U.S. Should Choose Practical Patriotism Over Party Tactics
"There
are times that the national interest must be held higher than party politics
and electioneering. It is about practical patriotism, which is often praised in
the United States."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Early Sunday evening, Reid confirmed that he had signed off on a debt ceiling deal. If his and the Republican caucus' approve, the crisis could be over by Monday afternoon.
Now it's really becoming
embarrassing. We've been following the circus for a long time and now the whole
U.S. economy is at risk with Democrats and Republicans continuing to argue. The
debt ceiling must be raised by August 2 at the latest so that the country can afford
to pay for pensions and interest on loans.
The polarization is worsening
due to the fact that both sides have difficulty with internal fights and
betrayal. Republicans are being pressured hard by the Tea Party movement not to
raise taxes, while within the Democratic Party there is strong resistance to
cutting the social safety net - even if Obama now seems to be going along with
that.
As a politician, making
enemies among one's own party members and voters or even risk one’s political
career is obviously difficult. We hope that the drama in this serious, acute
situation makes it easier for the parties to justify internal compromise.
Under normal circumstances of
course, the parties should represent citizens of differing opinions and fight hard
for their cause. But there are times that the national interest must be held
higher than party politics and electioneering. It is about practical
patriotism, which is often praised in the United States.
It is gratifying to see that the
American people want them to find a compromise solution. “You know what people
are most tired of? They're tired of a city where compromise has become a bad
word,” Obama said recently.
The financial crisis and its
economic aftermath have forced many countries to make difficult choices. This
has provided an interesting window on the differing ways in which governments
and peoples have dealt with the challenges.
The Baltic States underwent a
drastic austerity program. In Latvia, public sector salaries were cut by 20
percent. And although this hit many public employees hard there was public
acceptance and the measures were greeted with relative calm. It was a
courageous choice that now seems to be paying off as the small and open economy
has begun to grow through exports.
Posted
by WORLDMEETS.US
In Greece, the situation is
the opposite. On the streets and squares, Greeks are shouting their anger
against politicians and the E.U. One can understand their disappointment with
the system, but also marvel at their naivety. If you've been involved in a
widespread black economy, it may not surprise you to hear that the state doesn't
collect enough in taxes. And how can Greece defend a retirement age of 58, when
other countries don't consider themselves capable of affording it? The Greek
people should also be able to acknowledge their own part in what is now
happening.
In Sweden, we have learned
from the tough decisions we made in the 1990s. Pension and tax reform are proud
examples of when the country’s long-term interests were allowed to prevail over
party politics. With all parties - except the Left Party - and with other key
stakeholders supporting pension reform, there were a few protests but no public
outcry. Against this historical background, it's no wonder that many were
outraged by Hakan Juholt's suggestion that the Social Democrats could develop
their own proposal for reforming the pension system and make it an election
issue.
We see several examples in
the world around us in which both governments and the voters lack a sense of
responsibility. For leaders, it's about daring to take wise decisions - even if
there is a cost. As voters, it's more important that we keep ourselves well
informed about the economic realities facing the country. In the end, it is our
responsibility to neither reward economic frivolity nor punish politicians that
dare to take tough decisions on behalf of the public good.
