Democrats, Republicans, and the 5 year plan

Way too many topics in this title! But the point here is not an in-depth analysis. It is, rather, an attempt to recognize the forces at work and see them in a bit of logic.

Few of us who voted for Mr. Obama BELIEVED he really meant for there to be change. It was the same scenario when Minnesota elected Jesse Ventura, a pro wrestler, to the governorship. He was voted in NOT because people truly believed in him, but as a message to our politicians that 'business as usual' was getting tiresome. We wanted something better, and we knew it had been a long time since anyone in government had tried to supply 'better' without getting neutered by the system.

As for Obama, a president who spends trillions to bail out corporate banking while executives walk away with large salaries and bonuses, and a president who backs nuclear power plants whose waste cannot be safely disposed, is either caught in the web of American politics or never meant for real change to take place.

I've long thought I was closer to being a Democrat than a Republican but, like many Americans, I've come to think there is little difference in what gets accomplished by either party. So what's the point?

My previous post about the 5 year plans created by China was intended as food for thought and not as an argument for communism. However, I would like to point out a couple of obvious things about our 'democracy' that are holding us back as a nation dedicated to progress. It may seem like I am attacking the Republicans, but I hope it will be seen that it is really just intended to improve the state of the nation.

Republicans of my acquaintance seem to contradict themselves. They ask for smaller government, less regulation of business, and a free hand to pursue wealth as properly befits a market economy. They go on to say that government inefficiency is a major evil in society and that, if the government wishes to supply a service, it is best left to the business world to supply the service as they will do so more efficiently. It seems to follow logically that ... government should be run more like a business.

Wait a minute, though. Running government like a business, in the interest of efficiency, economy, and goals means a top down hierarchy, concentrated power that must be obeyed once decisions are made, and very importantly, maybe most importantly.... a business plan.

How can we have concentrated power, efficiency, economy of effort and wealth, and goals for the future in a two party system that seemingly passes power back and forth faster than a ping pong ball changes sides of the table?

Yes, folks, you heard it here first. Ping-pong-power-politics.

Now, when I look at the problem in this light, I am a Republican. Our country needs a business plan in the government....but not just directed at business. It needs to address business, political reform, environmental protection, ownership and usage of natural resources, and a host of issues that I can't even comprehend, much less explain.

One of the first and largest issues such a plan would have to address is "just who is the boss here?". Anyone who objectively looks at much of the modern western world can recognize that big business considers politics to be one of the many tools in its toolbox. Everyone knows beyond any doubt that businesses donate to politicians whom they believe will further their interests. All very legal, and even reinforced in a recent US Supreme Court decision guaranteeing corporations the right to do this.

I'm sorry, but I find this bass-ackwards. Doesn't it seem more logical for business to be a tool in the hands of a government acting in the interests of the people, rather than for the government of the people to be a tool in the hands of business?

Corporations benefit greatly by continued inefficiency in government. They perpetuate the myth that pro-business government is good for employment. A government without power over business allows them to continue to operate in their own interest. Yes, they do provide jobs and in this sense, the myth is true. But there is money to be made, employment to be created, and improvement in the state of the world to be had in creating industry that serves the people more than it serves corporate profit.

Corporations operating outside of government regulation follow only the whims of the market, whims often created by powerful and expensive advertising campaigns ... and their own plan to survive in the "survival of the fittest" world of capitalism. This survival is ever dependent on making more money, gaining more power, controlling more aspects of their environment to ensure their continued success. In short, operating primarily in their own best interest. The jobs they create lure people into backing pro-business government without telling them that the this solution to unemployment is, ultimately, a short term solution in an ever evolving society that needs to take into account the fact that, as technology increases, there will always be less work next year than there was last year.

The fact is, we need a lot more than a 5 year plan to face the challenges of limited resources, pollution, food production, over-population, and many more. Business will seldom act outside of its own goals unless it does so because we demand social responsibility.

So....what'll it be? Government the tool of business, or business the tool of the people?