Nope. Those have been around long before our latest dysfunction. The answer might surprise you...because it boils down to sociology.
This is one of the best reviews of our political situation that I've read in quite some time. It's long, but I'd love to have a discussion on this. I'll hold off on my comments for a bit to let you digest.
The United States hasn’t reached the level of dysfunction that paralyzes Jamaica. But judging from the exasperation Americans now feel about Washington’s ongoing failure to tackle the nation’s big challenges—the tendency of Congress to let issues come to the breaking point before piecing together a temporary solution—it seems we may be headed in that direction.
Explanations for the gridlock abound. Many on the left blame recalcitrance within the conservative movement—Republicans, they claim, cave in too frequently to the irresponsible demands of Tea Party activists. Others cite the nefarious influence of the filibuster, which allows a minority of senators to block substantive bills supported by the broad majority. Some argue that gerrymandering—the manipulation of legislative districts to guarantee the outcome of an election—has polarized the House of Representatives.
But while Democrats fault Republicans and conservatives blame progressives, most of the country is simply fed up. A recent New York Times/CBS News poll found that 72 percent of Americans believe that the country is off on the wrong track.
Something has changed to preclude the collegiality of earlier eras. Worse still, beneath the veneer of frustration is the sense that something more nefarious is corrupting the system. Nostalgia suggests that previous generations were more inclined to put the public interest above their own parochial concerns. It’s as if a self-interested fever has spread through the governing class. Whether that’s true or not, there’s certainly veracity in the suggestion that something has changed. The question is: what threw the American system so far out of whack?
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Apparently a nation hell bent on economic collapse due to the underlying socialism creating a hands out nonproductive society slips by many. We are headed for failure and most people don't give a rats a$$.A society of consumers that produce almost nothing, while centralizing in cities as the faithful globalist believes is right, will always fail.
How do you account for the fact that many people on welfare are working individuals? That doesn't sound like "underlying socialism creating a hands out nonproductive society" to me.
As for a "society of consumers" I will agree that we are materialistic and extremely wasteful (e.g. look how much bottled water we go through per year instead of promoting reusable water bottles and restricting the use of bottled water?), but I think our government and corporations moving manufacturing overseas have contributed to that quite a bit.
Humans have been centralizing in cities for millennia - it's allowed our civilizations to grow when we cooperate and help each other survive rather than each individually fighting for survival. The problem, as pointed out in the article, is that despite our close living quarters, we've become isolated. Politicians, who used to move their families to Washington DC, and the kids would attend the same schools while the parents mingled at the same clubs, restaurants, theatres, etc now fly in Monday, vote, get on the phone and beg for money, and fly right back out on Friday without developing those integral relationships with each other that allow even those with such disparate ideals to fight to find common ground and work together.
The same is happening in communities around the country. Facebook allows you to selectively associate with those whom are most like you, whom you agree with, and it filters your news feed so you see what you like, reinforcing your world view rather than challenging it. Older individuals are so busy shuttling kids to sports, and working long hours that we hardly interact as families, much less as extended families, with friends, or in neighborhoods where views can be diverse yet we feel bonded due to commonality for the love of community/where we live.
So the question is, how to fix that problem? The one where we need to connect more with each other, and not just those with whom we agree, but more importantly, those with whom we do not. Because our problems will not be solved by one side's solutions any more than the other's side - it will take new solutions forged by both (as homeagain's sig line says). And we can't just expect our leaders to blaze this path all on their own - there's no incentive, no motive.
So...how?
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Job growth in the minimum wage market isn't real job growth, except under Odumbo. And when your government creates a populace dependent on them, it ensures socialism for the future. Now he wants to educate illegals instead of our citizens. Third world $4ithole here we come.
[quote="ScienceChic"
Something has changed to preclude the collegiality of earlier eras. Worse still, beneath the veneer of frustration is the sense that something more nefarious is corrupting the system. Nostalgia suggests that previous generations were more inclined to put the public interest above their own parochial concerns. It’s as if a self-interested fever has spread through the governing class. Whether that’s true or not, there’s certainly veracity in the suggestion that something has changed. The question is: what threw the American system so far out of whack?[/quote]
Perhaps instead of a
God we are joined by a collective unconscious mind. George Bernard Shaw referred to it as the life force. perhaps collectively the force knows that with unsustainable debt and a growing underclass we are doomed.
In other words, steal everything, eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.
SC, sadly that statement is very true. When society doesn't believe in God or some type of afterlife, the thought is what you said because there are no consequences.
I think everyone has nostalgia for a golden age in politics that was actually quite rare. Congressmen used to whip each other, have fist fights, it got brutal. There were occasional times of bipartisanship but that was usually when the US was united against a strong enemy like the Cold War or the Nazi's.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
ScienceChic wrote:
So the question is, how to fix that problem? The one where we need to connect more with each other, and not just those with whom we agree, but more importantly, those with whom we do not. Because our problems will not be solved by one side's solutions any more than the other's side - it will take new solutions forged by both (as homeagain's sig line says). And we can't just expect our leaders to blaze this path all on their own - there's no incentive, no motive.
So...how?
There was a time when we did expect our leaders to blaze a path, because we had leaders who were capable of putting country before ideology. We had leaders who didn't spend most of their time campaigning for themselves and for their party. We had leaders who did not vilify their opponents by calling them "the enemy", "terrorists", or "hostage takers". We had presidents that didn't pit the people against each other by race, gender, and economic class.
As for motive, what was Washington's motivations or motives? How about MLK... was he more interested in throwing fuel on the fire or was his motive to unite ALL people?
If we can't expect, or even demand that our leaders put the country first and focus on uniting us instead of dividing us, there is no hope and our future is doomed to be grim. I think the chances of electing people with brains and a desire to put the country before their political ambitions are pretty slim. This problem is of our own making... the majority seems to care more about the next new IPhone than it does about paying down a debt our children will be burdened with or electing leaders based on more than gender, skin color, or promised freebies. Idiocracy, here we come.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
It's a BALANCING OF ENERGY....(which sometimes takes decades)...
1982...."Economic hit men (EHM) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank,the US Agency for International Development (USAID) AND other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs,extortion, sex and murder. They play a game as old as empires,but one that has taken on a new and terrifying dimension during this time of GLOBALIZATION. I should know...I was
an EHM...........1982 John Perkins "Confessions of an Economic Hitman".....(be on notice...you reap what you have sown.)
ScienceChic wrote: Something has changed to preclude the collegiality of earlier eras. Worse still, beneath the veneer of frustration is the sense that something more nefarious is corrupting the system. Nostalgia suggests that previous generations were more inclined to put the public interest above their own parochial concerns. It’s as if a self-interested fever has spread through the governing class. Whether that’s true or not, there’s certainly veracity in the suggestion that something has changed. The question is: what threw the American system so far out of whack?
Collegiality of previous eras is a myth. What we are experiencing today is mild compared to other periods in the Union's history.
What has changed is the abandonment of the founding principles by the governing class. Power breeds corruption - always has, always will. Wielding power comes at the expense of individual rights - always has, always will. The last couple of generations of the governing class, with a few notable exceptions, has replaced the idea of the general welfare of the Union with the individual welfare of every citizen residing in the Union. Taking care of the individual person's need is not something the federal government was created for. That is a micro issue, not a macro one and the federal government was created to deal with the macro, not the micro. Micro issues are supposed to be dealt with at the micro, not the macro, level.
What has changed is that our federal government is now nearly indistinguishable from the government that first generation of patriots pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to rid themselves and their posterity from being subjected to.
