MB Civic

From various sources (attributes given):

“From Miami to San Francisco, the nation’s priciest real estate now faces beaches and straddles fault lines; its most vibrant cities occupy its most hazardous land. If, after World War II, you had set out to redistribute wealth to maximize the sums that might be lost to nature, you couldn’t have done much better than Americans have done.”

“In Nature’s Casino”: NYT Magazine, Aug. 26, 2007

—

“Why has capitalism succeeded while democracy has steadily weakened? Democracy has become enfeebled largely because companies, in intensifying competition for global consumers and investors, have invested ever greater sums in lobbying, public relations, and even bribes and kickbacks, seeking laws that give them a competitive advantage over their rivals. The result is an arms race for political influence that is drowning out the voices of average citizens…Let us be clear: The purpose of democracy is to accomplish ends we cannot achieve as individuals. But democracy cannot fulfill this role when companies use politics to advance or maintain their competitive standing, or when they appear to take on social responsibilities that they have no real capacity or authority to fulfill. That leaves societies unable to address the tradeoffs between economic growth and social problems such as job insecurity, widening inequality, and climate change. As a result, consumer and investor interests almost invariably trump common concerns.”

“How Capitalism is Killing Democracy”: Foreign Policy, Sept/Oct 2007

—

“Nearly every foreign policy of the U.S. government – from domestic surveillance activities and the detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to U.S. energy policies and efforts in the Middle East peace process – was sharply criticized by the experts. More than 6 in 10 experts, for instance, believe U.S. energy policies are negatively affecting the country’s national security. The experts were similarly critical of the CIA’s rendition of terrorist suspects to countries known to torture prisoners and the Pentagon’s policy of trying detainees before military tribunals. No effort of the U.S. government was more harshly criticized, however, than the war in Iraq. In fact, that conflict appears to be the root cause of the experts’ pessimism about the state of national security. Nearly all – 92 percent – of the index’s experts said the war in Iraq negatively affects U.S. national security, an increase of 5 percentage points from a year ago. Negative perceptions of the war in Iraq are shared across the political spectrum, with 84 percent of those who describe themselves as conservative taking a dim view of the war’s impact. More than half of the experts now oppose the White House’s decision to “surge” additional troops into Baghdad, a remarkable 22 percentage-point increase from just six months ago. Almost 7 in 10 now support a drawdown and redployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq.”

“The Terrorism Index”: Foreign Policy, Sept/Oct 2007

—

“If the country is to be governed with the consent of the governed, then the governed must arrive at opinions about what their governors want them to consent to.”

Walter Lippman, from an archive piece in the Sept 2007 issue of Atlantic