How We Rebuild Matters

Like most everyone I’ve been talking with my friends and family about the destruction of the cultural, community, and government systems that we have known for generations. One of my cousins is excited to see all of it burn (he leans right), another is distraught that the degree he worked for years to get might no longer be useful (he leans left). I often hear that this guy or that is great and can fix it all, or is too much one way or another. Of course, the current Administration is not dismantling broken systems, they’re dismantling the safeguards, the departments that help the people. They are bolstering the patriarchy and causing harm that could last generations.1 Harm that will take more than one person to fix. Harm that will require a unified vision and a functional congress.

But what do we want?

I’ve been thinking a lot about what Latin American countries did after declaring their independence despite millennia of European and U.S. exploitation. They created social rights. They required their governments to not just not trample on individuals, but stand up for the common good. Venezuelans in their first constitution wrote, “Because governments are constituted for the common good and happiness of men, society must provide aid to the destitute and unfortunate and education to all citizens.” Greg Grandin quoted in America, América, “True freedom, the constitution argued, ‘means the renunciation of unlimited and licentious freedom.’” Can you imagine? What if our government leveled the playing field for women. Created real equality. Chose community over individuals.

Years ago, I suggested some “novel” idea about putting restrictions on property. I don’t remember the full context, but I remember whomever I was talking to telling me that we couldn’t tell people what they can or cannot do with their land. Given my social circle, I am nearly positive they were a democrat. Of course their argument isn’t true at all. Zoning and building codes and taxes dictate what people can and cannot do. In mountain towns all over Colorado, municipalities are putting deed restrictions on properties, requiring developers build affordable housing, and restricting whether or not and how often second home owners can rent their houses. We’re toying with exacting business taxes equal to other hospitality businesses on short term rentals and increasing taxes on vacant houses. It turns out the government is the people, and we can do more than we think.

In latin America, many counties have nationalized their resources so that U.S. and global companies can’t exploit them. In places with good revolutionaries and bad managers, this has not always worked in the favor of the people. And the U.S. has repeatedly deposed liberal democratic leaders and replaced them with men they think will make decisions favorable to us. But it doesn’t always work out. The U.S. has not been able to force Mexico to give up their oil or land rights. Cuba has long withstood U.S. capitalization. Under Mexican President Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexico passed land reform returning land taken by U.S. citizens and companies to Mexicans and natives within their boundaries, showing what is possible, if uncomfortable. On the other hand, Venezuela nationalized their oil, but their leaders squandered the resources and did not take care of the people. However, the people are hopeful now that Maduro is gone that they will once again receive the riches of their country.

What if we passed limits on the number of homes people can own. What if we “nationalize” rental properties—give states or counties control over them. What if we nationalize resources extraction with laws that require the profits go back to the people like in Alaska. What if we limit the amount of wealth any individual can accumulate? Lest you think it’s a ridiculous idea, Thomas Paine and Benjamin Franklin advocated for it. “Thomas Paine, proposed a 100% tax on income of more than £12,000 annually (equivalent to about $27 million in annual income today). He wrote, ‘There ought to be a limit to property.’ Extreme wealth led to an overgrown influence; of the rich, ‘one of the principal sources of corruption at elections.’”2 Franklin too understood that too great a division in wealth would inhibit an effective republic. “The Truth is, that though there are in that Country few People so miserable as the Poor of Europe, there are also very few that in Europe would be called rich; it is rather a general happy Mediocrity that prevails. There are few great Proprietors of the Soil, and few Tenants; most People cultivate their own Lands, or follow some Handicraft or Merchandise; very few rich enough to live idly upon their Rents or Incomes, or to pay the high Prices given in Europe for Paintings, Statues, Architecture, and the other Works of Art, that are more curious than useful. Hence the natural Geniuses, that have arisen in America with such Talents, have uniformly quitted that Country for Europe, where they can be more suitably rewarded.”3 Ahh the good old days. I think a 100% tax on all assets for people with over $27 million seems reasonable. Imagine how much U.S. government debt could be paid off. The government could provide free higher education, free healthcare, a year of paid family leave, retirement for everyone. Perhaps with the people taken care of we would begin to value women, treat everyone equally. As Franklin said, “Everyone should have economic independence so they can act as citizens.” Governments, as representatives of us citizens, might even have enough money to creatively support us in ways we can’t even imagine today. And those of us creatives, inventors, thinkers could rise the U.S. to heights in innovations never seen before.

Or we can keep letting Musk and Bezos and their ilk take everything and send it to Mars. We can let Trump destroy the social services that help people, that move the needle towards equality, and pretend to be shocked when men who’ve been taught entitlement their whole lives continue to treat women like property.4 We can ask that our government be a representative democracy or we can elect people actors and athletes and businessmen famous for their talents in areas that made them rich and have nothing to do with good governance.

We need to dream big to move to dial. I dream of a fully female congress. Why not; it’s been all male before. I dream of housing for everyone run by local governments where the “profits” go back into housing or community programs. I dream of an ERA that protects women, but also elevates us. I dream of free higher education and nationalized quality healthcare that put patients above pharmaceutical and religious companies. I will probably have even bigger dreams when I have the freedom and respect to be creative.

In the meantime, (given we will likely never elect a female president let along an all female congress) we need another FDR, another “Good Neighbor league.” We need a leader who understands social structures and government with a purpose to use his powers for the people. Someone who will repair our social services, but not just put them back, but improve them as well. We need someone who will help us mend our relationships with each other as well as in the global community. I don’t know who that person is. But if anyone is listening, or there is a higher power who cares, I am putting out my requests. I don’t just want Roe back. I want great healthcare free of patriarchy and religion for all women. I want an end to men’s violence and justice for those who experience it. I want the U.S. to be a welcoming place where we can integrate people from all over into our communities and benefit from their knowledge and experiences. But where if people do immigrate here, or are born here, prejudices and biases won’t be tolerated. Can you imagine? I want a happy mediocrity where genius and creativity thrive. I want the people to be taken care of. I want community to be valued over individuality in local governments and at the federal level.