In Frank Capra's classic film, "Mister Smith Goes to Washington," Jimmy Stewart plays Jefferson Smith, a political rube who uncovers graft in a relief appropriations bill.
Here is a question for you. Do all means justify all ends? How humanitarian is "humanitarian aid" when the legislation created to produce it is weaponized?
Since most of us have a lot of time on our hands these days, it may behoove us to re-watch the 1939 masterpiece, "Mister Smith Goes to Washington" (currently available on Amazon Prime as a $2.99 rental).
For those unfamiliar with this depression era piece, the story revolves around a scoutmaster, Jefferson Smith (Stewart) who is picked by an opportunistic, machine-supported governor, to fill a vacancy in the U.S. Senate. The choice of Smith as senator is very important, because the political machine in question has been stuffing a relief appropriations bill with goodies and graft-- (especially a dam construction project on land owned by the machine, where the guileless Smith also wants to build a national boys camp). When the machine boss tries to bring Smith into the fold (and Smith refuses) the political boss and his media machine. set about destroying the upstart politico.
It isn't pretty folks.
For those who think films without color or gratuitous violence won't resonate with them, I suggest they reconsider. Except for some scenery, costume, and racial tropes-- this film is as dead-on today as it was in 1939; right down to spin and fabricated crises.
Of course the crisis we now face is not fabricated per say; and whatever you might think about either side of the argument (or the level of government involvement in mitigating it) any crises that uses fear, sickness, and suffering as a mace for forcing unrelated political gains, is suspect in the highest order.
Among certain Machiavellian politicos, the belief that all means justify their ends is well-documented. But whatever perceived "noble intentions" these Machiavellian operatives might profess to have (of any party) you can be sure their palms are greased and their backs waxed long before any relief trickles down to you. Whatever their bloviating rants might profess-- a wise constituent divides (or multiplies) by three the cost and effect.
All this would be unpalatable enough in normal times, but the truly nauseating thing here is there are millions of people who actually applaud this behavior. It's one thing for politicians to be opportunistic and covetous-- that's their chosen profession and inherent nature. But when average citizens find nothing wrong with loading-up a relief bill with so many gadgets, bells and whistles that the true nugget of need is nearly lost in a boulder of lard-- its a sad day indeed.
The saddest thing of all is that we can see how this resonated with another financial crises eighty-one years ago. You would think that after four generations we might have learned something.
I suppose in a way we have. We've learned the bigger the graft you want the bigger the mace you need.
Very sad lesson indeed.
Comments