Right now, the United States is being “governed” by a dangerous fool–a madman entirely ignorant of governance, cause and effect, or anything other than his own self-importance. Perilous as the current situation is–and it is–he will be gone, and given his obvious and accelerating decline, probably sooner than later, making it imperative that Americans engage in an important–an essential–debate: what is government for? What are the core responsibilities that markets and individuals and voluntary organizations cannot provide?
In my last few posts, I’ve emphasized that there are two questions pertinent to the operation of governing institutions: what and how–and I’ve explained the importance of the “how.” Today, I want to talk about the “what.”
I think most reasonable people look to government to provide essential infrastructure. There’s broad agreement about its responsibility to build and maintain physical infrastructure. There is far less understanding or agreement about social infrastructure–what is sometimes called the “social safety net.” Ideologues of the Right dismiss efforts to strengthen that social infrastructure by labeling it “socialism” (a label that is supposed to justify a hysterical repudiation of whatever the proposal may be). That response ignores the reality that all first world countries have mixed economies. The issue isn’t whether we should “socialize” certain activities, it is the much harder questions of which ones and why.
Resistance to expansion of America’s social infrastructure– our inadequate social safety net– keeps millions from accessing medical care. It keeps working people impoverished and mothers out of the workforce. It reduces economic mobility and amplifies historic inequities. Ironically, it costs considerably more and delivers much less than is the case in other first-world countries. As researchers have amply documented, the inadequacies of our social infrastructure push numerous problems downstream: Jails and prisons become de facto mental-health providers; emergency rooms substitute for primary care; Police and courts manage crises unrelated to public safety. Our insistence upon limiting “help” via means-testing adds millions in bureaucratic costs.
Despite the claims of “fiscal conservatives,” keeping safety nets inadequate doesn’t save money or eliminate costs—it adds many and reallocates others inefficiently.
And what about the argument that “big” government (i.e. government administering a more capacious safety net) erodes individual liberty?
The new mayor of New York begs to differ. And I agree with him. As Heather Cox Richardson recently reported,
The policies [Mamdani] promised are not simply about lowering costs, he said, but about “the lives we fill with freedom.” For too long, he said, “freedom has belonged only to those who can afford to buy it.” “Here,” he said, “where the language of the New Deal was born, we will return the vast resources of this city to the workers who call it home.”
Mamdani’s speech was a declaration of a new kind of modern politics that focuses on “freedom to” rather than “freedom from.” For decades, the Republican Party has called for dismantling the government, arguing that regulations and taxes were destroying Americans’ freedom from constraints. But for most Americans, government regulation and investments in social welfare like education and infrastructure guarantee freedom to build a life that is not cramped by preventable obstacles, including those imposed by the wealthy and powerful.
The idea of government regulation and a basic social safety net to permit Americans to live their lives to their fullest potential was a key principle of the New Deal launched by Democratic president Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933, and Mamdani was right to note that the New Deal was born in New York City.
A number of political philosophers have argued that liberty is, indeed, “freedom to” rather than “freedom from.” When every day is a struggle for survival, the promise of “freedom” to follow one’s dreams rings pretty hollow.
For a long time, proponents of a minimal state have argued that the absence of social supports results in a system where “merit” allows talented individuals to prosper. If our current government demonstrates anything, it is the idiocy of that assumption. The “captains of industry” who have clawed their way to power are anything but the best and brightest–they are beneficiaries of a social system that elevates some at the expense of others, and they are busy dismantling another important part of our social infrastructure: the rule of law.
When we rid ourselves of the current kakistocracy, we need a national discussion about the nature of liberty and the dimensions–and costs–of our social infrastructure, and what we expect government to do (not to mention what we expect a legitimate government to refrain from doing….)
Very informative and thought-provoking. I have been thinking about what would or could replace the current system; not just replacing MAGA with another ideology, but changing the whole extractive/exploitative economy. This system is failing. I say the sooner the better, but what will rise up to replace it?
“A number of political philosophers have argued that liberty is, indeed, “freedom to” rather than “freedom from.” When every day is a struggle for survival, the promise of “freedom” to follow one’s dreams rings pretty hollow.”
Simply getting through our day-to-day lives is now governed by electronic devises we need to be educated to use and the cost for the power to use them is escalating daily. We are being blocked from performing the simplest tasks quickly and manually; the lack of cashiers in businesses and being forced to stand in long lines as customers go through the self-checkouts, scamming as many articles as possible, with sometimes one employee policing 5-6 customers at once adds to the rising cost of all products.
