RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Newsmax Ratings Are Collapsing - but Insiders Claim Victory Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=58682"><span class="small">Justin Baragona, Lloyd Grove and Diana Falzone, The Daily Beast</span></a>   
Tuesday, 16 March 2021 08:11

Excerpt: "For Newsmax, it looks like midnight is approaching, and the upstart TV channel is in danger of turning back into a pumpkin."

'National Report' on Newsmax. (photo: Emma Rechenberg/Twitter)
'National Report' on Newsmax. (photo: Emma Rechenberg/Twitter)


Newsmax Ratings Are Collapsing - but Insiders Claim Victory

By Justin Baragona, Lloyd Grove and Diana Falzone, The Daily Beast

16 March 21


Without Trump’s scraps to fight over anymore, Newsmax ratings have sunk and the network further resembles a cheap Fox knockoff. But insiders see a big win for the fledgling outlet.

or Newsmax, it looks like midnight is approaching, and the upstart TV channel is in danger of turning back into a pumpkin.

The pro-Trump cable news network—which barely registered in Nielsen ratings for the first six years after its chief executive and majority owner, Chris Ruddy, launched it in May 2014—prompted massive media attention for seemingly taking Fox News head-on in the aftermath of last year’s presidential election. Perhaps more than a Cinderella story, it was a wingnut media version of David versus Goliath.

But now, a mere four months after the supposed slingshot to Fox News’ forehead, reality has intruded, and Newsmax finds itself smack-dab in the middle of a ratings collapse.

Many of the disaffected Trump supporters who initially flocked to Newsmax to gobble up unhinged election conspiracies challenging the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s presidency have faded away now that Biden is firmly ensconced and Fox News has pivoted to aggressive coverage of the Democratic establishment’s supposed war on Christianity, support for open borders and unlimited immigration, and “cancel culture” that is allegedly depriving innocent children of their beloved Dr. Seuss books and Looney Tunes characters.

While some Newsmax insiders feel that the plummeting viewership is much ado about nothing, as other cable news networks also experience a post-inaugural erosion, others suggest that the fledgling network’s days of hoping to compete head-to-head with Fox are all but over, and that Newsmax will inevitably return to the fringes.

“I would look at it from the viewpoint of consumer marketing,” said University of Maryland business professor P.K. Kannan, who has studied the dynamics of the cable industry. “Let’s say you have Post and Kellogg cereals and each has a brand of raisin bran, and then a new, healthier version comes out with no sugar and some raisin bran eaters might like the healthier option even though it’s bland. So they’re going to focus on the consumers who want the healthier version and take them away from Post and Kellogg.”

Kannan acknowledged, however, that in this case the analogy might be better expressed this way: Instead of buying the traditional raisin bran—as marketed, say, by Fox News—some consumers are opting for the much-tastier Newsmax product, albeit a media breakfast loaded with sugar, corn syrup, addictive chemicals, and artificial flavors.

“After a while, you see that it starts dissipating. I don’t think it’s going to go back to the level of, say, August 2020”—when “Newsmax was not a player” and drawing a total viewership in the barely measurable 30,000 range. “But over time it will slowly erode. They will have to fight for their survival, like they were doing before.”

Newsmax, which spent the months before last November’s election staffing up its network with D-list Trump hangers-on and ex-Fox personalities, pounced after Fox News enraged then-President Donald Trump and his followers when the network’s decision desk made an early (and correct) Election Night projection for Biden to win Arizona.

With the president’s supporters taking to the streets yelling “Fox News sucks,” Newsmax made a transparently concerted effort to not only reject Biden’s victory but to peddle and amplify Trump’s baseless and dangerous “Big Lie” that the election was “stolen” from him due to widespread voter fraud. The day all the networks and major media outlets declared Biden the president-elect, Newsmax—despite having no election decision desk—defiantly declared it would not name Biden the victor.

Pushing all-in on election lies paid immediate dividends for former right-wing newspaper reporter Chris Ruddy’s fledgling channel, and Ruddy—who also bills himself as a close Donald Trump confidant—wasn’t shy about tweaking Fox News in the media over the Rupert Murdoch-owned channel’s fall from atop the cable-news heap.

