Reich identifies something real, the Democratic Party's failure of nerve is a structural problem, not a messaging one. Warriors, worriers, wimps is a clean taxonomy. But the frame misses a layer: the worriers and wimps aren't just cowards. They're rationally optimizing for a donor ecosystem that is itself oligarchic. You can't shame people out of incentive structures.
Roosevelt had a catastrophic exogenous shock (the Depression) that scrambled elite interests enough to allow a coalition to form. What's the equivalent today? A stock market at record highs, corporate profits surging, and a working class that is angry but not yet organized in any institutionally durable way. Rage without structure is just weather.
Mamdani's primary run in New York is the real test case here, not rhetorical exhortation.
The diagnosis is right.
The prescription though, that just be bolder, undersells how captured the party machinery actually is.
Disagree, and agree with Reich. The people are angry. even many MAGA voters know what is going on. Give them a tangible, passionate leader and they will follow.
The problem is that for every new FDR out there, there are a dozen Mussolinis and Hitlers. And from experience, you can bet the MAGA horde won't be flocking to FDRs camp.
A few months ago I volunteered to come to America to ASSIST in raising a social revolution. No one took me up on & if I came today ICE would slam the door in my face. Since then I have learned that America is a much more complex place than i first thought; which seems why you will not respond ads I feel they should Months ago I became heartily sick of people endlessly gossiping about Trump WHILE DOING NOTHING about him.
If you want to know how to raise a people's revolution may I refer you to all of the higher religions all of whom gained the support of the common people who transferred their allegiance to them. They became so powerful that every aspiring ruler needed their support to gain office. They were the first to establish the principle ~that none could rule without the CONSENT of the governed~
I agree that "They they (the world's great religions) were the first to establish the principle ~that none could rule without the CONSENT of the governed." But they were not the last. Others traditions include democracy, science, justice, education, etc. The basic principle in all of them is that we are all equal, and we must work together to serve the inconvenient long-term common interest at the expense of our short-term convenient limited interests. Otherwise, we are serving the our short-term convenient limited interests at the expense of inconvenient long-term common interest.
If we want to stop Trump, then we can't be acting like Trump.
Adam Smith's concept of capitalism does the same thing, and so does the American tradition, until you discard the founding moral principle, and then you get "unfettered free enterprise" and the Republican Party.
Adam Smith described the moral foundation of his concept in his book, "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" (1759). Milton Friedman described his idea (that capitalism is so much easier for rich people if they get to ignore morality) in his book, "Capitalism and Freedom" (1962).
Smith's concept provides freedom to people. Money is either an opportunity to be seized, a threat to be neutralized, or irrelevant.
Friedman's concept provides freedom to money. People are either an opportunity to be seized, a threat to be neutralized, or irrelevant.
Ken Maynard, if you truly wish to make a democratic difference, why do you go out of your way to provide the world's largest anti-democratic date miner gO0gle via its email system access to not only 100% of your contacts, but as well 100% of your deliberations?
Chris, we don't need MAGA so much. It's the non -MAGA who need to get out and vote and make noise If we don't get an FDR we may get other incentives for people to get off their ass.The future seems open wide.
Chris, IMO&O you make a well stated observational analyses. But why not seek out how the quiet majority of well-minded Americans like yourself can actually and effectively on election day actually elect a law-maker who has the confidence of most American voters?
Because we have a two-party system with both parties beholden to the oligarchs. The FDRs of today are actively opposed by both parties. We need to destroy the Republican Party for actively supporting a Fascist president. We need to destroy the Democratic Party for actively supporting the oligarchs. We need new parties, because both of ours are bought and owned.
From my perch outside America, Marvin, I totally agree with you. It would take mass organisation to form two new parties, but the American public do have numbers on their sides. A huge challenge, but worth it, because of the stakes. Their country is being taken over, INVADED by monied interests. The public need to start on a war-time footing. Fighting with the ballot box, not giving in to the Arms Industry. But it will be like war, because those threatened, are not used to people rising up in huge numbers. A velvet revolution. But they may chose a better, more uniquely American name than that.
I agree with you about the lack of suitable leaders within the Democratic Party, so let's look outside it. There is, IMHO, only one candidate, an old man by the name of Bernard Sanders. I know, I know, he's 84, but so was Adenauer when he led West Germany.
Sanders is the only current candidate who could conjure a landslide victory, which is what we will need to reform America. No more anemic 51/49 governance, at the mercy of John Fetterman, but a resounding victory capable of adding amendments to the Constitution, raising a wealth tax, reversing Citizens United and Dobbs, and setting term limits for justices on SCOTUS.
I can think of only one President who could achieve all this. Of course, Bernie would have to commit to being a one term President, and would need an engaging, populist VP to learn on the job and take over in 2032.
Disagree with Johan, Michael, and Reich. Agree with Abraham Lincoln when he said, “Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently, he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.”
Democrats must take on America's oligarchs. Here's how. Agree with Lincoln when he said, “Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith, let us dare to do our duty as we understand it.”
Think global but act local starting with the person in the mirror. “I” need to create public sentiment within “my” personal relationships. “We” need to know how to get from conflicting but convenient opinions to an inconvenient truth. And then someone needs to take on a leadership role and expand the circle. That’s what the people of Minneapolis did without a how-to manual and instead because that’s how we humans respond naturally to a crisis.
The Democratic Party is an expression of public sentiment. If the public thinks the solution to the problem is to criticize the Democratic Party the same way one would criticize the sports team that lost the game, then there is no public sentiment.
If “I” remain overly attached to “my” opinions in “my” personal relationships, then do “I” blame the person in the mirror? Or do “we” all agree to blame the Democratic Party because the politicians are all idiots because they don’t agree with “my” opinion while ignoring the fact that the only thing “we the people” agree on is “blame the politicians?”
We still have a chance to elect progressives if we want to change what's going on. The corporate dems will never do what's needed. This is not blaming the politicians. We need to elect representatives who will represent the working people and not grovel before the wealthy. There is enough to go around if we are willing to share.
I don't blame ANY person for what's going on, James. (No, not even him.)
Yes, many if not most Democratic politicians want what is best for our country. However, the DNC as an entity has an existential imperative to maintain its power. After all, in our two-party system, any power the Democratic Party loses, will be gained by the GOP. They have power over the system, yes, but they are also extremely constrained *by* the system. The same goes for the GOP. Remember, after January 6, the Republicans in Congress, who were there, said "never Trump" along with all the rest of us... until he recaptured the GOP electorate. The US government is injured, dying, and needs our help; we cannot continue foisting our responsibilities as citizens off onto Congress.
If UTW is successful, we will be leaving the two-party system where it belongs, in the dusty annals of our rocky history. To do that, we must erase the artificial borders between us that the parties have drawn. We cannot be Democrats or Republicans; we must be Americans, the people who, 250 years ago, stood up and said: "even an uncertain future is better than this."
I agree wholeheartedly, Michael, I've come to the same conclusion! And it's not going to be anyone who currently uses their public identity as their brand, because leading a viable resistance against the entrenched powers risks destroying a public identity, given the likely potential blowback. They could be risking their entire careers to do so. So if we are to be led to freedom by a tangible, passionate leader, it must be someone new to the scene, someone that can risk losing their public identity because it isn't their livelihood, that steps up in front of everyone and leads the charge.
I'm still waiting for that person to show up too, but perhaps while we're both waiting, you might take a look at what I've got planned for next week, over at UTW.vote? ❤️
Based upon my sincere "like" you will know I saw your earlier much appreciated corrective to another.
Except now in real time I now come across this one of yours, but noticed a contradiction in your final sentence that I hoped your link would explain.
There with my full agreement, IMO&O you post a key overarching principle "Democracy spreads through people."
Why then are you looking for another top-down leader, instead of a chairperson who facilitates the democratic minded discussion to take place, what we in Canada call, but like you do not practice as actually being our House of Commons for commoners?
My the two heads of ours working together help lead and sp
ark the way for a better democratic tomorrow, effectively from day one forward after the very next election?
I don't think we need a leader as a movement, no; I do, however, believe that we need someone charismatic enough, with good enough vision and a strong enough torch to light the way, because people have become understandably wary of faceless organizations claiming to have their best interests at heart.
I don't want to be a leader. I don't want to be a politician, and if there is any mercy in this world I'll never be forced into that role. I never even wanted to be known; I just wanted people to take my ideas seriously when I have good ones.
The first three months of developing what would become UTW, I spent trying to take that kind of an "advisor" role, presenting my ideas to people with the power and influence to implement them. That was when I learned that the people with the power and influence don't have the freedom to implement ideas like mine. The only people with enough freedom (aside from the tyrants) are the electorate; thus, the electorate must speak ideas that are as potent as the ones I've spent the past six months crafting and refining, and we must all do it with one voice, and we must do it right the fuck now.
I don't know that the social media strategy I've chosen will prove to have been the most effective one to gather the support we need, but if it isn't, then someone else can pick up the torch I've dropped, and I can go back to being a private citizen. As long as I'm lighting the way, I'll do it in the way that is the most natural for me personally: as myself, with my real name, my face, and my honor on the line. If that is not what America needs, then I'm much happier letting someone else guide the way than trying to mold myself into something I'm not.
Instead, we in Colorado are putting forward a former Republican with a sketchy questionable history of being a navy "real admiral"(lower) and home schooling her 5 children despite her putative 34 naval career (almost all as a reserve and never serving on a ship). Voted for trump at least twice.
MAGA voters enabled the GOP and oligarchs to destroy the economy.
The problem is that 33% of voters (MAGA ...) still approve of what Trump is doing.
The MAGA voters including the racist white nationalists are a cancer destroying America. The GOP is controlled by billionaire oligarchs and corporations. The GOP and oligarchs responded in the 1970s to FDR's successes in the 1930s and 1940s that saved America and the world by winning WW2, stopping the billionaires and Republicans who created the Great Depression and by creating a large middle class. The GOP and oligarchs with support in the 1970s from what was then MAGA started an organized campaign to destroy democracy and take control of the economy and the federal government after the Powell Memo in 1971.
Since then the neoliberal Democrats (Clinton and Obama) have been complicit supporting GOP fake economics that stole wealth from 99% of American and transferred the wealth to the billionaires and corporations as economists including Fed Chair Greenspan and Milton Freidman deceived us all with cruel economics adopted as policy by Reagan claiming fake free market economics were saving us from a deficit and economic disaster. Of course, Bush 2 caused the disaster with the Great Recession in 2008.
Democrats failed again to fix the core problem with wealth inequality enabling Trump and a lawless fascist autocracy which was the objective as planned in PROJECT 2025. Reich totally recognizes and describes the core problem and the cause. But the new media still doesn't recognize what happened over the last 55 years and why. The news cycle is focused on sensational crap that gets attention and feeds a stupid public. The solution is Democrats in 2029 enforcing the law against insurrection.
You're preaching to the choir here, and I agree with every single one of your words. The real enemy is not Trump (who is an imbecilic and demented paper tiger) but the DNC, which has failed consistently over the last 45 years to grow a spine.
The Clintons were handsomely bribed to create the rustbelt, destroy rational healthcare and empower the oligarchs. MAGA is just a symptom of the disease they created. Obama was a huge disappointment - far too corporate.
There is only one possible solution to this awful state we find ourselves in, an old man by the name of Bernard Sanders. I sure hope he runs.
