Capitalism, democracy and freedom go very well together, since capitalism was invented as an economic system to promote a congenial society. After the fall of fascism in the last century, America may have come close to achieving such a society (although there were flaws).
Marx misunderstood capitalism because he assumed the proletariat could only wield power through revolution. He should have known better, because in the late 19th century unions were already forming in England and Germany, and women were on the verge of getting the right to vote. Democracy! I suggest Mr. Thiel sits down again and this time actually reads "Wealth of Nations. "
One of the underpinnings of capitalism, as originally conceived, is progressive taxation. Taxes were high during the post-fascist period of Thiel's Germany, and in America....until things started to unravel here with Reagan's "trickledown economics," followed by the gradual descent into the New Age of socialism.
Such socialism is not something Marx would have recognized, because it is welfare for the rich rather than for the common man. Legal tax avoidance is nothing more than government welfare, so Thiel is one of the new Welfare Queens! As a Rand acolyte and derivatives trader, he has done nothing useful in his career other than take advantage of New Age socialism to enrich himself.
Thiel, to paraphrase Kris Kristofferson, is partly truth and mostly fiction.
If some of his allies get their way, LGBTQ people like him would be EXTERMINATED.
He is heilige Deutsch, an Elon Musk associate, now living here in Baghdad By the Sea openly cohabitating with his significant other of the same kind.
After college, he raised $1 million from friends and family to launch Thiel Capital Management to invest in the dot-com boom, before co-founding a payments company with Max Levchin that would become PayPal, which was later acquired by eBay. Thiel became Facebook's first outside investor when he acquired a 10.2% stake for $500,000 in August 2004. He sold the majority of his shares in Facebook for over $1 billion in 2012, but remains on the board of directors. He cofounded Palantir Technologies, where he serves as chairman.
Here, he's been plugging what Warren Buffet calls kleptocurrency. Recently, Palantir’s plunge is breathtaking. "Shares were off more than 20% in Monday morning trading, reaching an all-time intraday low of $7.32; shares had never previously moved lower than $8.90, and have never closed lower than $9.03 since they were listed in September 2020, according to FactSet. The stock was also on track for its steepest single-day percentage decline on record, topping a 15.8% drop on Feb. 17."
Meanwhile the entire keptocurrency market remains "bearish amid a prevailing sentiment of “extreme fear”. At the time of updating this (9.05 pm), global crypto market cap again crashed to $1.25 trillion from the $1.31 trillion recorded on Monday. Bitcoin price has again crashed to below $29,000 level.
"The global cryptocurrency market volume over the last 24 hours decreased by 0.11% to $80.41 billion. The total volume in DeFi was $7.26 billion, which is 9.03% of the total crypto market 24-hour volume. Stable coins volume was $70.38 billion, which is 87.52% of the total crypto market 24-hour volume."
I'm not sure that capitalism and democracy go so well together. One is a top-down authoritarian regime and the other is a bottom-up majoritarian structure. As you suggest, capitalism can only function when guided (or controlled) by a strong government, strong unions, and progressive taxation. We see in the US that the government is unable to control the excesses of business, unions have been all but eliminated, and the taxes are no longer sufficiently progressive. This is all due to the fact that the structure you propose automatically creates an adversarial relationship between business, on the one hand, and government and the general population, on the other hand. This, in turn, has led us to the "Winner Takes All Politics" we see today.
I understand what you are saying, and agree that it is difficult to maintain Smithian capitalism, particularly when the wealthy are able to get the proletariat to vote against their economic interests (as in the US, by exploiting their inherent racism). Smith thought that, by allowing everyone to pursue their own selfish interests you would, ironically, end up with a congenial society. This is what I think he meant by "the invisible hand."
I believe there is no better economic system, so we should try get it back. Currently, the best examples are to be found in the Scandinavian societies, where taxes are high and people are happy.
That said, if we could persuade 20 million Americans to start again voting their own economic interests, rather than those of the plutocrats, we could perhaps have the best of all worlds, the entrepreneurial spirit of America, with the liberal spirit of the Danes. Difficult - it will require a wealth tax - but not impossible.
We need for democracy to control capitalism and not allow capitalism to control democracy. Alas, presently in America the latter is the case. See book CAPTURED by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.
Yes, that would require that Americans are educated as to the connection between politics and economics. An education in Political Economy would raise the level of discussion regarding public policy to a new level that will be needed if we're ever to progress beyond an Horatio Alger understanding of the economy.
Capitalism then forewarned us of capitalism now. Marx misunderstood nothing. It is capitallsts who misunderstand socialism. Some of the most successful countries in the the, with high levels of citizen satisfaction and happiness, are Socialist countries. The USA is nowhere near the top in having happy and satisfied citizens. Socialism promotes euality of all peoples, and has NOTHING to do with PERSONAL WEALTH! Co-opting words like socialism to mean something entirely different than intended does not change the value of the original conception of socialism. If you weren't American you might be able to see the differences.
Thanks for trying to explain (democratic) socialism to Americans. We've grown up brainwashed since the 1950s that communism and socialism are bad because they are totalitarian. Ain't true. Totalitarian government evolved under communism because of Russia's desire to get a bunch of religious farmers involved in the industrial revolution. It's hard to get farmers off the land. They had to force the issue. You can have democracy along with both capitalism and socialism, which is what those few "successful" European countries are doing. All these socio-economic terms exist because they are different from each other. This means that socialism is not, by definition, totalitarian.
@rawgod, I sense from your comment the absence of a critical distinction, in my view, between Socialism, that advocates for government control and ownership of the means of production, and Democratic Socialism, that simply, though importantly, calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth. I would note that I am unaware of any of our democratic European counterparts, all of whom subscribe to some version of Democratic Socialism, who would dispute the claim that pure Socialism invariably devolves into a consolidation of power under autocratic leadership.
I did not make that distinction because I was only talking about socialism itself. Human-tainted socialism might devolve into autocracy, but that is not on socialism, it is on the greedy capitalIstic-oriented leadership who take over socialIstic ideals for their own purposes. THAT DOES NOT ""INVARIABLY" HAVE TO HAPPEN? That it does happen is more a comment on asshole humans that it does on a political/economic ideal!
If as you say the European nations practise Democratic Socialism, whatever that is, they are still better systems than what America has. It is American society AS IS that I am condemning.
rawgod, We agree on your last point that Democratic Socialism, whose institutions seek to provide a more equitable distribution of its nation’s wealth, is a far better system than the one practiced in the States, which is neither good at equitable distribution nor at containing the excesses of unbounded concentrations of wealth. Hence, as I have stated elsewhere, we would greatly benefit were we to focus on passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform, all of which would help remedy the inequities in our society.
Footnote: I would submit that capitalism has worked relatively well in the European democracies precisely because it’s been wedded to social democratic institutions, to a regulatory state which contains its excesses, moderates its self serving impulses, keeps it honest, gives it a human face, and makes it work for everyday people. I would add that the legislation cited in my foregoing comment would produce a similar effect here at home.
Doesn't socialism include the possibility of democratic economic decisions made by the majority of the workers, and an equitable distribution of the wealth the workers have created? What's the government got to do with THAT?
Carol, In answer to your question, I would submit that our efforts should focus on passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform, all of which would contribute to more widespread economic, social, and environmental justice, the foundations, if you will, that underscore Democratic Socialism.
Carol, Though I am sensing some common ground, which I view as positive, I, nonetheless, would maintain that capitalism has worked relatively well in the European democracies because it’s been wedded to social democratic institutions, to a regulatory state which contains its excesses, keeps it honest, gives it a human face, and makes it work for everyday people. Passage of the legislation cited in my foregoing comment would have a similar effect here at home.
Capitalism can serve hierarchy as well as it can serve the network. It can serve democracy and it can serve socialist values. But just remember, Money Means Monarchy. The lure is always present to those who know how to become kings, by rigging the system.
Capitalism is fundamentally anti-democratic because it promotes the rich, who get richer and richer, while opposing the rights of workers, who have to fight the rich with unions. Capitalist owners hate unions because unions want to force the rich business owners to give workers their due. That’s why Jeff Bezos spends millions trying to keep unions out of Amazon. That’s why Starbucks tries to defeat unions. There’s no freedom or democracy when you see a few rich entrepreneurs owning most of the wealth of this country and not giving a damn about whether or not workers have enough to eat. You’re not free if you’re starving. You’re not living in a democracy if your voice doesn’t matter.
