How to Save American Capitalism, in 809 Words

[unhappycamper]

How to Save American Capitalism, in 809 Words
by Ted Rall
Published on Sunday, October 10, 2010 by CommonDreams.org

~snip~

If I were Obama, my first act would be to shut down the banking system and securities markets for a week or two. Why? To prevent the capital flight that might follow what comes next. I'd announce that any attempt to transfer money or securities overseas during this period would be prosecuted as an act of treason.

Next I'd order an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops, contractors and sub-contractors from Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti, and all foreign military bases around the world. We're an overextended empire inviting blowback all over the place. No more.

It would be moral. The world would be happy. It would make us safer. However, my primary motivation would be to stop chucking hundreds of billions down the military rathole while Americans are losing their jobs and their homes. $4 to $6 billion a week on Afghanistan and Iraq alone. Can anyone explain why we still have thousands of soldiers in the DMZ between the two Koreas? Or in Okinawa? Bring the 600,000-plus men and women in uniform, and the millions of support personnel who aren't, home.

Obama doesn't need congressional approval. He can bring the troops home by executive order.

Next up: nationalizations. "Tough on crime" shouldn't be limited to individual citizens. Rob a 7-Eleven and you go to prison for many years. If it's your third felony, for life. You lose everything. Companies deemed "too big to fail," many of which are run by criminals whose monstrous deeds make Charles Manson look like a piker, should get the same treatment or worse.

[HughBeaumont]

1. K & R.

Not like it's ever going to happen in Surveillance State UHmerica.

Capitalisn't will eat itself.

[bherrera]

2. Very impractical proposal

This is the reason why people who write for Common Dreams do not win elections. They write childish prose intendend to make their readers happy. Most of what they write lacks pragmatism or can be achieved. And this is why they remain a small minority. We Spanish Socialists have a much better approach, we have decided communism, nationalizations, and all that are senseless, and have negative impact on society. And we win elections. You can't. :-)

[chillspike]

3. Capitalism will phase itself entirely out

when the robots come.

[rug]

4. One word: why?

[blindpig]

5. Good luck....

War and war preparation are gold mines of capitalism, this 'solution' would just change the winners and losers among the capitalists. While it surely would be better if this murderous nonproductive aspect of capitalism were suppressed I expect that it is too profitable and powerful to be supplanted within the capitalist system. And why should we want to save American Capitalism anyway?

[bherrera]

10. War is not unique to capitalism

The Killing Fields of Camboya

"The Killing Fields were a number of sites in Cambodia where large numbers of people were killed and buried by the Khmer Rouge regime, during its rule of the country from 1975 to 1979, immediately after the end of the Vietnam War.

At least 200,000 people were executed by the Khmer Rouge<1>. Analysis of 309 mass grave sites by the DC-Cam Mapping Program and Yale University indicate at least 1,386,734 victims.<2><3> Estimates of the total number of deaths resulting from Khmer Rouge policies, including disease and starvation, range from 1.4 to 2.2 million out of a population of around 7 million.<4> In 1979, communist Vietnam invaded Democratic Kampuchea and toppled the Khmer Rouge regime."

Soviet Union Invasion of Poland

"The 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland was a Soviet military operation that started without a formal declaration of war on 17 September 1939, during the early stages of World War II. Sixteen days after Nazi Germany invaded Poland from the west, the Soviet Union did so from the east. The invasion ended on 6 October 1939 with the division and annexing of the whole of the Second Polish Republic by Germany and the Soviet Union.<5>

In early 1939, the Soviet Union entered into negotiations with the United Kingdom, France, Poland, and Romania to establish an alliance against Nazi Germany. The negotiations failed when the Soviet Union insisted that Poland and Romania give Soviet troops transit rights through their territory as part of a collective security agreement.<7> The failure of those negotiations led the Soviet Union to conclude the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Nazi Germany on 23 August."

China-Vietnam War

"The Sino–Vietnamese War, also known as the Third Indochina War.....was a brief but bloody border war fought in 1979 between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The PRC launched the offensive in response to Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia, which ended the reign of the PRC-backed Khmer Rouge."

Soviet Repression and terror in Turkmenistan

"In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin made harsh and sweeping changes throughout the USSR. Private property was seized, and the Soviet government used brutal methods to punish opposition. These policies sparked a rebellion in Turkmenistan, and in 1927 the Soviets lost control of the republic to a national resistance movement called the Turkmen Freedom.

After reclaiming the Turkmen SSR in 1932, Stalin executed thousands of Turkmenistan's Communist leaders—including the president and the premier—whom he accused of helping the nationalists. After the terror of the 1930s, the Communist regime in Ashkhabad became completely obedient to the central Soviet government in Moscow."

Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan

"The Soviet War in Afghanistan was an almost ten-year conflict involving the Soviet Union, supporting the Marxist-Leninist government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan at their own request against the Mujahideen Resistance when on December 27, 1979, 700 Soviet troops dressed in Afghan uniforms, including KGB and GRU special force officers from the Alpha Group and Zenith Group, occupied major governmental, military and media buildings in Kabul, including their primary target—the Tajbeg Presidential Palace. The mujahideen found other support from a variety of sources including the United States, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt and other Muslim nations through the context of the Cold War.

The initial Soviet deployment of the 40th Army in Afghanistan began on December 24, 1979 under Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev.<5> The final troop withdrawal started on May 15, 1988, and ended on February 15, 1989 under the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Due to the interminable nature of the war and the damage it is perceived to have caused the USSR's international standing and military morale, the conflict in Afghanistan has sometimes been referred to as the Soviet Union's Vietnam War.<6>"

[blindpig]

11. Certainly not...

But Capitalists like it plenty because it is so profitable and solves other problem for them besides.

As for your fractured history lesson please note:

The Khmer Rouge was toppled by the Communist{/b] Vietnamese.

The Soviet Union did not invade Afghanistan, it's troop deployments were an extremely reluctantly response to calls for aid from a fellow socialist country. It should be noted that Socialist Afghanistan was a progressive state and that US involvement set the whole train wreck in motion, a tragedy for the people of Afghanistan.

[bherrera]

12. Interesting distortion of history

Communists seem to like war just as much if not more than capitalists...

The Soviet Union did invade Afghanistan, the "call for aid" was made by a traitor. The people of Afghanistan defeated the invasion, and this was one of the reasons why the Soviet Union fell, it was recognized by the people to be an evil imperial regime.

[blindpig]

14. Wow

[Starry Messenger]

6. Why would he want to save it?

Even if you throttle it with the disciplines that Ted is proposing, it just comes roaring back like kudzu on meth.

[The_Commonist]

7. If I were Obama, I would do the same thing!

And the next day I and my lovely wife and my children would be found with bullet holes in our heads.
But it would be worth it!

[maryf]

8. How about how to save the American people?

and cover their needs, housing, health care, etc.. The steps would be the same...ending occupations would help a lot, and if we weren't worried about saving capitalism, the profit concerns wouldn't be there...

[Blue_Tires]

9. makes too much sense to work...

[crazyjoe]

13. what if the person robbing the 7-eleven just needs food for his children?

[Javaman]

16. I made that same comment in my long winded reply...

I found the original article lacking in reality in many ways.

I said as much in my reply on the site.

Below you will see a copy of my reply.

[Javaman]

15. My response to the writer of the article...

While that is all well and good...

Doing all what you wrote, all at one time, would basically cause a world wide depression.

Shutting down the banking system for 2 weeks would kill this nation. Right now, companies and people are just starting to get loans. Shutting them down now would kill us economically and would give the rich a holiday as they would continue to collect interest on their money.

How do you consider it treason for someone to transfer money? We already have laws on the books that prevent the transfer of moneys during the time of emergency. So if you consider it treason, would you then hang the perpetrators?

This is why things have to be done in steps.

Due to everything now being connected globally, if we do one thing here, it effects several things there.

This was part of the plan of the globalized economy put down after WWII. This was to work as a check and balance to guard against a world wide depression.

If one area did bad another would do well thus balancing the over all picture.

What they didn't count on was massive deregulation by the biggest player in the game: us.

When we stopped "playing by the rules" the doors were flung open for corruption and graft. aka the mortgage industry gaming the system resulting in a massive housing collapse.

While I'm not a fan of globalization, it's what we got and have to deal with it.

You wrote: "Jail the executives. Seize their personal assets. And nationalize their companies.

Citigroup alone is worth $14 trillion. That should pay for some extensions of unemployment benefits."

What of the thousands of people who work for those same companies? SOL for them? This would cause massive unemployment.

"Oh, and let's put an end to the insanity of home foreclosures. Not only do evictions speed downward mobility, empty houses ruin neighborhoods. If you can't pay your mortgage or rent because you lost your job, don't worry--we'll work out a solution."

Bank of America has halted all foreclosures in all 50 states.

Again, you wrote: "Let's rehab the 20 million abandoned homes nationwide so that the world's richest nation can finally house its homeless. Let's repair and update long-neglected infrastructure."

While I agree that we need to house the homeless, where is that money coming from?

While everything you suggest is a little extreme, a middle ground can be found. The people thrown out of work by your suggestions, could be retained to work in the infrastructure "field". But again, that would also take a huge infusion of money and there would be a lag time before they are up to speed.

While pulling the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan would be a wonderful thing, pulling troops from all our bases abroad in one full stroke would kill many a foreign economies who depend on those bases for income, but would also kill us because having a huge standing army at home that was suddenly decommissioned. It would cause all sorts of 1) societal problems 2) economic problems and 3) employment problems.

We have 30,000 soldiers as part of our joint agreement as allies with the South Koreans. Or do you suggest that we stop honoring our treaties and agreements?

This is why this type of "program" needs to be "phased in".

