The question today is whether we can twist free of them and again become a self-governing nation. Or if we’re doomed to continue to devolve into a full-blown oligarchy
Congress must gut and incinerate the Buckley and Citizens United Scotus decisions, then put limits on corporate, individual, and PAC political donations, prohibit dark money in politics, and regulate or ban any other forms of political influence and favors involving money.
NO Constitutional amendment is needed:
Congress can do this with their power to ban judicial review of select legislation as ordained and authorized in Article 3, section 2, clause 2. Keep Scotus entirely out of this, or these 6 extremists will certainly make another horrific mess.
In fact for those who believe we can ONLY do this by amending the Constitution, remember that even an amendment wouldn't assure us that Scotus wouldn't step in to limit its reach and smother its effect. So, this must be OFF LIMITS for Scotuws.
No amendment, no "Move to Amend": Congress must act with NO Judicial Review allowed!
If Congress does not, then whatever is left of our democracy will perish.
A fine sweeping story of the deep injustice sown by our 'Justices'. The emperor had no clothes; what terrifying hate is cloaked by those long black robes? History needs be held close and itself protected from being purged.
It is of course the greatest trauma to this Nation, allowing thieving Corporations to determine how our country will function. Of all of the agents for repeated disaster to Democracy, The Supreme Court leads the pack . Republicans support the middle of the Snake, and the very wealthy insure it continues to have the fangs to insist on its status for harm and destruction. Corruption is routine and damning to anyone without huge amounts of money, the majority are at least struggling and many are drowning with no guards in sight. Tragic undermining of democracy.
"As we pass from one century to another, one millennium to one another, we would like to think that history itself is transformed as dramatically as the calendar. However, it rushes on, as it always did, with two forces racing toward the future, one splendidly uniformed, the other ragged but inspired. There is the past and its continuing horrors: violence, war, prejudices against those who are different, outrageous monopolization of the good earth's wealth by a few, political power in the hands of liars and murderers, the building of prisons instead of schools, the poisoning of the press and the entire culture by money. It is easy to become discouraged observing this, especially since this is what the press and television insist that we look at, and nothing more. But there is also the bubbling of change under the surface of obedience: the growing revulsion against endless wars … the insistence of women all over the world that they will no longer tolerate abuse and subordination… There is civil disobedience against the military machine, protest against police brutality directed especially at people of color. … It is a race in which we can all choose to participate, or just to watch. But we should know that our choice will help determine the outcome."
Your article, while informative, doesn't go far enough Thom. Legal reforms to right the current wrongs will last only one day as the morbidly rich pay their lawyers to scheme to overturn them. As long as capitalism is our economic system there will never be justice. We need to replace it with a system that has the laws of natural systems, the basic needs of working people as it's foundations.
The set up on denying abortion rights ( precedent for fifty years) has created unimaginable pain and chaos. This is not as much a moral issue as a fulcrum for denying women their right to choose. Republicans have made no bones about the fact that they have no interest in funding programs in nutrition for poverty stricken kids , of which there are more every year. They ruin public education by starvation of funds and push private education which denies access to the majority of kids. Children are deemed not mature enough to decide on abortion and at the same time are mature enough to raise a child. Men deciding who will bear children and raise them is arbitrary cruelty to mother and child. Doctors are not allowed to save a life in the event that pregnancy may kill the woman. Because in their twisted little minds women aren’t worth it . But the fetus is and if it lives, has no mother . Of course this is a decision we remove from women , because they’re incapable of reasonable decision making. These actions by the Court. Propelled by Republicans posing as God fearing protectors, they protect no one.
You're definitely hitting the heart of the matter. We can only hope it'll raise the consciousness of American society. In Canada, we're beholden to the medical establishment as well. We like to brag about our healthcare system, but the price we're paying for subsidized healthcare for all has been the mindset of complete dependence on them. So many of us have lost, or are losing, any confidence that we can keep ourselves healthy; we've given that confidence to the medical system, and healthcare is now THE drain by far on our budgets, and threatening to ruin us. We're affected by the greed of corporations and others likewise, but it's the medical system that's shredding the fabric of our society.
Great column as usual. I just want to add an observation:
If the Supreme Court deems corporate speech to be so important for informing us, isn't that importance directly related to, indeed only made meaningful by our response, i.e. our vote. So why is the court allowing unrestricted money to flow to "inform" us while granting states power to limit our vote.
I just want to mention how this works with democratic processes on a local level. The business owners run for office and make sure their interests are taken care of. This reflects in ordinances that control the homeless population, taxes, traffic, and many many more really important issues in a community.
"Shockingly" the end result is the focus is not safety and the public welfare. They want to run your city or county like a business and for businesses. This leads to insane worship of job creation and the creators.
Be vigilant about the business owners and networks that don't just want to buy the politicians, they want to be the politicians in their spare time. The idea of a conflict of interest has almost become "quaint" on the national AND local level.
The Clark story was an excellent example of how to catalyze action... This country is filled with Billionaires that love to bask in the glory of Twitter and any media that will report on them.
