MAAS: Master Program in American Studies
  • Home
    • Events
  • Courses
    • Overview 2015-2016
    • General courses 2015-2016 >
      • Methodology of Trans-Atlantic American Studies
      • American History, Politics, Economics I & II
      • American Culture : Regions and Ethnicities
      • U.S. Law and Justice in an International Context
      • Master Thesis
    • Electives 2015-2016 >
      • The American Way of Religion
      • Literary Journalism Across Cultures
      • America and the Challenge of Terrorism
      • Postmemory and Postmodern: Third-Generation Jewish American Trauma Narratives (MA English)
      • European Union Trade Policy (MSc in EU Studies)
      • European Common Agricultural Policy (MSc in EU Studies)
      • European Common Foreign & Security Policy (MSc in EU Studies)
      • Internship
    • Course Schedule 2015-2016
  • Staff
    • Professorial staff >
      • Gert Buelens
      • Philippe Codde
      • John Dick
      • Ken Kennard
      • Rob Kroes
      • Isabelle Meuret
      • David Woolner
  • Housing etc.
  • APPLY
    • Overview
    • Admission requirements
    • Request an application form
    • Additional application materials
    • Submit your complete application
  • FAQ
  • Testimony
  • Links
  • Contact
  • Blog

The Right To Be Stupid!

16/10/2016

0 Comments

 
Public Lecture this Tuesday 18th October at 7pm, the Blandijn in Auditorium C, Ugent
TRUMP v CLINTON - All welcome


It is difficult to put a clear figure on all the money raised and spent to date on the 2016 US Presidential Election because of the complex, opaque and bureaucratic nature of election funding but $1.1 billion would seem a 'conservative' estimate.(That is not taking into account all the 'dark money' that is being illegally spent - don't ask) Considering that around 43 million people in the US rely on food banks, that over half a million citizens are homeless and that around 30 million still do not have any health care cover it is easy to wonder about the wisdom and value of this huge outlay considering it is pouring into the pockets of already wealthy ad and media firms, TV companies, lawyers etc etc Why not use it to feed the hungry, help heal the sick and give shelter as winter approaches? Don't be so simplistic I hear you cry, society just doesn't work like that!

No clearly it does not, but may I ask another simple question, Why are funding records being broken in this Presidential race while the overall federal budget on social welfare is declining? Now I hear you say not only are you being simplistic but ignorant because the funding of welfare programs is public money(tax dollars) and the funding of the presidential race is largely private money. As the federal deficit stands at around $587 billion and the US debt over $19 trillion then clearly there is no money to help support these 'disadvantaged' citizens. Yet I reply, as the top 10% in the US earns over 39 times more than the other 90% couldn't this issue over welfare funding be solved by a relatively small raise in income tax? What! not only are you being simple and ignorant you are now just being plain stupid. The US is a low tax economy in keeping with its understandings of freedom. That means that it is the responsibility of the individual to look after their own welfare and largely not the role of the federal government. But isn't that unfair because if you do belong to these 'disadvantaged' groups how can you improve your overall welfare as well as your families, if you cannot afford to eat, sleep and be healthy? Since, in large part the US is not only low tax its is a low wage economy and that is why the majority of those 'disadvantaged' are actually in paid employment.

Well, the money being spent on the Presidential race is indirectly looking to solve this problem by getting elected a President that can provide for a fairer society. But isn't Trump looking to cut taxes and federal spending while Clinton is suggesting very modest tax raises but also federal spending cuts, so how does that help? OK, in truth what matters is not the Presidential race but the Congressional one since the House and the Senate have most impact on domestic affairs. But don't we already know thanks to the bizarre nature of the US electoral system that after this election the House will continue to be controlled by the Republicans and therefore, the purse strings, and the Senate will most likely go to the Democrats but without the two thirds majority needed to be able for them to do anything meaningful. Therefore, if electing the President doesn't really have any real effect on American society and Congress will stay largely unchanged I go back to my first simple question; why are Americans spending the $1.1 billion on a process that ultimately will provide nothing for large numbers of its citizens? I know, you have already told me, I'm just being stupid!      

Matthew Arnold, English essayist (1822-1888) once observed, Our inequality materializes our upper class, vulgarizes our middle class, brutalizes our lower class.” All very true but of course today it also drives a narrative in the US that demands the 'rightness of the status quo' over the 'simple and ridiculous notion' that the nation's priorities are just plain wrong and need urgent attention. Why? because regardless of which candidate finally limps to the White House this one sided conversation will continue to be delivered by a powerful elite who enjoy the materialisation of inequality, they benefit from this growing space between them and us and in-spite of all their rhetoric, will not change it. Since they have been branded 'wealthy and wise' and therefore,we are considered poor and stupid.

