Hello! Delighted to read so many thoughtful comments here. My hope was for this space would become a forum for interesting and engaging discussion about the most important issues of our time, and you're already fulfilling that hope. Thank you.
Let me begin with Todd's point -- which several of you share -- that inequality is at or near the root of the challenges our democracy faces today. I'm reminded of Justice Louis Brandeis's famous comment in the 1920s (when we last faced extraordinary inequalities of income and wealth) to the effect that "we can have great wealth in the hands of a few or we can have a democracy, but we can't have both." The reason then -- as it is now -- is that wealth and power are almost synonymous, so that when wealth is concentrated power tends to be as well.
The wealthy argue that the economy will fail if we try to "redistribute" wealth. Is this supposed to represent economic expertise or is it a threat. If an economy has to be this skewed to function then the economy needs a serious reboot.
Nancy, their argument is pure rubbish. In fact, our economy flourished between 1946 and 1980 when income and wealth in the United States were far more equal.
Those in power always use the argument: "you NEED us". In certain indigenous Central American societies the priests (the wealthy ruling class) indoctrinated the population to believe the sun would not rise unless the priests were kept in their positions.
Those in power often think of themselves as "gods" and somehow convince others to worship them. I'll never understand, but some just want a leader--even if not in their best interest.
Very true, and even if one does not enter into political life with such an attitude, the pattern is typically that one gets quickly corrupted. Having power over others is like a narcotic: not everyone is susceptible, but those who are are quickly seduced and need ever more. Add to that the predilection for a certain percentage of any population to be essentially herd animals like sheep and the recipe is complete.
Is that control of power dependent only on the lack of awareness of the people that they have the true power through their vote. Until the citizenry is educated on the true nature of American constitutional democracy they will allow the powerful to manipulate them through misinformation and manipulation and thus maintain power that the masses hand them through ignorance, willful or otherwise.
Education is certainly part of the answer (more particularly, as I've said in my responses to several of you, we need to revive what used to be called "civic education") but even an educated public is no match for all the corporate money now inundating Washington. Right now, more than 4,000 lobbyists are working to pare down or eliminate measures in Biden's "Build Back Better" plan. Ten major industries have spent nearly $700 million on lobbying. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce alone has spent $30 million this year, aiming to prevent Democrats from raising taxes on the wealthy and big corporations.
Then to my mind, what needs to happen is to end lobbying and campaign contributions. No money to influence means more honest people that actually want to the job of governing rather than building wealth and power. Also, end the law that made corporations an "entity" with voting rights. No company should ever have such a designation in the first place.
Does any other western democracy have the lobbying "system" operating as a means to influence legislation and if not what laws do they have in place to avoid what happens here. Yes I am not so naïve to think money influences in other ways in other countries, but I do see a relatively more egalitarian systems of democracy in Europe and around the world.
I see the wealth inequality = power inequality argument clearly. The needle to thread seems to be how to pass equality of access to vote so that the voices of the majority can be equally heard so that power is generated to pass legislation that begins to dismantle the income/wealth inequality.
Yes, and also how to inform the majority about the truth. Some of the money at the top is being used to distort the truth, so people don't understand what's at stake or they're confused or misinformed about where their interests lie.
I've got to head off, but before I do I want to thank all of you once again for participating and providing extremely thoughtful comments. I hope this forum continues to be useful and interesting to you.
A final thought. I consider the "anti-democracy movement," if you want to call it that (a polite way of describing the move toward a form of 21st century fascism, both in the US and in several other countries that should know better), one of the three most threatening trends we must deal with in years to come. The others are climate destruction, and widening inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity, particularly racial. All three are interrelated in important ways. For example, oligarchies have never liked democracy out of fear that majorities will take away their wealth, and have done whatever they can to divide people and propagandize the so-called social benefits of concentrated wealth. They also use their wealth to bribe lawmakers through so-called "campaign contributions." But it's important not to fall into hopelessness or succumb to fatalism about this. During the progressive era (1901 to 1916) and the New Deal (1933 to 1940), and then again after World War II, America strengthened our democracy, reduced inequalities, and invested in public goods. There is a kind of pendulum in our life together. It will swing again. It may be doing so already.
I think the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in news reporting has been the biggest threat to democracy since it was tossed aside back in the 1980s. Because of the lack of Fairness Doctrine, "news" media such as Fox News, Newsmax, and their ilk have bombarded their listeners and viewers with only one side of any issue - as far right-wing as possible.
I agree Charlotte. We must first work with an agreed upon basis of reality. Before any talks, joint work, or even discussions occur, we all have to agree upon objective reality.
Carter began the acquiescence to license holders and their Broadcasters' group, not Reagan, in another example of the Great American myth that the American People may decide things for themselves (based on what they get to hear ..)
Ha ha "fox news" Rachel Maddow/MSNBC, CNN and every other liberal propaganda disinformation outlet pushed the false Russian collision narrative for 3 years on our nation. The majority of those Fox viewers knew the Russian collusion story was a hoax created by the HRC campaign, DNC, Fusion GPS and deep state operatives in the FBI, but liberal propaganda viewers like you did not. The indictment last month of HRC''s lawyer (Sussman) backs this up the fact that the Russian collusion was a hoax. Fox news has moved left or stayed the same of where they were 5 years ago. The reason you view FOX as "far right-wing" is because the left has moved so far to the extreme left that the middle now looks far right to people like you. You're the extremist.
Russian collusion and influence in our 2020 election and their ongoing efforts to skew American public opinion through the placement of false stories in social media and payments to members of the Trump election team has been well-documented and sufficiently-proven in credible media and the courts as well.
If what you say is true, that I am the extremist, I can only say that I'd much rather be what is considered "extremist" on the liberal side than your side, believing the Big Lie at all costs and mounting an insurrection to overturn the United States Government. You can't fix stupid, but at least your hats give you way. Don't bother to reply, I won't be paying any attention to the likes of you.
Our system is too heavily-influenced by wealthy corporate donors who control our politicians. They directly interfere with the will of the people, turning our democracy into an oligarchy. If Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema weren’t so interested in what their donors think, Democrats would be able to pass more progressive social reform for once.
Additionally, we can see how the rapid escalation of big money in politics after the Ctiizens United ruling has changed our politics. I remember a time around 15-20 years ago when Republicans were talking about combatting climate change and focusing on closing tax loopholes for the wealthy; now, they’re the primary enablers of issues like these because they’re more interested in money over morals.
Bingo. For several years now, the majority on the Supreme Court has been more focused on the so-called "freedom" to make campaign donations (under the First Amendment) than on the real freedom to vote (under the 14th and related Amendments). The Court's priorities should be just the reverse, in my view.
A final thought. I consider the "anti-democracy movement," if you want to call it that (a polite way of describing the move toward a form of 21st century fascism, both in the US and in several other countries that should know better), one of the three most threatening trends we must deal with in years to come. The others are climate destruction, and widening inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity, particularly racial. All three are interrelated in important ways. For example, oligarchies have never liked democracy out of fear that majorities will take away their wealth, and have done whatever they can to divide people and propagandize the so-called social benefits of concentrated wealth. They also use their wealth to bribe lawmakers through so-called "campaign contributions." But it's important not to fall into hopelessness or succumb to fatalism about this. During the progressive era (1901 to 1916) and the New Deal (1933 to 1940), and then again after World War II, America strengthened our democracy, reduced inequalities, and invested in public goods. There is a kind of pendulum in our life together. It will swing again. It may be doing so already.
We have numerous problems that need to be addressed such as social media, gerrymandering, Citizen’s United, cable news, voting regulations to mention just a few, but the real question is where do we start first. To me, the single most important step has to be getting big money out of politics. We won’t be able to fix anything without addressing this first like repealing Citizen’s United and requiring at least a three year wait period before any of our politicians can take a lobbyist position after leaving office.
Our current form of democracy often fails to represent the majority of Americans. For example, Republicans have been in the White House for 12 of the past 20 years despite winning the popular vote in only 1 election, 2004. In the U.S. Senate, Republicans haven't represented a majority of the population since 1996, because the states they represent tend to have smaller populations. Even in the U.S. House of Representatives, gerrymandering has distorted representative government. For example, in 2020, Democratic House candidates received about 66% of the total votes cast in California, but 79% of its Representatives are Democrats.
