The over age 50 folks know that a “banana republic” was the term first applied to a third world country. (We’re not talking about a specialty retailer here.) A banana republic has these features and as you read them consider the US situation in bold. A “BR” has political instability. The US can claim the last few years with two impeachment trials, the sacking of the US Capitol, hanging threat against the Vice President and an opposition party whose platform apparently is chaos. A BR has one commodity that dominates its export product list (bananas, for example). The US export list is dominated by oil which comprises nearly 40% of the value of all US exported goods. A “BR” has an economy that is significantly impacted by foreign countries. The US international conglomerates are directly and immediately affected by what happens in foreign. For instance, look at our gas prices as a result of the Ukraine situation. Also, Fortune 500 companies stock values, revenues and profits all decline during times of foreign disruption–including foreign currency devaluations. A “BR” has a well-defined social (income) order with unequal distribution of wealth and assets. The US always addresses low, middle and high income categories in every phase of domestic life and is clearly controlled by the super wealthy whose 1% of the population owns nearly 50% of all wealth. A “BR” has a significant absence of justice in both the legal sense and in society, meaning the poorer income members are voiceless. The US has seen the constant erosion of individual rights, arbitrary judge decisions based on political leanings and an increase in poverty–despite words to the contrary. It should come as no surprise that 60% of the Federal Budget is set aside for welfare programs. So the comparison to a “banana republic” is not as far-fetched as you might think. Is this the normal evolution step for a 250 year old democracy?
Comments are closed