Trump professes to be on the side of the 'victims' of an unfair society as long as your white, male and a 'genuine' American. Clinton professes to be on her side; the middle classes that also been disadvantaged by inequality. Both are part of the powerful elite that have benefited from this unfair economic system. Are we really stupid enough to believe either of them will effect the change necessary to make the welfare of the poor and disenfranchised a priority since most cannot even vote let alone live in the world where both candidates reside?  

KK
 
Public Lecture this Tuesday 18th October at 7pm, the Blandijn in Auditorium C, Ugent
TRUMP v CLINTON - All welcome

 


                
0 Comments

Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Right!

13/10/2016

0 Comments

 
Having watched recently the second live (scrap) debate between Trump and Clinton what stuck me even at 3am is how damaged and therefore, dangerous these two candidates actually are. Moreover, how damaged and destructive US politics has become as this prime time TV non reality show revealed.

In the world we now inhabit image dominates, this provides opportunities for a narcissistic and base view of society. Both candidates in their own style 'successfully' projected just that. Clinton, who seems to becoming more like Angela Merkel every time she appears in public adopted the school mistress approach to her audience. Knowing all, seeing all but how much does she really understand? Apparently, as she observed - trying to illustrate her superiority of thought, not too difficult I might add - 'as the opposition go lower, I go higher' an interesting comment in light of her and Bill's antecedence - Whitewater finances, her impracticable and unreadable health bill, the defence of her husband's abusive behaviour to women, voting for the Iraqi War, her involvement in the (Benghazi) Libyan debacle and the breaking of federal law by deliberately wiping chemically 39k emails from a private server whilst Secretary of State. Where is the high ethical behaviour to be found amongst that 'barrel of cookies'? As Trump triumphantly retorted as he strutted the stage (I paraphrase) 'when I become President I will ask the Attorney General to employ a Special Prosecutor to look into Clinton's affairs... and she will go to Jail'. As Trump announced his 'new-found keenness' for the law it just crossed my mind somewhat playfully that we might all be better off if both candidates spent the next four years in 'the slammer' as opposed to the Oval Office!

The revelations that Trump is a crude, sexist, misogynist was hardly surprising but his taped eleven year old 'locker room' talk did provide some low grade entertainment for many who did not enjoy being lectured to by Mistress Clinton. The fact that Trump's relationship with the truth is a very distant one - I'm being unnaturally generous - just adds to the overall sense that the citizen's of the US are being asked to vote on the basis of who is less disgraceful than the other - the 'say it as you see it' Trump who only cares about Trump or the more prissy Clinton who fears revealing her true self since she clearly does not like what she sees.

As this is supposed to be an academic based blog let me try and rephrase what the choice really amounts too. Does the US vote for a man whose understanding of foreign affairs has more to do with the fairer sex than international diplomacy? Or do they put their 'trust' in a woman whose instinct is to cover up and deflect, moreover, not sharing much at all really because paradoxically she is sure that she knows best? Hence, the conceit, ego and consistent lack of judgement that underpins both Presidential hopefuls makes me wonder why I would want either to be in charge of the most powerful military in the World!  As a European - I know I'm a Brit but please put up with my delusion - my worries also concern our on going reliance on an economic and military security relationship with a nation that is either to be 'overseen' by a real estate agent that does not understand one end of a tax form from another - allegedly - or a 'teacher' that hides her grades just in case someone will discover how inept she actually is?

Who will win this unedifying race to the bottom? Who will march down the Mall in January to the general chorus of 'what have we done? Who will do battle with Congress to see which branch of US governance is less likely to do something/anything as opposed to not? Well, please come to my Public Lecture next Tuesday at 7pm, the Blandijn in Auditorium C, Ugent and all will be revealed! Whoops, sorry for that burst of openness, I nearly forgot that in my lecture I need to closely align myself with the two personalities involved. So shall I pretend I know what I'm talking about when clearly I do not or shall I just cover up and preach to you all with that certain brand of certainty that gets up all our respective noses! No, that is not meant as a description of many academics! Please come, listen and ask any questions you may have since in the 'Reality World of Trump verses Clinton' nothing seems right, nothing seems wrong, its just different!

KK 





   


 

      
   

           

0 Comments

    Author

    Dr J Ken Kennard Professor of Politics and History - Master Program in American Studies - Universiteit Gent

    Archives

    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    March 2015
    November 2014
    September 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.