Unfortunately, the world has gotten worse during the last 28 years because most of Carter’s efforts were squashed and negated by a concerted propaganda campaign lead by Ronald Reagan, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George H. W. Bush Sr., who started the Second Cold War even though the Soviet Union was already in decline. And the younger George W. Bush has now led us into horrible conflict and even started the Third Cold War with Russia. And they all served to benefit and empower the Military-Industrial Complex that Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us against back in 1961.
The point is that bad (or "evil") leadership can be very cunning and loves to masquerade as good, and it often even thinks it IS good, which is why it often succeeds when the political climate is ripe. It succeeds because many people are easily fooled by demagogues who appeal to the human ego and its tendency toward feeling superior, whether it’s because of religious beliefs or nationalism or race or political ideology. After all, the murderous tyrant Adolf Hitler easily rose to power by making the German people feel superior and powerful, and he was the epitome of the worst kind of demagogue.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that Ronald Reagan was as bad as Adolph Hitler, because Hitler was so blatantly evil that the vast majority of people and even most Germans eventually recognized it. However, the script Reagan followed as a television pitch man made him an even more successful demagogue, because most people did not recognize him for what he was. Thus he was able to open the doors wide for the forces of self-interest, greed, inequity, racism, nationalism and militarism. And many people STILL do not see what he was. His attitude and policies, many of which were more or less copied later by George W. Bush, are some of the biggest reasons why we have had such bitter partisan gridlock; corporate corruption; bad relations between labor and management; huge income disparity; diminishing protection of the environment; increasing racism; growing poverty, hunger and homelessness; a shrinking middle class; and diminishing financial status for the vast majority while the rich have been getting a whole lot richer - incredibly richer. And that's just the domestic problems. (Again, see the page on Reagan’s Real Legacy.)
Furthermore, if a good Democrat actually advocated the kinds of changes that are needed to establish real fairness, equality, equity and justice, he would be in grave danger of being assassinated, because wealthy, extreme right-wing ideologues do not stop at deception, fraud and malfeasance. Some are prone to use violence and even deadly force to control and rule. So a truly good and fair reform candidate or leader might be killed, just as John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., moderate Israeli President Rabin, and moderate candidate Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan were. After all, they and many other good, conscientious, progressive leaders, who served in the best interests of humanity and the people as a whole, have been assassinated by those who love and even lust for worldly wealth, power and domain, and will stop at nothing to acquire and/or maintain it. They resort to assassinations to kill good people who expose them and try to stop them, and they are very cunning and adept at covering their tracks and getting unstable, zealous scapegoats to do their dirty work.
Even if they didn’t, and even if enough voters were aware enough and informed enough to elect a good president, it doesn't necessarily mean our most serious problems would be solved. Just consider that the election of Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1992 did very little to stop Reaganism and prevent or deal with its rampant political and corporate corruption. In fact, it continued and increased in the 1990s during the eight years Clinton held office, and then was continued and further enabled and exacerbated by George W. Bush.
Granted, early in this decade there were some token legal actions against the most blatant and exposed political and corporate corruption, but those actions have dealt only with what is like the tip of a huge iceberg, and only the tip shows above the surface while the rest is hidden. The basic problem is still there. Corporate corruption and abuse of power, which Reaganism enables and licenses, is immense, and pervasive, and the army of highly paid corporate lobbyists who bribe and influence politicians in Washington D.C. is only part of the problem.
When Democrat Bill Clinton was president in the 1990s, he couldn't stop Reaganism because Reaganite Republicans controlled Congress during most of Clinton's term. In fact, even when Clinton could have vetoed Reaganite legislation, in certain instances he chose to go along with it because he thought it was politically expedient to do so (e.g. he did not veto the so-called Welfare Reform legislation in 1996). Thus, Reaganism essentially prevailed, continued and in certain ways got worse throughout the 1990s. Then it expanded and got even worse under the Bush Regime, so it has had an increasingly devastating impact for the last 28 years. Not on the wealthy, of course, because rising and out of control costs don’t bother them. In fact, their incomes have risen far greater and much faster than inflation. But it’s had a terrible impact on 80 percent of the U.S. population and growing numbers of people around the world.