Despite his recent history of providing quotes touting Newsmax and slagging off Fox, the usually voluble Ruddy declined to comment for this story.

Post-election and through January, Fox News found itself in third place for the first time in 20 years. (The network, in the most recent full week, has since returned to the top of the heap in primetime and total day.) At one point, Newsmax’s biggest star Greg Kelly—a former Fox News host himself—defeated Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum head-to-head in the advertiser-friendly 25-54 age demographic, drawing headlines across the media world and prompting one Fox News staffer at the time to say the one-day ratings loss “scared them to their core.”

When Fox News announced in January, amid its then-slumping ratings, a complete revamping of its daytime lineup, notably demoting MacCallum from her 7 p.m. primetime slot to 3 p.m., Ruddy couldn’t help but gloat that his channel was responsible.

“The Fox is on the run,” he boasted. “The rise of Newsmax TV has caused a major shake-up at Fox News with news today that early evening host Martha MacCallum has been demoted to early afternoons.”

Ruddy, however, is gloating no more.

“We all knew their ratings surge wouldn’t last just because that’s how the news business is especially something as amateur hour as Newsmax,” a current Fox News staffer told The Daily Beast.

Earlier this month, Mediaite first reported that Newsmax had lost half of its audience since its November post-election high. Between the week ending Nov. 16 to the last week of February, the right-wing channel saw a 51-percent drop in total day viewership and a 63-percent decrease in its demo audience.

Kelly, who saw his viewership nearly top a million total viewers in November, was down to an average audience of 502,000 at the end of February. Even worse, considering his one-night demo victory over MacCallum, Kelly’s 25-54 ratings plunged by 63 percent.

“Mediaite published misleading information,” Newsmax spokesperson Brian Peterson told The Daily Beast. “They cherry-picked data using one major news week in November and compared it to one arbitrarily selected week in February, creating a data set that showed a fall-off for most of cable news, not just Newsmax.”

To be fair, as Peterson suggested, the three major cable networks have all experienced notable drops since the early post-election days, when the nation was enraptured by the all-encompassing drama surrounding Biden’s win and Trump’s refusal to concede. Their drops, however, are less significant than Newsmax’s.

Fox News, for instance, has only seen a 7-percent decrease in total day viewership and 13 percent in the demo since mid-November. MSNBC, as another example, is down 17 percent in total day audience and 28 percent in the demo.

“There’s normalization going on,” one Newsmax insider noted to The Daily Beast. “By mid-summer, Fox will be on top again. I’m watching Newsmax drift lower.”

The source added that “Trump gave them a moment” but what Newsmax now needs to do is “to hire talent with real names that audiences know.” Another insider, meanwhile, expressed pessimism over whether Ruddy can turn the ship around and truly be long-term competitive with the major cable-news stations.

“I’ve said this for a while that [Ruddy’s] over his head on financing,” said the source familiar with the situation, adding: “But when you put all these pieces together—this is a big operation, he’s hired a lot of people, there’s a lot of turnover. The advertising thing hasn’t changed dramatically in his favor. The ratings are down. He’s paying cable operators” for carriages on their systems—in contrast to Fox, which charges cable operators a subscriber fee.

The month of March has been even less kind to Newsmax.

Having already seen its 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. average total audience (the network’s peak day part) dwindle from 509,000 in January to 405,000 in February, Newsmax is only drawing 308,000 total viewers in March—an additional decrease of 24 percent. In total day, its overall viewership has tumbled all the way down to 178,000, a loss of 20 percent from the month before.

The March demo (ages 25-54) audience for 4-8 p.m. has also plunged 32 percent from February to just 47,000, while total day’s 25-54 demographic audience has fallen an additional 29 percent.

“I laughed when I saw the news about the drop,” a second Fox News staffer said. “Everyone panicked over a sugar high. Nothing about it was sustainable, yet people think it’s the new normal. Management panicked off of a small period of time and dismantled the entire lineup.”

A Fox News insider echoed those sentiments, noting that “all I’ve heard about Newsmax is that people at Fox now see them as a non-threat and essentially irrelevant.”

With Newsmax pulling only an eighth of Fox’s audience now when it drew one-fourth of the rival network’s viewership immediately following the election, CNN chief media correspondent Brian Stelter reported in his newsletter last Wednesday night that “Kelly is no longer nipping at Fox’s heels” and his demo win over MacCallum “was a fluke” in hindsight.

Newsmax, for its part, responded to Stelter’s remarks on its drop in ratings by pointing out that CNN itself has also seen its viewership plunge following the immediate post-election highs.

“As it turns out, Biden is also a very tame story for CNN as well, which has seen its own ratings collapse in recent weeks,” the network reacted, published on Newsmax’s website. Newsmax further noted that CNN has recently seen a 45 percent drop in total day viewership through March compared to the week after the election.

The network also pointed out that they are still showing double-digit growth compared to the fourth quarter of 2020 and said that Newsmax remains a top 25 cable network in total day audience. (For the week of March 7, however, Newsmax’s average total day audience of just 150,000 placed it 44th in cable.)

“Over the past few months, Newsmax has had a sudden rise, catapulting the independent network as a top cable news player,” the network added. “This fact has panicked not only CNN but Fox News, which has made dramatic changes in its lineup to counter Newsmax.”

(Last fall, for its part, Fox told the L.A. Times that it “regularly considers programming changes” and that these “changes are being made independent of any other ongoing matter” after host Melissa Francis was pulled off-air amid a gender pay dispute.)

This also reflects a widely shared suspicion within the network that since Newsmax rose to prominence in November, Fox News has allegedly tracked any fall-off in Newsmax’s ratings and pitched other media outlets to report on it.

The root cause of Newsmax’s decline seems all but obvious: They can no longer rely on the “Big Lie” to pull in Trumpers angry with Fox. And worse yet, in a right-wing media world where anti-Biden content doesn’t resonate as much, Newsmax now comes across as nothing more than a low-budget Fox News copycat, incessantly peddling the same exact “cancel culture” outrage bait about Dr. Seuss books and Pepé Le Pew cartoons.

In the waning days of Trump’s presidency, meanwhile, the dents in Newsmax’s armor began to show. After the Electoral College formally voted on Dec. 14, giving Trump 232 votes to Biden’s 306, Newsmax announced on-air that Biden was indeed the president-elect. A week later, amid legal threats from voting software company Smartmatic, the network forced several anchors to read a lengthy fact-check statement debunking its own baseless voter fraud lies.

At the same time, Kelly and other on-air Newsmax personalities still continued to push the falsehood that Biden “stole” the election—even after the violent Capitol insurrection incited by Trump in order to stop Congress from certifying Biden’s election on January 6. And while Ruddy defended his network’s journalistic integrity and insisted it wasn’t peddling lies, hosts and guests claimed that the deadly riots were “very peaceful” and led by antifa activists pretending to be Trump supporters.

Perhaps the moment that it all came crashing to reality for Newsmax viewers, outside of Biden’s inauguration, was the early-February broadcast which featured anchor Bob Sellers literally fleeing the set when he couldn’t stop conspiracy-pushing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell from blathering on about voting machines stealing the election from Trump. (Newsmax, much like other right-wing outlets and figures, is currently trying to avoid the sort of multi-billion-dollar defamation lawsuits that Smartmatic and the voting software firm Dominion have threatened and, in the case of Lindell and canceled Fox Business anchor Lou Dobbs, actually filed.)

Despite issuing an on-air groveling apology to Lindell—one of Newsmax’s biggest advertisers—the following day, the damage was done when it came to the MAGA base. Fellow fringe channel One America Network declared war on Newsmax for “censoring” Lindell while Trump supporters called for a boycott of the channel.

Since then, Newsmax has appeared lost and adrift, basically just following the trends of Fox News and other right-wing media outlets by raging about so-called liberal cancel culture, all while trying to find something about Biden to inflame their viewers.

In what might be the saddest attempt yet at rage-bait content, Kelly last month hosted a panel discussion on how “dirty and disheveled” Biden’s elderly pet dog Champ is.

“Did you see the dog? I wanted to show you something I noticed. Doesn’t he look a little rough? I love dogs, but this dog needs a bath and a comb and all kinds of love and care. I’ve never seen a dog in the White House like this,” Kelly declared of the 13-year-old German shepherd, adding: “This dog looks like, I’m sorry, like it’s from the junkyard.”

Not to be outdone, however, Newsmax primetime host Grant Stinchfield took the whole “cancel culture” obsession to its inevitable conclusion.

“This is how cancel culture ends. This is the finale, right? It's gotta be,” he said last Wednesday. “The banning of the Bible, canceling Jesus."

Yet, despite the sinking ratings and current lack of direction, some folks associated with the network are still highly optimistic about Newsmax’s future.

“They received a lot of positive press over the last couple years of the Trump administration. Positive in the sense of sometimes beating Fox in the ratings. Just growing very quickly,” a network insider told The Daily Beast. “The ratings for Fox are definitely higher. But I think they have an audience for sure. Especially with Trump bashing Fox the way he did. For now, Fox is still king of the conservative media. But Newsmax is a viable alternative.”

That outlook seems contagious within Newsmax circles. Another insider declared utmost “confidence” in the network’s ability to hold its own against Fox News.

“Absolutely. No one has expressed worries.”

Diana Falzone was an on-camera and digital reporter for FoxNews.com from 2012 to 2018. In May 2017, she filed a gender discrimination and disability lawsuit against the network and settled, and left the company in March 2018.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Immune System Is Resolutely Apolitical, and So Is the Virus Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=11104"><span class="small">Charles Pierce, Esquire</span></a>   
Monday, 15 March 2021 12:23

Pierce writes: "I can't imagine being so consumed by my personal political beliefs that I wouldn't protect myself from a stubbornly nonpartisan plague."

Lila Blanks is comforted by her friend Nikki Wyatt, her son Brandon Danas, 17, and her daughter Bryanna Danas, 14, at the casket of her husband, Gregory Blanks, 50, who died from complications from COVID-19 in Texas, on 26 January 2021. (photo: Callaghan O’Hare/Reuters)
Lila Blanks is comforted by her friend Nikki Wyatt, her son Brandon Danas, 17, and her daughter Bryanna Danas, 14, at the casket of her husband, Gregory Blanks, 50, who died from complications from COVID-19 in Texas, on 26 January 2021. (photo: Callaghan O’Hare/Reuters)


The Immune System Is Resolutely Apolitical, and So Is the Virus

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

15 March 21


I can’t imagine being so consumed by my personal political beliefs that I wouldn’t protect myself from a stubbornly nonpartisan plague.

eing in the immunological hammock between Dolly Shot I and Dolly Shot II, I have a little more time to despair of my fellow citizens, many of whom are, according to a new Monmouth poll, simply unreachable morons.

Partisanship remains the main distinguishing factor among those who want to avoid the vaccine altogether, with 36% of Republicans versus just 6% of Democrats saying this. Reluctance among these two groups has declined slightly since January (by 6 points among Republicans and 4 points among Democrats), while it has actually grown among independents. Currently, 31% of independents say they want to avoid getting the vaccine altogether – an increase of 6 points since January.

I am fairly political, as should be obvious by now, and even I have to admit that I can’t see a political reason to get (or not to get) vaccinated. My immune system is resolutely apolitical, for which I thank god, because, if it weren’t, I’d go into anaphylaxis at every Republican campaign event, and CPAC might have turned me into one big fever blister. I can’t imagine being so consumed by my personal political beliefs that I wouldn’t protect myself from a resolutely nonpartisan virus. But then again, there has been a conservative backlash against public safety and public health for as long as there has been a conservative backlash against all aspects of the political commonwealth.

When I was growing up, Worcester refused to fluoridate its water for ideological reasons. (Among other opponents was the John Birch Society, which believed fluoridation to be a form of mind control, and the publisher of the local newspaper was a founding member of the JBS.) The controversy was nationwide, and its parameters should sound familiar to all of us today. From Science History:

…right-wing groups like the John Birch Society have long implied dark motives behind fluoridation. But more common are groups raising safety questions. Anti-fluoridation literature goes back over half a century, with titles like Robotry and Water: A Critique of Fluoridation (1959). Members of the Fluoride Action Network and Citizens for Safe Drinking Water have linked the chemical to several varieties of cancer, diminished intelligence, birth defects and declining birth rates, and heart disease—among other maladies. The Sierra Club worries about the “potential adverse impact of fluoridation on the environment, wildlife, and human health.”

