Is Who Becomes the Next President All That Matters?

BERLIN, MAY 13, 2008 -- I know. I know. How this is the most important election in history, and why the next occupant of the White House will not only be answering the red phone at 3 a.m. but possibly be saving these not always United States from the decline that even Time magazine has announced the country is facing.

Yet, as I travel outside the country, I can’t help but feel, or is it fear, that this logic leaves out some rather important considerations.

Like the fact that the United States cannot unilaterally impose its will on the world anymore as our dollar falls and our credibility falls with it. Even a strategy of negotiation as opposed to confrontation is not a recipe for success because in a multipolar world, other countries and power blocs like the Russians, the Chinese, the EU, the Persian Gulf and OPEC have their own interests. They will listen to our proposals but may reject them if they are at variance with their own needs.

We just don’t have the power to impose our will even as we still suffer from “the USA is No. 1” syndrome and think that we can kick ass and take names if anyone stands in our way.

Whoever becomes president may not have the power he or she assumes goes with the office. (In fact, after the fact, in their memoirs, most presidents complain they often felt powerless, besieged by lobbyists, party factions and reticent bureaucrats at every turn. They see themselves constrained by institutional obstacles at every turn.)

In many ways, Mao was right, the occupant of the oval office is a paper tiger.

In this new world, if we want others to do our bidding, we can’t threaten to obliterate them or strut around like Mighty Mouse when so many in the world see us as the Mouse that Roared.

So many of our problems today are global and shared by others. Globalization has assured that. We are all impacted by global threats like climate change, escalating food prices, world hunger, endemic poverty and pandemic disease that the White House can’t wave a magic wand to cure. Sadly, most Americans are not educated about these issues, and the press downplays them.

Even when we cause problems, like the mortgage collapse, markets worldwide feel the pain in an internationally entangled financial system where we are dependent on monies from China. Meanwhile, others invest in the United States to keep their own profits up and compete with our companies on our home ground.

Sure, we are a militarily powerful but apparently not powerful or smart enough to subdue Iraq or Afghanistan after five years. Our warriors on terror have yet to capture Bin Laden or even neutralize the Taliban. The truth is the Democratic candidates don’t think they can tell the military what to do and so have withdrawal plans that will take years. That’s the reality.

The military industrial complex often has a mind of its own

And so does Wall Street, which won’t take marching orders from any president. Both Clinton and Bush turned to Goldman Sachs to run the Treasury, and it’s not clear if their former execs were ambassadors to The Street or from the Street. Financial power trumps political power in a country dominated by a corporate system.

Who can impose an excess profits tax on Big Oil? Who will dare?

In fact, look at the credit crisis. It started with the mortgage meltdown of August 2007. At least one million families have lost their homes. Another two and half million are threatened. The New York Times reports that even their storage spaces are now being auctioned off, because many folks can’t afford the monthly charges. The Onion jokes that a family burned their stimulus check because they can’t afford heat.

The Times’ business columnist, Gretchen Morgenson, notes that in all these months of obvious economic calamity, nothing meaningful has been done by our government to help people in need, writing, “As the great American credit crash continues to reverberate, we still have nothing that resembles an intelligent and comprehensive plan for dealing with mass foreclosures and the economic consequences associated with the debacle.”