Opium of the Masses

Extremist Christian Talibinists aside, today’s true opium of the masses is the Industrial Entertainment Complex. This encompasses Hollywood films, television, videogames, and sports.

Believe me, I’m as much a child of pop culture and a consumer of entertainment as the next person. But when one considers the amount of money made and spent on these industries, and the amount of time devoted to such pursuits by consumers, it certainly calls into question American priorities and values.

I am writing this the day of the New England Patriots – New York Giants football game, as the Pats attempt to go 16–0. Although I’m interested in the outcome, I was amazed by the amount of exhaustive coverage the game has been receiving, similar to the kind of all-day coverage of the SuperBowl and the Academy Awards.

I went through a phase several seasons ago where I followed pro football. I always was content to simply watch the games and track what was going on through the sports section. But I always thought that the coverage the games received on gameday was ridiculous, obvious, and overkills, with subscriber-only channels and services for the truly sports-obsessed.

I similarly stopped watching the Oscars for the same reasons. In view of the SAG Awards, the Director’s Guild Awardes, the Golden Globes, etc ., there has been for me a saturation of award shows±basically a place for Hollywood to self-promote and to pat themselves on the back.

It’s a larger reflection of the fact that we’re a celebrity-obsessed culture. Athletes and top tier entertainers get paid way more than what they do merits—but as much as people complain about it, these out-of-kilter paydays are the result of a society that constantly craves to be diverted and entertained. I’m sure that’s to the relief of an Administration that prefers a disengaged public that doesn’t ask questions and wants to be able to fight terror and wage wars without being asked to pay new taxes or make any inconvenient sacrifices.

The China Century

U.S. policy has become obsessed with terrorist threats and the so-called Axis of Evil. While terrorist threats certainly need to be taken seriously, the Administration’s shrill approach and flat-out incompetency—and its use of the fear card—have played into terrorists’ hands by giving what is a rather fragmented, disorganized movement more credence and attention than it deserves. Designing virtually our entire foreign policy and its attendant resources around the fear of a terrorist attack seems to be a case of the tail wagging the dog, which in turn has seriously affected American prestige and its international standing.

Given somewhat less attention has been the quiet ascendancy of China, which probably poses the only true “threat” to American hegemony. In anticipation of this, many people have already dubbed this century “The China Century.”

China has made no secret of its desire to advance itself among the community of nations. To its credit, after surveying the international landscape and recognizing that the primary source of global power today is economic strength, the Chinese have for the most part eschewed a classic geopolitical, colonial and militaristic approach and instead identified economic, educational, and technological mastery as the key to prosperity and respect. While it certainly remains a Communist state, its met with great success in developing a market-style economy and has shown little interest in developing a geopolitical sphere of influence (unlike, say, the newly assertive, petro-dollar-driven Russia).

China is well on its way to achieving its goals. Although many of its political, social and legal institutions lag behind and remain the main threat to fully achieving its goals, it is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Its hunger for resources already has made it one of the largest donor nations in Africa and South America (and unlike the West, China provides funding with no strings attached, whereas Western nations tie human rights issues to funding). The Chinese have benefited greatly from sending its students and scientists abroad for legitimate study and training (primarily in the U.S.), and have a growing professional, middle class that is educated and increasingly proud of its country’s recent strides. Its middle class is projected to become the largest in the world by around 2025, and most ordinary Chinese feel a renewed sense of national pride and are understandably optimistic about the future.

Recognizing the importance of Sino-U.S. relations and trade, the U.S. has generally tried to play nice with China. At the same time, it has rightly raised serious concerns about its environmental records, its economic policies that often are at the expense of the U.S., and its human rights and political institution.

By the same token, it seems a bit disingenuous and hypocritical, however, to fault China for acting out of economic self-interest or to hold it to some higher standard. The U.S.’s growth to international prominence in the 19th and 20th century is marked by plenty of disregard for workers’ rights and the environment, and benefited a definite robber baron class. It’s arguable that the U.S might not even have become an economic powerhouse without these abuses; fortunately, the work of unions, anti-trust policies, and other such activities “corrected” these abuses in the long term. In view of this, one must wonder whether it’s just to hold another country to the same high standard while it makes the leap from an agrarian and basic industrial economy to a 21st century high tech one.

Obviously, the U.S. needs to act out of its own best interests as well, which understandably includes protecting its own place as the world’s premier superpower. However, we also need to wake up to the fact that, given China’s booming economy, its growing middle class, and its clear ambitions, it’s very possible that China may become the economic and technological engine for the world, the world’s tastemakers, and the largest consumer class that drives everything else. How this will benefit, or hurt, the U.S., remains to be seen; and, as a reporter for National Public Radio recently reported after a visit to China, there certainly are people who don’t wish the Chinese well, I suspect both for xenophobic and chauvinistic reasons. But it will be difficult to hold China back. And relative to the other threats that exist in the world, it would be prudent for the U.S. to develop a good partnership with an ascendant fellow economic superpower that is relatively benign compared to the kind of very real geophysical and national security threats that pose serious problems the U.S. around the world.

Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

I’ve been meaning for awhile to post about the latest brand of despots who’ve emerged in recent years, chief among them Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez. (North Korea’s Kim Jung Il is defiantly old school and in a kooky class by himself.) Like many of the tyrants who’ve emerged over the centuries (particularly the 20th), they’ve used the guise of nationalism to consolidate power. And like many of their predecessors, they initially rise to power under legitimate means, usually by election.

In some ways, my feeling is that these countries get what they deserve--while I recognize that there usually isn’t often much choice, and it may be a matter of voting for the devil you know, by the same token, it’s hard for me to be sympathetic to an electorate that votes wholly for nationalistic or tribal reasons. While I certainly can’t pretend to understand the thinking of your average Third World citizen, given the lessons of history, I can’t believe these electorates actually don’t know what their voting for.

Chavez, in particular, appears to be the most transparent and a real live cannon. Emboldened by petro dollars (like Putin), he likes to throw his weight around and so obviously craves personal power.

So I must say it was quite a delight to watch Chavez get slapped down by the Valenzuelan people in the recent elections which would have, among other things, extended the President’s term of office and done away with term limits, essentially making him president for life.

It appears the honeymoon is over. Even many of Chavez’s supporters saw through transparent attempts to consolidate control and make the state more authoritarian. More importantly, however, the emptiness of Chavez’s rhetoric is beginning to show through. Despite the nation’s oil wealth and the largesse he has shown throughout the region to buy friends, little of that appears to have trickled down. While Chavez does provide handouts to the poorest in the country who constitute his largest supporters, he has done nothing to create opportunities or economic growth that would truly lift the masses and the country. And, apparently, crime in the country remains rampant, partly it is reported because Chavez is reluctant to move on those areas from where his strongest support comes. And, of course, his family and cronies have benefited greatly from his presidency.

Mark my words, like all good lunatic dictators, Chavez will pursue some other extra-constitutional way to achieve his authoritarian goals. Whether the Venezuelan people have the will and the unity to stand up to him when that day comes remains to be seen. But at least Chavez is now weakened and the opposition has been emboldened.