Public policy is based far too often on emotion-driven reactions, which is no more self-evident in the wake of tragic events like the Paris Terrorist Attacks. Panic, fear, and anger are very powerful emotions that blind people to the necessary cold calculations of fact, logic, and strategy. Unfortunately, it is when people are most vulnerable that political figures use emotions to further their political agendas and careers by manipulating public policy to their benefit.
The Paris Terrorist Attacks, Syrian Refugee Crisis, and the Ukraine Crisis reveal the weaknesses of European leadership when it comes to addressing unsavory foreign policy and national security issues. The blunt truth is that European leaders have failed on these and other fundamental responsibilities of governance. The impulses of American politicians and global influencers in general are no better. Saving face, these politicians simply shift blame onto others or react to distract from their failures, which is a dangerous cocktail when it comes to public policy.
Comments
The Paris Terrorist Attacks have once again galvanized the West against the Islamic State and the threat of globalized terrorism. Unlike in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the rhetoric recognizes the need to balance national security interests with civil liberties. The problem is that people do not seem to understand what this means while we are still lacking the basic conversation needed to determine what balance might look like.
Balance is needed, so we do not solve one problem by creating even more problems. For civil liberties advocates, balance means preventing national security overreach by establishing boundaries. For national security advocates, balance tends to mean removing barriers for investigators. Unfortunately, a superficial understanding of balance allows advocates to disarm valid criticism by simply saying there is a need to for balance without taking any meaningful steps to find an actual balance. The Paris terrorist attacks of November left the City of Lights sounding a lot more like Bagdad than a European metropolis. Between the coordinated kidnappings, shootings, and bombings, those living in the birthplace of democracy probably felt more like those living in the Middle East. Moving away from grandiose 9/11-sytle terrorist attacks designed to give Al Qaeda political legitimacy, the shifting threat of globalized terrorism appears to be focusing more on multiple, small-scale attacks of opportunity. Because terrorist attacks of this kind are easier to pursue, terrorist attacks could become more common, which threatens public safety and civil liberties.
Events like the Paris terrorist attacks are solely designed to instill fear and drive chaos that terrorists can use to force their view onto others. Humans feel particularly vulnerable and grow increasingly desperate to the point they make irrational decisions if they are unable retreat to a “safe haven” when threatened. Terrorists who can strike anywhere at any time are very effective at creating panic and provoking self-destructive reactions, i.e. bad policies, to their actions, because they are able to destroy the security of the community. “Peak Oil” is the concept that eventually helped usher in the 1973 Energy Crisis. As economic forces and political efforts to preserve domestic petroleum supplies left the US reliant on foreign oil, OPEC nations suddenly discovered they had influence over the world’s largest economy. In turn, the wealth and power of Middle Eastern governments grew with their nations’ oil revenue.
Where reaching peak oil production was something feared by Westerners in the 1970’s, predications that the world has surpassed so-called peak demand for oil should provoke Russian and OPEC governments to prepare for a future where oil no longer sustains their monopoly on power within their own territories and regions. Social Security spending hit a new high in Fiscal Year 2015. For every person receiving Social Security and disability benefits, there were only about two people working full-time. The increased spending levels translate to about $7749 per full-time employee, or nearly 15% of the median income.
The growing spending gap may result from an aging workforce and insufficient full-time employment opportunities, but cost saving measures, raising the cap on taxable earnings, a higher retirement age for non-labor workers, converting the program to a need-based insurance plan, and others steps can be taken to address the higher costs of Social Security. The real problems, however, are the National Debt and growing income inequality. |
Read old posts
April 2020
|