Thursday, September 15, 2005

Killing the Referees: The Republican Assault on Political Accountability

The other day, Ed Kilgore posted a wonderful rant on the topic of political accountability (or the lack thereof). His frustration is palpable and essentially mirrors my own. Kilgore writes:
"Maybe I'm just consumed with anger at the
administration and its congressional allies right
now, but I think Mark [Schmitt is] basically
right. Most of these people have no concept of
"accountability"--in terms of short-term
performance, long-range consequences, the
judgment of history, or even public opinion. Their
only benchmark is progress towards their own
ideological goals, which are "starving the beast,"
destroying the very possibility of meaningful
bipartisanship, radicalizing permanent institutions
like the judiciary, the military and the corporate
sector, and keeping Americans afraid of the world
and each other. That's why they've relied so heavily
on abuse of power; it's the only way to perpetuate
their power without compromise or accountability.
And that's why they are so uninhibited by most
considerations of truth or decency. In fact, I would
argue that their most important tactical consideration
has been to destroy the possibility of accountability
by short-circuiting all the signals whereby a healthy
society normally judges its leaders. Any source of
objective measurement has been systematically
discredited as inherently ideological: scientists are
secularist fanatics; the media are elitist liberals; the
judiciary is full of anti-Christian activists; the
opposition party is anti-American. We've all had much
fun with the conservative characterization of "liberals"
as "reality-based," but it's no laughing matter: the
essence of Rovism is to eliminate any zone of rational
persuasion and force Americans to pick sides in an
identity politics of real and perceived privileges under
imaginary assault. . . .

So if we do not happily cooperate with the GOP in
reducing all politics to our team versus their team,
and our "truth" versus their "truth," to what higher
standard can we appeal? And that gets back to the
problem of accountability in an age with few
uncontested facts and no credible referees
to keep a score card."
Kilgore puts his finger on the heart of the problem. Over the last two decades, the Republican political machine has engaged in a relentless and systematic assault on all of the institutions in our society that have traditionally served as checks on excessive partisanship. They have attacked the press, the judiciary, academia, even the very concepts of science and empiricism. Their goal is to discredit and disable the referees, to politicize, marginalize, and co-opt any and all non-political institutions, and thereby eliminate any meaningful policing of political discourse. And they have been remarkably successful. In a relatively short period of time, conservatives have managed to convince a large segment of the population (including most of the Republican base) that the media, the judiciary, and even science itself cannot be trusted. Beyond damaging their credibility, this withering assault has actually transformed the institutions themselves. Fear of the "liberal bias" charge has effectively emasculated much of the press corps. The federal judiciary has been disproportionately stacked with reactionaries and Federalist Society-types. And our scientific and empirical knowledge has been polluted and corrupted by pseudo-science and ideologically-driven research. We've reached a point where nearly all truth is politicized. The line separating facts from spin has been hopelessly blurred, and political discourse has become a joke.

Unfortunately, I suspect that the only way out of this partisan trap is for the party that started it all to be confronted by the real world consequences of its near-sighted and reckless policy decisions. Bad policy and bad governing inevitably lead to bad results, and as we've seen in the last week, there are some facts and some failures that are nearly impossible to ignore or spin. Sooner or later, there will be a reckoning.
Digg!

5 Comments:

Anonymous jackmac said...

My worry is that the day of reckoning will come so late that those responsible will skip away without suffering the consequences and the damage they caused will be nearly impossible to fix. Can you imagine a Democratic president taking office in 2009 faced with a collapsed military, a trillion dollar deficit, a severe recession and social upheaval? It's not a far-fetched scenario. And the new president's attempts to fix these problems and restore budget sanity will be hooted down by the same hypocritical right wing assholes who hounded Bill Clinton and touted Dear Leader as the greatest president ever. It's a sickening prospect and I fear the country my children will inherit will be a shadow of what America should be: strong, idealistic and prosperous.

9:36 AM  
Blogger mizerock said...

I agree that it will have to be Republicans that decide that they do not want their party run this way any longer. But as long as it is "working", keeping them in power, they have no incentive to stop this steamroller.

I'm not looking for revenge, for that "I told you so" moment, I just want to fix my country, before it is too late. The damage is already massive - not for "the Democrats" or "Progressives", or "the poor", but for all of us. Americans. The World. We are ALL worse off for the changes that have been made.

"Hooted down" - yes, greed and hatred are powerful tools, aren't they? We can try to hound the people who are threatening our Constitution, but what does it matter when they control all 3 branches of goverment, they've fixed the voting machines and they dominate the media? Suggestions??

3:47 PM  
Anonymous CurtisB said...

Suggestions? Do what Jackie O did in the face of this absurd and outrageous society, emigrate.

9:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The problem with the GOP is not as simple as a lack of accountability. It is a profoundly different definition of accountability, based on a hellish combination of material and emotional benchmarks.

From the material perspective, a liberal would argue that strengthening america would entail building a more prosperous society, where life expectancy goes, infant mortality goes down, average school scores go up, etc. For this GOP, material success is strictly viewed in personal terms - do I have a nicer car? Does my kid get into a better college? Do I have a more comfortable time in my selected hospital? It is a close reading of material success - and by this the GOP has been quite successful. By most accountability standards they have done well.

From an emotional level, a liberal would argue for a more just society, an equal one, a good one. These GOP'ers are however panicked that the world is immoral and falling apart - and have fixated on sexual morality (among a few others) as a key indicator. From an accountability, then, the steps they are taking to limit birth control and gay rights and underage abortion etc are quite successful. By their benchmarks, then, they are doing quite ok.

Katrina is interesting, though, because it highlights a major hypocrisy within this rational/emotional link - namely that Christianity has explicit teachings about man's obligations to the poor. No good Christian, no matter how foam-at-the-mouth anti-gay, can possibly look at the images from Katrina and not feel an obligation to help. And a nagging concern that, hey, maybe we are leading this country in a bad direction. Maybe we are the problem, not the solution....

1:12 AM  
Anonymous George Arndt said...

Its all a port of the GOP's "war on reality"

3:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home