Fascinating observation, Johan. I think we have to change the narrative from "government is the problem," the Laffer curve, and Friedman economics by exposing them on their own terms. The modern innovation economy was not born primarily from private risk-taking, but from decades of taxpayer-funded research led by government agencies like DARPA, NASA, NIH, and NSF, which absorbed the earliest and most uncertain stages of technological development—creating foundational breakthroughs such as the internet, GPS, advanced materials, and biotechnology. In effect, the taxpayer served as the original risk-capital investor, funding high-risk, long-horizon research that private markets could not justify, while the private sector later commercialized and profited from these breakthroughs. So, where is the return for the original investor? Someone more skilled than I needs to expose the larger-than-life "rugged individualism " myth of the entrepreneur as hero for what it is. We got here because of who we are together. Don't get me wrong. A good portion of why we are struggling is because one party thinks government is the problem and the other thinks it is the solution. We need only look at the New York Times 2023 Reports on the mismanagement of water in this country to realize that the institutions of the administrative state have been obsolete and increasingly costly for the last 30 to 60 years. It is not the declared certainties of the heroic ego-logical "I"s that will preserve the democracy. It is the inquisitive and imaginative "Eco-logical WE" of citizenship that will make the difference. We need to recover our invested funds and invest in restoring the social capital of hopeful and engaged citizens. because all capital formation begins with social capital formation.
Craig, I would go a step further than R Reich in characterizing trump's degree of corruption, to say that he is at the nadir of corruption of any politician and indeed any human being to exist in our collective lifetimes. This ultimate failure of a national leader to serve the purpose of promoting the welfare of the citizens under his charge represents the failure of the Republic as it was designed at the Founding - the worst fears of the best architects and proponents of the US Constitution are about to become fact. Evidence pours in daily that we are at the verge of becoming a police state under control of the biggest money launderers in history, the foremost of whom Reich named at the opening of this piece and thousands of others. Dark money in politics has served the ignominious purposes of 1) subverting the vote by the actions of foot soldiers for the fascists in polling places and state houses and 2) and the vicious lie campaigns by regime supporters in attack ads and at campaign rallies. In effect the "people's sentiment" of Lincoln has been poisoned by the sentiment of the mighty which serves the 1%. The actions of "Who we are together" from the 1930's onward is the reason why the Western World hasn't been a Nazi police state for the past 80 years.
Dennis, further to your final sentence "The actions of "Who we are together" from the 1930's onward is the reason why the Western World hasn't been a Nazi police state for the past 80 years" might not the following two abbreviations define the heart of the problem when instead of a fully 100% egalitarian 1 Person = 1 Vote our present electoral structure tips the scales towards $1 = 1 Vote?
Need I say more to underline my point beyond citizens United? :) No /s
Reich is amusing in his language, which grows in proletarian anger, almost daily. But it won't help very much, might even be ineffective.
Of course the diagnosis is right.
But what does it mean for politics and public debate? I think I pleaded before this: what social relations between people do we need and want?
What translation of these relations in political forms and habits we envision? How can the regaining of control of big money be organised?
Bob said some weeks ago that the filthy rich changed the laws of demand and supply. It looks like the truth. Are there political systems in the world doing better than the US?
Can we improve the existing party system without violence?
Tom, you ask “can we improve the two party system without violence?“
No, we cannot improve the existing two party system. As others have said our problem is systemic and the only solution is to create and implement a new system. Isn’t that what the Second Continental Congress did 250 years ago despite the opposition of the largest and most powerful country and military then existing on the planet? If they could do it then why can’t we do it now? It takes bold thinking and a commitment to revolutionary change, and by that I mean, nonviolent revolutionary change.
Look at Albania today. Overnight mass nonviolent demonstrations are stopping a land grab by politicians and oligarchs in it’s tracks. Can we at least follow the example of Albania who years ago overthrew the communist regime through nonviolent revolution? With such a vast number (261) of Democrats in both the house and the Senate, how come we can only name a few that we can count on to stand up for our rights? The Republican Party has destroyed itself and the Democratic Party is impotent to the wishes of the billionaires to even think of changing or even improvingthe system. If neither party can stand for us the citizens, then clearly our two party system is broken, likely beyond repairs and fixes. IT IS TIME TO THINK BIG! Since 1980 there have been over 10 highly successful nonviolent revolutions on this planet. We may not be the first to accomplish this, but maybe we can at least be the 11th?
We must stop allowing ourselves to think that Trump is the problem, he is only the eventual manifestation of our problem. We love our country, we love what our constitution stands for, but it does not mean we cannot think and act boldly to change the course of the future of our nation.
The definition of revolution is a rapid, fundamental change in a countries political system, government or social structure usually driven by widespread action. A revolution doesn't just change who is in charge, it changes how the system works. Here are 10 examples of successful nonviolent revolutions.
POLAND and Solidarity (1980s)- led by Lech Walesa with mass labor strikes and negotiations led to a peaceful transition to Democracy.
CZECHOSLOVAKIA-Velvet Revolution in 1989. The result was the end of communist rule with almost no violence.
EAST GERMANY-Peaceful Revolution 1989 resulting in the fall of the Berlin Wall and reunification with Germany.
PHILIPPINES -People Power Revolution in 1986- removed Ferdinand Marcos and the restoration of democracy under Corazon Aquino
ESTONIA-The Singing Revolution (1987to1991) led to Estonia regaining independence from the Soviet Union. It is considered one of the most successful examples of mass nonviolent resistance in modern history.
TUNISIA-The Jasmine Revolution (2011) Nonviolent protests led to leadership change and democratic reforms.
SERBIA-Bulldozer Revolution (2000) Student led movement used Nonviolent tactics-Overthrew Slobodan Miolosevic with a transition to democracy
GEORGIA- Rose Revolution (2003) Peaceful resignation of the president and new elections.
UKRAINE-Orange Revolution (2004) Mas protests against election fraud resulting in re-run election and political reforms.
LATVIA-Latvians used mass demonstrations, public singing events, cultural revival, political organizing, and civil resistance rather than armed rebellion. Important milestones included:
* 1987: Public protests against Soviet policies began to emerge.
* 1988: The Popular Front of Latvia was formed and became a major force for independence.
* August 23, 1989: The famous Baltic Way linked approximately two million people in a human chain stretching across Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to mark the 50th anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
* May 4, 1990: Latvia’s parliament declared the restoration of independence.
* January 1991: Soviet forces attempted to reassert control. Latvians responded largely through non-violent resistance, erecting barricades and maintaining mass civic mobilization.
* August 1991: Following the failed hardline coup in Moscow, Latvia’s independence became fully recognized internationally.
WITH ALL OF THIS HISTORY TO BUILD ON, WHY NOT US? Certainly we will try all strategies at our disposal, but if they fail, do not give up hope! We have options.
Re the Baltic States hand holding demo: it would take approximately 3.2m people to span the US coast to coast on the highways - less than turn out for No Kings.
Marc, nearly all the peaceful revolutions you mention were byproducts of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which Gorbachev was unable to prevent. The fascist regime now in power in Washington DC is much stronger and would use such demonstrations as pretext to tighten its grip over the country.
Victor,, it’s quite true that the situation we are facing. is quite different than all the revolutions that occurred in what was once the mighty and super repressive Soviet Union. However, the situation we are facing is unique in that I have never seen a so-called functioning democracy so quickly degenerate into an oligarch supported dictatorship, and at the same time this Trump powered dictatorship seems to be falling apart all over the edges. What is the same in all these situations is the brave and dogged determination of the people to either win back their freedom or create their freedom.
I was in Moscow shortly after the attempt at counterrevolution failed and these people had lived under an unbearable oppression for decades and decades. They had no model of democracy to restore, they had to do it from scratch, and again there was a mighty military machine opposing them. Yet, they kept their determination for change, and their determination to maintain non-violence in the face of the possibility of crushing violence on the part of the Soviet regime.
I was also in Estonia a few years after their successful revolution, and I would say and witness that the change of events there was quite remarkable.
I still hold to my point, if they can do it under much, much worse conditions than we are facing then why cannot our country, created by revolution in the face of overwhelming odds do the same?
Every time we have the thought that we cannot do this, it is a win for the Trump regime. This is the psychology. They are attempting to instill in us, and it is this psychology that we must fight unceasingly if we want our country back.
I'm asthonished a very long time about the way the rape of constitution and law were accepted. The courts did their jobs, not the supreme court, but the representatives of the people were sent on vacation by lapdog Johnson.
Your list of revolutions is gratefully accepted; a lot can be said about each one of them, but that is not usefull.
Yes, the parties are in control of their quest for donations, and do not discuss principles and values, or how to curtail big money influence.
Yes, the fraction of independent voters is growing, which seems good to me, but will it grow strong enough to fight the system of political financing?
Of course, not Trump is the problem, but what was accepted for decades as normal behaviour and thinking.
But how to organise a peacefull transition? You are one of the few to think about it, and you earn my respect for it. But the problem is big, and I'm looking for ideas that can form this transition. Trump and MAGA are at war with the dumbocrats, but how can we destroy this way of thinking?
I wrote in a post here that the US was doomed and you protested, quite right. But this is the time to think about the demise of the Trump regime and what should follow. Horrifying perspective is the entrenched attitude of the Rep's and Maga...
Tom, hopefully you ask a rhetorical question "Can we improve the existing party system without violence?"
And if not, I will add emphatically, it's the only way because as soon as one gets into a shooting war we all lose as observed by a Chinese ancient Sun Tzu observed when the shooting begins we all lose.
Thank you, Johan. I appreciated both Reich's piece and your response to it.
What I found interesting is that I don't actually see a great deal of disagreement between the two. Reich emphasizes the concentration of wealth and power and calls for a stronger response. Your comment highlights the reality that these patterns are reinforced by institutional incentives and donor structures that are not easily overcome through rhetoric alone.
To me, both point toward the same underlying challenge: how political and economic systems become organized around concentrations of power that tend to perpetuate themselves.
I also appreciated your observation that "rage without structure is just weather." That line stayed with me. History suggests that lasting change requires not only recognizing problems but building durable institutions, relationships, and forms of participation capable of carrying change forward.
Perhaps Reich is focused on the urgency of confronting concentrated power, while your comment draws attention to the practical constraints that make such confrontation difficult. Both perspectives seem necessary.
Thank you for adding another layer to the conversation.
Individual politicians cannot be expected to seek election without financial backing that extorts "favors". Is there a way to provide financial support without the quid pro quo aspect? Our form of government depends on "one person, one vote", not "one dollar, one vote". We need better ideas on how to fund elections.
Ban donations over $1,000. Reverse Citizens United. Levy a higher corporation tax and use it to fund elections. Call it the Corporate election tax! They donate already - this would level the playing field. (Maybe levied for the first 10 years as an average of their donations over the previous 10 years!)
Make MSM - not cable - channels show political ads free - with equal air time.
Forbid advertizing on cable tv, except for cable news channels - which would be obliged to show, free, material from each party. (Fox a few years ago got itself classified as "entertainment" in a legal case - this would have to be reversed. For heavens sake, their name is Fox NEWS!)
Limit the campaign season to a reasonable period - say 6 weeks for primaries and 2 months for general elections. (The UK limits election campaigning to 6 weeks).
This would have the added benefit of allowing politicians to actually do their job, rather than incessantly campaigning and fundraising.
Put limits on how much each candidate can spend - adjusted to each post - the dog catcher gets a very small allowance, a senator a much larger one.
This would have the added benefit of easing the election fatigue so many feel with the constant political ads.
And it would give parties other than the big two a place at the table - something I believe is desperately needed.
By the way, in the UK they used to have these "Party Political Broadcasts" on all channels at the same time - before the advent of cable and streaming. The main result was a peak in water consumption, as the nation collectively used the time to make a cup of tea and have a pee!
We have to come up with practical solutions that will work with THIS supreme court. We are stuck with this court structure for at least several decades. If any of the older justices retire, tRump will pick younger ones who will bend to his will. Can you imagine Aileen Cannon on the court or similar? We can be certain that no Democratic President will ever be able to nominate another SCOTUS justice while the Republicans hold the Senate now that the McConnell maneuver is in play. Adjusting the Senate rules to force a confirmation vote on all Federal judge appointments as a first priority issue would help. The constitution requires advise and consent, not a partisan block on all confirmation voting.
Johan your response was introspective for all democrats. Democrats failure to elevate a UNIFIED message is self defeating. Name calling by Trump has proven effective so hire entertaining ,clever , humorous, speech writers to oppose Trump idiots. Biden must retire. His image is poison. Mamdani, Bernie Sanders, AOC, Jasmine Crockett , Mark Kelly, Wes Moore, Hakeem Jeffries are fresh trusted faces that can make a UNIFIED message feel like a new beginning. Trump bias makes him appear as a pre WWII confederate leading the KKK. Republicans have no response to Mamdani in the same way that Democrats were overwhelmed by Trump bombast. People are hungry for intelligent leadership.
Correct, Johan. And, in response to your question: what is required is not (necessarily) a catastrophic shock, though you're right that it must be exogenous to the system. More generally, we need a black swan event, in whatever form that takes.
Have you subscribed to UTW yet? We're going to attempt to generate such an event by tapping into the outrage felt by the vast majority of Americans and using it to fuel a viral grassroots movement that the powerful interests can't quell. We will be taking aim not at the Republicans nor at the Democrats, but at the two-party system that allows them to maintain their undisputed duopoly. Is that dangerous? Maybe. Is it more dangerous than doing nothing? You tell me.
Yes a structural problem and a failure by Democrats since 2020 to enforce the law against the people who have violated the federal law against insurrection.
There is a solution to the core problem which Reich described as Democrats not taking on America's oligarchs.
What is the solution? A new generation of Democrats need to get elected in 2026 and 2028 and commit to enforcing the law against insurrection that began on January 6, 2021, as incited by Trump and continued with violations of the law against insurrection by others in the federal governmetn from 2021 into 2025 and 2026. In March 2024, the Supreme Court violated federal law 18 U.S. Code § 2383 by failing to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that stated Trump, an insurrectionist, was ineligible to hold office.
Trump owes his presidency to his lying and the failure by Democrats and the Supreme Court to enforce the law against insurrection that began on January 6, 2021, and has continued into 2025 and 2026 as planned in Project 2025. Why was PROJECT 2025 required? In Trump's first term, the honest people in the federal goverment including civil servants acted to block most of what Trump was trying to do which was illegal. So PROJECT 2025 was designed to eliminate the honest civil servants and restruct the federal government with people loyal to Trump and wllling to do anything to implement a lawless, facist autocracy. DOGE was part of the effort but so are the Cabinet Secretaries firing honest people including the DOD with Hegseth, the DOJ with whoever is the AG, and with Bill Pulte now firing people in DNI.
In 2025 and 2026, Trump and members of his administration including his Cabinet and ICE agents, Republicans in Congress and six justices on the Supreme Court were criminal felons who massively rejected and disobeyed the laws and rejected the authority of courts in the United States and must be arrested, prosecuted convicted and jailed in 2029 after Democrats control the presidency, the DOJ, and Congress.
According to the federal law on insurrection, 18 U.S. Code § 2383, “whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
In America, Democrats have been asleep for decades since the 1970s while Republicans have caused tragic suffering in America with attacks on democracy and justice with perversions including Citizens United, wars, and wealthy inequality created by Republicans and the Supreme Court controlled by the oligarchs to steal wealth from 99% of Americans and transfer the wealth to the top 1%. Republicans and the Supreme Court controlled by the oligarchs also created the affordability problems in housing, food, energy and healthcare that are sustained by a lawless, fascist autocracy that also attacks voting and civil rights.
In 2029, Democrats must create a new wealth tax and restore high income taxes on the wealthy, billionaires and corporations to the rates in 1965 to fund solutions to affordability of food, housing, healthcare and childcare and correct wealth inequality by returning stolen wealth to 99% of Americans and especially to the working class. Democrats must also enable new laws and reform the Supreme Court after the six justices are removed as convicted criminals who violated insurrection federal law, end Citizens United, tariffs, and wars, and restore strong protections for voting and civil rights. But Democrats must first get elected and then enforce the federal law against insurrection.
Yu are right, Johan, and this is why a class revolution is not likely to happen. The US middle class is basically conservative, because it is fairly well off. The situation could change quickly and dramatically should Trump&Co threaten home owners, pension beneficiaries, saving accounts, and so on. Dems must tread carefully and not forget the ACA care fiasco.
Johan, you are very clear-eyed about the Democrats. I am pretty sure you are right about how captured the so-called party of the people really is. Money in politics, money that is needed to win, sucks even well-intentioned politicians into the fold of the moneyed-class (the Epstein class). But we need Democrats, as the opposition party, to take the Congress come November. They will do what is needed to be done just by virtue of their opposition status. No more Supreme Court justices. Impeachment for the worst public servants. Blocking and reversing the Trump legislative agenda, blocking and reversing the Trump theft of American taxpayer money. We need Democrats in spite of their many weaknesses.
Many thanks Johan in your summary statement for stating succinctly with precision by words that did not come to my dyslexic mind, but once seeing them, I shall try harder to remember "The diagnosis is right. The prescription though, that just be bolder, undersells how captured the party machinery actually is."
On that theme of insight, its my pleasure making your acquaintance towards possible collective problem solving as I now repeat what I said a little earlier which may be compared and contrasted with the 10 earlier replies you have already received.
Robert Reich, over the years since you came across my radar I have much appreciated many of your insights, such as in this one, where you again make some exceptional points. Except here again you unfortunately undermine your own message when you conflate "the Democrats" and/or "The Democratic Party" with the democratic minded! Such as Bernie Sanders of whom you make pointed reference.
Imagine how much more of a greater impact you could have made when in 2024 you are encouraging Biden and Harris to get serious regarding the genocide in Gaza, except you too to use your very own key words as used in this article regarding "Class Worriers and Class Wimps".
But it's not too late where the majority of Americans in many voting districts were to simply conduct their own pre-election vote123 ranked ballot poll and with this information on election day actually elect the one and only person who the majority of Americans have confidence in. And thereby simultaneously no longer allow the lesser of two evil extremists to slip up the middle and receive the phony electoral status where most American voters NEVER Vote for their declared elected law-maker!
And of course, I would welcome your collaborative problem solving reply!
There were campaign donation constraints on FDR and MOC, in theory, but these were not enforced and easily circumvented.
Watching Regime Change segment on Morning Joe this am they talked about GOP Party members go along or know they get their heads bashed in by trump, by his calling on corporations and individuals to supply the money to push those who oppose him out of office, like Massie. This is another consequence of Citizens United and the lower court ruling in Speechnow vs FEC. Under a vengeful President these court decisions confer extraordinary power on the Presidency and reduce the President's Party in Congress to dependent supplicants. According to my AI, this possible consequence was not an argument before the courts. In part because the Super PACs at the time weren't that powerful. Things change but the law does not change so fast.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (in SpeechNow v. FEC) held that the First Amendment banned limits on contributions to independent political action committees. This decision — not Citizens United — created SuperPACs. See https://equalcitizens.us/against_superpacs/
Another thing that needs to be exposed is the current lie Trump is spreading across the internet.
Obama made a deal with Iran in 2016 that Trump insists saw our country getting nothing in return. Bull!! The deal enacted the release of four individuals Iran held as part of the January 2016 prisoner swap under the Obama administration were Jason Rezaian, Amir Hekmati, Saeed Abedini, and Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari. This exchange took place simultaneously with the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal. It was tied to the U.S. airlifting $400 million in frozen cash assets (part of a $1.7 billion settlement over a decade). Why can't Trump tell the truth about anything. The Iranians can't be trusted and neither can Donald Trump. Donnie is the little engine that couldn't.
Trump and the Republicans rejected President Obama’s JCPOA precisely because it was President Obama’s plan, and then Trump gets in there, he and Kegseth start a war illegally without preparation and planning, and wind up losing to Iran. Trump and Kegseth are dangerously incompetent.
Trump is addicted to lying, and can’t stop himself. He lies about all sorts of things, large and small, because he’ll never admit a mistake, nor will he apologize.
By now, almost everyone in the world over knows trump lies - about everything. The question is, "who still believes he's telling the truth"? Americans, not all of them but enough of them who will never concede that he's a liar or a bad president. That pool is saturated with the brainwashed. They have become an 'obstacle' that won't move. The resistance needs to find ways to circumvent this mountain of ignoramuses.
His cult doesn’t care that he lies. Some are assholes who know he’s lying and the rest are gullible idiots. All would be honored if he shot them between the eyes because he paid them attention. They are the same shitheads who support dictators everywhere.
Yes, Professor, Democrats must take on America's oligarchs. But first, in order for that to happen, Democrats who are in bed with oligarchs either have to jump out of that bed or be pushed out.
We need to take on the wealth defense industry. Biden needed another term. He understood the problem but didn't have enough time, or likely the health, to see it through.
Maybe Joe Biden didn't have the the political will of the Democratic Party behind him because too many of them were (are) in bed with the wealth defense industry. While he was called "Senator Credit Card" and "Senator from MBNA" for good reason, he did take progressive steps to reign in corporatocracy. And with his talent for working across the aisle, I think you're right, Gloria, that with more time and good health he could have and would have made even more of a difference.
Actually, they need to lean over in bed and smother a few oligarchs with their pillows. That might get the attention of the remaining oligarchs, who think they're above the fray.
Campaign finance is the issue; our campaigns in America aren't publicly financed - so as long as there are no limits on spending (and, thanks to the Supreme Court, no limits on "soft money" etc.) those oligarchs - and their $ - plays an increasingly large role.
This is an excellent commentary. My only disagreement is the argument against name calling. We simply must call out the oligarchs for what they truly are - bloodsucking parasites. They are the ticks and leeches who have been waging war against our national body since 1980. They have volubly protested against us for waging a class war against them. By attempting to tax them at the same rate we tax wages? By contesting their never ending proposals for subsidies and exemptions and privileged status as “job creators”? Ha! The latest weapon in their arsenal to garner the wealth of the planet is a deliberate assault on employment - Artificial Intelligence to replace workers in near entirety. And we are supposed to have faith in their generosity to bestow upon us the meager scraps that will allow us to continue to consume their products so as not to interrupt the upward trickle? Call them the names of the creatures that they are.
One thing the own the libbers hate is to be laughed at. They’re now the laughing stock of basically the entire world. The curtain has been pulled back, and the wizard turned out to be a grifting obese pile of shit. A national embarrassment. The boobs who are out there for the entertainment should be starting to switch channels, or maybe the embers in their bellies will keep their fat asses on the couch during the midterms. “Winners” who stay too long are not followed once they reach the embarrassing stage. We’re there.
What he says…just do it,Democrats or why did we elect you?? Are you going to fight this oligarchy or hide in your closets with the cat?? Are you going to come out fighting for America or let us become another North Korea?? You have the power to charge things so do it.
Read Jeffrey Winters new book, "The Blind Spot," and you will understand why a few good Senators can't overcome the purpose of the Senate to protect the wealth class. The original structure of the government was to protect the wealth of the oligarchs and it has worked as intended. The estimated Gini Coefficient in 1789 was 0.50 to 0.60.Now the Gini coefficient on wealth is around 0.88 ( zero is total equality and 1.0 is total inequality).
So the structure of the Senate must be changed. We the people have to do our part. We need to create a massive blue wave to take control of the Senate. The Biden administration demonstrated the dangers of institutionalism. It is good to identify blocks to equality in the system so we can adapt and overcome. We cannot give up.
We need to boycott the Ellisons and Paramount. The creative people in Hollywood need to boycott Paramount. We need to organize and have each other’s backs.
Gloria, you nailed it. It's naive to think that dems can compete with oligarchs without their own oligarchs in their back pockets. I have not read "the blind spot", but did the author suggest any solutions?
Kathy, The only Republican Senator/Governor who had some belief in "public service", was George Voinovich. The worst is up for grabs but it looks as if Moreno and Husted are working hard to win that title. We have a good chance of changing that this year. Go Amy Acton and Go Sherrod Brown.
I plan to vote for Acton and Brown this year. Husted is a not very bright crony of DeWine from Kettering, and I seriously want Brown back in the Senate where he belongs. I am also unimpressed with Bernie Moreno. The only good thing he did was to squash Frank LaRose’s attempt to run in the Republican primary for Senate, LaRose came in third, but Moreno was Trump’s pick.
They certainly have a talent for finding the worst people to run. Vivek Ramaswamy doesn’t come off as a great candidate, and the white Christian Nationalists won’t vote for him as he is a Hindu. Personally, I don’t care what his religious beliefs are, it’s his personality and politics I find annoying.
FDR overcame a hostile media blockade by bypassing corporate newspapers entirely. He used radio to speak directly to citizens through "Fireside Chats," building deep trust. Crucially, he delivered undeniable material proof of success: jobs, roads, and Social Security. By leaning into the class struggle rather than backing down, he forged a massive new voting coalition of workers, minorities, and the unemployed. Real, visible economic relief completely neutralized the corporate press's misinformation.
To counter modern oligarchic media, Democrats must adapt FDR’s playbook for the digital age by changing how they deliver both information and policy. First, they can bypass hostile social media algorithms by building decentralized, direct-to-voter text and message networks, much like FDR bypassed newspapers with the radio. Democratic leaders should abandon sterile, scripted press releases in favor of unscripted video live-streams and raw, direct podcasts to rebuild authentic human trust. Crucially, the party must pivot its messaging away from abstract political concepts and toward tangible, undeniable material proof of success, heavily highlighting local union jobs, built infrastructure, and capped healthcare costs. Finally, rather than appeasing wealthy centrist donors, modern Democrats must lean directly into the economic class conflict, aggressively championing working-class relief to re-energize and expand their voting coalition.
Excellent ideas. The old campaign system of "donate a fortune so we can give it the mainstream media to get our message across" isn't working anymore. First of all, Democrats don't have a message worth hearing, and secondly, many don't watch network television or read newspapers anymore.
I’m one of those Dems, Gloria. And I do read newspapers and watch network tv. I’m happy to see so many Repubs abandoning their party: welcome back to the No Kings Party, all of you.💖
Thank you for giving us a picture of how candidates must communicate to reach today's voters.
Democrats need to stop hiding, and start speaking clearly, loudly, and directly to voters about topics that affect daily lives: healthcare, transportation, education for all (including the disabled), unions, and a language of respect toward one another.
Get messaging about real "bread and butter" issues talked about EVERY DAY in ways that every American can access without paywalls.
Good point, Jim. I shudder to think of listening to The Orange Idiot trying to give a "fireside chat." He'd mumble incoherently for a while, then fall asleep.
It's time to use a very succinct label for the direction that we're heading as a nation:
Kleptocratic #RepubloFascism
This is not your grandpa's fascism. It is a kind formed by and for billionaires to extract all they can for as long as they can until we stop them. And if we don't, it will be those #BillionaireBuzzards who will drain the wealth from the rest of us and buy thousands of houses on the cheap.
Jeffrey Winters, the political scientist of "The Blind Spot," recently offered the term "participatory inequality" for our system. He points out that the Nordic Social Democracies have an oligarchic class that mostly opts out of paying taxes, leaving the majority to foot the bill for social programs.
I promise, I have no financial interest in promoting the book, lol.
You're definitely preaching to the choir here. Unfortunately the Dem establishment shows no sign of planning to bite the hands that bribe them. So the situation is going to probably have to get much worse before it (hopefully) gets better. Consider just how bad things were when FDR was elected for instance. The "bright" side, in a very bad way, is that the current phenomenally incompetent admin seems hell bent on creating the kind of catastrophe that might produce another FDR. This is no way to run a country though.
I’m afraid you are right - the average person just trying to survive has their hands full right now - not seeing the giant monster oligarchs gobbling up America and eventually their lives
Yep. The distributive tables have been tilted and tilted until a truly wild proportion of the value of national output plows into a few pockets-- where it's used, when it's used, largely for gambling, not for investment in the durable means of production.
A tangential historical event to remember in connection with plutocrats and their responses to equity-increase policies: the B business Plot of 1933, in which U.S. "business leaders" colluded in an attempt to overthrow the government, but happily picked the wrong potential dictator: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
Andy Lanset's audio documentary on NPR, "The Marine Corps General Who Called War 'A Racket'", is the best account of General Butler's life I've come across. Maybe one of these days, when Hollywood's ready to take on the project, they'll make a movie about the General's life that's less scattered and more to the point than "Amsterdam" was.
I can't access my Substack article on Smedley Butler, or most of my previous articles. I have hard copies, but I thought we were supposed to be able to open our archive to paid subscribers.
Trump used the right bait to hook his MAGA worshipers. Anyone promoting and believing in his smoke and screen ideologies was/is a true Patriot. They are the personification of a Christian. He and his wealthy ilk unabashedly insulted anyone denouncing their ideas. Once Patriot and Christian were thrown out to the populace it became very easy for them to call people anti Patriots, unamerican , and worst of all not Christian. Who would know best what a Christian is than a man selling his own bibles and never having opened one in his life. It boggles the mind that corporations and individuals holding the most ungodly amounts of money feel they should not pay taxes. They are proverbially laughing all the way to the banks.
They aren’t what I’d call genuinely Christian in following Jesus’s commands to care for the least of these. White Christian Nationalism is simply the latest version of slaveholder Christianity. Jesus becomes a political weapon and Christianity becomes mandatory, all while white Christian Nationalists selectively read the Bible to justify violence and the use of force. They rewrite the First Amendment to mean religious freedom for Christians only, which is not what its author James Madison intended. They rewrite history to make it look like the Founders were evangelicals like themselves, but the truth is many of them were Deists and not churchgoers.
In my admittedly limited experience many Americans are uncomfortable talking about class war because they truly believe that America is a classless society where anyone can make it if they work hard enough.
Worse, any attempt to analyse American politics in terms of class dynamics is seen as closet Marxism.
In that way the fundamental clash of interests between capital and labour is airbrushed out of the present, and indeed out of history.
The Dems have fallen for this, and are terrified, thus giving the wealthy free rein to accumulate ever-increasing wealth and power.
Or as Marx put it: 'Accumulate, accumulate. That is Moses and the prophets.'
He was wrong about a lot of things, but in that he was absolutely correct.
It’s annoying to have fascists calling Democrats socialists or communists. They don’t know what these terms really mean, and they use them as snarl words, designed to discredit Democrats and shut down discussion. The Republicans really don’t care how far they’ve gone in abandoning commitment to government of, for and by the people.
The key is getting the white working class to buy into reform. That is the missing element of the coalition, and one that would be a natural to align with radical economic policies. But the Republicans have been ingenious at inciting that class with fear mongering about immigration, DEI and trans rights, and Democrats have made it very easy for them. The average Democrat would rather champion transgender women competing in high-school sports than taxing the rich to fund Medicare for all. Adding ever new letters to the LGBTQ acronym doesn’t threaten the economic interests of the wealthy blue-state elite, but taxes do. So Democrats stick to the safer ground of identity politics and piss the hell out of the working class. When will the Democratic leadership figure that out?
Walter Scheidel ("The Great Leveler") documents the events that accompany the collapse of rising inequality in societies: Wars, Revolutions (that make a difference), Pandemics and Societal Collapse. Not once a democratic vote. Is the US about to experience one of these catastrophic events? A revolution, as when we fought for civil rights and against the Vietnam war? But today, you have to hold two jobs, the wife is working too, you are in debt, you have no union, your job is precarious, you cannot afford the premiums of the privatized health care system, can't afford to send your kids to college, if college, they are still paying for their educational debt, you have no money saved for retirement, and you are glued to your screens distracting you from the situation. All your waking hours must be devoted to survival, making money, more urgent with inflation. Where do you find the time to organize to regain power? Do the "masters of mankind' (Adam Smith 1776) know this? Yes, they design and control "The System." AI will balloon the above effects. The "exceptional country." What a regrettable tragedy!
A great description of wage earners lives today and why there is little energy left for organizing. Wait until more people are layed off due to AI and see what happens.
Prof. Reich, thank you for pointing a finger of guilt to our Democratic representatives. Save for a few, those in positions of possibilities, have been timid.
While patriotic and horrified Americans are marching in the streets, too many elected Democrats seem to be awaiting instructions from FDR, Abraham Lincoln, or George Washington .
Let’s hear it for tough guys and gal you applaud: Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Zohran Mamdani. A Jew, Catholic, and Muslim (but with a Jewish great-grandfather).
It’s no secret that along with his mania, Trump flaunts, rather than hides, his corruption. How is this possible?
Certainly, when our Democratic representatives took office, they intended to do their part to ferociously aid and support their constituents with the power of a lioness.
Sadly, too many of us Democratics are disappointed that other than the three you note, the remainder are behaving more like scared kittens.
The heart of the Democratic Party has to lean more left. The American people can see that we have a political system that favors the rich. We are on the brink of not only losing our democracy but also losing our freedom of choice. Trickle down economics proved that the rich are not going to share their wealth with those less fortunate unless they are made to. America needs members of the Democratic Party who are willing to force this kind of ideology.
The problem is that before this happens, we are likely to see Trump bring about economic catastrophe. Economic catastrophe on the scale of the Great Depression seems to be the only thing which moves the government to act.
Reich identifies something real, the Democratic Party's failure of nerve is a structural problem, not a messaging one. Warriors, worriers, wimps is a clean taxonomy. But the frame misses a layer: the worriers and wimps aren't just cowards. They're rationally optimizing for a donor ecosystem that is itself oligarchic. You can't shame people out of incentive structures.
Roosevelt had a catastrophic exogenous shock (the Depression) that scrambled elite interests enough to allow a coalition to form. What's the equivalent today? A stock market at record highs, corporate profits surging, and a working class that is angry but not yet organized in any institutionally durable way. Rage without structure is just weather.
Mamdani's primary run in New York is the real test case here, not rhetorical exhortation.
The diagnosis is right.
The prescription though, that just be bolder, undersells how captured the party machinery actually is.
Johan 🐌
Disagree, and agree with Reich. The people are angry. even many MAGA voters know what is going on. Give them a tangible, passionate leader and they will follow.
The problem is that for every new FDR out there, there are a dozen Mussolinis and Hitlers. And from experience, you can bet the MAGA horde won't be flocking to FDRs camp.
A few months ago I volunteered to come to America to ASSIST in raising a social revolution. No one took me up on & if I came today ICE would slam the door in my face. Since then I have learned that America is a much more complex place than i first thought; which seems why you will not respond ads I feel they should Months ago I became heartily sick of people endlessly gossiping about Trump WHILE DOING NOTHING about him.
If you want to know how to raise a people's revolution may I refer you to all of the higher religions all of whom gained the support of the common people who transferred their allegiance to them. They became so powerful that every aspiring ruler needed their support to gain office. They were the first to establish the principle ~that none could rule without the CONSENT of the governed~
ken.maynard7@gmail.com
"... heartily sick of people endlessly gossiping about Trump WHILE DOING NOTHING about him." You have encapsulated my feelings precisely.
but making fun of him is being brave in many ways.
I agree that "They they (the world's great religions) were the first to establish the principle ~that none could rule without the CONSENT of the governed." But they were not the last. Others traditions include democracy, science, justice, education, etc. The basic principle in all of them is that we are all equal, and we must work together to serve the inconvenient long-term common interest at the expense of our short-term convenient limited interests. Otherwise, we are serving the our short-term convenient limited interests at the expense of inconvenient long-term common interest.
