Real Change Trickles Up

At the risk of seeming flip or Pollyannish, I'm compelled to remind myself amid this economic emergency that crises can indeed be therapeutic. When the body politic of the American system takes a shock like that currently affecting the country, pain, as it were, can lead to gain. But only in the right circumstances. What are these? And what can we do in November and beyond to reap any benefit from the problems we face?

Since the word "change" -- first embraced by Barack Obama and then shamelessly co-opted by his opponent -- has become the operative theme of this election, it's imperative that we focus with surgical urgency on what we want to change about America and the mechanics by which such change can be effected. Beyond campaign rhetoric, we all implicitly know that real change - like economic prosperity -- is not trickle-down; it comes from below, requiring massive investment and sacrifice by everyday people that goes far beyond the effort of casting a ballot.

Don't get me wrong. Voting is essential. But unless we see our vote as part of a commitment to involve ourselves consistently and unrelentingly in the political process, our vote is wasted. This is because the forces that have led us to this economic, military, and political precipice exert such awesome power over the mechanics of Washington that no single candidate or group of legislators, whatever their intentions, can possibly go up against them unless armed with an irrepressible public mandate.

Take an example. Today, the B1 Bomber has a piece of it made in every single U.S. state. This simple fact offers a window into a heinous defense industry practice called "political engineering" -- a strategy for the grotesque misuse of taxpayer dollars. Simply put, a loose alliance of actors from the military, industry, and Congress (what Eisenhower first called the "military-industrial-congressional-complex" before removing the word "congressional") work together to ensure that the contracts and subcontracts to produce a given weapons system are distributed as widely as possible across congressional districts. This way, if the program ever comes up for reevaluation, there's a built-in constituency in Congress for its continuation. The question is not how to spend federal funds to give the American taxpayer the best defense possible but to spend the money in a way that best serves the private interests of those in the military-industrial complex.

But it's not fair or accurate to single out the defense sector. As the current crisis, as well as scandals from Enron to Halliburton reveal, industries across America are entangled in an unholy alliance with members of Congress that compromises the purity of congressional decision-making. Basically, a congressperson's lifeblood consists of two things -- jobs brought to his district and campaign-finance support at election time. To secure these, the congressperson becomes beholden to his corporate benefactors, on whose behalf he becomes in effect a professional pleader to the federal government. This pleading ultimately makes the congressperson vulnerable to the wishes of the executive branch. Why? Because the executive branch has, over many decades, overwhelmingly become the lead branch in guiding national spending priorities. With so many agencies under its control, the executive branch needs any individual congressperson less than that congressperson needs the executive. Say, for example a congressperson is looking to secure favorable treatment for a drug company in his district. He will need the help of the FDA. If it's a manufacturer, he may need the EPA. A media company, the FCC. And so on. All in the executive branch.

So widespread is this phenomenon that I would advocate replacing Eisenhower's military-industrial complex with the more comprehensive formulation "corporate-political complex." Unpacking this modern-day abortion of our republic will require revolutionary change. And this is where we must be unerringly candid with ourselves in checking our impulse to over-rely on any single candidate. Where this impulse comes from, I think, is our obsession as a society with the cult of personality surrounding individuals. This is a wonderful American quality in sports and entertainment, but it is dangerous in politics. We tend as a people to focus excessively on the significance of single individuals in the shaping of societies -- from Hitler to Gandhi to Nixon to Martin Luther King to Osama Bin Laden and so on. This ignores the lessons of our very own history, in which reforms like the end of slavery, women's suffrage, and the New Deal, let alone the birth of the nation itself, were the product of collective effort. Ultimately, it is as wrongheaded to believe that Dick Cheney single-handedly destroyed this country in the past eight years as it is to believe that Barack Obama alone can rescue it. If one votes for Obama, for example, hoping he will make the kind of change he promises, one must recognize the resistance he will be up against in the corridors of Washington and find ways - real ways on the ground in our everyday lives -- to help him.

As comparisons between today's crisis and the Great Depression are increasingly drawn, we must recall that the prosperity following the Depression was, after all, made of the sweat and blood of everyday Americans -- marshaled by strong and visionary leadership -- but sweat and blood all the same. Today's crises will prove no different. When we look back at the vast national effort that catapulted America from the depths of the Depression to the triumph of World War II, we must ask ourselves what form such engagement by each of us might take in today's world.

To be fair, modern life is hectic and leaves us little time to attend to even the most basic elements of health and survival, let alone the kind of far-reaching effort needed to reform a nation from below. Yet I would argue that we all have our own version of spending amounts of wasted time watching American Idol, NFL highlights, or aimlessly surfing eBay. And so long as we have the time for such pursuits, we don't have the luxury at this critical historic crossroads not to take the time to devote to the health of our republic. Our survival as a people and as a majestic idea in the history of the world is at stake.

