The One Big Thing George W. Bush Did Right
History will record that George W. Bush made one critically important contribution to our country -- and to the entire world. He and his administration provided unquestionable proof of the bankruptcy of radical-conservative ideology, and set the stage for a qualitatively different progressive era in American politics.
History is not linear. It is not gradual or evolutionary. Human progress proceeds in fits and starts like a volcano, where pressure gradually builds over years and then erupts with enormous power.
Very often those explosions of progress -- periods when we expand the realm of democratic values, human dignity, economic opportunity and optimism -- are precipitated by periods of domination by the forces of privilege, inequality and selfishness.
By assuring that all of the fruits of the growth of productivity in our economy went to the wealthiest 2% of our population, the Bush administration set the stage for the current economic collapse.
By actually putting into practice the Neo-Conservative theories of pre-emptive war and unilateralism, George W. Bush demonstrated their failure more persuasively than could the most articulate progressive critic.
By abandoning our historic commitment to due process and sinking into the dark world of torture, George W. Bush and his partner Dick Cheney isolated themselves from the growing worldwide commitment to human rights.
A brilliant new book by Democratic strategist and author Mike Lux documents the other periods in our history when conservative domination led to progressive renewal. The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, describes the five "big change" moments in American history since the American Revolution: the Bill of Rights, the ending of slavery, the Progressive Era, the New Deal and the civil rights movement.
He argues that big changes have never occurred gradually -- nor have they been spread randomly over our history. Rather, they have been concentrated in these periods of "big change.". In each, a cascade of progressive innovation took place over a short period of time, after years of right wing opposition.
Lux writes:
Progressives invented the American ideal and inspired the American Revolution. Conservatives, then known as Tories, opposed it. Since then, every major advancement in American freedom, democracy, social justice, and economic opportunity has been fostered, fought for, and won by progressives against conservative resistance. Now who's anti-American?
We've already seen previews of the new progressive era, but the curtain will really go up next Tuesday when Barack Obama is inaugurated the 44th President of the United States. The next few years could be a transformational period -- if we all make it so.
As for Bush, he will be remembered as the man who set the stage. He has played the Hoover to Obama's Roosevelt, the James Buchanan to Obama's Lincoln.
Lux's study also makes something else absolutely clear. In American history, the pendulum has not swung inevitably back and forth between conservative and progressive periods with some form of historic equivalency. Instead, the changes emerging from periods of progressive success, once made, remain a permanent feature of our society.
Conservatives fought against the ending of slavery, women's suffrage, Social Security, collective bargaining, Medicare, and the end of segregation. After the progressive period that brought them to life was done, a conservative backlash often tried to limit the scope of these important advances -- with Jim Crow, assaults on Labor, or attempts to privatize Social Security. But conservatives have never been successful at eliminating them.
Once enacted, progressive change is hard to dislodge. That's because progressive change is progress. Progressive values are the most adaptive trait human beings have yet created to ensure our success and survival on this small planet.
The Right battled for decades to take complete control of the levers of power in Washington. The election of George W. Bush finally gave them the ability to combine the power of the presidency with their control of Congress to make their program the law of the land.
Ironically, their very success may assure that George W. Bush is remembered as the president whose failures created the conditions we needed to craft a new bottom-up economy, to pass universal health care and to create new international institutions that bring us closer to a world where we no longer rely on war to resolve our differences.
Of course nothing is inevitable. We cannot afford to squander the opportunity that history and George W. Bush have provided us. It is time for all of us to report for duty in the battle to turn this historic opportunity into the next great period of progress in America.
Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.
Loading comments…
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
Bush didn't set the stage for the economic collapse, it was Reagan and his deregulation scheme followed by Clinton, all of them are to be blame but the biggest fault and who I blame the most it is those that voted for the man, not once but twice, if they had not voted for him we wouldn't be in the pickle we're in. He couln't have cheated if the voters had done their HW correctly. For the rest of us this will make us feel better:
HOW TO START January 20th WITH A POSITIVE OUTLOOK
You are corect - Reagn did start deregulation and set the stage ( and trickle down ) and it snowballed from there. Perhaps Clinton should have realized the danger that was coming- but keep in mind-we had a large surplus and a GREAT economy then. So Clinton DID NOT add to the problem. But Bush SR did nothing to help at all in that area. But Bush 2..was the worst- he gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy and corporate America, while paying for 2 wars-one of which did not have to start and borrowing untold amounts of money from China & Saudi Arabia. W & Cheney & Rumsfeld were planning the Iraq war weeks after the 2000 election-the one Bush really lost. W was warned in August 2001 about an IMPENDING ATTACK ON THE US. It was ignored !
Clarification: the Iraq War was not pre-emptive. It was aggressive, a large difference that has not been addressed in this purely political phase of history.
Neoconservatism is not radical conservatism. It was born of the American New Left, and has little to do with true conservatism. Bush and crew were not conservatives. There is a reason the republican party has diminished so much under them. Medicare D, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act...thes
One would wonder why so many self-professed conservatives voted for him, twice, then. Are they hypocrites, or just ignorant?
While I wish Bush/Cheney marked the end of an era, that people would finally see the poverty of conservative ideology, we surely haven't. Yes, a lot of people who voted Bush/Cheney previously voted Obama in 2008 and might never vote Republican again. But there's tons of cash swirling around in conservative backrooms which will continue to fund the appearance of a phalanx of conservative voices and a hymnal full of conservative arguments. The Limbaughs of the world aren't going to close up shop, nor are their fans suddenly going to realize they're being duped out of their minds and wallets. In short, the show's not over. I'm sure we'll continue hearing absurdities like "let's give money to the rich and they'll create jobs for the poor," "privatize [some government service] because the government can't do anything right" or "private enterprise is more efficient," "let loose the power of the marketplace," and a variety of other thin platitudes new and old. No doubt, too, we haven't seen the end of conservative tactics-- employing fear, greed and skewed stats, delaying in some situations, rushing in others, oversimplifying, obscuring and otherwise misrepresenting situations. In short, progressives still need to unveil conservatives' partisan strategies and unravel their insipid arguments again and again if we're ever to have an economy and a government that work to the benefit of all citizens rather than serve the narrow self-interests of the super-rich. The show's not over. Stay tuned.
This is one of the most intelligent assessments I have read. Bravo!!! I indeed will stay tuned as i hope a majority do.
Well informed voters are the best defense against bad govt. So let us all remain vigilant . Yes- Reagan pedaled that garbage like: All Govt is bad, lets give breaks to the rich so it 'trickles down' to the middle class-let the markets be unfettered ( deregulated ) So after all that has happened- if we still fall for their garbage again- then we are stupid. We should have learned our leson
quite well by now. We just gave 350 Billion to big banks so they would lend..well guess what.
They are not lending-they are hoarding the money..the
Limbaugh/ & Hannity / Coulter types only do well because most of their listeners believe what they are pedding.. Limbaugh does his show for one reason- he makes truck loads of money ! Don't believe any of them without checking facts...tr
Good points dianhow and Reagans ideas led to the extremely costly savings and loan disaster. Bush just repeated that mistake all over again. Let them try to make a hero out of Bush, just let them try.
Since the neo-conservative / individualist ideology is dead as Soviet Communism, what is to go in its place? What is the emerging political philosophy? In the 21st century we have come to the understanding that humanity does not stand alone, self sufficient in its being. We now understand that the human being is a part of the earth's biosphere, albeit a unique part. We understand that the biosphere is a dynamic, continually changing web of life, where the web affects the existence of each part, and each part reflects the web itself. We understand that through our technologies, especially our ability to burn fossil carbon, we are affecting the planetary system in a big way.
Therefore the dominant emerging political philosophy is the ecological or green ideology, that sees ourselves as part of a system with which we must live in harmony. As individuals, an important aspect of that system is the human society that we are part of, but human society is not the reference point - our being-in-the-world is the reference point. We must now view ourselves and the planet as systems, and in our policy thinking, take in as many parts of the picture as we are rationally capable of.
This shift in our political consciousness is arguably as revolutionary, if not more so, than the Enlightenment or the Renaissance.
The emerging political philosophy is based upon widening cognition. And we need to rediscover the value and the fruits of foreign and domestic policies based on peace and cooperation. We have warred and conflicted to such an extent, any possibility of gain from such behavior is gone. We must put aside the old fears and together, with confidence, disarm our nuclear arsenals and build no more nuclear weapons to threaten the world. It is the message of nuclear disarmament that we must take to Iran and all other nations contemplating a descent into this void.
PLEASE let poor G.W. Bush be. He does not know what is going on, never knew and never will he understand. What's more he does NOT care.
All of it is well above his ability to comprehend. It is the neo-cons who penetrated his "administration" who were making the decisions. and watch out. They are not done. Bush will go home to Texas and stay there and the neo-cons will try to wedge their way into Obama's administration. Watch and see.
Without a doubt, the neo-cons are still around. I understand Richard Holbrooke was actually considered for a post in the new administration. Felix Rohatyn continues to advise the democratic party. We still have Samuel Alito in the Supreme Court. The conservative "think-tanks" i.e. The Heritage Institute, the Enterprise Institute, and the Cato Institute are still seen on the news shows. Yes, George isn't aware that his administration is utterly discredited, but neither are the neo-cons aware of it. They have the attitude of Old Nazis; if only this or that had been done, it all would have worked, etc. It takes a generation before this is worked out of the system. We'll have to be cautious.
How right you are. Bush is and was clueless. but= heney knew exactly what he was doing.
Pres. Bush made it evident to me that he went out of his way to undermine everything this country stood for. The very idea that the departing administration condoned torture, detained people without due process, interfered with peoples' lives by promoting policies to prevent a particular class of citizens from marrying, or enjoying their right to pursue happiness is appalling, not to mention embarrassing for our nation. The man (Bush Jr.) demonstrated his lack of respect for our Constitution! That alone gives me cause to celebrate his departure. Call us unAmerican, will he? He was the one wearing that pair of shoes all along.
An excellent column.But it should be remembered tha Neo-Conservative movement ,made up of all ex-leftosts sought to emulate the foreign policies of Woodrow Wilson,,FD
Bush bought into the notion that governments shouldn't govern because they will just mess things up. It was the old self-fulfilling prophecy. He proceeded to govern by undoing everything that had evolved out of experience and knowledge, tore down everything that was built out of research of successes and failures and took the attitude of the ignorant government haters, kind of like police haters, who demean them until they need one. If the government doesn't come to your aid when you are in need, then you realize the problem. The one thing worse than a government, is no government. Ask the people in Somalia, where there hasn't been an effective government for many years and it has turned into a country that relies on aid largely. He channeled resources in the direction of his corporate friends, thinking they would save this country. Guess what, they are typical corporations with selfish interests that will prevail no matter how many others will suffer because of it. Corporations are not interested in fairness, at least not most of them. They serve stockholders and not even all of them, just the ones who have the largest portion of stocks. Well, we should have learned yet again, that we need smart and conscientious people to govern, ones who believe that if we don't strive to create a system where people can thrive, like plants in rich soil and favorable climates, then eventually our system will break down.
You obviously aren't looking around... "Somalia"? we're a heart beat from a 3rd world country? Please... Corporate buddies? Like who? What evidence / facts do you have? I'll answer that for you, none.
Gov. can't solve your or anyone else's problems, Gov. is the problem... This idea that Gov. is the answer has been debunked 200 years ago... Wake-up!
You're the one who's sleeping! Smaller government leaves eveyrthing to the predators of society and leaves the whole population vulnerable to every form of theft, extortion, violation and abuse. No, we must have government to protect the rights and interests of society as a whole and the American form of government, as outlined in the Preamble of the US Constitution, is the best when it fulfills its mission to promote the general welfare. You white, male conservatives will continue to be a drag on progress and you force us to fight you every step of the way.
Are you seriously arguing that GWB's policies HAVEN'T benefited rich corporations more than any other constituency? Do you not remember when Bush referred to corporate reps as "his base"? Where have you been the last 8 years???
Gov. debunked 200 years ago?
No. What happened 200+ years ago was the invention of a Representational form of Government. That's a good thing.
Without that, who rules? The aristocracy - private interests. The rich and powerful. That's what our country was founded in defiance of. Get it straight.
If you don't accept the answers that are plentiful and available, there is no reason to think that feeding you information would have any effect. You are obviously getting all you information from the corrupted sources and are now completely programmed. Too bad for you. You can no longer be an effective citizen. So wake-up, go on sleeping.
Two hundred years ago? That would be 1809 when politicians argued building national roads, and canals like the Erie. Through the remainder of the century, the government invested heavily in the railroads, giving huge tracts of land to the Union Pacific and the Northern among others. Despite excesses and some corruption, they built one nation across an entire continent. Iron from Missouri could trade in Cleveland. Grain from the Dakotas floated to New Orleans on river traffic engineered by the US Army. We became the richest nation in the world even as US made tanks paid for by our government rusted on old Soviet / German battlegrounds.
We pay for our government, and we have a right to see it works. When you stop to pay your tolls to the Spanish company that bought the skyway, you may be enriching private enterprise in Spain, but the part that does the job was made by your government.
OK. The government worked badly under Bush. That isn't the fault of democratic government but of you for electing people who held government in contempt, a mere thing to be looted..
As far as I'm concerned, George Bush didn't do a thing to help this country.
really... how about keeping us safe since 911? How about no child left behind? How about 53 months of economic growth (by cutting taxes)? How about the Drug program? How about a chance to have a democracy in the middle east along with Israel?
Drop the New York times / MSNBS and think for a second...
Since you asked - did Bush become president on 9/12 0h, wait he was already president when Condoleezza Rice and he were too busy to read that pesky memo about Bin Laden determined to attack in the United States. Economic growth - weakest growth since Bush I and budget surplus to humongous budget deficit - not to mention the current economic meltdown - the drug program oh, you mean the give away to the drug companies - see budget deficit above - for your information, Skippy, the VA is allowed to negotiate with the drug companies for best price and they do a pretty good job - Bush's law does not allow the Social Security administration to do the same.
"a chance to have a democracy in the middle east along with Israel?" - Chance oh, you mean fat chance - the last time I looked the Israelis were killing women and children trying to get at the democratically elected Hamas and our "friends" in Iraq are busy kissing up to the Iranians. Why is it that the president of Iran can announce his visits to Iraq and be greeted like a hero and Bush still has to sneak in like a thief in the night?
An utterly naive approach.
1- 9/11 The notion that we are safer because we have not been attacked since 9/11 is ignoring Muslim mentality. Seven years is nothing. Arabs, unlike us, do not think of the "here and now". They have a long history, are patient and stoic. Sadly, our actions-Iraq, torture, unquestionable support of Israel etc,- have inflamed their spirits and are biding their time until the next one. Wait and see.
2- No child left behind? Broad consensus among educators regard it as an utter failure.
Under-financed rhetoric so we look good.
3- Medicare Drug program? Designed by escapees of an insane asylum.
4- Democracy in the Middle East? Like trying to straighten teeth with a sledge hammer.
Are you serious? It may well be a notion 300 years ahead of its time. But not now and not by force..
You again! Are we really safe since 9/11 or have the terrorists not yet struck? No child left behind punishes schools for what they probably can't help and forces students into learning just to pass tests! What kind of "economic growth" have we seen in the last 53 months? The top 2% of the population has captured all the assets. Giving tax breaks to the rich turned loose the worst speculative market in history, the worst abuses of securities and mortgages since the Great Depression and a shrinking of the productive base of the US to Third World proportions. The Drug Program is an acknowledged failure and has led to the highest levels of incarceration in the world. Just voting doesn't make a democracy in Iraq or anywhere else. We'll see how long even that lasts when we leave. Iraqis are a tribal people with tribal attachments, and God knows, blood is thicker than water! That is something even you can learn.
Actually it take a reactionary conservative to radicalize the population. Most conservatives don't know this, as they don't know much of anything really. I thought Bush's creation of a marine sanctuary in Western Hawaii was good as was his AIDs funding in Africa. That's about it.
If it wasn't for him, Obama would not be making History on Tuesday
Yes he did, he helped turn the world against us.
I can think of another thing he did for the country.He was the driving force behind the "get out the vote" movement!
It took complete Republican rule for the American voter to find out just what Conservationism means. All the slogans were so engaging. Then we found out just how they worked. Freedom meant preemptive war. No child left behind meant vouchers and charter schools - punishing public schools rather than helping them succeed. Small government meant putting incompetent cronies in charge of needed programs. Clean Air Act brought us "clean" coal. And on an on. The point is we found out that we had bought into a lie. Conservatism doesn't work except for the wealthiest 1%. The rest that fell for the story must have thought they would get rich by the very act of supporting this failed ideology.
Wake-up please... Conservationism does work... it mean people are free... more Gov. means less freedom and I challenge you to prove me wrong on that. The "wealthy according to BO are people that make what... $200K? Try to live in Souther Cal. on $200K? that's getting by... The "wealthy" by this definition are small business that hire people, build things... What has Gov. built except pathetic Gov. jobs (been to the DMV lately?). Wake-up sir...
LOL - yeah after 8 years of conservative rule the country is in REAL good shape. You have an amazing capacity for self-delusion if you believe that crap.
Mr. Wakeup, isn't there anything that makes you shut up? Conservationism does work, it is Conservatism that doesn't. People are less free now that the rights of habeas corpus, trial by jury, the right to counsel are lost to some people, increased government spying on citizens, National Security Letters, increased costs for education, less opportunity for advancement, voter suppression, lowered wages, and more is in force. Freedom to a conservative means the unlimited opportunity to make and keep as much money as possible. Freedom to this same group also means fewer laws and regulations that limit the ways you can cheat, rob, extort, and violate people for profit. Going to a rich student's college, I learned rich people use a vocabulary different from everybody else. When I talk about freedom, I mean something different. I live in Southern California on considerably less than $200,000. Government in the time of FDR built TVA that brought electrification to the rural South, the Grand Coolee Dam, countless bridges, tunnels, & water systems. When government has vision, it can do almost anything. Private enterprise has created the l6 hour day, the paycheck you can't live on, union busting, the off-shoring of jobs, a feudal economic structure called the corporation, job discrimination, the complete denial of creativity to persons not specifically employed for this purpose, and the loss of freedom of speech whenever you are under their roof and public schools that teach only enough to make somebody employable at minimum wages. Some achievement!
What has govt done ? Lots...Gov
Lots of people here have tried to educate you W--U. I think we now have to conclude that you have a learning disability. You have a dyslexic world view. You see everything backwards.
Not every American fell for it. I didn't. Republicans (Conservatives) don't change much, only their slogans change. They are 100% predictable in that they like the wealthy, the corporations, globalized economics, smaller government, destroying all social safety nets, for-profit health care, wars for profit, high interest, low taxes on the rich, prisons, slavery, Wall Street, banks, big military, religion as another political force, money, money money and power power power. They hate humanity in general, labor unions, minorities, the poor, government that follows the Constitution in that it promotes the general welfare, public schools, well-paid jobs, prosperity for most people, peace, hope, love, compassion and charity that doesn't insult the recipient.
The problem is that the Republican lore is now desperately disassociating their failed ideology from Bush's record. Their argument now is that the problem was that Bush wasn't conservative enough and I have no doubt that leaving this revisionist view uncontested will eventually erase the lessons learned: Trickle-down economics is a farce, there is no such a thing as compassionate conservatism, Republicans are not in fact fiscal conservatives, Republicans do not want the government out of the people's back but in their bedrooms, and so on and so on.
You are absolutely right. I'm almost certain they will revise history so criminally any lessons that could have been learned will be lost. The next generation of conservatives will commit the same sins as their fathers. Did you know the "trickle-down" fraud was used by conservatives during Hoover's administration? Conservative should mean make the same mistakes over and over.
Thanks for finding a silver lining and maybe even a rainbow.
I would like to echo some of the notes of caution towards thinking this is going to herald a longterm wave of progressive government.
After Watergate, we thought paranoid secrecy and targeting of enemies would be passe. We thought we'd have a generation of liberal thinking, nuanced positions, increased empowerment for minorities and women; we thought there'd be windfall taxes on oil companies, conservation of our natural resources, and that FISA warrants were sensible vehicles.
And even after the embarrassment and the unmitigated disaster that was Nixon and Agnew, within four years of corporate media doing the bidding of the handlers and the think tanks, we progressives limped away while the country got the conservative momentum rolling again.
If the neo-cons hadn't made a complete and utter mess of it, we'd still be fighting an uphill battle.
So be proud that enough Americans woke up, but there's still plenty of work to be done.
Let's all start referring to the cons as "regressives!"
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
