James Kwak: The Only Two Things That Matter: Why I'm Supporting Larry Lessig

James Kwak writes that The Only Two Things That Matter: Why I’m Supporting Larry Lessig.

One of the most common objections to Larry Lessig’s candidacy is that even if he does become president, he won’t be able to pass his electoral reform bills. But why won’t he? Because Republicans have a solid lock on the House of Representatives — and they have it because of systematic gerrymandering on the state level. Again, the problem is with a political system that allows the majority in the state legislature to use redistricting to entrench itself in power.

If we don’t fix the system — then, well, nothing else really matters. Forget about doing anything about climate change.

At a minimum, Larry Lessig’s campaign will bring attention to the importance of electoral reform and political equality. And if he does win the Democratic nomination? Well, I’d like to see the election that will follow. We know that a large majority of Americans have lost faith in the political system. What will happen when one candidate campaigns solely on a platform of leveling the playing field?

(And, let’s face it, it’s not like we have such great candidates this time. Bernie Sanders is a self-professed socialist, Hillary Clinton is one of the most disliked people in American politics, and … Joe Biden?)

Emphasis Mine

Kwak is a Capitalist apologist who believes that the wrong people are running the system. I am a Communist apologist who believes we have the wrong system.

Both of us believe that the majority of people are alienated from the political system. Kwak does not understand that this is by design in a Capitalist system.

The politcal system must serve and protect the economic interests of the ruling class.

In a Capitalist system, the ruling class consists of the owners of capital. Their primary objective is to preserve and grow their capital. The political process must serve that objective.

Thus, any measures to dimmish their capital through redistribution of wealth, prohibition of profitable industries (such as coal mining, car production, etc.) is to be fiercely contested.

This fierce defence sometimes leads to Fascism wherein the petite bourgeiosie seizes power to defend their little capital against all-comers (banks, multi-nationals, unions, foreigners, etc.).

In a Communist or Socialist system. the ruling class consists of workers whose objective is protect their livelihood. Thus a Communist political system must protect a worker's right to sustenance and well-being.

Having the right people run a wrong system can only mollify the horrors of that system.

Read more!

Paradoxes of control

Chris Dillow discusses three (3) Paradoxes of control.

Which brings me to a second paradox. Although voters want the government to expand its sphere of control, they don't want to expand their own control. There is pitifully little demand at the political level for greater worker control of firms.

I say this is a paradox because of a simple principle: control should be exercised by those who know the most and who have the most skin in the game. Many workers — those with job-specific human capital — have a lot to lose if their firm is badly managed and have the dispersed fragmentary knowledge to improve management. But the same isn't true for politicians: for example, George Osborne doesn't know better than the market or Low Pay Commission what is the right level for the minimum wage, and it's no great loss to him if he gets it wrong. We'd therefore expect to see more political demand for worker control than state control. But we don't. Which brings me to…

Paradox three. Although there's no political demand for worker control, many people vote for it with their own feet. Since current records began in 1984 the numbers of self-employed have risen by 67.5% to over 4.5m — an increase from 11.1% to 14.5% of all those in work.

Emphasis Mine

Politically, worker control is seen as Communism. And Communism is seen as evil in a Capitalist society. Thus, there is no political impetus.

Economically, worker control is seen as petite bourgeoisie which is acceptable in a Capitalist society. It is something that workers aspire to — being their own boss.

Therefore, we have a conflict between political and economic aspects of worker control. Politically, movement towards worker control is progression towards the removal of the Capitalists. Economically, acceptance of worker control is acceptance of the Capitalist mode of production with the owners merging into the Capitalist class.

Workers need to have a political sense of what is happening in order to preserve their identity as workers, and work towards of society without Capitalists.

Read more!

Top Signs Pope Francis is an Honest Conservative

Juan Cole describes the Top Signs Pope Francis is an Honest Conservative.

Pope Francis has many virtues and strength of character, but he is not a progressive on most issues, and even where he leans progressive he is only willing to consider the individual as a charitable agent, eschewing most specific government-led reform.

Some American conservatives are angry at the Pope for not being far enough right on some issues, or for simply being humane, or for not joining in their delusions. Those aren’t conservative objections to the Pope, they are fascist ones. Italy’s Benito Mussolini, for instance, put in tax and other economic policy that gouged the poor above all. The rejection of science in favor of groupthink is also a far rightwing tradition. Mussolini denounced the barrenness of mere science and reason, and fascists rejected anthropological and biological findings about human universals. Being against the science of human-caused climate change (which is now indisputable) isn’t conservatism. It is something much darker.

Emphasis Mine

Conservatism, in Australia and the USA, is splitting into Fascist and non-Fascist camps. The election of Malcolm Turnbull as PM ruptured the fagile conservative alliance in Australian politics.

The strains of the failure of Capitalism to rebound after the GFC of 2008 are forcing conservatives to seek more radical anti-worker policies and measures. The current Royal Commission into Trade Unions is a manifestation of this. However, the failure of the last two (2) federal budgets shows the limits of this offensive. Even rabid billionaires, like Clive Palmer, are opposed to these measures.

When you have Capitalists publicly denouncing the policies of an extreme conservative government, you see the divisions within the ruling class. One faction is frightened of revolution overthrowing the system, while another wants to keep the system running at full-speed ahead.

The crisis in Capitalism is brought about by its very success, as Marx predicted.

Workers cannot stand idly by. We need to take control in order to protect our industrialised society. Otherwise, a world of hurt awaits as society collapses into primitive villages amid mass death all around.

Read more!

Show of Hands

Help fund Ted Rall's legal challenge to his firing from the LA Times through Ted Rall's Assistance Fund.

Rall asks for a Show of Hands:

Bottom line is, this will cost thousands of dollars. Which I don’t have, especially now that I’ve lost the income from the LA Times.

So here’s my request for a show of hands. If you would contribute toward this expense, please say so, along with how much, in the comments section to this post. This will help me determine whether I can continue my fight against the Times’ defamation and its collusion with the LAPD.

Emphasis Mine

Read more!