The US’ political and economic crisis is set to worsen following next month’s elections. US President Barack Obama will lose any hope of passing progressive legislation aimed at helping the poor or the environment. Indeed, all major legislation and reforms are likely to be stalemated until 2013, following a new presidential election. An already bad situation marked by deadlock and vitriol is likely to worsen, and the world should not expect much leadership from a bitterly divided US.
Much of the US is in a nasty mood, and the language of compassion has more or less been abandoned. Both political parties serve their rich campaign contributors, while proclaiming that they defend the middle class. Neither party even mentions the poor, who now officially make up 15 percent of the population, but in fact are even more numerous when we count all those households struggling with healthcare, housing, jobs and other needs.
The Republican Party recently issued a “Pledge to America” to explain its beliefs and campaign promises. The document is filled with nonsense, such as the fatuous claim that high taxes and over-regulation explain the US’ high unemployment. It is also filled with propaganda. A quotation by former US president John F. Kennedy states that high tax rates can strangle the economy, but Kennedy was speaking a half-century ago, when the top marginal tax rates were twice what they are today. Most of all, the Republican platform is devoid of compassion.
The US today presents the paradox of a rich country falling apart because of the collapse of its core values. Productivity in the US is among the highest in the world. Average national income per person is about US$46,000 — enough not only to live on, but to prosper. Yet the country is in the throes of an ugly moral crisis.
Income inequality is at historic highs, but the rich claim that they have no responsibility to the rest of society. They refuse to come to the aid of the destitute and defend tax cuts at every opportunity. Almost everybody complains, almost everybody aggressively defends their own narrow and short-term interests and almost everybody abandons any pretense of looking ahead or addressing the needs of others.
What passes for political debate is a contest between the parties to give bigger promises to the middle class, mainly in the form of budget-busting tax cuts at a time when the fiscal deficit is already more than 10 percent of GDP. People in the US seem to believe that they have a natural right to government services without paying taxes. In the US political lexicon, taxes are defined as a denial of liberty.
There was a time, not long ago, when Americans talked of ending poverty at home and abroad. Former US president Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty in the mid-1960s reflected an era of national optimism and the belief that society should make collective efforts to solve common problems, such as poverty, pollution and healthcare. The US in the 1960s enacted programs to rebuild poor communities, to fight air and water pollution and to ensure healthcare for the elderly. Then the deep divisions over Vietnam and civil rights, combined with a surge of consumerism and advertising, seemed to end an era of shared sacrifice for the common good.
For 40 years, compassion in politics receded. Former US president Ronald Reagan gained popularity by cutting social benefits for the poor (claiming that the poor cheated to receive extra payments). Former US president Bill Clinton continued those cuts in the 1990s. Today, no politician even dares to mention help for poor people.
The big campaign contributors to both parties pay to ensure that their vested interests dominate political debates. That means both parties increasingly defend the interests of the rich, though Republicans do so slightly more than Democrats. Even a modest tax increase on the rich is unlikely to find support in US politics.
The result of all of this is likely to be a long-term decline of US power and prosperity, because Americans no longer invest collectively in their common future. The US will remain a rich society for a long time to come, but one that is increasingly divided and unstable. Fear and propaganda may lead to more US-led international wars, as in the past decade.
And what is happening in the US is likely to be repeated elsewhere. The US is vulnerable to social breakdown because it is a highly diverse society. Racism and anti-immigrant sentiments are an important part of the attack on the poor, or at least the reason why so many are willing to heed the propaganda against helping the poor. As other societies grapple with their own increasing diversity, they may follow the US into crisis.
Swedes recently gave enough votes to a right-wing, anti--immigrant party to give it representation in parliament, reflecting a growing backlash against the rising number of immigrants in Swedish society. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government has tried to regain popularity with the working class by deporting Roma migrants, a target of widespread hatred and ethnic attacks.
Both examples show that Europe, like the US, is vulnerable to the politics of division, as our societies become more ethnically diverse.
The lesson from the US is that economic growth is no guarantee of well-being or political stability. US society has become increasingly harsh, where the richest buy their way to political power and the poor are abandoned to their fate. In their private lives, Americans have become addicted to consumerism, which drains their time, savings, attention and inclination to engage in acts of collective compassion.
The world should beware. Unless we break the ugly trends of big money in politics and rampant consumerism, we risk winning economic productivity at the price of our humanity.
Jeffrey Sachs is a professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. He is also special adviser to UN secretary-general on the Millennium Development Goals.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry