Wealth = political power
Robert Reich
The only point I take issue with Reich over is his statement, "America is not yet an oligarchy...."
Of course it is. That's why it was structured as a republic rather than a popular democracy at its inception and was soon to be dominated by two-party politics controlled by bosses.
Reich says, "American democracy used to depend on political parties that more or less represented most of us. Political scientists of the 1950s and 1960s marveled at American “pluralism,” by which they meant the capacities of parties and other membership groups to reflect the preferences of the vast majority of citizens."
This is the same period that Thomas Piketty points out as an anomaly in the history of capitalism.
Otherwise, it is a good post.
Reich says, "American democracy used to depend on political parties that more or less represented most of us. Political scientists of the 1950s and 1960s marveled at American “pluralism,” by which they meant the capacities of parties and other membership groups to reflect the preferences of the vast majority of citizens."
This is the same period that Thomas Piketty points out as an anomaly in the history of capitalism.
Otherwise, it is a good post.
Big Money wouldn't be a problem if we didn't elect selfish people.
ReplyDeletePoliticians do what Big Money tells them because they want to stay in office. They like being popular.
I'm not the world's biggest Bloomberg fan by a longshot, but I will say this about him. At least he actually got in the ring himself and ran for office. He was his own frontman for his 1% policies.
ReplyDelete