Sunday, February 26, 2012

The Price of Power


    After our recent class discussion regarding political campaigns and, more specifically, super PACs, I left with the feeling that our country's democracy favors the rich far more than it should. I was particularly appalled to hear that Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina primary election after a flood of donations to the super PAC that was supporting his campaign. This was the first proof I had heard of a direct correlation between the amount of money thrown at a political campaign and its success, and that just didn't sit right with me. Surely, in a nation where anyone can become president regardless of their social or economic background, the better candidate should triumph over the wealthier, worse candidate, right?
    Then I noticed this picture (shown above) on the cover of a January edition of the Chicago Reader and I realized the true extent to which America's capitalist ideals have permeated our political system.
    The focal point of the picture is the sign being held up by a patriotic pumpkin person which reads "Need $$$ to buy a Congressman," followed by the words "Please Help!" I felt that this really mirrored the sentiments expressed during our class discussion, especially the idea that political power is bought rather than earned in this country (at least earned separately from a paycheck). The poor pumpkin-faced figure feels that the only way to have his voice heard in our democracy is to pay a congressman to speak for him, similar to how many ultra-rich businessmen and politicians contribute millions of dollars to super PACs in order to have their ideas present in Washington or to put a candidate whom they believe in into the White House.
    The idea that those with the most money in this country have the most influence over our political landscape is a scary thing, especially when you consider the implications of such a power structure on the rest of the nation, the people without enough money to compete in a race where wealth wins votes. In such a race, the "99%" characterized by the Occupy Movement wouldn't really have any say at all in the direction of our government and our democracy would no longer be a democracy but a plutocracy (yes, I looked up "plutocracy" on Wikipedia). In such a race, the relatively poor senator Barack Obama, a man from remarkably humble beginnings, would have had no chance of winning presidency over the far richer senator John McCain. To me, this is not at all what America stands for, though I am fascinated by how our capitalistic democracy has produced something so wholly un-democratic.
    But what can we do? How did our country get to this point? These are the questions that were brought to my mind while writing this post and I hope that you have some thoughts on them after reading it. If you do, please feel free to leave a comment below.

1 comment:

  1. What if elections were funded by the government? See http://rootstrikers.org/

    Nice idea to bring an image into this post, Marsh. I wonder if you can predict who the Republican nominee for president will be based solely on cash?

    ReplyDelete