brahim warning the MCA and Gerakan at the Perhimpunan Melayu Perkasa Kedah today, April 30, 2011. Watching Ibrahim speak is Perkasa patron Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
The shameless manner in which the ruling party has gone about discrediting the non-political members of the committee has shocked almost everybody with a semblance of civility. I was, honestly, surprised at the ease, and alacrity, .The government clearly had its reasons to nip this in the bud. With a relentless media glare, , the crafty politicians/lawyers in the ruling class must have already thought through by then the shape this 'nipping in the bud' would take.Instead of debating the issues in a civilised manner Politics is carbon-dated by events, not time. Partnerships need tensile strength to survive misunderstandings when suspicion warps a relationship into a tangential curve. Mercury rather than blood flows through the vein of public life; politics is very human and turbulent, and ego floats beyond the reach of rational discourse.the MCA and Umno-owned newspaper Utusan Malaysia have clashed over the latter’s call for a “1 Melayu, 1 Bumi” campaign to unite the Malays against the growing threat of Chinese political power. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said today the Chinese community must choose to vote the MCA if they still wanted to represented in Putrajaya, or be left out.Najib, who is also Umno and the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition’s chief, said its Chinese partner had sent out a clear message to voters that they cannot have it both ways.The best politicians are very talented, but often that blessing is flecked with problems characteristic of a maverick. The big chiefs like talent in their subordinates, but squirm at its attendant frailties. Bright sparks tend to possess an implacable desire to place a mirror before stupidity. The reverse mirror, however, displays a more provocative facet. Jealousy and intrigue are companions of ambition; if the talented were not ambitious, they would not be in politics.Any institution, whether party or government, demands the stability of an uncontroversial script, or the comfort of silence from geniuses who can never find an equitable balance between their self-estimation and the role they have been given in what is essentially a Brechtian beggar's opera. .Any democracy is hobbled without an Opposition. Are we condemned it will be some time before it reaches 2009. With the Left neutered, and the Middle chasing its tail around a cemetery, what options does a voter have in the meantime?The Left, which could have been taken seriously had it taken itself seriously, reminds one of an anecdote which should be better-known. The ever-punctual Comrade Gorbachev, who huffed and puffed so hard that he brought the whole Soviet house down, was once late for a meeting with a French delegation. He explained to his guests that he had been delayed by a problem in agriculture. When did the problem begin, asked the solicitous French. ‘‘In 1917,’’ replied Gorbachev
Nature and politics have one thing in common: they both abhor a vacuum. In some MALAYSIA, the UMNO is doing its best to create its own Opposition. It has firmly rejected another pathetic overture from Perkasa so much egg on his face that he can breakfast continuously from now till the next G13 so much egg on his face that he can breakfast continuously from now till the next G13 Perkasa warned the MCA and Gerakan today that it would tell the Malays not to vote for their candidates in the next general election if they fail to stand up for the Malays and Islam.
Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said Barisan Nasional’s (BN) Chinese-based parties would not win any seats without Malay votes and cautioned them to “be friends with Perkasa.”“We will see whether candidates defend Malays and Islam. If not Perkasa will give the green light to pancung (cut off) them in the general election,” he said at a gathering organised by the Malay rights group here.
Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said Barisan Nasional’s (BN) Chinese-based parties would not win any seats without Malay votes and cautioned them to “be friends with Perkasa.”
“We will see whether candidates defend Malays and Islam. If not Perkasa will give the green light to pancung (cut off) them in the general election,” he said at a gathering organised by the Malay rights group here.
Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said Barisan Nasional’s (BN) Chinese-based parties would not win any seats without Malay votes and cautioned them to “be friends with Perkasa.”
“We will see whether candidates defend Malays and Islam. If not Perkasa will give the green light to pancung (cut off) them in the general election,” he said at a gathering organised by the Malay rights group here.
Although the Pasir Mas MP extended this threat to all candidates for a general election expected within a year, he singled out the MCA and Gerakan as those that needed Malay votes to win.
“With no Malay votes, not even one can win. They better be friends with Perkasa,” he said.
A majority of Perkasa members are also in Umno, the dominant partner in BN.