Taking one of them down for cheating on his/ her taxes in a very public way, in 2022, can catalyze both Red and Blue voters to start demanding that the law makers they vote for fight to reduce th power of the donor class.
Teddy Roosevelt famously opposed any rich person that though they were more powerful than the government. Having a President that shared in that world view will catalyze this. It always takes blood to make these things happen. I think voters will organize and vote for law makers that can get blood from todays egotistical, selfish and largely useless Billionaire class.
Our dominant economic system of the last 400 years, “[H]as [repeatedly] tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men[ royalty (1700s), slave owners (1800s), employers like industrialists (1900s) and now technologists (2000s)], whose chief object is to hold and increase their power.” — former President Teddy Roosevelt. This economic system always protects and empowers this “small class” since the system is authoritarian by nature and this “small class” is always in control.
Thom asks, “How does this end?”
- “All, however, are problems of political corruption at their core. And in almost every case, a solution to these problems is being blocked by politicians being paid off [by oligarchs] in a fashion legalized by Republicans on the Supreme Court.”
We need a new, more democratic, economic system that will complement, protect, and empower our democratic political system. A system that will disempower and democratically limit the existence and excessive power of oligarchs. A system that will preserve itself by permanently limiting oligarch wealth accumulation by removing them from control over that new system.
We need more than federal laws to re-regulate the authoritarian economic system - oligarchs will just pay to void those limitations on their wealth accumulation. We need more than to end Citizens United and the unlimited bribery it sanctioned. We need to prevent the accumulation of cash by Oligarchs in the first place. We need innovative laws to democratize our old, broken, authoritarian economic system. We need to enable, empower and protect democracy at work, https://www.democracyatwork.info.
We need workers deciding how their profits are fairly distributed. We need workers deciding where their factories and jobs are located. We need workers deciding what happens to their co-workers when their co-worker skills are no longer needed. Responsible workers won’t allow harmful work by-products to poison their communities. Responsible workers won’t use profits for anti-democratic initiatives that will threaten their wages, benefits, jobs, co-workers, safety or communities.
This is deja vu all over again, as you have detailed, Thom. ( can't believe your diligence, thanks again! )
I call it Moneyarchy, to distinguish it from other gilded ages in the USA. ( Monarchy plus oligarchy, but with morons . . . )
Whatever it is called, the very richest among us need to wake up and lead the way to make sure the rule of law is strong and maintained.
Why? In other oligarchies, no oligarch has been safe -- Russia and Saudi Arabia give many easy recent examples. So . . .
Oligarchs, take note! Beware! Some oligarchs do not respect your zillions, and you better make sure the democratic republic is strong and secure and can protect you!
The National Wealth Clock has chimed $141 Trillion.
That’s net wealth - net, net, net, net, and net. Net of mortgages, net of car loans, net of credit cards, net of student f-ing debt, net of all other obligations.
You haven’t seen the National Wealth Clock? Funny.
Nick Hanauer should build a proper one, but he hasn’t responded. I ran into Robert Reich on the sidewalk a few months ago, and through masks said ‘$140 Trillion!’ and he said, ‘yeah, can you believe it?’ but no more, he was running errands. Still haven’t heard it from him, in his ‘Wealth and Poverty’ class lectures. I spoke directly with the excellent Senator Ron Wyden in 2016, but he was still reeling from Russian interference in our election. A few weeks ago I spoke directly with the excellent Senator Jeff Merkley, and gave him a letter from 2014, when our net wealth was a measly $81 Trillion, but I still haven’t heard it from him or the Blue Wave.
To echo your comments about the Supreme Court ruling on money in politics, the ‘National Debt Clock’ is a lie. A big lie. I just realized how big, thanks, and that ruling has been a top focus for me. And outright lies in a top court ruling are clear grounds for impeachment and removal.
If you have $141 in one pocket, and an IOU for $30 in the other, you *are not* in debt!
So much more to say, but I’m always trying to find singular actions that can galvanize many.
A National Wealth Clock ought to get a lot of people’s attention - but I have been on that road for a long time. best luck to US — b.rad
Source: ( .gov web site ) ( It's like a stock market chart for our total household wealth, updated quarterly . . . it's about $1.1 million per household, a staggering number -- that should be TWICE as staggering, spread over the rest of us )
How are you going to "establish" anything when our side doesn't have a voice? A serous question. We all are gadflies. The morbidly rich hold the reins and figure keep them tight with the Supreme Court supporting them. You said you had ideas to deliver tomorrow but that's today, 8/25, and you were preempted by student debt. We need to have that forum for what to do -- not for what we need that we are eloquent about but for how to change things. I'd say it has to be we-the-people organizing ourselves, and I hope we can talk about ways to do that.
I agree, "what to do" seems far more important than why things are screwed up"
I would look to the Tea Party. They formed to oppose Obama and by the time his two terms were over their candidate won the White House and entirely took over the GOP...
So we know it can be done and it can be done quickly. Of course the Tea Party was entirely funded (IE: mailing lists, media access, professionals donor networks etc..) by a few billionaires like the Koch's. But the bottom line is that they did it. (A) Won the White House and (B) Took over the GOP.
How can the left do this? Organize, Protest and Vote.. It is as simple as that. Are you involved in an organized effort to overtake the Dem party with real progressives.? If you are organized what are you doing to create attention? Lastly, vote!!!
Vote in every single primary and no matter what NEVER EVER vote for the Party's Choice. Always make sure you vote for the progressive. No you are not going to start winning elections tomorrow but the move votes progressives see in each election cycle the better chances for the progressive in the next election cycle. STOP letting the Party Choice win reelection. VOTE
Michael, I have a lot of ideas. I poke around here with some of them, but mostly people are agreeing on how bad things are. Those ideas aren't about electing Democrats, who also serve the oligarchy although not venally like the Republicans, but are how we-the-people get a voice. I'm getting some formal materials so I get taken seriously, but want to see some drafts? Here's a 3-minute video: https://vimeo.com/742856949. And this is a fanciful package I'm working on to house some of the ideas for what we could do: https://suespeaks.org/saving-the-world. In the world of the internet, we don't need a billion dollars -- just some ideas that go viral could do the trick.
you are spot on. Its not about getting Democrats that are serving the Oligarchs re elected. It is about bringing them down and taking over the party...
Good luck on your organizing. We all have to do our bit. Loved the video
Thom. No doubt we are horribly coerced by big money corruption. But placing the entire blame on some on Supreme Court and the actions of Ronald Reagan points to a whole other kind of coercion. Such hyperbolic rhetoric entirely strips agency from everyone else responsible for our political mess. Your frame simply absolves a countless number that must be included in this critique. During Reagan’s entire presidency Democrats controlled the House. They could have done many things to stop him. And since Reagan, Democrats have controlled Congress as many years as the Republicans. Had they done the necessary work, so many of these related matters could have gone a much more constructive way. Blaming just one party for all these problems is sophomoric hyperbole at best and gross deception at worst.
I agree, there certainly are several approaches we could take to fix this. One would be a clear and honest reminder that both parties are completely responsible for the corruption that’s devastating our system. Also, it would be honest to remind your readers that there are many billionaires and banksters that continue to move policies in a very leftist direction. This would include such billionaires as Bill Gates, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Robert Iger, Jeff Bezos, Dana Walden, Michael Bloomberg, Jack Dorsey, Parag Agrawal, Tim Cook, Sundar Pichai, Chris Licht, Larry Fink, Jamie Dimon.
These and many more remind us of the magnitude of our problems. Or do you see it another way? That is, would you exonerate the billionaires and banksters on your side because they agree with your ideological beliefs? I hope not, but something tells me they’d most likely be let off the hook.
Whether we like it or not these two parties do not bear equal responsibility for the corruption of our government.
The Court was installed specifically to carry out these blind atrocities with no care for what the majority population in this country has requested or agreed with . And they do not find anything wrong with installing Citizens United as blithely as they did. The banned abortion , not based on the Constitution or precedent , but because the unholy alliance of white Christian nationalists required it. They are not in the majority. Mitch McConnel denied Obama’s his due designation of a Supreme Court candidate out of his petty bulldozer view that if Republicans aren’t in charge , no one else is going to get their position acknowledged. Republicans lie with fervor and suppress black , brown and liberal voters. They refused to sign on with the Voting Rights act , not because there was fraud which they lied about . But because they are bigots. They are the minority party but they have money and that determines many outcomes that are opposed by the majority party. They protect Criminal activity of their depraved leader. But mostly they lie. They’ve bought up most media in this country . These are all things the Republicans have backed There are not tit for tat actions on both sides. Sorry it is different.
Thanks for your challenge, however you’ve missed the point of the argument. You’ve provided a long list of republican value judgments that you disagree with. From vague claims about blind atrocities to generalizations about what the majority of the country feels to your own feelings on voting right and the constitutionality of the Roe … these clearly reflect your own values. There are a host of counter arguments to them but you simply discount them because they conflict w your beliefs and perspectives. And of course there are 10s of millions of people disagree with your values and opinions. Are they all wrong because you disagree with them?
But my point is that its self evident that both sides have their billionaires that have lobbied and paid to impose their ideological agendas. These agenda items include todays demand that we subsidize billions in student debt, that we continue to pay trillions in social services programming, that we maintain tax payer abortions, that we pay billions to protect Ukraines borders. Billionaires on the left continue to lobby to legalize drugs and weaken restrictions in law enforcement. Living in Chicago I know this firsthand. They lobby and pay for agencies,
not elected officials, to determine environmental laws and restrictions. They donate billions to politicians to keep their ideologues in office. The list of things the left pushes and pays for can go on and on.
Who has the superior values that support either sides’ ideologies would be good debate but that’s not salient to this discussion. Thom seems to tell his readers that progressive liberals have been powerless in the face of republican decisions over the past 40 years. Such rhetoric defies the facts on the ground.
Progressive messaging dominates big tech, the universities, cbs, nbc, abc, pbs, cnn and msnbc. It determines the storylines of Hollywood, and it informs the directions of NYC, LA, DC, Boston and Chicago etc. Who funds the power behind these things? It’s not the evil billionaires on the right.
Again I’m not arguing that one side is more evil then the other. That seems to be your argument. That’s another debate for another time. My point is that our country has been co-opted by the power of millionaires and billionaires on both sides. You seem to simply believe your billionaires are better than your enemy’s billionaires on the right. Certainly that’s what Thom believes.
I’m sure you are correct in the point that these values are also mine. I base that on what feels right and true to me. I do not expect that everyone agrees. Thanks for your response. 🙏
Thanks for your honesty concerning your feelings. I really appreciate this.
Conversations like this, perhaps reveal why and how people on each side disagree. Personally, I'm much more interested in why people disagree and why they disagree so adamantly. The language we use to support our views really seems to boil down to the feelings we have about our values, which in turn inform our political convictions and ideologies. I realize there's much more to this but I see our country's uncivil war of words coming down to a war of values. Of course this begs the question: Why are my values better than yours? Or vise versa. I suppose many would risk it and say: My values are better because they're true. I think that statement is based on a huge belief and the source of so many of our differences. And I've found (especially on this site) that when we get to the question of the values that inform our politics, that's where the discussion comes to an abrupt halt. Very sad that the conversation doesn't go further. If it did, we might actually become better listeners and stop condemning the other side for holding different values. Maybe I'm wrong, but something tells me the sides will NEVER reconcile anything unless they come to terms with their very personal opinions and value judgments ... and also then stop demanding their opinion are true and the other side's are, not only untrue, but also immoral and evil. this kind of rhetoric can only push the sides further and further away from each other. Someday the distance between the sides will eventuate into something far worse than our war of words.
Stephen Nelson is NOT correct - about anything. First, he calls Thom Hartmann's writing and thinking hyperbolic. Let me quote Mr. Nelson: "But placing the entire blame on some on Supreme Court and the actions of Ronald Reagan points to a whole other kind of coercion. Such hyperbolic rhetoric entirely strips agency from everyone else responsible for our political mess. Your frame simply absolves a countless number that must be included in this critique." INDEED Thom Hartmann's main focus is to write clearly and sanely on these pressing issues affecting ALL Americans. And he does that DAILY.
So, it's not a matter of Nelson disagreeing with you - he's trying to "put you in your place" - like the Supreme Court tried to do to ALL FEMALES (I didn't write "women" because a 10-year-old with a pregnancy through rape is NOT a woman just because she has a uterus.)
So I am greatly offended by Stephen Nelson's speech here. Oh, he is FREE to do that. But honestly, rudeness isn't necessarily covered by the First Amendment. And unclear thinking is just offensive, on its own. AND there is not need for you to "thank him for his response. Just sayin'
Thanks Dana, I appreciate your candor about this situation. Sometimes when I disagree vehemently w someone, I know I have a tendency to use sarcasm and sometimes I just try to mow them off the page. Mr. Nelson had some very condescending undertones with his response , but I still felt better about towing the line politely. He and I ,at a baseline ,will never agree on much , but I try to keep my bulldozer parked . It’s safer this way. No one can change the facts of this , no matter what they say or how they say it. Reagan’s Revolution till the present the GOP has made any but the wealthiest part of this population hostages to their twisted ideas . The Supreme Court today consists of groomed far right ideologues fed by monied puppeteers. With the exception of the minority
reality based Justices, they continue to meld religion with the government because it suits their devotion to authoritarianism.
Thanks for your comments and perceptions. Take care.
Thanks for writing back, Patricia. I liked this -"but I try to keep my bulldozer parked." And am going to use that as some advice for myself. So I can take better care of myself. Later, I wondered why Mr. Nelson had even bothered to read Thom Hartmann's essay at all. Yet, sometimes some people are just "itching for a fight." As our democracy threatens to take flight, we will see more chaos and violence - of everything, including (maybe especially) speech. When I go out into the public sphere (which is not often), I find myself in chaotic and semi-violent situations. Entering a Whole Foods store in downtown Denver and finding around TEN in-uniform Denver PD cops. I thought, what's going on in Whole Foods to create all this paranoia and fear? Then all of a sudden, I felt it, too. Just this big presence of law enforcement (and Denver cops have a "reputation") struck fear in ME - I've never felt that in downtown Denver before, never in a WF store. NOTE: I am reading "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present" and learning a lot about what it looks like in the beginnings. It's definitely started here. I needed education. And recommend to anyone brave enough to read it.
Congress must gut and incinerate the Buckley and Citizens United Scotus decisions, then put limits on corporate, individual, and PAC political donations, prohibit dark money in politics, and regulate or ban any other forms of political influence and favors involving money.
NO Constitutional amendment is needed:
Congress can do this with their power to ban judicial review of select legislation as ordained and authorized in Article 3, section 2, clause 2. Keep Scotus entirely out of this, or these 6 extremists will certainly make another horrific mess.
In fact for those who believe we can ONLY do this by amending the Constitution, remember that even an amendment wouldn't assure us that Scotus wouldn't step in to limit its reach and smother its effect. So, this must be OFF LIMITS for Scotuws.
No amendment, no "Move to Amend": Congress must act with NO Judicial Review allowed!
If Congress does not, then whatever is left of our democracy will perish.
A fine sweeping story of the deep injustice sown by our 'Justices'. The emperor had no clothes; what terrifying hate is cloaked by those long black robes? History needs be held close and itself protected from being purged.
It is of course the greatest trauma to this Nation, allowing thieving Corporations to determine how our country will function. Of all of the agents for repeated disaster to Democracy, The Supreme Court leads the pack . Republicans support the middle of the Snake, and the very wealthy insure it continues to have the fangs to insist on its status for harm and destruction. Corruption is routine and damning to anyone without huge amounts of money, the majority are at least struggling and many are drowning with no guards in sight. Tragic undermining of democracy.
Foreign interests own about 40% of US corporations, according to my searches.
So, 1) why can they make political contributions *at all* even with our scotus? and 2) why, again, do they get big tax cuts?
apologies for bombing the comments, had to throw that in — best luck to US, b.rad
ps search “foreign ownership fraction us corporations” one unverified source <https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/who-owns-us-stock-foreigners-and-rich-americans>
Howard Zinn would've been 100 today.
"As we pass from one century to another, one millennium to one another, we would like to think that history itself is transformed as dramatically as the calendar. However, it rushes on, as it always did, with two forces racing toward the future, one splendidly uniformed, the other ragged but inspired. There is the past and its continuing horrors: violence, war, prejudices against those who are different, outrageous monopolization of the good earth's wealth by a few, political power in the hands of liars and murderers, the building of prisons instead of schools, the poisoning of the press and the entire culture by money. It is easy to become discouraged observing this, especially since this is what the press and television insist that we look at, and nothing more. But there is also the bubbling of change under the surface of obedience: the growing revulsion against endless wars … the insistence of women all over the world that they will no longer tolerate abuse and subordination… There is civil disobedience against the military machine, protest against police brutality directed especially at people of color. … It is a race in which we can all choose to participate, or just to watch. But we should know that our choice will help determine the outcome."
- Howard Zinn
Your article, while informative, doesn't go far enough Thom. Legal reforms to right the current wrongs will last only one day as the morbidly rich pay their lawyers to scheme to overturn them. As long as capitalism is our economic system there will never be justice. We need to replace it with a system that has the laws of natural systems, the basic needs of working people as it's foundations.
The set up on denying abortion rights ( precedent for fifty years) has created unimaginable pain and chaos. This is not as much a moral issue as a fulcrum for denying women their right to choose. Republicans have made no bones about the fact that they have no interest in funding programs in nutrition for poverty stricken kids , of which there are more every year. They ruin public education by starvation of funds and push private education which denies access to the majority of kids. Children are deemed not mature enough to decide on abortion and at the same time are mature enough to raise a child. Men deciding who will bear children and raise them is arbitrary cruelty to mother and child. Doctors are not allowed to save a life in the event that pregnancy may kill the woman. Because in their twisted little minds women aren’t worth it . But the fetus is and if it lives, has no mother . Of course this is a decision we remove from women , because they’re incapable of reasonable decision making. These actions by the Court. Propelled by Republicans posing as God fearing protectors, they protect no one.
You're definitely hitting the heart of the matter. We can only hope it'll raise the consciousness of American society. In Canada, we're beholden to the medical establishment as well. We like to brag about our healthcare system, but the price we're paying for subsidized healthcare for all has been the mindset of complete dependence on them. So many of us have lost, or are losing, any confidence that we can keep ourselves healthy; we've given that confidence to the medical system, and healthcare is now THE drain by far on our budgets, and threatening to ruin us. We're affected by the greed of corporations and others likewise, but it's the medical system that's shredding the fabric of our society.
Great column as usual. I just want to add an observation:
If the Supreme Court deems corporate speech to be so important for informing us, isn't that importance directly related to, indeed only made meaningful by our response, i.e. our vote. So why is the court allowing unrestricted money to flow to "inform" us while granting states power to limit our vote.
I just want to mention how this works with democratic processes on a local level. The business owners run for office and make sure their interests are taken care of. This reflects in ordinances that control the homeless population, taxes, traffic, and many many more really important issues in a community.
"Shockingly" the end result is the focus is not safety and the public welfare. They want to run your city or county like a business and for businesses. This leads to insane worship of job creation and the creators.
Be vigilant about the business owners and networks that don't just want to buy the politicians, they want to be the politicians in their spare time. The idea of a conflict of interest has almost become "quaint" on the national AND local level.
The Clark story was an excellent example of how to catalyze action... This country is filled with Billionaires that love to bask in the glory of Twitter and any media that will report on them.
Taking one of them down for cheating on his/ her taxes in a very public way, in 2022, can catalyze both Red and Blue voters to start demanding that the law makers they vote for fight to reduce th power of the donor class.
