There was a really excellent piece in the Washington Post on August 20, 2011 by Alexander Keyssar about the complete unraveling of the social contract in America. Keysser taught at Brandeis and now teaches at Cambridge. Keyssar posits that the American social contract consisted of three important components -- 1) the regulation of business to stop the excesses of capitalism that threatened the safety and stability of society; 2) the allowance for workers to organize in order to demand a greater share of the pie created by capitalism; and 3) social insurance to alleviate the hardships that could not be addressed in the marketplace or workplace. He argues in this article that all three of these pillars of the social contract, which have been under attack for decades, are now seriously threatened. Moreover, he points out that things like the Citizens United decision, the Republican pushed voter ID laws, and the attacks on the 17th Amendment and the direct election of senators, constitute an attack on democracy itself. A world in which this social contract is destroyed and the electoral means to rectify it made difficult, if not impossible, is not a world in which I am anxious to live.
I suppose this is inspired by my ongoing comments in the piece I posted at J.O.B. on my impressions of the French Medical System as opposed to America's non system. One series of comments I posed and I elaborate on here was:
"Why is it important to you that Perry -- and the majority of Republican Presidential candidates in the last two election cycles -- claim to be willing to consider creationism and evolution equivalent?" Here is my stab at it. I think it is important that politicians attempt to undertake policies that have an empirical basis indicating their efficacy. I would not want to elect someone who believes that the National Institutes of Health should promote "bleeding" or "hot cupping" as a means for treating illness nor someone who believes that the alleged grant of dominion over the birds of the air and the fish in the sea in the Bible means we should indiscriminately slaughter animals to the point of extinction. Nor do I want to elect someone who has no sense of the scientific method or other evidence-based modes of thinking. And I sure as hell don't want to elect someone who thinks that the abstinence-only approach to sex education and family planning works.
Yes, why is Perry taken seriously as a candidate after the 8 years of George Bush Jr.? Is he being foisted upon us as The Bilderberg Conspiracy Candidate? Is that why he is suddenly the darling of Wall Street Corporations Are People too contributions?
Is this why Perry seems to be able to say anything and get away with it? Can America afford to elect a self admitted theocrat with a connection to the New Apostolic Reformation Dominionist Pentacostalist Group?
Here's a video by Think Progress that goes a long way towards debunking some of the myths that the ignorant are fed about Perry. Here's some real truth: