Thoughts on Module 7

Our final discussion on existential threats provided some provoking arguments, but also reaffirmed my own views concerning the largest threat to the U.S.  My academic background is in sociology and psychology, with a focus in political science.  Each discipline identifies the immediate and latent effects of structured inequality, although in different ways.  Psychology concentrated on the individual, sociology on the community, and political science focused on governmental institutions and processes.  While different, all find that high levels of inequality produce destabilizing stresses with destructive long-term consequences.  Perhaps because of this, my bias in identifying the greatest threat to the U.S. is grounded in addressing the impact of inequality in both domestic and foreign affairs.

External attacks and severe environmental challenges are unlikely to challenge the U.S. in the near future, or at least probably not in our lifetime.  However, an internal attack or revolution is a feasible threat, and one whose strength may be building.  The deep fissures in American equality demonstrate not only the inability of politicians to address and improve the structures preventing equality, but also the inability of the American public to recognize the importance of addressing issues of inequality early.  The immediate reversal of detrimental trends is necessary in order to gain the momentum needed to effect change.

In recent years, we’ve witnessed the naissance of movements such as Occupy Wall Street that have mobilized masses of Americans for a common cause.  The initial impression is that social and economic inequality primarily effect individuals, and individuals of small importance to economic development at that. However, inequality is in fact directly linked to national productivity and international competitiveness.  By ignoring factors such as education, nutrition and overall wealth equality, the U.S. is setting itself up for a long and difficult road to regain economic traction and strengthen their international influence.     

Movements such as OWS may not be immediately “successful” in reaching the goals they set out to do, but they are at least successful in the sense that they bring attention to the situation for which they advocate.  The spread of information is half the battle, and an informed public is the most dangerous weapon of democracy (did Paul Krugman say this?). The social and economic inequalities for which OWS advocates are important for those directly affected, as well those on the periphery.   I believe that movements such as Occupy Wall Street will become more frequent as inequality becomes increasingly difficult to ignore, deny, or justify.