Wednesday, November 7, 2012

What’s Wrong With You, Europe?

by Madeleine Kando

Why are you not more excited about Obama’s re-election? Are you that self-centered that you only look at what the American presidency means to Euro-American relations? Why are you not as excited as I am about America’s narrow escape from a fall into the abyss of a Romney/Ryan/Ayn Rand world?

Are you taking your own social-democratic privileges that much for granted that you don’t see how huge this victory is for America?Here is a sample of what a Romney America would have looked like: The Dodd Frank Act (regulation of Wall Street) would have been repealed. We might have seen an overturn of Roe v. Wade, declaring abortion illegal throughout the land. We more than likely would have seen the dismantling of Obamacare. Funding for clean energy would have been vastly reduced. Potential appointment of extra conservative judges. An across the board 20% tax cut, meaning that the rich would have gotten a lot richer.

During the presidential debates, Romney accused Obama of trying to turn America into Europe. It was meant as Euro bashing but you should regard it as a compliment. You can thank your lucky stars that Romney has now disappeared from the political scene. There will be many who will want to step in his shoes, but for now we have been spared a fate worse than death.

Don’t pretend that you are not a living a little vicariously. When America votes, the world watches. The glitz and glamour, the obscene amount of money spent on the campaign must be fascinating to watch, like the Bread and Circus games during Roman times. If you were a bit more in tune, you would realize that the average American is trying to make things work within a pretty screwed up election framework.

The winner take all two-party system makes for quite a spectacle. Somehow it works in such a big country. The best gesture of solidarity that I have found was in an American-themed restaurant in Paris. As millions of voters were lining up at the ballot box here, the restaurant was holding a poll of its own. It was inviting diners to choose their favorite candidate by ordering an “Obama burger” or a “Romney omelet.” The Romney omelet was advertised as ‘sans rien’, (plain omelet, i.e. nothing inside). That is a very apt analogy to the real Romney. I know what I would have ordered. Unfortunately, they never did make the result of their polling public.

So I do not agree with your papers when they say that ‘Whoever takes the White House in the next four years, it’s all the same for Europe’. It does and should matter to Europe. 

leave comment here

4 comments:

drtaxsacto said...

Madeline- Your characterizations of what would have happened in a Romney victory are fanciful but I think mistaken.

I think it is also important to understand the inherent wisdom of the US electoral system. Indeed, we spend a lot of money and indeed, it is designed to be complex - both in terms of who can get elected and how they get elected. Parliamentary systems have their own problems including cycling of issues. And at some times lurching to odd drummers - Edmund Burke pointed that out in his Reflections on the Revolution in France. One need not look far into many members of the European Community to see the risks of proportional representation in a diverse society. It may be easier when the country is homogeneous (See Federalist #10 - for understanding how to deal with factions) but it is tougher when you have a country as large and complex as the US.

Gene said...

extra special earnest talk

Tom Kando said...

To Jonathan:

Regarding the pros and cons of proportional representation:

I have been on both sides of this issue. Just a couple of years ago, I was still defending the electoral college in a letter to the Sacramento Bee. Recently, I reviewed David Deutsch’s book, The Beginning of Infinity (see http://www.ijwp.org/, Sept. 2012 issue).

In this brilliant book, Deutsch argues, along with Karl Popper, that a plurality system such as the electoral college has a better chance in combating bad government than does a proportional system.

Okay.

Nevertheless, I find a proportional and direct system more logical and more democratic. For example, I have always been puzzled by the persistence of bicameralism in most Western democracies, in most of our states, in fact in most of the world.

Upper Houses are a vestige of the past, going all the way back to ancient Rome, where the Senate represented the Patricians and a second legislative body of some sort had to be created for the “New Men,” the Plebeians. England’s House of Lords, France’s and America’s Senates, and all the other upper houses around the world merely represent the old elites’ resistance to full democracy.

I don’t know what the argument is against unicameralism - just ONE legislative body, ONE parliament, ONE chamber. No duplication, no waste of taxpayers money. Simple, direct democracy.

So what I am saying is: Don’t just abolish the electoral college. Abolish the Senate as well. It is undemocratic. (And by the way, Jonathan, at this point, this would benefit your side, since you guys are in control of the lower house!)

Chen said...

Dear Tom and Madeleine

A heartfelt Congratulations for the reelection of Obama.

Don't blame the Europeans for being so ego-centered on their own interests in relation with America. The Chinese and the Japanese are all wondering "what will happen to us in the coming 4 years?" The Chinese are expecting more US pressure on their currency and in the defense field. The Japanese are worried that America will be more interested in China than in Japan.... Besides, the Europeans have reason to wonder how much focus the Asian-born US president will still keep on Europe.

Thank you for your continued sending of your interesting blog which keeps me informed about what the reasonable and common-sensed part of America is up to all these years.

In case you forgot, I am the former French diplomat in charge of Press and Communication in Los Angeles (1997-2001) and then in San Francisco (2001-2004). We had exchanged many emails during the height of Bush's War on Iraq when I was the only French diplomat on the Northwest Coast defending France's Freedom Fries position against the thousands of angry American patriots who wanted to bomb France after Bagdad and who wanted to get rid of the Statue of Liberty. I wonder what they are thinking now that no weapon of mass destruction was found in Iraq.

After SFO, I was back to Paris before being assigned to Singapore (2006-2009) and then to Beijing, China (2009 to May 2012). I retired in May 2012 after being awarded, on President Sarkozy's decision, the medal of Chevalier (Knight) in the National Order of Merit.

Since retirement, I have settled down with my wife in Japan, in a mountain chalet at 1500m altitude and 250 km from Tokyo. This remote settlement does not mean that I have cut myself off from civilization. With the Internet, I am still fully connected to world affairs and I have started writing regular Op-Ed comments on international affairs in several newspapers.

I am still following the political situation in and around the US and I hope to have more opportunities to exchange information with you.
Keep up the good job !

Best regards.

Post a Comment

Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!