As I’ve explained on other pages and in books, Reaganism is a very hard right-wing, divisive partisan political ideology which unfairly and disproportionately serves the interests of the wealthiest few and their corporations. It is to the detriment of the great majority, to the detriment of the environment, to the detriment of public education and public health, and to the detriment of the public infrastructure. Perhaps even worse, it is utterly devastating to the working poor, the poor and the elderly, all while deceptively claiming and pretending to serve all the people in the name of God and Country.
Ronald Reagan was successful in selling it because his greatest skill as an actor was as a commercial television pitch man, and he probably even believed what he said and did not realize that he was serving Mammon and not God or humanity. But, unfortunately, he misled many Americans, and since the early Nineties many Democrats have thought it was politically expedient to buy in to Reaganism. As I said, most Democrats had moved to the right of middle, and most Reaganite Republicans were, as the Bushites still are, on the extreme right.
Furthermore, even though the direction of the country could have changed considering the crushing defeat of right-wing Republicans in the November 2006 mid-term election which finally enabled Democrats to gain some control of Congress, it did not change much at all. And, even if it had made a difference, it would only be temporary. The partisan political pendulum would swing back to the right again, invariably, and we would have more conflict and instability.
Even if America had a more sensible, more reasonable and more fair system of caucuses and primary elections, partisan politics would still be hopelessly flawed. And it is extremely flawed now, not only because it divides and polarizes the people. The political caucus and primary election system is absolutely unfair, and the only reason it exists is for the convenience of presidential candidates so they can go from state to state, one at a time, without having to try to appeal to the whole country at one time. The trouble is, it gives certain states far more power than others, and it has rendered certain states almost powerless in determining who wins the primary contest. If primary elections were held at exactly the same time in every state and in every time zone, it would at least be more fair and make more sense.
But even if that were the case, partisan politics would still be hopelessly flawed. It is inherently divisive and inevitably corrupt. It does not and cannot serve the interests of all the people. And the biggest part of the problem is that it’s based on the idea that we should choose sides, fight for power over each other, and be forced to accept the results of a winner-take-all partisan contest for presidential monarchial power.
Furthermore, another big part of the problem is that it is fueled by money, which has invariably led to corruption. And that becomes even worse when you consider that 80 percent of the funding for the political campaigns of both major parties is invested by the wealthiest one percent of the population, who also pay for the army of lobbyists who continually influence and bribe members of Congress. And, as I said earlier, the wealthiest few get what they pay for.
Even if someone like Barack Obama could beat the system and try to change it, I doubt that he would succeed. And even he did have some success, it would probably be short lived, because partisan politics would inevitably enable someone to reverse it and restore business as usual. All it would take is a political climate ripe for someone to rise to power by waving the flag, thumping his bible, and rattling his sword, appealing to prejudices, nationalism and religious bigotry once again. And if you think that is not a danger, just consider how and why being a Christian has become a litmus test for being the American president, in spite of the Constitution and the intent of the founding fathers (see the page on Little Known American History). Consider how Barack Obama has had to convince people that he is a Christian and not a Muslim.
I tell you truly that we need a thorough reformation of government, along with a reformation of religion, to put an end to partisan party politics --- an end to division and polarization, an end to bribery and corruption, an end to congressional oligarchy, an end to the juvenile competition for the "throne" of sovereign power, and an end to the presidential form of monarchy.
After all, why should we be divided and fight for power over each other? Why should we follow, support and empower egocentric men who seek power over those who disagree with them? Why should we be either winners or losers in a continuous, winner-take-all partisan contest for power? Why should we perpetuate an unstable partisan system that creates, fosters and perpetuates corruption, conflict and division? And why should hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars be wasted on commercial television for political campaign advertisements that are generally offensive and annoying, when all that money could be far better invested in our country and in our people?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
