American
Elections: Cause for Hope and for Disappointment
"The American presidential
election campaign is disappointing … because the decisive states are in the old
rust belt (from Pennsylvania to Wisconsin), one fears that the battle will
continue on its current bad track - that of populism … The disappointment is a
measure of the hope, which is great: to see America reinvent a model of a
united society for the 21st century."
The American presidential
election campaign is disappointing. Not because of the people running. On the
contrary, they are rich, impressive and truth be told, they are far more
thoughtful than those who have run in Europe lately. And not because Mrs.
Clinton herself will have to withdraw. We’re sorry, but seen from France, it's
hard to see the difference between the two Democratic candidates.
It's disappointing because
it's nowhere near over. Not yet they say. There are six months until November
and it's possible that the content of the candidates' programs may again become
important in a race that today is being played out on the basis of age, color
or sex. But given the way things are going and because the decisive states are
in the old rust belt (from Pennsylvania to Wisconsin), one fears that the
battle will continue on its current bad track - that of populism.
When it came time to win over
blue collar voters, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama sank into outbidding one
another on the issue of protectionism. And they railed against the free trade
agreement with Canada and Mexico: it's a factor in outsourcing. John McCain,
long silent on economic issues - that’s not his area of expertise - took the
floor to propose cutting federal gas taxes this summer to relieve U.S.
households. And alas, Mrs. Clinton has upped the ante on this proposition -
which is 1,000 percent demagoguery.
Harper
Administration tells of comment from Obama campaign[Toronto Star, Canada]
This disappointment is a
measure of the hope, which is great: to see America reinvent a model of a
united society for the 21st century. Americans “want to do nation-building in
America,” summarizes Thomas Friedman, a columnist for The New York Times . “We are not
as powerful as we used to be because over the past three decades, the Asian
values of our parents' generation - work hard, study, save, invest, live within
your means - have given way to subprime values.” The Americans dream of putting
an end to the long drift toward selfishness, social injustice, the poor quality
of the infrastructure and the restriction of civil rights, of which the Bush
era was the paroxysm.
With morale at its lowest
because of housing and financial crises and failures in Iraq, America is at a
turning point. Thirty years ago, it engaged the Reagan-era free enterprise
revolution and has benefited since from a brilliant economy, reaping the
profits from technology, immigration and globalization. But now, social
institutions have been undermined to the point of imperiling the American dream
itself: the possibility for anyone to succeed. The median salary is no longer
rising, the benefits of growth are not being shared and the middle class has
been pushed off the social elevator.
The rhetoric is there in
Barack Obama - who boasts of a new ideal, as it is in John McCain. The themes
discussed are the right ones, but except for demagoguery, solid content is
missing from the answers - as though the solution to post-liberalism lay in a
return to the 1960s.
U.S. ELECTIONS EXPLAINED: A NEWSTOPIA
PARODY
1. The subprime
crisis illuminates the need to save the four million over-indebted households
(of the 55 million who have taken out a home loan). But above all, it
underscores the urgency of finding a growth engine other than debt. But what?
Will the United States enter a long period of weak growth like the European
Union?
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
2. Gasoline taxes raise the
even-bigger issue of the evolution of buying power and the force of
redistributive taxation: Should America restructure taxation in order to reduce
inequality and resume spending on infrastructure (Third World-quality roads and
bridges)?
3. Social security: Mrs.
Clinton and Mr. Obama envision providing health coverage for the 47 million
Americans who don’t have it. At the same time, the major auto companies can no
longer guarantee the retirement for their former employees. The broader issue
is that of the welfare state and adjusting the balance between private
insurance and public coverage.
4. The blue collar workers of
old industries: How can the candidates and many elected officials in Washington
resist the temptation of protectionism? America generally responds with
mobility: the unemployed can rebuild their lives in the flourishing southern
states. Is this still an adequate response?
5. To differentiate
themselves during the primaries, the candidates have emphasized the rivalries
between groups: the young and the old, workers and college graduates, women and
men, Whites and Blacks, etc. The impression given by such vote-grabbing
gimmicks is that of a non-stop battle for a slice of the social pie. Is this
inevitable? Is there a new way to share the benefits of growth?
John McCain has given very
little indication about his economic and social policies. Behind his idealistic
image, Barack Obama has remained quite vague. At any rate, the American choice
will be followed very closely here in Europe, where the political class on both
the right and the left is struggling with the same question: how to rebuild the
nation?
