When is the Price of a Politician Too High?

Since Citizens United paved the way for the wealthy to buy U.S. political candidates outright, there is more for Americans to worry about than losing their democracy, though that is certainly a blow to a once democratic country.

The people with all of this money expect something in return and in the case of Newt Gingrich, and his financial backer Sheldon Adelson, it might be a price few Americans are willing to pay.

Adelson apparently has demanded that the $10 million he gave to Gingrich be repaid with a war in Iran, if Gingrich is ever president.  (maybe on the moon)

Bill Maher and former Republican Congressman Mark Foley (yes that Mark Foley) discussed this recently, and Foley rightfully claimed that the "passion of the moment should not dictate foreign policy".  This bubble that conservatives live in, that facts can never penetrate, has to burst, before they do something really stupid. 

They actually believe that they can win a nuclear war.  Having more nukes only protects you from a potential nuclear attack.  Using them means something else altogether.

Like many conservative bubble dwellers, Adelson claims to love Israel, which is code for hoping Israel levels the rest of the Middle East.  Former president Jimmy Carter was interviewed by Time magazine last week, and was asked about the Israel/nuclear situation.

Are you optimistic about Israel's future?


No, I'm not. The U.S. has the least influence in the Middle East now than it's had since Israel was formed. We are totally immune to any sort of influence from the Palestinians or from the Arab world. We are completely in bed with the Israelis, who are persecuting the Palestinians horribly, and this is contrary, I think, to the best interest of Israel.


What do you think it means that Iran seems to have its first nuclear fuel rod?


Well, of course, the religious leaders of Iran have sworn on their word of honor that they're not going to manufacture nuclear weapons. If they are lying, then I don't see that as a major catastrophe because they'll only have one or two military weapons. Israel probably has 300 or so.

Carter is an Evangelist who created Habitats for Humanity.  The Evangelists circling the GOP like vultures, would never dream of doing something to help mankind.  Instead they seem determined to destroy it, arrogantly believing that only they will survive.

We don't talk about this enough (at all) in Canada, but as Lawrence Martin warns us in Harperland, Stephen Harper follows the doctine created by American conservatives:  The Clash of Civilizations.  He is onboard with the anhilation of Iran.  Newt Gingrich and Stephen Harper together as leaders would be terrifying.

If there is one good thing about the new policies that allow corporate financing of politicians, it's that the wealthy who used to operate in the shadows, are now known to us.  They are front and centre of the ugliness.  The Koch Brothers we knew about.  Some of the others, not so much.

It turns out that Newt's sugar daddy is not just insane but allegedly engages in criminal activities.  Today's headline:  Gingrich's billionaire campaign backer under federal investigation after lawsuit alleges he hushed possible ties to Chinese organized crime.

Now that we know who they are it will be like shooting fish in a barrel. We'll have the billionaires begging to change the election financing rules, or at least moving back to the shadows.

Stephen Harper still refuses to tell us who financed his leadership campaign in 2003.  It might be nice to have that list so that we could shine a light on those shaping Canadian policy.  But then again, maybe it's best we don't know.

Too Big to Fail or So Big They Must Fail

g

There is an excellent Viewpoint piece in this week's Time magazine, written by foreign and domestic policy expert, David Rothkopf.

Fixing Capitalism Means Taking Power Back From Business

Rothkopf discusses not only the rise of big stateless corporations, now dictating foreign policy, but also what domestic capitalism has turned itself into. 

Using Newt Gingrich's attack on Mitt Romney as an example:  “If we identify capitalism with rich guys looting companies, we’re going to have a very hard time protecting it.”  For once I have to agree with Newt, though he's hardly an example of  principled commercialism.

Rothkopf rightfully claims that a "key part of fixing capitalism will be reconciling the large and growing imbalances between the public and private sector."  Corporations have gotten so big and powerful that when they make bad decisions, citizens are told that they must pay for those bad decisions or go down with the ship.  Yet when they rebound, they cling to their wealth and throw the rest of us out of the lifeboats.

When early corporations were established by royal charters almost a millennium ago, there was no mistaking their purpose. They had been created by the state to serve its interests. But over the centuries, they took advantage of their special status, which allowed them to achieve enormous scale and buy political favor. The result: They helped shape the development of laws that further tipped the balance of power in their favor ... Corporations have morphed from legal entities designed to ensure an enterprise could survive the death of its owners to institutions possessing more rights than people.

Even Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, condemned "the abuses of the megacompanies of his day, like the British East India Co., calling them “nuisances in every respect,” since the monopolies they fostered inevitably led to profit-destroying corruption."

Conservatives like to suggest that their radical movement is in response to the French Revolution, heralding Edmond Burke as the father of modern conservatism.  However, instead of living in the 18th century, they might want to learn from it.

The major cause of the French Revolution was the stark division of social classes in French society.  The First Estate, the Church and clergy, which represented  less than 2% of the population, owned almost 10 per cent of all land in France. They paid no taxes and relied on tithes to support their endeavours.

The Second Estate, or nobility, made up just 2 percent of the population, but owned most of the wealth.  Like the Church they paid little in taxes, despite earning enormous sums from rent on their property, and interest on loans. 

The Third Estate was everyone else. 96% of the population, with the poor propping up them all, through hefty taxes, tithes to the church, and rents to their landlords.   However, it was not the poor who initiated the French Revolution, but the middle class.  The merchants, manufacturers and professional people, who resented the birthrights of the nobility.

Today's capitalism has become a culture of nobility, where lobbyists hold court, the right-wing media act as royal scribes and the true aristocracies are the "Walmarts and Exxons of the world".  We have recreated the conditions that led to the French Revolution.

But What of 'Laissez Faire'?

The notion that if you leave business alone and let the markets prevail, everyone will win, has proven to be the biggest hoax of all time.  Says Rothkopf:

The current argument that larger government impinges on rather than protects or advances individual liberties is a far cry from the ideas that fueled England’s Glorious Revolution and the American Revolution. It ignores the fact that the void created by smaller government is often not filled by “liberty.” When matters like the global environment or regulation of derivatives trading are left entirely to market forces, for instance, outcomes tend to serve the most powerful because markets neither have a conscience nor do they ensure opportunity.

And yet the U.S. Supreme Court is allowing large corporations to be classed as "citizens", which means that they can now buy politicians outright.  No more under the table transactions.  Put your money in their mouth and a bill of sale comes out their butt.

The 96% in France created democracy.  The 1% in the United States and Canada is intent on destroying it.  What side of history do we want to be on?