Carol, Do you have a better way in mind to organize human labor for productivity? I ask, in part, because I, too, have commented on Capitalism and would welcome your response if you wish to comment.
Oh, yes. In a word, socialism—nonprofit work. Not giving someone else the right to own you or your work for that other person’s gain while you don’t earn as much
as you should and don’t get the benefits, including pension, healthcare coverage and paid leave—that you should. Capitalism favors the owner of the enterprise above all else.
Carol, I won’t have time to draft an adequate reply until I return home later tonight, at which point I will seek to clarify, through definition, whether your beliefs align primarily with socialism or with democratic socialism. The two systems are quite distinct.
Carol, As promised, I write to clarify the distinction between Socialism, that advocates for government control and ownership of the means of production, and Democratic Socialism, that simply, though importantly, calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth. I would note that I am unaware of any of our democratic European counterparts, all of whom subscribe to a version of Democratic Socialism, who would dispute the claim that pure Socialism invariably devolves into a consolidation of power under autocratic leadership.
Let me dissent a bit (see my note, above). Capitalism was intended by Adam Smith to promote a congenial society. In this regard, one of its underpinnings was progressive taxation, i.e., the rich would not only pay higher taxes than those less wealthy, but would pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes. The re are two reasons for this, first to prevent the rich from becoming too powerful, because Smith predicted they would destroy the free market (i.e., what we have now in America), the second to make money available for roads, bridges, canals, etc. (i.e., infrastructure, which we have so little of now in America).
The key to successful capitalism is high taxes, strong (but not too strong) unions, and a democratically elected government. The key to restoring all three is to focus on the first. There must be a wealth tax.
If you want to follow Karl Marx, good luck, we see the end result playing out in Ukraine and North Korea. If you say, we can have socialism without Marx, it's been tried before, in the UK in the postwar period. I was there. It's a disaster.
China proves you can call yourself a Marxist and also be a capitalist.
If you want to actually understand market capitalism, follow the shorts. It's gambling and right now the shorts are making a bundle. Bill gates sells Musk short.
I deliberately left out China because it complicates things. Nevertheless, I note that, just as with Russia and North Korea, it is not at all what Marx intended. On the other hand, like Russia and North Korea, China is basically an autocracy. So you could begin to make a case that Marxism ends in autocracy.
The problem is, looking at the US and China, you might be tempted to think the same about capitalism. This, I think, is Piketty's position. Autocracy has been a natural form of government since Babylon. Capitalism, as first conceived, can be viewed as a delicate dance of free markets and strong government, with an undergirding of progressive taxation. But, as we have seen, it is so easy to unravel. It lasted just 30 years in the US, and came apart in 1980 through exploitation of the racism of the proletariat, in the wake of Civil Rights.
Piketty advocates a global wealth tax. This is logical, but will be difficult. We could start the process in the US, if we can get past the fascists by persuading more people to vote in their economic interests.
I have a different perspective. Beginning in 1971 US corporations began a unified drive to reverse the laws imposed during the New Deal. They sought to undo a strong government, strong unions, regulation, and progressive taxes. They have been overwhelmingly successful on all fronts. As an added result of this effort they have "unraveled" democracy. Regular voters have a "statistically insignificant effect on legislation". Thus, the excesses of capitalist behavior have created a grossly unequal distribution of income and wealth and a dysfunctional democracy that many, including me, term an oligarchy. The US has had anything approaching a reasonable distribution of income and wealth for merely ~30 of its 243 years of existence. Hardly much to brag about.
"Beginning in 1971 US corporations began a unified drive to reverse the laws imposed during the New Deal. "
Actually, they had been trying to do this ever since the New Deal. They never stopped. They hated Roosevelt. It didn't matter, because taxes were high and the plutocrats lacked the real wealth necessary to assault democracy.
That all changed after Civil Rights, when 50 million people (almost all in the South) switched from voting Democrat to voting Republican, placing their racism ahead of their wallets, and allowing Reagan (shudder), and Friedman (shudder) a foot in the door. That was the beginning of the end for the New Deal, and the celebration of "freedom" as a disguised form of racism, ending in Tucker Carlson and mass shootings.
The practical solution is to persuade 20 million people that it is in their interests to vote Democrat.
Hmmm, interesting perspective. I agree that capitalists had been trying to undo the New Deal from its inception. I was referring to the Lewis Powell memo to business in 1971 that galvanized the corporate effort into eventually a juggernaut.
The Republican Party has 3 principle parts to its base that have formed an unholy alliance wherein they allow each part to pursue their aims and there is no obvious conflict among them. Each of the 3 has been granted one or a set of goals that the party will work towards. The three parts are 1) Capitalists - low taxes on corporations and the wealthy, limited regulation; 2) Religious extremists - overturn Roe v. Wade; 3) Racists - permission to act out their grievances. Everything the Republican Party says or does can be viewed through this lens.
So...how many horns does a unicorn have? The "laws" of economics require the suspension of disbelief.
Capitalism is not a form of government.
If you know the butterfly straddle and have access to the markets, you won't as a matter of math, lose much. Speculators are not capitalists by definition, as they don't create value.
I think that all depends on how you define capitalusts. They lust after capital, and the more they get, the more they want. In my mind, it was the capitalists of yesteryear who set the stage for the capitalusts of today. Due to the "gold standard" there was an actual limit on how much capital was available to be owned, and when they convinced the government to drop the gold stadard is when their true goal was realized. Now the government prints money as it wishes, with 1% being made available to WE THE PEOPLE, and 99% being made available to the WEALTHY, who hoard it where no one else but the WEALTHY can get it. The catch is, though, capital no longer is congruaant with printed money. Capital exists mainly in electronic storage files that are potentially impossible to fill. The "old capitalists" never had this option available to them, or they would have showed their true faces a long long time ago.
While I agree that capitalism is not a form of government, it does require a strong government in order to function, particularly a government collect progressive taxes.
As for your last paragraph, perhaps the most brilliant and enlightened of economists, John Maynard Keynes, regarded the stock market as a necessary casino, but was nevertheless able to come up with a solution to the Great Depression, along with strong advice to Roosevelt about the New Deal and it maintenance, and, finally the Bretton Woods blueprint for a world economic order (basically, drop tariffs, free the markets, back to Smith). It worked very well in the US until that horse's arse, Ronald Reagan, introduced us to the New Age of Socialism, which has culminated in Thiel, Musk and Zuckerberg.
Thank you Michael Hutchinson for beginning a discussion regarding the political economy that I know little about. The people that entered the discussion i.e.. Daniel Solomon, Jeff Rose and rawgod made Reich's newsletter a real treat to be a member of, but more importantly an education I would only have received if I read Foreign Policy, the Atlantic and magazines that are comparable. You guys made it a lot more palatable!
I like Keynes but he didn't anticipate (nor did Ayn Rand, Galbreath, Friedman, Van Misses or anyone else) figure out the yin and yang of hedging bets, the power of computers.
There’s no real success in capitalism because it gives preference to the rich owners. I agree that the rich must be taxed much more than the rest of us. Capitalism is a colossal failure because it’s based on inequality between workers and business owners. The owners always have more power, and are incentivized to keep workers down so that they can pay the workers as little as possible so that the owners can make as much as possible. They fight and spend to keep unions out. In our country they are not paying enough taxes (or they’re even paying no taxes) because they can buy legislators and threaten to cut production and raise prices to get their way. Worker ownership of business, or government control (as in traditional Medicare), is the answer.
Please don't penalize small guys, many trapped into an IRA, 401 k or in my case "thrift plans" controlled by institutional fund managers.
Please also note that the industrial revolution has sunsetted. Most educated people work for themselves. In a gig economy, temporary, flexible jobs are commonplace and companies tend to hire independent contractors and freelancers instead of full-time employees. A gig economy undermines the traditional economy of full-time workers who often focus on their career development.
Workers who work gigs are not able to get pensions, health insurance, or a guaranteed decent wage. Private contractors get no protections. This is all another way for rich owners to exploit workers.
