The Peoria nighttime skyline is an interesting sight to behold. Witnessing it from across the Illinois river, you see a capitalist monstrosity; a mesh of golden wealth and prosperity whose glimmer fades from North to South until it reaches its final destination of cool, gray destitution, the way a smile fades into a sneer. It's like a forlorn Two Face, caught in lament of his grotesque disfigurement, yet at the same time celebrating the power that it brought him.

    It possesses a very external beauty.

    Every city of reasonable size has its share of the bad with the good (for whatever those terms are worth; some, I'm sure, would think that those are perfectly fine, to the point where capitaliZing them would be proper). But Peoria wears both of them like an advertisement. It's a cool reminder to those who set aside so-called 'public housing' for the marginalized, similarly to the way the U.S. government set aside reservations for the Indians. These areas stick out like a thorn in the side of any 'modern' society who believes that hiding the hideously oppressed behind these false façades will be to the benefit of everyone. After centuries of degradation, humiliation, alienation, and death, society then expects the marginalized to accept a small apology in the form of 'political correctness' (like society needs a constant reminder that we're all supposed to be on the same plane of equality), take a small 'handout,' and then become 'one of us.' When the ghetto finds out that it got fucked, and can't make a living with the paltry amount that society 'gave' it, the ghetto finds an alternative route. Darwin called it 'survival of the fittest.' Society calls it 'criminal' and uses it as an excuse to further marginalize and oppress the victims: the ones, it tells in a childlike way, "I'm stronger than you, so I'm going to beat you up," but does so with the pariah's hands and feet tied.

    Peoria is beautiful because this stark difference is rarely seen in other cities. Many of its citizens, while descending Interstate 74 into the Peoria that exists at night, choose to look at the beautifully lit business buildings, the churches, and the hospitals that rise, bouquet-like, from the downtown skyline. This phenomenon is surprisingly similar to the one experienced delving into the heart of Chicago's business district by virtue of the Stevenson and Eisenhower expressways: depression exists to your left and right, but it is masked by the stark beauty of the monoliths that corporations have built to celebrate their remarkable achievements. It is surprising because Peoria is relatively small, as far as cities are concerned, and from the bluff over East Peoria, there is more time to analyze this difference of which I speak.

    Those who take the time to see critically these differences recognize the marbled opaque consistency that makes up every society. Whether this phenomenon is described in an educated and privileged way, or in a rough and 'layman's' way (as so many often do and get ignored because of that 'rough-ness'), it is the same. It's easy to ignore when you are a benefactor, but hard to forget when you are a victim.

    Some would say that the Caterpillar company is the heart and soul of Peoria, and this is hard statement with which to contend. Cat has its roots planted firmly in Peoria's soil, its colleges, infrastructure, and economic prosperity. Successful, large, and worldwide businesses are given high incentives by virtue of contracts and other 'non-monetary' funding by cities that would benefit highly from the placements of their roots into a city's very soil. I can remember when the Boeing company was making its imminent decision to move its large presence to the city of Chicago, and the hoopla surrounding that decision. Of course, few residents in Peoria realize the impact that Caterpillar has had, both on its own soil and abroad. Few realize the integral role that Caterpillar (among other U.S. corporations) played in deforestation of the rain forests in Costa Rica, for example. They literally paved the 'Hamburger Connection' between the U.S. and Costa Rica. In the 70's, a large project was undertaken to clear 'useless' land to make way for food production, supposedly to the benefit of Costa Rican citizens. As a result, over 2/3 of what used to be rain forest is now cattle grazing land; cattle that will produce beef that will in turn be predominantly sold to U.S fast food. Costa Ricans, with their less than $1 per day wage, couldn't afford a $0.99 Big n' Tasty™ even if one would feed the family for an entire day. Cat's name is displayed proudly with the others in the credit line of an old educational film about U.S. agribusiness, and how far its tentacles have reached.

    I digress. Those that still have some semblance of what 'heart and soul' is recognize Peoria and Chicago for their rich histories and art cultures (which still thrives in the latter, but falters a bit in the former), before they recognize these cities for whatever good was brought to them by a corporation or two. Peorians to this day, not excluding journalists and other local celebrities, use the tired 'If it plays in Peoria…' line. This phrase used to denote the fact that a show or act tested its mettle before a crowd in Peoria, who were historically picky. If the act succeeded in Peoria, IL, then it would be a success anywhere. It shouldn't be without mention that Peoria, and central Illinois in general, is the last bastion of conservatism in the state of Illinois. The art culture, consequently, resides now in a once-famous small theatre, a couple of comedy clubs, and a coffee house next door to Bradley University.

    Returning to topic, the U.S., both pre and post civil rights, has invested much of its resources into creating for the 'less fortunate' a system with which they might try and create for themselves a reasonable livelihood. This manifests itself in several forms, notably welfare, public aid, and public housing projects. Much rhetoric is thrown around about 'ghetto' situations, and the problematic impact that the poor faction presents to society. This rhetoric is largely non-historical, non-economical, and non-academic in nature, at least as far as politicking is concerned. Many prominent agenda-seekers in government would love most people to believe that ghetto situations are interwoven with the so-called 'decline in family values,' and a decline in morals in general. Many citizens subsequently believe that poor people are in their situations because they are lazy, stupid, or otherwise unfit to 'live the American dream.' In a country where there is a pre-requisite to be economically well off in order to 'serve' in politics, this is the type of thinking that is bred over time, thought processes that are, in their nicest and most well-intended forms, still ignorant.

