US’ desperate struggle at home
By: By Jeffrey D. Sachs
The author, a professor at Columbia University, is director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Project Syndicate
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
US’ desperate struggle at home
2022 New Year’s Eve numerals arrive in Times Square on December 20, 2021 in New York City. [Photo/Agencies]
Almost a year after Joe Biden’s narrow election victory over Donald Trump, the United States remains on a knife-edge. Many political outcomes are possible. These range from the gradual economic and political reform that Biden is seeking to the subversion of elections and constitutional rule that Trump attempted last January－and that he and the Republican Party are still intent on pursuing.
It’s not easy to diagnose exactly what ails the US at its core so deeply that it incited the Trump movement. Is it the ceaseless culture wars that divide the US by race, religion and ideology? Is it the increase in inequality of wealth and power to unprecedented levels? Is it the US’ diminishing global power, with the rise of China and the repeated disasters of US-led wars of choice, leading to national agony, frustration and confusion?
All of these factors are at play in the US’ tumultuous politics. Yet in my view, the deepest crisis is political－the failure of the US’ political institutions to “promote the general Welfare”, as the US Constitution promises. Over the past four decades, the US’ politics has become an insider’s game to favor the super-rich and corporate lobbies at the expense of the overwhelming majority of citizens.
The 1 percent above the rest of Americans
Business magnet and investor Warren Buffett homed in on the essence of the crisis in 2006. “There’s class warfare, all right,” he said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
The main battlefield is in Washington. The shock troops are the corporate lobbyists who swarm the US Congress, federal departments and administrative agencies. The ammunition is the billions of dollars spent annually on federal lobbying (an estimated $3.5 billion in 2020) and campaign contributions (an estimated $14.4 billion in the 2020 federal elections)). The pro-class-war propagandists are the corporate media, led by mega-billionaire Rupert Murdoch.
Nearly 2,500 years ago, Aristotle observed that good government can turn into bad government through a flawed constitutional order. Republics, despite being governed by the rule of law, can descend into populist mob rule or oligarchic rule by a small and corrupt class, or a tyranny of personal, one-man rule. The US faces such possible disasters unless the political system can detach itself from the massive corruption of corporate lobbying and campaign financing by the rich.
US war against poor intensified in the 1970s
The US’ class war on the poor is not new but was launched in earnest in the early 1970s, and has been implemented with brutal efficiency over the past 40 years. For roughly three decades, from President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s inauguration in 1933 in the midst of the Great Depression to the Robert Kennedy-Lyndon Johnson period of 1961-68, the US was generally on the same development path as postwar Western Europe, becoming somewhat a social democracy.
Income inequality was declining, and more social groups, most notably African Americans and women, were joining the mainstream of economic and political life.
Then came the revenge of the rich. In 1971, a corporate lawyer, Lewis Powell, laid out a strategy to reverse the social democratic trends toward stronger environmental regulation, worker rights and fair taxation. Big business would fight back. Then president Richard Nixon nominated Powell to the US Supreme Court in 1971, and he was sworn in early the next year, enabling him to put his plan into operation.
Court opens floodgates to corporate money
Under Powell’s prodding, the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to corporate money in politics. In Buckley vs. Valeo (1976), the court struck down federal limits on campaign spending by candidates and independent groups as violations of free speech. In First National Bank of Boston vs. Belotti (1978), Powell wrote the majority opinion declaring that corporate spending for political advocacy was free speech that could not be subjected to spending limits.
The court’s onslaught on campaign finance limits culminated in the Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission (2010), which essentially ended all limits on corporate spending in federal politics.
When Ronald Reagan became president in 1981, he reinforced the Supreme Court’s assault on the general welfare by cutting taxes for the rich, waging an assault on organized labor and rolling back environmental protection measures. That trajectory has still not been reversed.
As a result, the US has diverged from Europe in basic economic decency, well-being and environmental control. Whereas Europe generally continued on the path of social democracy and sustainable development, the US charged ahead on a path marked by political corruption, oligarchy, an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor, disdain for the environment, and a refusal to limit human-induced climate change.
US’ declining welfare indexes
A few numbers make clear the differences. Governments in the European Union raise revenues averaging roughly 45 percent of GDP, while US government revenues amount to only about 31 percent of GDP. European governments thus are able to pay for universal access to healthcare, higher education, family support and job training, while the US does not ensure provision of these services.
Europe tops the World Happiness Report rankings of life satisfaction, while the US ranks only 19th. In 2019, life expectancy in the EU was 81.1 years, compared with 78.8 years in the US(which had a higher life expectancy than the EU in 1980). As of 2019, the share of the richest 1 percent of households in national income was about 11 percent in Western Europe, compared with 18.8 percent in the US. In 2019, the US emitted 16.1 tons of carbon dioxide per person compared with 8.3 tons per person in the EU.
