Pay over Patriotism.
One way of framing the current conservative government model in relation to a progressive model is to look at who is supposed to be performing the public work and why.
I would argue that at the present time this becomes a contest between the ideas of work done for love of country vs. work done for love of money. By taking government functions away from civil servants and handing them over to private contractors, conservatives are saying that love of money is a more important motivating factor than love of country. This choice of pay over patriotism can be used to help recapture the word patriotism for progressives by asking a simple question.
Love of Country or Love of Money?
More on the flip.
Love of country or love of money?
That is the question the conservative movement needs to answer. In Iraq at this very moment, Haliburton and a number of private security firms like Blackwater are doing jobs that would once have been performed by members of the United State military. This outsourcing of government functions is a natural outgrowth of the Republican contention that the private sector will always do things better than the public sector. In other words, love of money trumps love of country.
Ronald Reagan said that the scariest words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Grover Norquist said that he wants to shrink government to the size where “I can drown it in a bathtub.” For thirty years Republicans have argued that government is always the problem, never the solution. Anyone who went to a public school, has had their house saved by the fire department, their family protected by the police, or driven to work on a public road should be able to see the absurdity of this idea. And yet it has caught on to such an extent that the people who want to get rid of government are now running it.
And what are they doing? Outsourcing government wherever they can. Taking government functions away from poorly paid public servants who do their jobs because they want to give back to community and country and handing them to large for-profit corporations who are in the business to make money. You can’t blame the corporations. That’s why they came into existence. But you can blame the people who choose to take vital government functions from the people who work primarily for love of country and community and give them to those who work primarily for love of money.
The free market can do many things. It’s one of the most powerful forces in the world. But it is not government and anyone who believes that it can fulfill the role of government has forgotten that the fundamental driving force of the market is the love of money and the fundamental driving force of government is the love of country.
America has a choice to make over the next several years. Will we continue to elect governmental officials who don’t believe in government? Who would choose to hand over the reins to those who see it as a money making venture? Or will we turn back from that path and choose to elect progressives? The group that truly believes that government is of the people, by the people, and for the people? That chooses service over profits, and country over money?
Love of country? Or Love of money?
This a simple but powerful frame reinforced by continuing reluctance on the part of conservatives to spend the money necessary to truly support U.S. troops with such things as veteran’s benefits, while simultaneously paying out large sums to private contractors. As well as by numerous other similar decisions.
Some examples:
On Iraq:
Love of Country
Progressives support our soldiers.
Love of Money
Conservatives support Blackwater mercenaries.
On Katrina:
Love of Country
Progressives support a revitalized FEMA.
Love of Money
Conservatives support Halliburton.
This is my first diary at Booman Tribune, so I thought I’d try my first poll:
Nice first diary, Kelly!! Looking forward to more from you!
I chose “other” because I think it could be useful in some instances, not so much in others. You know the old saying that a people get the government they deserve, right? Well, in the “love of money over love of country” frame, we will also have to look at Americans themselves…the ‘greedy-materialistic-superficial-anti-intellectual-instant-gratification at all costs’ national psyche will have to be addressed FIRST. Unless we can change the hearts and actions of people in
this regard, we will continue to have government that reflects the worst in us and ploughs over, devalues and makes impossible the best…
More ont his later — gotta run!
Thanks for the comment and the compliment. I like to think that no one deserves the government we currently have, but I defintiely see your point.
Many horrors have been committed in the name of “love of country”. I prefer this frame: love of humanity.
What was it someone said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels?”
Often, love of country is used to highlight a marriage with free market economics, as if the two can’t exist without each other. And perhaps they can’t, not in the current context of belief systems that dominate this country.
“America” is synonymous with “free market economics”.
We may THINK America is synomymous with “free market economics” but any first-year econ major who is paying attention could tell you that what we have going on here is anything BUT the free market!!
Just two examples that shoot “free market” right out the window:
who would argue that “love of country” per se is an intellectually unhealthy attitude. However, I have no illusions about proving that point to the larger population.
Therefore, I think your framing is powerful and we should all use it. And thanks for a focused and well-written diary!
Thank you for responding.
I guess that I fall in the middle on the “intellectually unhealthy” issue. While patriotism has too often been used as duranta quoted above, as “the last refuge of scoundrels.” It is also, or can be, a powerful tool to drive public service in the “ask not what your country can do for you” mode.
The reason I feel that we need to address it is that it’s a huge factor in American politics, and one that has been used to great effect against the left. While it’s a two-edged sword at best, I would much rather have my hands on the hilt than the blade. That way, we can hope to create a situation where it gets put back in the sheath and stops being used as weapon by either side. (Way optimistic, I know)
As I see it, the best way to do that is turn it against the Republicans, knocking the crutch of jingoistic patriotism out from under them. This is one meme that I think can be used to help achieve that goal.
I don’t think this quite works … seeing how well the Republicans have been able to monopolize patriotism. Love of country as a theme seems play into the hands of the jingoistic flag wavers.
Maybe Love of People vs. Love of Money would work a little better?
I’m not sure the frame works; it’s fairly simple to deflect…
Public service has been a patronage and padding sinkhole under both parties for a lot of years and patriotism has NEVER seemed much of a motivator for the majority of practitioners, as anyone who’s ever had to deal with a bureaucracy and its associated paperwork can tell you. Financial Gain is a great deal more effective. Unfortunately, in this case Ideology and Common Sense run together.
The problem with privatization isn’t lack of patriotism, it’s that “running the government like a business” is a HORRID approach to take in the first place.
I’d have to disagree on this one.