It seems to me that the goal of every capitalist is to make lots of money and then retire, leaving the remains to be sorted out by successors. This sort of mentality is the opposite of what I understand as "community." It seems that the USA is nothing but a giant market in which capitalists compete -- to the detriment of the average person.
Robert you nailed it again! Viktor Orban is being tiptoed around by the European Commission as he openly subverts both its democratic ideals and its Russian oil and gas sanctions. Undermining the US electoral system on behalf of Putin is a pleasure for Orban who was fêted not long ago with a photo opp at No.10 Downing Street by PM Johnson.US democracy is under seige from a combination of big capital and foreign autocrats in a way that the dictators of the 20's and 30's could only have dreamt of.Hungary should be told to leave the EU if it cannot respect its fundamental values.
As a start, to push back against the billionaire class, Dems need to show everyday people, not just tell them, that Capitalism, albeit an effective system for organizing labor for productivity, is not very good at distribution, unless wedded to social democratic institutions which contain its excesses and make it work for all of us. A ready-to-pass piece of legislation that could help drive this point home is the Budget Reconciliation package (BBB). Hence, I would urge Senate Democrats promptly to pass whichever provisions of the package can gain the support of 50 Senators to present to voters as a down payment of more to come if Dems, this fall, can hold the House and pick up at least 2 Senate seats. Were the Senate, now, to get this done, its remaining domestic agenda, in my view, could wait.
If you want to increase your membership greatly, drop the economic line of attack, and raise the attack on the fact women will be losing Roe v Wade. Half the voting public in America is female, and once they are made to realize losing body autonomy is the first step in losing the right to be people (as opposed to being chattel again--or cattle!) and the right to vote as full citizens of the nation. That will lead to all minorities l8sing their gains too. Society itself is under attack. We must FIGHT BACK!
@rawgod, Though the threats to privacy rights, voting rights, and so forth will be on the ballot, so will inflation. In my view, Senate Dems need to amplify the provisions they tried to deliver through budget reconciliation that every Republican, plus Manchin and Sinema, opposed.
Unfortunately, the 2 obstructionists (i.e., Manchin and Sinema) will invent new reasons why they don't like the individual pieces of the BBB package. Those 2 are as wedded to corporate America as any Republican. The whole system is corrupt. Only people should be allowed to participate in politics. Not corp[orations, not unions, not trade associations, not churches, etc.
Jeff, You might be right about Manchin and Sinema. Hence, for some time, I have believed that a strong, tough, Biden needs to go to West Virginia, and also to the red parts of Mississippi and Alabama, and to other states and say, “This is what we have tried to deliver and these folks have voted against it.” Simply stated, Dems have to be willing to engage in war. One can’t play fair with people who don’t play fair. There are no rules. The other side (including Manchin & Sinema) have shown that it will do whatever is necessary to retain (or attain) power. Therefore, Democratic leadership has got to say, “America, when they didn’t care about you, we did.”
I couldn’t agree more. Biden needs to hold at least 1 Trump style rally every month, maybe far more. He needs to get the message out that we tried to honor the wishes of the people but THESE people blocked it. If he can’t do it, maybe he’s too old.
Jeff, Glad to hear we’re on the same page. As for Biden’s age, I believe it will be less of a factor so long as he is surrounded by a strong team of advisors and speechwriters.
Carol, The point is that the Budget Reconciliation package (BBB) is a necessary (though not entirely sufficient) step towards creating a more equitable distribution of our nation’s wealth and also giving people more of a say in those institutions that guide and regulate their lives.
I wrote “not entirely sufficient” because I believe that achieving more equitable economic, social, and environmental justice is predicated upon passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform.
The convening of CPAC in Hungary is a blatant demonstration of the GOP’s embrace of authoritarianism and corruption. It is an “in your face” call for America to become a white christian nationalist theocracy, run by anti-democratic strongmen. The election of Mastriano as the GOP candidate for governor in PA is the latest evidence of this trend. Last night a clip was played on TV of him joking with a friend about literally stealing PA’s electoral votes if 2024 didn’t go his way. What’s more disheartening is the vast number of Americans who vote for this….who are just fine with it. To make matters worse, the GOP now owns the Supreme Court. If Republicans take back the House and Senate in ‘22, and the presidency in ‘24, the drive to entrench minority rule through voting manipulation will reach a fever pitch. Billionaires like Thiel and Koch prefer an authoritarian plutocracy, and they would subvert, or outright reject, representative democracy to get it. This is our existential danger. We must not let them win.
Right u are but how do we fix stupid ignorant people who refuse to vote in their best interests??? They are on autopilot to always vote conservative even when the choices are skunks bec they are part of the so-called Bible Belt & are mostly single issue voters!! My Gen X adult kids make me believe that they will reap the lousy benefits of voting for Repugs & might one day see themselves living in a freedomless America!!! I hope I live long enough to tell them I told u so but u refused to even listen to ur Dear old Mom!! It’s very tough for parents to witness this kind of stupidity & refusal to vote in their best interests bec none of them are wealthy or have an assurance of a comfortable retirement other than 401k savings! It’s impossible to fix stupid!!!
First, we have to try to understand them. I agree that they’re going against their own best interests. I think the attitude of superiority that the Republicans foster is what appeals to many people. Also, if they’re White, they can blame Black and Brown citizens and immigrants. This is racist and false. They need to see how terribly Black and Brown people, especially immigrants, suffer because of White injustice. Patience and determination! Tell them they’re blaming others for their problems. A good course in economics, and good documentary films, might help. I hate Trump and Manchin/Sinema and the Republican Party. But when your own children are taken in by them, try to think of their best qualities and ask them if the attitude of superiority is good for them, and consistent with the kindness they might have shown others at times. Ask them, are these rabble rousers selling the truth? Also, there are great groups who can rally people against the false hoopla that the Republicans promote. Everyone loves to belong to a cause. There are good causes to march and fight for. I hope this helps. The only thing that should die is despair. Your children don’t like the way things are going. Look at the real causes.
Powerful and needed information all. Strange times and our values are under serious assault. A lot here helps explain why in Florida, the legislature and executive branch pay no apparent attention to issues concerning the population but focus on culture wars and trample on the little people. Learning about Senator Rick Scott's blueprint for the future if the GOP regains control should have been a wake up call and huge warning. Don't forget Scott was a large healthcare exec. before he became Governor and while he was CEO his company kept 2 sets of books and was later fined billions. His " i didn't know" defense has now been outlawed. He took the 5th on over 70 questions. When he ran for office, he refused to meet with any editorial board......My way or the highway style.
I wish u good luck in converting FL to a Blue state but I believe their retired voters are as ignorant as the KY voters who refuse to vote for their best interests & that’s why we couldn’t get rid of McConnell in 2018 when Amy McGrath took a run @ him!! And it looks like it’s also going to be tough to beat Rand Paul this Nov even though we have a fairly strong Dem candidate in Charles Booker!! Neither has been doing much campaigning lately since the primary on the 17th! I guess they are both planning vacations or something instead!!
McGrath was a lousy candidate. I have advice for Booker, all Democrats in Kentucky. 1. Speak about "benefits." Even MAGA deadbeat dads need the $300 child tax credit that Paul opposed. 2. Play more bluegrass. Eat more burgoo. Identify with local interests. Need to memorize the lyrics to Bill Monroe's songs. 3. Build a connection to religious gospel. Rand Paul was named after an atheist. Carpetbagger. Can tie him to Putin, Russian money in Kentucky elections. Tried to hold up money for Ukraine. Take on the preverts.
Although many people regard Florida as a reactionary state, I must give them credit for giving a second (and third) chance to a criminal like Scott. "Give us Barabas!"
Believing the “election was stolen” and not being able to prove it, is treason. Those who continue to believe the lie should be banned from running for office, and/or imprisoned.
The goal of Stop the Steal and all those lawsuits claiming voter fraud was to undermine faith in elections and democracy. It has worked better than they ever imagined, since now those of us working to protect elections in the era of unverified computerized vote counts are painted with the same brush. The Democrats have rushed to the other extreme to yell from the heights that 2020 was Free and Fair, the other big lie. It’s true, there was almost no actual voter fraud. But election fraud? That’s another discussion. Were the vote counts right in other races? Where were the hand counts to prove the computerized vote count was right in all those other races, like New York’s CD 22 race, where the incumbent Democrat Brindisi was projected to win handily. But the race came down to too-close-to-call resulting in a lawsuit amidst many violations of election law by the local Board of Elections, no hand count of the ballots, 1,500 ballots tossed out uncounted, and Republican Tenney now sits in Congress. This happened in race after race in state after state in down-ballot races. But the Democrats keep saying 2020 was free and fair?
