Change, Hot Potatoes and Accountability

As the battle for the presidency rages on, candidates turn to the polls in search of a message that will resonate with the American people. What these politicians, political correspondents, and pollsters have found is a feeling that no one can definitively describe, yet can be perceived as a desire rising from a nation unsure of its direction.

"Change" is the message Americans are responding to, yet what does change mean in a nation whose imperial agenda has, for so long, been integrated into the political landscape?

Americans turn to political parties to provide gregarious statesmen who offer promises of better days, implying that the best could be behind us.

With a failed foreign policy, an energy crisis in the form of dependency on foreign oil, a nation in fear of a housing market that has all but imploded, one of the western world’s worst health care systems, a currency (which once enjoyed premier status) that is plummeting in value, and a nation quickly falling behind in a globalized world, one cannot help but believe that the damage from the last fifty years has created an atmosphere where upward progress seems out of the question.

Yet out of the darkness come politicians who promise they can fix the problem. From "Yes we can" to "Experience making change," Democrats toss around promises and catchy phrases as though they are hot potatoes, hoping to warm the hearts of the American voters.

What is missing from the conversation, however, is the accountability this country so desperately needs.

Nearly all the candidates signed on to bills approving government spending in support of the Iraq war. What is generally not understood is how that money is being spent. Those in Congress – liberal and conservative alike – wrap the flag around every weapons system and claim that the funds go directly to the troops in the field. The reality is that this money is fueling business competition for contracts between very large corporations with vested interests in a continued military buildup. Aside from campaign contributions, politicians benefit twofold as money spent on the war effort is given back into the system to create and maintain jobs for constituents in their respective states.

It is no coincidence that the B1 bomber has a part made in every state of the union, so if at any point the program were to be phased out even the most liberal members of Congress would fervently oppose the change. Those voting for further military spending are doing so because it is in their best interest, meaning it helps them to retain their seats.

Lost jobs equate to lost votes, lost votes means the possibility of a lost election.

What we have is a self-sustaining body of government with a vested interest in continued foreign military conflict. President Dwight Eisenhower called this unseen, unelected body of government the military-industrial complex.

Since Eisenhower’s presidency, every American president and member of Congress and Senate, regardless of party affiliation, has been directly involved or supported military operations throughout the world. Every politician has benefited from this nation’s addiction to defense spending.

What does this mean for the American way of life, you ask?

Defense spending vastly overshadows our investment in our youth’s education, our country’s health care, shelter for the homeless, public transportation, and medical care for the mentally ill. We as a nation have spent more money on defense than all other members of NATO combined. Under the cloak of fear, we as a nation have watched as the western democratic world surpassed us in nearly every aspect of life by investing in social programs. We Americans have become complacent, arrogant, and ignorant to the world around us and blind to the disparity and cries for reform from within.

Those looking to make true change are those that aim to change the direction of the country entirely and it begins with the reallocation of funds and government control.

Too long have corporate interests and padded pockets determined the direction of this country.

Change must come from an electorate that demands it within government. If it is our conviction that this government is "of the people, for the people," it is our duty to change ourselves to a nation in a constant state of vigilance.

As we make our way to voting booths across the nation in these upcoming months, we would do well to remember the past we’ve so eagerly chosen to forget. American foreign policy has reshaped the world (for better and, more often than not, for worse) and has inadvertently determined the path in which this great nation has walked at home.

Too long have we remained silent while our government speaks and acts on our behalf, making choices that directly affect the future of its constituents.