Teddy Roosevelt famously opposed any rich person that though they were more powerful than the government. Having a President that shared in that world view will catalyze this. It always takes blood to make these things happen. I think voters will organize and vote for law makers that can get blood from todays egotistical, selfish and largely useless Billionaire class.
As my FB PINNED post, and its growing list of comments, says, Oligarchs Are The Problem, https://www.facebook.com/cahailey.
Our dominant economic system of the last 400 years, “[H]as [repeatedly] tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men[ royalty (1700s), slave owners (1800s), employers like industrialists (1900s) and now technologists (2000s)], whose chief object is to hold and increase their power.” — former President Teddy Roosevelt. This economic system always protects and empowers this “small class” since the system is authoritarian by nature and this “small class” is always in control.
Thom asks, “How does this end?”
- “All, however, are problems of political corruption at their core. And in almost every case, a solution to these problems is being blocked by politicians being paid off [by oligarchs] in a fashion legalized by Republicans on the Supreme Court.”
We need a new, more democratic, economic system that will complement, protect, and empower our democratic political system. A system that will disempower and democratically limit the existence and excessive power of oligarchs. A system that will preserve itself by permanently limiting oligarch wealth accumulation by removing them from control over that new system.
We need more than federal laws to re-regulate the authoritarian economic system - oligarchs will just pay to void those limitations on their wealth accumulation. We need more than to end Citizens United and the unlimited bribery it sanctioned. We need to prevent the accumulation of cash by Oligarchs in the first place. We need innovative laws to democratize our old, broken, authoritarian economic system. We need to enable, empower and protect democracy at work, https://www.democracyatwork.info.
We need workers deciding how their profits are fairly distributed. We need workers deciding where their factories and jobs are located. We need workers deciding what happens to their co-workers when their co-worker skills are no longer needed. Responsible workers won’t allow harmful work by-products to poison their communities. Responsible workers won’t use profits for anti-democratic initiatives that will threaten their wages, benefits, jobs, co-workers, safety or communities.
But first, we need a Brand New [People’s] Congress! https://www.brandnewcongress.org
This is deja vu all over again, as you have detailed, Thom. ( can't believe your diligence, thanks again! )
I call it Moneyarchy, to distinguish it from other gilded ages in the USA. ( Monarchy plus oligarchy, but with morons . . . )
Whatever it is called, the very richest among us need to wake up and lead the way to make sure the rule of law is strong and maintained.
Why? In other oligarchies, no oligarch has been safe -- Russia and Saudi Arabia give many easy recent examples. So . . .
Oligarchs, take note! Beware! Some oligarchs do not respect your zillions, and you better make sure the democratic republic is strong and secure and can protect you!
best luck to US -- b.rad
The National Wealth Clock has chimed $141 Trillion.
That’s net wealth - net, net, net, net, and net. Net of mortgages, net of car loans, net of credit cards, net of student f-ing debt, net of all other obligations.
You haven’t seen the National Wealth Clock? Funny.
Nick Hanauer should build a proper one, but he hasn’t responded. I ran into Robert Reich on the sidewalk a few months ago, and through masks said ‘$140 Trillion!’ and he said, ‘yeah, can you believe it?’ but no more, he was running errands. Still haven’t heard it from him, in his ‘Wealth and Poverty’ class lectures. I spoke directly with the excellent Senator Ron Wyden in 2016, but he was still reeling from Russian interference in our election. A few weeks ago I spoke directly with the excellent Senator Jeff Merkley, and gave him a letter from 2014, when our net wealth was a measly $81 Trillion, but I still haven’t heard it from him or the Blue Wave.
To echo your comments about the Supreme Court ruling on money in politics, the ‘National Debt Clock’ is a lie. A big lie. I just realized how big, thanks, and that ruling has been a top focus for me. And outright lies in a top court ruling are clear grounds for impeachment and removal.
If you have $141 in one pocket, and an IOU for $30 in the other, you *are not* in debt!
So much more to say, but I’m always trying to find singular actions that can galvanize many.
A National Wealth Clock ought to get a lot of people’s attention - but I have been on that road for a long time. best luck to US — b.rad
Source: ( .gov web site ) ( It's like a stock market chart for our total household wealth, updated quarterly . . . it's about $1.1 million per household, a staggering number -- that should be TWICE as staggering, spread over the rest of us )
<https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/>
How are you going to "establish" anything when our side doesn't have a voice? A serous question. We all are gadflies. The morbidly rich hold the reins and figure keep them tight with the Supreme Court supporting them. You said you had ideas to deliver tomorrow but that's today, 8/25, and you were preempted by student debt. We need to have that forum for what to do -- not for what we need that we are eloquent about but for how to change things. I'd say it has to be we-the-people organizing ourselves, and I hope we can talk about ways to do that.
Suzanne
I agree, "what to do" seems far more important than why things are screwed up"
I would look to the Tea Party. They formed to oppose Obama and by the time his two terms were over their candidate won the White House and entirely took over the GOP...
