Skip to main content

Texas and the Myth of Self-Reliance

I don’t know much about Texas. At least, not the real Texas.

But I certainly know the Texas mythology, going back to my first Davy Crockett movie when I was six years old. I also know that the Texas mythology is not inconsequential, because apparently much of the Texas electorate still buys into it. Or more likely, they’ve been sold on it.

Call it the myth of self-reliance.

It’s been passed down through generations in story, song, and John Wayne movies. It’s the myth of the rugged individualist, the free-range cowboy who goes it alone, the Marlboro Man making his own way in the world. It’s the Lone Star State, where the lone Texas Ranger single-handedly holds off a passel of Mexican banditos with one gun tied behind his back.

The myth of self-reliance is currently being exposed for the fraud it’s always been. As with all myths, this one’s basis in historical reality was suspect to begin with. And as with all myths, this one continues to be useful, especially to selfish and corrupt people with lots of money.

It’s a myth that has merged seamlessly with the more modern myths of free markets and deregulation. Which is where Republican dogma meets the current man-made catastrophe in Texas.

From an energy standpoint, Texas took “go it alone” to extremes. It opted out of the national electrical grid that might have provided it with backup power, just in case a once-in-a-century storm happened to mosey through.

But that backup — that ability to tap into the national grid in an emergency — would have dealt a blow to the collective Texas ego. It would have meant Texas subjecting itself to, OMG, regulation by the federal government.

Texas Republicans, bought and paid for by the energy industry, could never submit to such a thing. Texas is independent. Texas goes it alone. Texas relies on itself, as opposed to those nanny-state meddlers in Washington.

Of course, self-reliance is easy when you have running water, flush toilets, gas stoves, and a functional electrical grid. Lose those things and your reliance on others — and theirs on you — gets really important, really fast.

And by reliance on others, I don’t just mean your neighbors. I mean your government. Because this is what government is supposed to be for. For coming to the rescue. For keeping people from being screwed over by natural disasters, institutional idiocy, or both.

But thanks to that self-reliance myth, Texas now boasts a culture of hostility to government that never comported with reality, and still doesn’t. It does, however, comport with the attitudes and reflexes of Texas Republicans, who have for decades shown themselves to be hostile to both government and reality. Republicans have long been the party of short-term earnings over long-term planning, and Texas takes that ethos to a whole other level.

So their current predicament is a “pay-me-now-or-pay-me-later” story, updated for our new climate-challenged times. It’s a cautionary tale of deregulation gone awry, in markets where deregulation had no business in the first place.

Back when George W. Bush was governor of Texas, Republicans decided that Texas would be the perfect place to experiment with near-total deregulation of energy consumption. Taking its theoretical underpinnings from Enron — then the darling of the energy industry, now the poster child for criminal market manipulation — Texas created an unfettered marketplace where power companies could compete for customers on price.

Consumers were now free — an important word in Texas mythology — to pick and choose among these companies in search of the lowest rates they could get. If these practices had been federally regulated, they would’ve raised all sorts of questions about quality of service, network resilience, and other annoying things nobody wants to think about. But this was Texas, and while the questions might have come up, Republicans weren’t interested in the answers.

So Texas went it alone. Self-reliant consumers signed up with self-reliant companies in a self-reliant state. With so much self-reliance, what could go wrong? Or, more important, why bother to regulate?

I’m guessing most of those customers didn’t read the fine print, because it turns out those rates were adjustable. They were based on overall demand. As long as demand and supply were more or less in line, the system worked okay.

But if the supply of electricity were to collapse — as in, say, a once-in-a-century winter storm — demand would, quite predictably, go through the roof. Taking prices with it. That’s how a $200-a-month electricity bill balloons to $16,000 in one week. Which, even in Texas, tests the limits of self-reliance.

But that’s not the worst part. These same companies also had to compete on cost. If they wanted to keep their prices low enough to stay competitive with dozens of other suppliers, they needed to keep their business costs as low as possible. If they couldn’t do that, their beloved free market would eat them alive.

So there was no incentive to spend money on maintenance, or to bother with things like winterizing their equipment. And why should they? Texas doesn’t get bad winters. Except when they do.

This is why we have regulation. This is why we have government. This is why we pay taxes to enact and enforce laws that keep vital infrastructure companies from putting their own greed ahead of our health and safety. This is why we keep a close eye on essential human services. So they don’t collapse and kill us.

It’s been comical, in a tragic sort of way, to watch Republican officials fall all over themselves to deflect the blame. They blame wind turbines. They blame Democrats in general, and AOC in particular. They blame the Green New Deal, which doesn’t even exist. What happened to self-reliance?

Here’s the thing. Hundred-year climate events are clearly occurring on an accelerated schedule. What happens when they come every decade? Or every five years? In California, the wildfires seem to be happening every summer. And we’re seeing a lot more extreme weather — hot, cold, wet, dry — in a lot more places, a lot more often.

So obviously, this is not just about Texas. Texas is just a reminder of the power of bad ideas. A reminder that wanton deregulation is a dangerous, even deadly, path. That mindless hatred of government makes us all vulnerable to worst-case scenarios. That Republicans will always double down on the worst possible ideas.

And that the myth of self-reliance is long past its sell-by date.

 


Comments

  1. Spot on. I think the Texas myth has been so ingrained by repetition and racism that it will be near impossible to change. But one lives in hope.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

France and Britain Just Gave the Finger to Fascism

There is now ample evidence that people with democratic systems of government actually like them, and would just as soon keep them, flaws and all. There seems to be a strong backlash occurring in several European countries, a trend toward shoring up democracies threatened by toxic authoritarian forces. In Poland last year, then in France and Britain last week, actual voters — as opposed to deeply compromised opinion polls — gave a big middle finger to the fascists in their midst. I don’t pretend to understand the electoral systems of these countries — let alone their political currents — but I’m struck by the apparent connections between different elections in different countries, and what they might be saying to us. I’ve spoken before of Poland , where ten years of vicious minority rule was overturned at the ballot box. A ban on abortion was the galvanizing issue — sound familiar? — and it brought an overwhelming number of voters to the polls, many for the fir

Don’t Let the New York Times Do Your Thinking

  My father would not live any place where the New York Times couldn’t be delivered before 7:00 a.m. To him, the Times was “the newspaper of record,” the keeper of the first drafts of history. It had the reach and the resources to be anywhere history was being made, and the skills to report it accurately. He trusted it more than any other news source, including Walter Cronkite. Like my dad, I grew to associate the Times with serious journalism, the first place one goes for the straight story. Their news was always assumed to be objectively presented, with the facts front-and-center. Their op-ed writers were well-reasoned and erudite, even when I thought they were full of shit. But there was more. The Times became — for me, at least — a sort of guide to critical thinking. It helped teach me, at an impressionable age, to weigh the facts before forming an opinion. And many of my opinions — including deeply-held ones — were formed around facts I might have read

Democrats, Step Away from the Ledge

  Anxiety comes easily to Democrats. We’re highly practiced at perceiving a crisis, wanting to fix it immediately, and being consistently frustrated when we can’t. Democrats understand consequences, which is why we always have plenty to worry about. Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about consequences — which is, let’s face it, their superpower. I wasn’t intending to write about last Thursday’s debate, mostly because I post on Tuesdays, and this could be old news by the time it gets to you. But then the New York Times weighed in with a wildly disingenuous editorial calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race, and the rest of the mainstream media piled on. In the Times' not-so-humble opinion, Biden needs to consider “the good of the country,” something their own paper has repeatedly failed to do for almost a decade. And since this is now the crisis du jour for virtually every Democrat who watched that shitshow, I thought I might at l