If we want to stop Trump, then we can't be acting like Trump.
Adam Smith's concept of capitalism does the same thing, and so does the American tradition, until you discard the founding moral principle, and then you get "unfettered free enterprise" and the Republican Party.
Somehow "free enterprise" has become "backroom deals".
Adam Smith described the moral foundation of his concept in his book, "The Theory of Moral Sentiments" (1759). Milton Friedman described his idea (that capitalism is so much easier for rich people if they get to ignore morality) in his book, "Capitalism and Freedom" (1962).
Smith's concept provides freedom to people. Money is either an opportunity to be seized, a threat to be neutralized, or irrelevant.
Friedman's concept provides freedom to money. People are either an opportunity to be seized, a threat to be neutralized, or irrelevant.
There was never such things as free enterprise and a free market. Someone has always been gaming the systems.
What do you think We the People (with absolutely no power) should do about Trump???
Ken Maynard, if you truly wish to make a democratic difference, why do you go out of your way to provide the world's largest anti-democratic date miner gO0gle via its email system access to not only 100% of your contacts, but as well 100% of your deliberations?
Ever herd of making your own goals? :)
We don’t need MAGAT’s. They are only 30% of the voting population.
That is why they want to stop people from voting.
Chris, we don't need MAGA so much. It's the non -MAGA who need to get out and vote and make noise If we don't get an FDR we may get other incentives for people to get off their ass.The future seems open wide.
Chris, IMO&O you make a well stated observational analyses. But why not seek out how the quiet majority of well-minded Americans like yourself can actually and effectively on election day actually elect a law-maker who has the confidence of most American voters?
Because we have a two-party system with both parties beholden to the oligarchs. The FDRs of today are actively opposed by both parties. We need to destroy the Republican Party for actively supporting a Fascist president. We need to destroy the Democratic Party for actively supporting the oligarchs. We need new parties, because both of ours are bought and owned.
From my perch outside America, Marvin, I totally agree with you. It would take mass organisation to form two new parties, but the American public do have numbers on their sides. A huge challenge, but worth it, because of the stakes. Their country is being taken over, INVADED by monied interests. The public need to start on a war-time footing. Fighting with the ballot box, not giving in to the Arms Industry. But it will be like war, because those threatened, are not used to people rising up in huge numbers. A velvet revolution. But they may chose a better, more uniquely American name than that.
But looking at the Democratic Party there few who are willing to to take up the leadership needed today.
I agree with you about the lack of suitable leaders within the Democratic Party, so let's look outside it. There is, IMHO, only one candidate, an old man by the name of Bernard Sanders. I know, I know, he's 84, but so was Adenauer when he led West Germany.
Sanders is the only current candidate who could conjure a landslide victory, which is what we will need to reform America. No more anemic 51/49 governance, at the mercy of John Fetterman, but a resounding victory capable of adding amendments to the Constitution, raising a wealth tax, reversing Citizens United and Dobbs, and setting term limits for justices on SCOTUS.
I can think of only one President who could achieve all this. Of course, Bernie would have to commit to being a one term President, and would need an engaging, populist VP to learn on the job and take over in 2032.
Maybe Pete Buditigieg or Beto O'Rourke?
As VP? Yes! Both would be good candidates.
How about Chris Murphy?
Disagree with Johan, Michael, and Reich. Agree with Abraham Lincoln when he said, “Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently, he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.”
Democrats must take on America's oligarchs. Here's how. Agree with Lincoln when he said, “Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith, let us dare to do our duty as we understand it.”
Think global but act local starting with the person in the mirror. “I” need to create public sentiment within “my” personal relationships. “We” need to know how to get from conflicting but convenient opinions to an inconvenient truth. And then someone needs to take on a leadership role and expand the circle. That’s what the people of Minneapolis did without a how-to manual and instead because that’s how we humans respond naturally to a crisis.
The Democratic Party is an expression of public sentiment. If the public thinks the solution to the problem is to criticize the Democratic Party the same way one would criticize the sports team that lost the game, then there is no public sentiment.
If “I” remain overly attached to “my” opinions in “my” personal relationships, then do “I” blame the person in the mirror? Or do “we” all agree to blame the Democratic Party because the politicians are all idiots because they don’t agree with “my” opinion while ignoring the fact that the only thing “we the people” agree on is “blame the politicians?”
We still have a chance to elect progressives if we want to change what's going on. The corporate dems will never do what's needed. This is not blaming the politicians. We need to elect representatives who will represent the working people and not grovel before the wealthy. There is enough to go around if we are willing to share.
I don't blame ANY person for what's going on, James. (No, not even him.)
Yes, many if not most Democratic politicians want what is best for our country. However, the DNC as an entity has an existential imperative to maintain its power. After all, in our two-party system, any power the Democratic Party loses, will be gained by the GOP. They have power over the system, yes, but they are also extremely constrained *by* the system. The same goes for the GOP. Remember, after January 6, the Republicans in Congress, who were there, said "never Trump" along with all the rest of us... until he recaptured the GOP electorate. The US government is injured, dying, and needs our help; we cannot continue foisting our responsibilities as citizens off onto Congress.
If UTW is successful, we will be leaving the two-party system where it belongs, in the dusty annals of our rocky history. To do that, we must erase the artificial borders between us that the parties have drawn. We cannot be Democrats or Republicans; we must be Americans, the people who, 250 years ago, stood up and said: "even an uncertain future is better than this."
Hitler knew how to mold public sentiment. So did Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News.
I agree wholeheartedly, Michael, I've come to the same conclusion! And it's not going to be anyone who currently uses their public identity as their brand, because leading a viable resistance against the entrenched powers risks destroying a public identity, given the likely potential blowback. They could be risking their entire careers to do so. So if we are to be led to freedom by a tangible, passionate leader, it must be someone new to the scene, someone that can risk losing their public identity because it isn't their livelihood, that steps up in front of everyone and leads the charge.
I'm still waiting for that person to show up too, but perhaps while we're both waiting, you might take a look at what I've got planned for next week, over at UTW.vote? ❤️
Based upon my sincere "like" you will know I saw your earlier much appreciated corrective to another.
Except now in real time I now come across this one of yours, but noticed a contradiction in your final sentence that I hoped your link would explain.
There with my full agreement, IMO&O you post a key overarching principle "Democracy spreads through people."
Why then are you looking for another top-down leader, instead of a chairperson who facilitates the democratic minded discussion to take place, what we in Canada call, but like you do not practice as actually being our House of Commons for commoners?
My the two heads of ours working together help lead and sp
ark the way for a better democratic tomorrow, effectively from day one forward after the very next election?
I don't think we need a leader as a movement, no; I do, however, believe that we need someone charismatic enough, with good enough vision and a strong enough torch to light the way, because people have become understandably wary of faceless organizations claiming to have their best interests at heart.
I don't want to be a leader. I don't want to be a politician, and if there is any mercy in this world I'll never be forced into that role. I never even wanted to be known; I just wanted people to take my ideas seriously when I have good ones.
The first three months of developing what would become UTW, I spent trying to take that kind of an "advisor" role, presenting my ideas to people with the power and influence to implement them. That was when I learned that the people with the power and influence don't have the freedom to implement ideas like mine. The only people with enough freedom (aside from the tyrants) are the electorate; thus, the electorate must speak ideas that are as potent as the ones I've spent the past six months crafting and refining, and we must all do it with one voice, and we must do it right the fuck now.
I don't know that the social media strategy I've chosen will prove to have been the most effective one to gather the support we need, but if it isn't, then someone else can pick up the torch I've dropped, and I can go back to being a private citizen. As long as I'm lighting the way, I'll do it in the way that is the most natural for me personally: as myself, with my real name, my face, and my honor on the line. If that is not what America needs, then I'm much happier letting someone else guide the way than trying to mold myself into something I'm not.
Instead, we in Colorado are putting forward a former Republican with a sketchy questionable history of being a navy "real admiral"(lower) and home schooling her 5 children despite her putative 34 naval career (almost all as a reserve and never serving on a ship). Voted for trump at least twice.
This to replace Lauren Boebert
Sorry for you and fellow Coloradans who fall for this bullshit story line.
Wow! Jen.That.’s better?
Michael
MAGA voters enabled the GOP and oligarchs to destroy the economy.
The problem is that 33% of voters (MAGA ...) still approve of what Trump is doing.
The MAGA voters including the racist white nationalists are a cancer destroying America. The GOP is controlled by billionaire oligarchs and corporations. The GOP and oligarchs responded in the 1970s to FDR's successes in the 1930s and 1940s that saved America and the world by winning WW2, stopping the billionaires and Republicans who created the Great Depression and by creating a large middle class. The GOP and oligarchs with support in the 1970s from what was then MAGA started an organized campaign to destroy democracy and take control of the economy and the federal government after the Powell Memo in 1971.
Since then the neoliberal Democrats (Clinton and Obama) have been complicit supporting GOP fake economics that stole wealth from 99% of American and transferred the wealth to the billionaires and corporations as economists including Fed Chair Greenspan and Milton Freidman deceived us all with cruel economics adopted as policy by Reagan claiming fake free market economics were saving us from a deficit and economic disaster. Of course, Bush 2 caused the disaster with the Great Recession in 2008.
Democrats failed again to fix the core problem with wealth inequality enabling Trump and a lawless fascist autocracy which was the objective as planned in PROJECT 2025. Reich totally recognizes and describes the core problem and the cause. But the new media still doesn't recognize what happened over the last 55 years and why. The news cycle is focused on sensational crap that gets attention and feeds a stupid public. The solution is Democrats in 2029 enforcing the law against insurrection.
William:
You're preaching to the choir here, and I agree with every single one of your words. The real enemy is not Trump (who is an imbecilic and demented paper tiger) but the DNC, which has failed consistently over the last 45 years to grow a spine.
The Clintons were handsomely bribed to create the rustbelt, destroy rational healthcare and empower the oligarchs. MAGA is just a symptom of the disease they created. Obama was a huge disappointment - far too corporate.
There is only one possible solution to this awful state we find ourselves in, an old man by the name of Bernard Sanders. I sure hope he runs.
WE have people who could be a leader but I think they are afraid.
Afraid of what?
Fascinating observation, Johan. I think we have to change the narrative from "government is the problem," the Laffer curve, and Friedman economics by exposing them on their own terms. The modern innovation economy was not born primarily from private risk-taking, but from decades of taxpayer-funded research led by government agencies like DARPA, NASA, NIH, and NSF, which absorbed the earliest and most uncertain stages of technological development—creating foundational breakthroughs such as the internet, GPS, advanced materials, and biotechnology. In effect, the taxpayer served as the original risk-capital investor, funding high-risk, long-horizon research that private markets could not justify, while the private sector later commercialized and profited from these breakthroughs. So, where is the return for the original investor? Someone more skilled than I needs to expose the larger-than-life "rugged individualism " myth of the entrepreneur as hero for what it is. We got here because of who we are together. Don't get me wrong. A good portion of why we are struggling is because one party thinks government is the problem and the other thinks it is the solution. We need only look at the New York Times 2023 Reports on the mismanagement of water in this country to realize that the institutions of the administrative state have been obsolete and increasingly costly for the last 30 to 60 years. It is not the declared certainties of the heroic ego-logical "I"s that will preserve the democracy. It is the inquisitive and imaginative "Eco-logical WE" of citizenship that will make the difference. We need to recover our invested funds and invest in restoring the social capital of hopeful and engaged citizens. because all capital formation begins with social capital formation.
If we elect people who think government can't work--Republicans-- what surprise is it we end up with this?