Perkasa had supported Utusan Malaysia’s call for a 1 Melayu, 1 Bumi movement after BN lose nearly all Chinese-majority seats in the April 16 Sarawak election.
The result echoed the loss of Chinese votes in the March 2008 general election where MCA won just 15 seats in Parliament — fewer than half the 31 MPs it had before — and Gerakan were wiped out in its former stronghold of Penang.
Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia called for the 1 Melayu, 1 Bumi campaign to unite the Malays against what the Umno-owned daily said was racial politics by DAP to stir up Chinese sentiment.
This led to a running feud with Chinese-dominated parties especially the MCA who called for a boycott of the newspaper.
Ibrahim recently attacked MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek for blaming the loss of Chinese support on Perkasa and the Malay daily, saying that the party’s “immoral leaders” were the cause instead.
He was referring to the sex video that surfaced at the end of 2007 which led to Dr Chua resigning as health minister and MCA vice-president.
Although Ibrahim again criticised Dr Chua for using Perkasa as a “punching bag” today, he supported the announcement that the MCA would decline any government posts if it did not perform in the next general election.
“This is an honourable move. I hope this makes the Chinese aware that they will not be represented if they don’t support BN,” he told reporters after the Perhimpunan Melayu Perkasa Kedah gathering.
Earlier, he had told over 1,000 Malays that the Chinese should be satisfied that “they can do anything in business.”
“They control gambling, alcohol and entertainment centres. These are worth billions. Do Malays stop them? Does the government stop them?
“Still they are not satisfied. What more do they want?” he said
Congress president Sonia Gandhi has assured Anna Hazare that she favours a strong Lokpal Bill to curb corruption. But some members of her own party have been left free to attack the civil society members of the joint committee formed to draft the Jan Lokpal Bill. They have also raised questions over the efficacy of the Lokpal in checking corruption. And, after causing the damage, Pranab Mukherjee, who is also co-chairman of the drafting committee, is sent to issue a statement that the work of the committee will continue despite controversies. The attempt seems to be to show the people that "nobody is clean" but in the process Congress leaders have also made their frustration evident – the frustration of being defeated by the Gandhian ideology to which Congress claims to have a copyright but rarely exhibits in its character.
On April 21, 2011, when the Madhya Pradesh High Court was directing the Economic Offences Wing to file a chargesheet by June 30 against former chief minister Digvijay Singh in connection with the alleged irregularities committed in the construction of a shopping mall during Singh’s rule in the state, Singh was addressing a press conference in Lucknow, passing judgment on the efficacy of the Lokpal in curbing corruption. Targeting Karnataka Lokayukta Santosh Hegde , Singh said that despite being a strong Lokayukta, Hegde has not been able to curb corruption in Karnataka ruled by the BJP. Singh apologised later when Hegde threatened to quit the joint committee formed for drafting of the Jan Lokpal Bill. Through his statement, however, he not only attacked BJP government in Karnataka and Hegde to scuttle the endeavor but also tried to mislead people by arguing that an institution like Jan Lokpal is useless.
Nobody can believe that Singh is unaware of what Justice Hegde has done in Karnataka. The institution of Lokayukta has been deliberately kept weak by politicians and government in power so that they can get away with their misdeeds. But despite the limitations, Hegde cracked the whip on corruption. He became Lokayukta in 2006 and since he has exposed over 350 cases of corruption in the state and unearthed disproportionate assets of scores of officials and politicians, including mining giants Reddy brothers. But the state government has not taken appropriate action in any of the cases. The powers of Lokayukta are limited, hence he cannot move court to prosecute the corrupt. The law has been made by politicians like Singh. Naturally, no matter how strong a Lokayukta is, the results are not going to be up to the mark. But this does not mean that the Lokayukta or the Lokpal is a useless institution. Give it the power and the institution will definitely deliver.
Digvijay Singh seems to be against a strong Jan Lokpal because as chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, he locked horns with the state Lokayukta several times. The most talked about case was the allegations of corruption against two ministers of his cabinet in a land deal. After conducting an inquiry, the Lokayukta in 1998 sought the governor’s permission for prosecution. The governor sought advice from the council of ministers headed by Singh. The latter refused to accord sanction saying there was no material available against the ministers in the case. But the governor gave the sanction. The ministers challenged the order in the High Court which ruled in their favour. The High Court order was challenged in the Supreme Court, where a five-member Constitution Bench on November 5, 2004, in a landmark verdict ruled that the governor can grant prosecution against the advice of the council of ministers, if the latter is biased.
