Parochialism on the Hill

Last August, an agreement was made to create a bipartisan “super-committee” of 12 legislators, charged with agreeing on a formula to gradually reduce the debt and national deficit of the United States. Radical conservatives derailed efforts to achieve compromise amendments. This month we have been informed of the failure, the consequences of which have pained the world. Stock market activity has been tainted with red numbers across the board, though there will be some respite with Thanksgiving Day and the consumerism of Black Friday, mitigating the return of the phantom that is the global recession.

The predominance of parochialism in the U.S. has never come at a more inopportune moment. Turbulence in Europe and Asia demanded intervention by reliable leadership, capable of controlling universal uncertainty. Confusion in the euro zone, aggravated by the absence of respectable leaders, is triggering regional and national reactions, which are contributing to the atmosphere of anxiety. In the old world, there is no expectation in sight of a new era being constructed in the West. So there was hope that the U.S. would re-emerge, strengthened by its technological innovation, military power and existing industrial base.

Instead, what it confirmed is that politicians are blinded by immediate patronage, obsessed with election results. Their mediocrity blinds them from recognizing that there were well-founded global expectations, by which one could assume a universal attitude and an ambitious vision, leaving behind the fear of profound reforms. “Go big, Mr. Obama” was the title of Thomas Friedman’s editorial in The New York Times, in which he discusses a president who prefers to follow a re-election campaign than to rock the boat and scrutinize the actors that drove the intransigent conservatism that broke the equilibrium of the 12 members of the super-committee. While some failed to recognize that reducing the deficit could not be postponed, others failed to recognize that this could be achieved by introducing social programs, rather than scrapping them. Meanwhile, the liberals exaggerated their plans to raise taxes with their ideological viciousness. The sheer senselessness at both extremes inevitably led to the beginning of collapse.

The postponement of decision-making suggests that in 2013, a budget cut of 1.2 billion dollars will be made without delay, indiscriminately affecting public spending, the military budget and national security, resulting in a loss of equilibrium that is so essential in an ever more unpredictable international reality. This shock therapy will have lethal effects on the economies of both the EU and the wider world. The deficit would be reduced suddenly rather than gradually, generating an inevitable contraction of the most powerful economy on the planet.

The progress that we have witnessed by contenders for the Republican nomination only confirms our worst fears. They are establishing the basis for a localist debate, without contemplating the United States’ position as the central actor for global recovery. The ramblings on international topics have confirmed their disdain for such matters — even when it comes to national security. Inadmissible and aberrant geographical errors seem to be made deliberately in order to capture the sympathies of a localist electorate that demands employment and indicators of rational consumerism. In short, the recovery of that distant “American way of life” that was the object of global envy for decades.

Along this same trajectory, we can expect a turbulent 2012 election year on both sides of the border. Harsh exchanges and defamatory remarks may abound. The Republican perception that Democrats will not be able to ignore border security, migration, organized crime and terrorism will inevitably see a response in our presidential campaigns. Adjustments to the economic decline will drastically affect neighboring Mexico. The interrelation is undeniable, something which we frequently try to downplay. Let us be realistic and accept that in the entropy and self-absorption of Americans, there are no viable considerations for the rest of the planet. It seems clear that it will be an electoral process both ideologically driven and polarizing. We must be wary of Fate.