How a British liberal views the American right in general and George Bush in particular. Fear and distrust of America is not limited to Moslems and Arabs.
Published on Sunday, November 5, 2000 in the Observer of London
Nightmare On Pennsylvania Avenue
by Will Hutton
We speak the same language, watch their films and have fought and died together. Most of us feel we know
America well. But the time has come to be wary of our century-long ally. The world's hegemonic power has been
becoming more isolationist and self-interested ever since the Cold War ended, but if George Bush becomes
President it could become genuinely nasty.
As British Euroscepticism reaches more hysterical and irrational peaks, the real story of our times has gone largely
unregarded. The superstate whose ambitions menace our sovereignty and frames our policy choices is not the
European Union - it is the USA.
The range of American influence is already intense and growing. It was American investment banks which wanted
to put the London Stock Exchange up for sale to Frankfurt. Our enfeebled film industry depends on distribution
through American-owned cinema chains. Our research scientists register their patents at the US Patent Office. Our
drug companies seek the approval of the US Federal Drug Administration. Our academics make their intellectual
mark by being published in American journals refereed by American professors around American benchmarks and
objectives.
Our politicians look to America for their policies - William Hague 'denationalising compassion' as he attacks the
welfare state or Gordon Brown building a social policy around tax credits are both overtly borrowing from
Republicans and Democrats alike. And the American companies buying up our leading firms bring with them the
same expectation about how to lobby and how to union-bust as they do at home, generating copycat British
political lobbying firms and copycat legal experts adept at bending employment law.
This is an American capitalism much harsher and more profit-seeking than ever before. It is creating a society in
which everything - even votes - is increasingly up for sale. We think America is the same friend it has always been,
but it is changing for the worse.
Those with doubts should take a look at the US's relations with the rest of the world. The international framework in
which the British operate is firmly run from Washington, and President Clinton has chosen not to challenge a tide in
which the assertion of 'America first' is becoming ever more aggressive - and which Bush is pledged to intensify.
If you are worried about global warming and climate change, then beware Bush; he will have no truck with any
international treaty limiting the emission of American carbon dioxide. Debt relief for the poorest countries? Forget it.
The establishment of an international criminal court? Baying for the Moon. Even American support for the United
Nations, IMF and World Bank - flawed as they are - should not be taken for granted. Bush, for all his homespun
affability, is bad news.
He personifies the new business-led American ideology. He portrays Washington and the Federal government as
evil, business and the private sector as virtuous. He has no truck with those who worry about the decline of public
debate, public spirit or the common interest. Bush's heroes are those of American conservative mythology; the
god-fearing, gun-owning, male small farmer or small businessman who is rugged and self-reliant. His 'compassion'
does not stretch to spending hard cash on alleviating poverty or promoting educational opportunity. That would be
unAmerican.
Bush and the coalition of the Business Roundtable, National Rifle Association (NRA) and Christian Right which
supports him are indifferent to the gross inequalities that disfigure American life; the mushrooming of millions of
'gated' communities at the top and the harsh insecurity at the bottom. Nor do they worry about environmental
despoilation of their country, the violence in their cities or the gross commercialisation that intrudes into every
avenue of American endeavour. Rather, they would advance inequality with across-the-board tax cuts that favour
the rich, entrench gun ownership, weaken what is left of universal medical and pension provision, and cut
corporate interests free of what little regulation remains. It is sheer poison.
The depths to which Bush and the Republicans have sunk is their mendacious approach to the impact of money
on American politics. This will be the most expensive presidential election campaign ever. Total political advertising
expenditure, including soft money, is estimated to be more than $1 billion. And the business givers - the
investment banks which demand more financial deregulation, the NRA which wants no change to the gun-control
laws, the drug companies opposed to prescription drugs, the oil companies which want to drill in the protected
wilderness and so on - all want to buy private advantage at the expense of public interest.
In this, the Democrats, however business-friendly they try to be, will always be outspent by the Republicans. The
trick is to evade the formal laws on campaign finance by enlisting interest groups to advertise on your behalf, which
as long as their adverts do not mention 'vote for' or 'elect', is deemed as soft money - and legal. In the last four
weeks, the Republicans and their networks have outspent the Democrats two to one, literally trying to buy the
election.
It makes a mockery of democracy, as both Bill Bradley and John McCain - challenging for the nomination of the
Democrat and Republican parties - argued in the primaries. But while Al Gore is pledged to attempt some reform of
campaign finance, Bush is unapologetic. The state should not stand in the way of those who want to give money
to politics.
It is an indifference to the public domain and accompanying celebration of the private that is uniquely American -
and which has deep roots in the experience of the early settlers and the expansion west. Extending citizenship
rights beyond the narrow domain established by the eighteenth-century constitution and into the social and
economic realm has always been fiercely contested by the American Right as 'unAmerican'.
Yet the paradox is that Bush's challenge comes as a growing mass of ordinary Americans are ever more
concerned about the harshness of their capitalism, the decline of their politics and the illiberality of much social
policy. Religious attendance is falling as is support for capital punishment. There is no fall-away in the support for
international engagement. Support for gun control mounts. There is no especial demand for more tax cuts; rather,
there is a recognition, as in Britain, that necessary public goods have to be paid for.
Without his stunning war chest or the 'integrity' issue after Lewinsky, Bush would be in trouble. But if he wins, or
even narrowly loses on Tuesday, his campaign stands as a warning. Beware the powerful American Right - they
menace us all. Left-of-centre British Eurosceptics please note.
© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2000
### |
