Jess Rivas: Changing our political nature
Changing our political nature
By Jess Rivas
We just witnessed one of the most convincing victories in Presidential elections in many years. After the intense campaign the Republicans waged against Barack Obama, accusing him of being a socialist, the case could be made that his victory is a referendum of the American people choosing socialism.
However, we know well that Obama is far from a socialist. In fact, his policies are mildly progressive at best. The problem is that Bush's policies have been so extreme that the center has moved too far to the right.
Nowadays people who support invading other countries, endless occupations, using our military to serve the interests of corporations, supporting the right to torture, holding prisoners without a trial and spying on our citizens without warrants are considered "moderate."
But if you believe in using the military only for defense, respecting human rights, three independent branches of government and upholding the Constitution, you are some sort of left-wing radical and anti-American.
The reason for this disconnect is that neither Republicans nor Democrats act to follow their ideology or the interest of their base. Both act to please the interest of whoever paid for their political campaigns.
When politicians prioritize the interest of their contributors over the interest of the people, the result is that a wealthy elite is a lot more influential in the politics of the country than the majority.
For years, we thought the only solution for this problem was deep electoral campaign reform. However, Obama got the majority of his campaign funds in the form of small contributions. So, Obama has both an economic as well as a moral commitment to his electorate. The internet has allowed democracy to raise itself over the highjacking of lobbying corporations and has given democracy back to the people.
Being the first African American president is an important milestone. However, just as relevant as the issue of race is the fact that Obama is the first president in the country's history who can emancipate us from the tyranny of the big corporations without jeopardizing funds for his political career.
He has the potential to put the interest of the country, the interests of the many, ahead of the interest of the few. A lot of the relevance of Obama's presidency will pivot on whether he uses this freedom.
Jess A. Rivas of Somerset is an assistant professor at Somerset Community College. E-mail him at anaconda@prodigy.net.
By Jess Rivas
We just witnessed one of the most convincing victories in Presidential elections in many years. After the intense campaign the Republicans waged against Barack Obama, accusing him of being a socialist, the case could be made that his victory is a referendum of the American people choosing socialism.
However, we know well that Obama is far from a socialist. In fact, his policies are mildly progressive at best. The problem is that Bush's policies have been so extreme that the center has moved too far to the right.
Nowadays people who support invading other countries, endless occupations, using our military to serve the interests of corporations, supporting the right to torture, holding prisoners without a trial and spying on our citizens without warrants are considered "moderate."
But if you believe in using the military only for defense, respecting human rights, three independent branches of government and upholding the Constitution, you are some sort of left-wing radical and anti-American.
The reason for this disconnect is that neither Republicans nor Democrats act to follow their ideology or the interest of their base. Both act to please the interest of whoever paid for their political campaigns.
When politicians prioritize the interest of their contributors over the interest of the people, the result is that a wealthy elite is a lot more influential in the politics of the country than the majority.
For years, we thought the only solution for this problem was deep electoral campaign reform. However, Obama got the majority of his campaign funds in the form of small contributions. So, Obama has both an economic as well as a moral commitment to his electorate. The internet has allowed democracy to raise itself over the highjacking of lobbying corporations and has given democracy back to the people.
Being the first African American president is an important milestone. However, just as relevant as the issue of race is the fact that Obama is the first president in the country's history who can emancipate us from the tyranny of the big corporations without jeopardizing funds for his political career.
He has the potential to put the interest of the country, the interests of the many, ahead of the interest of the few. A lot of the relevance of Obama's presidency will pivot on whether he uses this freedom.
Jess A. Rivas of Somerset is an assistant professor at Somerset Community College. E-mail him at anaconda@prodigy.net.
Labels: General information
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home