The challenge of representative government in the U.S. is complex. Some of it is structural, embedded in the Constitution, such as the composition of our Legislature, and is unlikely to change. Other parts are procedural, including parliamentary rules, such as the anti-democratic filibuster. States determine some of these outcomes, such as voting rights, districts and how their electoral votes are cast (all for one candidate or split based on the popular vote).
Both major parties have learned how to "game the system" for their own advantage and quest for power. Some of it is rooted in the methods of funding campaigns. It's clear that it's time for a change.
Sadly, you are correct about both parties being complicit. But! Dems tend to be less evil and at least the Dems DO some good things with their power. I guess that means their corporate sponsors are the ones who will SOMEHOW benefit from policies that at least don't outright kill us ..
Might make us sick, but there's ALWAYS money to be made from misery and injustice.
As Rae Duval eloquently states: "Citizens United. I believe it is unconstitutional, should not have stood as law. A corporation is not a man. It has allowed the uncontrolled greed and power grab that can destroy a society. There is a group whose purpose is to get money out of politics and protecting our right to vote. Hope others will check it out and share - https://endcitizensunited.org/"
Ellie, of course you're right. As I've said repeatedly in this forum today, we need to get behind two bills now working their way through the Senate (already passed the House): the John Lewis Voting Rights Act (which responds to the Supreme Court's problems with the old Voting Rights Act), and the Free to Vote Act (it had been named the For the People Act), which reforms campaign finance, congressional districting, and a host of other problems now undermining our democracy.
While I am no expert, I would say that tRump Republicans are the greatest threat we have to our country. The ultra-right media is also culpable, in that Fox News, OAN and other right wing media spread lies and propaganda fermenting fear and mistrust of our political processes, and of our public health experts and policies. Further, the less militant news media do not help, in that, in the well meaning impulse to deliver "fair and balanced" reporting, give tacit approval to what the right wingnut media are promulgating, i.e., disinformation and outright propaganda.
I would have to say money in our political system. If issues were our only focus, people who vote would develop critical thinking skills, and mis-and disinformation wouldn't stand up to scrutiny, as the argumentative fallacies would be flushed out for all the world to see.
For me the biggest problem is the rt wing ownership of every major news source. It has created a separate reality for an already racist group of people. It’s about the lies being told and allowed to stand. We can have the correct laws but the truth has to reach people. Fear and inequality are baked into our culture. Constant lies about it keep people stirred up and it’s clearly VERY dangerous.
(1) The decline in the quality of U.S. public educational systems. Emphasis should be placed on increased & intelligently-applied federal funding and higher standards of curriculum requirements, to include extensive Civics and meaningful American and world history courses. (Surely a few billion shifted from the antiquated and bloated military budget could be re-assigned to ensure well-informed citizens and potential voters? aka- no new taxes necessary. ) Are not well-educated citizens the foundation of a good national defense? (2) Unregulated social media platforms: Perhaps modifying pre-1980 FCC regulations to apply to these entities, accompanied by breaking up monopolies in this arena and compelling federal fines that have teeth when the standards are ignored? Social media seems to have allowed its participants to equate "opinion" with "expertise." The distinction should be pointed out/documented, and respected or at least categorized as such. Else, what is an education for?
Hi Marian. The core problem of public education today, in my view, is that schools and teachers in relatively lower-income areas have far less resources than schools and teachers in high-income areas. That's largely because 40 percent of the typical school's revenue comes from local property taxes, which provide lower per-pupil funding in poor communities than in higher-income communities. These disparities are widening inequalities, and also undermining our democracy in many ways.
Thank you Mr. Reich. Should the public school system not also be funded (proportionally- using your mentioned handicap) by federal taxes? And in your opinion, does the decline in the quality of public school education equate to an undermining of our democracy?
Yes, I believe the federal share of school funding (now about 8 percent, on average, nationally) should be expanded and the reliance on local property taxes dramatically decreased. And, yes, I do think there's a relationship between the decline in quality of public education and the rising dysfunctions in our democracy. When the children of the wealthy attend well-funded private schools (or public schools in high-income areas that, because of their funding, are tantamount to well-funded private schools) while the children of the middle and working classes and the poor attend sub-standard schools, we lose the understanding that we're part of the same nation. We lose our capacity to appreciate what we owe one another as members of the same society.
Right on completely. Our education system has been hijacked and undermined over the past 50 years and has created a culture of docile consumerism and a lack of considered thought. Free thinkers pose a threat to any status quo so the solution is to quash it through widespread ignorance and an inability to form complex thoughts.
Inequality and privilege. Concentration of wealth gives a minority huge power in setting the rules for the majority to sustain and gain even higher levels of inequality and privilege. It threatens national security and will cause civil unrest.
The Biggest Threat is Voter Suppression and the passage of Voter Suppression laws in many states. Congress must pass the Freedom to Vote Act NOW!!!! This, plus debunking Criminal Trump's Big Lie will bring confidence in our Voting System, which is the cornerstone of our Democracy.
A lack of basic civics knowledge. People can only be taken advantage of if they are ignorant (willfully or otherwise) of the way American democracy is actually designed to work. Politicians and their backers can only succeed in misinforming, distracting or manipulating people into voting and acting against self interest if their target audience is unaware of their rights, responsibilities and how they play a role in their own constitutionally based democratic government. As long as people are unaware or purposely kept in the dark of how the American system of democratic governance is designed and meant to work, they will be susceptible to craven manipulation by forces that do not have their best interest in mind in the least.
When I went to public high school (about a century ago), we had a required course called "citizenship education," which emphasized our responsibilities to society. Some of it was simplistic and silly. Some was pure propaganda (it was at the height of the Cold War). But looking back, much was important and useful. I think you're right about civics knowledge.
When I attended High School in Illinois in the late 70's and early 80's passing a class and test on the constitution and civics basics was a requirement to graduate. That doesn't seem to be the case any more.
Hello! Delighted to read so many thoughtful comments here. My hope was for this space would become a forum for interesting and engaging discussion about the most important issues of our time, and you're already fulfilling that hope. Thank you.
Let me begin with Todd's point -- which several of you share -- that inequality is at or near the root of the challenges our democracy faces today. I'm reminded of Justice Louis Brandeis's famous comment in the 1920s (when we last faced extraordinary inequalities of income and wealth) to the effect that "we can have great wealth in the hands of a few or we can have a democracy, but we can't have both." The reason then -- as it is now -- is that wealth and power are almost synonymous, so that when wealth is concentrated power tends to be as well.
The wealthy argue that the economy will fail if we try to "redistribute" wealth. Is this supposed to represent economic expertise or is it a threat. If an economy has to be this skewed to function then the economy needs a serious reboot.
Nancy, their argument is pure rubbish. In fact, our economy flourished between 1946 and 1980 when income and wealth in the United States were far more equal.
Those in power always use the argument: "you NEED us". In certain indigenous Central American societies the priests (the wealthy ruling class) indoctrinated the population to believe the sun would not rise unless the priests were kept in their positions.
Those in power often think of themselves as "gods" and somehow convince others to worship them. I'll never understand, but some just want a leader--even if not in their best interest.
Very true, and even if one does not enter into political life with such an attitude, the pattern is typically that one gets quickly corrupted. Having power over others is like a narcotic: not everyone is susceptible, but those who are are quickly seduced and need ever more. Add to that the predilection for a certain percentage of any population to be essentially herd animals like sheep and the recipe is complete.
Is that control of power dependent only on the lack of awareness of the people that they have the true power through their vote. Until the citizenry is educated on the true nature of American constitutional democracy they will allow the powerful to manipulate them through misinformation and manipulation and thus maintain power that the masses hand them through ignorance, willful or otherwise.
Education is certainly part of the answer (more particularly, as I've said in my responses to several of you, we need to revive what used to be called "civic education") but even an educated public is no match for all the corporate money now inundating Washington. Right now, more than 4,000 lobbyists are working to pare down or eliminate measures in Biden's "Build Back Better" plan. Ten major industries have spent nearly $700 million on lobbying. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce alone has spent $30 million this year, aiming to prevent Democrats from raising taxes on the wealthy and big corporations.
Then to my mind, what needs to happen is to end lobbying and campaign contributions. No money to influence means more honest people that actually want to the job of governing rather than building wealth and power. Also, end the law that made corporations an "entity" with voting rights. No company should ever have such a designation in the first place.
Does any other western democracy have the lobbying "system" operating as a means to influence legislation and if not what laws do they have in place to avoid what happens here. Yes I am not so naïve to think money influences in other ways in other countries, but I do see a relatively more egalitarian systems of democracy in Europe and around the world.
I see the wealth inequality = power inequality argument clearly. The needle to thread seems to be how to pass equality of access to vote so that the voices of the majority can be equally heard so that power is generated to pass legislation that begins to dismantle the income/wealth inequality.
Yes, and also how to inform the majority about the truth. Some of the money at the top is being used to distort the truth, so people don't understand what's at stake or they're confused or misinformed about where their interests lie.
So vital! A clear stream of truth🏞
I've got to head off, but before I do I want to thank all of you once again for participating and providing extremely thoughtful comments. I hope this forum continues to be useful and interesting to you.
A final thought. I consider the "anti-democracy movement," if you want to call it that (a polite way of describing the move toward a form of 21st century fascism, both in the US and in several other countries that should know better), one of the three most threatening trends we must deal with in years to come. The others are climate destruction, and widening inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity, particularly racial. All three are interrelated in important ways. For example, oligarchies have never liked democracy out of fear that majorities will take away their wealth, and have done whatever they can to divide people and propagandize the so-called social benefits of concentrated wealth. They also use their wealth to bribe lawmakers through so-called "campaign contributions." But it's important not to fall into hopelessness or succumb to fatalism about this. During the progressive era (1901 to 1916) and the New Deal (1933 to 1940), and then again after World War II, America strengthened our democracy, reduced inequalities, and invested in public goods. There is a kind of pendulum in our life together. It will swing again. It may be doing so already.
Thank you!!! 🙏🏻
I think the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in news reporting has been the biggest threat to democracy since it was tossed aside back in the 1980s. Because of the lack of Fairness Doctrine, "news" media such as Fox News, Newsmax, and their ilk have bombarded their listeners and viewers with only one side of any issue - as far right-wing as possible.
I agree Charlotte. We must first work with an agreed upon basis of reality. Before any talks, joint work, or even discussions occur, we all have to agree upon objective reality.
As has often been, facts matter.
correction, as I left out a key word - as has often been stated, facts matter.
Carter began the acquiescence to license holders and their Broadcasters' group, not Reagan, in another example of the Great American myth that the American People may decide things for themselves (based on what they get to hear ..)
Ha ha "fox news" Rachel Maddow/MSNBC, CNN and every other liberal propaganda disinformation outlet pushed the false Russian collision narrative for 3 years on our nation. The majority of those Fox viewers knew the Russian collusion story was a hoax created by the HRC campaign, DNC, Fusion GPS and deep state operatives in the FBI, but liberal propaganda viewers like you did not. The indictment last month of HRC''s lawyer (Sussman) backs this up the fact that the Russian collusion was a hoax. Fox news has moved left or stayed the same of where they were 5 years ago. The reason you view FOX as "far right-wing" is because the left has moved so far to the extreme left that the middle now looks far right to people like you. You're the extremist.
Russian collusion and influence in our 2020 election and their ongoing efforts to skew American public opinion through the placement of false stories in social media and payments to members of the Trump election team has been well-documented and sufficiently-proven in credible media and the courts as well.
I agree with Porter.
If what you say is true, that I am the extremist, I can only say that I'd much rather be what is considered "extremist" on the liberal side than your side, believing the Big Lie at all costs and mounting an insurrection to overturn the United States Government. You can't fix stupid, but at least your hats give you way. Don't bother to reply, I won't be paying any attention to the likes of you.
JJ, even Russia has NOT denied their involvement in the 2016 election and false news leading up to it. So, it is not fake news and has been verified.
What needs to happen is there must be a restoration of trust in our elected officials to move forward.
That must be some damn good kool aid.
Our system is too heavily-influenced by wealthy corporate donors who control our politicians. They directly interfere with the will of the people, turning our democracy into an oligarchy. If Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema weren’t so interested in what their donors think, Democrats would be able to pass more progressive social reform for once.
Additionally, we can see how the rapid escalation of big money in politics after the Ctiizens United ruling has changed our politics. I remember a time around 15-20 years ago when Republicans were talking about combatting climate change and focusing on closing tax loopholes for the wealthy; now, they’re the primary enablers of issues like these because they’re more interested in money over morals.
Bingo. For several years now, the majority on the Supreme Court has been more focused on the so-called "freedom" to make campaign donations (under the First Amendment) than on the real freedom to vote (under the 14th and related Amendments). The Court's priorities should be just the reverse, in my view.
I don't recall repubs doing anything good for the ppl over my 45 yr viting career
Voting, not viting!
Yes, this is it! I just commented above.
A final thought. I consider the "anti-democracy movement," if you want to call it that (a polite way of describing the move toward a form of 21st century fascism, both in the US and in several other countries that should know better), one of the three most threatening trends we must deal with in years to come. The others are climate destruction, and widening inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity, particularly racial. All three are interrelated in important ways. For example, oligarchies have never liked democracy out of fear that majorities will take away their wealth, and have done whatever they can to divide people and propagandize the so-called social benefits of concentrated wealth. They also use their wealth to bribe lawmakers through so-called "campaign contributions." But it's important not to fall into hopelessness or succumb to fatalism about this. During the progressive era (1901 to 1916) and the New Deal (1933 to 1940), and then again after World War II, America strengthened our democracy, reduced inequalities, and invested in public goods. There is a kind of pendulum in our life together. It will swing again. It may be doing so already.
We have numerous problems that need to be addressed such as social media, gerrymandering, Citizen’s United, cable news, voting regulations to mention just a few, but the real question is where do we start first. To me, the single most important step has to be getting big money out of politics. We won’t be able to fix anything without addressing this first like repealing Citizen’s United and requiring at least a three year wait period before any of our politicians can take a lobbyist position after leaving office.
Our current form of democracy often fails to represent the majority of Americans. For example, Republicans have been in the White House for 12 of the past 20 years despite winning the popular vote in only 1 election, 2004. In the U.S. Senate, Republicans haven't represented a majority of the population since 1996, because the states they represent tend to have smaller populations. Even in the U.S. House of Representatives, gerrymandering has distorted representative government. For example, in 2020, Democratic House candidates received about 66% of the total votes cast in California, but 79% of its Representatives are Democrats.
The challenge of representative government in the U.S. is complex. Some of it is structural, embedded in the Constitution, such as the composition of our Legislature, and is unlikely to change. Other parts are procedural, including parliamentary rules, such as the anti-democratic filibuster. States determine some of these outcomes, such as voting rights, districts and how their electoral votes are cast (all for one candidate or split based on the popular vote).
Both major parties have learned how to "game the system" for their own advantage and quest for power. Some of it is rooted in the methods of funding campaigns. It's clear that it's time for a change.
Sadly, you are correct about both parties being complicit. But! Dems tend to be less evil and at least the Dems DO some good things with their power. I guess that means their corporate sponsors are the ones who will SOMEHOW benefit from policies that at least don't outright kill us ..
Might make us sick, but there's ALWAYS money to be made from misery and injustice.
As Rae Duval eloquently states: "Citizens United. I believe it is unconstitutional, should not have stood as law. A corporation is not a man. It has allowed the uncontrolled greed and power grab that can destroy a society. There is a group whose purpose is to get money out of politics and protecting our right to vote. Hope others will check it out and share - https://endcitizensunited.org/"
Thank you, Bob for the kind remark
Big money in politics worries me the most. How will we be able to fix the environment with corporate $$$ owning our polititians?
Ellie, of course you're right. As I've said repeatedly in this forum today, we need to get behind two bills now working their way through the Senate (already passed the House): the John Lewis Voting Rights Act (which responds to the Supreme Court's problems with the old Voting Rights Act), and the Free to Vote Act (it had been named the For the People Act), which reforms campaign finance, congressional districting, and a host of other problems now undermining our democracy.
While I am no expert, I would say that tRump Republicans are the greatest threat we have to our country. The ultra-right media is also culpable, in that Fox News, OAN and other right wing media spread lies and propaganda fermenting fear and mistrust of our political processes, and of our public health experts and policies. Further, the less militant news media do not help, in that, in the well meaning impulse to deliver "fair and balanced" reporting, give tacit approval to what the right wingnut media are promulgating, i.e., disinformation and outright propaganda.
