RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Klein writes: "They will blame James Comey and the FBI. They will blame voter suppression and racism. They will blame Bernie or bust and misogyny. They will blame third parties and independent candidates. They will blame the corporate media for giving him the platform, social media for being a bullhorn, and WikiLeaks for airing the laundry. But this leaves out the force most responsible for creating the nightmare in which we now find ourselves wide awake: neoliberalism."

Elite neoliberalism unleashed the Davos class. People such as Hillary and Bill Clinton are the toast of the Davos party. In truth, they threw the party. (photo: Ruben Sprich/Reuters)
Elite neoliberalism unleashed the Davos class. People such as Hillary and Bill Clinton are the toast of the Davos party. In truth, they threw the party. (photo: Ruben Sprich/Reuters)


It Was the Rise of the Davos Class That Sealed America's Fate

By Naomi Klein, Guardian UK

11 November 16

 

People have lost their sense of security, status and even identity. This result is the scream of an America desperate for radical change

hey will blame James Comey and the FBI. They will blame voter suppression and racism. They will blame Bernie or bust and misogyny. They will blame third parties and independent candidates. They will blame the corporate media for giving him the platform, social media for being a bullhorn, and WikiLeaks for airing the laundry.

But this leaves out the force most responsible for creating the nightmare in which we now find ourselves wide awake: neoliberalism. That worldview – fully embodied by Hillary Clinton and her machine – is no match for Trump-style extremism. The decision to run one against the other is what sealed our fate. If we learn nothing else, can we please learn from that mistake?

Here is what we need to understand: a hell of a lot of people are in pain. Under neoliberal policies of deregulation, privatisation, austerity and corporate trade, their living standards have declined precipitously. They have lost jobs. They have lost pensions. They have lost much of the safety net that used to make these losses less frightening. They see a future for their kids even worse than their precarious present.

At the same time, they have witnessed the rise of the Davos class, a hyper-connected network of banking and tech billionaires, elected leaders who are awfully cosy with those interests, and Hollywood celebrities who make the whole thing seem unbearably glamorous. Success is a party to which they were not invited, and they know in their hearts that this rising wealth and power is somehow directly connected to their growing debts and powerlessness.

For the people who saw security and status as their birthright – and that means white men most of all – these losses are unbearable.

Donald Trump speaks directly to that pain. The Brexit campaign spoke to that pain. So do all of the rising far-right parties in Europe. They answer it with nostalgic nationalism and anger at remote economic bureaucracies – whether Washington, the North American free trade agreement the World Trade Organisation or the EU. And of course, they answer it by bashing immigrants and people of colour, vilifying Muslims, and degrading women. Elite neoliberalism has nothing to offer that pain, because neoliberalism unleashed the Davos class. People such as Hillary and Bill Clinton are the toast of the Davos party. In truth, they threw the party.

Trump’s message was: “All is hell.” Clinton answered: “All is well.” But it’s not well – far from it.

Neo-fascist responses to rampant insecurity and inequality are not going to go away. But what we know from the 1930s is that what it takes to do battle with fascism is a real left. A good chunk of Trump’s support could be peeled away if there were a genuine redistributive agenda on the table. An agenda to take on the billionaire class with more than rhetoric, and use the money for a green new deal. Such a plan could create a tidal wave of well-paying unionised jobs, bring badly needed resources and opportunities to communities of colour, and insist that polluters should pay for workers to be retrained and fully included in this future.

It could fashion policies that fight institutionalised racism, economic inequality and climate change at the same time. It could take on bad trade deals and police violence, and honour indigenous people as the original protectors of the land, water and air.

People have a right to be angry, and a powerful, intersectional left agenda can direct that anger where it belongs, while fighting for holistic solutions that will bring a frayed society together.

Such a coalition is possible. In Canada, we have begun to cobble it together under the banner of a people’s agenda called The Leap Manifesto, endorsed by more than 220 organisations from Greenpeace Canada to Black Lives Matter Toronto, and some of our largest trade unions.

Bernie Sanders’ amazing campaign went a long way towards building this sort of coalition, and demonstrated that the appetite for democratic socialism is out there. But early on, there was a failure in the campaign to connect with older black and Latino voters who are the demographic most abused by our current economic model. That failure prevented the campaign from reaching its full potential. Those mistakes can be corrected and a bold, transformative coalition is there to be built on.

That is the task ahead. The Democratic party needs to be either decisively wrested from pro-corporate neoliberals, or it needs to be abandoned. From Elizabeth Warren to Nina Turner, to the Occupy alumni who took the Bernie campaign supernova, there is a stronger field of coalition-inspiring progressive leaders out there than at any point in my lifetime. We are “leaderful”, as many in the Movement for Black Lives say.

So let’s get out of shock as fast as we can and build the kind of radical movement that has a genuine answer to the hate and fear represented by the Trumps of this world. Let’s set aside whatever is keeping us apart and start right now.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+92 # Anonymot 2016-11-11 10:42
I read this in the Guardian on 11/10. I've read a hundred articles since. It remains the best of the lot.

I've forwarded this article to everyone I know who can read (which excludes some, but not all, of the Clinton-blinded .)
 
 
+32 # Kiwikid 2016-11-11 13:14
I too agree - its very good. Klein has summed it up perfectly. The question now is: Where to start?
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 16:34
The only point on which I would quibble with Ms. Klein is her either/or assertion about the Democratic (sic) Party.

Given its long history of betraying the 99 Percent -- which started the instant a Missouri political hack named Harry S. Truman became president (but which dates to the era in which it was the party of slavery and slave-owners) -- it should be obvious to anyone of Ms. Klein's foresighted intelligence the only fate suitable for the Democratic (sic) Party is not just abandonment but methodical destruction.

Otherwise the Democrats' history of wanton betrayals will merely repeat itself again.

But where to start? Moron Nation, proven so by its election of Trump, most assuredly lacks the ability, the will and most importantly the courage to provide the requisite revolutionary leadership.

Asked without a scintilla of facetiousness: where is Vladimir Lenin now that we so desperately need him? Where is the old ComIntern? Where, finally, is the Soviet Union? (Never forget it was the USSR that during the 1930s provided us with a leadership built from our own people so effectively we nearly overthrew capitalism here in its global headquarters.)

Alas, there is nothing like that -- no source of the requisite training and discipline -- in the world today. Which means Moron Nation is truly on its own -- and when in history did a despotism of dunces ever give birth to anything save chaos, destruction and death?

Truly, only a miracle can save us now.
 
 
0 # Activista 2016-11-13 22:34
where is Vladimir Lenin now that we so desperately need him? Where is the old ComIntern? Where, finally, is the Soviet Union? (Never forget it was the USSR that during the 1930s provided us with a leadership built from our own people so effectively we nearly overthrew capitalism here in its global headquarters.)"
where is Lenin and Stalin to built concentration camps for the rich? We have a good start with Trump - starting with the immigrants from South America.
 
 
+31 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 18:09
if we want a chance we have to get rid of the primary superdelegate system which makes one super delegate vote worth 10,000 times that of an average primary voter.

Does that happen via the DNC -is the DNC our only primary vehicle?
 
 
+31 # rural oregon progressive 2016-11-11 19:49
Quoting Kiwikid:
I too agree - its very good. Klein has summed it up perfectly. The question now is: Where to start?
...

It should start with every democrat, every progressive and especially the Democratic "leadership", Congresspersons and Senators being sent a a link to this article with the admonition to "read and learn as you look back on the disaster that was the 2016 election season", and reminding them that they will either join us or be voted out of office beginning in 2018... That, I think, would be a good start. As I said in a previous post, "Mostly, people change not because they see the light - but because they feel the heat".
 
 
+36 # pmargaret7 2016-11-11 15:20
But it still doesn't account for the stupidity of the american public, supposedly hurting economically, voting for a billionaire buffoon who basically has little regard for them except as gullible voters. At least Hitler was a "man of the people" and not their polar opposite! Trump is not a Bloomberg billionaire - he cares nothing about charity and stiffs workers and the american people by not paying taxes! What is the disconnect here?
 
 
+52 # librarian1984 2016-11-11 16:36
It was a missed opportunity, right? Clinton did not talk to middle America, did not talk about jobs or economic justice -- Sanders did. That is one of the reasons Sanders would have beat Trump.

Those desperate voters had nowhere else to go. They decided to take a chance on Trump because he was anti-Washington -- and Washington has done nothing to help them for 25 years.
 
 
+10 # laborequalswealth 2016-11-12 12:17
Totally agree. It was obvious from both the Trump and Sanders insurgencies that the American public was angry and disgusted with the status quo.

And who did the DNC give them? Ms. Establishment. Ms. NAFTA. Ms. Mass Incarceration. Ms. Repeal-of-Glass-Steagal
And then there was her let's-bomb-Russ ia-and-send-you r-kids-to-die platform. Oh yummy. Gimme more of THAT.

Ironically, Trump was the PEACE CANDIDATE.

Let's hope he's Augustus Caesar, not Caligula.
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-13 21:25
Peace candidate who wants to use Nuclear Weapons and carpet bomb ISIS...
 
 
+17 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 18:04
If you read Thomas Frank ( "Listen Liberal ) he puts much of it down to anger at being looked down upon including culturally by the Ivy League educated classes, and a government that is just a revolving door of the 1% and aspiring 1%.
So many ways to slice it, but it's basically the coasts vs flyover country, even tho there are a few islands in the middle
 
 
+33 # dascher 2016-11-11 19:19
I am sick of reading these Monday morning analyses about how the 'white working class voted for change'. If that were the case, then I think we would have seen more than one or two Congressional incumbents replaced.

In the end, however, only 60 million people voted for each of the candidates - out of over 200 million eligible voters.

Trump will be distracted by the rituals of power, and will feel that he's finally overcome his "humble" origins as a "poor boy from Queens". While he is enjoying his dream come true, his laziness, lack of intelligence, and extreme ignorance will make him easy pickings for those he appoints to do the work.
 
 
+12 # librarian1984 2016-11-12 08:36
It does seem to be more than one group voting for Trump. Not just the bigots. Not just the 'left behind' economic voters. There are Obama voters who switched to Trump.

Did they vote out of animosity toward Clinton? Hostility against the establishment? That is an interesting group.

Also important was the low turnout of black voters. Blacks (and superdelegates) shored up Clinton when otherwise it would have become obvious early on that she would not work as a candidate. But perhaps as more revelations came out about how Clintonism hurt minorities in this country, as her insincerity became more apparent, that support ebbed and enthusiasm disappeared.

Dislike of Hillary trumped fear of Trump. And maybe people did not want war.

The demographics and large observations are fascinating but they cannot fully explain the dynamics of the race. There are relevant ineffables.
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-13 21:28
maybe they wanted to give Trump a majority in Congress...
Btw, she failed to ask for that during the campaign, another sign that it was poorly run (how would she have governed without a clear majority in Congress?)
 
 
+16 # origbrownfan 2016-11-12 10:51
All Trump needed for the disadvantaged voters he got was five words: "I am not the establishment." This election is a testimony to the level to which our educational system has sunk.
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 14:25
Quoting origbrownfan:
All Trump needed for the disadvantaged voters he got was five words: "I am not the establishment." This election is a testimony to the level to which our educational system has sunk.


Yes!
The 'disadvantaged' include the truly uneducated, resentful 'entitled' (bc they were white and Christian ...) & alas
'ignorant' (primarily bc the schools they went to could not even teach them to spell, not to mention 'think') rather than just memorize answers to a set test -- incapable of thinking through a problem for themselves.
 
 
-3 # crispy 2016-11-13 21:24
pmargaret7, you meant "Trump is a Bloomberg billionaire" but anyway I think we should NOT give up and sign the change.org petition (even though I think it's calling for an unconstitutiona l act: special times call for extra-ordinary actions!)

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19
 
 
+2 # Spud 2016-11-14 12:10
Trump's message is "white males are right". The power of propaganda is real. The media would not expose his lies because they needed a horse race to make money. They made a lot of money by not telling the white males who are hurting economically that Trump was lying to them and using their pain to get elected.
The MSM are whores. The american public are not stupid, they are paranoid and gullible, and Trump cashed in on their fear. Yes, lots of them are are racists, sexists, and natavists; they are also hurting.
 
 
+35 # 2wmcg2 2016-11-11 11:07
As a Trump voter, I endorse the sentiments expressed in this article.
 
 
+23 # Sandor 2016-11-11 17:07
I read Ms. Klein's article with a mixture of bemusement and despair. Much of what she wrote--especial ly about the Davos club, and the Clinton responsibility in organizing it--was right on target.

But the roots of our dilemma go far deeper--at least to the infamous Powell memo, and to the Milton Friedman doctrine that the paramount purpose of a publicly-held corporation is to maximize returns to shareholders. We have been building our distress for many decades.

But the most appalling omission from Ms. Klien's piece is that she fails to include the white middle- and lower-classes with "voters who are the demographic most abused by our current economic model." voters who must be connected into a movement against neo-liberalism.

These white middle- and lower-class voters came out this election in droves and elected Trump. They elected him because he was the ONLY viable candidate who spoke to their distress. They know they have been deserted by the Clinton Democrats; they know also that they have been lied to and exploited by the "movement" Republicans. They are not stupid.They did NOT vote against their own interests. They were joined by sizeable numbers of Latinos and Blacks. Trump will sell these people out at his own peril.

Quoting 2wmcg2:
As a Trump voter, I endorse the sentiments expressed in this article.


I find it difficult to know exactly what
"2wmcg2" means by this, and I wonder whether my comments also meet with her/his approval.
 
 
+7 # origbrownfan 2016-11-12 13:06
I think you need to read What's The Matter With Kansas.
 
 
+8 # economagic 2016-11-12 21:25
"Trump will sell these people out at his own peril."

And he almost certainly will. In fact the back-pedaling has already begun on some of the most popular items such as the wall. They will probably give him a pass on that one. Let's hope you're right in the longer run.
 
 
+28 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:08
One of Trump's first attempted administration picks is Jamie Dimon head of JP Morgan and a bail out recipient. Could'nt get much more establishment than that !
if Hillary had won, it would not have been a surprise to see her choose him as well ...or someone very similiar- Obama certainly did.
 
 
+11 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 21:19
@Grout4cake: My (very strong) suspicion is -- apart from an even greater escalation of Democratic (sic) and Republican "austerity" -- i.e., genocidal war on elderly, disabled and otherwise chronically impoverished people -- there will be very little change in the status quo. (But given the 180-degree difference between Hillary's "public" and "private" policies, no doubt we'd have gotten that anyway, assuredly in a far more euphemistic form.) To make real change, we need a genuine revolution, and that will never happen here in Moron Nation, at least not in the lifetimes of anyone now living, because too much of the citizenry has been moronated into maliciously selfish submission.
 
 
+103 # librarian1984 2016-11-11 11:10
I want Schumer and Pelosi to read this, and I want them to step aside. They brought us to this.

We need new progressive leadership working on a populist progressive agenda.

Sanders for minority leader, Warren for minority whip, Ellison at the DNC.

They need to recognize that Sen. Sanders (an Independent socialist!) runs the party now. He is the de facto leader of the DP. He is the one who should lead the loyal opposition. He is the one who has the plans that Trump can use.

Purge the neoliberals and Tea Party the ones who drag their heels in 2018.

Wonderful article. Great blueprint. Let's get to work!
 
 
+35 # markovchhaney 2016-11-11 11:59
Did you read that Schumer was endorsing Keith Ellison for DNC chair?
 
 
+23 # librarian1984 2016-11-11 12:58
I did see that. It's a START but not nearly enough.

I think the leadership should step down.
 
 
+4 # pbbrodie 2016-11-12 09:34
Why don't you run for office, any one of your choice. Most of your comments are right on and it at least appears that you would make a wonderful representative! !!
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-11-12 13:57
It's a real pity you missed my spit take. It was a beaut.

I don't have the skills or temperament to be a politician, and would be better as an aide behind the scenes -- but thank you for the vote of confidence :-D
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-13 21:33
I think... we should NOT give up and sign the change.org petition (even though I think it's calling for an unconstitutiona l act: special times call for extra-ordinary actions!)

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-

I think there should be a recount in key states: read Dr Miller's post on his facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/markcrispinmiller/

and here: http://markcrispinmiller.com/
 
 
+18 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:22
Chuck Schumer is one of the best allies of Wall St! Much more so than Pelosi .
"As a member of the Senate Banking and Finance committees, Schumer is well-versed on financial regulatory issues, and business leaders say he is a fierce champion of the industry in New York and nationwide. Over the years, Schumer has supported the financial and business sectors on some of their top agenda items, earning him the reputation of being a pro-business industry ally."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/chuck-schumer-business-wall-street/
 
 
+16 # Patriot 2016-11-11 13:01
A brief comment that I hope the more mathematically- talented will confirm or refute:

I watched the campaigns of the 13 Pregressive candidates of whom I was informed by Our Revolution. Their support--in polls and contributions-- grew and grew--until Pelosi chimed in with HER support of those candidates. Then their competition began to regain the lead. In many cases, they lost.

The same thing happened here in Kentucky during the 2014 campaign: We had a candidate for McConnell's Senate seat who did very well, until she dragged in Clinton. Presto! McConnell won.

Voters have discredited the Dem establishment, but they are wilfully, deliberately blind to that fact. Is that hubris? Pig-headedness? Or a deathgrip on power and profit that borders upon tyranny?

Can anyone verify (or not) my sense of how the numbers went for genuinely Progressive candidates before and after the kiss-of-death endorsement by Dem establishment pols?
 
 
-24 # ericlipps 2016-11-11 18:51
"Purge" the neoliberals? Bernie Sanders is a socialist, not a Stalinist; is the same true of you?

And if Bernie Sanders "runs" the Democratic Party now, look forward to a long, long Republican reign based on red-baiting and strident right-wing populism combined with support from the 0.0001%, billionaires like Trump and the Kochs.
 
 
+7 # librarian1984 2016-11-12 14:06
Oh goodness, does it worry you how quickly your mind jumps to violence? Purge out of office.

Seriously dude, did you not see Sanders' support? And really, could progressives do any worse than this? The neoliberals and Clintonistas have had their turns and I am heartily sick of their inane and merciless interventions, immorality and austerity.

The people are ready for a new way. You are not. It's a valid strategy and you're welcome to it, but it doesn't mean you're right, and I'd say the election results have done a lot to prove you're wrong. Many people were wrong this year and they need to admit it and learn. You're not there yet, eric, that's all. Not everyone progresses at the same pace. No shame.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-13 22:52
And WHO do you suggest to run the democratic party? another NEOCON (that got us the defeat?) I wonder sometimes...
 
 
+5 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:17
They won't do that. Most people won't voluntarily give up power. but Schumer knows he is in danger. He has endorsed Bernie's call for Keith Ellison to be head of the DNC.

I also read today that Bernie is considering running for a leadership position, but not minority leader.
 
 
-4 # rossny 2016-11-11 11:34
Sanders needs to excuse himself from the dems and run as an independent again or at least as a 3rd party Green. The dems ruined his run and showed themselves as the demapublicans that they are and will always be. They disrespected Sanders and the majority of Americans who wanted a choice. He has lost a good portion of the Peoples support by backing the corp dem party in the end. The only way he can win us back and redeem himself is to denounce the dems and the 1 party 2 part corporate system that keeps we the people down and powerless. He needs to come back as an Independent and gather the majority of us non-wealthy voters that are forced to vote as republicrats or demapublicans. Peace-Jobs-Sing le Payer can win the majority and give our kids a future. INDEPENDENT Bernie 2020 !!!
 
 
+65 # markovchhaney 2016-11-11 12:00
I disagree. He's perfectly positioned to take over the party with Ellison, Gabbard, Turner, MAYBE Warren, and some others. Why leave when you can turn it around?
 
 
+23 # dipierro4 2016-11-11 13:21
The Dems need to reform, AND the Green Party should grow. It's not either/or. What role Sanders himself should play, is not the biggest issue.

He is a force in the Dem party, and from that standpoint it makes sense to stay there, rather than drop out and risk being written off as irrelevant. Could he have a role in building a 3d party that becomes a real force? Maybe, but it seems less likely. Given his age, his time would be limited, and he'd be giving up a position of influence among the Dems. But again, this is not a major issue IMO. We should not put too much on him -- he is just one person.

Run in 2020? He'll be at or past life expectancy. Even assuming he has exceptional health and mental acuity, he'll be seen as too frail to serve. He could run as a symbolic candidate only, and at the risk of his being a spoiler -- which may be the right thing at the time, though it doesn't look that way now.

What matters is to develop progressive young leadership within the Dems, and it would be good if a 3d party like the Greens were to grow and become a force as well; and for the forces to maintain links where they can, as the Independent Sen. Sanders did with the Dems all those years.
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-11-11 13:46
Quoting dipierro4:
it would be good if a 3d party like the Greens were to grow and become a force as well

- unless! - they run against other progressives O N L Y in primaries!

progressives cannot justify enabling conservatives to win - that represents the opposite of progress - regress - that enables bad government - that harms the vast majority of citizens
progressives who run against other progressives - other than in primaries - help conservatives win

progressives should unite to vote in progressives - and call lame-duck session congress - urging them to oppose tpp - go bernie! and go dem! - jillie is an ass! - nader is an ass!
 
 
+11 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:20
Robbee, we MUST have more than two parties: Since the duopoly managed to virtually kill of any liklihood of successful independent party/candidate campaigns, we've had nothing but congressional gridlock--and the same applies to state legislatures.

