TPMCafe
« Inevitable: New Republic Calls Former Editor Andrew Sullivan An Anti-Semite | Home | What Tea Partiers Do -- and What They Should Do »

Be Careful What You Wish For

user-pic

As I've said before the right wing of American Politics is a pretty fractious bunch. It now appears that the Pro-business wing is getting pretty worried about the anti-business rhetoric of the Tea Party Populists. Conventional wisdom is that Republican gridlock is good for big business but in the Wall Street Journal it was noted that the stock market's recent fall started the morning after Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts.

So why did stocks collapse the moment the vote was tallied in Massachusetts?

It's because the immediate reaction to the Brown election--in both parties--has been a dangerous lurch toward antibusiness populism. The Obama administration's strategy has been to latch onto something that both parties can agree on: lynching Wall Street.


Republicans have to be careful what they wish for. John McCain under attack from the right, is no longer the maverick.
Yet Mr. McCain now finds himself jammed, moving starkly -- and often awkwardly -- to the right, apparently in an effort to gain favor among the same voters whom Mr. Hayworth, a consistent voice for the far right, could pull toward him like taffy come summer.

Mr. McCain now sharply criticizes the bailout bill he voted for, pivoted from his earlier position that the Guantánamo Bay detention facility should be closed, offered only a muted response to the Supreme Court's decision undoing campaign finance laws and backed down from statements that gays in the military would be O.K. by him if the military brass were on board.


Crib-note reading Sarah Palin, clearly positioning herself to run in 2012, suggests that Obama's best strategy to run against her would be to invade Iran. Last night on Hardball Chris Matthews had Republican strategist Mark McKinnon and Newsweek's Richard Wolfe on discussing Palin's weekend of speeches.
MATTHEWS: You know, Budd Schulberg couldn`t write better than this. This -- you know what I mean, A Face in the Crowd? You know...

MCKINNON: Oh, yes, no...

MATTHEWS: ... coming out with somebody who has little hand things written on their palm, calling for revolution, calling for secession, calling for declaring war on third-world countries. And people are cheering!

MCKINNON: Yes. No, I was actually thinking as we were coming on the program about this would make a screenplay and people would probably reject it as being too...

MATTHEWS: You know, Huey Long wasn`t the most sane guy in the world, Richard, but he said that when fascism comes to America, it will call itself anti-fascism.


Some of you have taken me to task for worrying about the potential rise of fascism in this country. But to read the whole Gramsci quote about the Interregnum is to understand that anything can happen in this political vacuum: "The old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum there arises a great diversity of morbid symptoms." 25 million underemployed Americans can be a volatile mix. We like simple solutions in this country--Revolution, Secession, Invasion--then everything will be alright. The possibility that we are in the twilight of American Empire may be very hard for much of the right to accept. Rather than seeing the great possibilities in Life After Empire, they may want to return to our martial past--a fantasy world that Sarah Palin already inhabits.


36 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Matthews has his moments, and this was one of them...

Facebook

Thanks for your patience and sorry for the inconvenience!

Best regards, Mary, CEO of youtube to mp3

user-pic

I'm beyond skeptical when someone claims that stocks fell because of "A" or "B." But if the business community really thinks that the Republicans or Sarah Palin is going to regulate businesses, or take any anti-business action at all, they are beyond stupid.

The minute Republicans are back in power, anger over the bailouts and concerns over the deficit are going to magically disappear. The useful idiots will be fat and happy again, and the establishment media will blame Obama and the free-spending Democrats for the deficit.

user-pic

Well, I totally agree with you about the interregnum, but the fact that everything is possible doesn't make analysis of what's likely useless. You seem not to understand Gramsci or not to take him seriously other than this word, which is a pity.

First, let's put aside the "fascist" moniker, because it is a distraction. Fascism was a complex phenomenon. I would follow the Marxist analysis and see the core of fascism as a combination of three elements, a corporatist economy, a populist nationalist political culture, and a repressive state. But fascism was a lot more, and I seriously doubt that we will see the full monty again.

However, as for the three key elements, I think it is a mistake to ask whether "fascism" is possible. The core, which I will call for the sake of an argument, corpopulist militarism, is already here, and in many ways stronger than in actual fascism.