Many opponents see fluoridation as a consequence of collusion among industry, government, and a scientific establishment in thrall to both. The scientific evidence—more complicated than revealed during the original Grand Rapids trials—collides with skeptical public opinion. Seven decades of controversy remind us that the two realms are never truly separate.

Nothing is really new. To paraphrase Ralph Waldo Emerson, stupid is in the saddle and rides far too much of mankind.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Increasing Israeli Squatter Violence Against Occupied Palestinians Goes Unchecked by the Israel Military Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=58676"><span class="small">Kamel Hawwash, Middle East Monitor</span></a>   
Monday, 15 March 2021 12:23

Hawwash writes: "While the number of fatal attacks by settlers thankfully remains rare, their violence against the Palestinians is escalating."

Aws Salahadin, 10, (left) and Mohammad Salahadin, 8, were detained by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank town of Hizma on February 21, 2021. (photo: Salahadin family)
Aws Salahadin, 10, (left) and Mohammad Salahadin, 8, were detained by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank town of Hizma on February 21, 2021. (photo: Salahadin family)


Increasing Israeli Squatter Violence Against Occupied Palestinians Goes Unchecked by the Israel Military

By Kamel Hawwash, Middle East Monitor

15 March 21

 

s I was reading an article headlined “Israel says 600 children given Covid jab had no serious side effects”, my twitter feed was filled with messages expressing outrage about a video of some other children: Palestinian children.

This told a very different story. Palestinian children aged 7 to 12 were being manhandled violently by fully armed and masked Israeli soldiers equipped to arrest dangerous criminals. The images were obscene. The might of the Israeli army — the so-called Israel “Defence” Forces —being used to terrorise children simply because it can.

Pro-Israelis jumped immediately to the defence of the soldiers, claiming that the children were “stealing” private property; there was little compassion shown for the situation that the children found themselves in. In fact, the children were collecting akkub, an in-season prickly wildflower that is the main ingredient for a Palestinian casserole with the same name as the flower. Their crime, apparently, was to be on “private land” near the illegal Israeli settlement of Havat Mi’un in southern Hebron. Those who took the side of the soldiers claimed that the incident was not portrayed accurately — that the video was pure “Pallewood” — and that the children were being taken to a nearby “holding station” before being released to their parents. I wonder if they would have been as forgiving if the children had been Jews caught by soldiers of a foreign army.

The contrast between these two news reports could not be starker. In one, Israel seeks to protect Israeli children from Covid-19; in the other its soldiers terrorise Palestinian children. I want all children to be protected from harm and do not distinguish between Israeli and Palestinian children, but Israel discriminates between them on a daily basis.

Israel’s abuse, mistreatment and, indeed, shooting and killing of Palestinian minors is well documented. It is also worth reminding ourselves that the ordeal of Palestinian children does not end with their arrest; they are usually abused at every stage on the way to the military courts which not only deal with them, but also have an almost 99 per cent conviction rate. Israeli children and their families, even those who live in the illegal settlements, are subject to civil, not military law.

Behind the Israeli soldiers’ capture of the children lies another problem that Palestinians under occupation are encountering; the increasing number of attacks by illegal settlers using the “Defence Forces” as a shield. Put simply, settler violence is on the rise aided and abetted by Israeli soldiers. The most common type of attack is against something that is symbolic of the people of Palestine and an essential part of the economy: the olive tree. Not only has Israel as a state cut down more than a million olive trees in the occupied territories, but settlers also regularly cut down and burn the trees out of sheer spite and as a way of attacking the livelihood of Palestinians to push them off their land.

This is confirmed by a report from Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem, which framed the issue of settler violence as “state-backed settler violence”. B’Tselem reiterated that under international law Israel has a duty to protect Palestinians in the West Bank from such violent conduct. “The long-term outcome of settler violence,” it concluded, “is the dispossession of Palestinians from more and more areas in the West Bank, facilitating Israel’s seizure of land and resources.”

The illegal settlers have been emboldened by their certain belief that they will not face any consequences for harassing and attacking Palestinians and their property. They also rely on the belief that Israel considers the land it occupies to be Jewish land to which the indigenous Palestinians have no right. On two occasions recently, notorious and fully-armed Israeli settler Zvi Bar Yosef was emboldened to order Palestinian families to leave their picnic at a tranquil location. He lives in a settlement outpost called Havat Zvi which is illegal under Israeli law as well as international law; it is near the village of Jibiya. On the first occasion, he was accompanied by soldiers who ordered a Palestinian Israeli family to leave what is a public area. The fact that they were Israeli citizens made no difference to the outcome. That is what “equality” means in apartheid Israel.

Settlers regularly attack Palestinian villages during the night, daubing walls and cars with anti-Palestinian graffiti. The illegal outpost of Yitzhar is infamous as a hotbed of hate, home to young Israeli settlers who see it as their mission in life to make the lives of Palestinians as miserable as possible. Settlers from this outpost have even seen their attacks on Israeli soldiers go unpunished, when similar attacks by Palestinians would have resulted in a harsh and possibly deadly response.

It is worth remembering that settler violence has not been confined to damage to property or minor injuries to Palestinians. In 2015, Amiram Ben-Uliel, an Israeli terrorist, firebombed the Dawabsheh family home in Duma village near Nablus, killing 18-month-old Ali and burning his parents Riham and Saad so badly that their injuries were fatal. Four-year-old Ahmad survived with severe burns. Ben-Uliel had spray-painted “Revenge” and “Long Live King Messiah” on the walls of the Dawabsheh’s and another home in the village.

While the number of fatal attacks by settlers thankfully remains rare, their violence against the Palestinians is escalating. Is it coincidental that this has happened since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government threatened to annex vast swathes of Palestinian land last year? While the threat of de jure annexation has been suspended to allow for normalisation agreements with some Arab states, the belief remains among Israelis, especially the fanatical settlers, that all of the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea belongs to them.

This has encouraged settlers to terrorise Palestinians in an effort to get them to abandon their homes and land. Even though I am confident that Israel and its illegal settlers will fail in that endeavour, the lives of the Palestinians on the front line of settler terrorism will continue to be difficult. If the occupying state of Israel ignores its legal obligation to protect the people under occupation, the international community shouldn’t. The latter should impose sanctions on Israel until it meets its international obligations as an occupier and impose law and order on its illegal settlers. And it should vaccinate vulnerable Palestinian children while it is at it.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Bandaging the Corpse: Biden's Big Bailout Can't Pull America Out of Its Death Spiral Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=58673"><span class="small">Chris Hedges, Salon</span></a>   
Monday, 15 March 2021 11:04

Hedges writes: "The American Rescue Plan is a desperate effort to address the multiple crises destroying America. It won't work."

Joe Biden. (photo: Melina Mar/Getty Images)
Joe Biden. (photo: Melina Mar/Getty Images)


Bandaging the Corpse: Biden's Big Bailout Can't Pull America Out of Its Death Spiral

By Chris Hedges, Salon

15 March 21


The American Rescue Plan is a desperate effort to address the multiple crises destroying America. It won't work

he established ruling elites know there is a crisis. They agreed, at least temporarily, to throw money at it with the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 bill known as American Rescue Plan (ARP). But the ARP will not alter the structural inequities, either by raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour or imposing taxes and regulations on corporations or the billionaire class that saw its wealth increase by a staggering $1.1 trillion since the start of the pandemic. The health system will remain privatized, meaning the insurance and pharmaceutical corporations will reap a windfall of tens of billions of dollars with the ARP, and this when they are already making record profits. The endless wars in the Middle East, and the bloated military budget that funds them, will remain sacrosanct. Wall Street and the predatory global speculators that profit from the massive levels of debt peonage imposed on an underpaid working class and loot the U.S. Treasury in our casino capitalism will continue to funnel money upwards into the hands of a tiny, oligarchic cabal. There will be no campaign finance reform to end our system of legalized bribery. The giant tech monopolies will remain intact. The fossil fuel companies will continue to ravage the ecosystem. The militarized police, censorship imposed by digital media platforms, vast prison system, harsher and harsher laws aimed at curbing domestic terrorism and dissent and wholesale government surveillance will be, as they were before, the primary instruments of state control.

