The Dying Days of Liberalism: Max Forte nicely summarizes Tom Frank's Listen Liberal
Well, of course it would happen that a few days after posting I have yet to see a decent summary of Thomas Frank's new book Listen Liberal, I see one.
First, a tip of the hat to Yves at Naked Capitalism, for linking to Canadian anthropology professor Max Forte's Donald Trump, Empire, and Globalization: A Reassessment, which is a very long but excellent and important article. Because of its length, I will plug it again in another post on Friday or Saturday, so people can wade into it over the weekend.
For now, let me point you to Forte's much shorter January 2017 posting, The Dying Days of Liberalism How Orthodoxy, Professionalism, and Unresponsive Politics Finally Doomed a 19th-century Project.
Forte is professor of Anthropology and Sociology at Concordia University in Montréal, Québec, and is a member of the Concordia University Faculty Association (CUFA), the trade union body for full-time faculty, and the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT). His two writings I have perused so far are wonderful essays combining the knowledge and methodology of several disciplines, making for some of the best political economy I have read in a while. And, as I wrote at the beginning, he as an excellent summary of Listen Liberal:
....Thomas Frank’s Listen Liberal is worth reading in particular for its chapter devoted to “The Theory of the Liberal Class,” which makes extensive use of the writings of sociologists and political scientists. The book opens with a quote from David Halberstam’s 1972 book, The Best and the Brightest, a quote that speaks of, “a special elite, a certain breed of men whose continuity is among themselves. They are linked to one another rather than to the country; in their minds they become responsible for the country but not responsive to it”.
Rather than focus on “the One Percent,” Frank asks that we look critically at “the Ten Percent,” which includes “the people at the apex of the country’s hierarchy of professional status,” from which the Ivy Leaguer Obama came, as did most of his Ivy League cabinet, explaining the self-justifying and self-flattering slew of comments from Obama about those who are “qualified” to govern and “knowing what you’re talking about”. Professionals value credentialed expertise, and tend to listen mostly just to each other. They monopolize the power to prescribe and diagnose, in consultation with each other: “The professions are autonomous; they are not required to heed voices from below their circle of expertise” (Frank, 2016, p. 23). Professionals emphasize “courtesy” with one another (hence the incessant tone policing), and show high contempt for those of lesser rank, including precarious professionals. Post-industrial technocrats, the ones who hail the “knowledge economy” and “education” as a solution to all social problems, have bred their own ideology: professionalism. Frank notes that as a political ideology, professionalism is “inherently undemocratic, prioritizing the views of experts over those of the public” (p. 24). Though they usually claim to act in the public interest, Frank observes that they have increasingly abused their monopoly power, started looking after their own interests, and increasingly act as a class (p. 25), an “enlightened managerial class” of quasi-aristocrats (p. 26). Frank’s critique outlines how the Democrats became the party of the professional class, disposing of labour along the way (p. 28). As a result, they care little about inequality, because their own wellbeing is founded on it. Inequality is essential to professionalism (p. 31). Meritocracy is opposed to solidarity (p. 32).
I want to emphasize "Inequality is essential to professionalism." It goes a long way in explaining why the devotees of identity politics came unhinged over Bernie Sanders's campaign; they are now vehemently arguing "Minorities are sick and tired of being told that economic equality will fix all the racism, sexism and the social injustices in the world" as someone commented in a recent posting of mine in reply to Markos.
On pages 32-33 of Listen Liberal, Frank writes;
There is no solidarity in a meritocracy. The very idea contradicts the ideology of the well-graduated technocrats who rule us…. Leading members of the professional class show enormous respect for one another—what I call “professional courtesy”—but they feel precious little sympathy for the less fortunate members of their own cohort [such as] colleagues who get fired, or even for the kids who don’t get into “good” colleges. That life doesn’t shower its blessings on people who can’t make the grade isn’t a shock or an injustice; it’s the way things ought to be.
Frank identifies the terrible consequences this ideology of the professional class has for liberalism and democracy. One important consequence is that professionals hold the traditional Democratic Party base—organized labor and the working class—in low regard, bordering on contempt. This contempt surfaces over and over again when a professional class twit points to industrial automation as being the cause of lost jobs, absolutely refusing to even discuss the result of the disastrous policies of globalization and free trade. Recall, for example, Markos' rant that the white working class voters who supported Trump are going to get what they deserve when Trump and the Republicans repeal Obamacare.
This contempt for the working class, Frank writes, has been documented in study after study of the professional-class. For the professional class, unions, factory work, farm work, and most any blue collar occupation “signify lowliness, not status.” This was well understood by Thorsten Veblen: at the very beginning of his 1899 classic The Theory of the Leisure Class (And Frank named his first chapter “The Theory of the Professional Class”), Veblen writes:
the distinction between classes is very rigorously observed ; and the feature of most striking economic significance in these class differences is the distinction maintained between the employments proper to the several classes. The upper classes are by custom exempt or excluded from industrial occupations, and are reserved for certain employments to which a degree of honour attaches… the upper classes are exempt from industrial employments, and this exemption is the economic expression of their superior rank…. Manual labour, industry, whatever has to do directly with the everyday work of getting a livelihood, is the exclusive occupation of the inferior class.
Frank continues:
Professionals do not hold that other Democratic constituency, organised labour, in particularly high regard. This attitude is documented in study after study of professional-class life. One reason for this is because unions signify lowliness, not status. But another is because solidarity, the core value of unions, stands in stark contradiction to the doctrine of individual excellence that every profession embodies. The idea that someone should command good pay for doing a job that doesn’t require specialised training seems to professionals to be an obvious fallacy.
The result is not pretty. As Forte writes near the beginning of his essay:
Liberal democracy has been reduced to a shell, more a name than a fact that deserves the name. For many years, liberalism has been liberal authoritarianism or post-liberalism or neoliberalism, with a high elitist disdain for democracy and a fear of the masses everywhere. Promises of inclusion, fairness, and welfare, were replaced by sensitive-sounding rhetorical tricks and tokenism. Moral narcissism, virtue signalling, identity politics, and building patchwork quilts of diversity were the order of the day....
...It’s not a small thing that has fallen here, not merely the defeat of Hillary Clinton and Americans rejecting Obama’s “legacy”. We are dealing with a series of institutions, an expert class, and a network of political and corporate alliances, that is being shaken beyond repair. We are in the earliest days of a historical transition, so it’s not clear what is coming next, and the labels that have been proliferating demonstrate confusion and uncertainty—populism, nativism, nationalism, etc.
....liberalism will not disappear outright, and not instantly. Ideas don’t ever really die, they’re just archived. [Emphasis mine.]
Comments
Progressives are sick and tired of being told
that minorities like low wages. Where do these Liberals get the idea that women and minorities are down with neoliberalism and why do they assume that the working class consists solely of straight white males ?
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
As we use to say at work when getting a pat on the back,
"don't applaud, throw money"
With enough money, it doesn't matter what race, color, gender, or creed.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
What’s the modern non-gendered politically correct equivalent of
one “attaboy”?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=attaboy+certificate&t=ffsb&iax=1&ia=images
Well said
I'm also sick and tired of being told that no one other then straight white men want or need real access to actual health care and medical services.
The argument that we can't have any focus or movement on any progressive issues -- we can't have health care, higher wages, economic security, for all working people -- until after we "fix" racism and sexism and all the other isms ... this is a mind boggling position. They can't be serious.
I've never heard this until recently, since the Clintons and DNC decided to intentionally create overt racial divisions in order to undermine Bernie's campaign. They made up this lie about Bernie Bros, it is their creation. And so disingenuous. Did anyone ever say that universal healthcare or $15 minimum wage was going to fix racism or sexism? Of course not. But it would save lives, and make lives better, including those of the identity groups they claim to care so much about.
This is why I can't take them seriously. They're pushing the current dem party line bullshit, overtly using race to divide the working people of this country. It's sickening.
well... it did exist before this campaign
But Clinton certainly brought it out to front-stage. It is now the official strategy of the Democratic party to rearrange the deck chairs on the sinking titanic. Don't worry though. We'll get around to those rising water lines as soon as we get all the black, latino, and women seated fairly.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
@SnappleBC
Actually, they just need to have the (edit: various) minority's places labeled - minorities don't actually need a real seat at the table or anything. It's not as though anyone wants a change in direction, or anything; I mean, as long as they're capitalists, what else really matters?
Edit: although they're really just the tip of the very iceberg they're steering their ship of fools into... we're just along for this last ride because the regulations on adequate life-boats were repealed with an axe - and this time, the Earth may sink below the sun. Or emulate it in a nuclear blaze...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@CS in AZ She needed to flip-flop
She needed to flip-flop on the race war in order to have a basis for getting votes. Like me, her advisors apparently saw that feminism was not a strong enough movement, and outrage at sexism not a strong enough feeling, to do the job: she was going to need to use race as well. That was tricky, since she used the other side of the race war to get votes in 2008, attempting to put herself on the "side" of the conservative white working class (Archie Bunker types). She kind of had to back then, because she was running against a Black man, and a Black man who was--despite his many faults--better qualified for the job and a better politician than she is. In 2016, she was running against a white man, so she needed to recreate herself as a Civil Rights champion and a SJW, after having run on racism in 2008. She flipped from one side of the race war to the other in under a decade. She's the only white politician I've ever seen to accomplish this acrobatic move with the support of the majority of Black leadership coast to coast.
And this is why I treat her anti-racism with all the respect it deserves.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
And the really Hillarious thing is that she did it to replace the 'hard-working White' voters with Republicans.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Where do they get those ideas? From each other. Those are the
ONLY people who matter. Everyone else is a low life ignoramus.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Excellent diary. Thank you for posting.
It's been this way since agriculture began 13kya.
2 million years as egalitarian hunter-gatherers that survived, thrived and evolved as a tribe not as individuals versus 13 thousand years of 1% running the show and taking 80% of it all. There are even Greek plays discussing the problems of wealth inequality.
The Brehon laws of Ireland and pre-Dynastic China both had wealth leveling laws that effected redistribution of anyone who accumulated too much wealth. One wonders and needs to do more research to determine if it was the rise of metallurgy 8kya that wiped this system out almost everywhere.
Michael Hudson says it was the Romans,
so a little less than 8ky. He points out that prior to the Roman empire ancient societies had debt jubilees every 30 years or so where an incoming monarch would cancel all debt and everyone would start afresh. We need a debt jubilee now. Debt is the problem and, as Hudson says, "debts that cannot be paid won't be".
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
I'm not 100% sold on that
Jubilees are debt forgiveness and contract cancellation they are different from redistribution of wealth/land and enforcement of ratios of wealth where Irish kings maxed out at 21 times a Freeman. When a Freeman got to 7x their land was divided up amongst poorer relatives to enforce the ratios. That is a gross summary.
The end of such practices in China coincide with the rise of Bronze and the rise of agrarian empires prior to Egypt would have mitigated against egalitarianism requiring concentration of resources in military and elite pursuits (halfway through The Great Leveler where there are mentions of this and the great Bronze age civilization collapse upon the rise of the Iron age.)
There is so much history out there and so little time to read it all
Edited to fix "debt cancellation to contract cancellation".
Book: Against the Grain, says agriculture did it.
It's very interesting & pretty convincing. Looking at neighboring groups at the same time, the farmers were less healthy than the hunter/gatherers. Inequality, forced labor, and a decline in the health of the masses, especially women, followed agriculture, while the elites still ate like hunter/gatherers.
Several of the Chinese dynasties had "equal fields" policies, giving the peasants farming space according to land quality & family size, but a lot of the time their peasants suffered, too. Confucianism, as one strain of influence, called for attention to the welfare of the common people.
Hey Sunspots. Will you clarify/elaborate on this?
To my eye initially, it would seem the inverse, about farmers and elites. Maybe I'm not reading this correctly.
Thanks.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Looking at the bones of both groups,
the masses of common people in agricultural societies were smaller, and their bones showed more nutritional problems, hard labor damage, and for women, more frequent child-bearing (hunter/gatherers nurse babies usually for about three years, which has a contraceptive effect and tends to space children, but agricultural societies can cook grains for young children and put their mothers right back to work), than their neighbors who were still living as hunter/gatherers, and than their elites (who still ate like hunter/gatherers and could avoid the forced labor).
The elites hunted for sport, and ate meat,
while the common people lived mostly on grains (cheap food), and did the drudgery of building the castles, etc.
@Sunspots As I've said
As I've said elsewhere, we should be able to grow vegetables and even raise some food animals, without inventing slavery, debt, serfdom, hideous aristocracies, etc.
for one thing, there's no need to invent private property just because one invents farming.
I get that a lot of people didn't want to do the back-breaking work of farming so they oppressed a group of people and made them do it. But again, I don't see anything much wrong with Ursula LeGuin's take on it in The Dispossessed:
"Who does the dirty work?"
"Well, we all do it. But nobody has to do it for very long, unless they like the work."
Of course, that would mean (among other things) that we'd have to educate people in a way that was not so hyper-specialized. And our people would have to be a lot healthier, more physically fit, stronger.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Yes, it shouldn't happen, you're right,
he's just saying that it HAS happened every time they can see. Maybe we haven't had enough time to evolve beyond being decent to a tribe of 20 or 30 people. Sad, if so.
@Sunspots I'm thinking
I'm thinking that's the problem, more than agriculture itself...
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
How do you separate them?
If that vulnerability is built into most people? How do we make ourselves evolve fast enough to survive?
The ancient cultures of native Americans
also frowned on wealth 'inequality'. The one I've read about the most are the Navajo people, and that hasn't been much. But they had, and some still have, a real problem with those that hoard their wealth and allow their fellow people to go without.
NOW I DIGRESS: Wealth'inequality. Such a tidy phrase to substitute such for such term as poverty, and a way to refer to the conditions of the poor or destitute. (I wish we could clean up our social problems as much as we have our language.) Regardless, we wouldn't want to use harsh and upsetting terms in our speech now, would we? That might traumatized some gentle flower who's sensitivity trigger might be pulled, or embarrass some self-serving opportunist who prospers off people who's financial condition can be described using the word 'poverty' and who is better served by making 'poverty' sound about as serious as a freaking hangnail.
Another foul term is 'food insecurity'. That fucking term is denigrating and PATRONIZING! People who don't have enough food are not INSECURE, they are fucking hungry. They are oft times even starving. (For instance some Third World country such as Somalia. Or some American communities like in the Appalachin region) How dare any well fed and safely sheltered person gloss over one of the most inhumane and one of the most devastating crisis affecting human beings with the term 'insecurity'. Even when used in reference to those that have food today and for the time being, insecurity is still an insult. If there is a reason that you have to worry about your family and/or yourself being without food at any time, you are not 'insecure'. You are often scared and at the point where dealing with that one issue takes up so much of your time and energy that it can often overshadow all the other problems in your life. It is just as important , no it is more important than shelter. You can hopefully survive without shelter, but you cannot survive or even function without food.
People need to quit sanitizing the our language. And to quit being such a bunch of selfish assholes.
EDIT: took out 's
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews I am so with you about
I am so with you about the phrases "wealth inequality" and "income inequality."
The whole notion of equality/inequality has become a monstrous playground for the sociopathic elites.
Dig into the notion of white privilege a bit and you'll see what I mean.
If I can go to the store and buy a Coke without being shot by a police officer, and a Black person can't, and someone says it's my "white privilege" that enables me to go get the Coke without being shot, doesn't that make the freedom to walk to the store without being attacked a privilege, rather than a right?
We used to say that such things were evidence of racism: depriving people of basic human rights because of the color of their skin. Now it's a "privilege" to move unmolested about our lives, a "privilege" that white people have, that, by implication, they shouldn't have--since "white privilege" is obviously a bad thing.
So what would equality look like? Everybody walking in fear?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Applauds loudly, while nodding like an old head-banger.
