It can be argued that there were two choices after WW2 i.e. either for government spending to be militarized or socialized. The later was rejected precisely because it had a democratizing effect.
In other words people would care where a hospital was built in their community, but not about the next generation of tanks. This allowed the pentagon to continue it's work without the interference of the middle class who seemed satisfied as long as they could remain consumers.
This led to a fairly rigid but invisible form of State planning where all of the major technological developments were in fact socialized in the sense that they were paid for by the taxpayer through the Pentagon. However instead of then also being owned by the taxpayer they were subsequently simply 'given' to private companies to profit from.
Many companies like Lockheed or Boeing directly related to the complex were then given huge State subsidies in order to remain profitable. This has always been an annual process, often associated with non-competitive contract awards....free trade my foot!
Now it seems all corporations appear to expect this consideration from the taxpayer; and that means that for the rich 'free trade' is simply a lie. Walmart as the largest employer being the most obvious example of a company totally dependent upon repression and a belief in corporate socialism.
While corporations collectively are the country's biggest welfare recipients, the people whose jobs have been replaced by slave labour in 3rd world countries have, for the most part, remained unemployed, and yes even blamed for the financial chaos that follows the banking corruption. This shifted responsibility even to the extent that their meagre family benefits have been further reduced to pay a debt they had nothing to do with.
While all this has been developing the US has fought democracy in at least 50 countries, replacing 30 governments with fascist dictators. There is no example when they have created and tolerated a thriving democracy because such a country would develop a form of economic nationalism not acceptable to amoral multinationals.
In other words they could not be ruined by overwhelming debt to the IMF or the Bank of Settlements and then raped of their resources when they could not repay their loans. Keep an eye on how this works in the Ukraine.
There is no example I can think of in any of these countries when this did not happen. Look only then at Venezuela as an example of how the US treated a democratic socialistic country. It is a mere example of a country demonized by both Government and media for attempting to improve the lot of its own people.
So perhaps we need to demand democracy first. Not just for US citizens but all people of the world. This would, if it was genuine coincidentally reduce the rapacious ravaging of the planet, and vastly improve conditions for indigenous people and the poor around the world.
As the 2 existing parties are both right wing business parties there is effectively no choice, therefore obviously no democracy. This is especially true when controlled media do not allow 3rd and 4th candidates into the debate.
The only solution as a first step in the world of Realpolitik then, at least it seems to me, is to withhold our vote. Demand more than is being offered... and don't mention socialism but Thomas Paine is OK.
This way an American Spring may stand a chance of producing real change, but it will still be a long and painful road as very powerful interests will have to be hit hard at the same time by a refusal to listen to their propaganda (in an internet age we don't need TV's do we?) or buy their products...
I think perhaps Occupy could achieve this simple objective and Thomas Paine is in fact a contemporary guide.
Image credit: The Guardian/pix
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
2
2