I would have to say money in our political system. If issues were our only focus, people who vote would develop critical thinking skills, and mis-and disinformation wouldn't stand up to scrutiny, as the argumentative fallacies would be flushed out for all the world to see.
For me the biggest problem is the rt wing ownership of every major news source. It has created a separate reality for an already racist group of people. It’s about the lies being told and allowed to stand. We can have the correct laws but the truth has to reach people. Fear and inequality are baked into our culture. Constant lies about it keep people stirred up and it’s clearly VERY dangerous.
Yup, consolidation of the media and an unwillingness on the part of government to take any action to stop/prevent it.
(1) The decline in the quality of U.S. public educational systems. Emphasis should be placed on increased & intelligently-applied federal funding and higher standards of curriculum requirements, to include extensive Civics and meaningful American and world history courses. (Surely a few billion shifted from the antiquated and bloated military budget could be re-assigned to ensure well-informed citizens and potential voters? aka- no new taxes necessary. ) Are not well-educated citizens the foundation of a good national defense? (2) Unregulated social media platforms: Perhaps modifying pre-1980 FCC regulations to apply to these entities, accompanied by breaking up monopolies in this arena and compelling federal fines that have teeth when the standards are ignored? Social media seems to have allowed its participants to equate "opinion" with "expertise." The distinction should be pointed out/documented, and respected or at least categorized as such. Else, what is an education for?
Hi Marian. The core problem of public education today, in my view, is that schools and teachers in relatively lower-income areas have far less resources than schools and teachers in high-income areas. That's largely because 40 percent of the typical school's revenue comes from local property taxes, which provide lower per-pupil funding in poor communities than in higher-income communities. These disparities are widening inequalities, and also undermining our democracy in many ways.
Thank you Mr. Reich. Should the public school system not also be funded (proportionally- using your mentioned handicap) by federal taxes? And in your opinion, does the decline in the quality of public school education equate to an undermining of our democracy?
Yes, I believe the federal share of school funding (now about 8 percent, on average, nationally) should be expanded and the reliance on local property taxes dramatically decreased. And, yes, I do think there's a relationship between the decline in quality of public education and the rising dysfunctions in our democracy. When the children of the wealthy attend well-funded private schools (or public schools in high-income areas that, because of their funding, are tantamount to well-funded private schools) while the children of the middle and working classes and the poor attend sub-standard schools, we lose the understanding that we're part of the same nation. We lose our capacity to appreciate what we owe one another as members of the same society.
Precisely. Thank you, Sir.
This does serve the aims of the privileged.
Right on completely. Our education system has been hijacked and undermined over the past 50 years and has created a culture of docile consumerism and a lack of considered thought. Free thinkers pose a threat to any status quo so the solution is to quash it through widespread ignorance and an inability to form complex thoughts.
Inequality and privilege. Concentration of wealth gives a minority huge power in setting the rules for the majority to sustain and gain even higher levels of inequality and privilege. It threatens national security and will cause civil unrest.
The Biggest Threat is Voter Suppression and the passage of Voter Suppression laws in many states. Congress must pass the Freedom to Vote Act NOW!!!! This, plus debunking Criminal Trump's Big Lie will bring confidence in our Voting System, which is the cornerstone of our Democracy.
A lack of basic civics knowledge. People can only be taken advantage of if they are ignorant (willfully or otherwise) of the way American democracy is actually designed to work. Politicians and their backers can only succeed in misinforming, distracting or manipulating people into voting and acting against self interest if their target audience is unaware of their rights, responsibilities and how they play a role in their own constitutionally based democratic government. As long as people are unaware or purposely kept in the dark of how the American system of democratic governance is designed and meant to work, they will be susceptible to craven manipulation by forces that do not have their best interest in mind in the least.
When I went to public high school (about a century ago), we had a required course called "citizenship education," which emphasized our responsibilities to society. Some of it was simplistic and silly. Some was pure propaganda (it was at the height of the Cold War). But looking back, much was important and useful. I think you're right about civics knowledge.
When I attended High School in Illinois in the late 70's and early 80's passing a class and test on the constitution and civics basics was a requirement to graduate. That doesn't seem to be the case any more.
I do not believe this is an oversight or a mistake: an informed public is a threat to those who wish to exploit and profit at the expense of others.