Conservative rhetoric hides facts and delays progress

Throughout U.S. history, there has been only one rhetorical exhortation declared and consistently reiterated by the conservative elite in response to progressive social movements: “This [insert progressive policy here] will be the beginning of the end of American society as we know it.”

In the mid-1800s, the entire southern half of the country went to war over the fear that its society would crumble if slaves were freed, even though the only real beneficiaries of slavery were a few extremely wealthy plantation owners.

Later, in the early 1900s, male political elites insisted women’s suffrage would greatly undermine a traditional political discourse that was only suited for clear-headed men such as themselves, and, the civil rights movement in the ‘60s guaranteed similar consequences, at least, according to a handful of white men who were afraid to make the playing field even for all.  

In case you haven’t noticed, there was a common theme among the opposition groups to all of these historical social movements. The groups on the side opposed to change were all led by a few elite economic or political beneficiaries of a system based on inequality. And they all were able to garner public support through fear campaigns constructed on the familiar slogan warning that a change in tradition would spark the end of the United States.

Obviously, the end of the United States has yet to come, but the paranoid fear belonging the rich and powerful — that they may not be able to have it all — is still very much present. And consequently, so is the funding of fear campaigns in an effort to persuade many to side with a few.

Presently, this theme manifests itself in the Tea Party, specifically in its reaction to the Affordable Care Act.

No matter what your opinions are on the semantics of the bill itself, the fact of the matter is that the American health care system was severely broken and treated human life as a mere commodity. Insurance companies continuously denied people because of pre-existing conditions, charged women more than men for coverage and could rescind coverage as soon as you became seriously ill. Employers retained the right not to insure their employees no matter how little they paid them. As a result, more than 50 million people were uninsured, so it’s no wonder the wait times for medical procedures were low. Yet, we still spent more than any country in the world on health care per capita, the average being a cost of $6,697 on health care for each U.S. citizen.

So logically speaking, health care reform should be in the best interest of the average American, unless of course you are a large employer or you are the head of a health insurance company. In these cases, sweeping reform would probably take some money out of your already-bloated bank account. Still, among the majority, only 16 percent of Americans were happy with this system.

Yet, despite the desperate desire for reform, about 50 percent of Americans currently oppose Obamacare. But is this really accurate? Because according to the same poll, only 37 percent oppose the Affordable Care Act, which is the exact same bill.

Recently, Jimmy Kimmel turned this ignorance into hilarity, sending a fake news crew onto the streets of Los Angeles to ask people whether they preferred Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act. Of course, most everyone sided more with the Affordable Care Act, and as the interviewer listed the aspects of the bill, most people concurred that they were all good ideas. Yet, they saw Obamacare as “un-American.” I don’t know whether to find this hilarious or extremely disappointing.

So how did all of this misunderstanding come to be? If you take a look behind the scenes of some of the groups most vehemently opposed to health care reform, or anything even associated with President Barack Obama, you will find a small group of conservative billionaires funding and organizing these “grassroots” movements, using them as a vehicle to promote their own individual interests.

Take brothers David and Charles Koch for instance, who head Koch Industries and are each worth about $21.5 billion. Both are extremely conservative public supporters of limited government interference in the marketplace. So, naturally, the Koch brothers have become fairly involved in American politics over the years. In fact, they have created a political empire with their vast wealth by sponsoring anti-tax foundations, lobbying groups and right-wing think tanks and by creating super PACs that specifically support candidates who fall in line with their own big-business-oriented ideology.

Specifically, the Koch brothers have spent more than $12 million dollars funding Tea Party group alongside hosting and planning various Tea Party conferences. Furthermore, they have spent $50 million on lobbying and $10 million in support of individual political candidates. In total, the Koch brothers and the organizations they control have spent an estimated $196 million on conservative causes and institutions.

The result of all this spending is a vastly successful fear campaign that has effectively convinced many Americans, by means of very strong rhetoric and propaganda techniques, that Obama and his “socialist” policies will bring about the death of America. Consequently, groups such as the Tea Party consist of members who have very strong opinions, but that’s about it. For example, when asked what they specifically don’t like about Obama, the top answer among Tea Party supporters was simply, I just don’t like him. No joke. The next top answer was that he’s turning this country toward socialism, which correlates with the belief among 64 percent of them that the president has increased taxes for the majority of Americans. Even though in reality, the majority received a tax cut under the Obama administration.

All of this fear-mongering and demonizing of words such as socialism and Obama, has resulted in the stagnation of progress, specifically when it comes to health care reform. When people are convinced to blindly disagree with pertinent issues, this undermines the democratic process, for the process relies on a knowledgeable electorate. Unfortunately, people like the Koch brothers have used vast wealth to eliminate knowledge from the equation, replacing it instead with seething ignorance. 

Write Nick at njv10@pitt.edu.