While a certain number of public service jobs are patronage jobs, and that number has increased exponentially under the current kleptocracy, the vast majority of public servants are in it to give back to community and country. Yes, I’ve had problems with bureaucracy. But…
I’ve got two professors, several teachers, and half a dozen retired active duty military in my family. I also know a number of cops and a fireman or two. From my own experience I can say that all of them do their jobs out a of sense of duty to country and their fellows. They sure don’t do it for the high wages in the public sector.
The right has spent years framing government workers as them and not us. I think that the Republican devotion to outsourcing gives us the chance to reverse that unfair frame at the very same time that it allows us to question Republican patriotism.
The way to do this is to point not to the bureaucratic portions of the public sector which have been systematically demonized, but rather to America’s heroes. The firemen and police officers killed on September 11th are one example.
When the Republicans talk about the IRS, we talk about the thousands of American public servants who put their lives on the line every day, and ask why they question the patriotism of American heroes. In my opinion, that argument is a winner for progressives.
I like it, the money thing is the real question, although it’s not a very realistic choice. I read a phrase this morning that struck me – Americans need to decide which is more important – natural resources or economic progress. It was an essay about the phosphate mining in Florida. The fact is that China has its own phosphate industry and purchases a great deal of what we produce. The author says we will be needing to preserve our own phosphate because we’ll need it to grow food.
I think the dichotomy is how do we react to suffering, is it a call for compassion or a profit opportunity? We do need to be reclaiming the language.
Good diary K. – keep up the good work!
Thanks. Good points.
Some great thoughts.
I think for many there is a big difference between Patriotism and Nationalism.
I think what we see now from the Red Regime is Nationalism. They have hijacked our flag and our love for this country.
This has been hard for me. Having been raised as a military brat and then wife…and a traveller who has always loved coming home… I can’t begin to tell you how it breaks my heart that they question anyone’s patriotism.
I feel that loving my country means loving freedom. Loving the heart and soul of what can make this country a wonderful provider and healer for so many.
Instead it’s a mantra somewhat similar to some damn football game..We’re number 1- that crap.
I think Patriots question their government – Nationalists blindly follow in line.
I am ashamed of my country and what it stands for right now. I feel this way because of my love for freedom and caring.
I guess the humanist in me is coming out more than the American in me. I love mankind more than any damn flag.
Yes! I agree with this. It’s a great way to talk about what the right calls patriotism vs. what patriotism should be.
That, I think, is the problem in a nutshell. A corporation is a fictional legal entity that is created for the sole purpose of preventing legal responsibility from attaching to the human beings who set up the corporation and profit from its existence.
You can try to assign legal blame to the corporation, i.e., sue it for however much money you can wring out of it after the people behind the scenes have diverted and hidden every cent they can. But the public can’t vote a private corporation out of power. The only ones with votes are the shareholders–the foxes who run the henhouse.
And, more importantly, you generally can’t touch the people who are pulling the levers. It’s often difficult, given the layers of parents and subsidiaries and holding companies that these people create, to even find out who they are. One corporation goes bankrupt, and the same lever-pullers create a shiny new one to take its place.
The private sector isn’t just about love of money–it’s about evasion of responsibility. It’s about profit without pain. It’s about reaping the benefits and passing the costs on to someone else. It’s about creating a big imaginary bubble to deflect the arrows of blame.
That’s the corporate mentality, and that’s what’s running the country right now. Bush may claim (because his PR department told him to) that he accepts responsibility for any mistakes with respect to Katrina (if the feds made any–big caveat because he doesn’t believe they did). But he’s spent his whole life in the bubble, so “responsibility” has no meaning for him.
Yes, the current balance of corporate rights and lack of responsibilities is terrible for this country. I’d love to see serious changes in American corporate law.
I’ve been awake waaay too long. I read the title as “Love of Country vs. Love of Monkey”. I thought it was about the lunatics who think Bush is god.
Thanks for this! It made me laugh hard enough to bring tears to my eyes. It’s been one of those weeks without enough and with way too little sleep. Love your sig, too.
Talk about synchronicity, I was just thinking about all of this stuff earlier today while walking around on the street.
Yesterday I was reading about the deline and fall of the Roman Republic (not the Roman Empire), and how the Roman army changed dramatically from the time of the Punic Wars (glorious victory over Hannibal and the Carthaginians by a group of citizen-soldiers motivatted primarily by patriotism) to the time of Caesar (glorious victory over half of Europe by a professional army beholden mainly to Caesar). Basically what happened is that the citizens, especially the rich ones, didn’t want to be soldiers any more, and bought their way out of it during the time of Marius (of whom Caesar was the protege), resulting in an army of for-pay soldiers who might well riot if they didn’t get their pay. It took a long time for the process to get to the point where the Republic was definitively ended ( with the death of Caesar and ascent of Augustus) but in my view, once the people started paying others to be their soldiers, it was pretty much just a matter of time.
This same process happened in Athens a few hundred years earlier when the Athenian democracy was transformed into the Athenian empire.
It’s happening now in the United States.
All this stuff about the army then connects back to the basic difference between the Rep and Dem view of the world and the nation. They have a philosophy of “every man for himself.” We are more like “we’re all in this together.” It’s hard to sort out their rhetoric from their real beliefs because they lie every time they open their mouths, but I think that’s basically it.
In other words, they really aren’t nationalists or patriots, they’re just in it for themselves and whatever they and their cronies can get out of it.
This too, echos developments in the Roman times, thoughat a later period, and it’s not an auspicious sign, either.
Yes absolutely, and I might add that in addition to people buying their way out of the army, several aristocratic generals whose only qualification to lead a Roman army was noble birth were responsible for disastrous defeats. Caepio against the Germans comes to mind. These defeats were largely the result of aristocrats prospecting for personal gain with the army as their tool. The defeats contributed significantly to the breaking of the Roman civilian soldier model. Another place where the parallels are all too clear.