Disclaimer: Some postings contain other author's material. All such material is used here for fair use and discussion purposes.

Wednesday, August 5, 2020

The Real Choice: Social Control or Social Investment -by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.
--------------------

The doctrinaire leftist Dr. Reich engages in his typical obfuscation. It very nearly astonishing how perfectly he parrots the leftist narrative. But this is typical for him. He's a "Bernie socialist," and socialists will say just about anything for the purpose of advancing the agenda. This is known as agitprop, and Dr. Reich lays it on thick.
------------------

Some societies center on social control, others on social investment. (Right off the bat Dr. Reich offers a false choice. There are more than two choices.)

Social-control societies put substantial resources into police, prisons, surveillance, immigration enforcement, and the military. Their purpose is to utilize fear, punishment, and violence to divide people and keep the status quo in place — perpetuating the systemic oppression of Black and brown people, and benefiting no one but wealthy elites. (Perhaps unwittingly, Dr. Reich has perfectly described the typical socialist society.)

Social-investment societies put more resources into healthcare, education, affordable housing, jobless benefits, and children. Their purpose is to free people from the risks and anxieties of daily life and give everyone a fair shot at making it. (This innocuous-sounding description betrays a glaring dichotomy. First he states what social-investment societies do. Then he states the purpose, to free people from certain things. 

But the stated purpose does not follow from the description. Putting resources into government programs does not free people from anything, it make them slaves to the whims of government. It ties them financially, not just to the benefits paid, but also by being taxed to fund those programs. It also ties them via their votes to the ones who are "generously" writing the checks. And, it removes personal choice, substituting what someone else thinks is best for them.

Lastly, we would contest the idea that being free from the risks of life is a good thing. Aside from the fact that it isn't possible to remove all risk, it isn't even desirable. Risk is a part of life, it's a way we learn perseverance and character. Humans are built to take on obstacles and become better people for it. By removing risk, Dr. Reich essentially wants people to become docile and soft.)

Donald Trump epitomizes the former. He calls himself the “law and order” president. He even wants to sic the military on Americans protesting horrific police killings. (Perfect agitprop. We doff our hat to him for this textbook example. 

First Dr. Reich creates a misrepresentation of the choice [social control/social investment]. Then he mischaracterizes the nature of each. Now he drops the person he wants to demonize into the equation. And finally, he lies about the nature of that person's actions.

These are not "Americans protesting horrific police killings." These are domestic terrorists looting cities and burning buildings. They are raping, murdering, and destroying. 

But it serves Dr. Reich's rhetorical purpose to represent the situation in this way. Because this article really isn't even about social control vs. social investment. It's a Trump hit piece, designed to ramp up the outrage. That is the purpose. That is always the purpose, to agitate the proletariat to rise up against the bourgeois. 

It's classic socialist tactics.)

He has created an unaccountable army of federal agents who go into cities like Portland, Oregon – without showing their identities – and assault innocent Americans. (Continuing to pile outrage upon outrage with a blatant disregard for the facts, Dr. Reich claims Trump created an army. This is simply false. These federal agents preexist the Trump administration. They are from the DHS, [created in 2002] the Federal Protective Service [created in 1790], Immigration Customs Enforcement [Created in 2002], U.S. Customs and Border Protection [created in 1789], and the U.S. Marshals Service [created in 1789].

Indeed, if these armies of federal agents are so bad, why hasn't the Left put an end to them? They've had ample opportunity.

And, where there are riots there are criminals who are rioting. Just being present at a riot is sufficient. Findlaw says
Per federal code, it's a crime when an individual "travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent" [to]:
  • Incite a riot;
  • Organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or
  • Commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or
  • Aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot.
Therefore, once a legal assembly devolves into a riot, everyone present is participating in an illegal activity. These are not "innocent Americans.")

Trump is the culmination of forty years of increasing social control in the United States and decreasing social investment (Yet we've had all these leftists in power. Why didn't they do something about it? Dr. Reich himself was in the Clinton administration. What did he do about it when he had power?

And of course, "social investment" has not decreased.)

 – a trend which, given the deep-seated history of racism in the United States, falls disproportionately on Black people, indigeneous (sic) people, and people of color. (That is, because of the Left's efforts to make people dependent on government programs, crime is epidemic in those communities, generally people of color, as they are forced to subsistence lives, without hope or a future. Thus the racial make up of criminals gets tilted.)

Spending on policing in the United States has almost tripled, from $42.3 billion in 1977 to $114.5 billion in 2017. (That's an insubstantial annual increase of 4.1%. Again we note the manipulative nature of Dr. Reich's rhetoric.)

America now locks away 2.2 million people in prisons and jails. That’s a 500 percent increase from 40 years ago. (The 1977 number would be 440,000. That represents a 10% increase per year, which seems rather unfortunate. But the US population in 1977 was 220 million and is now 321 million. If we consider population growth, the incarceration rate is much less egregious.)

The nation now has the largest incarcerated population in the world. (Ironic that a leftist is complaining about the result of leftist policies instituted and perpetuated by leftists. Then when a Republican like Trump wants to reduce crime by increasing policing, well, that's just beyond the pale.)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has exploded. More people are now in ICE detention than ever in its history. (Why might that be? Would it be because the Left wants open borders and no policing of immigration? Could it be because they continually send messages to non-citizens to come to America? Could it be that demonizing their opponents as racists and bigots for wanting a secure border has sent a message?)

Total military spending in the U.S. has soared from $437 billion in 2003 to $935.8 billion this fiscal year. (That's a 16.3% growth rate. Government spending was $1.797 trillion in 2003, and is estimated to be $4.79 trillion this year. That was before the stimuli, but we'll leave that out. Stimulus spending increases at 23.8% per year. So military spending is not the problem.)

The more societies spend on social controls, the less they have left for social investment. More police means fewer social services. American taxpayers spend $107.5 billion more on police than on public housing. (Has Dr. Reich ever lived in public housing? Has he even visited public housing? Would anyone who has a choice want to live in public housing?)

More prisons means fewer dollars for education. (False choice.)

In fact, America is now spending more money on prisons than on public schools. Fifteen states now spend $27,000 more per person in prison than they do per student.

As spending on controls has increased, spending on public assistance has shrunk. Fewer people are receiving food stamps. (This is a good thing. Fewer people on food stamps means they are working.)

Outlays for public health have declined. (This is false. We will leave it to the reader to research.)

America can’t even seem to find money to extend unemployment benefits during this pandemic. (The national debt is $24 trillion. There's no money for anything.)

Societies that skimp on social investment end up spending more on social controls that perpetuate violence and oppression. This trend is a deep-seated part of our history. (Correlation is not causation.)

The United States began as a control society. (No, it began as an experiment in self government with few controls.)

Slavery – America’s original sin – depended on the harshest conceivable controls. (There is nothing in the Constitution that creates or controls slavery.)

Jim Crow and redlining continued that legacy.

But in the decades following World War II, the nation began inching toward social investment – the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, and substantial investments in health and education. (Only "health and education" qualify for "social investment." The others are simply laws that created additional restraints on government.)

(We have grown weary correcting Dr. Reich. He just goes on and on, adding lie upon misdirection upon false conclusions. This is classic agitprop.)

Then America swung backward to social control.

Since Richard Nixon declared a “war on drugs,” four times as many people have been arrested for possessing drugs as for selling them.

Of those arrested for possession, half have been charged with possessing cannabis for their own use. Nixon’s strategy had a devastating effect on Black people that is still felt today: a Black person is nearly 4 times more likely to be arrested for cannabis possession than a white person, even though they use it at similar rates.

Bill Clinton put 88,000 additional police on the streets and got Congress to mandate life sentences for people convicted of a felony after two or more prior convictions, including drug offenses.

This so-called “three strikes you’re out” law was replicated by many states, and, yet again, disproportionately impacted Black Americans. In California, for instance, Black people were 12 times more likely than white people to be incarcerated under three-strikes laws, until the state reformed the law in 2012. Clinton also “reformed” welfare into a restrictive program that does little for families in poverty today.

Why did America swing back to social control? Part of the answer has to do with widening inequality. As the middle class collapsed and the ranks of the poor grew, those in power viewed social controls as cheaper than social investment, which would require additional taxes and a massive redistribution of both wealth and power.

Meanwhile, politicians whose power depends on maintaining the status quo, used racism – from Nixon’s “law and order” and Reagan’s “welfare queens” to Trump’s blatantly racist rhetoric – to deflect the anxieties of an increasingly overwhelmed white working class. It’s the same old strategy. So long as racial animosity exists, the poor and working class won’t join together to topple the system that keeps so many Americans in poverty, and Black Americans oppressed.

The last weeks of protests and demonstrations have exposed what’s always been true: social controls are both deadly and unsustainable. They require more and more oppressive means of terrorizing communities and they drain resources that would ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive.

This moment calls on us to relinquish social control and ramp up our commitment to social investment.

It’s time we invest in affordable housing and education, not tear gas, batons, and state-sanctioned murder. It’s time we invest in keeping children fed and out of poverty, not putting their parents behind bars. It’s time to defund the police, and invest in communities. We have no time to waste.

No comments:

Post a Comment