The answer is legislation to mandate paper ballots hand-marked by the voter and hand count audits adequate to detect miscounts by the computerized ballot scanners. I have been working in New York for 20 years to get those minimal standards in place with little success. Nationally, the Freedom to Vote Act attempted to create standards for machines, transparency, security but of course Joe Manchin killed it. The only answer is to keep slogging through at the state level to get laws to protect the vote count and enforcement to make sure the laws are followed.
Actually, I have a different point of view. Why go back to paper ballots? That is a 19th century technology. I do banking, investing, insurance, purchasing, and many other activities via electronic technology. There is no paper copy of my transaction. Why can't voting do the same?
Why? There’s no paper trail when a person executes extraordinarily large financial transactions. This sounds like silly posturing by people who don’t really understand how to create systemic controls and are simply harkening back to what they know and are therefore comfortable with. Banks process billions of dollars of transactions every day without a paper trail. If they had to create a paper trail and audit it by hand, they could never do what they do. I, for one, could live without a paper trail. Instead, if they automated the whole voting process, we could vote from home, we could inspect our ballot, make sure it was counted, and produce results immediately. We are stuck in our 18th century thinking.
Rupert Murdock has done more than any other individual to support the Republican Party with his FOX “Not-Really-the-News” and his Wall Street “Urinal.” We peons may not have the resources to “buy” our politicians like Peter Thiel but we CAN use our pennies to protest Murdock’s support of Trump and the Republicans by boycotting FOX and the companies that advertise their products and services on the network. And when I suggest boycotting FOX, I don’t mean just Tucker Carlson and the other ‘talking heads’ I mean ALL of FOX, especially the NFL games. Those of us still connected to cable can also insist FOX be removed, cut the cord if they aren’t. None of us have enough money to influence an election by ourselves, but together we can hit Murdock where it hurts - the purse. We can call our boycott the “Peons Penny Protest.”
The older I get the more I admire the Roosevelts—Teddy for countering trusts that tied up capital and his love of public land (even though he was a trophy hunter); Franklin for his acknowledgment that ordinary people needed government help to survive the Great Depression, and Eleanor for her genuine compassion for humans everywhere. All were born to privilege and all (Eleanor especially) were egalitarian. Today's billionaires are living proof that excess wealth generates insensitivity to one's fellow humans. And while I salute Melinda Gates and McKenzie Scott for giving away most of their divorce settlements, I don't feel they contribute to the political discussion that allowed that wealth to accumulate. The better good would be to regulate capitalism to channel more wealth toward the public good that allowed it to thrive in the first place. That's why the right wants all restraints lifted. But just because you can game the system and mow down those who help you profit doesn't make it just or desirable. I'm for a Brand New Deal!
Are we too late? I know you see reasons for optimism, but I see dominoes falling faster and faster. It could be that my life-long battle with depression is distorting my perspective, and I am now recovering from my second bout of Covid, but from what I've been reading and hearing from a wide range of news sources, I can't see much reason to hope. I have a strong feeling that this trend toward fascism will have to play itself out. It will ultimately fail and democracy will return, but perhaps not in my lifetime. These cycles have been playing out in history forever. We say "never again" until the next generation comes along and thinks they can do it better. We never learn. Humans seem determined to self-destruct. It never ceases to amaze me how an intelligent race can be so stupid.
The way to hope is to be actively opposed to what’s wrong. The wonders of electronics enable us to do a great deal from our armchairs or sofas. Sorry you’ve had COVID and very glad you’re recovering. Depression is opposed by looking to see what we can do to benefit others.
"The wonders of electronics enable us to do a great deal from our armchairs or sofas." Been doing that, will keep on doing that! And, indeed, glad you're recovering, Paula.
sigh I personally am not doing well. it appears that many other people in the USA are not doing well, that many, many people outside the USA are not doing well. One way we are not doing well, is we are increasingly living in a world where there are no rules to the powerful, strict although vague rules for the rest of us. Martin Luther King Jr taught that that are arc of justice is long, I am trying to write a book. the process is convincing me that the arc is very long, and at least in the short run bending toward injustice.
Yes, the arc seems to resemble the value of equities, always increasing in the long run despite the inevitable dips. If we can live thru the dips, we're in OK shape. My big question is: does the continual arc of the stock market rely on inflated currency to give it that Botox look?
i've never understood why an autocratic-ish country like hungary was ever allowed into the EU. they provide nothing of real value to the EU, and they don't like and don't want to adhere to the values that the EU was built on.
The first thing we must understand is that the word "freedom" is context-dependent. Without a context, it is a vaguely defined "trigger word" in common daily parlance - a Pavlovian bell. Without context, it's word for philosophers to debate and not a state anyone in history has actually experienced. If we want to get all "originalist" with it's interpretation, it was freedom from British rule - context. National independence. The existence of slavery at the time should be sufficient proof that it meant little else - context. Yet today, it seems to mean something akin to the anarchy of capitalists - context.
Democracy is a style of governance. Anarchists - by definition - rebel against being governed. In an ungoverned land, the strongest raise themselves to be kings who claim the sovereign right to take from and do to whomever they see fit to abuse - the people they oppress, who aren't strong enough to stand against them. And they >will< make law - they simply won't be bound by it. (Just what we need: anarchists making law they'll not be bound by!) Don't take my word for it. It's written history - from the dawn of time. What do you think plantation owners were if not a self-styled "new world" petty royalty? What do you think plantations were if not petty kingdoms? What do you think the slaves of the Southern plantations thought of their lives as "citizens" of those "free" lands? Note the role of property here - land as property and people as property - the fundamental principle of capitalism.
That's what >I< know about the anti-democracy movement.
We’re living in frightening times. I’m a long time PA resident. I’m totally freaked out that the likes of Doug Mastriano could become our next Governor. It’s time for me to volunteer for Josh Shapiro’s campaign. I’m calling today!
Capitalism, democracy and freedom go very well together, since capitalism was invented as an economic system to promote a congenial society. After the fall of fascism in the last century, America may have come close to achieving such a society (although there were flaws).
Marx misunderstood capitalism because he assumed the proletariat could only wield power through revolution. He should have known better, because in the late 19th century unions were already forming in England and Germany, and women were on the verge of getting the right to vote. Democracy! I suggest Mr. Thiel sits down again and this time actually reads "Wealth of Nations. "
One of the underpinnings of capitalism, as originally conceived, is progressive taxation. Taxes were high during the post-fascist period of Thiel's Germany, and in America....until things started to unravel here with Reagan's "trickledown economics," followed by the gradual descent into the New Age of socialism.
Such socialism is not something Marx would have recognized, because it is welfare for the rich rather than for the common man. Legal tax avoidance is nothing more than government welfare, so Thiel is one of the new Welfare Queens! As a Rand acolyte and derivatives trader, he has done nothing useful in his career other than take advantage of New Age socialism to enrich himself.
How could he possibly recognize democracy?
Beautifully stated.
Thiel, to paraphrase Kris Kristofferson, is partly truth and mostly fiction.
If some of his allies get their way, LGBTQ people like him would be EXTERMINATED.
He is heilige Deutsch, an Elon Musk associate, now living here in Baghdad By the Sea openly cohabitating with his significant other of the same kind.
After college, he raised $1 million from friends and family to launch Thiel Capital Management to invest in the dot-com boom, before co-founding a payments company with Max Levchin that would become PayPal, which was later acquired by eBay. Thiel became Facebook's first outside investor when he acquired a 10.2% stake for $500,000 in August 2004. He sold the majority of his shares in Facebook for over $1 billion in 2012, but remains on the board of directors. He cofounded Palantir Technologies, where he serves as chairman.
Here, he's been plugging what Warren Buffet calls kleptocurrency. Recently, Palantir’s plunge is breathtaking. "Shares were off more than 20% in Monday morning trading, reaching an all-time intraday low of $7.32; shares had never previously moved lower than $8.90, and have never closed lower than $9.03 since they were listed in September 2020, according to FactSet. The stock was also on track for its steepest single-day percentage decline on record, topping a 15.8% drop on Feb. 17."
Meanwhile the entire keptocurrency market remains "bearish amid a prevailing sentiment of “extreme fear”. At the time of updating this (9.05 pm), global crypto market cap again crashed to $1.25 trillion from the $1.31 trillion recorded on Monday. Bitcoin price has again crashed to below $29,000 level.
"The global cryptocurrency market volume over the last 24 hours decreased by 0.11% to $80.41 billion. The total volume in DeFi was $7.26 billion, which is 9.03% of the total crypto market 24-hour volume. Stable coins volume was $70.38 billion, which is 87.52% of the total crypto market 24-hour volume."
Will tomorrow be Thiel's Black Friday?
When Black Friday comes
I'm gonna dig myself a hole
Gonna lay down in it
'Til I satisfy my soul
Gonna let the world pass by me
The Archbishop's gonna sanctify me
And if he don't come across
I'm gonna let it roll
When Black Friday comes
I'm gonna stake my claim
I'll guess I'll change my name
With apologies to Steely Dan.
...
I'm not sure that capitalism and democracy go so well together. One is a top-down authoritarian regime and the other is a bottom-up majoritarian structure. As you suggest, capitalism can only function when guided (or controlled) by a strong government, strong unions, and progressive taxation. We see in the US that the government is unable to control the excesses of business, unions have been all but eliminated, and the taxes are no longer sufficiently progressive. This is all due to the fact that the structure you propose automatically creates an adversarial relationship between business, on the one hand, and government and the general population, on the other hand. This, in turn, has led us to the "Winner Takes All Politics" we see today.
I understand what you are saying, and agree that it is difficult to maintain Smithian capitalism, particularly when the wealthy are able to get the proletariat to vote against their economic interests (as in the US, by exploiting their inherent racism). Smith thought that, by allowing everyone to pursue their own selfish interests you would, ironically, end up with a congenial society. This is what I think he meant by "the invisible hand."
I believe there is no better economic system, so we should try get it back. Currently, the best examples are to be found in the Scandinavian societies, where taxes are high and people are happy.
That said, if we could persuade 20 million Americans to start again voting their own economic interests, rather than those of the plutocrats, we could perhaps have the best of all worlds, the entrepreneurial spirit of America, with the liberal spirit of the Danes. Difficult - it will require a wealth tax - but not impossible.
We need for democracy to control capitalism and not allow capitalism to control democracy. Alas, presently in America the latter is the case. See book CAPTURED by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.
Yes, that would require that Americans are educated as to the connection between politics and economics. An education in Political Economy would raise the level of discussion regarding public policy to a new level that will be needed if we're ever to progress beyond an Horatio Alger understanding of the economy.
Capitalism then forewarned us of capitalism now. Marx misunderstood nothing. It is capitallsts who misunderstand socialism. Some of the most successful countries in the the, with high levels of citizen satisfaction and happiness, are Socialist countries. The USA is nowhere near the top in having happy and satisfied citizens. Socialism promotes euality of all peoples, and has NOTHING to do with PERSONAL WEALTH! Co-opting words like socialism to mean something entirely different than intended does not change the value of the original conception of socialism. If you weren't American you might be able to see the differences.
Right you are!
Thanks for trying to explain (democratic) socialism to Americans. We've grown up brainwashed since the 1950s that communism and socialism are bad because they are totalitarian. Ain't true. Totalitarian government evolved under communism because of Russia's desire to get a bunch of religious farmers involved in the industrial revolution. It's hard to get farmers off the land. They had to force the issue. You can have democracy along with both capitalism and socialism, which is what those few "successful" European countries are doing. All these socio-economic terms exist because they are different from each other. This means that socialism is not, by definition, totalitarian.
@rawgod, I sense from your comment the absence of a critical distinction, in my view, between Socialism, that advocates for government control and ownership of the means of production, and Democratic Socialism, that simply, though importantly, calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth. I would note that I am unaware of any of our democratic European counterparts, all of whom subscribe to some version of Democratic Socialism, who would dispute the claim that pure Socialism invariably devolves into a consolidation of power under autocratic leadership.
I did not make that distinction because I was only talking about socialism itself. Human-tainted socialism might devolve into autocracy, but that is not on socialism, it is on the greedy capitalIstic-oriented leadership who take over socialIstic ideals for their own purposes. THAT DOES NOT ""INVARIABLY" HAVE TO HAPPEN? That it does happen is more a comment on asshole humans that it does on a political/economic ideal!
If as you say the European nations practise Democratic Socialism, whatever that is, they are still better systems than what America has. It is American society AS IS that I am condemning.
rawgod, We agree on your last point that Democratic Socialism, whose institutions seek to provide a more equitable distribution of its nation’s wealth, is a far better system than the one practiced in the States, which is neither good at equitable distribution nor at containing the excesses of unbounded concentrations of wealth. Hence, as I have stated elsewhere, we would greatly benefit were we to focus on passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform, all of which would help remedy the inequities in our society.
Also, let's vote to end child apartheid by abandoning the very unsafe classroom, and begin building village learning environments.
Sandra, I can’t comment because I don’t know what you mean by “child apartheid.”
Footnote: I would submit that capitalism has worked relatively well in the European democracies precisely because it’s been wedded to social democratic institutions, to a regulatory state which contains its excesses, moderates its self serving impulses, keeps it honest, gives it a human face, and makes it work for everyday people. I would add that the legislation cited in my foregoing comment would produce a similar effect here at home.
Doesn't socialism include the possibility of democratic economic decisions made by the majority of the workers, and an equitable distribution of the wealth the workers have created? What's the government got to do with THAT?
Sandra, When you mention “the majority of the workers,” I’m not clear about what group of workers you are referencing.
But does Democratic Socialism include the capitalistic means of gaining wealth?
Gaining and creating wealth is possible under a socialist economic system. Capitalism doesn't have a lock on profit.
Carol, In answer to your question, I would submit that our efforts should focus on passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform, all of which would contribute to more widespread economic, social, and environmental justice, the foundations, if you will, that underscore Democratic Socialism.
Also, let's vote to end child apartheid by abandoning the very unsafe classroom, and begin building village learning environments.
I would agree with that. The Rethuglicans have opposed all well-intentioned moves. Ultimately we still need to get away from capitalism.
Carol, Though I am sensing some common ground, which I view as positive, I, nonetheless, would maintain that capitalism has worked relatively well in the European democracies because it’s been wedded to social democratic institutions, to a regulatory state which contains its excesses, keeps it honest, gives it a human face, and makes it work for everyday people. Passage of the legislation cited in my foregoing comment would have a similar effect here at home.
Capitalism can serve hierarchy as well as it can serve the network. It can serve democracy and it can serve socialist values. But just remember, Money Means Monarchy. The lure is always present to those who know how to become kings, by rigging the system.
Capitalism is fundamentally anti-democratic because it promotes the rich, who get richer and richer, while opposing the rights of workers, who have to fight the rich with unions. Capitalist owners hate unions because unions want to force the rich business owners to give workers their due. That’s why Jeff Bezos spends millions trying to keep unions out of Amazon. That’s why Starbucks tries to defeat unions. There’s no freedom or democracy when you see a few rich entrepreneurs owning most of the wealth of this country and not giving a damn about whether or not workers have enough to eat. You’re not free if you’re starving. You’re not living in a democracy if your voice doesn’t matter.
Carol, Do you have a better way in mind to organize human labor for productivity? I ask, in part, because I, too, have commented on Capitalism and would welcome your response if you wish to comment.
Could you explain what you mean? Better than what?--Thanks.
Carol, To clarify, let me rephrase. Do you have an alternative to Capitalism in mind as a way to organize human labor for productivity?
Oh, yes. In a word, socialism—nonprofit work. Not giving someone else the right to own you or your work for that other person’s gain while you don’t earn as much
as you should and don’t get the benefits, including pension, healthcare coverage and paid leave—that you should. Capitalism favors the owner of the enterprise above all else.