Craig, I would go a step further than R Reich in characterizing trump's degree of corruption, to say that he is at the nadir of corruption of any politician and indeed any human being to exist in our collective lifetimes. This ultimate failure of a national leader to serve the purpose of promoting the welfare of the citizens under his charge represents the failure of the Republic as it was designed at the Founding - the worst fears of the best architects and proponents of the US Constitution are about to become fact. Evidence pours in daily that we are at the verge of becoming a police state under control of the biggest money launderers in history, the foremost of whom Reich named at the opening of this piece and thousands of others. Dark money in politics has served the ignominious purposes of 1) subverting the vote by the actions of foot soldiers for the fascists in polling places and state houses and 2) and the vicious lie campaigns by regime supporters in attack ads and at campaign rallies. In effect the "people's sentiment" of Lincoln has been poisoned by the sentiment of the mighty which serves the 1%. The actions of "Who we are together" from the 1930's onward is the reason why the Western World hasn't been a Nazi police state for the past 80 years.
Dennis, further to your final sentence "The actions of "Who we are together" from the 1930's onward is the reason why the Western World hasn't been a Nazi police state for the past 80 years" might not the following two abbreviations define the heart of the problem when instead of a fully 100% egalitarian 1 Person = 1 Vote our present electoral structure tips the scales towards $1 = 1 Vote?
Need I say more to underline my point beyond citizens United? :) No /s
Johan, I think you come close to my sentiments.
Reich is amusing in his language, which grows in proletarian anger, almost daily. But it won't help very much, might even be ineffective.
Of course the diagnosis is right.
But what does it mean for politics and public debate? I think I pleaded before this: what social relations between people do we need and want?
What translation of these relations in political forms and habits we envision? How can the regaining of control of big money be organised?
Bob said some weeks ago that the filthy rich changed the laws of demand and supply. It looks like the truth. Are there political systems in the world doing better than the US?
Can we improve the existing party system without violence?
Tom, you ask “can we improve the two party system without violence?“
No, we cannot improve the existing two party system. As others have said our problem is systemic and the only solution is to create and implement a new system. Isn’t that what the Second Continental Congress did 250 years ago despite the opposition of the largest and most powerful country and military then existing on the planet? If they could do it then why can’t we do it now? It takes bold thinking and a commitment to revolutionary change, and by that I mean, nonviolent revolutionary change.
Look at Albania today. Overnight mass nonviolent demonstrations are stopping a land grab by politicians and oligarchs in it’s tracks. Can we at least follow the example of Albania who years ago overthrew the communist regime through nonviolent revolution? With such a vast number (261) of Democrats in both the house and the Senate, how come we can only name a few that we can count on to stand up for our rights? The Republican Party has destroyed itself and the Democratic Party is impotent to the wishes of the billionaires to even think of changing or even improvingthe system. If neither party can stand for us the citizens, then clearly our two party system is broken, likely beyond repairs and fixes. IT IS TIME TO THINK BIG! Since 1980 there have been over 10 highly successful nonviolent revolutions on this planet. We may not be the first to accomplish this, but maybe we can at least be the 11th?
We must stop allowing ourselves to think that Trump is the problem, he is only the eventual manifestation of our problem. We love our country, we love what our constitution stands for, but it does not mean we cannot think and act boldly to change the course of the future of our nation.
The definition of revolution is a rapid, fundamental change in a countries political system, government or social structure usually driven by widespread action. A revolution doesn't just change who is in charge, it changes how the system works. Here are 10 examples of successful nonviolent revolutions.
POLAND and Solidarity (1980s)- led by Lech Walesa with mass labor strikes and negotiations led to a peaceful transition to Democracy.
CZECHOSLOVAKIA-Velvet Revolution in 1989. The result was the end of communist rule with almost no violence.
EAST GERMANY-Peaceful Revolution 1989 resulting in the fall of the Berlin Wall and reunification with Germany.
PHILIPPINES -People Power Revolution in 1986- removed Ferdinand Marcos and the restoration of democracy under Corazon Aquino
ESTONIA-The Singing Revolution (1987to1991) led to Estonia regaining independence from the Soviet Union. It is considered one of the most successful examples of mass nonviolent resistance in modern history.
TUNISIA-The Jasmine Revolution (2011) Nonviolent protests led to leadership change and democratic reforms.
SERBIA-Bulldozer Revolution (2000) Student led movement used Nonviolent tactics-Overthrew Slobodan Miolosevic with a transition to democracy
GEORGIA- Rose Revolution (2003) Peaceful resignation of the president and new elections.
UKRAINE-Orange Revolution (2004) Mas protests against election fraud resulting in re-run election and political reforms.
LATVIA-Latvians used mass demonstrations, public singing events, cultural revival, political organizing, and civil resistance rather than armed rebellion. Important milestones included:
* 1987: Public protests against Soviet policies began to emerge.
* 1988: The Popular Front of Latvia was formed and became a major force for independence.
* August 23, 1989: The famous Baltic Way linked approximately two million people in a human chain stretching across Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to mark the 50th anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
* May 4, 1990: Latvia’s parliament declared the restoration of independence.
* January 1991: Soviet forces attempted to reassert control. Latvians responded largely through non-violent resistance, erecting barricades and maintaining mass civic mobilization.
* August 1991: Following the failed hardline coup in Moscow, Latvia’s independence became fully recognized internationally.
WITH ALL OF THIS HISTORY TO BUILD ON, WHY NOT US? Certainly we will try all strategies at our disposal, but if they fail, do not give up hope! We have options.
Re the Baltic States hand holding demo: it would take approximately 3.2m people to span the US coast to coast on the highways - less than turn out for No Kings.
Marc, nearly all the peaceful revolutions you mention were byproducts of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which Gorbachev was unable to prevent. The fascist regime now in power in Washington DC is much stronger and would use such demonstrations as pretext to tighten its grip over the country.
Victor,, it’s quite true that the situation we are facing. is quite different than all the revolutions that occurred in what was once the mighty and super repressive Soviet Union. However, the situation we are facing is unique in that I have never seen a so-called functioning democracy so quickly degenerate into an oligarch supported dictatorship, and at the same time this Trump powered dictatorship seems to be falling apart all over the edges. What is the same in all these situations is the brave and dogged determination of the people to either win back their freedom or create their freedom.
I was in Moscow shortly after the attempt at counterrevolution failed and these people had lived under an unbearable oppression for decades and decades. They had no model of democracy to restore, they had to do it from scratch, and again there was a mighty military machine opposing them. Yet, they kept their determination for change, and their determination to maintain non-violence in the face of the possibility of crushing violence on the part of the Soviet regime.
I was also in Estonia a few years after their successful revolution, and I would say and witness that the change of events there was quite remarkable.
I still hold to my point, if they can do it under much, much worse conditions than we are facing then why cannot our country, created by revolution in the face of overwhelming odds do the same?
Every time we have the thought that we cannot do this, it is a win for the Trump regime. This is the psychology. They are attempting to instill in us, and it is this psychology that we must fight unceasingly if we want our country back.
Communist countries had fake elections. Our elections have been fair thus far. We must not jeopardize the upcoming elections.
Hi Marc, agreed very much.
I'm asthonished a very long time about the way the rape of constitution and law were accepted. The courts did their jobs, not the supreme court, but the representatives of the people were sent on vacation by lapdog Johnson.
Your list of revolutions is gratefully accepted; a lot can be said about each one of them, but that is not usefull.
Yes, the parties are in control of their quest for donations, and do not discuss principles and values, or how to curtail big money influence.
Yes, the fraction of independent voters is growing, which seems good to me, but will it grow strong enough to fight the system of political financing?
Of course, not Trump is the problem, but what was accepted for decades as normal behaviour and thinking.
But how to organise a peacefull transition? You are one of the few to think about it, and you earn my respect for it. But the problem is big, and I'm looking for ideas that can form this transition. Trump and MAGA are at war with the dumbocrats, but how can we destroy this way of thinking?
I wrote in a post here that the US was doomed and you protested, quite right. But this is the time to think about the demise of the Trump regime and what should follow. Horrifying perspective is the entrenched attitude of the Rep's and Maga...
What choice do we have?
It is work, but you need a political party with inspiration to organise the effort of discussion , bridging diversity
Tom, hopefully you ask a rhetorical question "Can we improve the existing party system without violence?"
And if not, I will add emphatically, it's the only way because as soon as one gets into a shooting war we all lose as observed by a Chinese ancient Sun Tzu observed when the shooting begins we all lose.
Thank you, Johan. I appreciated both Reich's piece and your response to it.
What I found interesting is that I don't actually see a great deal of disagreement between the two. Reich emphasizes the concentration of wealth and power and calls for a stronger response. Your comment highlights the reality that these patterns are reinforced by institutional incentives and donor structures that are not easily overcome through rhetoric alone.
To me, both point toward the same underlying challenge: how political and economic systems become organized around concentrations of power that tend to perpetuate themselves.
I also appreciated your observation that "rage without structure is just weather." That line stayed with me. History suggests that lasting change requires not only recognizing problems but building durable institutions, relationships, and forms of participation capable of carrying change forward.
Perhaps Reich is focused on the urgency of confronting concentrated power, while your comment draws attention to the practical constraints that make such confrontation difficult. Both perspectives seem necessary.
Thank you for adding another layer to the conversation.
Individual politicians cannot be expected to seek election without financial backing that extorts "favors". Is there a way to provide financial support without the quid pro quo aspect? Our form of government depends on "one person, one vote", not "one dollar, one vote". We need better ideas on how to fund elections.
Ban donations over $1,000. Reverse Citizens United. Levy a higher corporation tax and use it to fund elections. Call it the Corporate election tax! They donate already - this would level the playing field. (Maybe levied for the first 10 years as an average of their donations over the previous 10 years!)
Make MSM - not cable - channels show political ads free - with equal air time.
Forbid advertizing on cable tv, except for cable news channels - which would be obliged to show, free, material from each party. (Fox a few years ago got itself classified as "entertainment" in a legal case - this would have to be reversed. For heavens sake, their name is Fox NEWS!)
Limit the campaign season to a reasonable period - say 6 weeks for primaries and 2 months for general elections. (The UK limits election campaigning to 6 weeks).
This would have the added benefit of allowing politicians to actually do their job, rather than incessantly campaigning and fundraising.
Put limits on how much each candidate can spend - adjusted to each post - the dog catcher gets a very small allowance, a senator a much larger one.
This would have the added benefit of easing the election fatigue so many feel with the constant political ads.
And it would give parties other than the big two a place at the table - something I believe is desperately needed.
Well, I can dream, can't I?
How about making voting mandatory?
By the way, in the UK they used to have these "Party Political Broadcasts" on all channels at the same time - before the advent of cable and streaming. The main result was a peak in water consumption, as the nation collectively used the time to make a cup of tea and have a pee!
Reverse Citizens United!!
We have to come up with practical solutions that will work with THIS supreme court. We are stuck with this court structure for at least several decades. If any of the older justices retire, tRump will pick younger ones who will bend to his will. Can you imagine Aileen Cannon on the court or similar? We can be certain that no Democratic President will ever be able to nominate another SCOTUS justice while the Republicans hold the Senate now that the McConnell maneuver is in play. Adjusting the Senate rules to force a confirmation vote on all Federal judge appointments as a first priority issue would help. The constitution requires advise and consent, not a partisan block on all confirmation voting.
https://equalcitizens.us/against_superpacs/
Johan your response was introspective for all democrats. Democrats failure to elevate a UNIFIED message is self defeating. Name calling by Trump has proven effective so hire entertaining ,clever , humorous, speech writers to oppose Trump idiots. Biden must retire. His image is poison. Mamdani, Bernie Sanders, AOC, Jasmine Crockett , Mark Kelly, Wes Moore, Hakeem Jeffries are fresh trusted faces that can make a UNIFIED message feel like a new beginning. Trump bias makes him appear as a pre WWII confederate leading the KKK. Republicans have no response to Mamdani in the same way that Democrats were overwhelmed by Trump bombast. People are hungry for intelligent leadership.
Correct, Johan. And, in response to your question: what is required is not (necessarily) a catastrophic shock, though you're right that it must be exogenous to the system. More generally, we need a black swan event, in whatever form that takes.
Have you subscribed to UTW yet? We're going to attempt to generate such an event by tapping into the outrage felt by the vast majority of Americans and using it to fuel a viral grassroots movement that the powerful interests can't quell. We will be taking aim not at the Republicans nor at the Democrats, but at the two-party system that allows them to maintain their undisputed duopoly. Is that dangerous? Maybe. Is it more dangerous than doing nothing? You tell me.
Johan
Yes a structural problem and a failure by Democrats since 2020 to enforce the law against the people who have violated the federal law against insurrection.
There is a solution to the core problem which Reich described as Democrats not taking on America's oligarchs.
What is the solution? A new generation of Democrats need to get elected in 2026 and 2028 and commit to enforcing the law against insurrection that began on January 6, 2021, as incited by Trump and continued with violations of the law against insurrection by others in the federal governmetn from 2021 into 2025 and 2026. In March 2024, the Supreme Court violated federal law 18 U.S. Code § 2383 by failing to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that stated Trump, an insurrectionist, was ineligible to hold office.
Trump owes his presidency to his lying and the failure by Democrats and the Supreme Court to enforce the law against insurrection that began on January 6, 2021, and has continued into 2025 and 2026 as planned in Project 2025. Why was PROJECT 2025 required? In Trump's first term, the honest people in the federal goverment including civil servants acted to block most of what Trump was trying to do which was illegal. So PROJECT 2025 was designed to eliminate the honest civil servants and restruct the federal government with people loyal to Trump and wllling to do anything to implement a lawless, facist autocracy. DOGE was part of the effort but so are the Cabinet Secretaries firing honest people including the DOD with Hegseth, the DOJ with whoever is the AG, and with Bill Pulte now firing people in DNI.
In 2025 and 2026, Trump and members of his administration including his Cabinet and ICE agents, Republicans in Congress and six justices on the Supreme Court were criminal felons who massively rejected and disobeyed the laws and rejected the authority of courts in the United States and must be arrested, prosecuted convicted and jailed in 2029 after Democrats control the presidency, the DOJ, and Congress.
According to the federal law on insurrection, 18 U.S. Code § 2383, “whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
In America, Democrats have been asleep for decades since the 1970s while Republicans have caused tragic suffering in America with attacks on democracy and justice with perversions including Citizens United, wars, and wealthy inequality created by Republicans and the Supreme Court controlled by the oligarchs to steal wealth from 99% of Americans and transfer the wealth to the top 1%. Republicans and the Supreme Court controlled by the oligarchs also created the affordability problems in housing, food, energy and healthcare that are sustained by a lawless, fascist autocracy that also attacks voting and civil rights.
In 2029, Democrats must create a new wealth tax and restore high income taxes on the wealthy, billionaires and corporations to the rates in 1965 to fund solutions to affordability of food, housing, healthcare and childcare and correct wealth inequality by returning stolen wealth to 99% of Americans and especially to the working class. Democrats must also enable new laws and reform the Supreme Court after the six justices are removed as convicted criminals who violated insurrection federal law, end Citizens United, tariffs, and wars, and restore strong protections for voting and civil rights. But Democrats must first get elected and then enforce the federal law against insurrection.
Yu are right, Johan, and this is why a class revolution is not likely to happen. The US middle class is basically conservative, because it is fairly well off. The situation could change quickly and dramatically should Trump&Co threaten home owners, pension beneficiaries, saving accounts, and so on. Dems must tread carefully and not forget the ACA care fiasco.
Johan, you are very clear-eyed about the Democrats. I am pretty sure you are right about how captured the so-called party of the people really is. Money in politics, money that is needed to win, sucks even well-intentioned politicians into the fold of the moneyed-class (the Epstein class). But we need Democrats, as the opposition party, to take the Congress come November. They will do what is needed to be done just by virtue of their opposition status. No more Supreme Court justices. Impeachment for the worst public servants. Blocking and reversing the Trump legislative agenda, blocking and reversing the Trump theft of American taxpayer money. We need Democrats in spite of their many weaknesses.
Our only choice until there is universal ranked-choice voting, allowing other party influences.
Many thanks Johan in your summary statement for stating succinctly with precision by words that did not come to my dyslexic mind, but once seeing them, I shall try harder to remember "The diagnosis is right. The prescription though, that just be bolder, undersells how captured the party machinery actually is."
On that theme of insight, its my pleasure making your acquaintance towards possible collective problem solving as I now repeat what I said a little earlier which may be compared and contrasted with the 10 earlier replies you have already received.
Robert Reich, over the years since you came across my radar I have much appreciated many of your insights, such as in this one, where you again make some exceptional points. Except here again you unfortunately undermine your own message when you conflate "the Democrats" and/or "The Democratic Party" with the democratic minded! Such as Bernie Sanders of whom you make pointed reference.
Imagine how much more of a greater impact you could have made when in 2024 you are encouraging Biden and Harris to get serious regarding the genocide in Gaza, except you too to use your very own key words as used in this article regarding "Class Worriers and Class Wimps".
But it's not too late where the majority of Americans in many voting districts were to simply conduct their own pre-election vote123 ranked ballot poll and with this information on election day actually elect the one and only person who the majority of Americans have confidence in. And thereby simultaneously no longer allow the lesser of two evil extremists to slip up the middle and receive the phony electoral status where most American voters NEVER Vote for their declared elected law-maker!
And of course, I would welcome your collaborative problem solving reply!
https://robertreich.substack.com/p/class-warriors-class-worriers-and/comment/281313454
Nailed it. I said the same but your explanation is more eloquent.
I like your messaging on Warriors, worriers and wimps. I can't go out and campaign but I support the ones who do!!!!
But, isn’t that all we have to work with?
There were campaign donation constraints on FDR and MOC, in theory, but these were not enforced and easily circumvented.
Watching Regime Change segment on Morning Joe this am they talked about GOP Party members go along or know they get their heads bashed in by trump, by his calling on corporations and individuals to supply the money to push those who oppose him out of office, like Massie. This is another consequence of Citizens United and the lower court ruling in Speechnow vs FEC. Under a vengeful President these court decisions confer extraordinary power on the Presidency and reduce the President's Party in Congress to dependent supplicants. According to my AI, this possible consequence was not an argument before the courts. In part because the Super PACs at the time weren't that powerful. Things change but the law does not change so fast.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (in SpeechNow v. FEC) held that the First Amendment banned limits on contributions to independent political action committees. This decision — not Citizens United — created SuperPACs. See https://equalcitizens.us/against_superpacs/
Another thing that needs to be exposed is the current lie Trump is spreading across the internet.
Obama made a deal with Iran in 2016 that Trump insists saw our country getting nothing in return. Bull!! The deal enacted the release of four individuals Iran held as part of the January 2016 prisoner swap under the Obama administration were Jason Rezaian, Amir Hekmati, Saeed Abedini, and Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari. This exchange took place simultaneously with the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal. It was tied to the U.S. airlifting $400 million in frozen cash assets (part of a $1.7 billion settlement over a decade). Why can't Trump tell the truth about anything. The Iranians can't be trusted and neither can Donald Trump. Donnie is the little engine that couldn't.
Trump and the Republicans rejected President Obama’s JCPOA precisely because it was President Obama’s plan, and then Trump gets in there, he and Kegseth start a war illegally without preparation and planning, and wind up losing to Iran. Trump and Kegseth are dangerously incompetent.
Trump is addicted to lying, and can’t stop himself. He lies about all sorts of things, large and small, because he’ll never admit a mistake, nor will he apologize.
Everyone must expose all of Trumps lies - he is a 100% failure
By now, almost everyone in the world over knows trump lies - about everything. The question is, "who still believes he's telling the truth"? Americans, not all of them but enough of them who will never concede that he's a liar or a bad president. That pool is saturated with the brainwashed. They have become an 'obstacle' that won't move. The resistance needs to find ways to circumvent this mountain of ignoramuses.
All failure, all the time!
His cult doesn’t care that he lies. Some are assholes who know he’s lying and the rest are gullible idiots. All would be honored if he shot them between the eyes because he paid them attention. They are the same shitheads who support dictators everywhere.
Trump's book should have been entitled, "The Art of the Con".
Russ--"Con-man the Barbarian.."
Yes, Professor, Democrats must take on America's oligarchs. But first, in order for that to happen, Democrats who are in bed with oligarchs either have to jump out of that bed or be pushed out.
Cleaning out the DNC and replacing it with realists who know how to communicate to the public would be a start.
We need to take on the wealth defense industry. Biden needed another term. He understood the problem but didn't have enough time, or likely the health, to see it through.
Maybe Joe Biden didn't have the the political will of the Democratic Party behind him because too many of them were (are) in bed with the wealth defense industry. While he was called "Senator Credit Card" and "Senator from MBNA" for good reason, he did take progressive steps to reign in corporatocracy. And with his talent for working across the aisle, I think you're right, Gloria, that with more time and good health he could have and would have made even more of a difference.
There was covid ….. that threw a monkey wrench in getting back to normal
Actually, they need to lean over in bed and smother a few oligarchs with their pillows. That might get the attention of the remaining oligarchs, who think they're above the fray.
Campaign finance is the issue; our campaigns in America aren't publicly financed - so as long as there are no limits on spending (and, thanks to the Supreme Court, no limits on "soft money" etc.) those oligarchs - and their $ - plays an increasingly large role.
> = |
This is an excellent commentary. My only disagreement is the argument against name calling. We simply must call out the oligarchs for what they truly are - bloodsucking parasites. They are the ticks and leeches who have been waging war against our national body since 1980. They have volubly protested against us for waging a class war against them. By attempting to tax them at the same rate we tax wages? By contesting their never ending proposals for subsidies and exemptions and privileged status as “job creators”? Ha! The latest weapon in their arsenal to garner the wealth of the planet is a deliberate assault on employment - Artificial Intelligence to replace workers in near entirety. And we are supposed to have faith in their generosity to bestow upon us the meager scraps that will allow us to continue to consume their products so as not to interrupt the upward trickle? Call them the names of the creatures that they are.
One thing the own the libbers hate is to be laughed at. They’re now the laughing stock of basically the entire world. The curtain has been pulled back, and the wizard turned out to be a grifting obese pile of shit. A national embarrassment. The boobs who are out there for the entertainment should be starting to switch channels, or maybe the embers in their bellies will keep their fat asses on the couch during the midterms. “Winners” who stay too long are not followed once they reach the embarrassing stage. We’re there.
Well said. "bloodsucking parasites"
Yes, as my formerly Republican husband has said "poly tics, many blood sucking insects, after our money to sell us out".
Kerry, I can share the sentiment, but namecalling is not political argument...
What he says…just do it,Democrats or why did we elect you?? Are you going to fight this oligarchy or hide in your closets with the cat?? Are you going to come out fighting for America or let us become another North Korea?? You have the power to charge things so do it.
Schumer should be getting the message after Mamdani’s election and Platner’s Maine primary win over the candidate Schumer picked.
There are Democrats in Congress who support public campaign funding like Rep. Jaime Raskin and Sen. Dick Durbin.
If you are represented by Democrats in Congress contact them to demand that they take on the oligarchs.
Read Jeffrey Winters new book, "The Blind Spot," and you will understand why a few good Senators can't overcome the purpose of the Senate to protect the wealth class. The original structure of the government was to protect the wealth of the oligarchs and it has worked as intended. The estimated Gini Coefficient in 1789 was 0.50 to 0.60.Now the Gini coefficient on wealth is around 0.88 ( zero is total equality and 1.0 is total inequality).
So the structure of the Senate must be changed. We the people have to do our part. We need to create a massive blue wave to take control of the Senate. The Biden administration demonstrated the dangers of institutionalism. It is good to identify blocks to equality in the system so we can adapt and overcome. We cannot give up.
We need to boycott the Ellisons and Paramount. The creative people in Hollywood need to boycott Paramount. We need to organize and have each other’s backs.
Gloria, you nailed it. It's naive to think that dems can compete with oligarchs without their own oligarchs in their back pockets. I have not read "the blind spot", but did the author suggest any solutions?
The Republicans have performed a hostile takeover on my state of Ohio, and the damage is all around us.
Kathy, The only Republican Senator/Governor who had some belief in "public service", was George Voinovich. The worst is up for grabs but it looks as if Moreno and Husted are working hard to win that title. We have a good chance of changing that this year. Go Amy Acton and Go Sherrod Brown.
I plan to vote for Acton and Brown this year. Husted is a not very bright crony of DeWine from Kettering, and I seriously want Brown back in the Senate where he belongs. I am also unimpressed with Bernie Moreno. The only good thing he did was to squash Frank LaRose’s attempt to run in the Republican primary for Senate, LaRose came in third, but Moreno was Trump’s pick.
I guess Ohio Republicans can always find the worst candidates. This year's choices are perfect specimens.
They certainly have a talent for finding the worst people to run. Vivek Ramaswamy doesn’t come off as a great candidate, and the white Christian Nationalists won’t vote for him as he is a Hindu. Personally, I don’t care what his religious beliefs are, it’s his personality and politics I find annoying.
FDR overcame a hostile media blockade by bypassing corporate newspapers entirely. He used radio to speak directly to citizens through "Fireside Chats," building deep trust. Crucially, he delivered undeniable material proof of success: jobs, roads, and Social Security. By leaning into the class struggle rather than backing down, he forged a massive new voting coalition of workers, minorities, and the unemployed. Real, visible economic relief completely neutralized the corporate press's misinformation.
To counter modern oligarchic media, Democrats must adapt FDR’s playbook for the digital age by changing how they deliver both information and policy. First, they can bypass hostile social media algorithms by building decentralized, direct-to-voter text and message networks, much like FDR bypassed newspapers with the radio. Democratic leaders should abandon sterile, scripted press releases in favor of unscripted video live-streams and raw, direct podcasts to rebuild authentic human trust. Crucially, the party must pivot its messaging away from abstract political concepts and toward tangible, undeniable material proof of success, heavily highlighting local union jobs, built infrastructure, and capped healthcare costs. Finally, rather than appeasing wealthy centrist donors, modern Democrats must lean directly into the economic class conflict, aggressively championing working-class relief to re-energize and expand their voting coalition.
Excellent ideas. The old campaign system of "donate a fortune so we can give it the mainstream media to get our message across" isn't working anymore. First of all, Democrats don't have a message worth hearing, and secondly, many don't watch network television or read newspapers anymore.
I’m one of those Dems, Gloria. And I do read newspapers and watch network tv. I’m happy to see so many Repubs abandoning their party: welcome back to the No Kings Party, all of you.💖
I read newspapers but rarely watch network television.
Democrats need to rediscover how to communicate with the public. Often they don’t, and I’m only too aware of this even though I am a Democratic voter.
We don't have a choice but to vote Democratic.
Believe me, I know.
Thank you for giving us a picture of how candidates must communicate to reach today's voters.
Democrats need to stop hiding, and start speaking clearly, loudly, and directly to voters about topics that affect daily lives: healthcare, transportation, education for all (including the disabled), unions, and a language of respect toward one another.
Get messaging about real "bread and butter" issues talked about EVERY DAY in ways that every American can access without paywalls.
Yes, we need another FDR or two or three or more.
We could use another Eleanor Roosevelt, too.
Good point, Jim. I shudder to think of listening to The Orange Idiot trying to give a "fireside chat." He'd mumble incoherently for a while, then fall asleep.
It's time to use a very succinct label for the direction that we're heading as a nation:
Kleptocratic #RepubloFascism
This is not your grandpa's fascism. It is a kind formed by and for billionaires to extract all they can for as long as they can until we stop them. And if we don't, it will be those #BillionaireBuzzards who will drain the wealth from the rest of us and buy thousands of houses on the cheap.
Jeffrey Winters, the political scientist of "The Blind Spot," recently offered the term "participatory inequality" for our system. He points out that the Nordic Social Democracies have an oligarchic class that mostly opts out of paying taxes, leaving the majority to foot the bill for social programs.
I promise, I have no financial interest in promoting the book, lol.
You left out Idiocracy.
1/8th, you are master of hashtags. I look forward to them every day.
You're definitely preaching to the choir here. Unfortunately the Dem establishment shows no sign of planning to bite the hands that bribe them. So the situation is going to probably have to get much worse before it (hopefully) gets better. Consider just how bad things were when FDR was elected for instance. The "bright" side, in a very bad way, is that the current phenomenally incompetent admin seems hell bent on creating the kind of catastrophe that might produce another FDR. This is no way to run a country though.
I’m afraid you are right - the average person just trying to survive has their hands full right now - not seeing the giant monster oligarchs gobbling up America and eventually their lives
Yep. The distributive tables have been tilted and tilted until a truly wild proportion of the value of national output plows into a few pockets-- where it's used, when it's used, largely for gambling, not for investment in the durable means of production.
A tangential historical event to remember in connection with plutocrats and their responses to equity-increase policies: the B business Plot of 1933, in which U.S. "business leaders" colluded in an attempt to overthrow the government, but happily picked the wrong potential dictator: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
Gen Smedley Butler is one of America's greatest unsung heroes.
He was certainly an interesting and distinctive guy.
Andy Lanset's audio documentary on NPR, "The Marine Corps General Who Called War 'A Racket'", is the best account of General Butler's life I've come across. Maybe one of these days, when Hollywood's ready to take on the project, they'll make a movie about the General's life that's less scattered and more to the point than "Amsterdam" was.
I can't access my Substack article on Smedley Butler, or most of my previous articles. I have hard copies, but I thought we were supposed to be able to open our archive to paid subscribers.
He was much more than that.
To you.
Smedley Butler, a United States hero.
Fascinating article!
Set them in opposition to the people because they are:
Protect government and tax the rich
Protect roads and tax the rich
Protect hospitals and tax the rich
Return Obama care and tax the rich
Protect services and tax the rich
Protect the courts and tax the rich.
There’s 983 billionaires and one trillionaire and they were four to one against the Dems and 343 million people in the last election.
Their effective tax rate is 3%.
Yes. Except I'd change the syntax: ' Tax the rich TO protect the government. Tax the rich TO protect roads"... etc.
Better way your way✊!
Tax the R. I. C. H. - they can afford it - should be on signs and billboards everywhere
Can you put a melody to those words?
Trump used the right bait to hook his MAGA worshipers. Anyone promoting and believing in his smoke and screen ideologies was/is a true Patriot. They are the personification of a Christian. He and his wealthy ilk unabashedly insulted anyone denouncing their ideas. Once Patriot and Christian were thrown out to the populace it became very easy for them to call people anti Patriots, unamerican , and worst of all not Christian. Who would know best what a Christian is than a man selling his own bibles and never having opened one in his life. It boggles the mind that corporations and individuals holding the most ungodly amounts of money feel they should not pay taxes. They are proverbially laughing all the way to the banks.
They aren’t what I’d call genuinely Christian in following Jesus’s commands to care for the least of these. White Christian Nationalism is simply the latest version of slaveholder Christianity. Jesus becomes a political weapon and Christianity becomes mandatory, all while white Christian Nationalists selectively read the Bible to justify violence and the use of force. They rewrite the First Amendment to mean religious freedom for Christians only, which is not what its author James Madison intended. They rewrite history to make it look like the Founders were evangelicals like themselves, but the truth is many of them were Deists and not churchgoers.
In my admittedly limited experience many Americans are uncomfortable talking about class war because they truly believe that America is a classless society where anyone can make it if they work hard enough.
Worse, any attempt to analyse American politics in terms of class dynamics is seen as closet Marxism.
In that way the fundamental clash of interests between capital and labour is airbrushed out of the present, and indeed out of history.
The Dems have fallen for this, and are terrified, thus giving the wealthy free rein to accumulate ever-increasing wealth and power.
Or as Marx put it: 'Accumulate, accumulate. That is Moses and the prophets.'
He was wrong about a lot of things, but in that he was absolutely correct.
Some comedian put it well: Marx was completely wrong about communism, but completely right about capitalism.
It’s annoying to have fascists calling Democrats socialists or communists. They don’t know what these terms really mean, and they use them as snarl words, designed to discredit Democrats and shut down discussion. The Republicans really don’t care how far they’ve gone in abandoning commitment to government of, for and by the people.
The key is getting the white working class to buy into reform. That is the missing element of the coalition, and one that would be a natural to align with radical economic policies. But the Republicans have been ingenious at inciting that class with fear mongering about immigration, DEI and trans rights, and Democrats have made it very easy for them. The average Democrat would rather champion transgender women competing in high-school sports than taxing the rich to fund Medicare for all. Adding ever new letters to the LGBTQ acronym doesn’t threaten the economic interests of the wealthy blue-state elite, but taxes do. So Democrats stick to the safer ground of identity politics and piss the hell out of the working class. When will the Democratic leadership figure that out?
Walter Scheidel ("The Great Leveler") documents the events that accompany the collapse of rising inequality in societies: Wars, Revolutions (that make a difference), Pandemics and Societal Collapse. Not once a democratic vote. Is the US about to experience one of these catastrophic events? A revolution, as when we fought for civil rights and against the Vietnam war? But today, you have to hold two jobs, the wife is working too, you are in debt, you have no union, your job is precarious, you cannot afford the premiums of the privatized health care system, can't afford to send your kids to college, if college, they are still paying for their educational debt, you have no money saved for retirement, and you are glued to your screens distracting you from the situation. All your waking hours must be devoted to survival, making money, more urgent with inflation. Where do you find the time to organize to regain power? Do the "masters of mankind' (Adam Smith 1776) know this? Yes, they design and control "The System." AI will balloon the above effects. The "exceptional country." What a regrettable tragedy!
A great description of wage earners lives today and why there is little energy left for organizing. Wait until more people are layed off due to AI and see what happens.
Prof. Reich, thank you for pointing a finger of guilt to our Democratic representatives. Save for a few, those in positions of possibilities, have been timid.
While patriotic and horrified Americans are marching in the streets, too many elected Democrats seem to be awaiting instructions from FDR, Abraham Lincoln, or George Washington .
Let’s hear it for tough guys and gal you applaud: Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Zohran Mamdani. A Jew, Catholic, and Muslim (but with a Jewish great-grandfather).
It’s no secret that along with his mania, Trump flaunts, rather than hides, his corruption. How is this possible?
Certainly, when our Democratic representatives took office, they intended to do their part to ferociously aid and support their constituents with the power of a lioness.
Sadly, too many of us Democratics are disappointed that other than the three you note, the remainder are behaving more like scared kittens.
There are more - you just need to look
The heart of the Democratic Party has to lean more left. The American people can see that we have a political system that favors the rich. We are on the brink of not only losing our democracy but also losing our freedom of choice. Trickle down economics proved that the rich are not going to share their wealth with those less fortunate unless they are made to. America needs members of the Democratic Party who are willing to force this kind of ideology.
Senators who are part of the wealth class are going to keep on defending the wealth class, whether they call themselves Democrats or Republicans.
The problem is that before this happens, we are likely to see Trump bring about economic catastrophe. Economic catastrophe on the scale of the Great Depression seems to be the only thing which moves the government to act.