Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Well done, great summary.   One of the few pieces I have read which correctly diagnoses whats at play here.  Jerome has correctly predicted an analysed the financial and economic fall-out of the current crisis, but you begin to chronicle the possible political implications.

Change is the only inevitability in life, and the key political question is whether a particular political system can accommodate and enable it, or whether it seeks to block and destroy its momentum.  If the later there is the inevitable dam-burst of dreams when all manner of chaos descends and people lose hope in the midst of revolution.

However the European experience of this is decidedly mixed.  It can just as easily lead to Fascism and ever greater wars as the ruling and middle classes seek to destroy the momentum for revolution within by creating and engaging with enemies abroad who are scapegoated as the cause of the malaise.

So whilst you are correct that the potential and momentum for revolution is gathering, the much greater risk is that it will lead to an even greater upsurge of madness and militarism in response.  "Those whom the Gods wish to destroy they first make mad".

America managed to avoid a descent into such madness after the great depression, and the hope must be that it can also do so now.  However that depends on the American political system being a lot more resilient and amenable to change than many now seem to believe possible.

You don't just need Obama to win the election, you need him to deliver on the home he has engendered in so many, and that is a task of a different order of magnitude altogether.  You need a virtual revolution of the middle classes against the ruling classes (the top 0.1%) who have arrogated all growth in wealth to themselves over the past 30 years, and who have impoverished almost everyone else into unsustainable debt.

A default on those debts, combined with an inflation which dramatically devalues the accumulated wealth of the ruling class is part of such a radical re-alignment.  But unless the American Middle Classes stand firm against the temptations of dictatorship, the political consequences of that default and inflation will be far more terrible than anything you have yet contemplated.

Think Germany c. 1928.  I personally believe the US can do a whole lot better than that.  You have the experience of Europe to help guide you, and even we have learned from our mistakes.  The attitude of the next US President to Europe will tell a lot about how he/she proposes to address the USA's internal problems.

The lessons of social democracy have already been learned, and the alternative is probably not revolution, but Fascism.


"It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sat Feb 23rd, 2008 at 05:47:53 AM EST
Well-said, the question of whether we can learn without disaster (further) will be answered soon.  I hope that with the example of many of the successes of the Europeans in overcoming the tragedies of the first half of the 20th century we can see what a disaster we have brought on by our militarism and its human and financial costs.  It may well be that we can't learn to see until disaster hits generally-that seems to be mankinds way.

"I said, 'Wait a minute, Chester, You know I'm a peaceful man...'" Robbie Robertson
by NearlyNormal on Sat Feb 23rd, 2008 at 09:16:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
However the European experience of this is decidedly mixed.  It can just as easily lead to Fascism and ever greater wars as the ruling and middle classes seek to destroy the momentum for revolution within by creating and engaging with enemies abroad who are scapegoated as the cause of the malaise.

When I was much younger and would discuss politics, many people of my acquaitance would slag the USA off for its behaviour around the world and its treatment of people in those countries. I always felt it was worth mentioning the awful way that America treated its own people, "it is brutal towards its own, how can it not be brutal to others ?". A comment that brought grudging acknowledgement, although not a toning down of opinion.

Now I look at the way the USA treats its own and it seems worse. It's not just Katrina, it is the casual brutalisation of everyday contact with the police, the beatings and taserings. Not just of black people as of old, but of white people, women, older people. Of people who are demonstrably of no threat whatsoever, suspected criminals or even those reporting crime.

Like I have said of the treatment of Padilla, they don't do it cos they think it's legal, they know it's illegal and they're showing you they can do it and there's nothing you can do to stop them nor any redress you can seek.

The laws that are passed that render life just that little more precarious, less bearable. The ones that increasingly draw a line between the just about getting by and those who have more than they need.

Healthcare that is increasingly denied the moment you seem to need it.

The elite of America has declared war on its own citizens, it is eating its young. This is not so much fascism as the sate that germany was in during the last few months of war with Hitler railing against how the german people failed him and that they should be punished. Citizens being executed for any defiance or even attempted self-preservation.

A society gone mad. That is the USA. So tormented it is eating its own flesh and blood domestically and throwing lives onto an oil-fuelled pyre abroad to satisfy the bloodlusts of ancient gods of greed and domination.

I have terrible fears of where this goes. But as the film says "There will be Blood"

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Feb 24th, 2008 at 02:47:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Generally agreed, but I'm not so sure it's a case of "a society gone mad" as it is a case of a ruling class gone mad and reckless.  Up until 30 or 40 years ago, the northeastern power elites called the shots in the Republican Party, and the government took its tone from New York.  Now, Texas money calls the shots in the Republican Party, and the government takes its tone from Texas.  So do the corporate media, and Democrats don't get into power often enough to change the tone, even if they would.
by keikekaze on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 04:43:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There has not been much work done on it that I know of, except for a no more than two pages in Kevin Phillips' American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush (2004) where Phillips provides the briefest of outlines of how George Bush I and other scions of the American Eastern Establishment moved in on Midland, Texas and the Permian Basin in the 1950s. Phillips has much more details on how droves of CIA/Wall Street people worked for George Bush I's campaigns in 1980, 1988, and 1992. (I write "CIA/Wall Street" because my understanding is that the two were interchangeable in the 1950s to 1970s.)

Someone who studies these issues once told me that the U.S. Eastern Establishment transformed into the multinationals / globalization juggernaut in the 1980s.

And I think you will find these fascinating if you want to pull on loose threads:
Battling Wall Street: The Kennedy Presidency, Part 1
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/11/124525/795/299/300743
 

by NBBooks on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 10:14:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I said, or implied, that there was a difference in tone.  And moreover, the old establishment, in the olden days (before about 1980), had rather more of a sense of social responsibility--noblesse oblige, if you like--that has atrophied alarmingly since.

I've been meaning to read Phillips' Wealth and Democracy for some time but haven't got around to it.  Thanks for the reference to the other book, and the dKos thread.  I'll bump both the books up higher on my "to do" list!

by keikekaze on Fri Feb 29th, 2008 at 12:31:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
... at least among the economic elite, in large part a necessity, and given the opportunity to walk away from it, there seems to have been a strong determination to git walkin'.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 1st, 2008 at 10:04:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
 . . . of there having been laws and regulations governing their corporate activities--laws and regulations that were actually enforced--I completely agree, and that's yet another argument (among many) for bringing back those laws and regulations and enforcing them again.
by keikekaze on Sat Mar 1st, 2008 at 07:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Even more than laws and regulations governing their corporate activities, institutionalized organized labor that focused their attention on trying to grow the pie, given that trying to get a progressively larger share of the pie seemed a more difficult strategy.

Of course, those laws and regulations were part of the structure that supported the strength of organized labor, but social structures neither build nor reproduce themselves.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Mar 1st, 2008 at 08:13:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
NBBooks:
Someone who studies these issues once told me that the U.S. Eastern Establishment transformed into the multinationals / globalization juggernaut in the 1980s.
Which probably explains why they don't seem to care much whether the US remains a strong economy or not. The elite has become transnational.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Mar 1st, 2008 at 03:26:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series