Significantly, Justice Santosh Hedge, then a Supreme Court judge, was also in the five-member Bench, which in its judgment observed: “The democracy will be at stake, if the government refuses to accord sanction for prosecution against ministers in matters where prima facie a clear case for a prosecution was made out. It would lead to a situation where people in power may break law with impunity, safe in knowledge that they will not be prosecuted as requisite sanction for prosecution will not be granted." Though by that time the two ministers had resigned, it led to a huge embarrassment for Digvijay Singh. Clearly, a Lokayukta with appropriate legal powers would have been fatal for Singh’s government. This explains why politicians like Singh and bureaucrats are against a strong Lokpal. Such an institution would make it difficult for the corrupt to evade prosecution after being caught looting the wealth of the country.
Union human resource development minister Kapil Sibal has raised questions that a Jan Lokpal will not be able to bring children to school or provide safe drinking water. As a loyal follower of Gandhi family, Sibal would be aware that former Congress prime minister the late Rajiv Gandhi had said (later reiterated by his son Rahul) that out of Re 1sent from the Centre for development, less than 15 paise reaches the grassroots, the rest is siphoned off by the corrupt. That’s the reason why India continues to suffer despite trillions being sanctioned for the welfare schemes for poor. The Congress has been ruling the country for over 55 years after independence and takes credit of the development done in the country after 1947, hence the responsibility of corrupting the system also lies with it. From 1966 Jeep scam to 2011 2G scam, 100-odd big scams have taken place in India, of which the majority occurred during Congress regimes.
Another argument being given by Congress leaders as well as some members of the civil society that a Jan Lokpal cannot be placed above a government elected by 120 crore people of India. The argument holds no ground because democracy will be under threat if a government refuses to grant sanction for prosecution of ministers or chief minister or prime minister. One cannot be a judge of his/her cause. Further, there is no democracy within the political parties. Sycophancy rules and individuals have become important than ideologies. Also, if one goes by the head count, khap panchayats enjoy majority support in their area of jurisdiction but their decisions taken by majority votes do not become legal if they are against the law of the land. Today winning elections has become the only aim of political parties and in the process, money, mafia, muscle, mandir and masjid have been introduced in the system to influence voters.
Further, no political party can claim to have majority support in the democratic set-up we have. As per the data of the Election Commission, total votes polled in the country in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections were over 41.71 crore, of which the Congress got only 11.91 crore, which was 28.55% of the total votes polled and 16.61% of the total electors in India. The party contested 440 seats and won 206. It gained majority in the 543-member Lok Sabha with the help of alliance partners. The BJP got 18.80% of total votes polled. Total votes secured by all the seven national political parties in the country was 63.58% of the total polled and 36.99% of the total electors. Of total 543 candidates, only 95 got more than 50% votes in their constituencies. A person can become prime minister without contesting any direct elections as a back-door entry, as in the case of Manmohan Singh, through the Rajya Sabha.
The political arithmetic to win elections is not about getting majority votes but how to get maximum votes by applying various caste and community combinations, by fielding dummy candidates, by using muscle to prevent weaker sections from voting, by using money to buy floating votes etc. Ideally, the democracy should be about entire population and not majority alone. The corrupt regimes have been overthrown in the past but their replacements were equally corrupt. People have been forced to accept corruption as an inseparable part of life. Those who deliver after taking bribe are considered `honest’. A section of `disenchanted’ people have stopped voting because they know that money speaks whosoever is in power. For poor, who constitute 80% of population, survival is a bigger issue than corruption. A dialogue from the movie Rajneeti aptly defines compulsions of poor in elections: “Bus do roti ka asra de do, kisi bhi rang ka jhanda utha lenge,” .
In such a situation, a strong Jan Lokpal is required to save democracy from politicians who have made `politics a business'. According to an study conducted by National Election Watch, the total assets of all the 543 MPs is over Rs 3,000 crore. The number of crorepati MPs in 2004 was 154, which has increased to 300 in 2009. Of 430 candidates fielded by the Congress, 261 were crorepatis, of which 138 won. The average worth of a Congress MP was Rs 3.38 crore in 2004, which increased to Rs 6.86 crore in 2009. The BJP gave ticktes to 177 crorepatis, of which 58 won. The average assets per BJP MP in 2004 were 1.20 crore which increased to Rs 3.06 crore. Among top 10 crorepatis MPs, five are from Congress, three from Nationalist Congress Party and one each from ShiromanI Akali Dal and Telgu Desham Party. Notably, the average assests have doubled between 2004-2009 despite the great economic recession of 2008-09.
All the major scams -- 2G, CWG, Radia Tapes, Cash for votes July 2008 UPA I trust vote - have taken place between 2004-09. Politicians take vote from people and work for corporate. Is this democracy? And, why not bring corporate and media (which helped A Raja to become minister) also under Lokpal?
The election centric politics (instead of people-centric) with an aim to grab power at any cost has been then main cause of corruption. Hundreds work for a party but few become MP or MLA. Rest survive on `cuts and commissions’ in transfers and postings of officers or by grabbing government contracts. The elections are mostly funded through illegal means. After winning, the office is used to earn several times than investment. The rule of the BJP and other political parties at the Centre and in states have also been no better than Congress on the issue of corruption. Though parties say that they support Anna, they will try every trick to scuttle or dilute it the institution of the proposed jan lokpal. It’s not without a reason that the Bill is pending since 1968. Only public pressure can make a strong Jan Lokpal a reality. And, thereafter, as Anna says, we will have to fight a long battle do decentralisation of power and adopt a village-centric Gandhian and Jai Prakash Narain’s model of democracy wherein every individual will have say in the governance.
On April 21, 2011, when the Madhya Pradesh High Court was directing the Economic Offences Wing to file a chargesheet by June 30 against former chief minister Digvijay Singh in connection with the alleged irregularities committed in the construction of a shopping mall during Singh’s rule in the state, Singh was addressing a press conference in Lucknow, passing judgment on the efficacy of the Lokpal in curbing corruption. Targeting Karnataka Lokayukta Santosh Hegde , Singh said that despite being a strong Lokayukta, Hegde has not been able to curb corruption in Karnataka ruled by the BJP. Singh apologised later when Hegde threatened to quit the joint committee formed for drafting of the Jan Lokpal Bill. Through his statement, however, he not only attacked BJP government in Karnataka and Hegde to scuttle the endeavor but also tried to mislead people by arguing that an institution like Jan Lokpal is useless.
Nobody can believe that Singh is unaware of what Justice Hegde has done in Karnataka. The institution of Lokayukta has been deliberately kept weak by politicians and government in power so that they can get away with their misdeeds. But despite the limitations, Hegde cracked the whip on corruption. He became Lokayukta in 2006 and since he has exposed over 350 cases of corruption in the state and unearthed disproportionate assets of scores of officials and politicians, including mining giants Reddy brothers. But the state government has not taken appropriate action in any of the cases. The powers of Lokayukta are limited, hence he cannot move court to prosecute the corrupt. The law has been made by politicians like Singh. Naturally, no matter how strong a Lokayukta is, the results are not going to be up to the mark. But this does not mean that the Lokayukta or the Lokpal is a useless institution. Give it the power and the institution will definitely deliver.
Digvijay Singh seems to be against a strong Jan Lokpal because as chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, he locked horns with the state Lokayukta several times. The most talked about case was the allegations of corruption against two ministers of his cabinet in a land deal. After conducting an inquiry, the Lokayukta in 1998 sought the governor’s permission for prosecution. The governor sought advice from the council of ministers headed by Singh. The latter refused to accord sanction saying there was no material available against the ministers in the case. But the governor gave the sanction. The ministers challenged the order in the High Court which ruled in their favour. The High Court order was challenged in the Supreme Court, where a five-member Constitution Bench on November 5, 2004, in a landmark verdict ruled that the governor can grant prosecution against the advice of the council of ministers, if the latter is biased.
