America’s Stockholm Syndrome

by David Deutsch

Perhaps you have heard of Stockholm Syndrome, which is roughly defined as hostages sympathizing with their captors. The term was coined in the 1970s when gunmen robbed a Stockholm bank and held some employees captive in the vault for six days. Upon emerging the captives publicly sympathized with their captors and even supported their cause, thus giving birth to the name. While many social scientists do not believe the phenomenon is real, it nevertheless accurately describes the United States in late 2010. We seem to be willfully held captive by those who promote policies which are antithetical to our own personal, cultural and national best interests.

Kreditbanken, Norrmalmstorg, Stockholm, Sweden,
birthplace of Stockholm syndrome

We see examples of this every day. The biggest policy argument in Congress revolves around whether or not millionaires and billionaires deserve a tax break while one side throws a temper tantrum at the prospect of extending modest unemployment benefits for people desperate for work. Why should these millionaires and billionaires get a fat tax break, even though they only pay taxes on 15% of their income, while the majority of Americans continue to suffer? Well, say America’s hostages on behalf of their captors, the rich create jobs, of course! (In reality there is zero evidence that tax cuts have ever resulted in significant job creation, but hey, these are just facts.) But never mind about job creation; there is a much more important ideological argument which needs to be made on behalf of the rich. Arguing for a 3% tax hike on the wealthiest Americans, so the story goes, is class warfare! Socialism! Communism! Europeanism! Nazism!

These arguments are so patently ridiculous they are not even worth rebutting. Even if they are rebutted, the same tired old clichés—Class Warfare! Class Envy!—are parroted all over Fox News and CNBC, effectively silencing critics. And yet the Conventional Wisdom in Washington is that we absolutely must cut unemployment benefits as well as Social Security and Medicare while cutting taxes for the ultra rich. (Big surprise, since nearly every U.S. Senator is a millionaire and most members of Congress feed off the troughs of billionaires.)

The argument is completely surreal, but more inexplicable is the deafening silence from the American people. Citizens in other democratic countries would not tolerate this kind of injustice. For instance, British students recently went nuts when their government decided to implement across-the-board tuition hikes, going so far as to physically attack the Royals in protest. Apparently the Labor Party campaigned on no tuition increases, only to flipflop and endorse the deal. If Americans rioted every time a politician or political party flipflopped it would make the Watts riots look like Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.

Compare the American reaction to that of the British. Where is the American outrage? Where are the protestors? Where are the attacks on our Royals? Why are Americans outright supporting the looting of our future for the ultra rich?

For one thing, we lack a national leader to coalesce around. President Obama, for all his intellect and political prowess, is in his heart a compromiser, someone who seeks consensus at all costs, even if it means torching his own reelection prospects and the country as well. (I think when he said he wants to change the way Washington works he was talking about making painful compromises for their own sake, but that’s another story for another article.) Indeed, the only person in full-time outrage mode with any ability to do anything about it is Elizabeth Warren, head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. While this position is much needed, the office is still getting ramped up and remains under vicious attack by entrenched interests trying to scuttle any kind of consumer protections. Say it with me folks: consumer protection is Socialism! Communism! Terrorism! _____ism!

And yet, Americans remain silent, sympathizing with our captors and even rooting for their success, even if it means our personal and national failure.

Nicholas Kristof recently wrote in the New York Times that it was unfair to compare America’s wealth maldistribution to Latin American banana republics—because it was unfair to the Latin countries. Right now, 24% of American wealth is owned by 1% of Americans. This is a staggering figure, one which normally portends social and political instability. But again, anyone who dares discuss this fundamental truth is smeared as a jealous class-warrior who envies the super duper rich and is just too lazy anyway.

It is truly scary to see how far down the rabbit hole we have gone, but I think there is reason for hope in the long run. In my next article, I will discuss a way forward for America and will try to guess what America might look like when—not if—we emerge from this slump.

Comments

No comments.

Comments closed.