What is evident is that unbridled Capitalism is anathema to Democracy. The ferocity that Big Business has set about over the last decades to obliterate the needs of the people -essential for Capitalism to function- is astonishing as it is unrelenting. That they have bought and installed Democratic Party "politicians" speaks volumes in that there needs to be an equivalent organization to counter Big Business!! Unions and Guilds have proven unequal to the task as being targeted for annihilation or being excessively weak to be of consequence. There really is no representation of the average person in our politics, leaving us with the task to vote for the least harmful, which by definition is a Democrat, but that is not so comforting as it has barely proven to be effective. The alternative, however, has been shown to be a disaster!!
In addition the sabotage of anything pertaining to actual help for We The People is automatically done by the repugnicans and then little or no mention by how it was sabotaged is stated by Democrats other then we were done over by the Republicans again. It needs to be shown how destructive these people are. I agree with you that we are again choosing the lesser of two criminal parties.
Sorry, you are not entitled to put words in my mouth. I did not use the word "criminal" because only the Republican Party is criminal. Your desire to walk the fence does not make you smart but truthfully the opposite, because you cannot distinguish criminal from non!! We are all human with faults. But only one Party insists on making their faults into virtues and that is a rejection of reality!! Learn to think critically and not lazily dumping everyone in the same basket. Nixon did some good stuff but he was bad for our country because he did not believe in the system that unfortunately got him elected. Trump is much much worse because he is even more ignorant and immoral than anything we have seen before in our government. There are worse people in the world at least at this point as we speak. Who knows what damage Trump could unleash on the world. There are differences that by definition makes the Democrats party of today a good Party, while the Republican Party is a party of self indulgent traitors!!
CITIZENS UNITED MAKES CRIMINALS was not directed at you Nicholas or anyone else. It was simply a statement of fact. When you put unlimited money in the game, you create criminals. Sorry, I will avoid comments to you in the future.
Citizens United is absolutely relevant to the conversation, because it is this action that allowed unbridled funds to be funneled to political candidates with no accountability.
No the Party as a whole is criminal because EVERYONE subscribes to the values of said Party. Just have a look at the the RNC conventions of the last decade or so. Read their manifestoes. It's the people that make up a Party, so the Party is guilty!! NO excuses!!
Daniel, certainly, no one who is not being paid to say it would claim that money is speech. That is only one of the dumbest things the Roberts Court has come up with. I am suspecting the next dumb one will be giving state legislatures the right to declare who wins elections. That fits their lack of concern for our democracy. These are not the brightest bulbs in the string, and they keep proving it.
This goes back to the 1970s. Started with Buckley v. Valeo. Here's what I said:
Robert, you're right.
From a legal aspect this culminated in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 US 1 (1976), and Citizens United, 558 US 310 (2010), when SCOTUS ruled, 5-4, that the First Amendment prohibits limits on corporate funding of independent broadcasts in candidate elections. The justices said that the government's rationale for the limits on corporate spending—to prevent corruption—was not persuasive enough to restrict political speech.
It struck laws that limited the ability of corporations and labor unions to spend their own money to advocate the election or defeat of a candidate on the basis that they violate the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech.
In order to reach this conclusion, the court had to assume that speech = money and that corporations are people.
Montana state law provided that a "corporation may not make ... an expenditure in connection with a candidate or a political committee that supports or opposes a candidate or a political party." Mont. Code 13–35–227(1). The Montana Supreme Court rejected a claim that the statute violated the First Amendment. In American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, 567, U.S. 516 (2012), in a per curiam decision, the Court held that the findings in Citizens United also applies and that political speech is protected regardless of the source. The Court also held that all of the relevant arguments were addressed in the Citizens United decision and reversed the decision of the Supreme Court of Montana.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer dissented and noted that he disagreed with the Court's original holding in Citizens United. In this case, he argued, Montana did have a compelling interest to limit electoral and political corruption by limiting corporate political expenditures. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined in the dissent.
When I speak to even Republican lawyers, let alone MAGA/Tea Parties/Don't tread on me Confederate radicals, they reject the notion that money should be considered to be speech. A disturbing factor is that there was an error reporting Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886), the case that falsely states that corporations = people according to the 14th Amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad_Co.
Perhaps more fundamentally, the challenge of the future is that somehow machines and structures, entities and corporations, the non-living 'bots and algorithms and digital surveillance machines, have crept into the arena of control of many aspects over Human Life, not just over government. Entities prey on natural sympathies of egalitarianism, to claim equality to living, breathing humans, based on their cunning ability to feign what individuals do. If people with religious beliefs own a company such as Hobby Lobby, we imbue the corporation with the attribution of "fundamental religious belief." This is clearly grotesque sacrilege to the eyes of any God or Goddess.
It is distasteful to use statements once used to divide HUMANS, but non-living entities of any sort cannot by any means achieve equality with the living. Whether one uses the principles of birthright, or endowment by Natural Law and creation, we are elsewhere-created creatures (set the metaphysics aside). They are human-created things, Golems and parties and corporate religions, they are things, and there is no bridge to their becoming human. Even Things controlled by People, like the Trump Corporation, are things. There cannot be equality between them and us.
It's also a sci-fi plot! Maybe in the style of Le Guin. The android aspect of it is straight out of Asimov's "I Robot," not to mention the questions raised in Philip K Dick's "Blade Runner."
I almost neglected to include the "Matrix" trilogy, where human beings became the energy source for the technology via virtual reality.
On Star Trek: The Next Generation there was a trial about whether the android, Mr. Data, had the rights of sentient beings. The verdict: he did. I’m a little vague on it now but I’m think the conclusion was also that he was one. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
The plot details aren't so important as another example of Mr O'Cally observation as related to sci-fi plots handling the same kind of principles. Thanks for another example.
Steve, the non-living "beings" cannot really be treated at this time as persons, yet, Johnny Roberts Court has decided that corporations (non living things) are persons. Of course they are not, but it works for businesses to claim personhood as long as they don't have to be held accountable as actual persons would. Maybe when they as a corporation break a law, their top say, 10 officials go to jail.
Thanks for this. When I read the Powell memo I was flummoxed on where to begin. All I was going to say is simply that I'm not smart enough to comment on it - and begged off thinking it not worth posting. However, in discussing interpretation with you concerning another comment, the whole thrust of the memo crystalized in my mind. What >I've< concluded is this:
You and I seem to agree that "unbridled Capitalism is anathema to Democracy," that in >my< words I'd say "unregulated capitalism is inimical to democracy."
What Powell is saying is:
>>>True democracy is inimical to pure capitalism.<<<
Whatever words he uses, no matter how seemingly eloquent, that is all the Powell memo >really< says.
AS A FURTHER THOUGHT:
It occurs to me that even democracy can be inimical to itself. We seem to be trending such a direction. All it would take is for the voters to be convinced The Constitution should be abolished. I remember from some time ago, one Northern African country apparently voted to abolish its constitution and impose sharia law. >It gave me pause.< I don't remember which country that was, and I never - to my recollection - learned about how that all played out. But it >did< serve to get me thinking about the >true nature< of democracy.
In our Declaration of Independence “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” If they want to try another gig that works for them, selah. Give it a whirl.
Agreed. I doubt most of them know what it is any better than they know what socialism or communism are. They seem to be about having fun, and socialism isn't fun - for example. I'll hazard most of them enjoy gambling, playing the lotto, and going to casinos as typical leisure activity. I'll also hazard a fair percentage of same are gambling addicts. All of that is - of course - conjecture. I have no data - only a gut response.
It was back at least in the '90s. I'm thinking Algiers or Morocco, or someplace like that. It was definitely not Egypt. Thanks for the memory refresher, though.
The true alternative would be ranked choice voting, but both the Donkeys and QOP adamantly oppose that. Voters could choose Green & Progressive alternatives as 1st & 2nd place choices, without "throwing away" one's vote (by choosing Donkey as choice 3).
Don Perata is a former CA Senate leader supported by many lobbyists, and had to leave in 2008 due to term limits. He thought he'd waltz into the Oakland mayor's office. But, a coalition of 2 progressive candidates asked each others' supporters to choose them 1-2 or 2-1. Perata never saw it coming! Bye-bye! If anyone wants a good laugh, the wiki link mentions lots of "controversy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Perata
Unbridled Capitalism is anathema to survival. Its own survival as a system, the survival of any political or economic systems it touches, and survival of every "resource" on the planet, including air and water.
That is broadly my view as well, Nicholas. The American corporate-financial complex has been at open war with 99% of the American public for at least _200 years!_ As a group, they have never done anything for the rest. Child labor, the company store, monopoly trusts: they loved all that. Only they screwed up in the 1920s, the American economy blew up, and a swatch of actual reform was enacted. Powell's memo is simply the fight back from the C-F-C. And he and they have won, as of 2022. The regulatory policies of the mid 20th century have been systematically gutted. We are crushed between gross, self-enriching monopolies. Wages have been pared down to an ever-declining sub-inflation level, don't even talk about income gains, while corporate profits at the expense of everyone else have never been higher. Student loans were turned into debt slavery instruments---on a Democratic watch---leaving they young broken to the yoke before they even hit the job market: by design, as one can see from the Powell memo. The push to 'privatize' Social Security and Medicare, amongst the few reform structures still largely intact, is the further and final chapter in their program of forcing the bulk of the population back into economic serfdom.
The corporate-financial complex bought both (major) political parties over 30 years ago. The Democrats were as bad or worse in their servility and solicitude to that center of power. Only the two-pronged crisis of an economy stunning pandemic on the one side and a clown car level incompetent nativist insurrectionary movement on the other induced some movement toward reform in the last few years. Only again this election cycle we see grotesque extremist billionaires recruited by AIPAC doing their worst to choke off any actually progressive legislative candidate they can, the _real_ indication of Big Theft's agenda. Almost everything of any value in the legislative package just passed in Congress is a watered down, severely compromised, 29% of what was actually needed; small potatoes as RR aptly described if. If that act is, in the sense of political movement of millimeters, more than the s(c)um of its parts, it is still barely a sliver of the reform needed.
I know how all this ends, but I don't know when. It may take another Depressionary crisis to get into a reform context in this country, given the degree to which the corporate-financial complex has effectively castrated electoral politics. And the fact is, the bulk of the citizenry WANT things this way. They are, too many of them, worried about 'those people,' and when they say that they are pointing down, not up. They are worried about holding onto the crumbs which they've been permitted to gather at the heels of the ultra-wealth class, just as petite bourgeois always have been. They don't want any 'revolution' because they have no power now and see no _personal_ prospect to improve their circumstances in anything like that. The soft middle of the public casts the deciding vote until or unless we hit the air pocket of another crisis, and they're already yoked in harness to chew the measly feedbags pulling the carriage of the uberwealth class, so I don't have a lot of confidence there.
We will, again, be voting on important social and institutional issues in a few weeks---but not at all on crucial economic and regulatory issues, which scarcely get more than a little lip service, and that from marginalized progressive candidates who will have no working pluralities in either House of Congress even if the Democrats retain those. Don't count me as amongst the optimistic that we'll get any substantive economic or regulatory reform even if the Democrats win. Those Democrats just voted to hand massive subsidies to the extremely profitable semiconductor and technology industries to 'do the country a favor.' I do believe that we need an industrial policy in this country, but that policy needs to be more than "give the corporate-financial complex all the $$$$ and more it demands at cost-plus," which is how the military-industrial complex runs its shop already out of the public till. The public should have had a stake in the results, and a regulatory regime to keep the ultra-rich from running those operations directly and only into their private bank vaults . . . but anything like that was omitted, it's a straight subsidy of some of the already richest enterprises in the USA. THAT is the 'reform' we can expect over the next yea-so-many years we have a corporate tool like Joe Biden blocking any real change, as his continued agonizing over even engaging with the student debt crisis makes too plain yet again.
I know how this ends. But I don't know when. Today wouldn't be too soon, in my personal view.
Note Bidens' response to the decisions of the Supremely InJustice court on Roe vs Wade "We do not want to cause people to loose their faith in this court"! Loose Faith? Are you kidding me!
No examples to this digression!! You are well aware that the CC as well as every other church/religion preys (correct spelling) on its followers/adherents. CC et al are just legalized cults, confidence tricksters designed to finance their existence selling the hope that there is an afterlife, that so far no one has been able to prove even in small measure!! The CC is the richest organization on the planet and they are not capitalist??? Do you know how much of the planet they own and control? Do you have any idea what they did during WW2??? Where have you been the last couple of decades when the top CC leadership around the world was exposed abusing children and profiting from selling them while protecting their own from lawful persecution??? There is less morality about the CC than there is about Donald Trump!! Sorry to blow your bubble!! It's a corrupt organization intent on preserving their hold on power no matter the cost! Corruption to the ultimate degree!! Hope this covers it for you.
They sure as hell don't reject the offering plate - or charitable contributions of >any< magnitude. Easy to reject those "isms" when you're in charge of them, and flattering the egos of the benefactors with promise of a heavenly reward. I'm sure Martin Luther and I would see eye to eye on >that< theologic issue.
Texas is a separate reality. I wouldn't judge the standing of the Roman Church based on Southern-fried TX Baptist and tent-revival standards. The Roman Church at least has character. Look way farther South. Cast an eye toward Western Europe. Take a look in Africa, as well. I don't think we'll be relegating the Roman Church to the dust heap anytime soon. I FAILED TO INCLUDE the Far East, as well.
Clearly, there's a sectarian divide in the Roman church, and I'm a bona-fide apostate. It's that way with all major religions, who all - from time to time - see it fit, right, and salutary to murder each other over the proper count of angels on a pin-head. Let me hasten to add, I'm not challenging you on what you believe You are not an institution. That view is - perhaps - the most apostate thing about me, and arguably the epitome of apostolicism.
I have no idea where to start. Your extremely long winded comment, Mr. Taylor, lacks focus and logic!! There are also plenty of errors of logic and a few that expose lack of writing skills. When you are able to reduce your comment to something that one can find a place to reply from, give it another try. I don't have the time to try and untangle your convoluted comment! From all appearances, you even misunderstood my POV but I am not concerned.
I think what he's trying to get at is something I've long banged on about: unchecked capitalism is inimical to democracy. I think he's trying to agree with you.
I've been a moderator on Nextdoor.com for some time, and have become practiced at interpreting comments by people who've never focused their effort on developing their writing skills. Being able to wade through sometimes nonsensical verbiage focusing on the way its trending, rather than how it's ineptly said becomes crucial when someone else takes umbridge, complains about it, and want's it to be removed from the discussion.
I would say that writing skills reflect thought and process such that impaired writing skills reflect ineptness in those areas. Similar to learning a foreign language, one generally cannot improve writing skills above a certain age, because their minds have settled into a way of thought, a mental architecture that reflects their capabilities, looping around itself. I have found that trying to discuss with that level, not worth the time. It rarely if ever results in improving said factors, in fact it often polarizes thinking.
Just looked up "your" app. Interesting idea if you really want to get your hands dirty. Most people don't want to know their neighbors because it complicates life, specially if there are wide ranges of factors involved....
It's hard to cut slack on someone who insists on making irrelevant comments!! Uttering opinions that are either agreeable or not, does not make them relevant!!!!
Want to ague that poodles are dogs??? No? Well neither do I want to discuss CU as being awful, BECAUSE THAT IS SO OBVIOUS but not in the discussion!! It's just plain as day!!
Please refrain from ad hominem remarks in this forum. People here are seriously trying to understand important issues. I think you are, too, so don't get sidetracked.
Thank you Professor Reich. I had read excerpts from this memo before, It is the most disgusting piece of propaganda I have ever read. We need to publish the sources of financial assistance to all 435 members of the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch (not naming individuals or exact amounts but indicating donations exceeding $2500 per year and whether it is an individual, corporation, union, etc). I knew the lobbyists had increased astronomically, I just didn't understand how or why. With so many politicians being on the take it will be difficult to reverse. What I resent is how the memo lumps socialism with communism (which doesn't exist) and fascism which is the polar opposite of socialism. Was Powell really that stupid that he couldn't distinguish between forms of authoritarianism (dictators) and socialism which is government for the people. We did have a great American Democracy in the 40's 50's and 60's. While the corporations largely cared about their employees and communities, and ordinary citizens had a fair share of the economy. I know all corporations weren't good, and some labor unions (notably the Teamsters of that period) were bad. but with the government going after the mafia injection into the Teamsters, and people like Ralph Nader exposing corrupt corporations we were muddling through. I am shocked at his attack on college campuses. I was in College from 1964 to 1972 and while we did participate in the Civil Rights movement and the Anti Viet Nam war Movement, we were not 'radical'. We were attempting to right wrongs, We weren't destructive, we didn't hate America. And my Economics professor was a very conservative Republican, who welcomed my liberal/progressive outbursts and encourage me to speak out.
Fay, While you’ve advanced some astute points, I write to comment on your use of the term “socialism.” Socialism, as I understand, is a system rooted in government control and ownership of the means of production. I am not aware of any socialist project that doesn’t invariably devolve into a form of autocracy. In contrast, “democratic socialism” practiced throughout much of Western Europe merely calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth.
Though European nations generally regard capitalism as a reasonably productive system, they recognize capitalism is not very good at distribution unless wedded to social democratic institutions that contain its excesses and moderate its self serving impulses. I imagine the reason, for example, why, between 1947-1973, real family income growth in the US increased by 116.1% for the lowest fifth and 84.8% for the top fifth (Source: Economic Policy Institute) is because capitalism had been contained by a regulatory state whose protections leveled its effects.
Regrettably, because Americans typically aren’t as attuned to these distinctions as their European counterparts, Americans largely are susceptible to Republican’s conflation of the two to serve their own interests.
My understanding is more the European (and American of the pre-1970's) model of socialism. Where big business is regulated to be safety conscious, pays a fare share of the tax burden, is bound by law to pay a fair wage. Social Services, Social Security, Oil Depletion allowances, tax breaks for corporations are all examples of socialism. The recipients don't want to admit it because in the US we have been indoctrinated to equate socialism with the totalitarianism of those who erroneously call themselves communists. If you prefer the term democratic socialism, I'm fine with that and will refer to it that way in the future. My hesitancy is caused by my age (nearing 90), the Nazis of Hitler's Germany officially called themselves the Democratic Socialist Party, a misnomer if ever there was one. They were a pure fascist dictatorship, not a democratic, nor socialist impulse among them.
The problem is, as you say, that the word “socialism” has been deliberately turned into something dirty by the right wing, which literally spits it when they say it. There’s nothing inherently evil about socialism but they’ve brainwashed a lot to people into thinking there is. They twist everything, just as Orwell predicted. We need to take the language back.
I am in agreement with you on this, Paula. And this is another reason we need to teach Civics in schools across the countries, If more people understood the difference between a representative democracy form of government (such as we have) and fascism (as exemplified in Germany, Italy, and Spain, in the 1930's and 1940's, the trumpster would never have been elected. And if real communism was explained as a good ideal, but only workable in very small, cohesive groups (maximum size 100 people) People would understand that communism bears no resemblance to the authoritarian, dictatorial, totalinarian regimes who call themselves communist. Shakespeare famously wrote "What's in a name?" My answer, not a damned thing. You can call your political party anything you want, it's the behavior of that party that designates their beliefs. In this respect the trump led Republican part is truly a fascist regime. If they want to call us "antifa", if it means anti-fascist, count me in.
Fay, I realize your comment is not addressed to me. Still, while I fully subscribe to your premise regarding behaviors, if I may, I also would note, say, for Floridian Latinos, who largely fled from Cuba’s and from South America’s socialist regimes, that names/labels do matter. Hence, the reason a state that once was a battleground state has turned increasingly Republican, and why I am frustrated that Dems are losing elections they should be winning.
I see your point, Barbara, But Cuba and the South American regimes such as Colombia and Equador are not socialist or communist, they are and always have been outright authoritarian, dictatorships. Which is why I said names mean nothing, it is the behavior that counts. A few obscenely wealthy, hiring a thuggish corrupt military and bullying the rest of the people into less than slaves is not socialism.
Fay, To be clear, it’s never been a matter of my preference for particular terminology. My sole concern centers on choosing words that provide one with the best chance of being understood. As someone who abides by that old saying, “If something can go wrong it will,” I believe it prudent to expect to be misunderstood and then taking precautions against that happening.
@progwoman, Unless I’m missing something, I have no idea how your comment relates to my intent to clarify the meaning of socialism and differentiate it from democratic socialism.
Sorry, it was my ineffective way of defending you. Maybe I just betrayed my weariness with explaining democratic socialism to people. By defining capitalism even at its most predatory as essential to our democracy, I think the right has made almost anything that serves the common good into "socialism."
@progwoman, I believe your assessment of the far right is spot on. In response, I will continue to think that the security of this nation and its people, not to mention people everywhere, depends on a far more cooperative environment in which there is a modicum of social and economic justice for large numbers of people today who feel oppressed and marginalized by a runaway wild capitalism.
This memo leads with the most manipulative rhetorical phrase of all time “No thoughtful person can question that … (followed by a take that thoughtful people damn well ought to question)”.
As has been said so many times before - we have the best government money can buy. And it has. We have nothing over the corrupt nations around the world.
Thanks for this. I have been wondering for a long time what the basis was for what seems to be the excessive influence Big Money and Big Business has on Politics. This is nothing more than legalised corruption.
A fascinating memo from Powell. Thanks for sharing it. It reads like a road map for the Koch Brothers. What followed are the think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Hudson Foundation (which funds corporate agriculture thinking), the Hoover Institute and much more. Essentially all of these are an attempt to quash the supposed academic tilt to the left by funding a strong "academic" shift to the right. However, all of these "think tanks" have a predetermined economic and cultural end they seek that does not necessarily need guidance by actual fact, or broadly accepted scientific or social consensus. If it makes money it is good, if it blocks making money then it is leftist, communist, socialist and bad. When your criteria for success is narrow you blind yourself to realities that could easily result in the death of the planet. If that sounds to extreme, ask a Californian with a burned out house; a Kentuckian cleaning mud off their ceiling; a Bangladeshi farmer trying to keep her farm from washing into the Bay of Bengal. Powell's memo deserves a broader historical evaluation and hopefully a significant rebuttal. If it continues to guide the political process then humanity may just drown in the refuse of corporate success.
Agree. It needs to be published wider in its entirety. We don't usually rank Powell high enough in his influence on American history. Maybe his memo had more influence than any of his Supreme Court decisions.
Correct, his impact on the Supreme Court was minimal, but his influence through his memo on government, economy & society has been monstrous, essentially turning our erstwhile democracy into a corporatocracy.
Seeing that today’s Newsletter opens by naming 2 Senate Democrats who are among the highest recipients of corporate money, I wish mostly to amplify some of what everyday people have lost due to how these 2 Senators have voted in the past 8 to 10 months.
I start with the Senate’s failure, by 2 votes this past January, to pass the $1.75 trillion budget reconciliation climate and care economy package (negotiated down from the $3.75 trillion bill that had passed in the House in fall of 21), and underscore how the public-at-large was denied an extension of the child tax credit, affordable, quality childcare and universal Pre-K, investments in housing, in eldercare, in expanded ACA subsidies, in climate, and much more.
While the $4+ billion Inflation Reduction Act that received support, this past week, from all 50 Senate Democrats surely will contribute, despite some concessions, to helping make the transition from the fossil fuel industry to clean energy, most of the care economy piece that would have improved life for tens and tens of millions of working people, plus most of the tax reform provisions, were dropped.
Additionally, but for Manchin and Sinema, who, this past January, supported the federal voter protection bills that would have safeguarded our democracy and then, on a second vote, joined the 50 Senate Republicans to oppose an extremely modest change to the filibuster that eventually would have allowed for an up or down vote, GOP controlled State Legislatures would have been blocked from continuing to lay the groundwork for changing state election rules to change who can be in charge, how votes are counted, and how they’re certified.
If these 2 detailed iterative examples don’t mount a convincing case for moving towards getting dark money out of politics, I don’t know what would.
Paula, I just wrote a note to another subscriber that I believe is equally applicable here. Essentially, I think the security of this nation and its people, much less people everywhere, depend on a far more cooperative environment in which there is a modicum of social and economic justice for large numbers of people today who feel oppressed and marginalized by a runaway wild capitalism.
More Greed and the ability to get easy money. Imagine coming from some farming area/state to Washington and getting wined and dined and then told all you had to do was sign something and you got an envelope full of cash! Many thought it could be a one time deal until they saw what it took to keep a house there and back home. Remember most had kids in private schools too so it all added up. Back then the social scene was mandatory too! I am coming at this from a completely different angle then everyone else here. I can see how truly horrible it is now, but back then? I will say it could have and should have been controlled better. Now? It is pretty much accepted that once in office you do what they want, not for the people, or only around election time.
I knew something was wrong when sportscaster Roone Arledge was appointed run ABC news and People magazine appeared in supermarkets. I also recall when organized labor was ordered to sit in the corner when a Democrat-run Congress shot down common situs picketing in 77. I didn't know what it was until I heard Bill Moyers' address at the 40th anniversary of Public Citizen where he mentioned and described the Powell memo. Then it became clear. The Powell memo is a declaration of war and battle plan. He may have had benign goals when he wrote it, but the class war has gone and is going very well for the elite. Every plant closure and every stock buyback is an attack against us.
As a preeminent business attorney, he knew he couldn't say "Here's how we seize control of the government". But maybe he meant no harm to the country. If so, the memo was circulated to CEOs, people who were very capable of harming people and the country.
This is exactly why I keep saying that we need to go back to the Declaration of Independence as these criminals need to go for our very existence to continue! They have brought war to the planet and all its people! We don't need violence just a direct order from "We The People" demanding they turn themselves in to the nearest prison. Call it a "Citizens Arrest" if need be. When they refuse send in the military. They have made the whole system including laws to be used against us therefore those laws are not for the people by the people so the corporate police force is under their control, the military is not as it is obligated to to protect us "We The People" against a corrupt government. Also these criminals are not our government THEY ARE CRIMINALS!
This is so GOP! Imagine that anything that tries to keep capitalism in balance with other human needs (worker welfare, public safety, …), is an existential threat that must be stopped at all costs.
"But most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining, consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and services provided the consumer."
Thanks to what resulted from this memo, we no longer have much beyond private ownership and profit. As Dr. Reich has documented, the end of anti-trust enforcement and the resulting corporate consolidation has perverted the market economy. As the founder of Whole Foods wrote a few years back, we now have a rigged "crony capitalism".
wow- that was a lot to ingest/digest the system isnt broken- its being built this way. the right time to do the right thing is right now- sadly, we are so distracted by just trying to fight over crumbs that we lose sight of the bigger picture. and trump and his minions are sucking all the oxygen out of the room.
And the American people missed their golden chance for meaningful repair of this nation when they failed to elect her last election. I hope we get another chance next election
I fear we won't get another chance. The degree to which people who don't like her HATE HER is shocking. And they're a high-voting sector--not of Nazis, but of business people (and not just CEOs). We like her in MA where she's our Senator, but the farther away you get the more people can't stand her. Not just because she's a powerful woman (and a professor) who doesn't harp on her kids and grandkids, but because so many people do NOT think "the system is rigged," even when it's rigged against them.
She is tougher against giant corporations & their executives than anyone else, which is why they keep smearing her mercilessly. And in our corporatocracy, no entity is as powerful & influential as giant multinational corporations & their billionaire executives, which have organized the most sophisticated & well-funded propaganda machine in the US if not world. Too many people have fallen for their lies. Not Elizabeth Warren, but she is just 1 person as valiant & righteous as she is.
Yes! But I'm saying these billionaires aren't the only ones--they're defending their property, their interests, illicit as those interests are from a democratic or moral POV. But many people who are merely middle and upper-middle class also hate her, not because they're dupes of propaganda in any ordinary sense. It's worth thinking about those people, because there are lots more of them and they are informed, educated voters.
There are at least 2 factors in play. One is that they've been thoroughly brainwashed by the billionaire-funded propaganda. The other is that they (usually mistakenly) believe that rules, regulations & taxes Warren is advocating will personally affect them adversely at some point.
But where I live, among middle class, academic, politically aware environments, Warren is widely adored. So some of it may be regional: one sees or fails to see what the other side sees or doesn't see.
Didn’t finish reading yet but a note on WV..my relatives worked in the coal mines there for many years. And many died from Black Lung Disease. Didn’t know about the pipe line. I will have to focus on this post. Chock full of info!!!
Thanks for including the entire memo. The Memo is a very carefully crarfted long range plan of attack on our "Government Of by and for the People" and well organised and carefully worded to be pointed with the monicur The American system to replace the more obvious Corperate America we have come to recognise as the entire government to the benefit of the Elite whose primary effort is to profit and control that alows them to continue to maintain control of it's greaest "asset" the working class, the one comodity that fuels their source of "wealth" and power. The original sin of greed exposed.
Yes! And it is an amazing piece of redefinition of concepts, how Corporatism was to overshadow citizenship as the greatest Power of America, and so much else. The "greatest "asset" the working class," as America grew, came to be seen as the owners of the farm, not the farm animals as Powell would have it.
"The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom." What bullshit, in truth it's the exact opposite. A wiser man once said "Never let companies get together or they will collude against the public interest."
Chilling, but interesting to note that there was all this talk about Communists, Marxists and socialists destroying American business. Even Milton Friedman was there in 1971.....and then came Reagan.
Sinema is a nauseating symbol of this corruption. If this nonsensical thinking is not thwarted it's the end of America, we'll go down faster than Rome.
However I find it encouraging that with only 50 seats in the Senate, some small semblance of sanity is beginning to emerge there. Just think what 53 seats may achieve.....
I think winning 53 Senate seats is achievable. There seems to be more doubt about the House, which leads me to this question. The House over the last few years it's been majority Democratic has passed a tremendous amount of progressive legislation that has just been sitting there waiting to be taken on by the Senate. Even if the House becomes majority Republican & no longer passes progressive legislation, can a majority Democratic Senate choose to consider proposals previously passed by the House? Is there a time limit?
What a classic piece of rhetoric! To take things that are softly defined, and manipulate them to show a predetermined outcome - that is rhetoric. Look to the terms!
Like Ralph Nader said on his book title "Unsafe at Any Speed". Powel wanted to defend the indefensible. Honor cannot be forced onto the Dishonorable, no matter how organized and powerful the attempts to do so.
Looks like Big Business wants to control the Schools, starting with high schools, then Colleges. I guess they want to indoctrinate and brainwash everyone and use the courts as a weapon. Looks like they are already at it. I never liked the Chamber of Commerce, because it seemed so obvious what it is about. If business has good policies and respect for the consumer and the environment, it would not need to 'attack' and 'be agressive' and essentially take over the textbook industry, schools and the law itself. Sadly, it seems that it actually has, with passage of Citizens United. We see the stacked court.
20-20 hindsite for too many of us Laurie. It's good to bring all this informatio forth to re-awaken us to what has been going on since before the Nixon debacle. Again I remind us all : The dangers of of allowing the "Industrioal-Military Complex" to become involved in government postulated by President Dwight D Eisenhower.
Steve O'Cally ; Hard to know what is in someone's mind. But words like organized and aggressive, and the way he was throwing words like Socialist, Communist and even Fascist around, makes me wonder if he really appreciated the meanings of these words. Was he ever a worker in a large concern? Anyone in his family? Infiltrating the justice system and the administrations of Colleges seems pretty deliberate. He had an agenda.
What is evident is that unbridled Capitalism is anathema to Democracy. The ferocity that Big Business has set about over the last decades to obliterate the needs of the people -essential for Capitalism to function- is astonishing as it is unrelenting. That they have bought and installed Democratic Party "politicians" speaks volumes in that there needs to be an equivalent organization to counter Big Business!! Unions and Guilds have proven unequal to the task as being targeted for annihilation or being excessively weak to be of consequence. There really is no representation of the average person in our politics, leaving us with the task to vote for the least harmful, which by definition is a Democrat, but that is not so comforting as it has barely proven to be effective. The alternative, however, has been shown to be a disaster!!
In addition the sabotage of anything pertaining to actual help for We The People is automatically done by the repugnicans and then little or no mention by how it was sabotaged is stated by Democrats other then we were done over by the Republicans again. It needs to be shown how destructive these people are. I agree with you that we are again choosing the lesser of two criminal parties.
Sorry, you are not entitled to put words in my mouth. I did not use the word "criminal" because only the Republican Party is criminal. Your desire to walk the fence does not make you smart but truthfully the opposite, because you cannot distinguish criminal from non!! We are all human with faults. But only one Party insists on making their faults into virtues and that is a rejection of reality!! Learn to think critically and not lazily dumping everyone in the same basket. Nixon did some good stuff but he was bad for our country because he did not believe in the system that unfortunately got him elected. Trump is much much worse because he is even more ignorant and immoral than anything we have seen before in our government. There are worse people in the world at least at this point as we speak. Who knows what damage Trump could unleash on the world. There are differences that by definition makes the Democrats party of today a good Party, while the Republican Party is a party of self indulgent traitors!!
CITIZENS UNITED MAKES CRIMINALS was not directed at you Nicholas or anyone else. It was simply a statement of fact. When you put unlimited money in the game, you create criminals. Sorry, I will avoid comments to you in the future.
I am not sure what you are talking about, but just relevant to your comment, HOW exactly is CU relevant to the conversation?
Baboons are dangerous!!
Okay! No one will contest such a statement either.
Citizens United is absolutely relevant to the conversation, because it is this action that allowed unbridled funds to be funneled to political candidates with no accountability.
OK so you're a troll bye!!