Carol, I won’t have time to draft an adequate reply until I return home later tonight, at which point I will seek to clarify, through definition, whether your beliefs align primarily with socialism or with democratic socialism. The two systems are quite distinct.
FDR had the right idea!
But Reagan, Bush I&2, Trump emasculated the agencies that regulate the excess power of capitalism.
Carol, As promised, I write to clarify the distinction between Socialism, that advocates for government control and ownership of the means of production, and Democratic Socialism, that simply, though importantly, calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth. I would note that I am unaware of any of our democratic European counterparts, all of whom subscribe to a version of Democratic Socialism, who would dispute the claim that pure Socialism invariably devolves into a consolidation of power under autocratic leadership.
I hope you find my clarification useful.
Let me dissent a bit (see my note, above). Capitalism was intended by Adam Smith to promote a congenial society. In this regard, one of its underpinnings was progressive taxation, i.e., the rich would not only pay higher taxes than those less wealthy, but would pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes. The re are two reasons for this, first to prevent the rich from becoming too powerful, because Smith predicted they would destroy the free market (i.e., what we have now in America), the second to make money available for roads, bridges, canals, etc. (i.e., infrastructure, which we have so little of now in America).
The key to successful capitalism is high taxes, strong (but not too strong) unions, and a democratically elected government. The key to restoring all three is to focus on the first. There must be a wealth tax.
If you want to follow Karl Marx, good luck, we see the end result playing out in Ukraine and North Korea. If you say, we can have socialism without Marx, it's been tried before, in the UK in the postwar period. I was there. It's a disaster.
China proves you can call yourself a Marxist and also be a capitalist.
If you want to actually understand market capitalism, follow the shorts. It's gambling and right now the shorts are making a bundle. Bill gates sells Musk short.
I deliberately left out China because it complicates things. Nevertheless, I note that, just as with Russia and North Korea, it is not at all what Marx intended. On the other hand, like Russia and North Korea, China is basically an autocracy. So you could begin to make a case that Marxism ends in autocracy.
The problem is, looking at the US and China, you might be tempted to think the same about capitalism. This, I think, is Piketty's position. Autocracy has been a natural form of government since Babylon. Capitalism, as first conceived, can be viewed as a delicate dance of free markets and strong government, with an undergirding of progressive taxation. But, as we have seen, it is so easy to unravel. It lasted just 30 years in the US, and came apart in 1980 through exploitation of the racism of the proletariat, in the wake of Civil Rights.
Piketty advocates a global wealth tax. This is logical, but will be difficult. We could start the process in the US, if we can get past the fascists by persuading more people to vote in their economic interests.
I have a different perspective. Beginning in 1971 US corporations began a unified drive to reverse the laws imposed during the New Deal. They sought to undo a strong government, strong unions, regulation, and progressive taxes. They have been overwhelmingly successful on all fronts. As an added result of this effort they have "unraveled" democracy. Regular voters have a "statistically insignificant effect on legislation". Thus, the excesses of capitalist behavior have created a grossly unequal distribution of income and wealth and a dysfunctional democracy that many, including me, term an oligarchy. The US has had anything approaching a reasonable distribution of income and wealth for merely ~30 of its 243 years of existence. Hardly much to brag about.
"Beginning in 1971 US corporations began a unified drive to reverse the laws imposed during the New Deal. "
Actually, they had been trying to do this ever since the New Deal. They never stopped. They hated Roosevelt. It didn't matter, because taxes were high and the plutocrats lacked the real wealth necessary to assault democracy.
That all changed after Civil Rights, when 50 million people (almost all in the South) switched from voting Democrat to voting Republican, placing their racism ahead of their wallets, and allowing Reagan (shudder), and Friedman (shudder) a foot in the door. That was the beginning of the end for the New Deal, and the celebration of "freedom" as a disguised form of racism, ending in Tucker Carlson and mass shootings.
The practical solution is to persuade 20 million people that it is in their interests to vote Democrat.
Hmmm, interesting perspective. I agree that capitalists had been trying to undo the New Deal from its inception. I was referring to the Lewis Powell memo to business in 1971 that galvanized the corporate effort into eventually a juggernaut.
The Republican Party has 3 principle parts to its base that have formed an unholy alliance wherein they allow each part to pursue their aims and there is no obvious conflict among them. Each of the 3 has been granted one or a set of goals that the party will work towards. The three parts are 1) Capitalists - low taxes on corporations and the wealthy, limited regulation; 2) Religious extremists - overturn Roe v. Wade; 3) Racists - permission to act out their grievances. Everything the Republican Party says or does can be viewed through this lens.
Yup.
Couldn’t have said it better, Jeff! Right on the Money!
And Michael…
So...how many horns does a unicorn have? The "laws" of economics require the suspension of disbelief.
Capitalism is not a form of government.
If you know the butterfly straddle and have access to the markets, you won't as a matter of math, lose much. Speculators are not capitalists by definition, as they don't create value.
I think that all depends on how you define capitalusts. They lust after capital, and the more they get, the more they want. In my mind, it was the capitalists of yesteryear who set the stage for the capitalusts of today. Due to the "gold standard" there was an actual limit on how much capital was available to be owned, and when they convinced the government to drop the gold stadard is when their true goal was realized. Now the government prints money as it wishes, with 1% being made available to WE THE PEOPLE, and 99% being made available to the WEALTHY, who hoard it where no one else but the WEALTHY can get it. The catch is, though, capital no longer is congruaant with printed money. Capital exists mainly in electronic storage files that are potentially impossible to fill. The "old capitalists" never had this option available to them, or they would have showed their true faces a long long time ago.
While I agree that capitalism is not a form of government, it does require a strong government in order to function, particularly a government collect progressive taxes.
As for your last paragraph, perhaps the most brilliant and enlightened of economists, John Maynard Keynes, regarded the stock market as a necessary casino, but was nevertheless able to come up with a solution to the Great Depression, along with strong advice to Roosevelt about the New Deal and it maintenance, and, finally the Bretton Woods blueprint for a world economic order (basically, drop tariffs, free the markets, back to Smith). It worked very well in the US until that horse's arse, Ronald Reagan, introduced us to the New Age of Socialism, which has culminated in Thiel, Musk and Zuckerberg.
Thank you Michael Hutchinson for beginning a discussion regarding the political economy that I know little about. The people that entered the discussion i.e.. Daniel Solomon, Jeff Rose and rawgod made Reich's newsletter a real treat to be a member of, but more importantly an education I would only have received if I read Foreign Policy, the Atlantic and magazines that are comparable. You guys made it a lot more palatable!
Reagan was no socialist. He favored the rich.
I like Keynes but he didn't anticipate (nor did Ayn Rand, Galbreath, Friedman, Van Misses or anyone else) figure out the yin and yang of hedging bets, the power of computers.
Speculators are not capitalists.
There’s no real success in capitalism because it gives preference to the rich owners. I agree that the rich must be taxed much more than the rest of us. Capitalism is a colossal failure because it’s based on inequality between workers and business owners. The owners always have more power, and are incentivized to keep workers down so that they can pay the workers as little as possible so that the owners can make as much as possible. They fight and spend to keep unions out. In our country they are not paying enough taxes (or they’re even paying no taxes) because they can buy legislators and threaten to cut production and raise prices to get their way. Worker ownership of business, or government control (as in traditional Medicare), is the answer.
What you mean is capitalism is a "zero sum game."
Please don't penalize small guys, many trapped into an IRA, 401 k or in my case "thrift plans" controlled by institutional fund managers.
Please also note that the industrial revolution has sunsetted. Most educated people work for themselves. In a gig economy, temporary, flexible jobs are commonplace and companies tend to hire independent contractors and freelancers instead of full-time employees. A gig economy undermines the traditional economy of full-time workers who often focus on their career development.
Workers who work gigs are not able to get pensions, health insurance, or a guaranteed decent wage. Private contractors get no protections. This is all another way for rich owners to exploit workers.
Exactly right.
If capitalists treated workers fairly, unions wouldn't exist.
The incentive to make as much money as possible keeps them from treating workers fairly.
It seems to me that the goal of every capitalist is to make lots of money and then retire, leaving the remains to be sorted out by successors. This sort of mentality is the opposite of what I understand as "community." It seems that the USA is nothing but a giant market in which capitalists compete -- to the detriment of the average person.
