The United States remains the sole superpower, but its dominance is challenged by an economic and cultural shift toward Asia and the impact of globalization which Americans do not yet fully comprehend.
The next US president, Democrat or Republican, will take office at a troubled time for most Americans who do not have confidence in their future.
The subprime banking crisis is the latest major event, likely to continue for at least another year and no one can predict if it's hit bottom or there is still bad news to come. Foreclosures will not only leave thousands of American families without homes, but it will mean they lose much, if not all, of their life's savings. And, this is at a time when l0% of the US population owns 90% of the nation's wealth. The remaining 90% are living on l0% of the wealth which will continue to impact the already hard pressed middle class.
Long ago the United States demonstrated that centrist politics and a thriving middle class are the very foundation of a healthy democracy capable of coping with change. Today, the American political spectrum lacks balance. The Bush presidency, promised to be the "great uniter," has polarized the body politic moving too far to the right away from the comfort zone of centrist politics virtually eliminating bipartisanship. Unilateralism in foreign affairs and partisanship in domestic issues have created a crisis of confidence among Americans.
A serious credit crisis is hitting Americans hard, but it comes on top of the catastrophe of the American health care system, the decline of education in the US, and a broken infrastructure and transport system.
The United States is the only member of the OECD that does not have universal health care. The cost and availability of adequate health care in the United States, even for those who have insurance, is a looming crisis. Those Americans without insurance are outside a broken system and left largely without options.
One of the great levelers for a country of foreigners has been the American public education system. Today, that system is in serious decline at every level -- from kindergarten through high school. Many of those who graduate from high school do not have the basic skills to get even a low level job, let alone find a career path. Universities have become outrageously expensive and while many still provide good higher education, American students want to get rich quick and are not choosing science and mathematics which has always given the United States a lead in innovation and technology.
America's infrastructure is dated and in desperate need of repair and renovation which will carry a heavy cost. The transport system is particularly appalling with inadequate public transportation, poor roads, and overcrowded airports. Europe, Japan and China have fast trains on many routes, but the United States is not even considering a fast train at geographic hubs such as the Northeast corridor, Washington DC, Chicago and the West coast. The so-called fast train, the Acela, takes a full three hours from New York to Washington. A modern fast train can go from NY to Washington in about an hour, taking many cars and buses off the overcrowded highways, reducing carbon emissions and providing a service which would encourage commerce and culture.
The big American auto producers have access to the same technology as Toyota which makes most of its cars for the American market in the US. Yet, Detroit does not seem willing or able to make use of that technology to produce automobiles which are fuel efficient, safe and long lasting. As industrial giants, American automobile manufacturers have an obligation to adapt to new technology and the need for fuel efficiency.
Americans are now finally aware of the global warming crisis which is another major worry. Yet, presidential candidates continue their slogans about decreasing US dependence on foreign oil instead of facing the ugly truth about American energy consumption. The United States, about 4% of the world's population consumes 25% of the world's energy and produces about 30% of the globe's noxious gases. How the US uses energy is the issue, not where the energy comes from---oil is a global commodity and will be the energy of choice for years to come despite global warming and the huge increase in demands primarily from India and China.
Energy security is a global issue. The US needs a serious and realistic energy policy, but will not ultimately have energy security without a multilateral global approach which addresses not only supply and demand, but transport, climate change, new technologies and alternative energy, repair and renovation of facilities, exploration and refining. What may now be the most important global threat - energy security - requires strong US leadership which is sorely lacking.
Other long term problems including the judicial and prison system, racism, poverty, distribution of wealth and social questions continue fester and need the attention of the American people and their leaders. Bickering rather than civil discourse about these vital issues in the presidential campaigns wastes an opportunity.
Only a leader who will genuinely tell the American people the truth about their situation at home and abroad will be able to introduce meaningful reform and change in the way Americans live. Talking about core values used to be the prerogative of the right who wrapped themselves in the flag to prove their righteousness above all others. Today, renewing core values is a matter of restoring the American way of life, its commitment to human rights and civil liberties, its vibrant economy and creativity and its essential role in the world.
Americans are not now influenced or ruled by the brainy people, the innovators, the courageous and visionary. Somehow, money and material wealth have become the characteristics of leadership that Americans admire and follow. Celebrity, either positive or negative, has also become a requirement for leadership in the United States.
As a people, Americans are generous, enormously resilient and willing to change when necessary. They are much better with an innate wisdom than most of the leaders they elect. Every presidential campaign matters, but the 2008 presidential campaign is particularly important. What the United States needs is a president who will begin to heal the nation and to address its formidable problems realistically and courageously. There is no doubt that the American people, once again, will make whatever sacrifices are necessary providing their leaders tell them the truth.
Americans are afraid, but they do not know of what. The "war on terror" fear mongering of the Bush administration has created a "gated community" mentality in the United States allowing old prejudices and new enemies to emerge. Instead of seeking to be part of globalization and a partner to the international community, Americans are isolated and out of touch with their own reality.
Transnational threats including extremism, global warming, cyperspace, disease, energy security and others require multilateral approaches, even for the sole superpower. Sovereignty and borders including for the United States are far less important when confronting these transnational threats. Americans need to understand that there is no threat to the United States of an invasion by a foreign army, or of any country near or far declaring war on America. But, the world is still a dangerous place where acts and events which happen across borders, even on the other side of the world, impact on US national security.
Violent extremists are a global threat, but not nearly to the extent the Bush administration wants Americans to believe. Confronting the extremists as well as understanding and fighting root causes are necessary in a multilateral approach. The United States cannot do it alone despite its superpower status. Though many extremists come from the Middle East or Pakistan, the Middle East is a front page story, but actually not a major threat despite the Iraq war, Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Pakistan is still in question.
The rapidity and consequences of global warming is undoubtedly the most important and severe threat to the United States and the world. Global warming cannot be negotiated or fixed by traditional means. No presidential action or congressional resolution are going to help. Climate change threatens the planet -- and long before that -- its consequences will create economic chaos and humanitarian crises around the globe.
If there were ever an historic need for American leadership it is now, not in the second term, not in a decade, not when it is convenient. Steps to stop global warming cannot wait for the politicians. A global crisis of this magnitude calls for a leader who will rise to the occasion. There is no Lincoln or FDR on the horizon, but often circumstances create leaders who can accomplish extraordinary achievements.
The question is whether the American people will elect a president who is also a leader so that the United States becomes again the beacon on the hill, providing an example and hope while tackling incredibly difficult problems at home and abroad.
Judith Kipper, Director, Middle East Programs, Institute of World Affairs, provides strategic advice consulting to the private sector.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Raise the Stars N Bars boys and salute our white, christian, double wide asses.
Ever been involoved with a liar, either freind, family memeber or spouse. Eventually you catch on and realize that they are liars and when you go vback and review all their lies you realize how cold and calculating they are. A cold chill runs up your spine and you begin to perspire. That's when you realize they'll lie to you about anything. That is where this country is. They want to believe everything is OK ala Neville Chamberlain, BUT THEY KNOW DEEP DOWN THAT IT WON'T.
One thing we've noticed as more and more of the country's wealth and income as been captured by the top .1% is the way the super-rich use their money to buy their way out of society. They have private suppliers for practically everything, and depend on public sources for very little.
This simply confirms that it is human nature to use your money to buy yourself independence, to eliminate dependencies on sources of supply that you don't control. This is a well-tried method of improving your personal security.
What we see the rich doing now - to excess - is what many more Americans at lower - but still substantial - income levels have done since WWII. Basically the trend since the end of WWII has been a drift away from the public toward the private.
Now we are realizing that this trend has gone too far, that there are goods that are best provided socially rather than privately - health insurance being one - but we've lost the ability to recognize it. The market has served so well in so many areas, bringing a sense of personal empowerment with it, that we are lost when dealing with a problem that is *not* best served by a market-based solution.
Basically, we've lost the ability to feel any kind of social and/or political solidarity. Yet this is precisely the ability we need to cultivate before we can proceed effectively on any of the issues raised in the original article.
Judith, I would frankly challenge this fond American notion that "America remains the world's only superpower."
It seems to be a cherished notion among American lawmakers that "well, of course we rule the world." This is usually followed by fond references to "glory days." But that was a very long time ago, and you are simply not the country you once were. Nor is the world, the world it once was.
Today, America is a flat-broke has-been with ten thousand nuclear weapons. It owes literally trillions of dollars to its sworn enemies, produces far less than it consumes, and is entirely dependent upon foreign states for its energy. The country has quite-literally been looted by its own leadership, which is still firmly in denial about most things.
Other countries have been here ... and they failed because of it. We will be no different if we follow the same course. The millions of other men and women in this world who would like to live their own lives and perhaps achieve their own aspirations rightly recognize us as a grave threat to their safety and security -- bristling with weapons, spoiling for a fight, and totally devoid of truth and honor. The bully on the playground, wearing body-armor from the waist up ... and no pants or shoes.
Hellenhat,
Your point is quite valid. Unfortunately, I think a John Edwards presidency would go the way of a Jimmy Carter one. Edwards would be stymied at every turn by a bunch of corrupt members of Congress, lobbyists, bankers, corporate CEO-pigs, etc. Unless and until we change the way elections are financed and covered by the media, its just going to be more of same no matter who is in the White House next year.
So much to respond to here...interesting post. I especially like the comment about how our society is no longer lead by the "brainy" people. The 1950s certainly had some serious problems, mainly dealing with appalling racism, sexism and homophobia. However, people in the mid 20th century at least seemed to believe in science and press themselves to make society more efficient and well run.
More Americans need to put their limited money and influence behind the societal shifts they want to see, though. Look at the ongoing flight to exurbia. People are choosing 50 mile commutes so they can live in sprawling McSuburbs. If the professional class began moving closer to the cities again, and demanding better public transportation based on changing demographics toward urban centers rather than away from them, it might influence change.
If more people could bring themselves forego every new gadget or upgrade that came down the block, it might sent a message that we are no longer sheep being lead to a maxed out credit slaughter.
Being a regular presence in your kid's life might also help with the problems at school. This is almost impossible for parents today, because so many of them are forced to work 60 hour weeks far from home. Kids left to manage themselves will generally not elect to do homework or study very hard.
I am dismayed by the direction we have been going as a society. But I am also frustrated by the choices I see people make.
Good post, but the problem goes far beyond the Presidency and is probably beyond the capability of any President to fix.
All societies are both unified by some forces and divided by others. In response to the 1960's and 1970's, business funded a revival of pro-business ideology, Chicago school economics, etc. This led business managers, plus the occasional entrepreneur, and many other professionals to come to the conclusion that their class interest was also the US national interest.
This in turn led them to organize. The politicians that represented them, with ideas provided by the think tanks, brought about a massive wealth redistribution upwards. It is not in the short term interests of the business class to pay the taxes that would be needed to fix these problems. As long as the short term class interests of the business elite are identified with the US national interest these problems will not only persist, they will get worse.
The problem is that if a President were to unify us, right now; he would probably have to unify us in support of the illusion that the interests of the rich are the interests of America. This is false. So a unifying president will actually probably just make things worse. The rest of us have to fight back first, and scare the rich into giving back enough of their gains to fund addressing the national problems you cite. Once the class war gets ugly enough, a unifying president could then make peace. But right now, a social peace on terms that will enable the US to solve its problems is not on the horizon,
The author has offered a comprehensive statement of what currently ails us and a prescription that represents the only potential cure - a return to the "vital center" that prospered America in an unprecedented (and unrepeated) fashion for two generations.
The forces gathered against this personal and national transformation know that such is not in their interest. Why? Because the old politics of division feed our apathy, which reduces our participation, hence, increasing their power to influence and manipulate our democratic institutions.
Therefore, such a transformation demands great leadership - from our president, our Congress, our state and local governments, and, most important, from each of us.
Leadership - not of the variety that demonizes the opposition, but of the type that appeals to the principles that hold the key to transcending our divide.
Our children will someday ask us what role we played during this dark but potentially-dawning hour.
There's nobody like that running for President. The frontrunners in both parties all still want to continue our act of national cowardice in Iraq (despite double-talking points to the contrary) on somebody else's dime -- simultaneously destroying any perception of the United States as a just, courageous and moral country in the short run and for all time while ruining the economy in the long run.
Yes, we have problems"and a government that will not solve them, whether run by Republicans or Democrats.
Case in point: healthcare. Insurance companies skim off 25-30% of total healthcare revenues. The value they add? Almost none. The obvious move, as eloquently described by Dr. Arnold Relman in "A Second Opinion": cut out the insurance companies and switch to a tax-based single-payer system, redirecting to actual healthcare delivery the billions now skimmed off by the insurance companies. For the same total cost we currently pay for healthcare, "Medicare for All" could cover everyone.
Do the leading presidential candidates therefore propose cutting out the wasteful insurance companies? No. Republicans and Democrats alike insist that the insurance companies must "have a place at the table." It is impossible even to advocate a single-payer system"witness the fate of Dennis Kucinich.
Election campaigns are now very expensive, so politicians need big campaign contributors, who get to dictate public policy. Single-payer healthcare, even though in the best interest of the electorate, is "politically impossible" because the insurance companies oppose it. With billions of dollars at stake, they buy whatever politicians they need.
We need serious campaign finance reform. But we won"t get it because the moneyed interests prefer the present system and even well-meaning politicians are locked into it.
"Every presidential campaign matters, but the 2008 presidential campaign is particularly important."
Remember the people who went on about how important the 2004 election was?
"As a people, Americans are generous, enormously resilient and willing to change when necessary"
you have got to be kidding we are the only nation not on the metric system. even england has made the switch.
typical american looking thru rose colored nationalism glasses.
generous? 47 million without health care that is not generous that is criminal.
What the new leader will have to call for is sacrifice for the good of the country.
Those that are able to give the most, the rich and mega rich are protected by Senate Republicans and DLC democrats ...
If and until the most blessed by our society are tasked to sacrifice why should anybody else entertain the idea.
All the points Ms Kipper raises are valid ones but the one she misses is one that neither Americans nor their politicians will raise: how to best manage the decline of the "sole superpower" that is now underway.
I'm sorry to say that NONE of the candidates seem to address seriously and specifically the USA's two most important problems, the economy and health care. Nor do any of them have much of an understanding of foreign cultures needed to address the third major problem facing the USA, Iraq.
Ms. Kipper, it's rather difficult to be a uniter when the opposition doesn't show the slightest interest in compromise. The problem for Democrats has been precisely the party's willingness to move to the center. Clinton began the exodus from the left and today would someone please explain to me how Democratic leadership positions differ substantially from those of the GOP. Frankly, they don;t differ and that's a serious problem. Democracy thrives when there is opposition to the status quo. In 2006, we began to see a reemergence of opposition. We can talk about uniting the country form now until the 2012 election but this country has been dragged so far to the right that what passes for "centrist" today would seem radically conservative a generation ago and all Democratic leadership seems willing to do is validate conservative ideas. Take for example free market economics. This idea was proven bogus almost 80 years ago yet liberals and progressives have to fight the same battle FDR won in 1932. It is accepted as an article of faith that Americans reject radical policies yet how does one explain the policies of Bush/Cheney? This country needs leadership but as longer as leaders from both parties pander to voters to win elections that isn't going to happen. In poll after poll, the voters in this country reject most of the Republican agenda; that being the case, I'm not sure why Democrats should compromise on what should be our core values of social and economic justice.
peter schiff and don luskin just endorsed ron paul.
he has a constitutional foreign policy
knows our monetary system and economy and how to fix it (see endorsements and plan)
understands the relationship between spending and taxes
will restore social security and medicare
has a short term and long term stimulus package that will bring sound money, savings, and a vibrant economy for ALL.
will close money spent on lobby
challenges the federal reserve, military industrial complex and healthcare complex
has a stellar record on civil liberties, veteran affairs and national defense
understands immigration and its link to economy and how to eventually welcome more immigration after a vibrant economy is earned
will repeal the patriot act and military commissions act and restore habeas corpus
his word matches his vote
has the funds and support to go the distance in the campaign. is winning delegates in non "top tier states" as a strategy.
www.ronpaul2008.com
Excellent post. Unfortunately a discussion like yours would be considered "alarmist" yet the truth is Americans seriously need to confront the hard decisions they're going to have to make in the immediate future rather than bury their heads in the sand. We HAVE to make huge investments to improve our infrastructure. We need more rail service for high-density, energy-efficient transportation and folks need to use their cars less. We need smaller, more energy efficient homes (better appliances, insulation, etc.) and people to use a lot less electricity, no more McMansions. Smaller homes additionally encourage closer family bonds, less television, video games and powered toys, encourage curiosity, imagination and learning. We need people to walk and bike more- with the additional benefit of improved health- and drive less and we need to bring back urban planning that incorporates better positioning of schools, shops and other services such that people do not need to drive as much.
We can do all these. But the author is right. We need a leader who can best impress on the American people the need to do these things, who gives them the hard truths and inspires them to confront difficulty not with fear, but with hope and determination.
Don't propose someone who changes the rules as she goes along- we won't stand for stolen elections- this time the dems are one by one waking up to smell the roses...
Maybe its time to stop looking for a "leader".
Maybe its time to recognize that these "leaders" are the basic reason for the "incredibly difficult problems at home and abroad". Perhaps its time for the Sheep to understand (if they can) that their loving Shepherds are only interested in shearing them and having a few lamb chops.
Speaking as PhD student in a hard science - there just isn't any more incentive to stay in this country. People are so blinded by religion, and are in general poorly educated about science (we're still having to combat creationism!). The other major factor is that the science budgets of the major funding organizations (such at the NIH and the NSF) have been frozen over the past seven years - a viable career in research is about ten times harder now that it was just a mere seven years ago. Now that the economy is crashing, there really isn't a lot of incentive for even native Americans to stay here and tough it out with other economies and governments ponying up hard cash for science. Expect a serious exodus of "the best and brightest" innovators over the next couple decades - the foreigners we attracted here in the previous decades are already starting to bail.
A refreshing change from the normal banter here. Thank you.
well, I made a comment but it didn't come up. Too dumb i guess
Yeah, except that an awful lot of us have become convinced that the biggest part of the power running our nation is criminal, that we have become effectively a criminal nation, and that so long as we don't get THAT there can be no reconciliation in the name of 'our country'.
Before the largest crowd of his campaign, Democratic presidential contender Barack...
**UPDATE 7/25** ThinkProgress now reports that the bar...
Major news organizations are drawing...
There is one more John McCain gaffe that...
As we have observed throughout the last several years,...
In a flagrant political act, the State Department has...
John McCain's famously cozy relationship with the press is getting a bit testy. Taking questions in...
** Update below: Nas delivers Fox petition to Stephen...
BARCELONA, Spain — Christian Bale swept into Barcelona on Wednesday night to attend a...
WASHINGTON — Rescue legislation sailed through the House on Wednesday aimed at...
I have a wait problem. I hate to wait. When...
Ashcroft Claims Waterboarding...
Loading comments…
Posted January 28, 2008 | 06:22 PM (EST)