I do not typically find modern liberals particularly useful or engaging but I have to admit, Professor Paul Krugman may be an exception. His social and political analysis is always lucid (rare among academics) and his credentials – a feature oh so important to the establishment – are beyond reproach. So having Nobel-Laurette Princeton Economics Professor Paul Krugman PhD make similar critiques, or really just reveal the same set of facts, as the 99% Movement and Occupy Wall Street is both poignant and empowering. You don’t even have to be a Keynesian to enjoy it (though I imagine it helps).
From Plutocracy, Paralysis, Perplexity:
Did the rise of the 1 percent (or, better yet, the 0.01 percent) cause the Lesser Depression we’re now living through? It probably contributed. But the more important point is that inequality is a major reason the economy is still so depressed and unemployment so high. For we have responded to crisis with a mix of paralysis and confusion — both of which have a lot to do with the distorting effects of great wealth on our society…
Today, Washington is marked by a combination of bitter partisanship and intellectual confusion — and both are, I would argue, largely the result of extreme income inequality…
Specifically, money buys power, and the increasing wealth of a tiny minority has effectively bought the allegiance of one of our two major political parties, in the process destroying any prospect for cooperation…
No, the real structural problem is in our political system, which has been warped and paralyzed by the power of a small, wealthy minority. And the key to economic recovery lies in finding a way to get past that minority’s malign influence.
Of course, there is one obvious critique to Krugman’s essay, not of the analysis but of an omission. While it is rather clear the heart and soul of the Republican Party are moneyed interests who use the organization to promote plutocratic interests, finding coalitions with any group that will drive turnout and not challenge Neo-feudalism (Gods, Guns, Gay-haters) – there is something Krugman is omitting.
The Democratic Party has been captured as well. There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is the decline of unions. Politics is an ugly game, so say what you will about the pathologies of Big Labor but they weren’t afraid to take on Big Business and had the strength, tenacity, and viciousness necessary to do it and win. To be fair, unions helped destroy themselves with AFL-CIO President George Meaney and Teamster President Frank Fitzsimmons endorsing Nixon in 1972. How sorry can you feel for people who slit their own throat?
In the Teamsters instance the endorsement was part of a corrupt deal hatched by Nixon apparatchik Charles Colson and Fitzsimmons, namely that in exchange for Jimmy Hoffa getting out of prison the Teamsters would endorse Nixon. Oh, and Hoffa would be banned from labor activity until 1980. That last amendment was apparently requested by Fitzsimmons, securing his presidency of the Teamsters Union. When Hoffa found out he threatened to retaliate by exposing Fitzsimmons and others’ illegal activities and then Hoffa… disappeared. In the AFL-CIO instance President Meany stated he believed the Democratic candidate George McGovern was “an apologist for the Communist world.” The wrecking of the New Deal Coalition and a more malignant Chamber of Commerce diluted labor even further. Needless to say, Reagan’s Neoliberalism found a more receptive environment than it should have in 1980 (Reagan also received Teamster endorsements in both 1980 and 1984).
So with labor on the ropes who would pick up the slack and fight for the working class and poor within the Democratic Party? Nobody.
The plutocrats got free reign while progressives made progress on other issues like civil rights, women’s rights, and gay equality. And the Democratic Party became a second front for corporate interests culminating in the creation of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) which promotes Big Business within the party itself. They even helped promote a corporatist party leader, President Clinton; who deregulated Wall Street, shredded welfare benefits, and helped jam through NAFTA and other trade agreements aiding Corporate America in its endless quest to ship jobs abroad and dodge taxes for greater profits. Big Business would have two political parties, one pro-life, one pro-choice.
This system, with all the electoral kabuki theater of two candidates pretending to actually disagree with each other vis a vis plutocracy (I’m a pragmatic liberal! I’m a compassionate conservative!), would have continued except allowing the 1% to do whatever they want with no check on their power and influence lead to the outcome it always does – a crash.
And not surprisingly the minute rich people got into trouble both parties scrambled to find ways to help them. By the end, the establishment ran out of ideas and simply handed Wall Street everything they wanted – endless loans from the Fed and hundreds of billions in bailout money to make private debts become public debts. Because both parties were constructed or should I say reconstructed to serve the interests of the 1%.
