Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Framing the debate: Democrats need to start using the word "plutocracy" regularly

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 11:49 AM
Original message
Framing the debate: Democrats need to start using the word "plutocracy" regularly
Edited on Sun Mar-06-11 12:01 PM by highplainsdem
And this speech Moyers gave at Boston University last fall needs to be posted here again. You'll find a link to a two-hour video of the entire speech and the question-and-answer session there, too. If you haven't read it and watched it, you should. And you should forward it and Like it and tweet it.

This is the argument that needs to be made now.

We can't win the debate and deal with this threat to our democracy if we can't frame the debate.

Moyers did:

Bill Moyers: "Welcome to the Plutocracy!"

http://www.truth-out.org/bill-moyers-money-fights-hard-and-it-fights-dirty64766

-snip-

So the answer to the question: “Do the Rich Need the Rest of America?” is as stark as it is ominous: Many don’t. As they form their own financial culture increasingly separated from the fate of everyone else, it is “hardly surprising,” Frank and Lind concluded, “ that so many of them should be so hostile to paying taxes to support the infrastructure and the social programs that help the majority of the American people.”

-snip-

You will hear it said, “Come on, this is the way the world works.” No, it’s the way the world is made to work. This vast inequality is not the result of Adam Smith’s invisible hand; it did not just happen; it was no accident. As Hodge drives home, it is the result of a long series of policy decisions “about industry and trade, taxation and military spending, by flesh-and-blood humans sitting in concrete-and-steel buildings.” And those policy decisions were paid for by the less than one percent who participate in our capitalist democracy political contributions. Over the past 30 years, with the complicity of Republicans and Democrats alike, the plutocrats, or plutonomists (choose your own poison) have used their vastly increased wealth to assure that government does their bidding. Remember that grateful Citigroup reference to “market-friendly governments” on the side of plutonomy? We had a story down in Texas for that sort of thing; the dealer in a poker game says to the dealer, Now play the cards fairly, Reuben; I know what I dealt you.” (To see just how our system was rigged by the financial, political, and university elites, run, don’t walk, to the theatre nearest you showing Charles Ferguson’s new film, “Inside Job.” Take a handkerchief because you’ll weep for the republic.)

Looking back, it all seems so clear that we wonder how we could have ignored the warning signs at the time. One of the few journalists who did see it coming – Thomas Edsall of the Washington Post – reported that “business refined its ability to act as a class, submerging competitive instincts in favour of joint, cooperative action in the legislative arena.” Big business political action committees flooded the political arena with a deluge of dollars. They funded think tanks that churned out study after study with results skewed to their ideology and interests. And their political allies in the conservative movement cleverly built alliances with the religious right – Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority and Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition – who zealously waged a cultural holy war that camouflaged the economic assault on working people and the middle class.

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan also tried to warn us. He said President Reagan’s real strategy was to force the government to cut domestic social programs by fostering federal deficits of historic dimensions. Senator Moynihan was gone before the financial catastrophe on George W. Bush’s watch that could paradoxically yet fulfill Reagan’s dream. The plutocrats who soaked up all the money now say the deficits require putting Social Security and other public services on the chopping block. You might think that Mr. Bush today would regret having invaded Iraq on false pretences at a cost of more than a trillion dollars and counting, but no, just last week he said that his biggest regret was his failure to privatize Social Security. With over l00 Republicans of the House having signed a pledge to do just that when the new Congress convenes, Mr. Bush’s vision may yet be realized.

-snip-



He outlines the solution, too, as well as the problem.

What do we do about Big Money in politics buying off democracy?

Organize. Mobilize.

But we need to be clear about why this has to be done, and what we're fighting.

We can't be afraid to name the enemy of democracy -- the plutocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. The problem is half the US population think Plutocracy has something to do with astronomy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I seriously doubt that. And it's fairly easy to explain what plutocracy is and why it's a threat
to democracy.

If we simply criticize "the rich" then RWers will counter by saying things like, "Michael Moore is rich! And look at George Soros! And union bosses make six-figure incomes!"

We need to make it clear that the threat is the use of money in politics by the rich, for the benefit of the rich, to the detriment of democracy and the working class.

And we already have a widely understood term for that -- plutocracy. Time to use it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
socialist_n_TN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. And the other half thinks it's about that dog at..........
Disney World.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. plutocrat is an obsolete word with no meaning for most Americans - better synonyms might be
fat cats, moneybags, money grubbers, bloated capitalist...words with some emotional value
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Kleptocracy
That's what I call it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Those synonyms lack the political connotations of "plutocrat."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
socialist_n_TN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I don't think so. I grew up in a REAL working class..........
family in the South during the 50s/60s and I NEVER heard the word plutocrat used. I did hear all of the above used at one time or the other though. Even "Monied Aristocracy" to me would be a better term to use. Although my favorite is still, "capitalist pig". :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
24. How about "kakistocrat"
"the worst possible choice for a given political position"

From "kakistocracy", a government by the worst possible politicians
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. And btw, the fact the term isn't used enough now is symptomatic of the problem, the failure to frame
the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. Good post - Spread this document
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Is that bipartisan? What is the pay off for politicians?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
11. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
12. Exactly
Republicans aren't conservatives they're radical plutocrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
13. They'd have to explain it every time they used it. Cable hosts would cut them off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. I know I've heard it before, and I've never heard anyone try to give a lengthy explanation which
was cut off. Can you find me even one example of this happening?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. And btw, the solution to people being unfamiliar with an accurate term is to USE it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EstimatedProphet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
14. No, they need to start using the words "spoiled brats" regularly
This is one of our problems. We use words like "plutocracy" which just don't have the emotional punch that "spoiled brats", "rich kids", "trust funders", etc. have. In that respect, we're talking over the average person's head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. I think you're underestimating the average person. And while the kind of name-calling you suggest
would be better might be appealing at times (though it can also make us look very petty), it completely undercuts the "democracy vs plutocracy" framework, and it also ignores the fact that not all of the rich are "spoiled brats" who want to use their wealth to create a plutocracy. Which is a point John Nichols made in The Nation, in a column I quoted in my other topic on this subject. He said it isn't right to call the GOP the "the party of the rich" since that's unfair to the rich. The GOP is the part of the "greed is good" contingent of the rich, and he calls them the Grand Old Plutocrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EstimatedProphet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Frankly, I'm sorry, but I disagree
During my lifetime I have watched the term "liberal" go from a positive thing to completely toxic. It now equates to the boogeyman in the mind of the average American. Now, it is quite true that not all of the rich are spoiled brats. Nevertheless, all of the spoiled brats are spoiled brats, and that term allows people to make the distinction between the rich and the greed is good class, while still allowing an emotional punch. Whether we want to stay on the high road or not, we need to connect with people, and that requires an emotionally-charged term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. What you said about how "liberal" has become a pejorative to many people just shows how usage and
context are everything.

We need to make people familiar with the terms "plutocrat" and "plutocracy" and what they represent, as opposed to everything democracy represents.

"Spoiled brats" simply conjures up images of kids for most people. NOT an image of the Koch brothers.

I'm old enough to remember when hippies were reviled as "spoiled brats" who'd grown up in comfort and thought life was all about play.

Plutocrats is a specific term, not an insult that can be twisted around.

And we have to make people aware that this is the battle that's being waged, plutocracy vs. democracy. We can't make them aware of that by simply calling our opponents "spoiled brats."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EstimatedProphet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #20
31. OK, that's great - 20 years from now.
And I am not saying we should rule out using "plutocrats" entirely, but until we have given the emotional punch to the word that it needs to be effective, we still need something else. Maybe "spoiled brats" doesn't do it, but I think it comes closer. Also I often will talk about how what the right really wants is for people to suck up to them. That hits home, but it's hard to encapsulate in one word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
17. But their plutocrat bosses wouldn't like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. You seem to forget that 99.9% of Koch and Chamber Money goes to Republicans
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
35. I don't think that's true.
Even if we're only speaking of the Koch's, they spent a lot of money on the DLC. I have to assume they're still spending on "moderate" Democrats, and those types comprise much of the Democratic Party's national leadership.

If we're not just talking about the Kochs, but Wall Street and Corporate America in general, the Democratic Party is practically as pro-plutocrat as the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
22. Kevin Drum in Mother Jones last month: "Plutocracy Now: What Wisconsin Is Really About"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
23. K&R, it's the people vs the hoarders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
25. Robert Reich: "We're losing our democracy to a different system. It's called plutocracy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
26. Paul Krugman: "Prices and Plutocrats"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
27. Paul Krugman: "Punks and Plutocrats"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
28. Felix Salmon, Reuters: "How to deal with the plutocrats"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
29. Marshall Whitfield for Buzzflash at Truthout: "Sleepwalking Toward Plutocracy"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
30. John Atcheson, CommonDreams: "The Plutocrat's Coup d'Etat, Their Republican Allies and Their
Democratic Enablers"

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/25-1

-snip-

What Can We Do? Citizens, we have a choice. We can confront this Plutocratic coup, or we can draft an apology to our founders, beg the forgiveness of the brave men and women who fought valiantly over the last two centuries to defend the ideals of this country, and then kiss those ideals goodbye.

At the end of the day, we have the three things that can trump money: truth, the vote and market power. If we insist on candid, transparent discussions on the issues of the day; refuse to vote for dirty-money or mealy-mouthed candidates; and punish Plutocrats like Murdoch and Koch and Rove who intentionally distort the truth in the one place where it hurts – the market place – we can win this country back.

It will take commitment, organization, a willingness to endure some hardship, and a passion for justice and fairness– the kind of things that animated exploited workers back when facts mattered, but it can be done.

The pieces of a resistance to the Plutocratic coup are coming together.

-snip-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
32. Jim Hightower: "We can have a plutocracy, or a democracy. But not both."
http://www.csindy.com/colorado/all-we-export-these-days-is-our-future/Content?oid=2073177


I posted a separate topic about that column, since it's only a few days old and I hadn't noticed anyone else post it. I'm including it here as well since I'm trying to show people that the words plutocrat and plutocracy ARE in use. They do need to be used more widely, and we shouldn't be making the rather condescending -- and erronious -- assumption that people won't understand them.

Jim Hightower doesn't. You don't see him feeling it necessary to explain what a plutocracy is. And he uses the word to frame the democracy vs plutocracy issue in the most concise, accurate way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
33. call it "rule by the rich" and I agree--I can't spend half my time explaining the P word
the average moron I run into at the grocery store.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. IF someone doesn't already know what plutocracy is, it takes just seconds to explain it.
And I don't think progressives, who should also be populists, should assume that the people they run into at the grocery store are "morons."

If Jim Hightower, whose populist and progressive credentials are unassailable, has no problem using the word without feeling he necessarily has to explain it, neither should we.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
36. Too many syllables ... how about ROBBER BARONS?
Bake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC