Recently, Ian Macnab wrote an editorial entitled “Politicians Will Have To Start Looking at The Big Picture” (10.4.11). The column explained the dynamics between economics and politics in the United States. He astutely pointed out that a significant impediment to our recovery from the 2008 financial crisis is the lack of unity in Washington.
This problem can be seen in varied crises domestically and abroad, such as the debt-ceiling dispute in August and the current — hopefully ending — Eurozone sovereign debt dilemma. Without collective convergence and compromise, economic assistance is almost impossible.
The questions that have to be asked and answered, then, are: What does unity mean exactly? What has to be done to attain it? What is the “big picture”? Unity, in the sense of how it manifests itself in a democracy, is when opposing parties or factions realize they have more in common than they differ, and are willing to agree to work together. This realization comes through active political participation, whether it is peaceful protesting (Occupy Wall Street) or joining a populist movement (the Tea Party).
It is interesting to see the similarities between Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party, despite the fact that they are on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. They both materialized due to immense frustration with a brutally broken system.
The Tea Party, however, has directed their discontentment at the government while Occupy Wall Street blames the private sector. Both are probably right to some degree, yet the groups have nothing but vitriolic sentiments for each other. Everyone knows that there are a lot of problems that need to be fixed, but they don’t know how to solve them.
Accordingly, the Obama administration has initiated an active approach to mortgage and tax reform — though some might say not aggressive enough.
The results of these reforms will likely predict the President’s fate as a one- or two-term president. His ultimate test is to help citizens handle the hefty burden of financing a mortgage, especially when some were arguably unethically issued in the first place and to shake up the tax system to free up more capital to meet demand.
The logic is if Obama can lessen both the tax burden a citizen has to the government and the mortgage burden a citizen has to the private sector, he is even-handedly fixing our brutally broken system and has a good chance of locking up the 2012 election. A brief look at history can shed insight into the trajectory that the country might soon follow.
The last president who was in this type of position was Franklin Roosevelt; he began his presidency as the country was suffering during the Great Depression, and still struggling to recover.
Though FDR may be credited for ending the Great Depression with the New Deal, the actual event that jumpstarted the economy was our entrance into World War II. As a result of Japan’s surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, FDR was able to bring the nation together against a common enemy, the Axis Powers. Prosperity rapidly grew, and FDR ended up serving four terms. (Interestingly, he was the reason term limits for the president were put in place).
Based on what happened in the 1930s and ’40s, the crossroads for Obama — regardless of his campaigning, credibility and actual potential effectiveness — is to create exactly what his 2008 campaign promised: hope. Fostering the belief that we are far better off as a country that acts together rather than diametrically opposed. As Abraham Lincoln once wisely stated, a house divided cannot stand.
With the alleged attempted terrorist plot by Iran on the Israeli and Saudi embassies on U.S. soil last week, the President may have his uniting opportunity.
Any and all reactions to Iran would not be considered a political “anti-Arab” policy of the U.S., which has been an accusation of past conflicts in the region. If it is true that Iran sponsored the terrorist plot due to resentment of increasing anti-Iran sentiments from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, as is claimed, maybe Washington can finally see the big picture of embracing unity, not defecting for the sake of posturing.
Obviously, I am not saying we are on the cusp of World War III, but simply that the way a democracy rebounds from an economic crisis, or any crisis, is through collectively approaching threats and problems that affect us all. FDR knew what unity meant, and the next 12 months will indicate if Obama does as well.
Maeshal Abid is a College senior from West Des Moines, Iowa.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment