The Corporatocracy: A New Economic System for the Connected Banking Sector and Political Elites. Providing the new Serfdom Massive Debt Servitude.

The Corporatocracy: A New Economic System for the Connected Banking Sector and Political Elites. Providing the new Serfdom Massive Debt Servitude.

Posted using ShareThis

New realities well met create the dreams of the future

Every thirty years or so in this young and powerful country there has been a progressive or semi-progressive upwelling to clean things up a bit, shake them up a bit, and move things awkwardly forward. Like a gigantic teen with coordination problems we seem to have managed a few moments of brilliance and genuine moments of change. For some reason, for the first time (at least in modern history), this progressive hiccup has been skipped. Clinton's "bridge to the 21st century" was coopted into a blithe economism.

I think we progressive leaners have all sensed that this is our time for change, not just because we "want" it, but because it is being thrust upon us and we desire to meet the challenge of our time. What we are getting is people who seem to think we can run out the clock, keep our noses clean, etc. and things will turn around. Obama was called a "once in a generation leader" by Ted Kennedy. It appeared that the confluence of Obama's promise (metaphorically and literally) combined with the times would open the door to recognize that change is upon us in a way that really required a bold new mindset and direction. Instead we seem to be getting retreaded conventional wisdom which is predictably proving itself to be unworkable and unequal to the demands and opportunity of the time.

Yes, I am somewhat selfish in that I would like to experience one progressive moment in my civically conscious life. (I was about 9 when the Vietnam War ended and a few years older when the ERA was defeated.) I realize that the resistance to the necessary changes now are signs of the probable immensity of the shifts we are being brought to globally and nationally. I am patient and perceptive, but problems do not solve themselves. Big problems and big changes need big leaders who not only inspire but push to recognize the nature of our challenge in practical terms. Obama's response in this regard and that of the Democratic party has been undoubtedly tepid.

They seem to be signaling that they are not up to the challenge and Republicans smell blood in the water. They are as effective as an opposition party as they are lousy as a governing party. The question is, "Who will govern in a manner appropriate these times?" I'm beginning to think it will simply have to be us working on the local level, grooming and supporting candidates, and creating our own positive change. Notice Obama and Rahm have completely abandoned the "house party" and local organizing roots they used to get themselves and Democrats elected. We were told he would need us to push for essentially progressive change and that he would have our back. For whatever reason, compromise, DC realities, too much on his plate, Obama has not done this. So it now gets thrown back to us. Is it too much to ask to have a champion, and not simply to be doing all the hard work ourselves with a hope that my son will have a brighter world, based in the reality of the changes we face as a foundation not an impediment to our greatest dreams?

Lawrence Wilkerson: Congress Is "Spineless" (VIDEO)

There are no positive steps without the truth. We've lost the ability to distinguish between positive and painful (cutting through lies, looking at our own complicity, transparency) and negative and numbed (willful ignorance, calculated amnesia, allergy to accountability). The longer we go on playing footsie with the truth, the more painful the inevitable unveiling will be. Political animals, it seems, survive by foisting the consequences of decisions or LACK OF decisions on the next generation and the next Congress. This is the root of the cowardice-- bald, butt-preserving, short-term self-interest. Thank you Col. Wilkerson for speaking out. (In defense of him, they were lied to as well. At least he is telling the truth after being lied to, instead of continuing to lie to himself and the American people like the Republicans and their Democratic enablers.
About Colin Powell
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Chill the (heck) out, I got this.

Much ado is being made about Obama's lack of strength and quickness on progressive issues, his over-concern with bipartisanship, his apparent continuation of some distasteful or unjust Bush policies (at least temporarily).  This reminds me of the humorous and profane captioned photo of Obama being circulated on the net where he is looking into the camera and "saying,"  "Chill the f--- out.  I got this."  

How many times did we hear this Chicken Little, sky-is-falling commentary during the campaign.  First it was that Obama was being too nice to McCain calling him a genuine war hero ("Jeesh, why don't you just campaign for him, while you're at it.").  Then there was the lack of push back against both Hillary and Bills sleight-of-hand playing of the race card.  Then it was all about Obama's inadequate response to sleazy and heavy-handed efforts by Republicans to brand him as a terrorist sympathizer, a Muslim, a corrupt official, an anti-American religious nut (Rev. Wright, anyone?).  

So Obama played it cool and calm, remained magnanimous and positive, organized efficiently, fundraised impressively, and spent effectively.  Oh, and he won by 9 million votes, along with an Electoral College landslide.  He went to work immediately beginning to institute the plans he had already been making for the last 6 months, anticipating he would be in office.  Always one step of the game.  He had weekly press conferences, appointed a host of people to his cabinet, stayed out of the Washington fray ("only one President at a time"), developed strategic plans with his transition and White House teams, and hit the ground running.  

One of Obama's greatest strengths is other people's remarkably constant tendency to underestimate him.  I'm no worshipper of the man.  I actually take him at his word that he is imperfect and bound to make mistakes, but he has an unerring sense both patience and timing, allowing him reflect, gather information, and then act at the right times in ways that are not driven by anxiety, but by judgment.  That judgment may not always be exactly right, but the chances that it will be the most favorable given the myriad quagmires surrounding him is increased immeasurably by his quite measured approach.  

I'm looking at the evidence.  Exhibit 1:  The stimulus bill.  He took a "bipartisan" approach which apparently fell flat on its face.  The bill included compromises on tax cuts with zero Republican representatives and only 3 senators supporting it.  However, the spending in the bill was about the size he had originally estimated.  The negotiations made Republicans look like the do-nothings and obstructionists and bad-faith bargainers they were.  Obama's popularity skyrocketed, the Republicans tanked.  The bill included the core elements of his campaign emphases (infrastructure spending, middle-class tax cuts etc.).  So where was the failure exactly?  

I think we can expect more of the same sober and clear-eyed movement on emerging issues:  He won't press it, and he won't avoid it.  He will gather information, state much of it in clear terms to the American public, develop a plan which responds to developments and contingencies and act decisively when the time is right.  I sense he and Geithner have been gathering information on the solvency of major banks.  I suspect they already know that some are under water, and more are headed that way.  He can't outright declare federal receivership and restructuring at this point without major panics and private capital flight, so he plays it cool again.  He can't just keep throwing money at the problem, so he takes a breath and a step back.  He will try to stabilize the system from the bottom-up, shoring up mortgages.  

He may try to attract private capital with some government guarantees to the financial sector to those banks that can survive, and he will likely pseudo-nationalize (take over, restructure, and sell back to the private sector) those banks that are irretrievably under water.  Stabilize, negotiate, intervene.  There is a wisdom there.   Obama is interested in getting things done, but not simply for the sake of getting them done.  That cowboy approach has already been tried.  We've seen the results.  Is Obama too cautious?  His track record would indicate he tends to get the balance between reflection/gathering information and acting/applying resources about right.  

Like I said, though I voted for and supported Obama, I understand he is only a talented, charismatic, thoughtful, and disciplined leader, not a demi-god.  It's nice to have someone like him covering our back.  We're here to cover his back as well.  This does not mean making excuses for him but emboldening him to act in a more comprehensive progressive direction and clarifying for him the right things (and the right times) on which to move through our pressure and our own grass-roots organizing.