Libertarian think-tank Cascade Policy institute ( http://www.cascadepolicy.org/) "leads the way locally in confronting smart growth myths and presenting alternative policy solutions." (Italics ours)
In contrast to community-based democratic planning, the Institute's alternative solutions rely on property rights, and market incentives. Their response to land governance seems to advocate decentralizing, thus breaking up the power local democracies use to plan the future of their land and resources to the benefit of all.
Cascade Policy's stand on unbridled "laze faire" capitalism, and their statement of principles illustrates that even the thinly-enforced, loosely defined environmental protections still in effect are too much for this hard-right think-tank.
With statements like:
"Over the last three decades America has increasingly looked to the federal government to protect the environment. Yet laws such as the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, Superfund, and The Endangered Species Act have proven costly and disappointingly ineffective." CPI clearly demonstrates their intent to rob us of our few hard won gains.
CPI's president and CEO published the following classics:
Free Market Environmentalism: Not an Oxymoron
Wheels to Wealth: Why Low-Income Workers Need Cars, Not Transit
Save the World, Ignore Global Warming
These are just a few examples of CPI's efforts to normalize the hard rights conspiracy to privatize our common resources. Their efforts stem from a bipolar worldview of America's political landscape. CPI's president John A. Charles, Jr. marks himself as the vanguard of this mentality with statements like:
"Distribution of power is the central issue of how we organize ourselves. There are two basic ways to approach this: one is to centralize power in government (creating a Political Society), and the other is to disperse power among individuals (known as Civil Society)."
( http://www.cascadepolicy.org/pdf/misc/irrelevancy.htm)
Statements like this purposefully disregard the democratic heritage of this country. Purposefully disregard the vote, and civil rights inherent in every human being. Civil rights intended to be expressed in a political, and societal commons. Not separate, but equal ideas. Guess it's all in a day work at the "think tank."
On one hand this organization calls itself libertarian and speaks as if it is a front against "big government." On the other hand, this organization stands in solidarity with the forces of privatization spearheaded mainly by internationalist world government, and capitalism's elite. On the frontlines of this effort is an organization called the WTO. The WTO seeks reform nation's laws to make them consistent with an international standard or practice of privatized "free" trade. The WTO and its related organization the World Bank use strong arm loans, and international threats of organized economic sanctions to force countries into compliance with their un-elected, anti-democratic world government.
International law is international "government" and these "libertarians" do nothing to stand against it! Rather, they're known to do "favors" for money.
Recently libertarians ran a $100,000 Enron-funded campaign to keep "Portland's" General Electric private. The people of Portland need to ask our selves:
What do we stand for:
-Wars to rob whole nations of the people's resources?
-Do we stand for artificially high gas prices?
-Rolling blackouts?
-Do we stand for medicine priced beyond measure?
-Privatized WATER?
-PGE/Enron Park anyone?
Or do we stand against privatization, and the WTO's minions?
|
The trouble is, most grassroots "Libertarians" uncritically accept the fantasies of Libertarian politics, like the idea that you can be anti-imperialist without taking into any account the forces within capitalism itself that drive imperialism. They think that "big government" is the only force that can threaten freedom, without ever taking into account that our society is split into social classes, and that government in a capitalist society becomes a creature of economic elites.
The ideology of groups like Cascadia Policy Institute is truly obnoxious. But I don't know what the best way of confronting it is, without making them look like martyrs to "politically correct bullies" here in "ultraleftwing Portland." The irony is that Portland is one of the few cities in this country that remains slightly resistant to the kind of crap they are peddling, in a society that is otherwise almost totally dominated by rightwing extremist ideologies like theirs. This crap goes over so well precisely because it is so pseudo-populist, and wraps itself up in this pseudo-antiestablishment ("anti big-government") chic, so successfully that even many leftleaning people end up buying into it.
Noam Chomsky once said that subscribing to an unreflective, kneejerk "anti-big-government" rhetoric or ideology is like advocating that we tear down the bars of a cage we are trapped in, while there is a tiger right outside it ready to devour us. In short, it's basically suicidal. It's a whole lot more prudent in the short-term to work out ways to increase our maneuvering room -- enlarge the size of the cage -- until we can figure out how to turn the tables in the long-term (put the "tiger" back in the cage where WE are currently stuck, instead of the other way around). The "tiger" here is the "free market," and the elite rule that it creates.
Also, you are exactly right when you point out that the idolatrous glorification of the "free market" so much worshipped by groups like CPI directly undermines the possibility of real participatory self-government (aka, "democracy"). By consistently deriding any efforts at community self-determination as "meddlesome" and "big government" -- such as the strong support in places like Multnomah County for regional planning and urban growth boundaries -- CPI shows its contempt for democratic self-government. Groups like CPI don't want ordinary people to use the one political instrument at their disposal for controlling their own destinies -- participation in local and regional electoral government. They don't want people to ever come together and make any kind of collective decisions about the future at all -- certainly not if this results in any diminishment of the profit potential for participants in the "free market."
Instead, by the rules of their ideology, we must never demand that the future of our society be determined by anything but the anonymous, mindless, amoral forces of "the market," in which human beings are reduced to reptilian "consumers," responsible to no one but themselves and their own atomized, narcissistic, hyperindividualist urges.
So I'm troubled by the prospect of making these guys look like martyrs by using strongarm tactics against them. But I'm heartened that you are making the connections that really need to be made. If nothing else, maybe this can help people on the left, especially people who subscribe to vaguely "anarchist" political ideologies, re-evaluate their stance towards "government." Because when we study very carefully and analytically about things, we discover that kneejerk "antigovernment" rhetoric plays right into the hands of the rightwing. Whereas the truth of the matter is that there are good government programs (protecting endangered species, or enforcing workplace safety rules) and bad ones (dropping bombs on Iraq, or throwing millions of people in prison on petty drug charges).