Our country is on a collision course, not only with would-be terrorists but, of even greater significance, with itself. Our political situation is that of two trains heading towards each other on the same track. Leaving the station is a passenger train, The Justice Express, filled with middle-class people, most of them of retirement or near-retirement age, all of them angry as hell. Speeding towards them is a freight train, The Saddam Special, loaded with high-tech weapons and headed for war. Which train has the right-of-way? Which train will be diverted to a siding so that the other can pass? Or will they crash, head-on, and, if so, what will be the outcome?

The unfolding scandals of corporate corruption are a political event of historic magnitude. Millions of Americans have lost their nest-eggs. I do not think we know the extent of this disaster. Many people who lost their savings feel guilty and, I would surmise, are ashamed to admit it. But as the news gets out -- like the story of the Atlanta advertising man who, planning to retire, sold his business for more than $2 million only to lose three-quarters of it in the stock market crash –- guilt and shame will become transformed into anger and political action.

What makes this movement different from previous reform movements is that the people who are hurting are the middle-class people who, statistically-speaking, turn out to vote. Politicians understand this. The Senate recently voted 97-0 on a package of corporate reforms far more extensive than a package passed in the House before the extent of the scandals was understood. Beyond the issues of corporate governance are those of greed and power. Increasingly we are being ruled by a small oligarchy of avaricious multi-millionaires. They sit on each others’ corporate boards, share insider information, and reward themselves with multi-million dollar salary and benefit deals, regardless of whether their companies fail or succeed. Theirs is a privileged world of targeted tax breaks and shelters, private jets, stretch limousines, and redundant vacation homes.

The Bush Administration exists to enhance their wealth and power. This is a defining moment for Democrats who are challenged to go back to their New Deal roots. It is also a defining moment for honest, pragmatic Republicans who believe in market fairness and are challenged to break with the corporate oligarchs and the free market fanatics who dominate the Bush Administration. The well-being of most Americans is dependent on reforms that restore confidence in the way our economy works.

The right-wing has always used social issues to blunt populist uprisings. Racism, homophobia, abortion, cultural conflict and the cynical manipulation of patriotism and religion have always worked to divide movements for reform and to protect the oligarchs who rule at the top. The anger that is building against corporate criminality may be enough to over-ride these particular wedge issues. But the Bush Administration still has a means of derailing the Justice Express. That’s the Saddam Special, a war against Iraq. The Bush Administration has doubled the production of "smart" bombs and is busy crafting plans for an invasion of Iraq.

The political engineers driving The Saddam Special say that the Iraqi dictator has weapons of mass destruction and we have to stop him before he uses them. It’s possible (though experts disagree) that he still has chemical and biological weapons; we know that he used chemical weapons against the Kurds. But if Saddam was as reckless as Bush portrays him, he would have used his arsenal in behalf of the Palestinians. But such an attack, as Saddam well knows, would invite his own destruction. The Bush Administration likes to compare Saddam to Osama bin Laden. But al-Qaida is a network of freelance terrorists with no assets, other than themselves, to protect. Saddam has his estates, his wealth, his power and a country to protect. Even if he has these weapons, the only reason he’d have to use them is as a last gasp act of vengeance if he was under attack and certain to be defeated.

An attack on Iraq would provide Saddam the one reason to use weapons of mass destruction, assuming he has them. Even if the U.S. achieves a quick and overwhelming military victory, Saddam would still have the opportunity, within seconds of the first American air strike, to launch missiles against Israel, the Kurds and any Arab country assisting the Americans. (No matter what the Bush Administration says, his weapons do not threaten the United States). The Middle East would erupt. Attacking Iraq is like playing with fire in the middle of an ammunition factory.

Creating a stable government in Iraq would be more difficult than driving Saddam from power. That would take years, possibly fail, and involve a huge occupying army. At home, the war in Iraq, and the jingoism it would encourage, would quicken the clamp down on domestic dissent that is high on the Bush Administration’s agenda. It would not surprise me if the timing of the attack coincided with the 2004, if not the 2002, election. Certainly, the train for reform that is just leaving the station would be derailed, if not destroyed, by the high-balling Saddam Special. Whatever the outcome in the Middle East, and it is not likely to be either peace, justice or regional stability, the war in Iraq will have a decisive effect on the domestic agenda.

The Saddam Special must be stopped before it collides with The Justice Express. The two issues are connected. The push for corporate reform and economic justice will not survive a war against Iraq.

Marty Jezer's books include The Dark Ages: Life in the US 1945-1960 and Abbie Hoffman: American Rebel. He writes from Brattleboro, Vermont and welcomes comments at mjez@sover.net.

###