In short, the US has become a country of the rich, by the rich and for the rich, with no political responsibility for the climate damage it is imposing on the rest of the world. The resulting social cleavages have led to an epidemic of deaths of despair (including drug overdoses and suicides), declining life expectancy (even before the COVID-19 pandemic), and rising rates of depression, especially among young people.
Politically, these derangements have led in varied directions－most ominously, to Trump, who offered faux populism and a cult of personality. Serving the rich while distracting the poor with xenophobia, culture wars and a strongman’s pose may be the oldest trick in the demagogue’s playbook, but it still plays surprisingly well.
Biden battling strong headwinds
This is the situation that Biden is trying to address, but his successes so far have been limited and fragile. The simple fact is that all congressional Republicans and a small but decisive group of Democrats (most notoriously Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona) are intent on blocking any meaningful increase in taxes on the rich and US corporations, thereby preventing the growth in federal revenues urgently needed to create a fairer and greener society. They are also blocking decisive action on climate change.
Biden is about to complete one year in office, yet the rich are still entrenched in power. But despite the obstacles in every direction in raising taxes for the rich, increasing social spending, protecting voting rights, and urgently bolstering environmental protection, Biden could still eke out some modest wins, and then build on them in the coming years. The public wants this. Roughly two-thirds of Americans favor higher taxes on the rich and corporations.
Yet there is a real possibility that Biden’s setbacks in 2021 will help the Republicans win control of one or both chambers of Congress in 2022. That would put an end to legislative reforms until at least 2025, and could even presage the return of Trump to power in the 2024 presidential election amid social disarray, violence, media propaganda and voter suppression in Republican-controlled states.
Turmoil has disturbing global repercussions
The US’ turmoil has disturbing international implications. The US cannot lead global reforms when it cannot even govern itself coherently. Perhaps the only thing that unites Americans nowadays is an overwrought sense of threats from abroad, mainly from China. With the US in domestic disarray, politicians of both parties have escalated their anti-China rhetoric, as if a new Cold War could somehow soothe the US’ homegrown angst.
The only thing that Washington’s bipartisan belligerence will produce, alas, is more global tension and new dangers of conflict (over the Taiwan question for example), not security or real solutions to any of our urgent global problems.
The US is not back, at least not yet. It is still in the throes of a struggle to overcome decades of political corruption and social neglect. The outcome remains highly uncertain, and the outlook for the coming years is fraught with peril for both the US and the world.
The author, a professor at Columbia University, is director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Project Syndicate
.
BUZZ NOTE: Comments are subject to the Confucius group RED RULES which may be accessed by clicking on the Confucius group avatar at the top right of this page.
Tags
Who is online
128 visitors
A Columbia University Professor describes the situation very clearly, although it's not what Americans would like to hear.
While a lot of this was true for some time, it rapidly goot much worse during the Trump presidency.
Under the Biden administration there have been attempts toreverse much of this (although IMO they still aren't doing enough).
The resulting social cleavages have led to an epidemic of deaths of despair (including drug overdoses and suicides), declining life expectancy (even before the COVID-19 pandemic), and rising rates of depression, especially among young people.
That's quite true. Suicides, especially amongst American youth, are quite high:
More young people are dying by suicide, and experts aren't sure why
The rate of suicide among those aged 10 to 24 increased nearly 60% between 2007 and 2018, according to a report released Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The rise occurred in most states, with 42 experiencing significant increases.
"It's a real trend that has been demanding, for a while, a serious public health and research effort to understand what is happening and why," said Anna Mueller, an associate professor of sociology at Indiana University Bloomington who studies suicides in adolescents. "I don't buy that it's just social media, which is one of the explanations that I most consistently see."
The suicide rate increased from 6.8 per 100,000 in 2007 to 10.7 in 2018. The report compared three-year averages of suicide rates for 2007–2009 and 2016–2018 and found:
(Cont'd HERE)
Really tired, so I'm locking this so I can go to sleep and will unlock it no later than when I finish eating my breakfast.
Oooops. Again I forgot to open an article I locked. Okay, go at it - it's an American university professor who wrote it.
Interesting article and pretty much spot on.
Same old trope based upon the same old misinformation. Europe is a continent and not a country. The United States is a country and not a continent.
The comparison is between the United States against a combination of 27 EU countries on the European continent (and sometime the 17 non-EU countries are included). That's a phony comparison. First of all the touted social democracy of Europe is not uniform across Europe; there are haves and have nots among the EU countries. Election laws are not uniform across the 27 EU countries. The forms of government are not uniform across the EU countries. The national charters or constitutions are not uniform across Europe.
The trope of comparing the United States and Europe is based upon picking and choosing among the 27 EU countries (or among the 44 European countries) to fit whatever narrative is desired.
Excellent cherry picking but whether or not that comparison is right or wrong does not affect the veracity of the many factual concerns related by the author.
The concerns stand alone and do not need comparisons. And attempting to apply an European model to address those concerns ignores the non-uniformity of Europe; the European model is rather arbitrary. Keep in mind that those wishing to avoid addressing concerns in the United States also pick and choose comparison to suggest that the concerns are not warranted.
The United States will need to address those concerns based upon a United States model. There needs to be a clear understanding of what the concerns are and there needs to be a rational evaluation of the implications of selected means to address those concerns. Those claiming that Europe does this or that are very misleading because Europe is not a country like the United States.
because Europe is not a country like the United States.
In fact, Europe is not a country at all-- its a continent!
(Did you actually not know that...???)
Your comments make me think of a father whose kid brought home a report card with a 97% average and his father screamed at him that he was a failure because he didn't get 100%.
Ummm ... I already addressed that. Or are you just trying to stir shit to raise a stink?
Look, this is the United States. Trying to turn the United States into some hypothetical Europe described by cherry picked bits and pieces will only cause division. The real Europe doesn't even fit the description of hypothetical Europe.
Whining about Americans fighting against becoming Europe won't address any of the listed concerns. Trying to turn the United States into some sort of nonexistent hypothetical Europe will only create conflict and divide the people of the United States. It's more important to NOT become Europe than to address concerns. If you don't understand that about the United States then you are in no position to criticize; you'll only make the situation worse.
I'll criticize your hallowed "exceptional" United States any way and any time I damn well feel like it, and no pompous "exceptional" American is gong to stop me from doing so.
You're relatively new on NT as compared to Krishna who has been my friend even back on Newsvine, for well over a decade. It might take you a while to comprehend his wit and sense of humour, if you're capable of doing so. . Personally, I enjoy it, and even look forward to it.
Same old, same old...typical attempt to derail by the nasty 'ole tactic of "whattaboudism".
Most of us here (but unfortunately not all) ain't falling for it.
And the forces of social democracy (touted or otherwise) of the U.S. is not uniform across this country either.
Do you really think people don't know that?
Please address the actual topic with significant facts!
Thank you!!!
We have 50 different states, one or two of which still celebrate Jeff Davis' birthday as a state holiday, different states
different constitutions, different laws.
Go Fish
I'm always curious why liberal unhappiness can only ever be cured by raising my taxes.
Ain't inflation fun?
The history of taxation in Europe is completely different than the history of taxation in the United States. European monarchs and feudal nobility taxed the population for their own benefit; that's how the European aristocracy obtained their income and wealth. The United States doesn't have a history of taxation as a means of redistributing wealth as can be found in European history.
Democratic socialism isn't about changing taxation; taxation is still consistent with the history of taxation across Europe. Democratic socialism is about changing the distribution of revenue obtained from taxation away from the aristocracy. But the United States doesn't have that history of taxation, so, it's necessary to impose new taxes that the United States has never had.
Trying to make democratic socialism work in the United States will require creating a feudal system that was common in European history but that never existed in the United States. There's nothing progressive about democratic socialism based on the history of the United States.
Once again your word salad contradicts itself. When the feudal lords taxed their subjects, they weren't looking to redistribute the wealth. They were looking to find the funds they needed to pay their overlords who had to pay their over lords, etc, til it all ended up in the monarch's hands...who BTW, most likely used that money to fund his wars and his lifestyle. You imply that the monarch's collected taxes to redistribute the wealth amongst the subjects. I'm pretty sure that didn't happen and that's why the French Revolution was so bloody.
Oh, yes, feudal lords and aristocrats across Europe were deliberately redistributing the wealth of common people into their own pockets. The European history of taxation was all about redistributing national wealth to an aristocratic class and the social safety net depended upon noblesse oblige.
The idea that redistribution of wealth only goes one way depends upon deliberate ignorance and phony political gaslighting. Lies upon lies won't change the nature of using taxation to redistribute income and wealth within an economy. Democratic socialism already had a system of taxation in place. Democratic socialism took the redistribution of income and wealth, through taxes, away from the aristocracy. The one thing democratic socialism did not do, and was not intended to do, was allow the common people to keep their income and wealth.
The common people across Europe have always been taxed to redistribute income and wealth. That has not been the history of the United States.
Why should they be? It's 27 different countries. Do you really expect 27 different countries to have the same type of government and constitutions?