Why does Parenti believe the nature of the office of the president of the United States of America makes him the “promoter and guardian of corporate capitalism”?
Traditionally, the role of the “promoter and guardian of corporate capitalism” (Parenti 215) does not top the list of the responsibilities that the President of the United States must fulfill. Although brought up not as often as other responsibilities of the head of the state, the role mentioned above can be deemed as essential as it creates the environment in which the economic wellbeing of the state becomes a possibility. Representing the executive-centered system catering to the needs of the capitalist society, the role in question serves as the primary tool for safeguarding the interests of entrepreneurs and, therefore, enhancing the operations in the contemporary American economic society (Solimano 4).
According to Parenti, the President of the United States caters to the needs of the capitalist society no matter what political party the former belongs to as the subject matter is believed to be the foundation for the well-being of the nation by any political power, including the Democrats, the Republicans, the liberals, and the conservatives alike (Parenti 215). Therefore, by definition, the President of the United States safeguards the capitalist environment and contributes to its evolution.
Attracting the overseas investments and stressing their role in the capitalist economy, the head of the state designs the environment, in which economic growth of private entrepreneurship becomes a possibility (Grover and Peschek 21).
According to Parenti, what is the relationship between corporate lobbyists and Congress? Explain the impact of this relationship on public policy.
Parenti makes it quite clear that corporate lobbyists pressure the Congress into making certain choices. Particularly, the people participating in corporate lobbies make the U.S. government recognize the significance of the contemporary economic system. In other words, the actions that the corporate lobbyists take create the environment, in which the American authorities reinforce the power of capitalism in the state as well as the influence thereof on the political and economic decisions made on both local and global levels.
As a result, the public policy adopted in the United States is shaped significantly. Particularly, the significance of private interests is introduced into the public arena (Parenti 2). Thus, the importance of corporations as a part and parcel of the modern economy is promoted among the members of the U.S. population. As a result, the understanding of capitalist relationships in the context of both the American and the global economic and political environment becomes a possibility.
What does he argue that this means in the realm of foreign affairs? Do you agree with Parenti? Why or why not?
The role of the guardian of the capitalist economic traditions that the U.S. president must play triggers a range of changes in the foreign affairs department. Detailing the effects of guarding and promoting capitalist relationships on the relationships between the states, one must mention that political conflicts may be regulated with the help of not military actions but changes in the economic cooperation between countries (Parenti 150).
It seems that Parenti has a point when talking about the effects that the role of the guardian of capitalism that the U.S. president possesses has on the international relations and on the foreign affairs. By introducing the measures that restrict certain economic relationships and, therefore, block countries from receiving certain benefits, one is likely to have a tangible effect on the decisions that will be made by the representatives of the government.
For instance, the phenomenon of the embargo, which is typically defined as the ban on trade between specific countries (Karson 85), can be used to regulate certain political conflicts and make the states that promote unreasonable politics to subdue and work on a compromise. Similarly, sanctions can be interpreted as an attempt to coordinate the existing conflicts and reason with the opponents (Blanchard, Mansfield, and Ripsman 19).
In other words, the role of a promoter of capitalism that the U.S. president plays can be viewed as a powerful tool in addressing emergent issues in the foreign affairs department (Griffin and Steele 214). Although the instrument under analysis cannot be considered perfect, it helps take the phenomenon of international politics on a new level, therefore, opening new possibilities in arranging the communication process between different states. Moreover, the chances for carrying out successful negotiations increase with the adoption of the instrument in question.
Works Cited
Blanchard, Jean-Marc F., Edward D. Mansfield, and Norrin M. Ripsman. Power and the Purse: Economic Statecraft, Interdependence and National Security. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014. Print.
Griffin, James M., and Henry B. Steele. Energy Economics and Policy. New York, NY: Elsevier, 2013. Print.
Grover, Walter, and John Peschek. The Unsustainable Presidency: Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Beyond. New York, NY: Springer, 2014. Print.
Karson, Lawrence. American Smuggling as White Collar Crime. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014. Print.
Parenti, Michael. Democracy for the Few. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.
Solimano, Andres. Economic Elites, Crises, and Democracy: Alternatives Beyond Neoliberal Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Print.