But here is the problem, most people in America (and the world if anyone cares) are not in the 1%. In fact, they will never be in the 1%. So they are getting royally screwed under this system, as Krugman notes rather clearly. The 99% have no reason to believe in this system and they don’t. Confidence in institutions and belief in a better future has been shattered. The noose of debt slavery and poverty is tightening around the middle class, what’s left of it.
Are we on the verge of a revolution? Probably not. At least not yet. Right now people are just fed up but it seems most are still hoping for some kind of miracle that will shift the country in the right direction, as many were in 2008. They aren’t going to get one. So what happens the next time Wall Street shits the bed?
Nothing good and nothing peaceful. Then you might see that revolution.
That’s why this is the time for the Democratic Party to reform itself, cast out the 1% apologists, and provide voters a real alternative to 1% based politics. That’s not Obama, not even close. So vote him back in, but realize that’s not going to solve the problem. Because Presidents like Clinton and Obama come from a party that, since the wrecking of unions, is not dedicated to advancing the interests of the 99%. It is at best, plutocrat light. As Krugman notes the plutocracy has lead to paralysis – and paralysis in the face of a crisis is disastrous.
Reform now, before it is too late.






18 Comments

Reccomended.
How shall a corrupt Democratic Party reform itself? Should it go to meetings and self-help groups?
Should it find religion? (I kid. The D Party panders to Christian Conservatives. See regressives Rick Warren at Barack’s Inaug and Donnie McClurkin. See the Stupak Ammendment. See School Vouchers defund public ed – heaping public money on religious schools.)
The D Party cannot be rehabilitated. It is like a hollowed-out junky that will tell any lie; cheat and steal from its own family to get a fix.
Excellent analysis and highly recommended, though I disagree with your last conclusion. Oh, it’s a reasonable conclusion, that the Democratic Party must reform itself in order to survive; I just think it’s already too late. The Democratic Party, like hackworth there noted, has prostituted itself to the plutocrats in order to get the fix of campaign cash for too long to be rehabilitated.
The Republicans are an increasingly regional party becoming more and more dedicated to white minority politics, and are no real longterm threat to the country. Time will make them increasingly irrelevant, though there will be some violent tragedies along the way.
The Democratic Party has become the real means for corporatism, fascism, and neo-feudalism to triumph. It must be destroyed. If that means dealing with a President Romney or a President Santorum in a few years, they will just accelerate the changes that are necessary. I fear Obama’s probable re-election will ultimately make things far worse by simply delaying the next inevitable Wall Street financial crash.
As I see it, the conditions for some kind of violent revolution are coming together quicker than most people want to admit. I’ll give 2-1 odds there will be a presidential election in 2016, 60-40 for 2020, and downhill from there.
20 years max. I don’t like it, and it can still be avoided, but not by the Democratic Party. A broad, energetic social movement is the only way to avoid it, and even then there will be violence as the kleptocracy will fight to hold on to power. And I am not optimistic that any broad, energetic social movement will have the time to force necessary reforms before Wall Street implodes and the chaos of a real revolution stares us in the face.
Maybe I’m wrong about that, but I’m not wrong when I say that our current system is simply not sustainable. It doesn’t WORK for the vast majority.
“No government is ever more than three days away from a revolution.”
–Voltaire
Seconded.
The big question: How do we keep the 1%’s money from smothering free speech? Look at how ALEC’s gone and bought up all our state legislatures for the GOP.
They control one house of Congress, the Supreme Court, several statehouses and governor’s mansions. That’s not exactly irrelevant.
The Roberts Court’s
Citizens United decision made the GOP stronger than ever. That’s what took the fetters off ALEC and other groups that are now funnelling billions, if not tens of billions, into Republican candidates, the last two election cycles. (It was ALEC’s work that was the key factor in flipping so many state legislatures, including that of my own state Minnesota, into Republican hands.)
