Flimsy arguments against current anti-government sentiment

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/aug/30/barack-obama-glenn-beck

In response to an article bashing Glenn Beck and co for what I think are rather flimsy arguments. Anti-government rhetoric has a lot of basis in light of recent events. The fact that many supporters are ignorant racists doesn’t mean there aren’t huge flaws in our government. I don’t believe these flaws can be addressed without a new constitution.

This author of this article argues that “Glenn Beck & co can’t step outside their own shoes.” In the same way, he doesn’t seem to be able to fully step into tea-baggers’ shoes. He cites a number of benefits to small businesses “roads, interstate commerce and preventing shady business practices” that are provided by the federal government. All of these could be provided by a rather small government or without government at all (see the civil war era Spanish Republic). With the advances we’ve seen in technology, decentralization seems easier and easier and the old arguments of “roads, interstate commerce and preventing shady business practices” as central benefits of government seem rather thin to me. That the government is capable of preventing shady business practices is quite a stretch, particularly in the past year. That these are the primary ways he can come up with that teabaggers benefit from government is rather telling to me.

More importantly, the author fails to address the monumental ways in which the government makes things worse for Glenn Beck and co. The author seems to think handwaving can address (I suppose it’s a blog post so they can’t address everything) the negatives that he didn’t spend time considering. Corporate powers & insurance market distortions originating from legislation during the Reagan era cause serious harm to working and middle class Americans. When collusion between government and corporate powers is considered, I think tallying up the total effect of the government as positive is a good deal more difficult. Sadly, these are not talking points of the Beck & Co. movement.

That the problems of corporate power and profit-driven insurance companies were pushed forward by earlier conservative administrations doesn’t make them less