit
sickness and death are by products of smoking. A critical mass of common sense
is coming to recognize that even a wonderful ecosystem like the earth has
limits to the amount it can inhale. Like the tobacco scientist the greenhouse
gas debunkers motives are transparently oily. Hopefully a rash of class actions
will signal the start of a serious intervention. Cheney dourly attempts to
convince the public there is no alternative. As it was before so it shall be in
the future. The truth is what happens next is only a matter of political will.
How can America, save the
planet, ignore OPEC, tackle the trade deficit, reduce fuel costs, increase
rural income, and return the favour to big oil? The shocking answer is to raise
gasoline tax by $.50 per gal. Due to the importance of trucking the tax should
not apply to diesel. Also this would encourage car owners to switch to proven
green diesel technology.
Assume a gallon of
bio-fuel can be profitably sold at $1.50/gal. The revenue earned from taxing
the 8.2 million gallons used daily could be used to buy bio-fuel. This would
cost about $50 billion per year. Through this action one third of gasoline
needs could be grown on American farms. Combining this new domestic source with
existing secure reserves would free America from the OPEC yoke. Bio-fuel can be made on a relatively small
scale without huge refinery like investments. The risks of spillage, and costs
of transport are eliminated. Once the
benefits of burning pure bio become obvious the market will spur further
production. A virtuous snowball will roll across America leaving cleaner air,
better jobs and significant energy self-sufficiency.
A paradigm shift will
leave the US without the need to defend Middle East oil. That should provide an
annual $50 billion dollar dividend. This can be used to further increase
efficiently and reduce dependency.
Market forces will react to a 30% decrease in gasoline demand. The net
price of gasoline will fall below $1.00/gal. Therefore even with the tax the
price will be less than we pay today.
For this proposal to work
there is no need for new technology. Bio-fuels are a proven boon to the
environment and the farmer. If the existing clean diesel technology employed in
European cars were used in American fuel use could decrease by another 50%.
Jimmy Carter had the answer 20 years ago. How much longer can it be ignored?
Remember when gas was
under a dollar a gallon? If congress had imposed a $0.50/gal tax at this time,
the price of gas would be still be hovering around the $1.40 level. More
importantly billions of dollars would be actively fighting the energy usage
crisis. Big oil is the schoolyard bully
stealing the lunch money of the feeble consumer. Why is the American consumer a
powerless pawn in the “great game” that has fuelled modern history? Mostly it
is a selfish lack of self-control.
Europeans have long
understood that without the discipline to pay yourself, big oil will pipe all
the funds into it’s overflowing coffers. Europeans and Americans will soon be
paying roughly same price for gasoline. In Europe 80% of the revenue is
returned to the people. Americans will send it to those individuals who know
how to spend it more wisely.
Demands for oil
drilling in fragile costal Alaska will test the American public. The higher the
oil price the more support such shortsighted wasting of the environment
gathers. It is a vicious circle;
increase the price of oil so that expensive recovery is possible, because oil
is so expensive exploration becomes cost effective. The only losers are the
people who are addicted to oil. Because
it is the world’s energy glutton the solution must be found in America.
Bush and the
Republicans make no secret of their love of big oil. Democrats have read the
polls and realized that only market forces can support high gas prices. Now
with gas prices ready to break the $3/gal barrier people might listen to a
common sense approach. If Clinton had gradually imposed the $.50 a gallon gas
tax over the last 8 years, prices could now be at least $1.00/gal less. Oil
addiction could be treated with a gusher of well-funded actions. The price at
the pump would still be less than half of first world average. Greener, leaner and leading, America would be
the undisputed environmental champion.
With gas prices at
all time highs new fuel taxes have no chance. However in 2001 congress has $100
billion surplus to dispose of. Whether your politics support the case for
energy shortage or global warming, everyone agrees there is some kind of
crisis. Someone please wake up the Democrats. Instead of giving the money to
the rich, invest the money. Global warming may not be as immediate a threat as
rolling blackouts. However $100 billion spent wisely can greatly diminish if
not eliminate both problems.
First invest in
bio-diesel. It
can be made on a relatively small scale almost anywhere using canola or
sunflowers. Even with the industry in its infancy a gallon can be produced for
around $1.50. Twenty-five Billion could subsidize enough bio-diesel oil to
drive 40 million trucks 10,000 miles a year. Due to decreased fuel demand
gasoline prices will drop under $.75 per gallon. Then tax oil to fix the price
at $1.25. The windfall can be used to fund the continuing subsidy of
bio-diesel. The environment would be instantly relieved of millions of tons of
economically depressing pollution. The frightful balance of trade and the
cloudy future of the American farmer are both decisively attacked. The strategic oil reserve would be in
surplus. This surplus could be used in a one-time strike to bring down prices
immediately. Worldwide, inflation free economic growth would explode. A huge
affordable wallop can be made against both high costs and green house gases.
