The argument over whether the Swedish Model is already present in America, I think we can turn to the recent debate over the torture photos as an obvious example of a government doing things wrong. The only reason that the US would not want the torture photos, let alone the fact that they were (and probably are) torturing people, getting out into the rest of the world is that it would compromise their integrity as a government of the people, and therefore its place as a beacon of hope to the rest of the world. There was never a ballot measure that involved the approval of relentless torture, and in order for the government to get around this they kept the secret within the government. Now, it’s true that America has a huge government, but total transparency is not impossible. The reason it’s currently hard to achieve is the question of security. The safety of the American people is the priority of the government (just like I mentioned earlier in my first post), and this means that the bad guys can’t know what the US government is up to. So the task then becomes eliminating the security threats that exist, which means resolving conflicts around the world where people dislike us. But, we can’t just give into the opposition’s measures and seek a trail of appeasement until everyone’s problems have been dealt with, this would hurt American’s financially. Hurt Americans don’t vote the president back into the presidency, and so it’s important for the government to not hurt Americans. So, what does America do? Total transparency at the price of the American people, or no transparency and Americans don’t pay a price for their security? We either have to bite the bullet and accept the actions of our government, or take the bull by the horns and have it come out of our own pocket. I’d be willing to pay for a better government because down the road this will actually pay itself back with increased economical success. I’m just gonna have to suck it up before down the road is the present.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
In response to Cas' response to my Swedish Model post
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I see the point you are making about transparency & the idea of the welfare state as a national security state. I just wanted to reiterate that the point I raised in the comment to your post is about the welfare state in general--which is an economic contract to take care of the citizen from cradle to grave, but with the proviso that you have a big gov't and that you are willing to give up alot of resources to do it.
ReplyDeleteIncrease the contract--but doesn't national security fall under one of the primal aspects of ANY state? Look at Hobbes--if the state cannot protect you from external enemies, what loyalty do you owe the state anyway?