It's not the party it's the Criminals in charge of the party! War is a crime!
No the Party as a whole is criminal because EVERYONE subscribes to the values of said Party. Just have a look at the the RNC conventions of the last decade or so. Read their manifestoes. It's the people that make up a Party, so the Party is guilty!! NO excuses!!
I agree, the RNC has become the modern day equivalent of the Nazi party.
The only good thing Nixon did was to establish the EPA.
Leonor, I think you are right about the EPA being the only good thing Nixon did and now the Supreme Court is even trying to bring that down. Amazing!
CITIZENS UNITED MAKES CRIMINALS!
See my comments above. If you ask them, even MAGA/Tea Party/Confederate rebs will admit that money should not equate to speech.
Daniel, certainly, no one who is not being paid to say it would claim that money is speech. That is only one of the dumbest things the Roberts Court has come up with. I am suspecting the next dumb one will be giving state legislatures the right to declare who wins elections. That fits their lack of concern for our democracy. These are not the brightest bulbs in the string, and they keep proving it.
This goes back to the 1970s. Started with Buckley v. Valeo. Here's what I said:
Robert, you're right.
From a legal aspect this culminated in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 US 1 (1976), and Citizens United, 558 US 310 (2010), when SCOTUS ruled, 5-4, that the First Amendment prohibits limits on corporate funding of independent broadcasts in candidate elections. The justices said that the government's rationale for the limits on corporate spending—to prevent corruption—was not persuasive enough to restrict political speech.
It struck laws that limited the ability of corporations and labor unions to spend their own money to advocate the election or defeat of a candidate on the basis that they violate the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech.
In order to reach this conclusion, the court had to assume that speech = money and that corporations are people.
Montana state law provided that a "corporation may not make ... an expenditure in connection with a candidate or a political committee that supports or opposes a candidate or a political party." Mont. Code 13–35–227(1). The Montana Supreme Court rejected a claim that the statute violated the First Amendment. In American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, 567, U.S. 516 (2012), in a per curiam decision, the Court held that the findings in Citizens United also applies and that political speech is protected regardless of the source. The Court also held that all of the relevant arguments were addressed in the Citizens United decision and reversed the decision of the Supreme Court of Montana.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer dissented and noted that he disagreed with the Court's original holding in Citizens United. In this case, he argued, Montana did have a compelling interest to limit electoral and political corruption by limiting corporate political expenditures. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined in the dissent.
When I speak to even Republican lawyers, let alone MAGA/Tea Parties/Don't tread on me Confederate radicals, they reject the notion that money should be considered to be speech. A disturbing factor is that there was an error reporting Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886), the case that falsely states that corporations = people according to the 14th Amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad_Co.
Perhaps more fundamentally, the challenge of the future is that somehow machines and structures, entities and corporations, the non-living 'bots and algorithms and digital surveillance machines, have crept into the arena of control of many aspects over Human Life, not just over government. Entities prey on natural sympathies of egalitarianism, to claim equality to living, breathing humans, based on their cunning ability to feign what individuals do. If people with religious beliefs own a company such as Hobby Lobby, we imbue the corporation with the attribution of "fundamental religious belief." This is clearly grotesque sacrilege to the eyes of any God or Goddess.
It is distasteful to use statements once used to divide HUMANS, but non-living entities of any sort cannot by any means achieve equality with the living. Whether one uses the principles of birthright, or endowment by Natural Law and creation, we are elsewhere-created creatures (set the metaphysics aside). They are human-created things, Golems and parties and corporate religions, they are things, and there is no bridge to their becoming human. Even Things controlled by People, like the Trump Corporation, are things. There cannot be equality between them and us.
It's also a sci-fi plot! Maybe in the style of Le Guin. The android aspect of it is straight out of Asimov's "I Robot," not to mention the questions raised in Philip K Dick's "Blade Runner."
I almost neglected to include the "Matrix" trilogy, where human beings became the energy source for the technology via virtual reality.
On Star Trek: The Next Generation there was a trial about whether the android, Mr. Data, had the rights of sentient beings. The verdict: he did. I’m a little vague on it now but I’m think the conclusion was also that he was one. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
The plot details aren't so important as another example of Mr O'Cally observation as related to sci-fi plots handling the same kind of principles. Thanks for another example.
The Butlerian Jihad of Dune.
Steve, the non-living "beings" cannot really be treated at this time as persons, yet, Johnny Roberts Court has decided that corporations (non living things) are persons. Of course they are not, but it works for businesses to claim personhood as long as they don't have to be held accountable as actual persons would. Maybe when they as a corporation break a law, their top say, 10 officials go to jail.
Thanks for this. When I read the Powell memo I was flummoxed on where to begin. All I was going to say is simply that I'm not smart enough to comment on it - and begged off thinking it not worth posting. However, in discussing interpretation with you concerning another comment, the whole thrust of the memo crystalized in my mind. What >I've< concluded is this:
You and I seem to agree that "unbridled Capitalism is anathema to Democracy," that in >my< words I'd say "unregulated capitalism is inimical to democracy."
What Powell is saying is:
>>>True democracy is inimical to pure capitalism.<<<
Whatever words he uses, no matter how seemingly eloquent, that is all the Powell memo >really< says.
AS A FURTHER THOUGHT:
It occurs to me that even democracy can be inimical to itself. We seem to be trending such a direction. All it would take is for the voters to be convinced The Constitution should be abolished. I remember from some time ago, one Northern African country apparently voted to abolish its constitution and impose sharia law. >It gave me pause.< I don't remember which country that was, and I never - to my recollection - learned about how that all played out. But it >did< serve to get me thinking about the >true nature< of democracy.
In our Declaration of Independence “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” If they want to try another gig that works for them, selah. Give it a whirl.
Exactly.
The snag with all that is that the capitalists believe it affirms their position, as well.
Most MAGAS are NOT capitalists.
Agreed. I doubt most of them know what it is any better than they know what socialism or communism are. They seem to be about having fun, and socialism isn't fun - for example. I'll hazard most of them enjoy gambling, playing the lotto, and going to casinos as typical leisure activity. I'll also hazard a fair percentage of same are gambling addicts. All of that is - of course - conjecture. I have no data - only a gut response.
Let’s just say the anti-democrats, small d.
Exactly!
Perhaps you're referring to the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood gov't, and the 2013 military coup?
It was back at least in the '90s. I'm thinking Algiers or Morocco, or someplace like that. It was definitely not Egypt. Thanks for the memory refresher, though.
Heart.
Well said!
He'll like that.
The true alternative would be ranked choice voting, but both the Donkeys and QOP adamantly oppose that. Voters could choose Green & Progressive alternatives as 1st & 2nd place choices, without "throwing away" one's vote (by choosing Donkey as choice 3).
Don Perata is a former CA Senate leader supported by many lobbyists, and had to leave in 2008 due to term limits. He thought he'd waltz into the Oakland mayor's office. But, a coalition of 2 progressive candidates asked each others' supporters to choose them 1-2 or 2-1. Perata never saw it coming! Bye-bye! If anyone wants a good laugh, the wiki link mentions lots of "controversy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Perata
I believe that “capitalism” is a meme, not a rational concept, and has been nearly as badly stretched out as “dialectic” has been.
Good point. It's as Pavlovian as "socialist."
Unbridled Capitalism is anathema to survival. Its own survival as a system, the survival of any political or economic systems it touches, and survival of every "resource" on the planet, including air and water.
God bless you. Having people hungry, homeless, without medical care.... It's very evil
Unbridled Capitalism, even capitalism in general, is not the economic system that Holy Mother Church teaches. It has many pitfalls.
That is broadly my view as well, Nicholas. The American corporate-financial complex has been at open war with 99% of the American public for at least _200 years!_ As a group, they have never done anything for the rest. Child labor, the company store, monopoly trusts: they loved all that. Only they screwed up in the 1920s, the American economy blew up, and a swatch of actual reform was enacted. Powell's memo is simply the fight back from the C-F-C. And he and they have won, as of 2022. The regulatory policies of the mid 20th century have been systematically gutted. We are crushed between gross, self-enriching monopolies. Wages have been pared down to an ever-declining sub-inflation level, don't even talk about income gains, while corporate profits at the expense of everyone else have never been higher. Student loans were turned into debt slavery instruments---on a Democratic watch---leaving they young broken to the yoke before they even hit the job market: by design, as one can see from the Powell memo. The push to 'privatize' Social Security and Medicare, amongst the few reform structures still largely intact, is the further and final chapter in their program of forcing the bulk of the population back into economic serfdom.
The corporate-financial complex bought both (major) political parties over 30 years ago. The Democrats were as bad or worse in their servility and solicitude to that center of power. Only the two-pronged crisis of an economy stunning pandemic on the one side and a clown car level incompetent nativist insurrectionary movement on the other induced some movement toward reform in the last few years. Only again this election cycle we see grotesque extremist billionaires recruited by AIPAC doing their worst to choke off any actually progressive legislative candidate they can, the _real_ indication of Big Theft's agenda. Almost everything of any value in the legislative package just passed in Congress is a watered down, severely compromised, 29% of what was actually needed; small potatoes as RR aptly described if. If that act is, in the sense of political movement of millimeters, more than the s(c)um of its parts, it is still barely a sliver of the reform needed.
I know how all this ends, but I don't know when. It may take another Depressionary crisis to get into a reform context in this country, given the degree to which the corporate-financial complex has effectively castrated electoral politics. And the fact is, the bulk of the citizenry WANT things this way. They are, too many of them, worried about 'those people,' and when they say that they are pointing down, not up. They are worried about holding onto the crumbs which they've been permitted to gather at the heels of the ultra-wealth class, just as petite bourgeois always have been. They don't want any 'revolution' because they have no power now and see no _personal_ prospect to improve their circumstances in anything like that. The soft middle of the public casts the deciding vote until or unless we hit the air pocket of another crisis, and they're already yoked in harness to chew the measly feedbags pulling the carriage of the uberwealth class, so I don't have a lot of confidence there.
We will, again, be voting on important social and institutional issues in a few weeks---but not at all on crucial economic and regulatory issues, which scarcely get more than a little lip service, and that from marginalized progressive candidates who will have no working pluralities in either House of Congress even if the Democrats retain those. Don't count me as amongst the optimistic that we'll get any substantive economic or regulatory reform even if the Democrats win. Those Democrats just voted to hand massive subsidies to the extremely profitable semiconductor and technology industries to 'do the country a favor.' I do believe that we need an industrial policy in this country, but that policy needs to be more than "give the corporate-financial complex all the $$$$ and more it demands at cost-plus," which is how the military-industrial complex runs its shop already out of the public till. The public should have had a stake in the results, and a regulatory regime to keep the ultra-rich from running those operations directly and only into their private bank vaults . . . but anything like that was omitted, it's a straight subsidy of some of the already richest enterprises in the USA. THAT is the 'reform' we can expect over the next yea-so-many years we have a corporate tool like Joe Biden blocking any real change, as his continued agonizing over even engaging with the student debt crisis makes too plain yet again.
I know how this ends. But I don't know when. Today wouldn't be too soon, in my personal view.
Not a word of "Untruth" in this statement! Every word of a "Realist", not a "BullShitis"!
Note Bidens' response to the decisions of the Supremely InJustice court on Roe vs Wade "We do not want to cause people to loose their faith in this court"! Loose Faith? Are you kidding me!
Excellent post in many parts.. Freemasonry is another huge enemy
Catholic Church rejects both capitalism and communism.
How naive!!
Give me examples, please
No examples to this digression!! You are well aware that the CC as well as every other church/religion preys (correct spelling) on its followers/adherents. CC et al are just legalized cults, confidence tricksters designed to finance their existence selling the hope that there is an afterlife, that so far no one has been able to prove even in small measure!! The CC is the richest organization on the planet and they are not capitalist??? Do you know how much of the planet they own and control? Do you have any idea what they did during WW2??? Where have you been the last couple of decades when the top CC leadership around the world was exposed abusing children and profiting from selling them while protecting their own from lawful persecution??? There is less morality about the CC than there is about Donald Trump!! Sorry to blow your bubble!! It's a corrupt organization intent on preserving their hold on power no matter the cost! Corruption to the ultimate degree!! Hope this covers it for you.
Commies, freemasonry, our enemies took Catholic Church out. Vatican II Robber Council.
We will crush New World Order. We just need true pope. Mystery in much of this
Where have you been? You believe John Paul II was a Catholic, A true pope, asaint?
He was a traitor to Holy Mother Church.
Research sedevacantism dude... Your ignorance is embarrassing. I feel bad for you typing this nonsense in public
Pope Pigs XII opeed up monasteries and contents to Jews. Was thanked by Jews after war
Catholic Church has been stripped of almost everything. There is one Catholic Church in Texas ... And we rent a place in Dallas area.
Catholics lost Vatican in 1958. Rape scandal occurred under enemies of Church calling themselves Catholic.
Communism and freemasonry, the gifts that keep giving
They sure as hell don't reject the offering plate - or charitable contributions of >any< magnitude. Easy to reject those "isms" when you're in charge of them, and flattering the egos of the benefactors with promise of a heavenly reward. I'm sure Martin Luther and I would see eye to eye on >that< theologic issue.
My priest flies 1000 miles to visit 3 cities in Texas.
They lose money on us.
Sometimes less than 20 people at Church. We have to rent hotel meeting room.
Catholic Church is in eclipse. A tiny remnanyt. Rome has lost the faith.
Catholic Church has 1 church in Texas. Another property that is rented.
Texas is a separate reality. I wouldn't judge the standing of the Roman Church based on Southern-fried TX Baptist and tent-revival standards. The Roman Church at least has character. Look way farther South. Cast an eye toward Western Europe. Take a look in Africa, as well. I don't think we'll be relegating the Roman Church to the dust heap anytime soon. I FAILED TO INCLUDE the Far East, as well.
The Roman Catholic Church will certainly last forever! God bless you for saying as much!
But this is great apostasy. If someone recognizes Francis as pope, they can't be Catholic (except for invincible ignorance)
1.2 billion in church headed by Francis... This is Not the Catholic church.
There are about 200k Catholis.
1 in 6000.
Research why You think this is... And become Catholic
Clearly, there's a sectarian divide in the Roman church, and I'm a bona-fide apostate. It's that way with all major religions, who all - from time to time - see it fit, right, and salutary to murder each other over the proper count of angels on a pin-head. Let me hasten to add, I'm not challenging you on what you believe You are not an institution. That view is - perhaps - the most apostate thing about me, and arguably the epitome of apostolicism.
I have no idea where to start. Your extremely long winded comment, Mr. Taylor, lacks focus and logic!! There are also plenty of errors of logic and a few that expose lack of writing skills. When you are able to reduce your comment to something that one can find a place to reply from, give it another try. I don't have the time to try and untangle your convoluted comment! From all appearances, you even misunderstood my POV but I am not concerned.
I think what he's trying to get at is something I've long banged on about: unchecked capitalism is inimical to democracy. I think he's trying to agree with you.
Isn't that exactly what I was saying?? He seems polemical to my writing. Thanks!!
I've been a moderator on Nextdoor.com for some time, and have become practiced at interpreting comments by people who've never focused their effort on developing their writing skills. Being able to wade through sometimes nonsensical verbiage focusing on the way its trending, rather than how it's ineptly said becomes crucial when someone else takes umbridge, complains about it, and want's it to be removed from the discussion.
I would say that writing skills reflect thought and process such that impaired writing skills reflect ineptness in those areas. Similar to learning a foreign language, one generally cannot improve writing skills above a certain age, because their minds have settled into a way of thought, a mental architecture that reflects their capabilities, looping around itself. I have found that trying to discuss with that level, not worth the time. It rarely if ever results in improving said factors, in fact it often polarizes thinking.
Just looked up "your" app. Interesting idea if you really want to get your hands dirty. Most people don't want to know their neighbors because it complicates life, specially if there are wide ranges of factors involved....
Yep! It was your thesis statement. I think he's using it as his conclusion. At least, that's how I interpreted what he says.
It's hard to cut slack on someone who insists on making irrelevant comments!! Uttering opinions that are either agreeable or not, does not make them relevant!!!!
Want to ague that poodles are dogs??? No? Well neither do I want to discuss CU as being awful, BECAUSE THAT IS SO OBVIOUS but not in the discussion!! It's just plain as day!!
I hope you don’t buy anything from Amazon, Ken. That’s one small way to protest.
Please refrain from ad hominem remarks in this forum. People here are seriously trying to understand important issues. I think you are, too, so don't get sidetracked.