With a mere 2% of seats, we have a chance to hold BOTH Dems and Repubs to a less than 51% majority. With a mere 5% of seats, such a majority becomes even less likely. The result won't be sabotage, but the salvation of our form of government, in which compromise is not only wise, but absolutely essential if all points of view are to be considered, and decisions taken that will accomplish the greatest possible benefit for the greatest possible number, while inflicting the least possible unbeneficial effect on the smallest possible number.
 
 
+17 # Kiwikid 2016-11-11 14:56
William Domhoff's analysis in 'Who rules America' is that the American 'winner takes all' electoral system virtually guarantees only two effective parties - his research indicates that principle follows world wide. It is certainly true where I live (NZ) and has been throughout its history UNTIL we moved away from a 'first past the post system' to 'mixed member proportional representation. ' We now have multiple parties in our parliament, the duopoly has been broken, and it is rare for the largest party to be able rule on its own. It works - we no longer effectively have a one party state between elections. It would seem that significant changes may need to be made to your electoral system before the Greens, or any third party, really have a chance.
 
 
+8 # ericlipps 2016-11-11 18:57
But in order to move away from "winner takes all" the U.S. will need a constitutional amendment abolishing or greatly modifying the electoral college. The EC's requirement that a presidential candidate receive an absolute majority of electors is what guarantees a two-party system at the presidential level, and that filters down to the states. We have NEVER had more than two major parties at any time since the 1790s. (We had NO parties at the start; George Washington was elected unanimously by the electors with no input whatever from the peasants, er, ordinary people.)
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-13 23:55
except for Ross Perot (not a party I know)
What's wrong with an amendment THROUGH the STATES, considering the current majority?
We need 3 amendments. A Constitutional convention is a solution.
 
 
0 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:25
"Robbee, we MUST have more than two parties: Since the duopoly managed to virtually kill of any liklihood of successful independent party/candidate campaigns, we've had nothing but congressional gridlock--and the same applies to state legislatures."

Evedryone says that, but most of the western world has multiple parties and they are just as mired in neoliberism, which Klein, correctly in my opinion, identifies as the root cause of this mess, as we are. There is no magic in third parties.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-13 23:51
Let's get proportional representation in Congress!
Another amendment needed to the Constitution besides the current one going (movetoamend) and the one abolishing the electoral college and allowing direct voting by the people with an election providing 2 runs (2-3 weeks apart) to allow 3rd parties (up to 10) to run in the 1st run; the 2nd run would be between the 2 highest vote getter (unless 1 gets >50% at the 1st run.)
It's the french system.
Meanwhile,sign the petition:

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-11-11 17:24
I would concur that real progressives should not run against other real progressives in the general elections.

I've never seen that happen, but would encourage the least progressive candidate to drop out if it ever were to happen.
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-11-13 23:55
or we could have instant runoff
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-13 23:45
NO Robbee! 3rd party are not spoilers, they are the PROOF OF VIBRANT DEMOCRACIES. They should and MUST be part of the future debates (at least 2 if not 3 of them); anything less is pure censorship. MSM is GUILTY of just that with Bernie, Jill Stein and G Johnson
 
 
+17 # kkartha 2016-11-11 11:52
Excellent piece by Naomi Klein. Resonates well with my thoughts... I opted to stay out after the loss of Bernie Sanders in the CA Primaries..
 
 
+13 # Patriot 2016-11-11 13:06
kkartha, I hope you didn't just announce that you didn't vote? If so, that was an unconscionable, indefensible position. Please don't brag about it (which, in fairness, you did not); I would hate for anything to encourage others to fail in their duty as citizens to help select the officials of our government for the next 2, 4, or 6 years.
 
 
+25 # Woratnac 2016-11-11 12:02
Yes. OK. I agree with her. HOW DO WE GET THERE? What do we do first? We need a real strategy. So far we don't have it. We must make it. I have no talent for this. I'll take my lead from Klein, if she can suggest steps forward, and others. Problem: All branches of government are now controlled by the party of evil.
 
 
+18 # mavrant 2016-11-11 12:16
Great piece!
Everything starts with the first step. Lets start to make a plan now, piece by piece, so we can be prepared to move forward with a coherent potentiation to Bernie's agenda. But first lets flush the crap out of the DNC, while keeping intact the progressive components. But what the hell do I know?
 
 
+19 # Jim Rocket 2016-11-11 12:23
There may be a glimmer of hope in that Trump, himself, is not as evil as the ghouls that surround him. The Joint Chiefs may be able to convince him that global warming is a real problem since they are taking it very seriously as a threat to world stability. Trump may actually stop the TPP and be progressive in some other places. On the other hand, a stopped clock is correct twice a day also.
 
 
+15 # MidwesTom 2016-11-11 13:03
The two parties historic definition wa almost reversed by Trump. Naomi hit the nail on it's head. HRC presented the Davo crowd and the DC neocons, and Americans simply said 'we have had enough'.
 
 
+14 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:24
Unfortunately Trump is just another 1%er. We truly had NO ONE to represent our interests running
 
 
+16 # MidwesTom 2016-11-11 13:09
My guess us that Trump will do some things that we do not like, but I also believe that now we will nor invade Syria, I believe that we will finally cooperate with Russia and destroy ISIS quickly; I believe that we will be much harder on the Saudi's; I also believe that the bathroom order will be reversed. I also believe that we will stop trying to rule the world.

On the negative side, the XL pipeline will probably get built; the southern border will be closed one way or another; many illegals will be forced to leave; I expect a national school voucher bill; the end of sanctuary cities; a drastic drop in Muslim immigrants; and big reductions in several Federal agencies.

We have to take the good with the bad. The fact that the whole establishment was for HRC is why Trump won.
 
 
+15 # Montanan 2016-11-11 13:55
And don't forget a rise in self-righteous Christianists, a rise in hate crimes, a rise in gun deaths, a rise in bullying in schoolyards, a rise in rape and domestic violence, a rise in deaths of young women from botched abortions. We will likely see a drop in education standards, rewrites of history, God in the classroom, the carving up of our national parks, and deregulated safety standards for food and drinking water.
 
 
+11 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:26
Montanan, those things will hapen only if we LET them, by accepting them silently, without massive--and I mean MASSIVE--but peaceful resistance.

We will get whatever we're willing to WORK and FIGHT for. Indeed, that's all we've EVER gotten.
 
 
+7 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:28
Massive resistance will just ensure massive arrests . Non profit prisons stock is soaring on Trump's election. He holds grudges.He barred those in the press who did not cover him favorably from access during the election.
Resistance to Trump will only result in vengeance -Omarosa his professional one black "friend" has already announced they are "making lists" of their enemies.
 
 
+1 # LionMousePudding 2016-11-13 03:19
It's pretty bad already. Did we LET them? Some of us have fought pretty hard. Remember the will of the people has on average (giggle) 0% influence on legislation. NOT LETting is not as easy as you seem to think--- i.e., possible at all.

Huge protests aren't even covered. Tiny protests are slaughtered by police and covered in the media as though progressives were violent vigilantes.

With Bernie, things would have changed.

THINGS DON'T GO FROM THE BOTTOM UP ANYMORE cuz it's TOO DANG FAR UP.
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:10
start here patriot: SIGN!
https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19
 
 
+6 # Activista 2016-11-11 15:49
and reverse Global Warming science - Naomi did not mention much in this article.
 
 
-11 # Eliza D 2016-11-11 17:10
Why do you think it's ok to bash Christians? And how does a rise in self-righteous Christianity equate to a rise in rape and domestic violence and the other evils you have listed? This is not only a false equivalency but subtle and dangerous bigotry.
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 14:40
Well, for starters, Islamophobia will rise and violence be 'justified', Anti-Semitic rants and lies will increase from the narrowly educated, and a complete disconnect with smaller groups and religions will also rise with self-serving justification originating in true ignorance.
 
 
+2 # Eliza D 2016-11-13 18:22
It's so interesting that you can predict the future. Not.
 
 
+5 # Montanan 2016-11-12 22:33
Eliza D, I didn't bash Christians, and nowhere did I suggest that a rise in violence equates with a rise in Christianity.

I was bashing "Christianists, " the so-called Warriors for Christ and anyone else who wears their religion on their sleeves to feel holier-than-tho u, uses the Old Testament to justify hatred of the "other" and eschews the teachings of the New Testament.

As for a rise in violence, I was speaking of a large swath of disaffected bullies (mostly white, mostly male) who view Trump's tacit approval of the violence during his campaign as a call to incite violence for its own sake. And that's already happening.
 
 
0 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:13
""Christianists , " the so-called Warriors for Christ ", the ones who support sharia law, only a Christian sharia law (ted Cruz comes to mind.)
 
 
+14 # Radscal 2016-11-11 17:41
Having a President who embodies racist, misogynist, xenophobic bigotry will assuredly embolden those in our population who share those bigotries.

The Republican Establishment will surely try to further weaken regulations and regulatory agencies intended to protect our health and environment.

But we need to understand that people who share those ideologies really are a minority in this country. Trump got about 1/2 of the tallied votes, and barely 1/2 of eligible voters actually voted.

So, his support was about 25%. And, a goodly number of those who did vote for him really were holding their noses and voting against the neoliberal, neocon agenda embodied by HRC.

Therefore, we need to find the common ground that the majority share, and present a unified front on those issues. And I'm quite certain that the majority of USians don't want those horrible things you listed.
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:15
I agree 100% with you (again) Radscal.
Did we go to the same "government school" as they caall it on the right?
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 00:45
Hehehe. Well, we all got schooled, eh?

I went to parochial school through 8th grade. But then I went to a gubmint high school... with Hillary for one year!
 
 
+4 # JCM 2016-11-11 16:21
Hillary has 400,000 more votes than trump. Just saying
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:09
"The fact that the whole establishment was for HRC is why Trump won."

He fooled electors! With 94% lies/inaccuraci es according to factcheck, it took idiots and poorly informed voters (thank you MSM!) to elect a sociopath.
sign petition:
https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19

He claimed to be anti-establishm ent but NOW he is surrounding himself 100% (I think) by establishment figures as most predicted!
look at Gingrich, Demint,Sessions , Bolton, the RNC Chairman now chief of staff!..
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:23
TRUMP Claims he is anti-establishm ent (notice it is a teleprompter-dr iven ad): Yes it's in English and you need to disable ad blocker apps to watch it. AMAZING VIDEO!
http://www.agoravox.tv/tribune-libre/article/un-discours-essentiel-de-donald-71197

Sign the change.org petition!
 
 
+26 # dipierro4 2016-11-11 13:28
I have long hoped the same, and Trump's past positions on health care, Wall Street, and (yes) women's rights seemed to be a basis for that. And of course, de-escalating the Cold War is not a bad idea. But every thing he says, every person he brings into his circle -- from Pence to Ed Meese to the lobbyists who are forming his transition team -- seems to give the lie to this hope.
 
 
+13 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:09
We can begin now, TODAY, to ACT by voicing our opinions:

We can send a civil letter to President-elect Trump praising the possitions he has articulated that we support, and explaining our opposition to those we reject--then outlining the policies we would prefer in the place of his, and explaining the difference between his versions and ours.

We can send a firm, unequivocal letter to each of our Democratic state legislators, governors, and congressmen explaining that we hold them personally accountable for the sabotage of Sanders' candidacy and his EARNED nomination, and for the fraudulent primaries--by the complicity of their silent acquiescense, if not their overt participation-- and demanding that they start, immediately, working for US, for peace, for a reduction in climate change--and get off the oligarchs' gravy train.

We also can write to their Republican counterparts who are SUPPOSED to be representing US and inform them that they do NOT have a mandate to finish destroying the planet, conquering the world, reversing hard-won cultural and legal status gains for minorities, and passing all the monetary profit of our economy to the oligarchs. We can tell them that we will fight them tooth and nail, with protests, obstruction, legal action--whateve r it takes--and wash them out of office at the first opportunity, if they persist in their arrogant, destructive conduct.
 
 
+11 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:09
We can point out that they rode in on Trump's coattails, on a wave of REJECTION of their decades-long determination to destroy the middle class and grind the poor to dust, and that we will vigorously support any of Trump's liberal and progressive policies and oppose even MORE vigorously ALL of their reactionary, feudalistic, oligarchic policies.

We should take our time with those letters. Spare the adjectives: Stick with solid, simple, nouns and verbs. Keep them as short and punchy as possible. Remain civil, but be crystal clear that we will not sit still for their failure to follow our instructions and keep our welfare uppermost in their minds. Check our spelling and grammar. Let our letters cool a day or two before we sign and seal them, so we can give them a last check with objective eyes.

And, we SHOULD send them by postal (snail) mail. It would not hurt every elected official in the country to receive several mailbags full of letters from firm, forthright, insistent, UNSUPPORTIVE constituents. (We might even tailor our "form" letters so they would be appropriate warnings to our local and county elected officials.)
 
 
+9 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:10
Finally, to the few elected officials of ANY party, at any level of government, who truly have been trying to serve the best interests of the people who elected them, PLEASE, let's send a letter of our thanks for their honorable efforts to be true representatives , and to serve and defend the Constitution.

Don't be dismayed: We really only need to compose three letters (unless, of course, we have plenty of individual ammunition to expend on each individual official): one to the arrogant, dismissive Dems, for claiming to work for us but actually serving only the oligarchy and their OWN interests; one to the deliberately deceitful, even more corrupt Repubs, whose every Act that damages us is described as for our good, but actually drives a few more nails in our coffins; and one for the good guys, who are fighting an uphill battle but getting very little credit for their nearly hopeless efforts.

Our printers or any copy machine can crank out endless copies of those letters, altered only to include the correct name and mailing address of each official. If we put any money at all into the election, we could consider the postage on all of those letters as our final contribution to this election.
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:11
Try it! Just imagine the effect of those letters from even only ONE member of each household in this country! This is doable, NOW, while we wait to see what will be the first thing to demand our immediate attention and response. And maybe, just maybe, all those letters will have some small effect on the course of the next several months. Maybe not, but we cannot know unless they are sent!

Go for it!
 
 
-5 # Activista 2016-11-11 15:56
You had a chance to VOTE for Hillary Clinton (democrat) as most informed people did. By not voting for Clinton you elected Trump/Republica ns. Here is a program of CLinton/Sanders :
1. "For families making less than $125,000 a year, we will eliminate tuition" for in-state students at public colleges.
2. "Pass comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship that keeps families together."
3. "Stand up to Republican-led attacks on this landmark (health care) law—and build on its success to bring the promise of affordable health care to more people and make a ‘public option’ possible."
4. "We will do everything we can to overturn Citizens United."
5. "Fighting for equal pay."
6. "I will not raise middle-class taxes."
7. "Say no to attacks on working families and no to bad trade deals and unfair trade practices, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership."
8. "We’re going to increase the federal minimum wage."
9. "As president, Hillary will expand background checks to more gun sales."
10. "Clinton would increase federal infrastructure funding by $275 billion over a five-year period."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/22/hillary-clintons-top-10-campaign-promises/
 
 
+11 # Merlin 2016-11-11 16:12
Activista 2016-11-11 15:56
"You had a chance to VOTE for Hillary Clinton (democrat) as most informed people did. By not voting for Clinton you elected Trump/Republica ns."

Give it up, Activista. Trump's win is your responsibility. YOU and your ilk chose HRC and backed her stealing of the primary from Bernie who the polls showed would have crushed Trump.

And you still try and tell us that she believed in Bernie's platform, admitting she had none of her own worth standing up for. The election is over! We are now stuck with this abomination, because of you and all your emotional blind believers. Give it up, and start learning the reality of politics in this country.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-11-11 17:55
Activista finally admitted that her/his goal is the Soros/Rockefell er Global One World Government, which HRC also supports.

Soros is quite clear that he is willing to foment havoc, including economic ruination and violence in order to drive the people into giving up their liberties for the promised security of this global government.

And most of these globalists are quite open in their expectation that the global population must be reduced by 80% to 90% anyway, so a Malthusian population collapse would actually be quite alright to many of them.

I do not know how much of this Activista supports, or even admits or knows is true, as he/she ignores my questions about them.
 
 
+5 # Merlin 2016-11-11 18:13
Radscal 2016-11-11 17:55
Spot on Rad.

You note:
"I do not know how much of this Activista supports, or even admits or knows is true, as he/she ignores my questions about them."

No answer, especially a repetitive no answer, is an answer loud and clear. It is the choice of ignorantly opinionated people self righteously sounding off. It is the technique of trolls like those of the clintonista camp's Corrupt The Record. It is the response of the emotionally weak who are to fearful to respond. It is the answer given when they know their unsubstantiated opinion will be destroyed by facts.

Keep pushing these people Rad! You are doing a great job, and I for one, cheer you on!
 
 
+8 # Radscal 2016-11-11 19:02
Yep. As David Gilmore sang in his aptly named song, "Sorrow:" "A silence that speaks so much louder than words"

Thanks, Merlin. And back atcha as always.
 
 
-2 # Activista 2016-11-12 22:23
and extreme right is with you Radscal - Soros also created global warming.
Soros Paid Al Gore MILLIONS To Push Global Warming Policies | The ...
dailycaller.com/.../soros-paid-al-gore-millions-to-push-aggressive-us-action-on-global...
Aug 17, 2016 - Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars over three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming, according to leaked documents. A document published by DC Leaks shows ...
Hacked Emails EXPOSE Who is REALLY Behind Al Gore's "Global ...
www.thepoliticalinsider.com/hacked-emails-expose-really-behind-al-gores-global-war...
Aug 17, 2016 - Al Gore, who has already has amassed a fortune pushing “global warming” propaganda, has received at least $30 million from George Soros ...
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-11-13 01:41
You know what? I don't care who uncovers and/or publishes accurate information. I'm only interested in learning the truth.

But if you wanted me to actually check out your sources to see if they are accurate, you should have posted the entire link.
 
 
0 # Activista 2016-11-14 15:55
There is this tool - Google Search - and enter the "Soros Global Warming"
or "Soros Israel" you get:
Hacked Soros e-mails reveal plans to fight Israel's 'racist' policies ...
www.jpost.com/Israel.../Hacked-Soros-e-mails-reveal-plans-to-fight-Israels-racist-poli...
Aug 15, 2016 - WASHINGTON— Hacked emails show that the Open Society Foundations, led by George Soros, has as an objective “challenging Israel's racist ...
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 00:51
Yeah, as I've noted for you multiple times, I've read a LOT about Soros in the past few years. Clearly, the most convincing stuff comes from his own mouth, and his NGOs' websites.

Turns out, a lot of the horrible stuff the right wing press writes about him is true.
 
 
-1 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:28
Soros "created Global warming". Wow Activista I did not realize he was able to blow so much (hot) air and fart as much!
I am glad Soros helped us know the TRUTH and compensate for Koch brothers and Exxon propaganda!
Are YOU blaming Soros for trying to SAVE THE PLANET?
 
 
-2 # Activista 2016-11-14 16:02
Sometimes the person is best characterized by the hate of his enemies - but for some of "progressives" Stalinist here - because he is a rich person, educated - he belongs to Gulags or worse.
This class war on 1% is destroying USA and is electing lying demagogues like Trump.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 00:54
For me, it's mostly his predatory financial schemes and the often violent and sometimes brutally murderous groups he funds.

And your refusal to even acknowledge that does seem to tell us quite a bit about you, too.
 
 
-3 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 14:43
As usual Merlin: (no magic here)

Nope.
 
 
+16 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:34
Unfortunately her 20 years in the political eye did not engender our trust as she has postured in so many ways contrary to her latest "platform."Hiri ng a woman who supported 300% predatory loans spoke much louder about her real intentions.
Obama's pledge to renegotiate NAFTA and instead creating an even worse trade bill in secret with Fortune 500 CEOs was a complete betrayal to progressives . Personally that alone was the end of my supporting a Third Way Democrat ever again.
 
 
+8 # Merlin 2016-11-11 18:15
Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:34

YES!

My feelings exactly!
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:31
Correct but still better than a sociopath (+ psychopath?) with the temperament and attention span of a 10 year old (source: his biographer) in the White House...
 
 
+10 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:43
If every one of us who refused to vote for Hillary changed our minds at the last minute, it would not have come out any differently. The only person who could have beaten Trump was Bernie. He spoke to the same diaaffected people Trump did, but without the racism, sexism, anti-immigrant, ant-muslim, pro brutal policing garbage we are now stuck with.
 
 
-1 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 14:48
Quoting lfeuille:
If every one of us who refused to vote for Hillary changed our minds at the last minute, it would not have come out any differently. The only person who could have beaten Trump was Bernie. He spoke to the same diaaffected people Trump did, but without the racism, sexism, anti-immigrant, ant-muslim, pro brutal policing garbage we are now stuck with.


I wish that were true -- but remember so many of the people who voted for Trump were rabid, uninformed anti-Semitic pseudo- 'Christians' who bc of their limited education, and family/communit y proclivities still believe that socialism. and social democracy are no different from Stalinism.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-11-12 16:43
Bernie would NOT have gotten the votes of the bigots who voted for Trump.

However, Bernie almost assuredly would have motivated huge numbers of other people to vote. Again, HRC got 10 MILLION FEWER votes than Obama got in 2008. And there are over 10 million more eligible voters today than there were then.

Remember the greeting Bernie got at the DNC Convention? And remember that the majority in the audience were HRC delegates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbRGKt2IX5U

That's what the HRC Establishment crushed. Trump's victory is on them.
 
 
+2 # Activista 2016-11-13 16:57
About 100 million of Americans did NOT vote in 2016 presidential election.
About 100 million people couldn't be bothered to vote this year
Washington Post‎ - 1 day ago
About 100 million people couldn't be bothered to vote this year ... there are about 251 million voting-age people in the U.S. But not all of ... But only about 132 million of them did, give or take the one or two ...
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-11-13 17:24
Yep. Almost half of all eligible voters didn't vote.

Again, HRC got 10 million fewer votes than Obama got in 2008. And there are more than 10 million MORE eligible voters this year.

Clearly, neither candidate provided the motivation for huge turnouts. But HRC was even less inspiring than Trump.

I doubt I'll ever forgive HRC and the DNC establishment for this disaster.
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:39
AND MSN put out unreliable polls that convinced unmotivated democrats not to bother to vote, hence low turn-out... (reps are motivated,they vote)
 
 
-2 # Activista 2016-11-14 16:10
I doubt I'll ever forgive anti Clinton, pro Trump fanatics for this disaster.
Paul Krugman: Trump will bring global recession - POLITICO
www.politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055
6 days ago - Krugman's pessimistic view comes in the wake of a more than ... Paul Krugman called Donald Trump the "mother of all adverse effects."
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:36
Soros did not have enough money to buy them up and pay them to vote i guess Activista. the Koch brothers on the other hand... Republignan governors and secretary of states however: massive purging of roles and voting obstruction in many states-especial ly in majority dem areas, (like in AZ)
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:20
yeah right... a letter to Trump to remind him he has already betrayed his promise to "return the power to the people" and LIED about being anti-establishm ent (his team - gang - is 100% establishment as many predicted) . He had a full speech (with prompter) on this:
here on a French site (disable ad blockers to watch video -- it's in English)
http://www.agoravox.tv/tribune-libre/article/un-discours-essentiel-de-donald-71197
 
 
+3 # Cassandra2012 2016-11-12 14:35
Jim Rocket:
Please- don't count on any of that. Trump is a classic narcissist, ONLY for Trump himself -- at ALL costs.
He does not learn very fast, has neither the aptitude nor the desire to learn much.
His mind and attitudes are stuck -- arrested development. His 'Yuuuge' vocabulary and his thought processes are stuck -- in the 3rd grade.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:01
the crowd (gang) he is surrounding himself with - starting with his VP _ does not bode well Jim... Demint is supposed to be in the gang and he is almost demented. He spelled out the obstruction to Obama to deny him a 2nd term (back in 09). Steve Banan is advisor, the former RNC chairman is chief of staff! Glimmer of hope?
 
 
+12 # librarian1984 2016-11-11 13:04
A good start is calling or writing your representatives today. The struggle for the direction of the party is happening right now. The establishment wants to preserve things the way they are. They want to toss us a few crumbs and maintain their comfy positions.

Tell them we want new leadership, progressive leadership. Tell them to follow Sanders' lead. Tell them to turn from Wall Street and focus on the working class and the poor. Tell them that neoliberalism must be abandoned and anyone who doesn't do that will be Tea Partied in 2018.

Call! Email! March!
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:43
A better MORE RADICAL start might be: to Call on the wimp (Obama) to
1-declare a state of emergency and Marshall Law and immediately run new elections! Our system gives us ample time until January and Marshall Law could extend it if necessary.
2- Appoint Garland during recess, as allowed under the Constitution; It's way overdue. Congress can kick him out later if they dare.

What do we have to lose?

I prefer Hilary as a representative of the oligarchs because at least she CAN govern while Trumpf CANNOT (so, Pence,Reince, Demint,Sessions , Gingrich, Rumsfeld (?) and the "OLD gang" will pull the strings and govern. Too bad Cheney is too old/sick or he would be called in...
also sign change.org petition
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:47
check this: http://markcrispinmiller.com/
and: https://www.facebook.com/markcrispinmiller/
 
 
+8 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 16:46
@Woratnac: Never forget "the party of evil" is in fact one capitalist party of two deceptive names, Democratic (sic) and Republican.
 
 
+37 # JCM 2016-11-11 12:02
Unbelievably, many of the people who suffer most under neoliberalism ideology have elected a man who will, if he follows through with what he has mostly said, deregulate, privatize, trickle down, and install Supreme Court Justices that will strip their votes by allowing unrestricted amounts of money into politics and elections. Is this what we get by years of Fox news lies, republican propaganda, corporate media that only cares about their bottom line and the apparent fecklessness of the Democrats to battle this. Time will tell but it will probably be to late for the planet.
 
 
+29 # Jim Rocket 2016-11-11 12:24
It's hard to over-estimate the damage that Fox News and the rest of that crowd has done to the fabric of society.
 
 
+11 # Merlin 2016-11-11 18:26
Jim Rocket 2016-11-11 12:24
“It's hard to over-estimate the damage that Fox News and the rest of that crowd has done to the fabric of society.”

Are you also including the damage the rest of the corporate owned and controlled media did by ignoring Jill Stein and Bernie while pushing hard for HRC? Like CNN for instance. Who bears more responsibility than the clintonista supporting, supposedly “liberal” media, for President Trump? Fox has always been there as the rethug outlet. Their support decided nothing! They don’t appeal to anyone but rethug supporters. It was the “liberal” media who pushed for the coronation of HRC, instead of the obvious, people’s choice of Bernie (and who actually won the primary,) who would have crushed Trump.
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2016-11-11 19:04
And except for Hannity, FOX was lukewarm at best towards Trump until he won the nomination.

I suspect they knew that Trump was HRC's preferred "Pied Piper" candidate as the Podesta emails proved.
 
 
+8 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:52
I almost think NPR and PBS are more dangerous than FOX. There are too many people who think they are well informed by them. They don't know about the many issues they ignore or the range of opinions they don't bother to present.
 
 
+4 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:58
I AGREE ABSOLUTELY! lfeuille NPR often gave a pass to Trump and ignored Bernie for a LONG time. Even recently they talked about "the 2 presidential candidates" ignoring 3rd parties.

NPR + PBS audience is also larger than Fox audience.

National Propaganda Radio is just that: Propaganda radio. It changed in 93 during the 1st Gulf war by the way and was noticed + denounced then with people calling NPR National Pentagon radio!
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:53
the “liberal” media also gave us poll results that de-motivated potential voters (it was a done deal - 74-98% chance - so why bother top vote?)
 
 
-4 # Robbee 2016-11-11 14:00
Quoting JCM:
Unbelievably, many of the people who suffer most under neoliberalism ideology have elected a man who will, if he follows through with what he has mostly said, deregulate, privatize, trickle down, and install Supreme Court Justices that will strip their votes by allowing unrestricted amounts of money into politics and elections. Is this what we get by years of Fox news lies, republican propaganda, corporate media that only cares about their bottom line and the apparent fecklessness of the Democrats to battle this.

- suffer? - so long as they can continue to abuse minorities and non-christians - whites R E V E L in supremacy!
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:01
who is saying it's whites? JCM isn't as I see it.
 
 
+14 # Radscal 2016-11-11 18:00
The Democratic Party Establishment did not fail to battle these things. They encouraged and even led many of them.

When the populists among Trump voters realize that he sold them out, we need to be ready to join with them, and continuing partisan divisionism will prevent that.
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2016-11-12 01:00
@Radscal: That is the one most profound statement on this entire thread. Thank you.

Trouble is, identity politics -- the capitalist antidote to class consciousness -- will abort that solidarity before it is even in the embryonic stage. The clitoris-envy misogyny of the anti-abortion Christian jihadist right; the forcible disarmament fanaticism of the pseudo-Left -- people who truly believe every firearms owner is "a Nazi" and the mere ownership of a firearm is "an act of violence"; the Ku-Klux minded racists and Nazi-minded ableists of the Right; the tree-spiking environmentalis ts of the bourgeois Left, whose hatred of corporate depredations is exceed only by their demonstrably murderous hatred of Working Class people who have no other livelihood than logging -- these differences and their corollaries, envenomed ad nauseam by hatreds of the same bottomless magnitude that tore apart the Weimar Republic and thus enabled Hitler, make any such union hopeless under present circumstances.

The question then is how do we educate people on both sides of the political spectrum -- people whose closed-minded zealotry proves them to be utterly ineducable.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-11-12 17:20
I'm thinking a key may be to largely not engage the issues that have been promoted to divide us.

Rather, let's focus most of our energy on the issues that we know most people agree about:

Ending "Free Trade" deals
Bringing Economic security
Ending corruption
Ending wars
Rebuilding infrastructure
And for now, stop talking about environmental issues almost entirely in global warming terms. Almost everyone wants to breath clean air, drink clean water, eat safe food, and live without pollution oozing up under our feet. The fact is, if we deal with those things, we will be reducing greenhouse gas production, so use the terms that we agree are important.

There are surely many other issues we agree on.
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:09
That's how Norman Goldman sees it (listen to his radio show).
but IDENTITY as pointed out by Lorenbliss is a problem. it creates distrust of the other sides (see my post and his)
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:07
Yes "Trouble is, identity politics -- the capitalist antidote to class consciousness -- will abort that solidarity before it is even in the embryonic stage."
People IDENTIFY as LEFT, Right,lib,indep endents, conserv, libertarians, anarchists... and fail to see common ground on issues so they can join forces to combat their COMMON enemies: the 1%, the oligarchs.

and yes, Lorenbliss, you are so insightful as usual: "The question then is how do we educate people on both sides of the political spectrum -- people whose closed-minded zealotry proves them to be utterly ineducable."

Sign the petition:

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:04
Yes, class consciousness has been largely erased from USian psyches, replaced with this false 'liberal' v. 'conservative' narrative.

However, most of us here on RSN do not see HRC as any sort of anecdote. She is a (woman) card-carrying member of the 0.1%, and has been the willing servant for them her entire adult life.
 
 
+7 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:54
I'm hoping it happens in time for the midterms.
 
 
+7 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 01:49
They were voting for jobs. They probably won't get them, but they definitely wouldn't get them with Clinton. They had noting to lose by voting for Trump.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 00:51
YES JCM correct. It is also what we get by having a neocon hawk, with low credibility and terrible campaign advisors, to run against him...
 
 
-13 # Tigre1 2016-11-11 12:20
Noami probably doesn't recognize the relationship between the founder of the Koch dynasty (and our political problems) and Joseph Stalin.

Slow researchers say,"Well, the Kochs are RW, and Stalin was supreme lefty"...and overlook what he had Koch do. TO US.

The country is about ready for actual, open, complete plucking.
For a while, the RW will believe that THEIR time has come, and truly, it may, as it did for Polish military and various nationalist groups when Stalin's emissaries took over their countries.

Fred Koch was a brilliant man, and set in motion the most successful subversion campaign ever seen ANYWHERE. Every and all people who think they are 'conservative revolutionists' are Stalin's 'Useful Idiots'.

Go ahead: sometimes I don't sound so crazy. It's worth checking out.

The 'Gullenist' situation in
Turkey, where the PM had a hundred thousand people picked up, fired, exiled, jailed, etc, etc. is just a tiny taste of what the U.S. would need to do
if anyone left in authority in this country reacted to a very real foreign subversion campaign...


THAT WON'T HAPPEN. It's gone too far now.
Expect to learn Russian soon.
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 17:01
@: Tigre1: You err grievously in conflating Stalin with the Koch brothers. Read some history: Stalin was building an industrial nation from the ruins of a feudal nation. The Koch cabal is building a feudal nation from the ruins of an industrial nation.

But the implication of your "expect to learn Russian soon" -- unintentionally to be sure (though maybe your subconscious is telling you something you should heed) -- is that given present-day politics, Russia could well emerge from the global miasma as the savior of human liberty.

That savior most assuredly won't be Moron Nation, i.e., the United States of America.

Вы говорите по-русски?
 
 
+1 # Kiwikid 2016-11-11 17:10
Stalin was a monster
 
 
+7 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 21:59
Before we damn Stalin as "a monster," let us acknowledge the monstrous behavior of the United States, which for the most part went unchallenged by its citizenry until capitalism brought USian sadism home and the white population began to suffer the same depredations as indigenous populations abroad and minority or First Nations populations in the imperial homeland.

Then of course the white population, methodically moronated to self-destructiv e stupidity, did precisely as it was conditioned to do* and in its ignorance-abort ed quest for relief voted in fascism.
_________

*Note for example the required high school reading of Ayn Rand, a fictionalizer of Hitler's "Mein Kampf" whose work should never have been published, much less given, like gasoline thrown on a fire, to people capitalism had already raised from birth to be moral imbeciles.
 
 
+1 # Activista 2016-11-12 22:47
to people Marxism had already raised from birth to be moral imbeciles:
Говорим по-русски - and it was not my foreign language choice - it was compulsory in Soviet occupied/ KGB controlled Czechoslovakia.
Stalin and Marx ideology was compulsory. In 1952 when Soviet dictator died (his picture was in all classrooms) the teacher cried - my mother called him a monster. If I would tell in school - my mother would disappear. This was the life of 7 year old under the dictator Stalin.
 
 
+1 # Activista 2016-11-12 22:50
Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is a Russian politician who is the current President of the Russian .... the best part of his life with "the organs". In 1999, Putin described communism as "a blind alley, far away from the mainstream of civilization".
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:12
THAT was after he left the KGB Activista and then he became a ruthless dictator
 
 
-1 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:09
A "ruthless dictator" that Gallup Polls consistently finds has approval ratings of 85% to 90%.
 
 
+2 # Merlin 2016-11-11 18:28
lorenbliss 2016-11-11 17:01

Excellent post Loren!
 
 
+1 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 21:08
@Merlin: Спасибо...er, Thank you!
 
 
+10 # Radscal 2016-11-11 18:08
Yep. Papa Koch made his fortune in the Soviet oil industry.

The Clintons made a smaller fortune selling 1/5 of US uranium to Russia.

The supra-national financial interests make (or more accurately, "take") great fortunes from all of it. And not many of them speak Russian.

Many Trump voters, and many eligible voters who refused to vote for HRC were taking a stand against these puppet-masters.
 
 
-4 # Activista 2016-11-12 22:54
"The Clintons made a smaller fortune selling 1/5 of US uranium to Russia. "
Radscal please stop these idiotic Trump lies ..
"Donald Trump inaccurately suggests Clinton got paid to approve ...
www.politifact.com/truth-o.../donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/
Jun 30, 2016 - Among them: "Hillary Clinton's State Department approved the transfer of 20 percent of America's uranium holdings to Russia, while nine ... Hillary Clinton's eponymous nonprofit foundation provided ready-made fodder for ... It churns out a smaller portion of actual uranium produced in the United States (11 ...
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-11-13 01:55
From the Business Insider:

"As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation," The Times reports.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-clintons-putin-and-uranium-2015-4?op=1

“I am pleased to inform you that today we control 20 percent of uranium in the United States. If we need that uranium, we shall be able to use it any time,” Russian state corporation Rosatom’s head Sergey Kiriyenko said in his address speech to the Russian Parliament after Rosatom consolidated 100% of Uranium One Inc. (U1) in January 2013 and takes it private.

http://www.mining.com/new-york-times-takes-on-the-clintons-and-uranium-one-connection/

And again, the "link" you provided is dead.

The Podesta Group arranged these deals, and Bill Clinton was personally paid $1/2 million for a single speech to the largest bank in Russia just as the deal went through.

As always, there is no notarized receipt saying "I bribe the Clintons X dollars for providing Y," so apologists for the Clintons claim there's' no "smoking gun."

If only the millions of blacks put in prison by the Clinton Crime Bill were allowed such lenience in evidence requirements.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:19
Rdscal, thanks again for contributing: that was a subject i was not sure about (it's rare.) good links.

What do you think of this:
Call on the wimp (Obama) to declare a state of emergency and Marshall Law and immediately run new elections! Our system gives us ample time until January and Marshall Law could extend it if necessary. Appoint Garland during recess, as allowed under the Constitution; It's way overdue. Congress can kick him out later if they dare.

What do we have to lose?

I prefer Hilary as a representative of the oligarchs because at least she CAN govern while Trumpf CANNOT ( as a consequence, Pence, Reince, Demint, Sessions, Gingrich, Rumsfeld (?) and more of the "OLD gang" will pull the strings and govern. Too bad Cheney is too old/sick or he would be called in…

did you sign this one?
https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:17
Martial law is nothing to call for. It is ONLY something to prevent under most any situation.

We're already living under a version of it, signed by George W. Bush on September 14, 2001, and then extended every year since by first Bush II and then Obama.

That's one of the reasons why W kept insisting that his warrantless surveillance was legal. It's also why Obama was able to say he had the authority to indefinitely detain US citizens who had never even committed a crime, but whom he could claim might have done so later.

And of course, he also suspended habeas corpus, so no evidence is even necessary for this clearly unconstitutiona l power. Martial law is tyranny.

Besides, if Obama openly declared Martial Law and reversed an election's results, there would be widespread rebellion and violence. And rightly so, I'd say.

I'd love to see a real investigation into the election fraud during the primaries and general election, followed by arrests and a new election. But neither branch of the corporate party would ever permit that.
 
 
+9 # kitster 2016-11-11 12:27
sorry. mostly wrong. the davos class will always be with us,,,just like the poor and disenfranchised . their existence didn't just spring up. and the truth is...even among dt dunces...that americans are way better off since obama has occupied the oval office. the triumvirate tragedy that put trump over the top were: whitelash, anger at a broken, political system and a mindset for mayhem. remember clinton actually won the popular vote...just in the wrong states. i question the means klein blames for ushering in the end. that the distempered don is an unfit demagogue is true. and those who said it couldn't happen here have been proven wrong once again. let us build a truly progressive party out of the ashes of patently passe republican and democratic, political incest and defeat both at the polls in 2020. anyway, "the fault, dear america, is not in our stars but in ourselves."
 
 
+8 # Radscal 2016-11-11 18:16
The only way one can claim that Obama was good for USians economically is to start at the depths of the second greatest recession in US history.

All economic trends for at least the past 40 years have shown that, while productivity skyrocketed, wages stagnated or lowered. Inflation- together with the replacement of living wages in manufacturing with low-paid service jobs - means that most USians have to work more hours to buy the same necessities, such as food, shelter and medical care.

Neoliberalism is a failure whether championed by a Republican or a Democrat.
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-11-13 18:13
Or a success, depending on which end of the stick you're on.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:35
I agree (again) BUT reversing Reaganomics (upper tax rate going back to 74%, end of most tax loopholes, end of subsidies to the wrong industries/agri cultural interests, end of foreign wars), closing Guantanamo, prosecuting GW Bush for High Crimes and Misdemeanors (along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, John Hu...), and waging a forceful fight against obstruction would have made him A LOT better.

Who knows, he might have been a model motivating 10-20% more Americans to go and vote for "4-8 more years" (with Hilary.)

He was, and still is, a wimp and he never intended to implement CHANGE - no more than Trump intends to "return the POWER to The People; liars!
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:25
This claiming that Obama is a "wimp" presumes that he would prefer to do something other than enforce the will of his sponsors, but is afraid to.

I see no evidence of that. He is doing precisely what he was trained and hired to do. HRC would of course have been exactly the same.

With Trump, I really don't know. I strongly suspect that he will also serve those same supra-national interests. If he really was opposed to them, I don't see how he could have been allowed to "win" an election.

But the national mood has grown so strong in opposition to these globalist fiends that they may allow him to oversee some substantial changes.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:24
"the fault, dear america, is not in our stars but in ourselves." and in MSM, and in MONEY (bribery) running our political system (Supreme Court decisions0
 
 
+29 # sharag 2016-11-11 12:40
What happened in this election was no surprise to anyone who was watching. This article and other pieces by Robert Scheer, Michael Moore and others point out what the true cause of Trumps rise was, anger at the neo-liberal destruction of so many people's livelihoods, communities, lives. The current Democratic Party leadership is deaf and delusional and should have been reorganized after the midterm losses of 2014. New progressive Democratic leadership is needed now, today. Without radical changes in leadership, the Democratic Party is dead and not worth following. A new movement must rise out of its ashes.
 
 
+19 # Patriot 2016-11-11 13:20
Sharag, DP leadership--and quite a bit of its political membership--als o is arrogant, dismissive of any point of view but their own, corrupt, and tyrannical--in a word, Republican Lite. (Okay; in two words.)

This is the THIRD presidential campaign IN A ROW during which they've tried, unsuccessfully, to ram Clinton down our throats. She was rejected all three times, yet they STILL cannot admit that they goofed. They COULD have paid attention to the galvanized electorate who backed Sanders, but, no, it was Clinton's (and THEIR) turn.

Don't all of us recall that this election was determined a couple of YEARS ago to be between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton--despit e the fact that the majority of the public rejected BOTH of them as mere continuation of the very unpalatable status quo?

Whether Trump was as sincere in attacking the Repubs as Sanders was in attacking the Dems remains to be seen--but the events of yesterday and today seem to indicate that neither party has learned a single thing from the election that just occurred. The Repubs think they have a mandate to finish destroying the planet and the fabric of our society, as well as most of the people in it; the Dems think everyone was wrong but themselves. Both are corrupt, avaricious, and power-mad.
 
 
+6 # Eljefe 2016-11-11 14:08
Right on! BTW,Is Hillary still worth $225K a speech to Goldman?
 
 
-7 # Activista 2016-11-11 16:06
www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-illuminating-but-unsurprising-content-of-clintons-paid-speeches
The real value of the WikiLeaks documents is one the hackers may not have intended. The documents, particularly the speech extracts, portray Clinton as she is: a hard-headed centrist who believes that electoral politics inevitably involve making compromises, dealing with powerful interest groups, and, where necessary, amending unpopular policy positions.

The materials appear to have been obtained when someone hacked the e-mail account of John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman. The Clinton campaign is blaming the Russian government and alleging that WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, are in cahoots with the Kremlin to help elect Donald Trump. WikiLeaks, as usual, isn’t saying where it got its material.
.. just money and money - any other principles like democracy ELJEFE?
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:59
Activista I read the New Yorker's article BUT there isn't much there...
The author himself says "So far, the documents have contained a few embarrassing revelations for Clinton—but they’ve been mild ones."
and yes Clinton IS: "a hard-headed centrist who believes that electoral politics inevitably involve making compromises, dealing with powerful interest groups, and, where necessary, amending unpopular policy positions."
Trump IS a hard-headed racist sociopath with dictator-like tendencies and the temperament of a 10 year-old kid who ONLY plays games fairly as long as he wins.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:29
I suggest you not believe a word printed in the NY Times.

Let me give you one example. The emails show that HRC knew that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were providing weapons, money and other support to al Qaeda (including specifically their ISIL branch) and other terrorist groups that the US is allegedly fighting our Global War OF Terror against.

But, she went ahead and signed off on the largest arms sales to Saudi Arabia in history.. and lobbied to get them onto the UN Human Rights panel!!!! Mind you, this is a country that will chop the head off a woman who has sex outside of marriage, and does not permit women to drive or even go out in public without a male chaperone.

And, she and her crime family accepted $ tens of millions in "charity donations" from those same human rights abusing state sponsors of terror.

That alone is a bit more than "embarrassing." Providing aid and comfort to enemies at war is actually the exact definition of treason.

And there's LOTS more of the same in there.
 
 
0 # crispy 2016-11-14 01:46
No Eljefe. In fact, (as in Trump's FACTS) they are asking for refunds and so are Saudi Arabia, Israel and Qatar.
Putin on the other hand is happy with his investment (at least hosting Trump's daughter for vacation in Russia, possibly more directly or via Assange.)
 
 
+3 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 17:07
@Patriot: hear, hear!
 
 
+6 # Merlin 2016-11-11 18:46
Patriot 2016-11-11 13:20

Well said, Patriot!

You note:
“This is the THIRD presidential campaign IN A ROW during which they've tried, unsuccessfully, to ram Clinton down our throats. She was rejected all three times, yet they STILL cannot admit that they goofed.”

I know this might sound like nitpicking but I see an ideological issue here. You claim “they goofed.” I disagree with that because they did exactly what the script called for. This is not a case where an honest, for The People group makes a mistake or an error in judgement. This was the plan and it failed. There is nothing to admit as they did exactly as they intended to. Now they will go back to the smoke filled room, and plan again to do the same thing, only with more success next time.

I really think we make an error in giving these nation destroyers any benefit of the doubt. Doing that with them is little different than expecting the mafia to reform because they were beaten at something. When your ideology is one of neoliberalism and neoconservative war mongering, you don’t suddenly see the light and change.

We have way more to fight than the rethugs and Pres. Trump. The “neos” aren’t going away and will be working behind the scenes to continue their insideous behavior. I believe Trump is stopable. The real question is are the neos stopable.
 
 
0 # ericlipps 2016-11-11 19:00
Third in a row? Funny, I don't recall her running in 2012.
 
 
+11 # Merlin 2016-11-11 12:56
Naomi mentions Davos Man.

From Wikipedia

Davos Man"
"Davos Man" is a neologism referring to the global elite of wealthy (predominantly) men, whose members view themselves as completely "international" . It is similar to the term Masters of the Universe attributed to influential financiers on Wall Street.

Davos men supposedly see their identity as a matter of personal choice, not an accident of birth. According to political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, who is credited with inventing the phrase "Davos Man", they are people who "have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the élite's global operations".


This is worth repeating!
“…they are people who "have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the élite's global operations".

This is the concept of One World Order. It is the TPP in action! No national sovereignty! Nations in name only with all power and governance coming from the elite. No Democracy! The destruction of the world as we know it, through a mostly unknown, and unseen, coup of the elitist corporate rich.
 
 
+11 # Montanan 2016-11-11 14:07
"There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars , multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM, and ITT, and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state, Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business."

– Network, 1976
 
 
+7 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:33
Montanan, that's an even grimmer picture, but probably no less true. THESE are the kinds of information we should be getting from RSN--not incitements to despair, frustration, and fear, NOR to riot and mayhem!
 
 
+7 # dipierro4 2016-11-11 17:24
Really prescient. Hit the nail on the head (except for "little twenty-one inch screen"), 4 years before Reagan took office, 18 years before NAFTA took effect, 40 years ago now.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:01
Brilliant Montanan!
Now the author would mention how money rules nations like ours, making them even less relevant and less "existent", via unlimited bribery allowed by Citizen united and the 1976 decision (what was it called? that said in essence that corporations are people.)
 
 
+6 # Patriot 2016-11-11 14:31
Thanks, Merlin. You saved me a search. Grim picture, indeed!
 
 
-6 # Activista 2016-11-11 16:14
“…they are people who "have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past ..."
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace... You...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:10
Are you agreeing with J Lennon or denouncing this genius?
 
 
+1 # Activista 2016-11-14 16:23
Lennon lyrics describe the World I hope to live in - not in the concentration camp surrounded by wires and killing walls - not in America under psychopath Trump.
 
 
+15 # Inspired Citizen 2016-11-11 13:16
For the record, Bernie or bust blames the superdelegates for choosing a candidate who was flawed, dishonest, distrusted and disliked.

https://youtu.be/epZuZsEdj-k
 
 
+14 # Totusek 2016-11-11 13:40
As I've pointed out before, it's the U.S. Electoral College that has always elected U.S. Presidents, never the combined U.S. public vote. Now, in terms of the U.S. Congress (the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate), it is the public vote that elects.

Furthermore, starting from the "dumping" / muzzling / silencing of 13 million plus dedicated volunteers from "Obama For America" starting in November of 2008 (via David Plouffe) plus the appointing of the worst of the Clinton people (via John Podesta) to the Obama administration - along with the keeping most of the neo-conservativ es from the George W. Bush administration, and the continuing of 90 percent of what the George W. Bush administration was doing at home and abroad, plus the actions and policies of the "Establishment" of both "parties" (who, as Glenn Greenwald has pointed out, actually agree on a frightening number of things - no matter how loudly they make a lot of noise about the things they don't agree on) in the U.S. House of Representatives , and the U.S. Senate etc., it should be no surprise what has happened more and more every 2 years since...
 
 
+6 # ericlipps 2016-11-11 19:03
U.S. senators were elected by state legislatures, not by popular vote, prior to ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913.
 
 
+9 # lorenbliss 2016-11-11 21:31
Think of the Electoral College as the national equivalent of the Democratic (sic) National Committee's "superdelegates ." Both serve the same class-war function -- that is, making sure the will of the One Percent and the Ruling Class prevail over the will of the 99 Percent.

Just as the Democratic (sic) superdelegates parlayed an enormity of election fraud into ousting Sanders and nominating Hillary, so did the Electoral College parlay the candidacy of Hillary into the presidency of Donald Trump.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:13
" it's the U.S. Electoral College that has always elected U.S. Presidents, never the combined U.S. public vote."
And we need to amend that NOW, via the states (hopeless i Congress for a while)
Any "movetoamend" Finally proposing that or a Constitutional assembly?
 
 
+3 # The Buffalo Guy 2016-11-11 14:07
Regardless of where their exact spot or title is politically, how can we overlook where we were economically under Bill Clinton. He left office with an unbelievable surplus that was immediately squandered by Bush. I had hoped for a similar economic era under Hillary. And I had hoped the NAFTA would bring South America to be a neighbor like Canada. We would all prosper. Not happening yet. Why?
We cannot survive without the Corporations but as they are now, survival is all we'll have. Is that enough?
 
 
-3 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:55
Thoughtful response-these are the things we need to think about, it is not enough just to hate corporations. They are also trapped in a dog eat dog system- there is a constant ratcheting up in competition which pushes those decisions makers to slash expenditures or the company dies....This is how Fannie Mae became embroiled in the CD mess , they had to make the government lender just as good a deal as the private...( and they serviced the largest amount of mortgages in the country! )
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:22
I disagree; we have to hate some Corporations and regret that their OBLIGATION to serve the good for society was removed. We used to be able to pull their charter for sort of "immoral" behavior. when is the last time it happened?
If love is opposite of hate, Name a multinational corporation you LOVE Grout4cake.
I know it's not black and white but it's leaning more BLACK than 40 years ago and i blame repubicrats and demoblicans.
 
 
+11 # Radscal 2016-11-11 18:33
"I had hoped the NAFTA would bring South America to be a neighbor like Canada. We would all prosper. Not happening yet. Why?"

Because that was never the intention of NAFTA, or any "Free Trade" Acts or what we call "globalization" in general.

The goal of the 0.01% has NEVER been to help raise the "developing world" to Western standards of wealth, but to lower us to theirs.

A documentary was made in the 1970s called "Controlling Interest" in which CEOs of transnational corporations were quite frank in saying just that.
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-11-13 18:10
"The goal of the 0.01% has NEVER been to help raise the 'developing world' to Western standards of wealth, but to lower us to theirs."

. . . and to exploit their labor and natural resources to enrich the global 0.01%, especially ours.

I'm not familiar with that movie: I've made a note.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:24
I'll look for it but I agree.
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:16
you may enjoy this Buffalo Guy and others, it's a TRUE JEWEL from 2000! AMAZING!
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/11/8/election_day_2000_bill_clinton_faces
 
 
+7 # alice arlene 2016-11-11 16:24
I agree with many of the sentiments expressed here but Naomi Klein seems to be saying we should hold out for socialism. Bernie is a social democrat not a socialist. Does anyone really believe that socialism could take hold in this country? This is America where half the people voted in a billionaire who has scary white nationalist leanings. How about we start with an amendment to overturn Citizens United? We just voted in Prop 59 in California to do just that. Don't we have to start with getting big money out of politics? Once a real progressive is elected to Congress they still have to spend all their time begging for money, hence we have the best government money can buy. After turning that back we have to elect people who will make public funding of our elections a mandate. Also we have to get rid of the electoral college. How about starting there? And with supporting Bernie's candidate for the DNC.
 
 
+8 # Grout4cake 2016-11-11 17:56
Working on CU and election finance reform is definitely where to start. On the other hand I must have signed 15 petitions for it and have never seen a serious threat to it yet.
 
 
+8 # Radscal 2016-11-11 19:28
Yep. It's hard to imagine how to get elected officials, who got into power through corruption to ban corruption.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:30
movetoamend.org
Let's amend the Constitution via the States not Congress (especially now!)
 
 
-11 # ericlipps 2016-11-11 19:04
"Bernie is a social democrat, not a socialist."

So why did he crisscross the country declaring himself a socialist during the primaries?
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2016-11-11 22:14
Because he DIDN'T. Even now, the Hil-bots remain uninformed or straight up liars.

You're ruining our country, as has your preferred candidates for the past 30 years. Not satisfied with having taken the Democrats to defeat and installing a neofascist?
 
 
+9 # lfeuille 2016-11-12 02:12
He said he was a democratic socialists. By that he meant a socialist of the Scandinavian sort. But he did use the word "socialist" and very few people got hysterical about it. The ones that did would have voted Republican regardless.
 
 
+6 # Activista 2016-11-12 15:59
Bernie is a democrat - social democrat - so dominant in Europe and misunderstood in the USA. Here most of people - from the childhood - want to be psychotic millionaires. And the prototype of their idol - Donald Trump exemplifies these values.
People in EU - especially in Scandinavia are happy - free education, free healthcare, no gun violence.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-11-12 17:31
You know who else had free education and healthcare?

Libyans and Syrians.

Libya even considered having a home to be a basic human right. Syria even gave the Palestinian refugees whose families had fled the brutal ethnic cleansing of the Zionist entity full rights to education, healthcare, etc.

Just like with Vietnam, the AAZ Empire could not permit such good examples to remain.
 
 
-3 # Activista 2016-11-12 23:05
"You know who else had free education and healthcare?"
So it was Soviet Union, occupied Eastern Europe - most socialist dictatorships - education with censorship - wrong book (smuggled from west) would end your "free education".
IT IS SOCIAL DEMOCRACY - with dictatorship of proletariat - it is a terror.
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-11-13 02:06
Neither Libya nor Syria were Soviet or Soviet-style governments.

Libya had the highest standard of living on the entire continent. Syria had lower poverty rates than Israel.

The terror was rained down on them by the US/NATO fiends, and HRC was so proud of her work in Libya that she hoped to use its "success" as a campaign issue. She was quite upset that Obama initially took credit for it (before admitting that it was his worst error in office).
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-11-13 18:04
"A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again."

(Alexander Pope, "An Essay on Criticism," 1711)
 
 
-2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:36
I thought it was a human right in Lybia as government would help people to buy.
For the rest though I am not sure that Lybia, Vietnam and Syria are to envy - especially in terms of leadership! i am sure you agree.
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:43
The Libyan government was providing housing for everyone. Qaddafi even promised not to provide a house for his parents until everyone else had one. That was a promise he was never permitted to fulfill.

Qaddafi and Assad were/are not faultless by any stretch (hell Assad even let CIA build a "black site" there to torture our "noncombatants" that we rounded up in Afghanistan), but they and their governments were better for the great majority of their citizens than most of their neighbors.

Look into the Great Manmade River system that Qaddafi built.

Then ask yourself what made it a legal target for aerial bombing by the US/NATO. And especially, why bombing the factories that made replacement parts was a good thing. What that did was create famine and guarantee it would last for many years to come.
 
 
-1 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:31
Right-on!
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:29
he said DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST. Were you listening ericlipps?
that said what's the difference except to clarify that you do not support any form of dictatorship of the workers but instead you respect DEMOCRACY?
the issues are what matters, not the IDENTITY!
 
 
+6 # reo100 2016-11-11 16:42
Namomi is right but let's not forget that change starts at the local level.
Not that we can't "make some noise" on a Nationwide level, but we must run progressives in our States. In my State of Florida where the Republicans have control, the Dems failed to run any candidates and lost a chance to take control.
I certainly agree with so many of you who make excellent points.
 
 
+5 # Gary Reber 2016-11-11 19:37
With exponential advancement of the non-human means of production (automation, computerization , robins, etc) corporation will increasing employed more efficient means to producing products and services American need and want, with prices dictated by competition, domestically and globally.

As a result, while education is critical to thinking and creating innovation and new technologies, even if EVERY American achieve the highest level of education, there would be no direct demand for their talents, as the bulk of future production and economic growth will be propelled by the non-human factor.

Thus, the question is what can we, as a nation, do to provide EVERY child, woman and man an equal opportunity to be productive in this technological age and earn an income by participating as individuals in the ownership of these so-called capital asset means of production?

We will need monetary and system reform with policies that create new capital asset owners simultaneously with the growth of the economy.

There is one significant piece of proposed legislation that will empower EVERY child, woman, and man, with or without education or savings, to acquire new, full voting and full dividend-paying , stock issues representing the ownership title to future capital asset formation by the successful corporations growing the economy. It is called the Capital Homestead Act (aka Economic Democracy Act).
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2016-11-11 22:19
I don't know about the Capital Homestead Act, but will look into it.

Otherwise, I agree completely with one addition. Since we live in a globalized economy, we need to see the 99% around the world as our compatriots.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:44
Humm... how about the Guaranteed Universal Income?
that sounds a lot more progressive than what you mentioned and I heard that one city in Ca is implementing it or thinking of implementing it. Melanchon,a left socialist in France proposed it.

You may also want to read The End of Work where the author suggests paying employees full-time income even as they work less and less hours. They are kept on the workforce, are productive and are provided a living wage/income. I LOVE the idea.

https://www.amazon.com/End-Work-Decline-Global-Post-Market/dp/0874778247/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1479113032&sr=1-1&keywords=the+end+of+work
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:47
"paying employees full-time income even as they work less and less hours."

When I was growing up in the 1950s and early 1960s, that's exactly what we were told to expect. Productivity had skyrocketed, so that was the preferred solution so that we wouldn't overproduce, but would still keep demand up.

BTW: Did you know that Nixon proposed a guaranteed household income?
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:49
who provides the capital to buy the stocks?
 
 
+7 # r_pickett@hotmail.com 2016-11-11 19:41
In the 1930s minorities groups were excluded from many of the union groups, obviously, the issues is more than neoliberalism. In fact, a half million Mexicans, both citizens and noncitizens were deported. Also, during this period, many "nonwhite" people were not granted citizenship. Ironically, not even the courts could define what "whiteness" was, little alone the American populous. Racism is alive and well, whether it's a southern youth going into an African American church and shooting 9 parishners or the millions of unconscious racist who where herded collectively, arousing an innate cultural paradigm that eventually revealed our nation's darkest side. It is significant to note that 49% of educated whites voted for Trump. White people, whatever that means, must take ownership for their history and culture and its consequences, while minorities groups must come together to protect ther own interest. Clean up you back yard and we can begin to come together as progressives.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-11-11 22:30
Yes, we all need to face and deal with our historical realities and the current results of them.

"Neoliberalsm," as the name implies, is new. It arose largely as a reaction to the successes of the New Deal. And yes, the New Deal almost completely excluded African-America ns and Latinos, and was also less discriminatory against some other minority groups. And actually targeted Native Americans for even greater harm.

Gradually, New Deal programs extended to reach more and more people. The arc of justice, as Dr. King said, bends towards justice.

But both current racism and the lingering effects of our history have profound negative effects on minorities today. Now that we have an obvious shared enemy in the White House, maybe we can put aside the various tools of divisionism that even people of good will sometimes fall prey to.
 
 
+3 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:53
and for that, as suggested by lorenbliss above and norm Goldman, we would have to drop what Norm calls LABELS or what lorenbliss calls IDENTITY**, and focus instead on ISSUES/Goals we can ALL agree on (well, almost ALL)
The concept is powerful but not used.
** political labels/identiti es that is
 
 
+9 # margpark 2016-11-11 21:22
We were hungering for someone to put things right. I really believe if Bernie had won the nomination he would have beat Trump. Because his message was much more hopeful and not scapegoating "others". Or if the country is in such bad shape that Trump might have won, we are pretty lost as a country.
 
 
+2 # commonsensepart 2 2016-11-12 00:21
Has anyone read, "An Alternative Republican Platform" at dankuruna.com? It may be the start and focus everyone is talking about.
 
 
+5 # alice arlene 2016-11-12 13:20
Public financing of campaigns has had many false starts in Congress and some bipartisan support. It's most recent death was because of the Tea Party backlash. There will be a backlash to this Congress so time to talk this up at the grassroots level. Talk up Keith Ellison for DNC, the only Muslim in Congress and head of the progressive caucus (Bernie's pick) phoning representatives in Congress and rattle the cages of your local Democratic Central Committee reps. Also start talking up the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Agreement, an agreement among states to award all of their respective electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote. 10 states have already signed up and we can get the additional 10 states with Democratic governors. Phone calls to your reps in Congress and the Senate make a difference.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-11-14 02:59
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Agreement? Never heard of it.
Good idea but a Constitutional amendment is still worth considering and getting it passed by the states.
 
 
+5 # Elroys 2016-11-12 14:41
Excellent and thoughtful piece by Naomi K. However, we "ain't seen nothin' yet". The forces in place will make the last 25 year feel like child's play - unless we recognize them and mobilize for the world we deeply want, can make a reality and deal with the criminals of mind and spirit now in power. The loss of jobs and sense of well bring for all Americans, and for all life and the natural world will be horrific in the next 15-25 years if we do nothing or simply look to "get back to normal". Think robotics, think Artificial Intelligence, think vast amounts of capital scurrying around the world to finance these and other new technologies that will replace us pesky human beings who need those silly vacations, get sick, hold our children, and talk back. Machines and great tech feats need none of that, work 24 hours a day, 7 days / week without a peep. Then there will be 10 trillionaires who invented these things and the rest of us will have nothing. Unless - drum roll - we change the tax laws and share the wealth.
There is a new culture and system seeking the light of the day and we can ensure that all people have a good quality of life without destroying the planet and well being of life. However, that will take all of us turning off the moronic TV and mobilizing for the common good, now. Not when this shit hits the fan. Trump - he's a puppet to some really bad people who care about nothing but maximizing their own short term profits. Your choice
 
 
-2 # Activista 2016-11-12 16:08
Trump - he's a puppet to some really bad people who care about nothing but maximizing their own short term profits."
Trump is more of a puppeteer - his populist propaganda will likely cause recession next year - economy does not strive on lies/populism.
 
 
+2 # Activista 2016-11-13 22:44
www.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/opinion/thoughts-for-the-horrified.html
"First of all, remember that elections determine who gets the power, not who offers the truth. The Trump campaign was unprecedented in its dishonesty; the fact that the lies didn’t exact a political price, that they even resonated with a large bloc of voters, doesn’t make them any less false. No, our inner cities aren’t war zones with record crime. No, we aren’t the highest-taxed nation in the world. No, climate change isn’t a hoax promoted by the Chinese."
like this article by Krugman - face up to the unpleasant reality that a Trump administration will do immense damage to America and the world."
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-11-15 01:50
And of course, the NY Times shamelessly lies to its readers by spreading the official propaganda daily.

They even made some half-hearted apologies for printing all the lies that convinced the public to go along with Iraq War II. Of course, they didn't do that until public opinion had swung into strong opposition to that war.
 
 
+4 # crispy 2016-11-14 03:28
and now a touch of reality...
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”
― George Orwell
Hilary and Trump would BOTH qualify for one or more of the above attributes...
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN