Of course, Obama is right to say that the GOP is patently hostile to the very existence of a popular program like Social Security. But, what is concealed by this claim is the fact that the Democrats themselves aren't averse to placing Social Security on the chopping block. The difference between the two parties here is mostly one of rhetoric. One tells you that they're about to screw you, the other says one thing and does another.
Sure, the Dems may not be quite as strident in their neoliberal zeal to privatize Social Security. But they are still interested in making punishing cuts to both Social Security and Medicare, and Obama is on the front line of this assault. Who is going to stop them?
Yes, the Republicans are openly hostile to Social Security. But ask yourself this: will merely voting for Democrats (or, closer to liberal rationalizations: "voting against Republicans") keep popular social programs off the chopping block? The answer is already provided by what's happening right now. So the real question must be: What can be done to stop the Democrats from imposing austerity and punishing cuts? The answer, any reflective person will note, has nothing to do with acquiescing to the two-party straight-jacket.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
while I appreciate the righteous anger and zeal of this post, it is important to understand that the Democrats aren't just going to cut Social Security and Medicare and justify it as purported deficit reduction (which it isn't), but they are simultaneously going to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (with, perhaps a few alterations, to give the false appearance that they curtailed them) and provide a $200 billion tax break for businesses that buy equipment
so, it's much worse than described here, it's austerity for the workers and subsidy for the wealthy, in effect, an ongoing enormous transfer of money from the bottom and the middle to the top
Post a Comment