The current government has fired thousands of employees; leaving few to perform the work of this nation or, as South African immigrant Musk did, hiring college students to do the firing and unqualified to replace them to perform the work. All the while rounding up, or killing, immigrants and American citizens to deport; and don’t forget those who are in hiding who did the manual labor for low wages and physical work is not getting done, leaving us without decent food or lack of products as costs continue rising.
In the 1960s or 1970s Alan Watts warned us “Man is going to computerize himself out of existence.” That time is here and now and all computerized products and personal information about the owners or users, can be found stored in iCloud for those such as Edward Snowden with the ability to hack to destroy or make our most intimate lives public and available for the current Fascist government to use or abuse.
PROGRESS DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN IMPROVEMENT! It does however always means PROFIT for those with the knowledge to access the information electronically.
“What Is Government For?…” I believed until this past year it was to protect America and Americans. Silly me!
In less complex terms, reducing/eliminating government regulations and taxes is just part of the grift of unregulated capitalism. Even the fascist Henry Ford figured it out that if his workers made enough money, they could afford to buy one of the cars they helped build. DUH!
Not today. Today’s capitalists/fascists want ALL the money and the workers be damned. Thing is this is still a consumer economy. When the consumers have little or no money, they don’t buy the products and services that make the capitalists rich. Credit makes the banks richer by the interest they charge. When the borrower is bankrupt, they don’t make any money either. DUH – squared.
Sick or imprisoned people aren’t productive and don’t produce goods and services. DUH – cubed.
Read FDR’s “Second Bill of Rights” when it was part of his last state of the union message. It might sound a little different from the one we’ll hear in February.
James asks, “What will rise up to replace it?”
Well, according to Marx, we would be at the late stages of capitalism, where there are two paths we can go: 1) Fascism, and 2) Socialism.
I’d argue we’ve been a fascist society since Bill Clinton, but probably even before that. Eisenhower warned us about the deep state running the government. It is more prevalent and less secret. Mamdani will give us an introduction to socialism, and all the rich cats want to move out. They also want to leave California because of the proposed billionaire tax, and the governor supports the billionaires. Imagine that!
I read an article yesterday from Mark Wauk, and he shared a quote by DT from a NYT’s interview where he said, “My own morality. My mind is the only thing that can stop me. I don’t need international law. I’m not trying to harm people.”
He’s almost 80 years old, and he thinks his morality comes from his mind. So, his internal arguments are between the Devil and the Devil.
That. Explains. Everything.
The fact that he can’t understand how many people he has harmed in his life, and during his presidency, is evidence that he’s a sociopath without a conscience.
And, DT, is exactly the kind of person the laws are meant to protect society from, yet our court of the supremes granted him immunity to murder anyone around the world without restraint.
We don’t have to guess what DT is anymore because he told us with his own twisted words. And, Peter Thiel thinks Greta Thunberg is the Anti-Christ!
#wrong #its #trump
‘’Emergency rooms substitute for primary care”
There has been a steady decrease in public hospitals over decades (currently 18-22%).
The winners have been for-profit and non-profit hospitals. Research showed the there is no difference in the level of indigent care provided between the two categories.
One in 6 hospitals are “non-profit” Catholic.
Women in their reproductive years would be wise to choose a hospital carefully.
Of course, when there is no choice to choose a public hospital…
Todd, “The fact that he can’t understand how many people he has harmed in his life, and during his presidency, is evidence that he’s a sociopath without a conscience.” We have not needed such evidence, although it is clearly correct, for a long time. The man is a Malignant Narcissist, as i’ve pointed out, here, numerous times. The quote you offer is very telling, but not news.
He has neither any idea, nor any concern, about who he hurts. I do not think that the original MN, Hitler, stayed up nights bothered by empathy, or concerns either.
Mamdani should be able to provide a positive lesson in real socialism, and caring for one another within our deeply interrelated society; one in which we all thrive if the full spectrum thereof thrives.
“I’m because we are.”
A map that shows which states have the most Catholic hospital beds is available.
The map is included with a report, “Catholic hospitals receive nearly$48 bil. of taxpayer dollars yearly…while seeking expansion of government permission to use religious doctrine to restrict care.” 2-8-2020, Community Catalyst, “Bigger and Bigger: the growth of Catholic health systems.” The report summary is worth reading
Women are 13 times more likely to die from complications of pregnancy than from abortions.
Care to speculate about how many men would make the decision that the Catholic Church demands of women? Would the men choose the continuation of fetus growth ( viable or not) over his responsibility to live in order to provide
for his existing children?
Controlling women’s sexuality is the goal for abortion opposition. Full stop.