Much of the social conditioning inflicted by the US (and other) corporate media on the public has been aimed toward convincing people that non-billionaire Poors do not deserve comforts or rights - and it's worked so well in propaganda-flooded America that many of the most propagandized people will voice outrage at the idea of any other non-billionaire Poor having either.
We have to stop terming The Parasite Class 'Elites', implying that they are 'the best of the best' 'the cream of the cream', as they believe the accumulation of great wealth (too-often drained from others/public/natural resources/the 'cost-cutting' industrial pollution and destruction of the environment and human health) qualifies them to be. 'Greedy' and 'great' are, however, two different things, one of these things very much not like the other.
Every time we accept and give the Parasite Class flattering and self-/sycophant-created names, we reinforce the notion of 'meritocracy via wealth/power' along with the propaganda making such destructive nonsense possible. (Not that I recall having seen you doing this, but that I keep seeing the term used and believe that such concepts as the 'meritocracy of the wealthiest' and of 'might making right' must be tackled - hard.)
Having been permitted to steal almost everything else, the Parasite Class seeks to privatize The very Rights Of Man, something which has also progressed well over half-way to hell, especially in America. It's got to be now, or there will be nothing remaining but never.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@gendjinn
Lead poisoning, perhaps?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
The professional class members are de-facto gentry.
Privileges have become hereditary, right down to political positions.
Of course, it isn't OFFICIAL, but every argument that is put forth against unions, solidarity, etc... is echoed from the robber barons and industrialists of 2 centuries ago.
We've even got an Empire. Sometimes I feel like Dr. John Watson, looking at the end of the British Empire, and somewhat abashed at the efforts I put forth on its behalf. The glory days are long over, and all that is left is to clean up the messes left by the psychotic back home.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
According to Will Durant, the average lifespan
Of any 'empire' is around 200 years then it starts to fall apart.
We hit our best if sold by date over 40 years ago. And the way things look, we're going to Hell in the proverbial hand basket as fast as we can.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews Except we didn't become
Except we didn't become an empire until the beginning of the 20th century (that's what Teddy Roosevelt was on about)
Teddy said:
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't get your point.
We became an empire beginning in 1776 when we declared our freedom from British rule. This is the onset of America's days of empire. We then began the process of taking or buying all the land in what we call the Continental United States. We hit our stride beginning with the Industrisl Revolution, (18th century.) and we began our national slide into irrelevance beinning with the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs beginning in the 1970s. (The 20th century).
I said that the average life span of any empire is around 200 years before it starts going to Hell in a hand basket. From the 1770s to the 1970s is 200 years.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Great diary - ditto thanks
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Thank you, thank you!
Thank you for posting this and sharing your thoughts. I hope you will continue to post and/or cross post here often.
This essay plugs directly into a series I had written earlier on neoliberalism. I keep coming back to how the idea of meritocracy is the lynchpin by which neoliberals justify their own righteousness while continuing to look down upon those who are not of their same class.
Thomas Frank has captured this so eloquently in Listen Liberal. There is a quote of Frank's that I have used here in the past on several occasions. This is a true class war and it is epitomized by this quote. The passage I am quoting is partially my own and partially from a quote by Frank in a New York Times review of Listen Liberal.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Meritocracy, as I understand it,
is when the professional class says, "it's your own fault you have a shitty job, you didn't go to college like we did." To which I say, why not a living wage for everyone ? And of course, meritocracy is refuted by a very simple reductio. Imagine universal college education, where everyone in the country has a degree. In that case fast food workers would be more literate but they would still make minimum wage. Church's Chicken might require a college degree as a condition for employment but they couldn't very well pay all their employees six figures.
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
Frank takes it further
and all one has to do is look at the educational pedigrees of the last several Presidents. It is not just a college degree. I have a college degree, bachelor's level, but that is not enough.
For the meritocracy, it is more than just a college degree, but it is a professional degree from one of the elite colleges such as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, etc. It creates a class of people who also belong to an exclusive private club. Their allegiances are first and foremost, and often solely, to those others in that exclusive private club. It is the new form of aristocracy that is based upon educational attainment and the place from which you got that education.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
An exclusive private club
My second chance college was one of what some people call Little Ivies. Even though I had to work the third shift in a factory while I worked there, I still graduated and went to grad school.
Years later, I joined the Alumni Association, largely to get access to JSTOR, and they sent me access to some other percs as well. One was the right to join the Princeton Club in NYC which allows members from other Ivies as well as several other similar colleges.
So yes, there literally is an exclusive private club that only the elect may join.
"People always have been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics, and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral, religious, political and social phrases."
@gulfgal98 I have a PhD from the
I have a PhD from the University of Pennsylvania, and they want nothing to do with me. The political world gave me the back of its hand, and now my choice is to work adjunct teaching basic comp for low wages, or nothing.
Well, I suppose I could tutor privately.
You have to be the right kind of person. Getting the degree ain't enough. In fact, in DC, most people I encountered had nothing but contempt for my degree; I knew a woman who was a lobbyist for a big NGO and she had more than one post-graduate degree (in science), but told me she had gotten out of school as soon as possible. That was a lie that I only discovered later when I looked her up on Google. One of the top two lobbyist/lawyers for a big NGO, and she was hiding her academic side.
I'm not saying Frank is entirely wrong about the technocrats, but there's no automatic "in" for people with Ivy League advanced degrees; I'm proof of that. They don't really worship expertise, they worship established markers of superiority. The right degree from the right place--wielded by the right person with the right ideology. And even then, there's a weird, lingering anti-academic bias around the place--or at least there was from 08-12, when I was still hanging around there.
But it's like a Scylla and Charybdis, a rock and a hard place, because you're also supposed to flaunt your connection with such academic institutions to advance yourself. It doesn't really make any sense--I'm guessing they like the wealth and elitism of such institutions, but don't like some of the mindsets encouraged by academic training. Questioning things, looking for the truth, making judgements based on evidence, trying to do one's job with competence...
Possibly the smartest thing Vaclav Havel ever said:
“You do not become a ''dissident'' just because you decide one day to take up this most unusual career. You are thrown into it by your personal sense of responsibility, combined with a complex set of external circumstances. You are cast out of the existing structures and placed in a position of conflict with them. It begins as an attempt to do your work well, and ends with being branded an enemy of society.”
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@gulfgal98
Lol, even if you apparently 'isn't learning'. Boy, Bush and Hillary sure have a lot in common...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
That's not too far off the reasoning behind
the feudal age.
The warrior, knightly/noble/Royal class providing "protection" taking in loadsa money. The monks and priests providing "salvation" taking in loadsa money. Everyone else, doing the actual hard work, taking in very little money, thanks to the first two 'estates' taking in loadsa money.
(Edited)
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
"taking loadsa money"
Or, as they said it better during World War I:
source
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
@thanatokephaloides The problem is that
The problem is that third layer (we shoot at you) and to some extent the fourth (we fool you).
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Your series is fantastic!
Is it finished?
No
It is not finished. I doubt any series on neoliberalism will ever be finished, but it was just that I got burned out on it so I went on hiatus. I actually have had one unfinished essay in the hopper for a while now. Thank you for the nice words.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Thank you. I hope I see the next installment
if and when you finish it.
Thanx for that summary.
I needed that. Now that I recall all the professionals I've come in contact with, it explains their behavior perfectly.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
This paragraph shows exactly what happened during Obama's tenure
I have been saying that he was selected as president to shut down the anti war movement, let the war and bank criminals and continue PNAC's agenda in the Middle East.
And it worked. As the article states, Liberal democracy has been reduced to a shell, more a name than a fact that deserves the name.
And now we have Trump as president and he either gave the military his power to pursue their wars anywhere they want or there was a military coup. Either way, the military and the rest of the MICC gets what they want.
This video of Obama and Hillary shows the same things that I blockquoted.
Great essay and thanks for posting it here.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
@snoopydawg Great video. Thanks!
Great video. Thanks!
I am amazed at how you
can so easily reference the right quote or the right video so easily. You must have the links well organized (something I need to do) because your points of reference are always so perfect. This video is terrific.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@snoopydawg I think the coup
I think the coup happened before the election.
It's kind of startling to have the military just break a ceasefire and then say "Whoops! Sorry, Mr. Prez! Can I call you Mr. Prez?" with no subsequent accountability for any involved.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I look forward to reading the article linked.
Conservatives, libertarians and many liberals (the Clinton kind) believe meritocracy is a requirement for an effective economy. The problem is, their idea of an effective economy is one with near endless growth, not full participation.
@Blueslide It's also an economy
It's also an economy that treats finite resources like they were infinite. Very, very bad. In fact, something of a death trap.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Forte on professionalism in Anthropology
Tony, thanks for the article for this post
I had run across Forte in passing but had not stopped to read more
I have been spending a lot of time with Bruno Latour over the last few months and did a search on Forte and Bruno Latour and found the following article
It is a criticism on the Anthropology profession and their lack of effort on the anthropology of the contemporary world and hence missed the Trump rise. Forte predicted Trump's victory early on based on his understanding of Anthropology.
This article is a study of a profession that lost track of what it was connected to. Another profession reduced to money, numbers, and going along with the dominate political forces.
Forte also makes the point that Bruno has made for years and he called it symmetric anthropology. Namely, we are all now Indians. The destruction of natives with colonization is now reproduced in the destruction of our own culture. Latour calls the major force The New Climate Regime which has been the most important political actor in the world for the last 30 years.
Here is a link to Forte's article published 11/17/16 (got the date from the link)
Trump and Anthropology
Good read
Trump and Anthropology
Very interesting piece, with great links too.
@DonMidwest
Thanks both, and for excerpting it to whet the appetite.
(note: and yet again, an edit, as below. Auto-correct took out the "r" in excerpting, and left me with "excepting.")
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
I know I'm horrible
but the vindictive side of me really, really hopes that bankruptcy happens for HER.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
@lizzyh7
It might. She and Bill could be down to their last hundred million or so to see them through their retirement years. But it seem likely that they have much more than this socked away...
And it also seems that the multi-billion-raising Clinton Fundation still exists.
Almost too tired to breathe, so hope I don't mess anything up too badly...
This following is an excellent article which seriously needs to be read in full at source - including the mentions of 2 'programs' pulling out of the foundation, one in Haiti (without the results being mentioned - and Rwanda also mentioned, where the [also unmentioned] drug scam was run) and of Fundation hiring having apparently dropped to mainly food services/catering jobs being posted for workers, at the Little Rock, Ark. Clinton Presidential Center, among other interesting issues, such as - following mention of the shut-down of the Clinton Global Initiative - opening a health clinic in Malawi, Africa, where, going by a fast search, it seems that a 'renaissance' is taking place and tourism a thing. And it seems that Mr. Clinton can still afford to offer to match tax-deductible contributions from (edit: the) wealthy in order to encourage donors, so they probably aren't back to being too broke to manage multiple mortgages, as they so sadly were right after Bill's Presidency.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/hillary-bill-clinton-foundation.ht...
Oooooo, wasn't he made famous in Wikileaks?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/wikileaks-reveals-clinton-ally-...
Speaking of Malawi, can anyone explain what '...a bilateral immunity agreement with the United States...' entails?
https://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/7231.htm
Oh, gee, I guess this explains it. Emphasis mine.
http://iccnow.org/?mod=bia
So there'll be a lot of business and profits for health clinics in a country where poverty drives them to allow US nationals and contractors immunity to do, I suspect, whatever they want to the people and country in order to get aid desperately needed, while US contractors presumably enjoy the 'renaissance' and tourism benefits and the citizens, no doubt, work for slave wages with no protections, rather like Haiti? Haven't the energy to look into it so don't know for sure, but we've seen this sort of thing before... and just as you think the Psychopaths That Be have sunk lower than is humanly possible, they achieve new depths through complicit politicians and the desperation of small, impoverished/bully-able countries...
In the meantime, the Clintons don't believe in feeding small kids or ensuring that their parents earn enough money to give them a healthy life or money to buy books, but are concerned that summer holidays may interfere with the programming of children.
Gee, if only Welfare programs had not been eliminated and incomes had kept pace with inflation, perhaps these kids might not be malnourished and stressed due to poverty ... Emphasis mine.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/get-involved/take-action/attend-an-eve...
That'll make all the difference to these kids lives, I'm sure.
Her was never a lesser evil. And as horrendous as Trump may be, I thank FSM every day that the Clintons did not get into the White House again to be rewarded for their pathological corruption.
But it's the billionaires and corporations, not merely their lackeys, who must be eliminated from public policy and politics in all countries and we must always keep this in mind.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@CB Very interesting read,
Very interesting read, really excellent.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The links provided herein were certainly illuminating.
Thank you, author.
The Max Forte piece entitled "The Dying Days of Liberalism…." revealed the stastistical tableaus of American attitudes surrounding the campaign — data that was knowable well in advance of Election Day to anyone who bothered to look. These data observations specifically foretold the election outcome. There was never a doubt that Hillary lost the election even before Trump won the Republican primary. (Oh, the folly of polling in these final days of neoliberslism.)
One tableau that grabbed me was the data on Hillary's book sales. Ugh. Wish I had seen it or thought to look. There was big money to be made on Intrade — the Las Vegas of politics. Sigh. As they say at the poker table: "Read it and weep":
Indeed.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
I remember the book sales being a canary in a coalmine.
Exactly.
As usual, Jimmy was right on about that, reminding us of how much Nate Silver, who $hills references in her pathetic, cringe-inducing, excuse-laden plea to be believed that Her Coronation was stolen, was so often wrong during the 2016 Primary:
I think the failure of the polls, and specifically exit polls too, are, according to elections experts/mathematicians, the elephant in the room. Clear evidence that the elections were rigged. I really hope the #DNCFraudLawsuit goes full force, and the discovery period yields all sorts of unavoidable evidence of blatant, thorough cheating. This country needs such a wake-up call, desperately, as we choke on a forced diet of red herring.
The irony of living in today's Upside Down world, in which we have to suffer through the hapless, nauseating Dems crying about the election loss blaming everyone but themselves, while they clearly colluded in countless ways to bring down Bernie, is astounding.
(note: edited for weird, auto-correct misspelling from "suffer," to "offer." Seems to happen with the auto-correct more often than I'm comfortable with, but usually don't go back to edit a comment.)
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
And notice Hillary's
look of condescension when she says she's an activist. She just cannot hide her contempt, can she? Just can't do it no matter how many hours of coaching she receives on it, can't do it even when she's married to the king of spin. Well, I'm sure she feels nothing but contempt for Billy Bob and I can't say I blame her one bit there, but you'd think she'd be smart enough to learn from the master just to one up him. And her contempt is the one thing about HER that is transparent as crystal to all who can stand to listen to her.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
@Mark from Queens Well...actually some
Well...actually some polls seem quite accurate, that's what makes it tricky; not all of them were rigged.
For instance Trump's unfavorables on Election Day were 58% and Hillary's were 60%.
Ironically enough, the outcome reflected those polling results pretty well. A lot of people didn't vote at all, a lot of people didn't vote for President but voted for everything else, and Trump edged her out, winning by a little.
Now, of course I believe that there was election fraud on both sides, but I think each side screwing with the process basically cancelled each other out, and we ended up getting what the American people really think of these bozos.
That didn't happen in the primary, because Sanders didn't cheat.
I've been waiting for a Karl Rove-style Swiftboat attack claiming that Sanders *did* cheat, but they haven't gone there yet. I guess they want to focus on Black vs white and right vs left.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic The title of "Hard
The title of "Hard Choices" filled me with rage.
Hard choice my white ass; when's the last time Hillary had to make a "hard choice?"
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
No kidding. Some gall.
At least, fate has allowed us to see some comeuppance delivered.
But when I think of all the lives she destroyed with the power she was given….
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic A "hard choice" is
A "hard choice" is when you have to decide to buy medicine or food. A "hard choice" is when you have to decide to join the military or let your kids sink into poverty.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Yes, those 'hard choices'
...the conflicted 'hero.'
A nice illustration of the anguished 'hero' making the tough choices for all the 'right reasons' is a common theme these days, and presumably that title was meant to adhere and further promote this false theme. Here's a nice essay about this theme, seen often in current movies: https://lorenzoae.wordpress.com/2015/10/16/sicario-americas-dark-new-fro...
@ChezJfrey One more way of de
One more way of de-fanging the concept of basic morality. Well, you see, Bob, in the real world, the real heroes are those who make the hard choices...
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Oooooo - Just like Hillary!
Lots of damaging and murderous 'hard choices' for self-enrichment and no concept of basic morality.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@ChezJfrey Thanks for the link;
Thanks for the link; going there now.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@ChezJfrey Wow, what a great
Wow, what a great article! I thought I was the only one noticing things like that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Glad you liked it. I have found that particular author intriguing. He categorizes that genre of propaganda in much of our current 'entertainment' as a more general, shoot-and-cry, and his insights are fascinating to me.
The particular subject of that one essay, Sicario, I had recently watched prior to reading the essay, and some unknown uneasiness of mine after watching the film, that I was unable to ascribe, plagued me, and that one essay that I stumbled upon in this wide internet, really helped uncover some attributions that probably contributed to my unease.
@ChezJfrey That's what
That's what happened to me with the execrable Up in the Air.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic He had me right up until
He had me right up until he said fascism wasn't particularly visible, or dominant.
Maybe he means Nazism.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Yep. I thought about that.
Even as a writer or reviewer, in these days of a highly stratified society, one must factor in their own bubble when using adjectives.
In my bubble, I would label "the enforcement" of facism — "instinctively deniable" rather than shocking or brutal.
Here in Denyville USA, people suffer the American tregedy privately. What fascism? They haven't seen any fascism. I understand the deniers. The only thing on the other side of denial for them is a nervous breakdown. I suspect that's what happened to all those Sanders voters. They let themselves consciously "see" the truth of Bernie's message because they believed there was a way out. They sure weren't there for the politics, and they didn't come back.
Thank god Bernie hasn't sacrificed their personal information to the Democrats.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic Most people want to
Most people want to think of fascism as Nazism instead of as corporatism. As you say, it makes it easier to get to sleep at night. After all, we once beat the Nazis--sort of (I'm not sure how bringing them into our intelligence services afterwards is part of "beating" them, but...)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
At the very least, it allows us to trace the genesis
…of the Deep State and the Neocons, after World War II, both here and in Israel.
To:
They were very, very rabid about Russia both during and after WWII and so were the US corporations, which share the genetic code for fascism. With their Nazi allies in the US, the corporate oligarchs used their wealth and their think tanks to write US foreign policy based on supranational supremacy through war and regime change. They scared the pants off Ike with their McCarthy terrorism. After Nixon resigned, they swarmed government like cockroaches, wedged into every useful crevice, where they remain to this day. Their cohort in Israel did the same. They never lost their hardon for Russia. While it was bad blood from way back, what drove them was one simple thing. Even Einstein pointed it out, as did Freud to some degree. Communism presented a solution to predatory capitalism by sharing the value of what was produced with the worker. Everybody's a winner. So, the US was forced into war, war, war against any nation with diplomatic ties with Russia. The fact that Russia has been a capitalist democracy for the past quarter century doesn't matter to them. The Neocons are born that way. When they say "better dead than red," know that is their Plan B.
Joe had a link to an article if you haven't seen it: The Scandal Hidden Behind Russia-gate The article sets the stage, but the author held back to protect himself. Those who click "comments" will see the whole story in the first dozen or so. Probably a deliberate addendum.
As I said, at least it clear what you're up against.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic I totally agree
I totally agree with your vision of the history, but never understood this:
After Nixon resigned, they swarmed government like cockroaches, wedged into every useful crevice,
Was Nixon in some way opposed to them, or holding them back? It seems so unlikely. Yet removing him opened the floodgates for every crappy person who ever worked for him to fuck over the rest of the government (and the country, and the world). Like killing a mama spider who's carrying a hundred babies on her back.
I consider Watergate, especially Nixon's resignation, as our last great victory. It was the last time the Republic won.
But maybe my view of that history is wrong. I don't understand how, if they got dealt a significant blow with Nixon's resignation, that resulted in their almost immediate dominance over politics in general.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think Nixon is going to play heavily in our minds
…in the very near future. When he took the dollar off the gold standard in 1971, he created a weapon that is about to be used against the US. But that's a another story. The real question is, why did Nixon halt the gold standard? Look there and you find the Nazi Neocons again. The Vietnam War was the Neocon proxy war against Russia and communist China. Nixon was advised to let the war drag on and on, and we were printing massive dollars to pay for it. However, under the terms of the Bretton Woods Agreement, which after WWII made the US dollar the reserve currency for global trade, those dollars in foreign hands could be redeemed for gold on demand.
Vietnam was a stupid, pointless war based on a lie, as all our wars are, The world watched our ridiculous folly, and knew it was unsustainable, so they walked their paper dollars to the US and demanded gold. France was first in line. We were emptying Fort Knox in exchange for money we had just printed to throw down the blck hole of destruction. Nixon abruptly stopped the gold exchange and Kissinger helped him tie the dollar to oil, instead. The Petrodollar.
Now, after another stupid, pointless war based on a lie — going on 15 years — the Petrodollar is finished. The world is simply too disgusted and the US is too broke to inspire confidence. It's the world, essentially, who determine the Petrodollar's value by using it for trade, or to buy arms, or oil, or by holding it in Treasuries. But, what if the world decides to stop using it? What if they cash in their dollar holdings. What if they buy oil outside the dollar? The world has other choices now that have just come on line. There are transfer protocols other than SWIFT, other settlement banks. China has settlement banks in every region of the world for those who want to trade in the Yuan, instead. The IMF offers SDRs to use. Countries can use currency swaps to avoid the Dollar.
What happens to the US, when the world pulls that trigger?
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic I thought we
I thought we started the petrodollar way back at the beginning of Saudi Arabia itself. Goes to show you what I know!
But that still leaves the question unanswered: why did taking down Nixon seem to massively empower Nixonian politics and politicians?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I honestly don't know.
I haven't analyzed it. I am only looking at concurrent events. I used to focus on the Reagan years, when there was another swarm, but it was more a time when the Neocons already embedded in the permanent government moved into the positions of the highest authority and oversight. That was the clean sweep.
The swarms happen when there has been a political rout, which was the case when Nixon was elected. Same too for Reagan. And the same again, now. In the case of Trump, however, I believe we have a complete coup. Bush the Lesser looked like a coup, but it wasn't. If you notice, those last three — Reagan, Bush, and Trump — have something in common. They are all mentally impaired. Two of the three could be easily handled, but Trump needed expert guidance. He's surrounded by all Neocons now and a few idiots. Some of Trump's picks had to be forcefully jettisoned.
The irony here is that there was foreign influence in the 2016 election, but it didn't come from Russia, it came from AIPAC. The fact remains, Hillary lost the election all by herself.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
Here's a quote using Nixon in the timeline:
This is more a time marker that a cause-effect, perhaps.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
@Pluto's Republic BTW, that
BTW, that article about Russia-gate is excellent, really great.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic Problem is, if you
Problem is, if you don't see corporatism as fascism, you're left with no alternative to seeing corporatism as capitalism. And then where are you?
Just better to imagine Nazis around every corner, except of course in the Ukraine where they actually are.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Puts into context remarks Obama made a month apart
There were two comments from Obama close on each other that showed something not very pleasant about him and his world view. Given this essay, better context.
The first remark by Obama was his praise and defense of bonuses for Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs, and for Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, Obama said he did not "begrudge people success or wealth." He called the two bankers "very savvy businessmen." He also said he knew both men, who are products of Ivy League institutions.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/02/street_...
FEB. 12 2010
JP Morgan got $25 billion in bailout money. Goldman got $10 billion in bailout monies.
https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list
A month later:
Obama angers union officials with remarks in support of R.I. teacher firings
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/01/AR201003...
March 2, 2010
Obama praises Harvard grads whose companies needed billions of dollars in bail out money, and then praises the mass firing of union school teachers, most of whom I believe were POC.
(Just as an aside, also shows the downfall and betrayal of union leadership as expressed by Chris Hedges. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten attacked Obama over the remarks, but years later, forced endorsement of the union in the primaries for Hillary Clinton who was boo'ed by union members for supporting charter schools. Much the same could also be said for other unions who endorsed Clinton during the democratic primaries.)
Obama's comfortable shoes got no wear during his term.
Including during that mess in Wisconsin.
https://projects.jsonline.com/news/2016/11/27/for-unions-in-wisconsin-fa...
Excellent read and excerpts
I would write more, but it would mostly become a, "yeah, I see that." So I'll just post a generic praise for posting some good material to pick up and try to find the time to more fully read.
Excellent
Those ten percenters. This is exactly what I was up against over at Balloon Juice, before they ended my misery there. In fact, I was often told that my opinions didn't count because of my station. Not in so many words, but clear enough.
The trick is that there are another group below them who believe that they are in the ten percent, not unlike how many poor people believe they're middle class. It seems to be a process inherent in capitalism.
Again, excellent article.
Frank's book....
I read Frank's book a couple of months ago and it completely changed my perceptions of the Democratic Party. I think I was asleep for a long time, lulled into the meme that the Dem Party wore the white hats. Because I trusted them, I didn't look behind the curtains very often nor did I analyze much of the legislation that came out of the Clinton years, at least not enough to see it's destructive potentials.
Thomas Frank does such a good job of laying it all out in simple and short descriptions, AND he has a good sense of humor.
This book is a must read for anyone who is or was a Democrat.
I, however, became an Independent after over 40 years of having a D next to my name.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
There is a value in expertise
I think if being anti-meritocracy gets out of hand, it can become anti-expertise. What's the point of studying political science or economics or international relations if any knowledge that is gained won't be used for fear of abuse and corruption? I think many people who are experts in one field or another, became that way because they devoted a huge amount of time to studiousness and what some would call nerdyness at maybe the expense of an ability to fit in and respond easily to mass emotions. If we don't value expertise, we can get incompetence.
Beware the bullshit factories.
@Timmethy2.0
Of course there's a value in expertise! But no degree of skill or knowledge lessens the human worth or human rights of anyone else lacking any such expertise - nor does the possession of such place anyone 'above the law' or give anyone divine rights over others.
In any event, the meritocracy of the pathological Parasite Class seems to be based more on wealth and the ability to exert will by brute force in some form or another over 'lesser' others than anything else, going by what I've seen.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.