So we know it can be done and it can be done quickly. Of course the Tea Party was entirely funded (IE: mailing lists, media access, professionals donor networks etc..) by a few billionaires like the Koch's. But the bottom line is that they did it. (A) Won the White House and (B) Took over the GOP.
How can the left do this? Organize, Protest and Vote.. It is as simple as that. Are you involved in an organized effort to overtake the Dem party with real progressives.? If you are organized what are you doing to create attention? Lastly, vote!!!
Vote in every single primary and no matter what NEVER EVER vote for the Party's Choice. Always make sure you vote for the progressive. No you are not going to start winning elections tomorrow but the move votes progressives see in each election cycle the better chances for the progressive in the next election cycle. STOP letting the Party Choice win reelection. VOTE
Michael, I have a lot of ideas. I poke around here with some of them, but mostly people are agreeing on how bad things are. Those ideas aren't about electing Democrats, who also serve the oligarchy although not venally like the Republicans, but are how we-the-people get a voice. I'm getting some formal materials so I get taken seriously, but want to see some drafts? Here's a 3-minute video: https://vimeo.com/742856949. And this is a fanciful package I'm working on to house some of the ideas for what we could do: https://suespeaks.org/saving-the-world. In the world of the internet, we don't need a billion dollars -- just some ideas that go viral could do the trick.
Suzanne
you are spot on. Its not about getting Democrats that are serving the Oligarchs re elected. It is about bringing them down and taking over the party...
Good luck on your organizing. We all have to do our bit. Loved the video
Thom. No doubt we are horribly coerced by big money corruption. But placing the entire blame on some on Supreme Court and the actions of Ronald Reagan points to a whole other kind of coercion. Such hyperbolic rhetoric entirely strips agency from everyone else responsible for our political mess. Your frame simply absolves a countless number that must be included in this critique. During Reagan’s entire presidency Democrats controlled the House. They could have done many things to stop him. And since Reagan, Democrats have controlled Congress as many years as the Republicans. Had they done the necessary work, so many of these related matters could have gone a much more constructive way. Blaming just one party for all these problems is sophomoric hyperbole at best and gross deception at worst.
I agree, there certainly are several approaches we could take to fix this. One would be a clear and honest reminder that both parties are completely responsible for the corruption that’s devastating our system. Also, it would be honest to remind your readers that there are many billionaires and banksters that continue to move policies in a very leftist direction. This would include such billionaires as Bill Gates, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Robert Iger, Jeff Bezos, Dana Walden, Michael Bloomberg, Jack Dorsey, Parag Agrawal, Tim Cook, Sundar Pichai, Chris Licht, Larry Fink, Jamie Dimon.
These and many more remind us of the magnitude of our problems. Or do you see it another way? That is, would you exonerate the billionaires and banksters on your side because they agree with your ideological beliefs? I hope not, but something tells me they’d most likely be let off the hook.
Whether we like it or not these two parties do not bear equal responsibility for the corruption of our government.
The Court was installed specifically to carry out these blind atrocities with no care for what the majority population in this country has requested or agreed with . And they do not find anything wrong with installing Citizens United as blithely as they did. The banned abortion , not based on the Constitution or precedent , but because the unholy alliance of white Christian nationalists required it. They are not in the majority. Mitch McConnel denied Obama’s his due designation of a Supreme Court candidate out of his petty bulldozer view that if Republicans aren’t in charge , no one else is going to get their position acknowledged. Republicans lie with fervor and suppress black , brown and liberal voters. They refused to sign on with the Voting Rights act , not because there was fraud which they lied about . But because they are bigots. They are the minority party but they have money and that determines many outcomes that are opposed by the majority party. They protect Criminal activity of their depraved leader. But mostly they lie. They’ve bought up most media in this country . These are all things the Republicans have backed There are not tit for tat actions on both sides. Sorry it is different.
Thanks for your challenge, however you’ve missed the point of the argument. You’ve provided a long list of republican value judgments that you disagree with. From vague claims about blind atrocities to generalizations about what the majority of the country feels to your own feelings on voting right and the constitutionality of the Roe … these clearly reflect your own values. There are a host of counter arguments to them but you simply discount them because they conflict w your beliefs and perspectives. And of course there are 10s of millions of people disagree with your values and opinions. Are they all wrong because you disagree with them?
But my point is that its self evident that both sides have their billionaires that have lobbied and paid to impose their ideological agendas. These agenda items include todays demand that we subsidize billions in student debt, that we continue to pay trillions in social services programming, that we maintain tax payer abortions, that we pay billions to protect Ukraines borders. Billionaires on the left continue to lobby to legalize drugs and weaken restrictions in law enforcement. Living in Chicago I know this firsthand. They lobby and pay for agencies,
not elected officials, to determine environmental laws and restrictions. They donate billions to politicians to keep their ideologues in office. The list of things the left pushes and pays for can go on and on.
Who has the superior values that support either sides’ ideologies would be good debate but that’s not salient to this discussion. Thom seems to tell his readers that progressive liberals have been powerless in the face of republican decisions over the past 40 years. Such rhetoric defies the facts on the ground.
