More stories

  • in

    Judge blocks Elon Musk’s Doge from accessing social security records

    A federal judge on Thursday blocked Elon Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) from accessing social security records as part of its hunt under Donald Trump for fraud and waste, calling the effort a “fishing expedition”.Judge Ellen Hollander granted a temporary restraining order that prevents Social Security Administration (SSA) workers from allowing Doge to have access to records that contain personally identifiable information.Musk, the world’s richest man and a huge political backer of Trump, has been tasked by the US president with slashing costs and employees at the federal government: a mission that has caused chaos and disruption across the US amid mass firings and huge numbers of government projects and contracts being canceled.The Trump administration says Doge has a 10-person team of federal employees at the SSA, seven of whom have been granted read-only access to agency systems or personally identifiable information.The lawsuit challenging Doge’s access to sensitive records was brought in February by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the Alliance for Retired Americans and the American Federation of Teachers.Attorneys for the government argued the Doge access did not deviate significantly from normal practices inside the agency, where employees are routinely allowed to search its databases. But attorneys for the plaintiffs called the access unprecedented.In her ruling Hollander also instructed Doge to “disgorge and delete” any non-anonymized data it has obtained from the SSA since Trump took office, and said the agency cannot install or access any software in social security systems.Social security payments are a lifeline for millions of elderly Americans across the country and any effort to cut back the system is widely seen as a political minefield. However, Musk has claimed the system – without providing much convincing evidence – is rife with fraud. More

