06.13.08
Posted in Politics, Current Events at 2:28 am by diantus
Recent protests in South Korea have gone largely unnoticed in the American media. The massive street riots in that country might not seem particularly important in an economy as big as America’s, but I think it worthy of considering them for two important reasons. For one, it highlights the general apathy that Americans feel towards their government; and two, it makes an important point about business transparency and oversight, the lacks of which weaken our ability to trade effectively with the outside world – though this second point will have to wait for a future post.
The recent protests that have erupted on the Korean Streets are tied, ostensibly, to fears about a recent decision to allow the importation of American beef into Korea. US beef has been banned in Korea since 2003, after the US federal government confessed to finding beef that was contaminated by mad cow disease. Korean health officials, with the support of a government already displeased with the Bush administration’s handling of the political situation on the Korean peninsula, banned the import of US agricultural products – especially beef.
The recent election of President Lee offered an opportunity to begin the process of shoring up relations given his relatively pro-US positions. However, his leadership style has been very top-heavy. Many Koreans feel that he acts without seeing the need to consult public opinion, and is prone to making decisions without making people aware of the fullness of the facts. Restarting beef imports without taking into account the very real public health concerns was the final straw dropped on a population already deeply dissatisfied with the Lee government.
Now mind you, there is an element of the comic to the Mad Cow Madness in Korea. A supposed expert appeared on television claiming that the Korean physiology was somehow more susceptible to the disease than other peoples; numerous videos have been circulating about the appalling conditions in US meat-packing plants – naturally heightening fears; and the level of rumor and misinformation about the quality of US beef has now reached the point of frenzy. To look at it closely is to see a popular campaign laden with more logical, medical, and economic errors than many that I have seen.
Nevertheless, one can’t help but admire the Korean people for fearlessly taking to the streets and demanding that their government be accountable to their demands. Such an outpouring of public rage and passion is simply unimaginable in the United States. Our own government has done far worse to us in the last eight years, and those who would dare protest are ridiculed regularly in the evening news, given nothing in the way of a genuine forum, and totally marginalized. In Korea, the cabinet has offered to resign. In America, Rumsfeld gets a cushy job in a think-tank and a book deal, while Karl Rove is now a regular paid commentator on Fox News.
The difference is stark. I believe that this highlights a willingness on the part of the American people to refuse responsibility for the action of our government. Koreans demand not only that their government work, but that it respond to the demands of the people and be transparent in its operation. Likely this is the response of a population only recently freed from the brutal yolk of a right-wing military dictatorship and its oligarchic alliances, but should that be an excuse for Americans to sit idly by when its government refuses to accede to the demands of the population? Bush’s popularity is one of the lowest of any president in history, yet even the opposition misdirects every effort to hold him accountable for his actions (I’m of course citing Kucinich’s most recent efforts here). It boggles the mind that we could be as complacent and lazy as a people.
Though I suppose I shouldn’t be too surprised. Our government is very good at making alliances with the right sort of people; specifically business and media leaders, whose aims can be a bit focused on immediate returns. This means that keeping the population in the dark is rather helpful – if we really knew how often we are made sick by poor oversight, we might start biting into those bottom lines. But, there really isn’t much in the way of reliable information available to us. For example, the Koreans know a great deal more about the weakness of the FDA to actually enforce food safety standards than most Americans. As we suffer through another outbreak of salmonella poisoning in fruit we have already conveniently forgotten that such outbreaks are basically yearly events.
This lack of responsibility and oversight makes us a poor trading partner in the minds of many countries. It undermines our ability to compete internationally, and the excuse that “we’re America, and that makes us the best” is falling on increasingly uninterested ears. As a developed country, we do a shockingly bad job of presenting our image abroad and of keeping to standards that are considered international norms by almost everywhere else.
We tend to see safety and environmental standards as violating our sovereignty somehow. Of course, it is also worth mentioning that US emission standards are behind most countries and this limits our ability to export cars outside of the US (our companies can get around this by simply building them overseas and meeting compliance standards overseas, but this does little for domestic workers), and the lack of safety standards and the proper levels of transparency in the agricultural business is about to cost us access to the 3rd largest beef market in the world – so much for helping the American farmer.
Permalink
06.09.08
Posted in Politics, Current Events at 1:33 am by diantus
In the wake of Senator Clinton’s loss of the recent democratic primary, the punditry is now awash in speculation as to her next moves and those of her supporters. While she herself has declared her intention to support the nomination of Barack Obama, who faces what is sure to be a vicious battle with John McCain in the coming months, there is justifiable concern over whether or not she and her supporters can really get behind the man that they have spent the past months vilifying and condemning as a condescending elitist, and inexperienced (black) candidate.
This is a perfectly valid concern, but it goes more to the traditional failings of the political left then to the nature of the two candidates. The left wing of the political spectrum has always struggled to put its differences aside to face a greater challenge. Left wing voters are politically exclusive in a manner similar to the right wing voters are, but the fundamental difference seems to be the very real way in which wedge issues can be used to completely alienate sections of the left. The right will typically rally around anyone who endorses their pet cause, whereas the left will only rally around those who endorse their pet causes in the perceived ‘correct’ order. This has led to some of the most famous failures of the left to oppose tyranny and injustice in modern history.
The greatest worry about the democratic movement now is whether the feminist clique, who was so passionately supportive of Clinton, can now channel any of their energy into Obama. They will likely struggle. They will put forth a litany of reasons, but in the end it boils down to the fact that he is not a woman, and they came so close. Of course, neither is John McCain terribly feminine, but the point remains. To me, this misses the basic point that the actual policies of the two candidates were virtually identical. Personally, I felt Obama to be the stronger candidate based largely on my judgment of his leadership style and the nature of the presidency, but was little concerned over the issues of gender or race that so concerned other voters.
In the end, we can hope that the champions of reason will win through. After all, the election of John McCain would further damage the goals of any progressive faction within the US polity – something that we can ill afford, given the devastating legacy of George Bush, and it doesn’t matter what your favorite minority is then – we’re all screwed. The simple fact is that it really doesn’t matter who your favorite candidate was. In terms of substance, they were effectively the same. The differences lay in style and packaging.
All we can do now is how that these speculations of feminist backlash are simply that: speculations; and that rationality will allow us to see past what is really an incredibly small question in this campaign. What is ultimately at stake is a change in political direction. Both candidates offered this, and you are a fool if you don’t take it just because they don’t happen to be a woman or black. Moreover, our new agent of change, Obama, has a large enough struggle ahead of him in the southern states, where the population giddily admits to deep seated racism and the anxieties to change that only under-education and poverty can offer. He really shouldn’t to have to worry about catering to narrow-minded feminists on that single issue as well. It’s not a fight he can win, and insisting that he try only fuels our opponents for another term of Republican hegemony – and you don’t get a lot more misogynistic than that.
Focusing too heavily on issues of race and gender is no better than racism or misogyny itself. As Obama famously pointed out, both of these are foils for larger issues, and while that doesn’t invalidate them as problems in need of solving, it means that we need to understand them in a broader context in order to do that. Politics doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. Sometimes, when you reach a milestone and break a barrier for one, you can do it for many. Since the foundation of the United States, both women and blacks have been underprivileged, why does it really matter who makes those important steps first now?
Permalink