My fear is that we were very, very lucky in the 1930s. The American public hadn’t been brainwashed by the right-wing corporate media (using Fred Bernays’ opinion-manipulation techniques) because that would not be developed in its full form until the 1970s. Nowadays, if things really turn to dreck, I suspect that the mass of Americans have been so misled that they are more likely to turn to a fascist strongman as the Germans did in the 1930s than to another FDR, should any exist.
Thanks DSWright for putting this My FDL Diary up. A very good one it is.
recommended
Putting the percentage numbers into these types of charts is very effective at illustrating what is going down between Americans at the top 1% or 10% or 20% USA income/held wealth levels and the other 80%,90% and 99%. Some years back I came across a chart that did this based on a row of 10 chairs where perhaps 90% of Americans were on perhaps 3 chairs and 10% of Americans on the remaining 7 chairs. Was a genesis moment for me to see what was being illustrated in chart format.
Chart formats make wealth/income numbers and portions plainly visible and superbly informative.
Plain to see and know both the Rs and Ds are failing/have failed to move on what these charts so readily show has taken/is taking place.
The 2008 Meltdown was/is both a economic failure and political failure.
Those who think or believe the post WW2 regime which WashingtonDC has been stringing us along with which both the Ds or Rs serve is capable of doing much or anything different can be fixed are badly mistaken.
Expecting more S+L debacles,Long Term Capital debacles,Enron debacles and Mortgage/RealEstate Casino schemes to show up is prudent.
What we are seeing take place as the American $$ becomes hollowed out more and more is too much too often being gamed based on wanton avarice and the worst of monetary/political shell games and high powered self-deception. Who are we gonna call? I am tired of calling POTUS Obama and his useless AG Eric Holder. These two guys are in thick with the crooks.
The 1% seem to think what happened to a French King,a Russian Czar and the King we Americans threw off won’t happen to them.
Some might see this as being optimistic. Others seeing it as seriously mistaken. I think the Others are closer to the truth and fact of it.
Lots of people needed to be going to jail because of what took place or did not take place leading up to late 2008. Did not happen. Same goes for what is being done/not done about the torturers and war criminals post 2008. Not too difficult to connect the dots. Who is now in the WH and who is doing what he is and what he is not? Why re-elect him again? So Mitt Romney can’t do what Barack Obama has been doing since 2009?
We are all in this mess like it or not and this current American regime is not going where at least 80% of Americans should consider and want/need to go. It is damn certain the Rs and Ds are about doing more nothing and more of the same and old Pick Coke/Pick Pepsi UniParty BS.
I’m aware of the current positions of power held by Republicans. I’m just taking the long view. From a political science standpoint, they are busily painting themselves into an irrelevant demographic corner, all other things being equal.
All other things are not necessarily equal, though. Your fear of a fascist strongman is justified. It may even happen, but I don’t think it would last for more than a few years.
I just have too much faith in my fellow Americans to think otherwise. Maybe I’m wrong. I hope not. Anyway,
“No people ever gets a government it doesn’t deserve.”
–Voltaire
What an excellent comment.
I agree that the Republican Party has become a regional, minority party. It’s the neoliberal ideology of the Obama Democratic Party that is the menace now. Neither party will endure because they stand for nothing more than the accumulation of wealth for the privileged few. Neither party has any guiding principles left.
I also believe violent revolution is inevitable, whether we like it or not. When those at the top are given all of the wealth and no legal constraints while those at the bottom are denied both economic and legal justice, the conditions are ripe for revolution. Why wouldn’t the citizens respond with violence? It seems unnatural to do otherwise, and as Ian Welsh as written time and again: nothing will change until they fear you.
The time for the Democratic Party to reform itself was before they decided to support Obama for re-election. His actions prove he is the best friend the Republicans ever had. By standing by him, the Democrats have proved they are past salvaging.
Any resources you put into the Dem party will be used to support the status quo. If that is what you want, then go for it.
Mass executions and confiscation of assets. Fairly self-evident, I’d say.
(Too soon? Probably, but getting closer every day…)
Why? Okay, that’s reflexive snark, but seriously. What in the last 40 years leads you to believe that humans as a whole (much less Americans) would be likely to resist whatever the corporate vermin impose on them?
Thank you, a most valuable post!
That’s why I largely agree to you conclusion EXCEPT I refuse to vote for Obama unless I see real action for reform before the election. I will support my party in the state elections, and most likely in the Congress and the Senate, but if it’s time to reform the Democratic party then we need to removed the current head of the party, and that is Obama.
Obama has been the number one enabler (if not out-right leader) of the continuation of Bush’s disastrous polices, the wars, tax cuts for the rich, cutting SS taxes, the Wall St bailouts, no prosecution of crooks or fraud, instead a continued cover-up, continued deregulation (the “JOBS” Act), continued stripping of civil rights. Voting this guy back in would be a serious mistake.
DSWright–
Excellent diary. However, the cognitive dissonance exemplified by your thoughtful analysis, but unacceptable (to me) conclusion, is the very reason I left the Democratic Party.
Recommended.
Blue
Reform vs. Revolution is always a difficult choice. I’m merely pointing out that the Democratic Party is becoming increasingly worthless and untrusted (and why).
So if the party doesn’t reform itself it will likely be wiped away because the public at large don’t trust it or believe in it and will be desperate to change the system. Also revolutions often lead to revolutionary violence and that’s what the people will have as an only recourse should Wall Street crash again if things remain as they are because the party won’t be seen as a real alternative to Republicans – which presently it is not vis a vis Wall Street and Corporate America.
If the Democratic Party reforms itself and offers voters a real choice then people will have an alternative (one most people will find preferable to the volatility and instability revolutions bring). Otherwise people will have no choice but to openly revolt and in an economic crisis – unlike say a social or political one – everyone becomes involved quickly because everyone is affected and has something at stake.
Obama is not at all like FDR, but America does need something like a New Deal or all bets are off. Another crash at this point will wipe out what’s left of the middle and working classes – they will have nothing. And when you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.
Well, if Michigan is any indication, they’ll solve their little demographic problem by simply a) suppressing voting, b) not counting the votes of the opposition in legislatures, and c) “emergency management”.
And, Repugs unlike Democrats don’t kid around. When the Dems get into power and start looking for ways to avoid fulfilling their election year promises, while the Repugs will seize the opportunity to enact what they always wanted even if they *didn’t promise it* (or didn’t mention it, or even denied they want to do it) and opinion polls be damned. What has happened in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Virginia isn’t popular but they aren’t stopping.
My only conclusion is that they’re not stopping because eventually the plans will include doing away with that pesky little ‘democracy’ thing, a la Michigan.
-stewartm
DSWright–
Thanks for your reply. Apologize for my rather nebulous reply to you (#13).
Actually, I agree with almost everything you say, in both posts. I guess where we part ways, is that I do not believe that the Democratic Party is capable of effecting the kind, or degree, of reform that you and I long for. The Democratic Party is simply too corrupt to serve as a vehicle for true progressive change (IMHO).
Maybe I’m just too cynical, but that’s how I feel.
Blue
I don’t think you’re cynical at all. You’re just facing reality, in my opinion. I mean, look at the Democratic politicians and the so-called leaders, of the Democratic Party: Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and of course, the Bug Kahuna, Obama. They aren’t capable of reforming the party. Even Kucinich and Sanders voted for mandated payments to private health insurance corporations. Next, I predict, they will mandate that we pay private schools to educate our children. We have to do everything we can to speed up the demise of the Democratic Party.
Thanks, lefttown.
Frankly, I’ve gotten to the point that I’m even fed up with the likes of Bernie Sanders (based upon my last conversation with him on Hartmann’s radio show several months ago). After enthusiastically “agreeing with me 100%” on my analysis of the draconian cuts that the Bowles-Simpson commission report would call for, he started spouting unrelated (and ridiculous) Dem Party talking points, ducking the the entire issue.
If anything, I think that a Romney presidency might “slightly slow down” the destruction of Social Security and Medicare, if for no other reason than the fact that the Dems may feel pressured to at least “look like there’re the loyal opposition.” (By all means, I would prefer to see a third party candidate elected. My vote will be cast for Dr. Stein, if the Green Party is allowed on the ballot in my state.)
Again, thanks for the moral support.
Blue