The admirable assailant
I have been watching the popular response to the Gulf Oil Spill and found myself growing increasingly baffled. It appears as though all of our popular angst is being directed against Obama and the Federal Government’s response to the disaster. Now, it is entirely rational for people to take issue with both the perpetrator and the response of the officials charged with regulating the perpetrator’s industry. What is strange is the idea that so much popular angst would be directed at the government that there would seemingly be none left to direct at the people who actually spilled the oil. In fact, the popular anger at the government has become so fervent that, in certain circles, BP has actually become a sympathetic character.
It all goes to show that the present crisis is less about an oil spill and more about the neurotic relationship the American people have with their government. It is generally accepted that both elected officials and members of the business community will inevitably act in an unscrupulous manner. However, while this is taken as an excuse to demonize “the Government,”it is generally tolerated when it comes from the private sector. It is accepted that the competition inherent within our capitalist system forces companies to drive down their bottom line, at times forcing them to cut corners if not blatantly transgress against the American people. Not only is this tolerated, buried deep in the American psyche, is a faint admiration for businessmen/women commit such acts.
It was not always this way. For almost a century, from the latter part of the nineteenth century well into the nineteen seventies, there was a vibrant political movement rooted in popular angst against corporations who were seen to be abusing the American people. There were farmers in the heartland who felt permanently relegated to poverty by the shakedowns (there’s that word again) of the railroads and the seemingly arbitrary price-setting of commodities by businessmen out east. There were workers in Urban America who literally put their lives on the line everyday, enduring inhumane conditions and felt they deserved better. As recently as the Vietnam-era, although it engendered plenty of condemnation, there were large numbers of American citizens who felt emboldened to blatantly criticize the military-industrial complex. Today, such critiques amount to treason.
What it comes down to is acceptable and unacceptable varieties of popular rage. Raging against the government feels good. It feels like an American tradition, “what the Founding Fathers would have wanted.” Raging against corporations feels like communism. The result is a populist conservative movement that doesn’t really know what to do with itself. Politicians are cheered on when they rag on NAFTA, but are charged with protecting our free market ideals that inevitably lead one to support free trade. So, we turn on those politicians. Furthermore, we demonize “Apu” and “Pedro” for “taking our jobs.” Never mind that the real Apu and Pedro are just a couple of schmucks just like us, standing in dilapidated housing and listening to the cries of mouths in need of feeding. The government betrayed us, foreign workers robbed us, but when it comes to attacking the corporate leaders who actually ordered the hiring of Pedro and Apu (please note that I use these names ironically) and sent campaign contributions to the politicians who voted for free trade provisions, the chorus grows silent.
This cosmic drama need not be. We could accept the fact that, while we love competition, we are cognizant of its potential ills. We could lay down a few basic ground rules and then allow corporations to compete within that framework. Instead, we are like rape victims who are so mistrustful of the police that we would rather tolerate violation than report the crime. I am not advocating for a communist revolution. I am merely saying that it is possible to be a patriot and still take issue with being mistreated by a private entity. Those entities can even be brought to the table when we discuss how to regulate them. (This of course leaves the issue of enforcing those regulations, which is difficult in the present case given that the Mineral Management Service make the Department of Housing and Urban Development look like a German car company). For now, America will continue to be attacked by assailants we secretly admire.
