Orwellian
December 26th, 2007
The Bush Administration has always made me think of George Orwell and his novel “1984†from the point of view of language. While all politicians and all administrations I can remember have been somewhat loose with language and the truth, the current administration has realized the vision of Orwell in that language means nothing and is to be used to manipulate the citizens of the country.
What makes me think of this once again? The Bush EPA blocking California and 16 other states from enforcing states laws to protect the environment and their citizens. EPA stands for Environmental Protection Agency, yet the Bush EPA has nothing to do with protecting the environment and everything to do with turf battles and giving in to special interests. As we all know, the Bush administration has shown no respect for the environment and has shown a total absence of leadership in the area of CO2 emissions. It actually fought and lost a court case where the court ruled that the EPA does have jurisdiction over the issue of green house emissions. Who does the Bush EPA protect? Not the environment.
The signing into law of the energy bill last week allowed the Bush EPA to deny California and the other states from enforcing laws that have more stringent regulations regarding CO2 emissions and automotive fleet MPG. The emissions standards California adopted in 2004, which were never approved by the federal government, would force automakers to cut greenhouse gas emission by 30 percent by 2016. If you have ever been in LA on a bad smog day you can understand the relatively easy passage of that bill. As I wrote here in a column titled “Once Again it Starts in Californiaâ€, that state has, in contrast to Washington D.C., shown consistent leadership in the area of issues pertaining to global warming. A Republican governor and a Democratic legislature came together for leadership; what a concept!
There of course is no precedent in what the Bush EPA did last week and the states are all going to take it to court as there is a lot of precedent on the side of the states. In fact, this year alone courts in California and Vermont upheld the California standards against legal challenges from the auto industry. The attorney generals of New York, Connecticut and California all said they would challenge the decision. They should all win in court, but once again leadership and taking constructive action is being resisted by those in the Bush administration.
This of course makes me think of Orwell again. I always thought that conservatives and most republicans believed in ‘states rights’. That was often a way to avoid taking a stand on a difficult issue such as integration, moral issues and taxation, but true conservatives felt that a big Federal government was not good and that states had certain rights. So here we have a “conservative†“republican†administration overruling states rights to protect their respective environment and citizens. Hmmmmmm, makes you think even more of the language the Bush administration, and many others in Washington D.C. use.
Big government and government spending is bad according to Bush, which was a significant part of the rationale to pass tax cuts. That’s what conservatives and republicans have always said. However not only has government spending grown more under this administration than any other, the national debt has increased more under this administration than any other. As the www.truthin2008.org site points out, the true national debt is more than $54 trillion. Yes trillion. More than half of that, some $30 trillion has been racked up since Bush came into office. But hey, we are spending ourselves into disaster because we are “fighting to protect freedomâ€. Freedom from what? Debt? Dependence upon foreign oil? Freedom from states rights and fiscal responsibility? Freedom from pollution? Freedom from fear?
I write this column as a futurist. I am concerned about the future of this country. There are half a dozen major issues that the U.S. must face, and soon, if it is to remain a great country. I will address these in 2008. The Bush administration is not looking at any of them. Not only are they not looking at them, they have taken George Orwell’s “1984†playbook and made it policy, whatever that might mean these days.
As a futurist, I have accepted that we will have to wait until there is a new administration to roll up our sleeves and face our country’s future. That is why the 2008 presidential election is the most important one in at least a generation. If the Bush EPA protects the environment, then a four letter word for peace must be Iraq.
December 26th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
“I always thought that conservatives and most republicans believed in ‘states rights’.”
Most of us (Conservatives and Republicans) DO believe this. And that’s why many of us are waking up to realize that the idealogical success of Reagan and the ’94 Congress was sold out and cannibalized by….something else.
The beliefs of R’s have been replaced by a bunch of toothless slogans, and unfortunately those slogans are attracting the same voters who believe in what used to be more than a party line. It’s a colossal bait n’ switch and this EPA thing is just another example.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Even though the economic powerbrokers among us, their bought-and-paid-for politicians and their minions in the mass media refuse to speak openly about anything having to do with our conspicuous consumption, overproduction and propagation activities, the ones they would have us continue to ignore, perhaps we can help these woefully inadequate leaders by beginning to speak for ourselves about the unsustainability of increasing per human consumption and seemingly endless economic growth that these adamant leaders are relentlessly pursuing without regard for either the future of life or human and environmental health.
Steve Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/
December 30th, 2007 at 2:38 am
I am stunned at your last paragraph – maybe it is good my earlier comment to this post was lost in the ether – because it implies that you think there is a choice involved in the American presidential elections. When a = b, a choice between a and b is not a choice at all, it is a theatrical fiction… that this is so is inadvertently confirmed by the media who write only of the contest, the race, the sport, the polls, the name-calling, and nothing at all about the issues.
There is no two-party system, except as a theatrical facade, there is only “the partyâ€, and except for some superficial differences this is the same as in russia or china, where they don’t delude themselves that there is “choiceâ€.
Who could you possibly vote for in 2008 that could get elected and would be any different than the current government? They all get their money from the same donors, respond to the same lobbyists, support the same policies….
Please, as a futurist, do not perpetuate the illusion that who you vote for will make a difference. Did the last midterm election returning “control†of the congress to the “democrats†make any difference at all? To anything?
It must be clear to all who contemplate creating, or guiding, change in this world that government is not your friend, nor are corporations… they both will resist anything that upsets their agendas or perceived sources of stability… this is, after all, human nature….
If you want to predict the future, you can bet that human nature and selfishness will be the only driving forces….. and if you want to create the future, you have to use selfishness as the goad and the goal and the game plan…..
Nature will make us change, there is no doubt about that….. our systems are not sustainable…. the only thing that can smooth the way is trying to fit in with nature’s ways as much as possible….
As Mr. Salmony points out, consumption is a huge problem, and it won’t be stopped, unless you can give people something even greater, and this will only be in the realm of understanding, of comprehension, of attitude and consciousness, and will never come from governments except as a last resource to be able to continue governing.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Gregory-
On some level you are correct that, as the Who said so long ago “new boss, same as the old boss”. No question. However, it is completely clear to me that:
1. George Bush is not only one of, if not the worst president this country has ever had, but he has nothing to do with solving the problems of the future, only adding to them.
2. I do believe that to some degree who is the leader of a country makes a difference. The difference between say a Barack Obama and a Rudy Guiliani would be significant
3. Life is a series of choices to make, some are relative, some are absolute. The choice as to who to vote for in the race for the presidency is a relative choice.
4. The most powerful force in the American political arena today is populism, or as it has been dumbed down, change. For the U.S to address its future, there must be a change in the White House. It is still a place that has a lot of power. Power to set a course, to open a dialogue, to challenge the status quo.
We are talking politics here and as the saying goes: “Democracy is a highly imperfect system of government, but is it much better than anything else”
David
December 31st, 2007 at 12:18 am
i was hoping both you and steven earl salmony, commentor number two above, would see this link… it is a fabulous piece of work
http://www.storyofstuff.com
December 31st, 2007 at 2:51 am
another good link…
http://broadstuff.com/archives/634-Innovating-Innovation.html
i am just trying to speed up your thinking, my thinking, and the world’s thinking… if you don’t want this stuff, just tell me
enjoy, gregory
December 31st, 2007 at 6:42 am
ah, populism, that sweet dream of the tyranny of the lowest common denominator (uninformed, that is what it becomes)… the only candidate that label can be applied to is Mr. Obama…. i think the republicans know they cannot win with any of their present contenders, and we will see if the party machine allows Obama over
clinton… either way, i think Bloomberg will be the Republican candidate, and that will be a very interesting exercise in understanding populism
January 1st, 2008 at 2:56 am
certainly futurists can be nationalists, though that is neither interesting, nor effective, from my point of view…
i take issue with the idea that the america should “remain a great country”…. why should that be a goal? can the country even afford it? at what expense to the rest of the world? in what fields? self-centerdeness? hubris? fiscal wisdom? resource use?
if it happens by accident that america is considered a leader in being an example for how to live on a planet with many other countries, peoples, ideas, fine….
but as a goal it is pure ego and a good example of what has to be left behind to get to a useful future for all.
January 1st, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Gregory-
You look at these terms from a filter of the past. I believe that the “nation state” that was a great creation of the Industrial Age is now becoming anachronistic. I deal with this in my upcoming book.
Basically what I mean by American staying a ‘great’ nation’ is that it is full of creativity, innovation and economic power. These forces must be harnessed not to create a greatness as defined over the last 50 years, but a greatness as defined by the new world global reorganization that is going on.
The question is “How can America be great and find its place in a global economy, a global government and a global culture. It is no longer about military power and production but about influence, innovation and intellectual property. We must define a new greatness.
David
January 8th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Amused to death……..
……by Roger Waters.
We watched the tragedy unfold
We did as we were told
We bought and sold
It was the greatest show on earth
But then it was over
We oohed and aahed
We drove our racing cars
We ate our last few jars of caviar
And somewhere out there in the stars
A keen-eyed look-out
Spied a flickering light
Our last hurrah
And when they found our shadows
Groups ’round the TV sets
They ran down every lead
They repeated every test
They checked out all the data in their lists
And then the alien anthropologists
Admitted they were still perplexed
But on eliminating every other reason
For our sad demise
They logged the only explanation left
This species has amused itself to death….