Isn’t this a risky precedent to set? Why are these coal miners any more deserving of a eulogy from the President than say those who died on the oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, or those who died in the tornadoes in Mississippi?
Amidst the dull uproar over the veiled threats from RevolutionMuslim.com, I can’t help but agree with one point the controversial site made: They didn’t start the wars, we, America, did. This is tragic and unconscionable for a society that so often uses life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as defenses. The question then remains, how do we transform our outrage into positive political action? I imagine contacting our representatives is a start, as is supporting anti-war organizations.
I don’t agree that all GS was doing was playing the bookie, or that they only realized what they’d done was a mistake in hindsight. They took out insurance on CDOs they didn’t even own (imagine taking out insurance on someone else’s car then profiting on it when they get in an accident) and re-packaged those CDOs into financial instruments which were then systemically disbursed. Then, to top it off, they made $13 billion in insurance when those CDOs went belly up while other financial institutions and investors crashed and burned around them.
Taken in the context of Goldman Sachs’ history, I don’t believe it’s possible to argue they were simply bookies. They knew what they were doing–they were in it for short-term profits, to get out before the melon hit the sidewalk, as RollingStone put it. That’s sleazy and, if not currently illegal, should be made so immediately. At the very least, GS and all those responsible should be stripped of their profits, because right now they’ve made off with billions of tax payer dollars, meanwhile the gulf between the rich and poor continues to grow. In the larger context, Mr. Zakaria, GS and other culpable firms are swindlers and robbers, not innocent victims of financial complexity.
This is the second paper written for my American Political Institutions course. Our readings for this week focused on Congressional policymaking, namely the logic behind it. The prevailing theory for explaining legislators’ actions centers on rational decisions aimed at securing re-election. Many factors play into the decision making process, including constituent needs, personal policy preferences, and party alignment. But they all are weighed in accordance with their ability to get the legislator re-elected.
Article 1, Section 5 of the Constitution grants Congress the right to establish their own procedural rules. Combine this with self-interest and you can imagine a framework would evolve that maximizes positive perception while minimizing costs of legislative decisions. There are specific tactics legislators employ to prevent their constituents from discovering the true, almost always negative, effects of a policy decision. The goal of any of these tactics is to reduce the traceability back to a particular legislator to avoid electoral accountability. What my paper focuses on is how citizens could use the Internet to maximize traceability.
Events like September 11th are tough to talk about. Fortunately, time makes their memory less potent, which is important as it enables us to take another, more objective look at what happened to ensure our recollection of history is as it was–free from momentary emotion and passion. That day holds enough historical significance to us and the world that it is unquestionably worth analyzing again.
Some may take issue with this sort of invocation claiming it’s at worst a gross politicization of a tragedy or at best simply unnecessary. My intent, however, is to highlight what I found to be legitimate and logical inconsistencies and their implications, and to share what influenced my judgment with others. It’s up to the individual to decide if this falls in the realm of reality or conspiracy theory, but I will say that impossible doesn’t necessarily follow improbable or unbelievable. Our world’s history is rife with government abuse, especially of its own citizens or property for political purposes.
These documentaries call to attention the real possibility–one with precedent in our country, even–that our government committed, or was complicit in, such an act eight years ago. True, the past is just that, but we need to learn from it so atrocities like 9/11 don’t happen again; and if they do, so those responsible are identified and held accountable.
It happened too often during the 2008 election and continues today: accusations of socialism and fascism flung about without proper appreciation or knowledge of their historical gravity. Most, if not all, of the time, the charges have flowed in one direction from right to left. They’ve been cast haphazardly and without understanding of their true meaning, especially fascism, perhaps the eviler of two.
So what is fascism, or what does it look like? Israel Charny, a world-known and respected psychologist and genocide expert, compiled a list of typical fascist traits he observed through his study of genocides and detailed them in his book Fascism and Democracy in the Human Mind. His juxtaposition of democratic traits effectively highlights the disparity between the two belief systems.
Fascist
Democratic
What’s shocking about the fascist mindset Charny describes is that it resembles the collective mindset of many on the far-right who vocally and persistently oppose the current administration and the left in general. They are trying to extinguish what they believe to be fascism with fascism, and they’re doing so seemingly unaware and even in denial (try pointing this out to any patron of Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, for instance, and see what happens.)
This mode of operation is dangerous and one we have to do our best to derail. Failing to do so could result in serious consequences for our democracy. In fact, truthout.org wrote an insightful piece recently on that very topic that’s worth a read. Though I don’t have the solution to this problem, I believe the first step required is learning about it and thinking critically about what we can do as individuals.
Along the road to grad school, many people impressed upon me how crazy I was to leave a comfy, secure job in troubled economic times to submit myself to abject poverty. To each of them I’d spew the normal “I’m chasing a dream” bit after which they seemed satisfied, even supportive. What I didn’t tell them was that I was using grad school as an excuse to unveil a new website. So here we are.
Welcome to technolitics, pronounced tech-nahl-ih-ticks, which, as I’m sure you’ve gathered, is the coupling of technology and politics. It’s my goal to use this site as an archive of my grad school work, a creative outlet for my thoughts and ideas when I emerge from my books for air, and a way to improve my writing by practicing as much as I can (apparently writing PHP and English are significantly different).
Like the name and description imply, you’ll find posts here about technology, politics, my experiences as a grad student and the intersection of all three. At first, my friends, family and co-workers were shocked when I told them I planned to study political science as it seemed I was abandoning my undergraduate studies and career. But really it’s a logical continuation. I’ve always been interested in the social sciences, and now more than ever the presence of technology is expanding in government. During the 2008 election, candidates used Facebook and text messages to rally their bases. Senators and governors have gone head-to-head on Twitter over healthcare reform and stimulus spending. Why is it that some of these technologies succeed where others have failed? What are the implications for government of a connected citizenry and world? Questions like these are best answered by those with both political and technical depth, which is why I’ve chosen now to expand my knowledge of politics. Hopefully some good can come from the tumbling in my head.
How frequently I’ll update this is at best a guess. I’d love to post multiple times a week but I’m not sure ambition and reality will jive come the start of the school year. An easy way to avoid coming back only to find stale content is to subscribe to my RSS feed, accessible by clicking the little orange icon in the upper-right corner. That said, do stop by often as I’m sure you can poke around and find something entertaining (that’s my dream, at least).
If you run into problems with anything on the site please let me know. I’ve done my best to test this puppy in multiple browsers and resolutions, but as, well, everyone that knows me will attest, I’m not perfect. Any feedback you can give that helps improve this site is and will be much appreciated.
Oh, and go Terps!
Especially when you see scenes like these. That the responsible parties for our economic disaster continue to kick people out of their homes and continue to show no compassion despite owing their existence to your and my tax dollars is heinous. I’m usually a fan of tolerance, but living with this kind of selective socialism seems un-American.
Write, call, or fax your representative or senators now!
This is the text of the message I sent to Senator Cantwell, Senator Murray, and Congressman McDermott (if you don’t want to write your own, feel free to copy this):
Recently in an interview with ABC, Vice-President Dick Cheney admitted his complicity in the torture and mistreatment of terror suspects. This goes against everything the United States of America and its citizens stand for. To stand by now and through our silence condone forms of torture condemned throughout history would be a betrayal of what we represent.
Please take action within your respective chamber to ensure that those within the current administration are held accountable for their actions. We, the people, will not view this as politics, but as a necessary step toward reviving the heart of America. We cannot afford to let their actions go unpunished, thereby setting the precedent that, while Americans and our government may not overtly condone torture, we will stand quietly by when it happens.
We are better than this. Please help us show that to the world.
Looks like the auto industry is out for a piece of the bailout pie too. Our government really is becoming a federal soup kitchen for the corporate poor. Who knows what ailing and failing industries will crop up next looking for their fair share of the handouts. This is, of course, the government’s fault as they set a precedent with the Wall Street bailout.
Even the rhetoric used by the auto industry mirrors that used by financial institutions and Paulson, Bernanke & Co. Here’s a quote from an industry source on what would happen if Congress goes on break before money is doled out (I say before because everyone knows it’s just a matter of time):
If Congress ends its autumn lame-duck session without helping the automakers, policymakers are taking a “substantial risk with the economy,” an industry source said. The automakers and their allies warn that failure of the Big Three could cost 3 million to 5 million jobs when the impact on related industries is calculated.
Imminent doom and destruction if nothing is done…when have we heard that before? Hm.
Their claims about the impact on parts manufacturers and car dealers may be legitimate, but they’re nothing new in a capitalistic economy. Competition exists to weed out the weak, and it just so happens that Chrysler, GM, and Ford are weak right now. If they go under it’s because of natural market forces, not neglect. Isn’t it odd how capitalism is great when you’re winning but sucks when you’re losing?
They have had many opportunities to respond to imminent competitive threats from foreign auto makers and their cheap, more fuel-efficient cars. Yet they haven’t done much of anything. Ford, for instance, recently issued a sizeable press release about their new 2009 and 2010 lineups that doesn’t explicitly mention, even once, the miles-per-gallon capabilities of their cars. And besting Honda and Toyota by 6mpg is not something to brag about. They are already innovating the next leap in efficiency. Give them a year, they’ll beat you by 10 or 20.
Our car companies are failing. There’s no denying that. That’s part of our economy, though. If my industry was failing, I don’t know what tune I’d be whistling. But I hope now that if/when that occurs, someone is smart enough to advocate against wasting billions of tax payer’s dollars (that have no sound financial backing, but I digress) to revive a faction of an industry whose time has past. If Ford, Chrysler, and GM can’t compete within the reality of the global economy, they should be removed from it.
Yes, this means a potentially crushing blow to our economy now. We’re all in recession mode, though. We’ve all cut back or are in the process of doing so. Let’s take the hit now instead of drawing out the deaths of these corporate giants.
Also, if you’re in the mood for a little more “it’s our fault we’re here but we’ll blame you for inaction if you don’t save us” fear mongering, check out GM’s Fact and Fiction site. The video in the corner is laden with interesting facts and figures. My favorite part happens around 3 minutes and 32 seconds in:
We can loan $25 billion now…or lose $156 billion later. What will we do?
The key word being now. How much more will they want in 3 months? 6 months? A year? Not a bone in my body believes their issues will be solved with $25 billion. If that’s all it would take to revive our auto industry, it would already have been done. The we part is great, too. Once again, profits are theirs and losses are all of ours.
I’m still waiting for Ashton Kutcher to jump out and scream “America, you got punked!”