  • in

    Democrats train fire on Musk as unelected billionaire dips in popularity

    For most of the 17-minute interview, Elon Musk stuck to a script. He was just a tech guy on a mission to “eliminate waste and fraud” from government.His slash-and-burn cost-cutting crusade was making “good progress actually”, he told the Fox Business commentator Larry Kudlow on Monday, despite sparking a backlash that has reverberated far beyond Washington.“Really, I just don’t want America to go bankrupt,” he said.But then Kudlow asked Musk to look forward. Would the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) still be in place in a year? He thought so – his assignment wasn’t quite complete. Musk, the world’s richest man, then pointed to social security, a widely popular federal program that provides monthly benefits to retirees and people with disabilities, and other social safety net programs: “Most of the federal spending is entitlements. That’s the big one to eliminate.”For weeks, Donald Trump and Republicans have insisted that social security, Medicaid or Medicare would not “be touched”. Now Musk was suggesting the programs would be a primary target. Almost as soon as the words left his mouth, Democrats pounced.“The average social security recipient in this country receives $65 a day. They have to survive on $65 a day. But you want to take a chainsaw to social security, when Elon Musk and his tens of billions of dollars of government contracts essentially makes at least $8m a day from the taxpayers,” Hakeem Jeffries, the US House minority leader, said in a floor speech the following day. “If you want to uncover waste, fraud or abuse, start there.”As the second Trump era comes into focus, Democrats have found a new villain: an “unelected billionaire” whose bravado – and sinking popularity – they believe may offer their party a path out of the political wilderness.“There’s nowhere in America where it is popular to cut disease research, to gut Medicaid and to turn off social security,” said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist. “So it’s hard to see a place where what Musk is doing for Trump doesn’t become an albatross for Republicans.”The White House has championed Doge’s work while reiterating that Trump would “protect” social security and other entitlement programs. Musk did not respond to a request for comment.The Social Security Administration , which serves more than 70 million Americans, has announced plans to reduce its workforce by more than 10% and close dozens of offices nationwide as part of Doge’s federal overhaul. Officials with the group have been installed at the agency since early last month.Despite mounting criticism of Musk, the president has embraced his beleaguered ally, who spent close to $300m helping elect him to the White House. This week, Trump hailed Musk as a “patriot” as he showcased Teslas from the south lawn of the White House. The president selected a red sedan, hoping to boost the electric car company, which has suffered a sharp decline in sales and stock prices since its chief executive launched his Doge operation. The White House has said that if conflicts of interest arise, “Elon will excuse himself from those contracts”.But Musk and his chainsaw-wielding approach to downsizing government is playing a starring role in early Democratic ads and fundraising appeals. Progressive activists have staged “nobody elected Elon” protests across the country while other groups are targeting Tesla showrooms and dealerships. On a “fighting oligarchy” tour across the country, Senator Bernie Sanders pointed to Musk’s growing political influence as a central threat to American democracy.“Most American people, they can’t name us. They don’t know who Chuck Schumer is, but they do know what this administration and Elon Musk and the GOP are planning for them,” Katherine Clark, the House minority whip, said on Friday. “It’s why you’re seeing this uproar in town halls.”While Democrats have much to say about Musk, they are less sure of how to stop him.Many of Doge’s actions have been halted or stopped in the courts. This week two federal judges ordered government agencies to rehire tens of thousands of probationary employees who were fired as part of Doge’s purge of the federal workforce.Locked out of power in Washington, Democrats are under enormous pressure to use any leverage they have to block Trump and Musk. A Republican-authored bill to fund federal agencies through September and avert a shutdown fiercely divided Democrats this week. House Democrats and progressive activists erupted in anger at Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, who ultimately relented and helped pass the measure rather than risk a funding lapse and, in his words, give Musk and Doge an opportunity to “exploit the crisis for maximum destruction”.Public polling underlines Democrats’ interest in Musk. A new CNN survey found that just 35% of Americans held a positive view of the billionaire Trump adviser, a full 10 percentage points lower than the president. The poll also found that he is notably better known and more unpopular than the vice-president, JD Vance.More than six in 10 Americans said Musk had neither the right experience nor the judgment to carry out a unilateral overhaul of the federal government, though views broke sharply along partisan lines. Roughly the same share said they were worried the reductions would go “too far”, resulting in the loss of critical government programs.A survey conducted by the left-leaning Navigator Research polling firm late last month found that views of Doge as a standalone cost-cutting initiative were marginally favorable, in line with other polls that have found Americans are broadly supportive of its stated mission to root out waste and improve efficiency. But there are signs Americans don’t like the approach or implementation so far.When the effort was framed as “Elon Musk’s Doge”, views turned sharply more negative. The poll also captured the far-reaching impact of the cuts: 20% say they or someone they know has lost access to a federal service, 19% say they or someone they know has lost access to a federal grant, and 17% say they or someone they know has quit or been laid off from a federal government job.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Musk is the face of everything that people are worried about in the Trump administration,” Ferguson said, adding: “To a lot of people, putting Elon Musk in charge of protecting the middle class is like putting Jeffrey Dahmer in charge of protecting a morgue.”Democrats believe Musk’s comments on entitlement programs are particularly potent – the world’s wealthiest man advocating for steep cuts to programs designed to help retirees and vulnerable Americans.In the Fox Business interview, Musk claimed the programs were rife with waste and fraud, suggesting as much as $600bn to $700bn – or nearly a quarter of their budget – could to be cut. Federal watchdogs have long identified improper spending as a problem, but Musk’s figure exceeds their estimates.Musk has derided social security as “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time”. As evidence of widespread fraud, Musk repeated a debunked theory, favored by Trump, that social security benefits are being paid to dead centenarians. The head of the agency has rejected the premise. Democrats have warned that Trump and Musk were using false or exaggerated claims of fraud as a “prelude” to slash the program or privatize it, as many conservatives have long desired.After Musk’s comments aired, the White House swiftly issued a “fact check” insisting that Musk had only advocated for eliminating waste and highlighted several occasions in which Trump has vowed to protect Americans’ benefits.Republicans also rushed to clarify Musk’s comments. “Look, Elon Musk is a brainiac with an IQ that I cannot even fathom. He is not a master of artful language,” Mark Alford, a Republican representative of Missouri, said on CNN. “We are not going to eliminate social security, Medicare and Medicaid. That’s sheer nonsense.”It was a rare break with Musk, whom Republicans have been loath to cross, well aware that he not only has the president’s full support and ear but a fortune to squash any dissent within the ranks. During Trump’s address to Congress earlier this month, Republicans gave Musk a standing ovation as the president heaped praise on his work. They publicly warn that Democrats oppose Musk’s fraud-and-waste removal efforts at their own political peril.Yet there are signs that Republicans are beginning to worry. Despite Trump’s close alliance with Musk, even he seemed to indicate it was time to rein him in. “We say the ‘scalpel’ rather than the ‘hatchet’,” the president wrote in a social media post.House Republicans have reportedly been advised not to hold in-person town halls after several widely publicized confrontations with constituents furious over loss of government jobs and services. At the few meetings that did take place this weekend, constituents confronted Republican members of Congress with their concerns about possible cuts to social security.Republicans are weighing deep cuts to entitlement programs as a way to offset the cost of extending Trump’s sweeping tax cuts aimed largely at the wealthy. Trump has praised the House plan.“The Republican party at this point has wrapped both arms around the third rail and is holding on as the electricity flows,” said Ben Wikler, the chair of the Democratic party in Wisconsin, where a contest next month will provide an early test of the party’s anti-Musk strategy.On Thursday night, Wikler hosted a People v Musk grassroots event to discuss the billionaire’s impact on the 1 April state supreme court race, which will determine the balance of power between conservative and liberal justices on Wisconsin’s highest bench. Musk has spent millions of dollars through his America Pac in an effort to tip the scales in favor of Brad Schimel, a county judge and former Republican attorney general. Democrats are supporting Susan Crawford, a county judge and former attorney for Planned Parenthood.Wikler said Musk’s ascendancy in Washington – and his influence in the race – has turned liberal voters in the state from “concerned to panicked to outraged with the heat of 1,000 suns”.“If Susan Crawford wins this race, and Musk and Schimel lose,” he said, “then that will be a big bat signal in the sky to Democrats everywhere that fighting back is not only the right thing to do, it’s good politics.” More

  • in

    ‘Resist’ shirts and ‘a little disturbance’: key takeaways from Trump’s Congress speech

    Donald Trump delivered a divisive, falsehood-laden speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, touting the successes of his first weeks back in office even as his tariff policies have rattled global markets and his criticism of Ukraine has stoked backlash among European allies.Addressing lawmakers for roughly an hour and a half in the longest such speech to a joint session, the president’s sweeping proclamations and biting attacks on Joe Biden prompted many Democrats to walk out of the House chamber as Republicans offered Trump one standing ovation after another.Here are the key takeaways from Trump’s address to Congress:1. Democrats voiced their discontent, with one House member even being removed from the chamberAs Trump kicked off his speech, he boasted about his electoral victory over Kamala Harris in November, describing his win as “a mandate like has not been seen in many decades”. Trump won the popular vote by 1.5 points last year, whereas Biden won it by 4.5 points in 2020. Trump’s electoral college vote count of 312 surpassed Biden’s vote count of 306 in 2020, but Barack Obama secured 332 electoral votes in 2012.Trump’s comment struck a nerve with with Representative Al Green, a Democrat of Texas, who began shouting at the president. “You don’t have a mandate,” waving his cane as he spoke.The Republican speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, then warned Green to “uphold and maintain decorum”. When Green continued shouting, Johnson instructed the sergeant at arms to remove him from the chamber.More Democrats voluntarily walked out of Trump’s speech as it went on, with some of them wearing black shirts bearing the word “resist”. Others displayed panels that read “false” and “save Medicaid” as Trump spoke.2. Trump doubled down on his divisive agenda and mocked BidenEchoing some of his most controversial rhetoric on the campaign trail, Trump warned about the dangers of “transgender ideology” and declared: “Our country will be woke no longer.”Trump repeatedly attacked his predecessor, labeling Joe Biden “the worst president in American history”. When Trump spotted Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat of Massachusetts, in the crowd, he again deployed his derogatory nickname of “Pocahontas” against her.Trump also applauded the work of Elon Musk and his so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), even as the billionaire’s efforts have sparked protests across the country amid layoffs of federal workers.“He’s working very hard. He didn’t need this. He didn’t need this,” Trump said of Musk. Pointing to Democrats in the audience, Trump added: “Everybody here, even this side, appreciates it. I believe they just don’t want to admit that.”3. Trump downplayed the risks of his tariffs despite warning signs in the marketsOne of the most noteworthy moments came when the president defended his trade agenda, just hours after Canada and China announced retaliatory measures after Trump moved forward with heightened tariffs against the two countries and Mexico.“Tariffs are about making America rich again and making America great again, and it’s happening, and it will happen rather quickly,” Trump said. “There’ll be a little disturbance, but we’re OK with that.”Trump’s escalating trade war has already contributed to wiping out all of the gains since election day for the S&P 500, and US retail giants have warned consumers to brace for price hikes because of the tariffs on Mexican imports.4. Trump called for an end to the war in Ukraine after his spat with ZelenskyyJust days after he and the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, exchanged heated barbs in the Oval Office, Trump reiterated his desire to bring about an end to the war.Trump said he received a letter from Zelenskyy earlier on Tuesday, which seemed to align with the Ukrainian leader’s public statement that he and his team “stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts”.“I appreciate that he sent this letter,” Trump said. “Simultaneously we’ve had serious discussions with Russia and have received strong signals that they are ready for peace.”5. Trump repeated thoroughly debunked claimsTrump shared claims about the economy, social security and foreign assistance that have already been fact-checked and found to be false.The president claimed to have inherited “an economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare” from the Biden administration. When Biden left office in January, inflation had fallen steeply from its peak in June 2022, and real gross domestic product consistently exceeded expectations in 2023 and 2024.Trump also repeated Musk’s incorrect claims that millions of dead Americans continue to receive social security benefits, pointing to the fact that at least one alleged recipient appeared to be 150 years old. But that data point reflects a well known flaw in the social security administration’s system in that it does not accurately track death records. A 2015 report found that only 13 people who had reached the age of 112 were receiving social security payments.6. Trump called for repealing a bipartisan bill signed by BidenRepublicans offered Trump repeated standing ovations throughout his address, even as the president called for repealing a bill that a number of them supported.“Your Chips Act is a horrible, horrible thing,” Trump said. “You should get rid of the Chip[s] Act, and whatever is leftover, Mr Speaker, you should use it to reduce debt or any other reason you want to,” Trump said.Signed into law by Biden in 2022, the Chips and Science Act has spurred investment in new semiconductor manufacturing sites in the US, and the bill was supported by 17 Senate Republicans and 24 House Republicans. And yet, Johnson and fellow Republicans still stood to applaud the suggestion. More

  • in

    Trump administration lays off most probationary staff and warns big cuts to come

    The Trump administration on Thursday intensified its sweeping efforts to shrink the size of the federal workforce, the country’s largest employer, by ordering agencies to lay off nearly all probationary employees who had not yet gained civil service protection – potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of workers.In addition, workers at some agencies were warned that large workplace cuts would be coming.The Department of Veterans Affairs, which provides healthcare for veterans, reported on Thursday evening that it had laid off more than 1,000 probationary workers. The US Forest Service was set to fire more than 3,000.The decision on probationary workers, who generally have less than a year on the job, came from the office of personnel management (OPM), which serves as a human resources department for the federal government. The notification was confirmed by a person familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.It’s expected to be the first step in sweeping layoffs. Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday that told agency leaders to plan for “large-scale reductions in force”.Elon Musk, whom the president has given wide leeway to slash government spending with his so-called “department of government efficiency”, called on Thursday for the elimination of whole agencies.“I think we do need to delete entire agencies as opposed to leave a lot of them behind,” Musk said via a video call to the world governments summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. “If we don’t remove the roots of the weed, then it’s easy for the weed to grow back.”Paul Light, an expert on the federal government and professor emeritus of public service at New York University, said it seemed like the administration was “inventing new methods for destroying government capacity”.“You’re basically harassing your own workforce at the end of the day,” he said. “You’re undermining the engine that you want to run.”Layoffs are unlikely to yield significant deficit savings. When the congressional budget office looked at the issue, it found the government spent $271bn annually compensating civilian federal workers, with about 60% of that total going to workers employed by the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.The government could, in theory, have cut all those workers and still run a deficit of more than $1tn that would continue to grow as tax revenues are needed to keep up with the growing costs of social security and Medicare.Thursday’s order was an expansion of previous directions from OPM, which told agencies earlier this week that probationary employees should be fired if they weren’t meeting high standards. It’s not clear how many workers are currently in a probationary period. According to government data maintained by OPM, as of March 2024, 220,000 workers had less than a year on the job – the most recent data available.The firing of probationary employees began earlier this week and has included Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Department of Education workers.At least 39 were fired from the education department on Wednesday, according to a union that represents agency workers, including civil rights workers, special education specialists and student aid officials.The layoffs also hit Department of Veterans Affairs researchers working on cancer treatment, opioid addiction, prosthetics and burn pit exposure, US senator Patty Murray, a Democrat, said on Thursday.“I’m hearing from longtime VA researchers in my home state of Washington who are right now being told to immediately stop their research and pack their bags,” Murray said in a statement, “not because their work isn’t desperately needed, but because Trump and Elon have decided to fire these researchers on a whim.”Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), a group that defends government workers, said the agriculture department’s food safety and inspection service would be hit especially hard by the laying off of probationary employees because it has trouble recruiting inspectors required to be present at all times at most slaughterhouses.“Firing any probationary employees would be a big kick in the gut to those that do very grueling and difficult work,” Peer’s executive director, Tim Whitehouse, said. “It would make our food system less safe and cause consumer confidence in the safety of our food supply to dip.”The civilian federal workforce, not including military personnel and postal workers, is made up of about 2.4 million people. While about 20% of the workers are in Washington DC and the neighboring states of Maryland and Virginia, more than 80% live outside the Capitol region.Trump’s initial attempt to downsize the workforce was the deferred resignation program, commonly described as a buyout, which offered to pay people until 30 September if they agreed to quit. The White House said 75,000 people signed up, and a federal judge cleared a legal roadblock for the program on Wednesday.However, the number of workers who took the offer was less than the administration’s target, and Trump has made it clear he would take further steps.Employees at the National Science Foundation and the housing and urban development department were told this week that large reductions – in some cases a halving of the workforce – would be coming, according to a person familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it.The National Science Foundation was told to expect a 25% to 50% reduction in force within two months, while the housing and urban development department was told to plan for a 50% reduction, the person said.Employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration were also bracing on Thursday for reductions in their workforce.The order Trump signed on Tuesday stipulated that government functions not required by law would be prioritized for cuts and hiring would be restricted. With exceptions for functions such as public safety, only one employee can be added for every four that leave. In addition, new hires would generally need the approval from a representative of Doge, expanding the influence of Musk’s team.Trump, speaking to reporters later at the White House, praised Musk’s work to slash federal spending.“We’re looking for waste, fraud and abuse,” he said. “That’s what Elon is working so hard on.”Trump has also been sharply critical of federal workers, especially those who want to keep working remotely, though his administration is simultaneously working to cut federal office space and ordering the termination of worksite leases throughout the government.“Nobody is gonna work from home,” Trump said on Monday. “They are gonna be going out, they’re gonna play tennis, they’re gonna play golf, they’re gonna do a lot of things. They’re not working.” More

  • in

    The Problem of Food Security in America’s Consumer Society

    Since the beginning of the 21st century and, more particularly, since September 11, 2001, the notion of security in the West has turned around the idea of terrorism and, more particularly, Muslim terrorism. During its first term, George W. Bush’s administration categorically refused the CIA’s findings identifying white supremacy as by far the most significant threat to national security. Bush forced the agency’s experts to put Muslim terrorism at the top of the list, despite all evidence to the contrary. Bush needed a reason to call himself a “wartime president.”

    Organized violence, such as the threat of war or terrorism, is not the only threat to security — or even the most significant. Today’s pandemic provides a dramatic example of a threat to security with an impact as great as war.

    Poverty has always been an unrecognized security threat. In a capitalist society, we have all been taught that poverty is inevitable because some people have failed to take advantage of the opportunities civilization offers them. Poverty represents some people’s failure to exercise their freedom to succeed. For some, it may be due to unmerited misfortune. But for most, it is explained as their own moral failings or their incapacity to rise to the challenge. That is why that wonderful activity we call charity exists. Because poverty is seen as an inevitable consequence of our wonderful system of economic organization, it is dismissed as a security threat.

    As past history has shown, poverty and famine have often led to revolt. But in this age of technology, those who might fear revolt take comfort from the sophistication of the technology that now exists to repress it. Pitchforks simply cannot rival armored Humvees operated by the security state.

    Who’s to Blame for a Tanking Economy?

    READ MORE

    Nevertheless, poverty has other ways of destabilizing societies whose elites believe their way of life represents the ideal of order and good behavior. The Trump years have vindicated the CIA’s traditional analysis identifying white supremacy as the most obvious threat to domestic security. Republicans like to characterize the essentially peaceful protests of Black Lives Matter as threatening, but they have clearly retained a character of protest rather than revolt. No one knows how the white supremacists currently refusing Trump’s electoral defeat may react when he is definitively dislodged in January.

    US culture has always minimized the reality of poverty, which now has a new face. Living in squalor in the inner city is one thing. But now more and more “respectable” Americans simply don’t have enough to eat. And at the end of this month, millions will discover they won’t be able to pay their arrears on rent. Already, millions can’t afford their daily bread. Some struggle to even bury their dead.

    The Associated Press quotes a report that lists some startling numbers: “In four states — Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama and Louisiana — more than 1 in 5 residents are expected to be food insecure by year’s end, meaning they won’t have money or resources to put food on the table.” Some states are more affected than others: “Nevada, a tourist mecca whose hotel, casino and restaurant industries were battered by the pandemic, is projected to vault from 20th place in 2018 to 5th place this year in food insecurity, according to a report from Feeding America.”

    Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

    Food insecurity:

    The inability to feed a significant portion of the population, a condition that theoretically disappeared after the agricultural revolution of the 20th century, but which has become endemic principally in the United States in the 21st century due to the acceptance of its dogma that wealth inequality is the vocation of a dynamic modern society.

    Contextual Note

    The media present the idea of food insecurity as a problem for individuals and their families, not as a social problem. And yet the queues of cars waiting for hours for handouts bear comparison with the image of soup lines we associate with the Great Depression. The sheer length of these modern-day bread lines puts to shame the black-and-white images of people waiting for handouts in the 1930s. For many, the car they drive to the food banks has become their only shelter. Many have lost their homes, as many more will in the months to come. It isn’t even clear how many own their cars, though repossessing from the homeless has become a challenge for creditors.

    Embed from Getty Images

    Law enforcement strategists may already be thinking that the idea of food insecurity represents something more than a state of personal anguish for isolated individuals in times of pandemic. At some point, today’s pandemic may become tomorrow’s pandemonium. In other words, like everything else in a society built on the foundational idea of the individual’s “pursuit of happiness,” the cumulative effect of an experience shared on an increasingly wide scale leads to its recognition as a potentially insoluble social problem.

    What better illustrates the phenomenon than the opioid crisis? Until only a few years ago, US media treated the problem of addiction as a personal drama that affected random individuals. Like Frank Sinatra’s character in the 1955 film “The Man with the Golden Arm,” the victims needed to acquire the courage to kick the habit and rejoin healthy society. But when, a decade ago, statistics began revealing a rapidly mounting number of deaths by overdose — not limited to down-and-out jazz musicians in an urban nightmare or the black minority — opioid addiction became “the opioid crisis.” Even rural whites were involved. 

    That meant that it was time to analyze the phenomenon as a security threat, to be treated the way any extensive social crisis is treated, by taking into account complex economic, sociological and even commercial factors that structure the crisis. It became a topic that politicians could now talk about out in the open. In 2020, food security is reaching a similar point of public recognition. Since Ronald Reagan’s presidency, Republicans have led an insurgency campaign against food stamps. They see food assistance as a demeaning symbol of the acceptance of the maligned welfare state. Given a challenge, true Americans will always rise up on their own initiative to meet it. Handing out food shamefully discourages that vibrant sense of initiative.

    Earlier this year, as the cars began lining up in increasing numbers on their way to food banks, the Trump administration tried to block the distribution of food stamps allowed by the Coronavirus Food Assistance program. But in an economy that is shedding jobs, hunger doesn’t simply go away thanks to an individual’s willpower, especially in a consumer society that for decades has literally fed the trend toward super-sizing and obesity.

    Historical Note

    When the symptoms of poverty traditionally associated with marginalized minorities emerge as a feature of the landscape to which a majority may be exposed, even an ideologically rigid society may begin to rethink the relationship between poverty and security. The poorer classes in the US have for most of the past century created a false sense of order in their lives through obsessive consumer behavior. Addiction took a variety of forms, most of which were deemed “healthy” for the economy, if not for the consumers themselves, from Coca-Cola and McDonalds to reality TV. 

    Addictive behavior seemed to define the American way of life. In contrast, the wealthier segments of society focused on ensuring their security by living in a separate mental and physical world. One prominent late 20th-century trend among the upper-middle class was the retreat into gated communities. Seeking to move further and further away from multiracial cities, neighborhoods emerged that looked comfortably residential while benefiting from military-style security, including armed guards at their unique entrance. They were effectively sealed off from the rest of society.

    The gated community mentality has now become a largely unconscious feature of US culture. The idea of security has itself become an obsession in stark contrast with the romantic tradition that celebrated the rugged individualism of the West and of early capitalism. It has justified the creation of the national security state.

    The US is now undergoing perhaps its deepest historical and cultural psychodrama since the Civil War. The reality of a crisis of “food security” reflects more than just the disastrous material effects of growing inequality. It highlights an extraordinary conflict capable of undermining traditional cultural assumptions. History has repeatedly shown that there is no cure for cultural chaos.

    *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    Politicians have lied about social security. The US must elect someone who'll fight for it | Mark Weisbrot

    Opinion US elections 2020 Politicians have lied about social security. The US must elect someone who’ll fight for it Mark Weisbrot Social security helps millions, but America’s largest anti-poverty program remains vastly misunderstood ‘It might be good to have someone at the helm who has seen through the false narrative that we have been fed, […] More