I am generally an FDR New Deal liberal, a fan of Henry Wallace, and can be persuaded to moving further left, as I have over the course of my adult life.
I wonder why that causes many in my Democratic Party to proclaim me to be a far left radical? I'm not. I just believe in what's right, decent, and fair. I really think the New Deal, if proposed today, would be opposed by a majority of "Democrats". Social Security, imperfect as it is, would not pass.
All of us lifelong, loyal petit-bourgoise Ken Galbraith, Henry Wallace Democrats (as our reactionary, racist yuppie/ PMC betters were calling themselves, revolutionaries, socialists, progressives...) as they gentrified blue collar "minorities" out of red-lined homes & bulldozed Black business districts now declare us radical, alt-left, Antifa, Rooski-bot anarchists (working, re-re-reinfected with PASC organ damage, onto our 7th decade, awaiting evictions or strokes?)
My 3rd attempt. Keep getting dumped by the server (trying to reply, intermittently at work). The class-based disparity in perception, between proles & Creative Class™ precludes adequate cross references. We'd been taught to educate ourselves in vernacular, usage, syntax, euphemism & tropes, peculiar to yuppies; or forever languish amidst fellow red-lined "essentials" and death-of-disparity deplorables? If we didn't adopt our landlord, boss or creditor's perspective & recite their incantations verbatim, with a non-threatening smile; we'd be "left behind." It was our job, to convince ourselves, whatever our betters were doing TO us, to upwardly redistribute our "value" over four decades, would give us an advantage over the other untermenschen being fed to FIRE & PhARMA Sectors, by our former party; that liberals would liquidate savings, homes, labor (& kids, to MICIMATT) in as painless a manner as was convenient or consistent with plausible deniability? I apologize for use of acronyms & jargon, like Ehrenreich's "PMC," but have seen your commentariat utilize these to cut verbiage?
> If we didn't adopt our landlord, boss or creditor's perspective & recite their incantations verbatim, with a non-threatening smile; we'd be "left behind."
Agree. There's a lot of "left behind" happening these days. Weird times indeed.
Biden is the appeaser and collaborator - far worse than 'Peace in our time' Chamberlain. Cataclysmically worse for we approach the irreversible Event Horizon. Bidens' victory will tranquilize the middle class.
I wrote what follows in response to Newsweek Opinion piece of 6/30/23: "Biden Won't Pack the Supreme Court, and It's Killing Democracy" by DAVID FARIS, ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY.
The 18th century Common Law definition of bribery is precisely mirrored in Kagan's Mother's Day rejection of a gift of lox & bagels from her high school classmates. As a public official or candidate it is illegal (under the actual Constitution) to accept or ask for anything value and likewise for a person to offer any gift. Specious Precedents from '76 Valeo through '17 McDonnell have legalized unbounded corruption. This metered transition from a reasonably representative 2 Party democracy to near total domination of Federal and State elections of both Republicans and Democrats by corporate "speech" in Primaries and the General election has effected the merger of State and corporate power that Mussolini defined as fascism. It is however a unique variant in that corporations, rather than a demagogue, seized power. Bernie 2016 represented the 1st threat to this paradigm. The DNC came through for their donor-owners with brutal and open rigging of the Primaries to eliminate Bernie. This created a path for Trump. Trump brought white supremacy, stochastic violence, de-humanization of Muslims and immigrants into the foreground. The 2024 Republican Primary is shaping up to be a contest between those who would be fuhrer. I suggest that the corporate interests will not tolerate a fuhrer. Arguably the appeaser Biden is the favorite son of corporate fascism. His dark $s exceeded Trump's in 2020. Neither is capable of addressing Climate Change at scale.
The above observations are embedded in the larger framework of normalized corruption.
As dark corporate money drives the super majority of Federal and State elections in both Parties, it is unsurprising that the 2 Parties have worked in harmony - largely adhering to a ratchet and pawl mechanism. The bad cop R Party would ratchets up the stresses on the body politic. The good cop D Party serves as the pawl to block any stress relief.
The determined failure of Obama's 2009-2010 supermajority Congress to pass any democratic legislation (ObamaCare = degraded RomneyCare was a rare positive - but far short of Hoped for Change); demanded a strategic refinement. The D Party implemented a Federal 'lose or win small' policy.
The next time the good cop Ds had a House majority was 2019. Ds had a 35 Member majority. Pelosi handled it 'brilliantly'. The still small number of un-bought progressives would add excellent long-needed Amendments and the D's in the House would pass it. McConnell would strip every progressive bit from the bill, the R Senate pass it and return it to the House. Pelosi would schedule it for an immediate vote and the R's plus blue-dogs would pass it. Not once did Pelosi call for a conference committee. Not once was any pressure applied to modify time critical bills. There was much kayfabe from D 'leadership' - but no wrestling match.
Biden's 2020 election illustrates the finesse that the DNC has developed in 'win small'. They knew that Biden had to win the popular vote by a strong majority in clean and un-contestable Nov. elections - which would of course be violently contested (perhaps they did not fathom how violently). The DNC achieved all of that for Biden while also managing to lose 22 House seats. (I trust that the 'Biden district' R Members, fearing defeat in a Blue District, will continue to reject the most rabid proposals of the lunies; to give some weight to the well-being of the voters in their districts.)
Unfortunately survival of voters and progeny is very much on the table. And we have no firm idea how small the table actually is. Risk analysis, in conjunction with the problem solving mindset required of a Ph'D in theoretical physics, means I approach Climate on a "what must be done" basis as opposed to the pragmatic defeatism of "what's the best we could do". The result is 1) 200 times the investment originally proposed in BBB, Build Back Better. And 2) A UBI funded by a CO2e tax (augmented by satellite localization and quantification of CH4 leaks) that simply inverts the frackers 'carbon capture' proposals to immediately crush all US Fracking and Tar Sands oil. Which is obviously impossible - which is just perfect. For Mohammed Ali teaches us that "Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they've been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary. Impossible is nothing."
Occam's razor cuts through to the heart of the problem. The wildly unconstitutional Precedents of the Supremes must be reversed. Exactly how do we do that when they have by '17 McDonnell protected themselves from any consequences of corruption short of addlepated Quid Pro Quo? Well they've forgotten that they are sworn to support the Constitution. [If they had even a vague recollection of that Oath they'd recall that State legislators are sworn to both State and Federal Constitutions and the ISL conceit in Moore v Harper was injusticible.]
What does the Constitution say? Article 3 Section 1: "Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour". The contrapositive of that statement holds with exactly the same force: Judges shall lose their Offices by bad Behaviour. This is simply a hiring and firing decision. As it only requires 51 Senators to hire them, 51 can fire them. As creating or honoring unconstitutional Precedents is destructive, we reset the entire Judiciary and replace them with people who embrace the Amended Constitution and recognize that it is converging on the aspirational preamble to the Declaration that we celebrate today:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
Outstanding article; great links.
I am generally an FDR New Deal liberal, a fan of Henry Wallace, and can be persuaded to moving further left, as I have over the course of my adult life.
I wonder why that causes many in my Democratic Party to proclaim me to be a far left radical? I'm not. I just believe in what's right, decent, and fair. I really think the New Deal, if proposed today, would be opposed by a majority of "Democrats". Social Security, imperfect as it is, would not pass.
> I really think the New Deal, if proposed today, would be opposed by a majority of "Democrats". Social Security, imperfect as it is, would not pass.
Quite troubling. Quite possibly true.
Thomas
All of us lifelong, loyal petit-bourgoise Ken Galbraith, Henry Wallace Democrats (as our reactionary, racist yuppie/ PMC betters were calling themselves, revolutionaries, socialists, progressives...) as they gentrified blue collar "minorities" out of red-lined homes & bulldozed Black business districts now declare us radical, alt-left, Antifa, Rooski-bot anarchists (working, re-re-reinfected with PASC organ damage, onto our 7th decade, awaiting evictions or strokes?)
Can you restate this, BeliTsari? I got lost in the prose. Thanks.
Thomas
My 3rd attempt. Keep getting dumped by the server (trying to reply, intermittently at work). The class-based disparity in perception, between proles & Creative Class™ precludes adequate cross references. We'd been taught to educate ourselves in vernacular, usage, syntax, euphemism & tropes, peculiar to yuppies; or forever languish amidst fellow red-lined "essentials" and death-of-disparity deplorables? If we didn't adopt our landlord, boss or creditor's perspective & recite their incantations verbatim, with a non-threatening smile; we'd be "left behind." It was our job, to convince ourselves, whatever our betters were doing TO us, to upwardly redistribute our "value" over four decades, would give us an advantage over the other untermenschen being fed to FIRE & PhARMA Sectors, by our former party; that liberals would liquidate savings, homes, labor (& kids, to MICIMATT) in as painless a manner as was convenient or consistent with plausible deniability? I apologize for use of acronyms & jargon, like Ehrenreich's "PMC," but have seen your commentariat utilize these to cut verbiage?
> If we didn't adopt our landlord, boss or creditor's perspective & recite their incantations verbatim, with a non-threatening smile; we'd be "left behind."
Agree. There's a lot of "left behind" happening these days. Weird times indeed.
https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/presidents-keep-hiring-elliott-abrams?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=132930615&isFreemail=false&utm_medium=email
Because nothing screams "human rights!" like hiring Elliott Abrams.
Thanks, Feral. I'll use this in the next Links post.
Thomas
Biden is the appeaser and collaborator - far worse than 'Peace in our time' Chamberlain. Cataclysmically worse for we approach the irreversible Event Horizon. Bidens' victory will tranquilize the middle class.
I wrote what follows in response to Newsweek Opinion piece of 6/30/23: "Biden Won't Pack the Supreme Court, and It's Killing Democracy" by DAVID FARIS, ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY.
The 18th century Common Law definition of bribery is precisely mirrored in Kagan's Mother's Day rejection of a gift of lox & bagels from her high school classmates. As a public official or candidate it is illegal (under the actual Constitution) to accept or ask for anything value and likewise for a person to offer any gift. Specious Precedents from '76 Valeo through '17 McDonnell have legalized unbounded corruption. This metered transition from a reasonably representative 2 Party democracy to near total domination of Federal and State elections of both Republicans and Democrats by corporate "speech" in Primaries and the General election has effected the merger of State and corporate power that Mussolini defined as fascism. It is however a unique variant in that corporations, rather than a demagogue, seized power. Bernie 2016 represented the 1st threat to this paradigm. The DNC came through for their donor-owners with brutal and open rigging of the Primaries to eliminate Bernie. This created a path for Trump. Trump brought white supremacy, stochastic violence, de-humanization of Muslims and immigrants into the foreground. The 2024 Republican Primary is shaping up to be a contest between those who would be fuhrer. I suggest that the corporate interests will not tolerate a fuhrer. Arguably the appeaser Biden is the favorite son of corporate fascism. His dark $s exceeded Trump's in 2020. Neither is capable of addressing Climate Change at scale.
The above observations are embedded in the larger framework of normalized corruption.
As dark corporate money drives the super majority of Federal and State elections in both Parties, it is unsurprising that the 2 Parties have worked in harmony - largely adhering to a ratchet and pawl mechanism. The bad cop R Party would ratchets up the stresses on the body politic. The good cop D Party serves as the pawl to block any stress relief.
The determined failure of Obama's 2009-2010 supermajority Congress to pass any democratic legislation (ObamaCare = degraded RomneyCare was a rare positive - but far short of Hoped for Change); demanded a strategic refinement. The D Party implemented a Federal 'lose or win small' policy.
The next time the good cop Ds had a House majority was 2019. Ds had a 35 Member majority. Pelosi handled it 'brilliantly'. The still small number of un-bought progressives would add excellent long-needed Amendments and the D's in the House would pass it. McConnell would strip every progressive bit from the bill, the R Senate pass it and return it to the House. Pelosi would schedule it for an immediate vote and the R's plus blue-dogs would pass it. Not once did Pelosi call for a conference committee. Not once was any pressure applied to modify time critical bills. There was much kayfabe from D 'leadership' - but no wrestling match.
Biden's 2020 election illustrates the finesse that the DNC has developed in 'win small'. They knew that Biden had to win the popular vote by a strong majority in clean and un-contestable Nov. elections - which would of course be violently contested (perhaps they did not fathom how violently). The DNC achieved all of that for Biden while also managing to lose 22 House seats. (I trust that the 'Biden district' R Members, fearing defeat in a Blue District, will continue to reject the most rabid proposals of the lunies; to give some weight to the well-being of the voters in their districts.)
Unfortunately survival of voters and progeny is very much on the table. And we have no firm idea how small the table actually is. Risk analysis, in conjunction with the problem solving mindset required of a Ph'D in theoretical physics, means I approach Climate on a "what must be done" basis as opposed to the pragmatic defeatism of "what's the best we could do". The result is 1) 200 times the investment originally proposed in BBB, Build Back Better. And 2) A UBI funded by a CO2e tax (augmented by satellite localization and quantification of CH4 leaks) that simply inverts the frackers 'carbon capture' proposals to immediately crush all US Fracking and Tar Sands oil. Which is obviously impossible - which is just perfect. For Mohammed Ali teaches us that "Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they've been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary. Impossible is nothing."
Occam's razor cuts through to the heart of the problem. The wildly unconstitutional Precedents of the Supremes must be reversed. Exactly how do we do that when they have by '17 McDonnell protected themselves from any consequences of corruption short of addlepated Quid Pro Quo? Well they've forgotten that they are sworn to support the Constitution. [If they had even a vague recollection of that Oath they'd recall that State legislators are sworn to both State and Federal Constitutions and the ISL conceit in Moore v Harper was injusticible.]
What does the Constitution say? Article 3 Section 1: "Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour". The contrapositive of that statement holds with exactly the same force: Judges shall lose their Offices by bad Behaviour. This is simply a hiring and firing decision. As it only requires 51 Senators to hire them, 51 can fire them. As creating or honoring unconstitutional Precedents is destructive, we reset the entire Judiciary and replace them with people who embrace the Amended Constitution and recognize that it is converging on the aspirational preamble to the Declaration that we celebrate today:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
Enough for now,
Tom Wells TomWellsForCongress.com FL CD3 352-514-5467
A very thoughtful read. Thanks, Tom.
Thomas