Right you are!
The essential element that powers the US economy is greed. That is not sustainable.
Robert you nailed it again! Viktor Orban is being tiptoed around by the European Commission as he openly subverts both its democratic ideals and its Russian oil and gas sanctions. Undermining the US electoral system on behalf of Putin is a pleasure for Orban who was fêted not long ago with a photo opp at No.10 Downing Street by PM Johnson.US democracy is under seige from a combination of big capital and foreign autocrats in a way that the dictators of the 20's and 30's could only have dreamt of.Hungary should be told to leave the EU if it cannot respect its fundamental values.
Thiel and Musk are a team. Act like sole proprietors but have corporate protection.
Today their holdings are falling like boulders in a landslide.
Got the jitters? I do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItxTsXLDgDY
As a start, to push back against the billionaire class, Dems need to show everyday people, not just tell them, that Capitalism, albeit an effective system for organizing labor for productivity, is not very good at distribution, unless wedded to social democratic institutions which contain its excesses and make it work for all of us. A ready-to-pass piece of legislation that could help drive this point home is the Budget Reconciliation package (BBB). Hence, I would urge Senate Democrats promptly to pass whichever provisions of the package can gain the support of 50 Senators to present to voters as a down payment of more to come if Dems, this fall, can hold the House and pick up at least 2 Senate seats. Were the Senate, now, to get this done, its remaining domestic agenda, in my view, could wait.
Amen. Also replicate more of us. https://www.fieldteam6.org/
If you want to increase your membership greatly, drop the economic line of attack, and raise the attack on the fact women will be losing Roe v Wade. Half the voting public in America is female, and once they are made to realize losing body autonomy is the first step in losing the right to be people (as opposed to being chattel again--or cattle!) and the right to vote as full citizens of the nation. That will lead to all minorities l8sing their gains too. Society itself is under attack. We must FIGHT BACK!
@rawgod, Though the threats to privacy rights, voting rights, and so forth will be on the ballot, so will inflation. In my view, Senate Dems need to amplify the provisions they tried to deliver through budget reconciliation that every Republican, plus Manchin and Sinema, opposed.
Agreed, and thanks, Daniel, for posting the sight.
Unfortunately, the 2 obstructionists (i.e., Manchin and Sinema) will invent new reasons why they don't like the individual pieces of the BBB package. Those 2 are as wedded to corporate America as any Republican. The whole system is corrupt. Only people should be allowed to participate in politics. Not corp[orations, not unions, not trade associations, not churches, etc.
Jeff, You might be right about Manchin and Sinema. Hence, for some time, I have believed that a strong, tough, Biden needs to go to West Virginia, and also to the red parts of Mississippi and Alabama, and to other states and say, “This is what we have tried to deliver and these folks have voted against it.” Simply stated, Dems have to be willing to engage in war. One can’t play fair with people who don’t play fair. There are no rules. The other side (including Manchin & Sinema) have shown that it will do whatever is necessary to retain (or attain) power. Therefore, Democratic leadership has got to say, “America, when they didn’t care about you, we did.”
I couldn’t agree more. Biden needs to hold at least 1 Trump style rally every month, maybe far more. He needs to get the message out that we tried to honor the wishes of the people but THESE people blocked it. If he can’t do it, maybe he’s too old.
Hosting rallies would be a good job for Kamala! She has the energy & ability!!
Jeff, Glad to hear we’re on the same page. As for Biden’s age, I believe it will be less of a factor so long as he is surrounded by a strong team of advisors and speechwriters.
The bill could help, but nothing will save capitalism in the long run.
Carol, The point is that the Budget Reconciliation package (BBB) is a necessary (though not entirely sufficient) step towards creating a more equitable distribution of our nation’s wealth and also giving people more of a say in those institutions that guide and regulate their lives.
I wrote “not entirely sufficient” because I believe that achieving more equitable economic, social, and environmental justice is predicated upon passage of the Green New Deal, the PRO Act, and comprehensive tax reform.
The convening of CPAC in Hungary is a blatant demonstration of the GOP’s embrace of authoritarianism and corruption. It is an “in your face” call for America to become a white christian nationalist theocracy, run by anti-democratic strongmen. The election of Mastriano as the GOP candidate for governor in PA is the latest evidence of this trend. Last night a clip was played on TV of him joking with a friend about literally stealing PA’s electoral votes if 2024 didn’t go his way. What’s more disheartening is the vast number of Americans who vote for this….who are just fine with it. To make matters worse, the GOP now owns the Supreme Court. If Republicans take back the House and Senate in ‘22, and the presidency in ‘24, the drive to entrench minority rule through voting manipulation will reach a fever pitch. Billionaires like Thiel and Koch prefer an authoritarian plutocracy, and they would subvert, or outright reject, representative democracy to get it. This is our existential danger. We must not let them win.
Right u are but how do we fix stupid ignorant people who refuse to vote in their best interests??? They are on autopilot to always vote conservative even when the choices are skunks bec they are part of the so-called Bible Belt & are mostly single issue voters!! My Gen X adult kids make me believe that they will reap the lousy benefits of voting for Repugs & might one day see themselves living in a freedomless America!!! I hope I live long enough to tell them I told u so but u refused to even listen to ur Dear old Mom!! It’s very tough for parents to witness this kind of stupidity & refusal to vote in their best interests bec none of them are wealthy or have an assurance of a comfortable retirement other than 401k savings! It’s impossible to fix stupid!!!
First, we have to try to understand them. I agree that they’re going against their own best interests. I think the attitude of superiority that the Republicans foster is what appeals to many people. Also, if they’re White, they can blame Black and Brown citizens and immigrants. This is racist and false. They need to see how terribly Black and Brown people, especially immigrants, suffer because of White injustice. Patience and determination! Tell them they’re blaming others for their problems. A good course in economics, and good documentary films, might help. I hate Trump and Manchin/Sinema and the Republican Party. But when your own children are taken in by them, try to think of their best qualities and ask them if the attitude of superiority is good for them, and consistent with the kindness they might have shown others at times. Ask them, are these rabble rousers selling the truth? Also, there are great groups who can rally people against the false hoopla that the Republicans promote. Everyone loves to belong to a cause. There are good causes to march and fight for. I hope this helps. The only thing that should die is despair. Your children don’t like the way things are going. Look at the real causes.
Yes. Fight, fight, fight!
Powerful and needed information all. Strange times and our values are under serious assault. A lot here helps explain why in Florida, the legislature and executive branch pay no apparent attention to issues concerning the population but focus on culture wars and trample on the little people. Learning about Senator Rick Scott's blueprint for the future if the GOP regains control should have been a wake up call and huge warning. Don't forget Scott was a large healthcare exec. before he became Governor and while he was CEO his company kept 2 sets of books and was later fined billions. His " i didn't know" defense has now been outlawed. He took the 5th on over 70 questions. When he ran for office, he refused to meet with any editorial board......My way or the highway style.
We are canaries in the proverbial coal mine.
Oxygen: Florida
770,734 Unregistered Likely Democratic Women --- Turn FL Blue
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Thank you, Daniel! I’m working on it!
(Notes from Boca Ciega Bay)
Wow, I had no idea there’s that many unregistered Voting age women in FL!
I wish u good luck in converting FL to a Blue state but I believe their retired voters are as ignorant as the KY voters who refuse to vote for their best interests & that’s why we couldn’t get rid of McConnell in 2018 when Amy McGrath took a run @ him!! And it looks like it’s also going to be tough to beat Rand Paul this Nov even though we have a fairly strong Dem candidate in Charles Booker!! Neither has been doing much campaigning lately since the primary on the 17th! I guess they are both planning vacations or something instead!!
McGrath was a lousy candidate. I have advice for Booker, all Democrats in Kentucky. 1. Speak about "benefits." Even MAGA deadbeat dads need the $300 child tax credit that Paul opposed. 2. Play more bluegrass. Eat more burgoo. Identify with local interests. Need to memorize the lyrics to Bill Monroe's songs. 3. Build a connection to religious gospel. Rand Paul was named after an atheist. Carpetbagger. Can tie him to Putin, Russian money in Kentucky elections. Tried to hold up money for Ukraine. Take on the preverts.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/Bombshell-400-page-report-finds-Southern-Baptist-17190816.php?fbclid=IwAR3eAVMRDPLfKusjE2IjboQLKu-BFuoIhDgbvhqH-ZTDDb7uFj7KGNV_i6o
Although many people regard Florida as a reactionary state, I must give them credit for giving a second (and third) chance to a criminal like Scott. "Give us Barabas!"
