
Strategic Culture Foundation
3 December 2017
A recent article in the Washington Post described
how the current US tax-‘reform’ bill is being shaped; and it describes,
basically (at least as far as tax-law changes are concerned), the
operation of a US dictatorship by the super-rich.
First
of all, however: there is no longer any realistic question as regards
whether the US in recent decades has been a dictatorship, or instead a
democracy. According to the only scientific analysis of the relevant data,
that has been done in order to determine whether the US is
a dictatorship or a democracy, the US is definitely
a dictatorship that’s perpetrated by the extremely richest, against the
public-at-large; in other words: the US Government functions as an
aristocracy, otherwise referred-to as an oligarchy, or a plutocracy, or a
kleptocracy; but, in any case, and by whatever name, it’s ruled by a
tiny number of the extremely wealthiest and their agents, on behalf of
those few super-rich, against the concerns and interests and needs of
the public (everyone else). So: instead of being rule by the public (the
“demos”
is the Greek term for it), it’s rule on behalf of a tiny dictatorial
class, of extreme wealth — by whatever name we might happen to label
this ruling class.
That study,
by professors Gilens and Page, explained that it examined “1,779
instances between 1981 and 2002 in which a national survey of the
general public asked a favor/oppose question about a proposed policy
change,” and it compared those public-policy preferences, by the public,
versus the public-policy preferences regarding those same issues, by
the super-wealthiest; and, it found that only the public-policy
preferences by the super-wealthiest and their paid agents, made any
discernible difference, at all, in the likelihood that a given public
policy ultimately became enacted into law, in the United States. Whereas
the public-policy preferences of the wealthiest do, at far higher than
mere random chances, become enacted into laws, the public-policy
preferences of the public are (except in political rhetoric and promises
— frauds perpetrated to deceive the public) ignored, in the United
States.
Here is an excellent six-minute video describing the methodology and findings in that landmark study, and here is
a commentary by former US President Jimmy Carter, in which he says that
he knows it’s true. He said this not on the basis of examining
thousands of cases and doing the statistical analysis of the data, like
Gilens and Page had done, but just on the basis of his observations of
how the US federal government has been functioning in recent decades.
And, of course, the scientific study is vastly more reliable than is any individual’s mere opinion about the matter.
Furthermore,
there exists evidence that even in some local or state governments in
the United States, considerable corruption exists, and therefore an
extreme slant prevails in favor of the rich. During June 2016, I
headlined about this, “Here Is How Corrupt America Is”, and opened:
The
best reporting on the depth of America’s dictatorship is probably that
being done by Atlanta Georgia’s NBC-affiliated, Gannett-owned, TV
Channel “11 Alive,” WXIA television, its “The Investigators” series of
local investigative news reports, which show, up close and at a
cellularly detailed level, the way things actually work in today’s
America. Although it’s only local, it displays what meets the legal
standards of the US federal government in actually any state in the
union; so, it exposes the character of the US government, such that
what’s shown to be true here, meets America’s standard for ‘democracy’,
or else the federal government isn’t enforcing federal laws against it
(which is the same thing as its meeting the federal government’s
standards).
The
links to three of these local TV news reports will be provided, along
with a summary of each of the videos; and then the broader context will
be provided, which ties the local picture in with the national, and then
the resulting international, picture. So: this will be like a zoom-lens
view, starting with three selected close-ups, and then broadening the
view to wide-angle, showing the context in terms of which what’s
happening in that fine detail (those close-up views) makes sense.
What
was exemplified in this reporting by that excellent investigative team
could be called “corporate organized-gangsterism,” and this gangsterism
was being led by an operation, “ALEC,” that was founded by politicians
whose careers are funded by the Koch brothers and some other US billionaires.
Furthermore, as was mentioned briefly at the opening here, a recent issue of the Washington Post’s “PowerPost” section was titled "The Finance 202: Tax overhaul's big test comes now”,
and it described in detail what was shaping the Trump Administration’s
tax-overhaul bill. This article reported that the lobbyists were shaping
it 100%. It’s a superb nitty-gritty, down among the weeds, description,
of the monetary deals, the horse-trading, that were being made, not
only for corporations, but for the wealthiest non-business lobbies,
including ‘nonprofit’ ones, but almost all of these lobbies, too, depend
overwhelmingly upon billionaires for their funding. What’s being carved-up and served, is being carved-up from governments, and being served to the
super-rich. (After all: conservatives say “Government bad, business
good,” and Republicans are the conservative Party; so, it’s taking from
government, and going to business.)
So:
is it any wonder why Gilens and Page found what they did? They found
that "economic elites and organized groups representing business
interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy,
while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no
independent influence.” (By “mass-based groups” was being referenced
what the left often calls “movements” or “grass-roots” organizations.
After all, what happened from “Occupy Wall Street”? Nothing. It was a
big waste of time and effort. Authentic movements get marginalized,
because the billionaires’ ‘news’media despise them. Fake ones, such as
the Kochs’ “The Tea Party ‘movement’,” get weaponized, because the
billionaires’ ‘news’media treat them extensively, and often grant them
respect. Top-down’s the way, in any dictatorship. That includes in
America.)
Here is another excellent video — this one 10 minutes long — summarizing the Gilens and Page study.
The
only major difference between Republican politicians and Democratic
ones, then, is that, whereas Republican ones don’t even need to pretend
that they oppose limitless greed (since limitless greed that’s carried
out by frauds instead of by outright physical violence — which latter
type of coercion is the type that’s employed more by lower-class crooks,
anyway, and those are the type of crooks who fill our prisons, not the
type who fill our boardrooms — is, essentially, supported by
Republicans’ ideology, as ‘being entrepreneurial’ and ‘competitive
spirit’), Democratic politicians do need to make that pretense (since
their voters are liberals, and liberals don’t share the conservatives’
“Greed is good” libertarian faith). But the outcomes, even when
Democrats are in power, are vastly more helpful to the billionaires,
than to the public.
Does
this mean that Democratic (or liberal) politicians are necessarily more
hypocritical than Republican ones are? No. Whereas Democrats pretend to
be opposed to the system’s favoring the super-rich, Republicans pretend
to be opposed to “sins” and other religious-based shiboleths. Both
Parties can win and retain power only by deceiving (defrauding) the
public, and serving the billionaires, though in different ways — some
conservative, and some liberal. Virtually everything else than that
service to billionaires (and to centi-millionaires) is just frauds by
politicians, because, at least after around 1970, only the richest 1% or
(usually far) less are actually being served by the US federal
Government. It’s not the billionaires that are defrauded by politicians;
it is clearly the public that is being defrauded by them.
The
public are served only to the extent that the public’s interests are
the same as the billionaires’ interests. And the Gilens and Page study
found that the public’s policy-preferences are simply ignored — not
ignored in the political rhetoric, but ignored in the political outcomes.
The
US Government, thus, is of a few people (the policymakers), by the
billionaires, and for the billionaires. And that’s just an established
fact.
Source: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/12/03/how-us-dictatorship-works.html
Comments
Post a Comment