While ordering contractors to stop working where ever, would basically be illegal, the stopping of those same contractors from working overseas would cause a huge rift in our economy. While I don't particularly like those contractors, many of them are American citizens and send their pay home. Bringing those contractors home would cause an additional rise in unemployment as well as economic problems.

If someone robs a 7-eleven for a loaf of bread to feed his family, he should go to prison for many years for a minor crime? (I guess you don't read the classics) This is like putting someone in prison for possession of a joint for many years. Oh wait, we already do that.

And you don't believe in rehabilitation? The prisons, which are already over crowded with get that much more crowded, plus it costs about roughly between 20 and 35k per year, depending on the state, to house a single prisoner.

"Companies deemed "too big to fail," many of which are run by criminals whose monstrous deeds make Charles Manson look like a piker, should get the same treatment or worse."

While I have no issue with this statement I do have issue with the last part. You are okay with torture? You allude to it as much.

"Let's stop pretending we're poor. All we need to do to save ourselves is unlock the wealth being hoarded by corporate pigs."

Let me clue you in on something, we are poor. We have a massive debt. Wait, let me say that again, A MASSIVE DEBT (and still growing), thanks to trickle down republican stupidity, which won't be paid off for the foreseeable next 3 generations. 50% of all our income goes to the military. Only a small percentage, as compared to the military budget, goes to infrastructure. Until those to percentages are flip flopped, nothing will change.

Our economy is now based solely on the military industrial complex and trying to pry those two apart will be a great feat of strength.

While I like a little rhetoric now and then, it's good for the blood, reality is what I usually prefer to exhibit in the end.

All of the things you propose are indeed possible, but to do them all at once would kill us and the world.

But then again, maybe that's what you want? Or you have been watching to many of those "make over" shows, where they bulldoze a house and build a brand new one!

Until the repubs get a clue and start actually doing something other than just saying, "NO!", we as a nation will continue to stagnate. Because while we Dems enjoy the claim that we hold a "majority" in the senate, the blue dogs, on their own, do enough to prevent that.

Until the tea party morons wake up and realize how they are being taken for a corporate funded ride, we will continue to hear their din of stupidity, that does nothing more than cause distraction from important issues.

We as a nation have long ago stopped requiring accountability from our elected reps. We just go with the flow and feel perfectly okay with complaining about "all politicians are corrupt" and other than a few protests for or against, we roll over and have our bellies rubbed by them.

Since Madison Ave took over political process and electronic voting took over our voice, nothing will change until we as a nation, stand up, pull the scales from our eyes and demand accountability and nothing less.

Writing, "know-it-all" screeds serves nothing. Your "solutions" are pie in the eye ridiculousness with out any real world answers.

Sure we would all love for those things to happen, per say, but the reality of their implication would leave us far worse off.

Reactionary solutions is what got us into the fix we are in now.

What we need are real answers, not angry bullshit. That's no better than the tea party morons.

[bherrera]

17. I don't think the guy has the ability to read such a long message

This guy doesn't understand how a modern society works. Clearly the educational response should be shorter, designed for a young person with impulsive thoughts, and short attention span.

[Bigmack]

19. Are there any "real answers" at this point?

I carefully read your post, and I am following the many parts of this world financial disaster, and I can see no "real answers" anywhere. None of the key players are going to do what is rational. From the Teabaggers to the Russian oligarchs, people are caught up in their own world view, to the complete exclusion of every other world view.

The Wall Street boys aren't going to give up their money and power... any part of it... willingly. The idealogues sure as hell aren't going to modify their beliefs.

I think there is going to be profound changes brought on by profound financial disasters. I don't know what's going to happen, but I doubt if the outcome will be anything planned... any more than the Dark Ages were planned.

Gloom and Doom looks wildly enthusiastic to me right now.

[Javaman]

21. real answers or non-answers serve no one other than the author.

There are real answers out there, but the way to get to them is not placating the lowest common denominator.

Until we all hold ourselves up to a higher standard, the answers we want will continue to escape us.

As long as we take whatever is thrown to us and act grateful that "at least we got something", we will never get any better as a nation or as a people.

I have always hated the expression "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good". I counter with that with, "let's strive for perfect so we get good in the end".

We have all fallen so far down the rabbit hole that we view scraps as gifts.

[Statistical]

18. Although it isn't our "responsibility" leaving the DMZ would result in South Korea falling.

We have promised them we won't and as such their defense plans expect we will be there. They would be anihilated without US support and millions would die and tens of millions subject to the brutal savagery, starvation, and loss of freedom imposed by the North. Also the North has nuclear weapons which likely would be launched against civilian targets in the event the North loses the invasion.

If we were to leave the DMZ it would have to be a planned withdrawal over the course of years (maybe a decade) to give South time to either preemptively topple the North or ramp up defense spending to hold back an invasion.

[lonestarnot]

20. eeeeewweeee! What he said!!!!!

K & R!