Significantly, Justice Santosh Hedge, then a Supreme Court judge, was also in the five-member Bench, which in its judgment observed: “The democracy will be at stake, if the government refuses to accord sanction for prosecution against ministers in matters where prima facie a clear case for a prosecution was made out. It would lead to a situation where people in power may break law with impunity, safe in knowledge that they will not be prosecuted as requisite sanction for prosecution will not be granted." Though by that time the two ministers had resigned, it led to a huge embarrassment for Digvijay Singh. Clearly, a Lokayukta with appropriate legal powers would have been fatal for Singh’s government. This explains why politicians like Singh and bureaucrats are against a strong Lokpal. Such an institution would make it difficult for the corrupt to evade prosecution after being caught looting the wealth of the country.
Union human resource development minister Kapil Sibal has raised questions that a Jan Lokpal will not be able to bring children to school or provide safe drinking water. As a loyal follower of Gandhi family, Sibal would be aware that former Congress prime minister the late Rajiv Gandhi had said (later reiterated by his son Rahul) that out of Re 1sent from the Centre for development, less than 15 paise reaches the grassroots, the rest is siphoned off by the corrupt. That’s the reason why India continues to suffer despite trillions being sanctioned for the welfare schemes for poor. The Congress has been ruling the country for over 55 years after independence and takes credit of the development done in the country after 1947, hence the responsibility of corrupting the system also lies with it. From 1966 Jeep scam to 2011 2G scam, 100-odd big scams have taken place in India, of which the majority occurred during Congress regimes.
Another argument being given by Congress leaders as well as some members of the civil society that a Jan Lokpal cannot be placed above a government elected by 120 crore people of India. The argument holds no ground because democracy will be under threat if a government refuses to grant sanction for prosecution of ministers or chief minister or prime minister. One cannot be a judge of his/her cause. Further, there is no democracy within the political parties. Sycophancy rules and individuals have become important than ideologies. Also, if one goes by the head count, khap panchayats enjoy majority support in their area of jurisdiction but their decisions taken by majority votes do not become legal if they are against the law of the land. Today winning elections has become the only aim of political parties and in the process, money, mafia, muscle, mandir and masjid have been introduced in the system to influence voters.
Further, no political party can claim to have majority support in the democratic set-up we have. As per the data of the Election Commission, total votes polled in the country in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections were over 41.71 crore, of which the Congress got only 11.91 crore, which was 28.55% of the total votes polled and 16.61% of the total electors in India. The party contested 440 seats and won 206. It gained majority in the 543-member Lok Sabha with the help of alliance partners. The BJP got 18.80% of total votes polled. Total votes secured by all the seven national political parties in the country was 63.58% of the total polled and 36.99% of the total electors. Of total 543 candidates, only 95 got more than 50% votes in their constituencies. A person can become prime minister without contesting any direct elections as a back-door entry, as in the case of Manmohan Singh, through the Rajya Sabha.
The political arithmetic to win elections is not about getting majority votes but how to get maximum votes by applying various caste and community combinations, by fielding dummy candidates, by using muscle to prevent weaker sections from voting, by using money to buy floating votes etc. Ideally, the democracy should be about entire population and not majority alone. The corrupt regimes have been overthrown in the past but their replacements were equally corrupt. People have been forced to accept corruption as an inseparable part of life. Those who deliver after taking bribe are considered `honest’. A section of `disenchanted’ people have stopped voting because they know that money speaks whosoever is in power. For poor, who constitute 80% of population, survival is a bigger issue than corruption. A dialogue from the movie Rajneeti aptly defines compulsions of poor in elections: “Bus do roti ka asra de do, kisi bhi rang ka jhanda utha lenge,” .
In such a situation, a strong Jan Lokpal is required to save democracy from politicians who have made `politics a business'. According to an study conducted by National Election Watch, the total assets of all the 543 MPs is over Rs 3,000 crore. The number of crorepati MPs in 2004 was 154, which has increased to 300 in 2009. Of 430 candidates fielded by the Congress, 261 were crorepatis, of which 138 won. The average worth of a Congress MP was Rs 3.38 crore in 2004, which increased to Rs 6.86 crore in 2009. The BJP gave ticktes to 177 crorepatis, of which 58 won. The average assets per BJP MP in 2004 were 1.20 crore which increased to Rs 3.06 crore. Among top 10 crorepatis MPs, five are from Congress, three from Nationalist Congress Party and one each from ShiromanI Akali Dal and Telgu Desham Party. Notably, the average assests have doubled between 2004-2009 despite the great economic recession of 2008-09.
