Wednesday, February 16, 2011

The Middle East and Democracy

George Bush supposedly wanted to build democracies all over the Middle East and that's something that Americans love to hear. I suppose that we love to hear the people's cry for democracy because we assume, naively, that they will turn into something very much like us. That, of course, is never obvious. Consider, for example, the Palestinian elections in which people freely chose to be represented by the extreme --- Hamas. Also, consider where democracy in Iraq is likely to go. "Oh, no, that's not what we had in mind!"

The most recent event, of course, is the 18-day victory of Egyptians in removing Mubarak from office. But are they on their way to democracy or what else? And, after all, is it really democracy that people are after or something else?

If you mean by "democracy" that people make all the decisions with regard to their collective problems, then America is no democracy and never has been. What we have is a so-called "representative democracy" or "democratic republic." We follow a general rule of majority decision in choosing those who will represent us, and they follow a general rule of majority decision in acting and making law. But the great stabilizing feature of our government is its anchorage in a constitution, held as "fundamental law" and protected by a system of "checks and balances." If that is what Egyptians aspire to, more power to them, and good luck. Even in America, it is not at all clear that the system works well.

Why is America not exactly a great example? Mainly because wealth always seems to come to the forefront and take command. It has an ingenious way of using the law to advance its own interests. So America is actually more like an "oligarchic republic" --- that is, a constitutionally sanctioned rule of wealth. Consider the great difficulty that we have had in providing health care to Americans. We have been trying for decades without any success whatsoever. Now, for the first time, the Obama administration has succeeded in providing something. But, wait. The first business of the new Republican House is to vote to demolish it. Why? In whose interest is our government working? In the interests of wealthy insurance companies and over-priced physicians and hospitals, of course. Health care is BIG business. We can't let the government interfere in that. Of course, that's not the end of it. Republicans also want to demolish National Public Radio, the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Oh, and by the way, isn't it obvious that "global warming" is just a fraud concocted by money-hungry scientists? Do Republicans ever look outside their little world of profit and greed to see what the rest of the world is thinking and doing?

Well, back to the Middle East. Like others, I am thrilled by their desire to free themselves from the rule of dictators. But they will need more than 18 days and crowds of young people to turn their governments into systems that work for freedom and justice and that avoid immediate collapse into corruption.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

A Comment on the Church

I've lost much of my interest in politics so I think I will discuss religion for a while. I was thinking about this while I walked downtown to coffee this morning. I suppose my mind was joggled by the weekly message on a little church I pass --- something to the effect that "Jesus saved us from our sins." Sin is a very strange concept but it has been enormously successful in trapping huge numbers of people for over centuries. It is doubtless to me that there are certain things we can do that are wrong to do. There are grounds for judging "right and wrong." But this does not mean that wrong things are sins. The notion of sin is actually quite unrelated to the issue of right and wrong acts. Christian theology wants to have us believe that we begin life "in sin." Even the baby is mortally encumbered by sin far before he/she can do anything that has moral scope. It seems to me that this is more-or-less equivalent to saying that life itself is viewed as evil. If we believe that, then there is no hope for us except what's offered by the church.

Christian theology has the formula for saving us from evil and stepping beyond sin. What is the formula? Being faithful to their theology of course. What this is, in my mind, is nothing related to the existence of a deity but rather a crass political usurpation of power over vast populations of people. It has been very successful. What better way to make people cower at your feet than to convince them that they have been created evil and impure and that their only path to redemption is to do everything that you tell them.

That, of course, is not all. At some point in the beginning, theologians realized that the one impulse in humans more powerful than even the need to eat is sexuality. Hence, all forms of sexuality had to be brought under church control. Now, even if people are a little hesitant about admitting sin in the abstract, they can become mortified by their own instinctual desires. And the Catholic (the traditional Christian) is not permitted sex in any circumstance but one in which conception of a child is possible, even intended. Joyce's "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" gives us a vivid picture of mortification-onto-damnation in the life of a young believer. I won't even bother to consider what this principle has done to world populations and how it maintains people in poverty. What interests me at the moment is what a shrewd political move it was to capture sexuality in this way before people felt free to own it themselves.

And if that isn't enough, Christianity was built on the foundation of yet another Achilles heal, the dread of death. If the physical body is desiring sex, the spiritual mind is anxious about death. The mind, too, must be imprisoned. Thus, Christian theology promises life-after-death and adds the quaint picture of hellfire versus heaven. It's a very scary road, life, and only the Church can guide you through so long as you are obedient and generous.

All of this is theology --- which is pretty much raw politics --- and has nothing to do with Jesus. I don't find any of this in Jesus' teaching, which is actually rather socialist in its leanings. As Nietzsche said, "There has been only one true Christian, and he died on the cross."

What will they do?

The interesting thing about politics, these days, is that, now that the Republicans have full power in the House, the whole question is what will they do with their new-found power. There are certain things that Americans want their government to do, but it is not at all clear that the Republicans are tuned into those wishes. Instead, they seem to be reaching out to achieve certain fantasies of what the American people want --- like re-defining "rape," throwing out the entire healthcare legislation, etc. And, of course, in spite of their heroic need to follow the Constitution to the letter, they spent their first three days violating the Constitution right and left.

The simple fact remains that Republicans hate government so much that they are terrible governors when they hold the power. All they want to do is tear things down, and the more they can give out to their rich corporate friends in the process, the better. After complaining about the failure of bipartisanship for the last two years, now is the time for the Republicans to demonstrate how they can work with Independents and Democrats to solve some of the urgent problems we face.