Imagine America really leading, not squandering.
Spend $50 Billion to
buy solar panels for every federal building and army base. Federal scientists
have already documented the incredible 40% savings available by investing in
heat pumps, so keep the momentum going. The economies of scale will bring the
price down and efficiency up for all solar systems. Furthermore this is an
investment that will pay far more than $50 Billion in dividends.
The last $25 Billion
should be spent on a hydrogen-generating infrastructure. LA, Washington and NYC
could switch their taxis, buses and police cars to hydrogen power. The American
auto industry could jump to the front of the hydrogen revolution.
The catalyst of this
spending will lead to energy self-sufficiency. Annual expenditures of $50
billion needed to defend the Middle East oil could be returned to the taxpayer.
A single investment of $100 Billion now, can bring annual returns far in excess
of the initial investment. Overall the benefits are immeasurable. Tell your
representative to support a bold but simple plan to let the people win the
great game.
Imagine a country
uncontested in military or economic might.
There is a budgetary surplus of a $100 Billion. Alone amongst first
nations it does not have universal health care, or a prescription drug plan.
All parties agree the education system is in a death spiral. The public school
system is becoming a crumbling holding cell of lost opportunity. Two percent of
the population is locked up, mostly for victimless crimes. The middle classes
have stagnated, while the manager’s wage has risen to 400 times that of the
workers. A shortage of energy threatens to cripple the economy. Gasoline is set
to reach levels triple that of a few years ago. Meanwhile the country has only
4% of the world’s population but creates 25% of greenhouse gasses.
What the opposition
proposes. Not much, Nader was right!
Logic dictates the
surplus be used to solve any problems that $100 Billion can cure. There are not
many problems $100 Billion cant cure.
1) Taxes are ideology and if the truth is
ever seen, it is only by historians. We can see that in the last 8 years all
Americans enjoyed a vibrant economy. If its not broke, don’t fix it. Therefore
until other crises are solved don’t touch taxes. Lower energy costs and the
Keynesian effect of spending $100 Billion will do more for the economy than
buying more T-Bills for the Ross Perot's of the land.
2) You can never have too much protection.
The money is there so why take a chance, build the missile shield, research
wonder weapons, but take the axe to conventional and nuclear forces.
3) It costs $20,000 a year to keep a man in
prison. Spending a fraction of that on children, will keep adults out of jail.
Furthermore through Headstart the essential skill of literacy can reach world
levels. Encouraging consumption cannot solve an energy crisis. While energy
efficient appliances may cost more, they more than pay for themselves due to
lower electricity bills. Everybody but the power company wins. Do not adopt oxymoron
standards. The health care crisis cannot be solved with 100 Billion. The least
harm is to train more doctors and hope supply and demand make capitalistic
medicine work. Both sides agree a prescription drug plan is affordable, make it
so.
4) The dawn of the 21th century
should not see a mandate to renew 18th century coal technology.
Fortunately the Federal Academy of Science has just released a report detailing
how conservation can take us more than half way to energy nirvana. So whom do
you trust non-political scientists, or an extreme conservative bunch of carbon
fuel entrepreneurs. New nuclear plants do not compute. Assume infallibility was
granted and all the Chernobyl like concerns can be eliminated. Nuclear reactors
are not financially viable. Nuclear projects will not fly without huge
government incentives. Large amounts should be used to seed alternate fuels.
Wind power, solar power, fuel cell, bio-fuels, and hydrogen infrastructure are
the only way forward. Blow a large wad on these bets. America can be self
sufficient on clean fuels; it is only a matter of political will.
5) Education also defies a pure monetary
cure. The infrastructure problem is local and therein lays the solution.
Perhaps education or highway money could be withheld from states with
substandard schools. We all know Johnny can’t read, why more money for
testing? America is a competitive place,
schools should reflect that.
Racism is a senseless activity, yet it
continues to wreak havoc. In the worst cases ethnic cleansing is justified. At
a minimum discomfort and dehumanization are inflicted on both sides. Like beauty racism is in the eye of the
beholder. European racism has a rainbow of colours. Whites are against blacks,
browns and other whites. Asians also
practice racism against their own genotype. In America white on white racism
has become virtually non-existent. But shades of black on black racism are very
real. Within Asian cultures there is also a shades of white racism existing.
The question then becomes why, and can the American selectiveness provide
answers to eliminate racism?
European and Asian racism
is more understandable than American racism. In much of Europe or Asia it is
very difficult for people from one village to integrate into another village
only a few hundred miles away. This negative response grows more extreme the
farther from ground zero the offending newcomer is. Europeans and Asians have
sophisticated and unique cultures developed over thousands of years. Europeans
and Asians share sedimentary cultures that take strength from their solidarity
or sameness. Immigrants to America
brought these prejudices with them, but the roots of American culture are so
diverse and so shallow that Europeans have come to exist as a single group.
Thus white on white racism could not be sustained. Meanwhile back in Europe,
all outsiders are still seen as threats to a highly successful social
framework. No one likes change, nice place to visit but I would not want to
live there is a universal feeling. Like Europeans Asian racism is strongly
fuelled by feelings of cultural superiority and centuries of conflict. To
settle and survive the Americans were forced to embrace change, and it has
become a centrepiece of American cultural success.
There is something about
a whiteness preference that transcends the European rooted cultural victory of
the past few centuries. It existed in China while Europeans were still carrying
clubs and wearing skins. Somewhat astonishingly Blacks have come to regard
lightness with superiority. Ironically most whites see themselves better brown.
Asian Indians would seem to have the complexion most Europeans desire. So in
summary it is very clear that racism according to skin colour is an abstract
notion. Therefore as the world grows
evermore intertwined and cultures mix, colour based racism will disappear like
bad sunburn. Inevitably countries like Canada, America and Australia will be
the first to become truly colour blind. Then the question becomes is politics a
form of racism?
America is now coming to
grips with minorities who think like Attila the Hun. Clarence Tomas and JC Watt
spring to mind. They fear the liberal more than the white suburbanite fears the
upwardly mobile black. The republican right practices a discriminatory campaign
against all types of liberals. While on the left no organized biased cabal
exists.
However do you think
liberals would find any protection from a conservative supreme court? No way!
The right control is so complete; the right to vote can be massaged. Where is
the outrage? It has been consumed by the WWF, and misdirected by talk radio.
Politics is being played as the weather, why complain, it wont change.
It is clear that liberals are dying in
America. They cannot survive in the sun and the conservatives prevent all light
from shinning. So when the message and the messenger can be condemned with only
a simple bromide, how can any progress be made? Good examples are the tax cut,
health care, campaign finance reform and global warming.
Lets examine each one in
detail. The tax cut. It’s your money not the governments. Who can argue with
that? Death Tax, surely that must be nonsense. Double taxation, they taxed us once
when we were alive and now when were dead they wont stop. Great words, but
highly deceptive if not untrue. No one
pays taxes on capital gains until the asset is sold. They are only taxed once. The rulers and the ruled have always had a
social compact. Traditionally the rulers got what they wanted from the ruled.
This was mainly men and material to fight wars and expand power. The divine
right can see no further benefit to the social contract. Millions have died and
suffered to expand the social contract. But with a few million dollars spent on
think tanks the right has turned the imperfect nature of government into a well
resonating condemnation of any attempt to rule on behalf of the majority of
people. This racism of power is not obvious to the majority. There is nothing
easier to hate than rules and regulations. Market this natural hostility as a
product and you have 60% of the people thinking in step with the 4% who
actually own 60% of the country. Otherwise the surplus would be returned to the
majority of the people, or used in a way that would benefit the majority.
Campaign finance, what is
the scam here? Free speech. Dollars speak larger than words. Again we see that
even if soft money is eliminated, the right still holds the advantage. Who gives
the hard money, again 4% of Americans make 80% of political donations. The
right creates an atmosphere of helplessness. When there is no solution, nothing
will ever change. In a battle between
the unarmed voter and the marketing genius who will win time and again?
Health care or the lack
therein off is a fundamental triumph of racism. Bill and Ted raised every fear
ever placed in the mind of the voter. Fact is universal health care reduce the
care for the rich. Its supply and demand. They will no longer get organs first,
and 5 star hospital rooms. This is what the rich fear, and why the poor will
continue to die young.
Global warming is so
abstract, but I compare it to smoking. Logically if you inhale smoke over time
it will not be good for your body. Therefore it should be clear that the earth
can only absorb so much smoking and it to will become unhealthy. Without
political racism coal fired plants would have disappeared 20 years ago. The
rich would not accept health care that let them die young, but they feel they
can move to healthy parts of the country or planet. Spending the money they
made causing the world to die, to convince everyone not to stop smoking.
No comments:
Post a Comment