But what can any one of us do? I'd like to offer two suggestions that make sense to me. The first is to make civic engagement an extension of what you already do for work or play. And the second is to break out of the isolation and individuation that so many of us experience in our television, cell-phone, and computer-dominated existence.

It's kind of like dieting. Don't all the diets idealize letting you eat the way you are used to? Well the same pragmatism can be applied to social change. The best way to start becoming more civically engaged is to recognize the untapped social impact that lies in what you already do in your life and make your civic engagement an extension of this.

If you are a teacher -- beyond the gift you give your own students, you can apply all you know to fight for an education system worthy of your commitment, lest you become a passive witness to its unraveling. If you are a computer expert, you must know about and educate people about net neutrality, the threats to it, and its vital role in ensuring the free flow of information so vital to our society. If you are a lawyer, you can work to restore the rule of law that was contemptuously abused during the past eight years. If you are a doctor, and you are not actively involved in efforts to reform our broken medical system, you may be treating your patients well, but you are doing so in a race against nightfall. If you are a historian, you can give the public a real understanding of how the historic balance in America's national soul between isolationism and expansionism has in recent years been so dangerously tilted toward the imperial. If you are a carpenter, a plumber, or any other craftsman or manual laborer, you can band together with your peers to demand that the corporate-political complex show greater regard for the value and conditions of your labor.

Will there be resistance? Of course. No revolutionary change can ever happen without it. But once you start to add this level of increased engagement to your daily life, all kinds of unexpected good things happen, too. You learn new things, meet new people, and have new conversations. And this is where the second part of the equation comes in. No matter what our individual vocation, we must follow Margaret Mead's timeless wisdom about the power of small groups of organized people to change the world. In an interconnected age more than ever, we must not toil in isolation but join forces with others to build groupings of pressure-groups - not shadowy think tanks on K street - but everyday organizations in small towns and big towns that fix their attention on a needed area of social change and work tirelessly for it. For some, these organizations will already exist and it means a bit of detective work to hunt them out online and through word of mouth and find the organization to which you can devote your energies. For others, it may be that no organization already exists that is devoted to your area of concern. If that's true, start one. Just to give an example, if 1,000 people in all 435 congressional districts committed themselves to spend 5 hours a month acting as a watchdog on congressional waste and corruption, making that information public, and demanding transparency and accountability, just think of the impact those 2,175,000 man-hours could have on our system.

Though this vision of social change may seem naïve, I would argue that, facing the combined military, political, and economic crises we face, anyone who thinks we can keep operating the way we have been is naïve. And perhaps that is the silver lining of this crisis after all -- to silence our cynicism and let the best and most inspired side of all of us rise to remake America and the world she so influences better reflect our values and our common humanity.

Eugene Jarecki's 2006 film Why We Fight won the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival as well as a Peabody Award. His new book, The American Way of War: Guided Missiles, Misguided Men, and a Republic in Peril, has just been released by Simon & Schuster/Free Press. He will be appearing on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart this Monday, October 20.

Comments

[Cndn]

Wow. That was amazing. Your appearance on The Daily Show brought me hear. And if your intention is to start a revolution of the mind and spirit, I think you've done it. Could this possibly be the start of something new? I've been feeling the rumblings. At a ripe old middle age, I have just voted in my first election. In Canada. Could America be the new Canada? (but sexier and with better self esteem?). Your presidential election has made me think America is cool for the first time since the 70's...and you Mr. Jarecki are the king of cool. And you have changed my life. And my future. Haven't we all been asking ourselves...what is my purpose? Why am I so busy, but so unfulfilled? This is the answer. We just have to turn off the tv, put down the computer, lower our medication and pack up the wine and the weed. Talk. I miss talking so much. Sometimes I have to go to Sweden just to have a conversation. Thanks.

[jsunspike]

PRESIDENT EISENHOWER ORIGINALLY SAID"BEWARE THE MILITARY-I­NDUSTRIAL-­CONGRESSIO­NAL COMPLEX." HIS ADVISORS TOLD HIM TO DROP THE CONGRESSIONAL PART. WHOA. ALMOST A LIBERAL.

[gwismyhero]

Good luck on Jon Stewart tonight!!

[EvanRavitz]

"Voting is essential. But unless we see our vote as part of a commitment to involve ourselves consistently and unrelentingly in the political process, our vote is wasted."

