|
That seems to be a common refrain from my friends over on the right-hand side of the political spectrum. But is the size of "government" that is really at the heart of the problem?
Don't we feel disenfranchised from a government that we look at as not the collective "us", but rather something seperate?
Aren't we, the poor and middle-class of this country, really tired of a government that we percieve does not work or represent in our behalf?
I think an argument could be made that merely reducing the size of our government, while being a feel-good reaction, would serve to increase our feelings of disenfranchisement from those that govern. That less regulatory oversight protecting our food, water, air, and civil rights would be disastrous.
We could have as small of government as we want but if it remains a government that represents the special interests of the monied few, if it remains a government set on lining the pockets of wealthy corporate interest with our tax dollars, if it remains a government that places the shareholder's dollar ahead of the health of it's own citizens then the problem will remain.
From my perspective it isn't the size of government that is at issue but rather the type of government we have. One that is engaged and responsive to the needs of the majority (the poor and the middle-class) or one that is in the pockets of the "too big to fail" monopolies that dominate our social/economic/political reality here in the USA.
---
|