Thank you Professor Reich. I had read excerpts from this memo before, It is the most disgusting piece of propaganda I have ever read. We need to publish the sources of financial assistance to all 435 members of the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch (not naming individuals or exact amounts but indicating donations exceeding $2500 per year and whether it is an individual, corporation, union, etc). I knew the lobbyists had increased astronomically, I just didn't understand how or why. With so many politicians being on the take it will be difficult to reverse. What I resent is how the memo lumps socialism with communism (which doesn't exist) and fascism which is the polar opposite of socialism. Was Powell really that stupid that he couldn't distinguish between forms of authoritarianism (dictators) and socialism which is government for the people. We did have a great American Democracy in the 40's 50's and 60's. While the corporations largely cared about their employees and communities, and ordinary citizens had a fair share of the economy. I know all corporations weren't good, and some labor unions (notably the Teamsters of that period) were bad. but with the government going after the mafia injection into the Teamsters, and people like Ralph Nader exposing corrupt corporations we were muddling through. I am shocked at his attack on college campuses. I was in College from 1964 to 1972 and while we did participate in the Civil Rights movement and the Anti Viet Nam war Movement, we were not 'radical'. We were attempting to right wrongs, We weren't destructive, we didn't hate America. And my Economics professor was a very conservative Republican, who welcomed my liberal/progressive outbursts and encourage me to speak out.
Fay, While you’ve advanced some astute points, I write to comment on your use of the term “socialism.” Socialism, as I understand, is a system rooted in government control and ownership of the means of production. I am not aware of any socialist project that doesn’t invariably devolve into a form of autocracy. In contrast, “democratic socialism” practiced throughout much of Western Europe merely calls for a more equitable distribution of a nation’s wealth.
Though European nations generally regard capitalism as a reasonably productive system, they recognize capitalism is not very good at distribution unless wedded to social democratic institutions that contain its excesses and moderate its self serving impulses. I imagine the reason, for example, why, between 1947-1973, real family income growth in the US increased by 116.1% for the lowest fifth and 84.8% for the top fifth (Source: Economic Policy Institute) is because capitalism had been contained by a regulatory state whose protections leveled its effects.
Regrettably, because Americans typically aren’t as attuned to these distinctions as their European counterparts, Americans largely are susceptible to Republican’s conflation of the two to serve their own interests.
My understanding is more the European (and American of the pre-1970's) model of socialism. Where big business is regulated to be safety conscious, pays a fare share of the tax burden, is bound by law to pay a fair wage. Social Services, Social Security, Oil Depletion allowances, tax breaks for corporations are all examples of socialism. The recipients don't want to admit it because in the US we have been indoctrinated to equate socialism with the totalitarianism of those who erroneously call themselves communists. If you prefer the term democratic socialism, I'm fine with that and will refer to it that way in the future. My hesitancy is caused by my age (nearing 90), the Nazis of Hitler's Germany officially called themselves the Democratic Socialist Party, a misnomer if ever there was one. They were a pure fascist dictatorship, not a democratic, nor socialist impulse among them.
The problem is, as you say, that the word “socialism” has been deliberately turned into something dirty by the right wing, which literally spits it when they say it. There’s nothing inherently evil about socialism but they’ve brainwashed a lot to people into thinking there is. They twist everything, just as Orwell predicted. We need to take the language back.
I am in agreement with you on this, Paula. And this is another reason we need to teach Civics in schools across the countries, If more people understood the difference between a representative democracy form of government (such as we have) and fascism (as exemplified in Germany, Italy, and Spain, in the 1930's and 1940's, the trumpster would never have been elected. And if real communism was explained as a good ideal, but only workable in very small, cohesive groups (maximum size 100 people) People would understand that communism bears no resemblance to the authoritarian, dictatorial, totalinarian regimes who call themselves communist. Shakespeare famously wrote "What's in a name?" My answer, not a damned thing. You can call your political party anything you want, it's the behavior of that party that designates their beliefs. In this respect the trump led Republican part is truly a fascist regime. If they want to call us "antifa", if it means anti-fascist, count me in.
Fay, I realize your comment is not addressed to me. Still, while I fully subscribe to your premise regarding behaviors, if I may, I also would note, say, for Floridian Latinos, who largely fled from Cuba’s and from South America’s socialist regimes, that names/labels do matter. Hence, the reason a state that once was a battleground state has turned increasingly Republican, and why I am frustrated that Dems are losing elections they should be winning.
I see your point, Barbara, But Cuba and the South American regimes such as Colombia and Equador are not socialist or communist, they are and always have been outright authoritarian, dictatorships. Which is why I said names mean nothing, it is the behavior that counts. A few obscenely wealthy, hiring a thuggish corrupt military and bullying the rest of the people into less than slaves is not socialism.
Fay, To be clear, it’s never been a matter of my preference for particular terminology. My sole concern centers on choosing words that provide one with the best chance of being understood. As someone who abides by that old saying, “If something can go wrong it will,” I believe it prudent to expect to be misunderstood and then taking precautions against that happening.
Well, she did say her Econ professor was a conservative Republican.
@progwoman, Unless I’m missing something, I have no idea how your comment relates to my intent to clarify the meaning of socialism and differentiate it from democratic socialism.
Sorry, it was my ineffective way of defending you. Maybe I just betrayed my weariness with explaining democratic socialism to people. By defining capitalism even at its most predatory as essential to our democracy, I think the right has made almost anything that serves the common good into "socialism."
@progwoman, I believe your assessment of the far right is spot on. In response, I will continue to think that the security of this nation and its people, not to mention people everywhere, depends on a far more cooperative environment in which there is a modicum of social and economic justice for large numbers of people today who feel oppressed and marginalized by a runaway wild capitalism.
This memo leads with the most manipulative rhetorical phrase of all time “No thoughtful person can question that … (followed by a take that thoughtful people damn well ought to question)”.
As has been said so many times before - we have the best government money can buy. And it has. We have nothing over the corrupt nations around the world.
Thanks for this. I have been wondering for a long time what the basis was for what seems to be the excessive influence Big Money and Big Business has on Politics. This is nothing more than legalised corruption.
A fascinating memo from Powell. Thanks for sharing it. It reads like a road map for the Koch Brothers. What followed are the think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Hudson Foundation (which funds corporate agriculture thinking), the Hoover Institute and much more. Essentially all of these are an attempt to quash the supposed academic tilt to the left by funding a strong "academic" shift to the right. However, all of these "think tanks" have a predetermined economic and cultural end they seek that does not necessarily need guidance by actual fact, or broadly accepted scientific or social consensus. If it makes money it is good, if it blocks making money then it is leftist, communist, socialist and bad. When your criteria for success is narrow you blind yourself to realities that could easily result in the death of the planet. If that sounds to extreme, ask a Californian with a burned out house; a Kentuckian cleaning mud off their ceiling; a Bangladeshi farmer trying to keep her farm from washing into the Bay of Bengal. Powell's memo deserves a broader historical evaluation and hopefully a significant rebuttal. If it continues to guide the political process then humanity may just drown in the refuse of corporate success.
Agree. It needs to be published wider in its entirety. We don't usually rank Powell high enough in his influence on American history. Maybe his memo had more influence than any of his Supreme Court decisions.
Correct, his impact on the Supreme Court was minimal, but his influence through his memo on government, economy & society has been monstrous, essentially turning our erstwhile democracy into a corporatocracy.
Seeing that today’s Newsletter opens by naming 2 Senate Democrats who are among the highest recipients of corporate money, I wish mostly to amplify some of what everyday people have lost due to how these 2 Senators have voted in the past 8 to 10 months.
I start with the Senate’s failure, by 2 votes this past January, to pass the $1.75 trillion budget reconciliation climate and care economy package (negotiated down from the $3.75 trillion bill that had passed in the House in fall of 21), and underscore how the public-at-large was denied an extension of the child tax credit, affordable, quality childcare and universal Pre-K, investments in housing, in eldercare, in expanded ACA subsidies, in climate, and much more.
While the $4+ billion Inflation Reduction Act that received support, this past week, from all 50 Senate Democrats surely will contribute, despite some concessions, to helping make the transition from the fossil fuel industry to clean energy, most of the care economy piece that would have improved life for tens and tens of millions of working people, plus most of the tax reform provisions, were dropped.
Additionally, but for Manchin and Sinema, who, this past January, supported the federal voter protection bills that would have safeguarded our democracy and then, on a second vote, joined the 50 Senate Republicans to oppose an extremely modest change to the filibuster that eventually would have allowed for an up or down vote, GOP controlled State Legislatures would have been blocked from continuing to lay the groundwork for changing state election rules to change who can be in charge, how votes are counted, and how they’re certified.
If these 2 detailed iterative examples don’t mount a convincing case for moving towards getting dark money out of politics, I don’t know what would.
If we can truly get control of Congress maybe we can actually reinstate these things.