Believing the “election was stolen” and not being able to prove it, is treason. Those who continue to believe the lie should be banned from running for office, and/or imprisoned.
The goal of Stop the Steal and all those lawsuits claiming voter fraud was to undermine faith in elections and democracy. It has worked better than they ever imagined, since now those of us working to protect elections in the era of unverified computerized vote counts are painted with the same brush. The Democrats have rushed to the other extreme to yell from the heights that 2020 was Free and Fair, the other big lie. It’s true, there was almost no actual voter fraud. But election fraud? That’s another discussion. Were the vote counts right in other races? Where were the hand counts to prove the computerized vote count was right in all those other races, like New York’s CD 22 race, where the incumbent Democrat Brindisi was projected to win handily. But the race came down to too-close-to-call resulting in a lawsuit amidst many violations of election law by the local Board of Elections, no hand count of the ballots, 1,500 ballots tossed out uncounted, and Republican Tenney now sits in Congress. This happened in race after race in state after state in down-ballot races. But the Democrats keep saying 2020 was free and fair?
A lot of questions, no answers
The answer is legislation to mandate paper ballots hand-marked by the voter and hand count audits adequate to detect miscounts by the computerized ballot scanners. I have been working in New York for 20 years to get those minimal standards in place with little success. Nationally, the Freedom to Vote Act attempted to create standards for machines, transparency, security but of course Joe Manchin killed it. The only answer is to keep slogging through at the state level to get laws to protect the vote count and enforcement to make sure the laws are followed.
Actually, I have a different point of view. Why go back to paper ballots? That is a 19th century technology. I do banking, investing, insurance, purchasing, and many other activities via electronic technology. There is no paper copy of my transaction. Why can't voting do the same?
Security experts say a paper audit trail is necessary...(!)?
Why? There’s no paper trail when a person executes extraordinarily large financial transactions. This sounds like silly posturing by people who don’t really understand how to create systemic controls and are simply harkening back to what they know and are therefore comfortable with. Banks process billions of dollars of transactions every day without a paper trail. If they had to create a paper trail and audit it by hand, they could never do what they do. I, for one, could live without a paper trail. Instead, if they automated the whole voting process, we could vote from home, we could inspect our ballot, make sure it was counted, and produce results immediately. We are stuck in our 18th century thinking.
Seems an important enough issue that it could surface again with the next Congress (much like 'Build Back Better' & review of the AUMF)...?
I almost wish it were that easy...
Why isn’t it?
That question is for RR.
Rupert Murdock has done more than any other individual to support the Republican Party with his FOX “Not-Really-the-News” and his Wall Street “Urinal.” We peons may not have the resources to “buy” our politicians like Peter Thiel but we CAN use our pennies to protest Murdock’s support of Trump and the Republicans by boycotting FOX and the companies that advertise their products and services on the network. And when I suggest boycotting FOX, I don’t mean just Tucker Carlson and the other ‘talking heads’ I mean ALL of FOX, especially the NFL games. Those of us still connected to cable can also insist FOX be removed, cut the cord if they aren’t. None of us have enough money to influence an election by ourselves, but together we can hit Murdock where it hurts - the purse. We can call our boycott the “Peons Penny Protest.”
Is Lachlan vulnerable?
The older I get the more I admire the Roosevelts—Teddy for countering trusts that tied up capital and his love of public land (even though he was a trophy hunter); Franklin for his acknowledgment that ordinary people needed government help to survive the Great Depression, and Eleanor for her genuine compassion for humans everywhere. All were born to privilege and all (Eleanor especially) were egalitarian. Today's billionaires are living proof that excess wealth generates insensitivity to one's fellow humans. And while I salute Melinda Gates and McKenzie Scott for giving away most of their divorce settlements, I don't feel they contribute to the political discussion that allowed that wealth to accumulate. The better good would be to regulate capitalism to channel more wealth toward the public good that allowed it to thrive in the first place. That's why the right wants all restraints lifted. But just because you can game the system and mow down those who help you profit doesn't make it just or desirable. I'm for a Brand New Deal!
Capitalism looks to be unrestrained. We can’t save it from itself.
Are we too late? I know you see reasons for optimism, but I see dominoes falling faster and faster. It could be that my life-long battle with depression is distorting my perspective, and I am now recovering from my second bout of Covid, but from what I've been reading and hearing from a wide range of news sources, I can't see much reason to hope. I have a strong feeling that this trend toward fascism will have to play itself out. It will ultimately fail and democracy will return, but perhaps not in my lifetime. These cycles have been playing out in history forever. We say "never again" until the next generation comes along and thinks they can do it better. We never learn. Humans seem determined to self-destruct. It never ceases to amaze me how an intelligent race can be so stupid.
The way to hope is to be actively opposed to what’s wrong. The wonders of electronics enable us to do a great deal from our armchairs or sofas. Sorry you’ve had COVID and very glad you’re recovering. Depression is opposed by looking to see what we can do to benefit others.
"The wonders of electronics enable us to do a great deal from our armchairs or sofas." Been doing that, will keep on doing that! And, indeed, glad you're recovering, Paula.
Paula Dean; The markets are self correcting.
Unfortunately bringing down little guys too.
sigh I personally am not doing well. it appears that many other people in the USA are not doing well, that many, many people outside the USA are not doing well. One way we are not doing well, is we are increasingly living in a world where there are no rules to the powerful, strict although vague rules for the rest of us. Martin Luther King Jr taught that that are arc of justice is long, I am trying to write a book. the process is convincing me that the arc is very long, and at least in the short run bending toward injustice.
True, but we have to be the ants in the anthill that overwhelm the big guys. We will!
Yes, the arc seems to resemble the value of equities, always increasing in the long run despite the inevitable dips. If we can live thru the dips, we're in OK shape. My big question is: does the continual arc of the stock market rely on inflated currency to give it that Botox look?
We don’t need the stock market. A sort of gambling, and based upon the money stockholders make from workers’ labor.
i've never understood why an autocratic-ish country like hungary was ever allowed into the EU. they provide nothing of real value to the EU, and they don't like and don't want to adhere to the values that the EU was built on.
Weren't when they were admitted.
... and can't continue to be as such (note the EU's reaction to "judicial review", per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Supreme_Court_Disciplinary_Chamber_law#Reactions)
The first thing we must understand is that the word "freedom" is context-dependent. Without a context, it is a vaguely defined "trigger word" in common daily parlance - a Pavlovian bell. Without context, it's word for philosophers to debate and not a state anyone in history has actually experienced. If we want to get all "originalist" with it's interpretation, it was freedom from British rule - context. National independence. The existence of slavery at the time should be sufficient proof that it meant little else - context. Yet today, it seems to mean something akin to the anarchy of capitalists - context.
Democracy is a style of governance. Anarchists - by definition - rebel against being governed. In an ungoverned land, the strongest raise themselves to be kings who claim the sovereign right to take from and do to whomever they see fit to abuse - the people they oppress, who aren't strong enough to stand against them. And they >will< make law - they simply won't be bound by it. (Just what we need: anarchists making law they'll not be bound by!) Don't take my word for it. It's written history - from the dawn of time. What do you think plantation owners were if not a self-styled "new world" petty royalty? What do you think plantations were if not petty kingdoms? What do you think the slaves of the Southern plantations thought of their lives as "citizens" of those "free" lands? Note the role of property here - land as property and people as property - the fundamental principle of capitalism.
That's what >I< know about the anti-democracy movement.
Brilliant commentary -- thanks!
Even a racist needs the necessities of life -- food, shelter, clothing and medical care!
We’re living in frightening times. I’m a long time PA resident. I’m totally freaked out that the likes of Doug Mastriano could become our next Governor. It’s time for me to volunteer for Josh Shapiro’s campaign. I’m calling today!
Good! That’s it!
It should be illegal to donate millions to a campaign. That’s how the rich can run and ruin things. Is this from Citizens United?
The battle lines are being drawn.
What's that sound?