    Of course, it is in our humble nature to help the 'less fortunate,' both at home and abroad. Previously I noted the 'hamburger connection' that exists between the U.S. and Costa Rica. This was originally set up for the supposed benefit of native Costa Ricans, yet lack of foresight made it into the exact opposite: investments by U.S. corporations that inevitably helped U.S. corporations, at the expense of both pristine natural resource and native resident alike. No less than eight of these connections exist throughout the world between the haves and have-nots, notably the one I have already described, and the one that exists between European nations and the Sahel region of Senegal, Africa (The 'peanut connection,' if you will – where non-native crops have contributed to the proliferation of the Sahara Desert. For more information research the documentary entitled "Hungry for Profit" – New Day Films, 1985, director: Robert Richter).

    Whether at home or abroad, the intent is the same, and the results are the same. If anything, U.S. and European hegemony are proliferated through these attempts that do nothing save for the infliction of more castigation on those who have seen enough of it. To see a notable exception to this rule, I'd advise a real look into the economies of four Scandinavian nations in Northern Europe: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands. Here, a type of economic structuring has evolved that is cutely called 'social democracy'. Of course, economics don't bring about a lowered sense of ethnocentrism or racism, but it would seem that it's a start. Their income tax rate hovers somewhere around 30%, which astonishes tax cut proponents and voters in the United States. But here's the kicker: they don't have to worry about finding health insurance, and their system of welfare and unemployment benefits are unrivaled throughout the world. Some other figures that are often used: in the U.S. and U.K, the rate of elderly living in poverty is 29% and 24%, respectively. In Scandinavia, that figure is a mere 1%. Unfortunately, adequate study of these societies from American scholars is lacking.

    Ronald Reagan gave the U.S. in the early 1980's a picture of the 'welfare queen,' riding around in her Cadillac, floating by on the citizen tax dollar. Unfortunately, this is an all-too-common false portrayal of the welfare system. If you know anyone on it, then you know what I'm talking about. The republican voter fits three major demographics: the poor, uneducated southern white, the rich, and the middle American farmer. The latter two of these have no real-life exposure to the welfare system, one for obvious reasons, and the other because they receive subsidies including agriculture loans and grants (not to downplay the struggles of the middle American farmer, who's plights have been the topic of extensive research). If you really want a glimpse of someone who is riding around on the American tax dollar, then take a gander at the rich 20% of the country who controls a monstrous 70% of income, or the top 0.5% of rich, who control an equally monstrous 50% of non-monetary income (i.e. stocks, employment incentives, and other forms of interest). This elite, with its high-powered lawyers and accountants, has managed an elaborate form of what should be considered nothing less than tax evasion. These are the same people who control an inordinate share of political power by virtue of lobbies in Washington D.C., and spend even more tax dollars for their wars across the world. Wars that, of course, have the full consent of the people, who are so scared stiff that they become afraid of the new 'trouble' minority every time they rear their ugly heads. (*note: this is, I agree, a simplistic view with much more involved. However, to deny that the number one lobby in the U.S. – big oil, for example, has no part in Middle Eastern affairs, then you are denying yourself the simple privilege of being educated.)

    While I'm on the subject of Republicans, I can spare a glimpse at the Democratic side, who are really only minutely less of an evil. Instead of concentrating an intelligent effort on Welfare, Medicare, and Social Security reforms, they instead concentrate on the importance of Affirmative Action, a policy that at best skirts the issue of inordinate race inequality and places agency in the hands of only the most successful minority people, a policy that infuriates most people for no real reason, as it only accomplishes anything on the most rare of occasions. They concentrate their efforts on the legality of Abortion while their Republican 'opponents' counter by taking away the use of Medicare for that purpose, thereby creating a system in which those least suitable for motherhood cannot use their only source of medical insurance to terminate a pregnancy. The ridiculous 'battle' waged between Republicans and Democrats goes on and on when there is no real difference between their basic ideologies, which change dramatically every time one of them gets the 'upper hand.'

    But of course, capitalist powerhouses like the U.S. and U.K. gaze warily at any country who hints at any reform that resembles socialism. It is in this way that 'social democrats' must tread lightly, even as they have seemingly created the most egalitarian form of government that exists in the world. Fear of economic sanction, coupled with the horrendous failure of the U.S.S.R., is a sure fire deterrence to becoming 'too much of a commie'. This has repercussions in the 'states as well, which a much-prevalent notion that 'small government' is better than 'big government' (for whatever those terms are worth), and the aghast looks that one would surely get from the American common person in response to any word or idea resembling 'socialism'.

    However, the West would do well to look at its policies for the poor. While I agree that the largest number of poor people are white, at 38%, the largest proportion of poor are black, at 37% of the total population of citizens living below the poverty line. Blacks, in total, number somewhere around 15-20% of the American population, with whites numbering somewhere around 65% (sorry for the approximations). In light of this, I apologize for focusing on the plight of the black minority, however it seems prudent at this moment in time. If we are to position ourselves as a 'society of equals,' then we need to go all the way, no reservations. I believe that the suffrage and civil rights movements have (thankfully) accomplished their goals. However, the policies of 'developed' countries warrant a good, hard, look. There is a reason that the liberal agenda is interwoven in a conglomeration of equal rights, environmentalism, revising of the drug policy, and at least a basic socialist assumption. The reason is that they are all interconnected.

    Peoria, with its blatantly obvious run-down industrial sector, with its equally blatantly obvious version of 'white flight,' and its extraordinary fear of the black ghetto is a good case study for liberalism. My advice is to not tiptoe around these issues. A solution will only come with a complete transformation of how we think of ourselves, our culture and its oppressive nature, and our relations with other cultures that we do not even have a base understanding of.

RWD
salva veritate