Paula, I just wrote a note to another subscriber that I believe is equally applicable here. Essentially, I think the security of this nation and its people, much less people everywhere, depend on a far more cooperative environment in which there is a modicum of social and economic justice for large numbers of people today who feel oppressed and marginalized by a runaway wild capitalism.
Couldn’t agree more.
That pipeline through West Virginia is part of the bill. They had to pay an equal amount to the fossil fuel industry for Manchin to sign it.
@CarbonCopy, I’m aware. Hence, my parenthetical “despite some concessions.”
Money broke our system of governance.
Full stop.
More Greed and the ability to get easy money. Imagine coming from some farming area/state to Washington and getting wined and dined and then told all you had to do was sign something and you got an envelope full of cash! Many thought it could be a one time deal until they saw what it took to keep a house there and back home. Remember most had kids in private schools too so it all added up. Back then the social scene was mandatory too! I am coming at this from a completely different angle then everyone else here. I can see how truly horrible it is now, but back then? I will say it could have and should have been controlled better. Now? It is pretty much accepted that once in office you do what they want, not for the people, or only around election time.
I knew something was wrong when sportscaster Roone Arledge was appointed run ABC news and People magazine appeared in supermarkets. I also recall when organized labor was ordered to sit in the corner when a Democrat-run Congress shot down common situs picketing in 77. I didn't know what it was until I heard Bill Moyers' address at the 40th anniversary of Public Citizen where he mentioned and described the Powell memo. Then it became clear. The Powell memo is a declaration of war and battle plan. He may have had benign goals when he wrote it, but the class war has gone and is going very well for the elite. Every plant closure and every stock buyback is an attack against us.
Gordon, you are very generous to ascribe benign goals to Powell! I suspect he knew very well what he was outlining.
As a preeminent business attorney, he knew he couldn't say "Here's how we seize control of the government". But maybe he meant no harm to the country. If so, the memo was circulated to CEOs, people who were very capable of harming people and the country.
Yes, unfortunately yes.
This is exactly why I keep saying that we need to go back to the Declaration of Independence as these criminals need to go for our very existence to continue! They have brought war to the planet and all its people! We don't need violence just a direct order from "We The People" demanding they turn themselves in to the nearest prison. Call it a "Citizens Arrest" if need be. When they refuse send in the military. They have made the whole system including laws to be used against us therefore those laws are not for the people by the people so the corporate police force is under their control, the military is not as it is obligated to to protect us "We The People" against a corrupt government. Also these criminals are not our government THEY ARE CRIMINALS!
Do you mean make a citizens’ arrest of Trump?
Well start with him and keep going.
This is so GOP! Imagine that anything that tries to keep capitalism in balance with other human needs (worker welfare, public safety, …), is an existential threat that must be stopped at all costs.
I think even grassroots Republicans reject it.
It’s a fallacy of inclusion. Baby kittens AND the Koch brothers like warm milk, eh?
"But most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining, consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and services provided the consumer."
Thanks to what resulted from this memo, we no longer have much beyond private ownership and profit. As Dr. Reich has documented, the end of anti-trust enforcement and the resulting corporate consolidation has perverted the market economy. As the founder of Whole Foods wrote a few years back, we now have a rigged "crony capitalism".
Excellent point. Thank for the contribution.
wow- that was a lot to ingest/digest the system isnt broken- its being built this way. the right time to do the right thing is right now- sadly, we are so distracted by just trying to fight over crumbs that we lose sight of the bigger picture. and trump and his minions are sucking all the oxygen out of the room.
This is what Elizabeth Warren has committed a career to battling--before and after her election to the Senate.
And the American people missed their golden chance for meaningful repair of this nation when they failed to elect her last election. I hope we get another chance next election
I fear we won't get another chance. The degree to which people who don't like her HATE HER is shocking. And they're a high-voting sector--not of Nazis, but of business people (and not just CEOs). We like her in MA where she's our Senator, but the farther away you get the more people can't stand her. Not just because she's a powerful woman (and a professor) who doesn't harp on her kids and grandkids, but because so many people do NOT think "the system is rigged," even when it's rigged against them.
She is tougher against giant corporations & their executives than anyone else, which is why they keep smearing her mercilessly. And in our corporatocracy, no entity is as powerful & influential as giant multinational corporations & their billionaire executives, which have organized the most sophisticated & well-funded propaganda machine in the US if not world. Too many people have fallen for their lies. Not Elizabeth Warren, but she is just 1 person as valiant & righteous as she is.
Yes! But I'm saying these billionaires aren't the only ones--they're defending their property, their interests, illicit as those interests are from a democratic or moral POV. But many people who are merely middle and upper-middle class also hate her, not because they're dupes of propaganda in any ordinary sense. It's worth thinking about those people, because there are lots more of them and they are informed, educated voters.
There are at least 2 factors in play. One is that they've been thoroughly brainwashed by the billionaire-funded propaganda. The other is that they (usually mistakenly) believe that rules, regulations & taxes Warren is advocating will personally affect them adversely at some point.
But where I live, among middle class, academic, politically aware environments, Warren is widely adored. So some of it may be regional: one sees or fails to see what the other side sees or doesn't see.
Hear Hear. Brief and consise.
Didn’t finish reading yet but a note on WV..my relatives worked in the coal mines there for many years. And many died from Black Lung Disease. Didn’t know about the pipe line. I will have to focus on this post. Chock full of info!!!
Thanks for including the entire memo. The Memo is a very carefully crarfted long range plan of attack on our "Government Of by and for the People" and well organised and carefully worded to be pointed with the monicur The American system to replace the more obvious Corperate America we have come to recognise as the entire government to the benefit of the Elite whose primary effort is to profit and control that alows them to continue to maintain control of it's greaest "asset" the working class, the one comodity that fuels their source of "wealth" and power. The original sin of greed exposed.
Yes! And it is an amazing piece of redefinition of concepts, how Corporatism was to overshadow citizenship as the greatest Power of America, and so much else. The "greatest "asset" the working class," as America grew, came to be seen as the owners of the farm, not the farm animals as Powell would have it.
"The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom." What bullshit, in truth it's the exact opposite. A wiser man once said "Never let companies get together or they will collude against the public interest."
Chilling, but interesting to note that there was all this talk about Communists, Marxists and socialists destroying American business. Even Milton Friedman was there in 1971.....and then came Reagan.
Sinema is a nauseating symbol of this corruption. If this nonsensical thinking is not thwarted it's the end of America, we'll go down faster than Rome.
However I find it encouraging that with only 50 seats in the Senate, some small semblance of sanity is beginning to emerge there. Just think what 53 seats may achieve.....
I think winning 53 Senate seats is achievable. There seems to be more doubt about the House, which leads me to this question. The House over the last few years it's been majority Democratic has passed a tremendous amount of progressive legislation that has just been sitting there waiting to be taken on by the Senate. Even if the House becomes majority Republican & no longer passes progressive legislation, can a majority Democratic Senate choose to consider proposals previously passed by the House? Is there a time limit?
What a classic piece of rhetoric! To take things that are softly defined, and manipulate them to show a predetermined outcome - that is rhetoric. Look to the terms!
Like Ralph Nader said on his book title "Unsafe at Any Speed". Powel wanted to defend the indefensible. Honor cannot be forced onto the Dishonorable, no matter how organized and powerful the attempts to do so.
Looks like Big Business wants to control the Schools, starting with high schools, then Colleges. I guess they want to indoctrinate and brainwash everyone and use the courts as a weapon. Looks like they are already at it. I never liked the Chamber of Commerce, because it seemed so obvious what it is about. If business has good policies and respect for the consumer and the environment, it would not need to 'attack' and 'be agressive' and essentially take over the textbook industry, schools and the law itself. Sadly, it seems that it actually has, with passage of Citizens United. We see the stacked court.
20-20 hindsite for too many of us Laurie. It's good to bring all this informatio forth to re-awaken us to what has been going on since before the Nixon debacle. Again I remind us all : The dangers of of allowing the "Industrioal-Military Complex" to become involved in government postulated by President Dwight D Eisenhower.
Ike was right.
Did Powell see it as an overt attempt at mind control, or was he merely brought to that plan by the fundamentals of his own beliefs?
Steve O'Cally ; Hard to know what is in someone's mind. But words like organized and aggressive, and the way he was throwing words like Socialist, Communist and even Fascist around, makes me wonder if he really appreciated the meanings of these words. Was he ever a worker in a large concern? Anyone in his family? Infiltrating the justice system and the administrations of Colleges seems pretty deliberate. He had an agenda.
Great Question. Enquiring Minds want to know. Nuff Said.