All the major scams -- 2G, CWG, Radia Tapes, Cash for votes July 2008 UPA I trust vote - have taken place between 2004-09. Politicians take vote from people and work for corporate. Is this democracy? And, why not bring corporate and media (which helped A Raja to become minister) also under Lokpal?
The election centric politics (instead of people-centric) with an aim to grab power at any cost has been then main cause of corruption. Hundreds work for a party but few become MP or MLA. Rest survive on `cuts and commissions’ in transfers and postings of officers or by grabbing government contracts. The elections are mostly funded through illegal means. After winning, the office is used to earn several times than investment. The rule of the BJP and other political parties at the Centre and in states have also been no better than Congress on the issue of corruption. Though parties say that they support Anna, they will try every trick to scuttle or dilute it the institution of the proposed jan lokpal. It’s not without a reason that the Bill is pending since 1968. Only public pressure can make a strong Jan Lokpal a reality. And, thereafter, as Anna says, we will have to fight a long battle do decentralisation of power and adopt a village-centric Gandhian and Jai Prakash Narain’s model of democracy wherein every individual will have say in the governance.
Since the election of Barack Obama, the Republican Party has proved that one of its central intellectual arguments was right all along. They have long claimed that evolution is a myth believed in only by whiny liberals -- and it turns out they were onto something. Every six months, the Republican Party venerates a new hero, and each time it is somebody further back on the evolutionary scale.
Sarah Palin told cheering rallies that her message to the world was: "We'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way!" -- but that wasn't enough. So they found Michele Bachmann, who said darkly it was an "interesting coincidence" that swine flu only breaks out under Democratic presidents, claims the message of The Lion King is "I'm better at what I do because I'm gay," and argues "there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows carbon dioxide is a harmful gas."
That wasn't enough. I half-expected the next contender to be a lung-fish draped in the Stars and Stripes. But it wasn't anything so sophisticated. Enter stage (far) right Donald Trump, the bewigged billionaire who has filled America with phallic symbols and plastered his name across more surfaces than the average Central Asian dictator. A survey suggestshe is the most popular candidate among Republican voters. It's not hard to see why.
Trump is every trend in Republican politics over the past thirty-five years taken to its logical conclusion. He is the Republican id, finally entirely unleashed from all restraint and all reality.
The first trend is towards naked imperialism. On Libya, he says: "I would go in and take the oil... I would take the oil and stop this baby stuff." On Iraq, he says: "We stay there, and we take the oil... In the old days, when you have a war and you win, that nation's yours." It is a view that the world is essentially America's property, inconveniently inhabited by foreigners squatting over oil-fields. Trump says America needs to "stop what's going on in the world. The world is just destroying our country. These other countries are sapping our strength." The U.S. must have full spectrum dominance. In this respect, he is simply an honest George W. Bush.
The second trend is towards dog-whistle prejudice -- pitched just high enough for frightened white Republicans to hear it. Trump made it a central issue to suggest Obama wasn't born in America (and therefore was occupying the White House illegally) -- even though this conspiracy theory had long since been proven to be as credible as the people who claim Paul McCartney was killed in 1969 and replaced with an imposter. Trump said nobody "ever comes forward" to say they knew Obama as a child in Hawaii. When lots of people pointed out they knew Obama as a child, Trump ridiculed the idea they could remember that far back. Then he said he'd "heard" the birth certificate said Obama was Muslim. When it was released saying no such thing, Trump said: "I'm very proud of myself."
The Republican primary voters heard the message right -- the black guy is foreign. He's not one of us. Trump responded to these charges by saying: "I've always had a great relationship with the blacks."
The third trend is towards raw worship of wealth as an end in itself -- and exempting them from all social responsibility. Trump is wealthy because his father left him a large business, and since then companies with his name on them have crashed into bankruptcy four times. In 1990, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Clay Johnson studied the Trump accountsand claimed that while Trump claimed to be worth $1.4bn, he was actually worth -$600m. That is, he owed $600m more than he owned. You and I were worth more than him.
Johnson says that in fact most of Trump's apparent fortune comes from "stiffing his creditors" and from government subsidies and favours for his projects -- which followed large donations to the campaigns of both parties, sometimes in the very same contest. Trump denies these charges and presents himself as an entrepreneur "of genius."
Yet for the Republican Party, the accumulation of money is proof in itself of virtue, however it was acquired. The richest 1 percent pay for the party's campaigns, and the party in turn serves their interests entirely. The most glaring example is that they have simply exempted many of the rich from taxes. Johnson studied four of Trump's recent tax returns, and found he legally paid no taxes in two of them. In America today, a janitor can pay more income tax than Donald Trump -- and the Republicans regard that not as a source of shame, but of pride.
How are these tax exemptions for the super-rich paid for? Here's one example. The Republican budget that just passed through the House slashed funding to help premature babies to survive. The rich riot while the poor shrivel. Trump offers the ultimate symbol of this -- he won't even shake hands with any ordinary Americans out on the stump, because "you catch all sorts of things" from them. Yes: the Republican front-runner is a billionaire who literally won't touch the poor or middle class.
The fourth trend is to insist that any fact inconvenient to your world-view either doesn't exist, or can be overcome by pure willpower. Soon, the U.S. will have to extend its debt ceiling -- the amount of money the government is allowed to borrow - or it will default on its debt. Virtually every economist in the world says this would cause another global economic crash. Trump snaps back: "What do economists know? Most of them aren't very smart."
Confront the Republicans with any long-term social or economic problem, and they have one response: it would go away if only we insisted on our assumptions more aggressively. So Trump says "it's so easy" to deal with rising oil prices. He says he would call in OPEC, the cartel of oil-producing nations, as if they were contestants on his show 'The Apprentice', and declare: "I'm going to look them in the eye and say 'Fellows, you've had your fun. Your fun is over.'... It's so easy. It's all about the messenger." It's the same, he says, with China. He will order them to stop manipulating their currency. When he was told they have some leverage over the US, he snapped: "They have some of our debt. Big deal. It's a very small number relative to the world, OK?"
This is what the Republican core vote wants to be told. The writer Matthew Yglesias calls it"the Green Lantern Theory of Geopolitics." It's named after the Marvel comics superhero the Green Lantern, who can only use his superpowers when he "overcomes fear" and shows confidence -- and then he can do anything. This is Trump's view. The whiny world simply needs to be bullied into submission by a more assertive America -- or the world can be fired and he'll find a better one.
Trump probably won't become the Republican nominee, but it won't be because most Republicans reject his premises. No: it will be because he states these arguments too crudely for mass public consumption. He takes the underlying whispered dogmas of the Reagan, Bush and Tea Party years and shrieks them through a megaphone. The nominee will share similar ideas, but express them more subtly.
In case you think these ideas are marginal to the party, remember -- it has united behind the budget plan of Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan. It's simple: it halves taxes on the richest 1 percent and ends all taxes on corporate income, dividends and inheritance. It pays for it by slashing spending on food stamps, healthcare for the poor and the elderly, and basic services. It aims to return the US to the spending levels of the 1920s -- and while Ryan frames it as a response to the deficit, it would actually increase it according to the independent Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Ryan says "the reason I got involved in public service" was because he read the writings of Ayn Rand, which describe the poor as "parasites" who must "perish", and are best summarized by the title of one of her books: 'The Virtue of Selfishness.'
The tragedy is that Obama needs serious opposition -- but not from this direction. In reality, he is funded by similar destructive corporate interests, and has only been a few notches closer to sanity than these people. But faced with such overt lunacy, he seems like he is serving the bottom 99 percent of Americans much more than he really is.
The Republican Party today isn't even dominated by market fundamentalism. This is a crude Nietzsheanism, dedicating to exalting the rich as an overclass and dismissing the rest. So who should be the Republican nominee? I hear the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse were considering running -- but they are facing primary challenges from the Tea Party for being way too mild-mannered.
No comments:
Post a Comment