Jarecki is right. But, HOW? Government is getting better and better at ignoring, "managing" and marginalizing citizens, and most people are getting more busy, stressed and traumatized because of this and the black holes our $ goes in. Exhorting us to try harder doesn't work.

Buying Congress is the world's best investment, paying off at 1000 to 1 and better. Jack Abramoff, jailed bribesman extraordinaire, says so in the 3rd paragraph of: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/30/AR2005043000783.html

So we need a REAL check and balance on Congress, a "Plan B" like 24 states have on our legislatures, NATIONAL ballot initiatives. Former Sen. Mike Gravel has the best plan, and YOU can vote to ratify it at http://Vote.org, much as citizens, not the 13 States, ratified the Constitution at the Conventions.

[absolument]

Beautiful!

I believe the "republic" model of government is fatally flawed; democracy-by-proxy is simply too susceptible to corrupt proxies, and the assumption that we may leave "government" to the elected *always* allows such corruption to spread. It has been creeping for a long time, and I think it would be very difficult to over-estimate how much work we have ahead of us, or face fascism followed by anarchy. Seriously.

"compromises the purity of congressional decision-making"

I thought you were being too delicate, but then I read the rest of the article!

"Because the executive branch has, over many decades, overwhelmingly become the lead branch in guiding national spending priorities."

As I recently attempted to explain to a colleague who argued that W. be relieved of responsibility for destroying the economy, the President's role is less limited to administrative duties than members of Congress or the Judiciary, and as "figurehead" of The State he IS responsible for setting the tone, of any public issues of which he sets policy, or even pursues policies via his "bully pulpit."

"With so many agencies under its control, the executive branch needs any individual congressperson less than that congressperson needs the executive."

...thus increasingly negating the intent and purpose of having separate branches of government.

[joyfullyalive]

Thank you for a wonderful and thoughtful blog! I'm so grateful that you have given this so much careful thought. What you are describing here is what I call "engaged democracy" and what others have called "deep democracy". Our elected officials in Washington cannot do it all by themselves. The job is just too big for them. We have been spoiled and narcissistic in expecting our government to take care of us for far too long. In a country as large and crowded and diverse as our own, the only way some of our complex problems are going to get solved is if we join the government and become their partners in helping to solve them. We may need to invent new ways of developing policy and finding solutions to difficult challenges to things like the health care nightmare and the energy crisis at the local level (even at the neighborhood level), the city level and the state level and figure out ways to pass our learnings and recommendations up to the national level. Actually, it could energize us. It could be a very exciting time.

[Tom95134]

"...real change - like economic prosperity -- is not trickle-down; it comes from below, requiring massive investment and sacrifice by everyday people..."

I just hope that the American people realize this. I'm a child of the 1940's and remember my parents telling me of the sacrifices that had to be made to get the country out of the previous Republican mess that culminated with Herbert Hoover's Presidency. I remember the "thin" times of the late 40's. I remember Liberty Bonds to help pay for the war debt and buying stamps at school to fill a book that could be exchanged for a bond.

There is no magic solution. There will be higher deficits because the only way to get the economy moving is to get people working again at good paying jobs. Obama will have to spend money on jobs here in the United States rebuilding infrastructure, building a 21st centry transportation system, and building a clean energy system to make this happen. It is critical that Obama be given a mandate and a majority in the Senate that can override the Republican obstruction that will start happening even before he takes office.

[absolument]

"There is no magic solution."

Only one type of solution is possible: DRASTICALLY greater citizen participation in OUR government. The Gingrich revolution was a farce. Ron Paul has the right ideas.

[gadjitfreek]

McCain and Palin are trying to sell you on their candidacy in the same way sub-prime mortgage companies duped their victims. The difference is that this time, it’s the whole country that will be in danger of foreclosure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-QCgZ0d-MM

Don’t make the mistake that Obama has this election won. The people must vote on November 4th. No complacency, my fellow Americans. We can’t afford it. The only way we give ourselves a chance to claw our way back to greatness is to make sure you get up, get out and vote. If you registered recently, just take some time to verify that you are still registered. We can start down the road to healing the wounds of the last eight years. It starts with sweeping clean the debris of failed ideals and poisoned policies, and you, my friends, are the broom. Let's start sweeping.

[ElBruce]

Supply side economics is like saying up is down. Checkit: if I give you a dollar for a hamburger, I have a hamburger. You have a dollar. Wealth (actual demand-meeting goods/services) flows in the opposite direction of currency. Although it's true that currency may tend to trickle down, wealth therefore trickles up.

The invisible hand matches supply to demand, not vice versa. Therefore, policies that attempt to manipulate supply (aka. "Supply side economics") are the precise opposite of policies that take free market economics into account. Manipulate demand. Supply will match it. That's how economies work.

This is not a matter of dogma, not a matter of ideology. This is simple math, simple science. Expecting an economic conservative to understand macroeconomics is like expecting a young-Earth creationist to understand paleontology. They can't do it, because they don't believe in it.

[plooger]

Bubbles Up.

[absolument]

Nice catch!

[Niijii]

As it is now, the real change we can immediately hope to make is by voting senate and congressional leaders from third parties into office. When you look at the lack of representation from a supposedly representational government as the "bailout" bill was being floated from one house to the other, our only choice at this moment is to take note of those that voted aye and remove them from office. It is obvious to me that neither party, as a whole, is representative of the people. Sweep them out of office, clean up the two houses and start anew with fresh faces and those that adhere and respect our forefathers and the risks they took to create the constitution and to subsequently protect its contents.

We all, in America, are here either because our forefathers fled lands that deprived us of our freedoms, or due to being kidnapped and sold into slavery. Regardless, we all have a common thread: landing on the shores of a country that gives us inherent rights, regardless of your origin. Seems as though our rights are being removed and replaced with a corporatism that will bind us in financial chains.

Unless we band together, remove the offending representatives, restore and re-separate the three branches of government, we will continue to lose our voices to corporatism.

I believe that the people of this country will band together, like a wave that builds across great distance, and clean the congress and senate. I hope.

[musselmanm]

You know, I don't think you should look down too far your nose a people and some very real problems. I am on the happy medicine. I am also a user of Vicodine and heppy smoke to mask the constant pain. You may not ever be in constant pain and I hope you are never injured to that point.
Just do not lump everyone into a group without understanding the different situations people are in.
I do not like either of the McCains and do not have much sympathy for either of them.
I am just saying I can see how her life must suck, even with all that money. Add the pain of injuries to the overwhelming pain being married to John McCain must cause, I can undrstand some of her problems.
Just don't lump everyone together that needs happy medicine or medical cheba!

[musselmanm]

Outstanding read! Hard to follow to the end but I was able to stay pretty much focused. During our current election period I have discovered the personal joy working for the good of my country does.
As is done in Israel, national service for all citizens would make our country such a better place for all of us.
As a disable older citizen, I am limited in my ability to do hard physical labor but I can sure do many things in spite of my problems. I would like to serve our military members in some way. I was unable to be a military member due to injuries early in life but I bet I could do work as a citizen serving food, doing erands, making calls, doing dishes if need be.
Just a few thoughts but I would hope that any of you progressives or liberals which read my thoughts will discover the joys and pride in hel[ing other people and our country.
Yes we can!

[jhNY]

In various forms, notions that the destruction of the international financial system are actually an opportunity for great political change have been floated around this site for weeks. It's only natural for optimists, finding the glass to be half-full and all, to see this as an opportunity to make lemonade out of all the lemons. But in this case, it's more like wanting to make hamburger out of the remains at a car wreck.

We work for international corporations, we endure their absolute sway over politics and politicians, we watch their news shows, we read the papers they print to inform us of their doings. In the last few weeks, even the slowest among us must have noticed all the money rushing their way from every corner of the federal governemnt, being hurried along by members of both major parties. And no one could stop them. And now the debt for all the financial gambling has been passed to the hapless pawns, otherwise known as ordinary citizens. And not just here. All over the world.

This is an opportunity to notice that were are all now in debt servitude to corporatism, likely for the rest of our lives, thralls to forces so well-organized and influential we have no real chance of dislodging them. But most of us will try to see something good where no good resides. It's a coping mechanism. But it ain't reality.

[ShawnMichel]

Wrong.

Your assumptions are based on mistaken data, or worse, biased data.

But this is often the default position of pessimists like yourself.

I would recommend you come out of your cave and take a look: it's bright and sunny out today, and Tennyson is dead, and so is Hume, and that is that.

The change Mr. Jarecki speaks of is well-documented and verifiable. I would argue that pessimism is a form of sloth, because it relieves you from both participation and thought--because had you studied history, even for a cursory amount, you'd see your assumptions are swill.

[larry278]

On the other hand, he could be using reliable, accurate data. Optomism is often called being a Polly Anna. If you can be optomistic about anything since 9/15/08, you either are unaware of the events at this hour or are in deep, pathological, denial.
If somebody offers you a great deal on 2 acres of ocean front land in Fl for $1000.00 & you buy it, don't be surprised if you find that it's 10 yards of water at low tide when you visit it.
Have a cheery day.