Populist Passion Is Antidote to Bankster Greed

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

By John Nichols

---snip---

Hightower has for almost three decades — since his election as Texas agriculture commissioner in the second year of the Reagan/Bush era — been America’s best-known and most ardent progressive populist.

Along the way, he has defended family farmers and factory workers, small-business owners and teachers, neglected rural communities, and inner cities from the ravages of the Wall Street speculators and their political handmaidens in Washington. During the farm crisis of the 1980s, it was Hightower who rallied activists across the country and forced Democrats to get serious about tackling the abuses of big agribusiness. That initiative spawned a renewed rural populism that produced a new generation of candidates in the Hightower mold: Minnesota’s Paul Wellstone, Wisconsin’s Ed Garvey, Iowa’s Tom Harkin. In the 1990s, he warned that trade agreements like NAFTA would devastate farm country and factory towns, and, like Wellstone and Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, he condemned not just the Republicans but Democrats like Bill Clinton for selling out America’s economic future.

Of course, Hightower was a critic of bailouts for Wall Street and, with Feingold, he was a critic of the so-called banking reform that Congress passed this summer. Of that legislation, Hightower observed: “The regulatory reforms were hailed by Democrats as possessing powerful cleansing power, while Republicans wailed that the new rules were overly caustic, imposing such a heavy-handed governmental scrub that the delicate layers of Wall Street innovation, competitiveness and profitability will be rubbed away. Meanwhile, the big bankers were grinning from ear to ear, for the bill requires no restructuring and decentralizing of the monopolistic grip that these giants have on America’s credit system. Thus, they still retain the power to rip off consumers, gamble with depositors’ money, haul in exorbitant profits and pay themselves ungodly bonuses — all while remaining ‘too big to fail.’ ” . . . .

Source: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/08/30-2

[RandomThoughts]

1. Capitalism has many forms.

Tostitos chips, they saw a market, many types of ways people like to dip chips, so they answered that demand with many shapes of chips. That is how Capitalism is suppose to work.

There use to be vanilla, Chocholate, and neopolitan ice cream, and that was about it. Then Basket and Robins came out with many flavors, then Bryers, Dryers, and Ben and Jerrys also came out with many flavors, each answering some demand people had. And creating it a bit with advertisement.

But the point is if there was 'copywrite' of concept of icecream flavors, or if one group owned all the icecream, why would they add flavors, or why even make quality ice cream.


The bankers were so in it for profit, there customers really don't matter, and from that they would have failed. And because they are in monopoly mode, they don't make products for customers, they make products that can make money for them with layers of complexity to hide the skimming.


The banks should have failed if you believe in Capitalism. Even if it took down the system. However if it was propped up by a bail out, then the system should still be dismantled in the same way it would have been without that infusion.

And Shareholders should have lost, not tax payers and retirees, because they are the ones that allowed CEOs to make those decisions.


So really the truth is, as I defend government by representation by the people, with regulatory powers, against the Republican Ideas, it is not against Capitalism, but because we don't have anything like Capitalism right now anyways.


Besides Capitalism when it sets direction needs more demand then production, if production is above demand, it goes all screwy trying to create profitable demand. False scarcity, stopping production, consumerism, planned obsolescence. Stuff like that.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

2. Some enlightening commentary...

...appended to this story at commondreams.org:

By poster Redwriteman:

HERE IS REASON FOR OPTIMISM:

The American public IS coming around, not withstanding the regional and idealogical pockets of fear, loathing, intolerance, and greed.

We have been in this position before in our past, and history is instructive here.

The 2008 election represented a victory for Progressivism. Now of course we did not get progressivism, but the majority voted for it. Point is, the battle for ideas has already been won. Now we are in the battle for implementation of progressivism. Obviously, we won't win that battle with the Democrats.

Those of us my age or older knew that Ronald Reagan, and the economic philisophy he brought with him would be the makings of a future disaster. We did not need to be oracles to know that. We just had to possess basic knowledge of human nature, history, math, and logic. Those to me are 4 of the 5 basic tenets of Progressives, the 5th being compassion.

But the American people had to experience 5 steps of evolution since Reagan.

STEP ONE: The experience with supply-side economics, trickle-down, Reaganomics, or whatever the hell you want to call it. From FDR to Jimmy Carter, despite flaws and imperfections, the basic tenets of the NEW DEAL were protected by most politicians. The orchestrated events of the late 70s gave the oligarchs their chance to begin the accelerated dismantling of it.

I personally remember arguing with my fellow factory workers (back when we had factories) over the economic policies of the day. Back then, I was more or less a lone voice in the wilderness while my less informed co-workers embraced "Reaganomics". Its the old "Whats A Matter With Kansas" conflict on how people can be tricked to vote against their own interests.

STEP TWO: The American people by and large, after too many bad experiences with supply-side economics, finally rejected them entirely in 2006 and 2008. This needed to happen: The rejection in the popular mind of a fraudulent economic system.

STEP THREE: The realization of Americans that we live in a two-party duopoly. American Voted for Progressivism, but got the Corporatists that ARE the Democratic Party. Those of us here in the well-informed progressive universe knew this for years. For me, it started with Clinton's support of NAFTA. But the American people by and large maintained hope and faith, however naive, that the Democrats were "Progressive". Finally most people are recognizing Dems for the frauds they are.

STEP FOUR: Dispair and Dissallusionment. There is a silver lining in this. In the past political environments, the American people have switched back and forth. One party in favor, the other out of favor. The party out of power was looked at as the ones that could make things better.

But for the FIRST TIME IN MY LIFETIME, there is near universal scorn for both parties AT THE SAME TIME. This has never been a majority view in my memory (and I am old).

The Republicans will win the mid-terms and maybe even the WH in 2012, but not because of their popularity. They always could count on the oligarchs and the crazies, but they are the minority. What will win it for them is the 2006 & 2008 former Democratic voters who will stay home.

The Important Point is that for Progressivism to succeed, there had to be a mass rejection of Democrats. This is the only way forward. The good news is its happened.

STEP FIVE: It may seem that we now live in a time when the oligarchs are ascendant, and its hopeless for the rest of us. But as I said, even looking at things from 1980, we had to reach this point before there can be progress.

Despair is never permanent. Sooner or later, positive action will result. What will make that happen is continued economic degradation of the country.

It won't be easy and we will experience much suffering. Just as in the last progressive revolution, there will have to be a calamity like the Great Depression.

Some of you in posts to other articles despair that the American Public never seems to be "Roused to Action". Why haven't they grabbed their pitchforks and torches by now? When will they storm the Bastille?

Again, history is instructive. We haven't yet sunk as low as other parts of the world where revolutions happened.

Others look longingly at Europe, especially at Greece and France, when governments there try to impose "austerity" measures. One has to remember that the people are taking to the streets to KEEP what they have.

That is why the oligarchs in this country do not want to see any more "entitlements" like Universal Health Care. Once people get an entitlement guaranteed by government, they will fight to keep it. We are no exception.

Medicare and Social Security are prime examples. Neither of those programs, despite the efforts of the oligarchy, have been effectively reduced.

A word about 3rd parties: They are coming. They are coming, because the main obstacle to them has been removed. That obstacle was the belief in most Americans that one party or the other had the answers. That perception is now destroyed.

Now the two-party duopoly will do everything it can to keep "outsider parties" out. They will use legal, legislative, and ELECTRONIC means to keep power. But they lost the people. They are not really for the people themselves, but in the past they kept the electorate fooled into continuing to support them.

All the steps I outlined earlier happened the way I thought they would back in the 1980s. They did not happen because I am some sort of prophet. It was just a clear-headed look at history, human nature, and logic. The script I envisioned is still intact.

To those of you who doubt this, I invite you to look into your crystal balls and say what you THINK will happen in the next two decades (leave your idealogy in the closet and put on your betting hat). I welcome debate on this.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

3. And responding to the above post of Redwriteman...

...poster, Stanley:

Jennifer and I would love to share that optimism but people in this country are nothing like the Europeans. They'll take to the streets to preserve the status quo with the media giving them more spotlight on things like Tea Party rallies, anti-abortion marches, pro-NRA marches, pro-war rallies, etc... but even when progressive causes such as millions protesting the war in Iraq in Washington become reality, the media sees to it that such is ignored. The vast majority of us may be sick and tired of the duopoly taking us for granted and capitalizing on the fixed system but the will of the people goes largely ignored and the corporate fascists win. Ironically, when any corporation goes good, suddenly government arrests them and citizens decry them as "anti-patriotic" just like it happened to Qwest when they refused to play by the Bush White House rules on interception. Third parties are already there but are stifled by the system on all levels. Maybe they'll make it in a decade or two but that is a long ways off and we must make sure that they rise to power without being like the Republican and Democratic parties. Furthermore, the Republican and Democratic parties will do their best to retain support and win back support if they find themselves losing to whatever third party(ies) is/are running against them if their fixed system doesn't keep them out. The future is uncertain.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

4. and then answering Stanley...

...poster Redwriteman:

Stanley, re-read my earlier posts. What I said was that we as a nation may have to experience a Great Depression-like calamity before any real change can happen.

What I was pointing out is that when we sink to that level, then the impotency of the two party duopoly becomes apparant.

Back in 1932, the Democrats, for all their past faults, came through, albeit not perfectly, for the American people (lead by FDR). Go back in history prior to the 1929 crash, we had the same media landscape, the same concentration of wealth, the same apparent apathy of the citizenry. True, the media wasn't as concentrated and monopolized, but it was just as uniformally right wing. Progressive publications were suppressed and mostly driven underground. They did not get above the ground until the Depression was in full swing.

Point is, there will be a "Peter Finch Network Moment" that will push the citizenry into popular rebellion (either by ballots or bullets). As I keep repeating, we are not at that point. But we are hell-bent as a nation to reach that point. The corporatocracy cannot prevent it. They can only delay it.

If there is a mistake by the oligarchy, they defanged their ability to manufacture a faux economic recovery. In past economic cycles, recoveries were driven by manufacturing. The oligarchs could always count on cyclical recoveries to pacify the masses. Since NAFTA, and all those other free-trade agreements, manufacturing has been effectively wiped out in the USA. There are not enough jobs in the National Security State or service industries that can fuel even an illusionary recovery.

Stanley, your post suggesting that Americans are too pre-occupied, propagandized, and compliant to effect any real change does not hold merit. A progressive voting revolution HAS ALREADY HAPPENED. Before 2008, we never had a progressive voting majority in my lifetime.

Now, mind you, we did not get progressives in office, as the system is rigged. So there is a lot of sulking, apathy, and dissallusionment right now.

As I said earlier, the only possible road to a progressive country had to get to the current state of things before people become energized in the right way.

The back and forth pendulum that defined our politics until now will not continue, because the regular economic cycles of recessions and recoveries are now vastly different.

I always knew it would take a Depression-live economic calamity for us to move forward as a country. I've known it for 30 years (call me Will Geer on the Waltons front porch dispensing folksy wisdom).

History is a dual universe. On one hand history never repeats itself, but on real substance it Always repeats itself. So far, I have not seen anything that alters my belief that it will get a lot darker before the dawn. The good news is there will be a dawn.