The
America that the 1960s ushered in, centered around a large
government (the better to fight
communism) and a
massive welfare state (the better to pay-off those with communist tendencies) is over.
The America of the new millennia is a more slender model, one designed for
speed,
agility -- one designed to lead the global marketplace.
It is for this reason that government is going to necessarily shrink,
politics are going to necessarily become more
conservative, and the lines between the two political the two major political parties --
Democrat and
Republican -- will blur to the point of camoflage.
Where there's
smoke, there's
fire.
The fall of the
Berlin Wall meant more than the
victory of
East versus
West; the fall of the Berlin Wall marked the
death throes of
Socialism worldwide and the power of free-market
Capitalism.
Why will governments shrink?
Because, in this global market, governments have less and less power. Certainly lawmakers can still influence policy -- but ask
Russia what happens when investors turn their back. Governments no longer have autonomy. Militaries become cumbersome. Who'll protect
policiticans from the citizen's uprising when their financial institutions are bankrupt?
Why will governments necessarily become more conservative?
Free-market capitalism is the new ruler. Can one possibly disagree? Look at the so-called "emerging nations":
China is a key example. Though the entire
Asian economy tanked in the 1990s, China has come out of the shit-storm smelling like a rose.
Why?
Because their
communist lawmakers were smart enough to perpetuate the fascade of a market system. Mao's
Great Leap Forward is happening as I type this out, because multinational corporations see fit to hire China's cheap labor force and bring much needed financial capital and current technology along with it.
Ask Malaysian leaders what happens when an economy attracts investors: they'll tell you that they were able to build two of the world's largest building and raise
per-capita income from $350 to $5,000.
Ask Malaysian leaders what happened when their Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir Mohammad, went to
IMF Headquarters are denounced the "western powers" and their evil ways. Shortly after, in 1997, the KLCI Index (the Malaysian equivalent of the Dow Jones) fell 47%.
Like it or not, the two policital parties in this country are also quickly becoming aquainted with the
New Economy and the serious political ramifications that come with it.
Partly through a desire for financial capital to run their campagins (money most often doled out by wealthy executives and
multinational corporations), partly through a desire (jingoistic or otherwise) to augment America's strength, the two political parties are adopting similar economic paradigms.
That the two parties also merge in their cultural perspectives -- especially in those values which most greatly benefit U.S. pecuniary interest (i.e.
education) -- is inevitable.
Like it or not, the underlying strength of the U.S. economy on this world stage is derived in large part from the changes impacted by
Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. People concluded that, in the preceeding decades, the economy was not experiencing the type of growth many economic models believed was possible.
Thus huge portions of
social programs -- previously though untouchable -- were reformed or demolished.
Keynsian economics, once widely taught in our nation's finest institutions, fell from grace.
Bill Clinton and the
Republican Congress, to their credit, have let
Alan Greenspan run this economy. Alan Greenspan, to his credit, has let a runaway train continue to streak across the night's sky.
Our country is at a critical juncture. There are two icons we have been given to worship: one which we must celebrate, one which we must destroy.
We must continue worship the
devolution of governmental power, the alleviation of dependence upon the State, the rise of the self-made-man, and the destruction of the status quo.
In short...
God Bless America.