1. We have a state that is on a steady course of increased repressiveness since 1980 (and faster since 2001), with prisons the fastest growing industry, assassination, arbitrary detention and torture normal state actions, and war becoming normalized and permanent.

2. About corporatism, there is nothing to say, as corporations rule America today much tighter than they ruled Italy under fascism.

3. Populist nationalism, on a growth path, beginning with the fringes of the far right under Clinton, mainstream by Bush as all out support for war and attack on "liberals" and now renivigorated by Obama's skin color. The relative weakness of that populism, not in the sense of actual numbers, but in the sense that the state doesn't yet arms them and sends them to break bones of striking workers, is the most important difference we have.

Actual fascism required a much bigger increase in state power, and indeed a transfer of power from the business elite to the state. That transfer of power was of course accepted by the business elite because it was a bargain, because the alternative was the real threat of a working class revolution.

The biggest argument against that in the US is that it is utterly unnecessary. Why bother? What more control of politics corporations can have that they don't have already? So you have someone like Kucinich making noises. What would be the point of jailing him as a subversive? Gramsi was arrested because he was an effective leader of a revolutionary party with a real and militant working class behind him. He was dangerous. That is why they needed black shirts and violence and massive repression to keep the corporations in power. Kucinich has a cadre of smiling lemmings behind him. No offense, because they (we) are all very nice people, but the worse we can do is throw a cocktail party.

And it's not like there is no real repression, but the repression, which is no less violent than the fascist one, take place where it matters, in the global arena, and mostly against Islam, because Islam, unlike liberalism, is a real threat to corporate rule today, and Islam organizes sectors of the global working class and lumpenproletariat in ways that are both effective and radical.

So worrying about fascism in the US is worrying that they will finally take away our right to throw cocktail parties. There is nothing to worry about. Nobody cares.

Can that change? In principle, yes, if some of Obama's lemmings move further to the left, or if some of the teabaggers cross the Bering straight to the far left and start threatening corporatist control. Then we can conceivably be in a situation that would make increased repression inside the US necessary for corporate control.

If that would happen, it would be of course a good thing, for the absence of repression is not an indication of the benign nature of the system, but of the weakness of domestic opposition to corporatism.

But how likely is either scenario? Not very likely, and it seems every liberal in the US with a mehgaphone is doing his and her best to make sure it doesn't happen.

user-pic

Quite a perceptive analysis. You would argue that Huxley's perception of the future (Brave New World) was more perceptive than Orwell's 1984. We don't need the boot of fascism, because we've entertained our selves into a stupor.

user-pic

Hats off! A very fine and documented analysis of the "I wish I had said That (and probably will variety)".

I do however agree with Taplin's basic idea. If corporate power thinks they can ride to safety on the back of the Scotch-Irish they may find themselves on the back of a tiger... This is the America of Andrew Jackson and along with the Pashtun of Afghanistan, a badder assed tribe than America's Scotch-Irish would be hard to find... leave the teabag in the hot water a bit longer and the descendants of Jackson, Bryant and Huey Long could give you quite a surprise.

user-pic

'Anti-Business rhetoric of the Tea Party populist', it is about the business of government in not just our lives but the live that are distroyed by government trying to run businesses they know nothing about.
Less Government is the key, get it Jony.

user-pic

If we could only go back to the good old days when businesses were unregulated. Because they know whats best!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire

user-pic

Very good. A must read. We are headed into uncharted waters.

To save the situation we must look to the impulse that caused people to support Barack Obama in the first place rather than looking to Obama himself.

Now that it is getting increasingly obvious that Obama "can't" or "wont", progressives themselves should again proclaim: "Yes we can!" and organize accordingly.

user-pic

In short there must be a progressive "tea party" movement... come to think of it, the civil rights struggle and the anti-Vietnam war demonstrations were progressive "tea parties".

user-pic

The difference is that the Civil Rights movement and the anti-Vietnam war movement were for the most part single issue movements. Once the issue that is the focus is removed the various participants tend to scatter.

What is needed now is something more encompassing, which is more difficult since it isn't about getting agreement over one issue but a multitude of issues.

Vaclav Havel wrote "A genuinely fundamental and hopeful improvement in "systems" cannot happen without a significant shift in human consciousness." Before we can hope for a sustainable progressive movement, we must first focus on facilitating that shift in human consciousness. Otherwise it will be the same few folks marching down the street, being drowned out by Madison Ave and 24 hours of cable tv.

Havel also wrote: "None of us know all the potentialities that slumber in the spirit of the population, or all the ways in which that population can surprise us when there is the right interplay of events." So who knows. The point is not to give up.

user-pic

I think consciousness is growing exponentially these days. When people got so starry eyed about Obama they were expecting him to be the solution to any number of specific problems. His supporters had correctly identified the problems, although by now it seems that they erred as to the solution.

user-pic

In a sense, what we are learning is that indeed we are the change we were looking for.

user-pic

I agree totally.

user-pic

Then you agree with Obama, David, who quite vocally repeated that phrase after Maria Shriver had said it at that California rally hosted by Oprah.

Seriously, I don't know how you can conclude that Obama's supporters "erred as to the solution" when Obama himself had said that the solution was all of us. One is forced to wonder who or what, in your mind, would have been the 'right solution'. McCain and Palin? Oh, wait, let me guess, Hillary? Sour grapes - still?

user-pic

Looking on the bright side of it, at least now we have a more visceral sense of what sort of things people in Eastern bloc countries pre-1989 were worried about. That's a good thing...right?

user-pic

It could be...if it pulls the scales from our eyes and allows people to embrace the hard work ahead of working toward something better.

Unfortunately, too many are as Taplin wrote: We like simple solutions in this country--Revolution, Secession, Invasion--then everything will be alright.

In other words, we have one illusion dispersed and we run like the dickens to find a new one to replace it.

Having gone through what they did, the Czechs sort of fell into the same thing as what we have experienced here. In interview with Havel in 1998:
http://www.salon.eu.sk/article.php?article=801&searchPhrase=velvet%20revolution

Q:..."On the one hand, we are becoming more and more civilized and instead of dictatorship we have democracy, and on the other hand there is a continual process of deterioration of the political class, followed by a process of deterioration of democratic institutions. How would you explain this contradiction?"

Havel: "On the one hand everything is getting better all the time - a new generation of mobile phones is being released every week. But in order to make use of it you need to follow new instructions. So you end up reading instruction manuals instead of books and in your free time you watch TV where handsome tanned guys scream from advertisements about how happy they are to have new swimming trunks by fashion house X....

To me all this is extremely dangerous and I doubt that civilization can come to its senses unless some enormous shake-up or a tsunami takes place. In any case, I feel the need for some kind of an existential revolution. Something has to change in people’s awareness....

But don’t take me for a total sceptic. I do believe that citizens’ organizations, associations and initiatives are doing something worthwhile. The Czech Republic has thousands of foundations of all kinds, many of them small and local, hardly known to anyone but doing important work in their micro-communities. I believe that a varied civic society is one of the ways of coping with the threatening consequences of civilization."

user-pic

Yes

user-pic
It also provided the proof that man can, without difficulty, combine crack-brained beliefs about the world with a confident mastery of contemporary high technology.

Well, that summarizes the rise and fall of Marxism, too, does it not? There is something in the soul of American progressives that can't let go of the past, and the cherished glow inside that comes from getting all anti-nativist and passionate. Huey Long was right with this catch: In this country, fascism will be installed by whoever owns the copyright.

user-pic

Ignorance is bliss.

user-pic

Pretty funny to try to point at the election of Brown as the reason markets began to fall, while ignoring that it was the financials that lead the collapse caused by Obama's attack on Goldman Sachs the day after the election. He wanted to recast himself as a populist and decided to attack Wall Street to win back support of voters. It was Obama himself that started the slide, not Brown.

user-pic

You should reread the the quote used by Taplin [EMPHASIS mine]:

It's because the IMMEDIATE REACTION to the Brown election--in both parties--has been a dangerous lurch toward antibusiness populism. The Obama administration's strategy has been to latch onto something that both parties can agree on: lynching Wall Street.

user-pic

Just to point the obvious, markets fall and rise. It's called volatility, and drawing these kinds of deep conclusions from one day of trading is as useful as astrology.

user-pic

Of course volatility is volatility, but the "invisible hand" is not always that invisible and certainly not as impersonal as market fundamentalists would have us believe. Here is the from Nobel Joe Stiglitz in The Independent:

(Stiglitz) "I've always been sceptical about the notion that the market is a person you can engage in an argument with, and that that person is an intelligent, rational, well-intentioned person: it is fantasy. We know that that person, the market, is subject to irrational optimism and pessimism, and is vindictive. If there is a speculative attack against you it is not an issue of appeasement but a judgement about whether they can break your back." He goes on, with the confidence of a man who, as World Bank chief economist about a decade ago, watched such assaults on countries in the same way you might watch a Saw movie: "You're dealing with a crazy man, you're asking what I can do to placate a crazy man: Having got what he wants he will still kill you." The professor appeals, instead to reason: "What I call 'fiscal fetishism' is really dangerous," he says. "Because cutting back means the economy goes into a downturn and the markets lose even more confidence, as it will trigger another recession or depression." If we do do that, he says, we will get the dreaded "double dip" recession. He urges ministers instead to tell the opposition and those short-sleeved, short-sighted, short-memoried traders in the City to consider the investment and returns that will come from all the public spending we are doing. It is true that the Government does seem to think that, for example, spending on our universities is just so much cash down the drain; for Stiglitz, certainly in the US, higher education remains a significant future engine of economic growth. Then again he is an academic. In any case, he finds it "unconscionable" that the British Government is now being held to ransom by the very credit ratings agencies – currently murmuring about withdrawing the UK's AAA rating – which fouled up so badly over sub-prime mortgages and all those unfathomable securities that landed us in the mess we're in now. And if the markets won't buy our gilts – the bonds the Treasury issues to cover its vast borrowings (about £175bn this year) – he wants the Bank of England to be "cooperative" and buy them instead. He is angry most of all on behalf of the 170 million people he estimates have lost their jobs globally because of this slump, and for the "ordinary taxpayers" now being asked to pay more taxes, defer their retirements and suffer poorer public services because of the greed of others.

user-pic

Yep! Just like global warming and global cooling is what some people call WEATHER.
Some times 'the obvious' is overlooked by the folks with the pointy heads.
Like Professors Gore and Obama.

user-pic

"..in the Wall Street Journal it was noted that the stock market's recent fall started the morning after Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts."

Market participants know that Republican ascendancy is historicaly very bad for market performance.

user-pic

Many may think Jon's "worrying about the potential rise of fascism in this country" is ahistorical and alarmist. Think again, because there's a conspiracy afoot.

For the past 15-20 years the corporatist elites have carved out a New Class of workers and bound them closely to themselves. This New Class is composed of government workers -- especially, police, firemen, and other security personnel.

While globalization of goods production (China) and of services (India) has kept the real wages of most workers depressed, the elites have, year after year, awarded salary and benefit increases to these security workers well in excess of the rise in the cost of living.

The result? This New Class now earns significantly higher incomes and benefits than the average worker. When the revolution comes this New Class, evildoer's 21st century black shirts, will side with the elites as against their so-called fellow workers. There will be blood in the streets.

Liberals who support public employee unions are doing nothing but aiding the kleptocratic elite in providing them with an army which, out of self-interest, will loyally defend it.

user-pic

Ellen,
That is incredibly perverse and twisted! Thank you.

user-pic

Good observation, Ellen. It reminds me of some third-world/banana republic type countries which have a very small wealthy elite, a vast majority of very poor and little in between. In such places the wealthy have the full support of a relatively well paid security apparatus, including private security forces. A domestic U.S. condition not so far removed from this is depicted in Steinbeck's, "The Grapes of Wrath", I believe.

user-pic

McCain has this election in the bag - and thank goodness! He's what our country needs to get back on track, and to stop the wasteful spending, and get our economy moving again. Flake says he is an “enemy of the big spenders in Washington." and he's right.

user-pic

Good information here. Not sure if McCain has things wrapped up? Most likely, but we will see.

Thanks. J
test prep

user-pic

Good information here. Not sure if McCain has things wrapped up? Most likely, but we will see.

Thanks. J
test prep

Facebook

This New Class now earns significantly higher incomes and benefits than the average worker.
Best regards, Katya, CEO of facebook, windows 2008 iscsi mpio

Facebook

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability computing

Facebook

car shipping, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, car shipping.

Facebook

car shipping, car shipping, car transport, car transportation, vehicle shipping, car shipping.

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address