It seems like much of the traditional left has lost the political debate, but the future isn't necessarily all right wing as things do keep changing. The future is hard to predict, but things keep moving on to new configurations.
Traditional left tended to blame leaders of private sector and government for things like climate change and inequality. At the same time much of the left still followed the cultural patterns of consumerism at the grassroots level. Much of the American Dream, as it's been defined in the past, is no longer viable. New definitions of the dream are needed. Organizations such as Strong Towns (I find on Facebook) offer some new directions that make sense to me.
Addressing climate change seems to contradict the old style American Dream in such things as over dependence on the automobile. Also other aspects of consumerism.
The desire for more income and wealth equity tends to counter people's fixation with celebrities; such as following wealthy entertainers and sports figures. People complain about the wealthy, but then follow the wealthy in sports, movies and so forth. The masses are often manipulated by the wealthy.
Consumerism tends to favor economy of scale which supports large corporations, like Walmart, that can offer consumers low prices yet it also brings concentration of power. Less economy of scale can mean higher prices and less selection, but it might be worth it for other reasons. Reasons such as knowing the owners as neighbors and participants in the community versus absentee landlords across the country or around the world.
Wealth inequality is exacerbated by things like the wealth gap between home ownership and renting.
Wealth inequality is also exacerbated by rising salaries toward the top of professions. This beyond just the 1%, maybe the top 25% is making life harder for the bottom precentiles. High salaries based on bidding wars between organizations for attracting to talent to higher level positions. Executive salaries at KCTS Channel 9 Seattle and many other non profits, private corporations and government agencies are examples. High executive salaries makes running those organizations less viable.
As we keep finding out, populism doesn't always lean toward the left. The idea of the 1% versus the 99% is not a slam dunk winner of elections though it seems like it would be from just looking at those numbers alone.
Populism often leans right as things are more complicated than that. Folks who are still struggling to bring back the old definition of the American Dream, often understand it's pillars of support in our mostly capitalist system. They realize that just taxing business and the super rich will still have consequences felt clear down the food chain; slower economy, lost jobs, higher prices. Taxing business does have consequences for consumers and workers at the grassroots level. We can't "have it all."
Some of the consequences from taxes and regulation are worthy, however. This could be better explained to the American people; for instance higher gas prices, from taxes can help to bring better infrastructure. In the long run, maybe more prosperity, but it's a bit much to expect no short term sacrifice.
Lots of changes need to come to our entire culture from the grassroots level on up. I think these changes can happen as the future tends to always bring new things.
No comments:
Post a Comment