A good, thought-provoking post, Sheila.
Vernon – just a reminder, because Ford, like Trump, had a desire to rewrite history. Ford’s pay increase was in response to sky-high turnover. New hires would start in the morning and never return from lunch due to the conditions in the factory and of assembly line work in general. Later, he realized, and bragged about, the fact that the higher salary allowed his workers to be able to afford the cars that they were building. He also may have been afraid of having to break down and hire some of those European immigrants who might have had evil ideas — like labor unions.
Sorry, since I ordinarily love your comments – I just have a think about Henry “the bigot” Ford.
If you visit Greenfield Village in Dearborn, MI, you will see a recreation of a plantation, complete with slave quarters. All the innovation and invention displayed was built on the labor of others, certainly not Ford’s own. He was a white supremacist, a fascist in every sense of the word. Yet, he is almost always portrayed as an American hero, driving prosperity for the common folk when in fact he did it to continue to enrich himself. He knew that his success and wealth depended on the sweat and toil of those he could exploit and control.
As I come up to the 62nd anniversary of our wedding, looking back on all that we lived through and accomplished for ourselves, our children and theirs, watching it melt away in a year, with barely a whimper of protest by a huge swath of fellow countrymen and women, some, in fact, actively cheering it on, I am disheartened and saddened by how easy it is. All of those we lost in wars against such ideology, the potential for good they sacrificed everything for, for what? For a madman to succeed, abetted by grifters and opportunists with no moral or ethical basis, calling themselves Christian in arrogance and mockery of what that religion espouses.
Our Founders were right to put in place foundational restrictions to government actions. Unfortunately, those restrictions have no enforcement when those in power ignore the law. Those who facilitate that overreach are true criminals but when there is no means of accountability, the law means only what they say it means. SCOTUS is a joke, corrupt in its majority, compromised and unethical.
When we finally are forced to face reality, it may be too late. Bread and circus continue to placate and distract.
I refuse to give up. I am old and without any real power to change but will never surrender who I am at the core.
RESIST. In any way you can.
SUGGESTION: Sheila, may I make a humble suggeston to you, inspired by your subject for the day today: What is government for?
As we approach the 1st anniversary of the current administration’s inauguration, might it be possible for you to add another line of inquiry to your list of topics for comment? How about doing some pro-active thinking together about what the Democratic Party should actually do for the last two years of Trump’s term, in the event that they actually do take control of one or both houses of Congress?
Everything that they would adopt will of course be vetoed. That goes without saying. So what do they DO…? What power, besides the power to investigate legislative topics and call in witnesses, would they actually have to make a difference? And how should they use it??
Len,
Thanks for the correction and supplemental comments to my rant. I believe that Hitler had a picture of Henry Ford in the chancellory too. Brothers of the bond. And didn’t Ford also provide enough impetus for the UAW to start?
As a student of WW II history, Henry Ford also had the largest factory under one roof built at Willow Run, Michigan where B-24s (and some B-17s) were built. He had to build barracks for the workers to man this semi-rural factory, but they HAD to be segregated as the white workers simply wouldn’t work with black men or women. That unionized “strike” brought in the Feds, of course. After all, there was a war on. Nonetheless, both black and white workers grudgingly toiled together as the factory ended up churning out a bomber an hour at its peak.
Our original sin still rears its head and screams at America as we refuse to rid ourselves of the idiocy and stupidity of it all. Today’s MAGA/Republican morons are just the latest version of the cultural imperative of racism that we’ll never seem to recover from no matter what.
Gaurav Mukherjee, UConn Law, “If religious organizations can run public schools while claiming exemption from Constitutional norms, that logic could extend across other privatized domains, from foster care to emergency housing. The result would upend long standing balances between religious liberty and civil rights in publicly funded systems,” Aug. 2025.
Al Rider,
Making a suggestion-
It’s easier to win a battle in the local arena than the national.
More than 30 states have set the stage for or, are allowing religious organizations to run public schools. Often, the initiation and passage of school choice law is spearheaded by the Catholic sect, including the bishops political arm, Catholic Conferences.
Do whatever you can to fight against it, join an organization in your state that is pushing back, make voters aware of the origin of school choice propaganda,
contact as many people as you can and don’t step back when they attempt to deflect by saying all of the religious sects are equal in terms of political power, when they disingenuously say that back in the day, there was discrimination against Catholics and, thirdly, when they claim it’s not the majority of politicized White Catholics who are responsible for the country moving away from civil rights, instead point them to the evidence.
On Jan. 20, political rallies are expected across the country. 50501 has details about locations.