Progressive messaging dominates big tech, the universities, cbs, nbc, abc, pbs, cnn and msnbc. It determines the storylines of Hollywood, and it informs the directions of NYC, LA, DC, Boston and Chicago etc. Who funds the power behind these things? It’s not the evil billionaires on the right.
Again I’m not arguing that one side is more evil then the other. That seems to be your argument. That’s another debate for another time. My point is that our country has been co-opted by the power of millionaires and billionaires on both sides. You seem to simply believe your billionaires are better than your enemy’s billionaires on the right. Certainly that’s what Thom believes.
I’m sure you are correct in the point that these values are also mine. I base that on what feels right and true to me. I do not expect that everyone agrees. Thanks for your response. 🙏
I appreciate your response though I think it’s obvious to both of us that we disagree.
Thanks for your honesty concerning your feelings. I really appreciate this.
Conversations like this, perhaps reveal why and how people on each side disagree. Personally, I'm much more interested in why people disagree and why they disagree so adamantly. The language we use to support our views really seems to boil down to the feelings we have about our values, which in turn inform our political convictions and ideologies. I realize there's much more to this but I see our country's uncivil war of words coming down to a war of values. Of course this begs the question: Why are my values better than yours? Or vise versa. I suppose many would risk it and say: My values are better because they're true. I think that statement is based on a huge belief and the source of so many of our differences. And I've found (especially on this site) that when we get to the question of the values that inform our politics, that's where the discussion comes to an abrupt halt. Very sad that the conversation doesn't go further. If it did, we might actually become better listeners and stop condemning the other side for holding different values. Maybe I'm wrong, but something tells me the sides will NEVER reconcile anything unless they come to terms with their very personal opinions and value judgments ... and also then stop demanding their opinion are true and the other side's are, not only untrue, but also immoral and evil. this kind of rhetoric can only push the sides further and further away from each other. Someday the distance between the sides will eventuate into something far worse than our war of words.
Thanks again.
Patricia,
Stephen Nelson is NOT correct - about anything. First, he calls Thom Hartmann's writing and thinking hyperbolic. Let me quote Mr. Nelson: "But placing the entire blame on some on Supreme Court and the actions of Ronald Reagan points to a whole other kind of coercion. Such hyperbolic rhetoric entirely strips agency from everyone else responsible for our political mess. Your frame simply absolves a countless number that must be included in this critique." INDEED Thom Hartmann's main focus is to write clearly and sanely on these pressing issues affecting ALL Americans. And he does that DAILY.
So, it's not a matter of Nelson disagreeing with you - he's trying to "put you in your place" - like the Supreme Court tried to do to ALL FEMALES (I didn't write "women" because a 10-year-old with a pregnancy through rape is NOT a woman just because she has a uterus.)
So I am greatly offended by Stephen Nelson's speech here. Oh, he is FREE to do that. But honestly, rudeness isn't necessarily covered by the First Amendment. And unclear thinking is just offensive, on its own. AND there is not need for you to "thank him for his response. Just sayin'
Thanks Dana, I appreciate your candor about this situation. Sometimes when I disagree vehemently w someone, I know I have a tendency to use sarcasm and sometimes I just try to mow them off the page. Mr. Nelson had some very condescending undertones with his response , but I still felt better about towing the line politely. He and I ,at a baseline ,will never agree on much , but I try to keep my bulldozer parked . It’s safer this way. No one can change the facts of this , no matter what they say or how they say it. Reagan’s Revolution till the present the GOP has made any but the wealthiest part of this population hostages to their twisted ideas . The Supreme Court today consists of groomed far right ideologues fed by monied puppeteers. With the exception of the minority
reality based Justices, they continue to meld religion with the government because it suits their devotion to authoritarianism.
Thanks for your comments and perceptions. Take care.
Thanks for writing back, Patricia. I liked this -"but I try to keep my bulldozer parked." And am going to use that as some advice for myself. So I can take better care of myself. Later, I wondered why Mr. Nelson had even bothered to read Thom Hartmann's essay at all. Yet, sometimes some people are just "itching for a fight." As our democracy threatens to take flight, we will see more chaos and violence - of everything, including (maybe especially) speech. When I go out into the public sphere (which is not often), I find myself in chaotic and semi-violent situations. Entering a Whole Foods store in downtown Denver and finding around TEN in-uniform Denver PD cops. I thought, what's going on in Whole Foods to create all this paranoia and fear? Then all of a sudden, I felt it, too. Just this big presence of law enforcement (and Denver cops have a "reputation") struck fear in ME - I've never felt that in downtown Denver before, never in a WF store. NOTE: I am reading "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present" and learning a lot about what it looks like in the beginnings. It's definitely started here. I needed education. And recommend to anyone brave enough to read it.
Thank you again for your honesty in this discussion. Some of the acute angst about these differing points of view has been purposefully injected.
It’s the hate in the delivery that makes it so divisive. And that of course, is combustible.
Honesty without rancor seems sometimes to be unattainable.
Again, thanks for your thoughts and your delivery of same.