This act will, at best, provide a momentary respite from the country's death spiral, sending out onetime checks of $1,400 to 280 million Americans, extending $300 weekly unemployment benefits until the end of August and distributing $3,600 through a tax credit for children under the age of 6 and $3,000 per child ages 6 to 17 starting on July 1. Much of this money will be instantly gobbled up by landlords, lenders, medical providers and credit card companies. The act does, to its credit, bail out some 1 million unionized workers poised to lose their pensions and hands $31.2 billion in aid to Native communities, some of the poorest in the nation.

But what happens to the majority of Americans who get government support for only a few months? What are they supposed to do when the checks stop arriving at the end of the year? Will the federal government orchestrate another massive relief package? I doubt it. We will be back where we started.

By refusing to address the root causes of America's rot, by failing to pump life back into the democratic institutions that once gave the citizen a voice, however limited, and make incremental and piecemeal reform possible, by not addressing the severe economic and social inequality and dislocation that afflicts at least half the country, the anomie and ruptured social bonds that gave rise to a demagogue like Donald Trump will expand. The American empire will not staunch its disintegration. The political deformities will metastasize.

When the next demagogue appears, and the Republican Party has banked its future on Trump or his doppelgänger, he or she will probably be competent. The Republican Party in 43 states has proposed 250 laws to limit mail, early in-person and Election Day voting and mandate stricter ID requirements, as well as reduce the hours at voting sites and the numbers of voting locations, potentially disenfranchising tens of millions of voters. The party has no intention of playing by the rules. Once back in power, cloaked in the ideological garb of Christian fascism, the new or the old Trump will abolish what little is left of democratic space.

The established elites pretend that Trump was a freakish anomaly. They naively believe they can make Trump and his most vociferous supporters disappear by banishing them from social media. The ancien régime, will, they assert, return with the decorum of its imperial presidency, respect for procedural norms, elaborately choreographed elections and fealty to neoliberal and imperial policies.

But what the established ruling elites have yet to grasp, despite the narrow electoral victory Joe Biden had over Trump and the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 by an enraged mob, is that the credibility of the old order is dead. The Trump era, if not Trump himself, is the future. The ruling elites, embodied by Biden and the Democratic Party and the polite wing of the Republican Party represented by Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, is headed for the dustbin of history.

The elites collectively sold out the American public to corporate power. They did this by lying to the public about the consequences of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), trade deals, dismantling welfare, revoking Glass-Steagall, imposing austerity measures, deregulating Wall Street, passing draconian crime bills, launching endless wars in the Middle East and bailing out the big banks and financial firms rather than the victims of their fraud. These lies were far, far more damaging to the public than any of the lies told by Trump. These elites have been found out. They are hated. They deserve to be hated.

The Biden administration — and Biden was one of the principal architects of the policies that fleeced the working class and made war on the poor — is nothing more than a brief coda in the decline and fall, set against which is China's rising global economic and military clout.

The loss of credibility has left the media, which serves as courtiers to the elites, largely powerless to manipulate public perceptions and public opinion. Rather, the media has divided the public into competing demographics. Media platforms target one demographic, feeding its opinions and proclivities back to it, while shrilly demonizing the demographic on the other side of the political divide. This has proved commercially successful. But it has also split the country into irreconcilable warring factions that can no longer communicate. Truth and verifiable fact have been sacrificed. Russiagate is as absurd as the belief that the presidential election was stolen from Trump. Pick your fantasy.

The loss of credibility among the ruling elites has transferred political influence to those outside established centers of power such as Alex Jones, celebrities and those such as Joe Rogan, Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi who were never groomed by the media conglomerates. The Democratic Party, in an effort to curb the influence of the new centers of power, has allied itself with social media industry giants such as Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Patreon, Substack and Spotify to curtail or censor its critics. The goal is to herd the public back to Democratic Party-allied news organizations such as The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN. But these media outlets, which in the service to corporate advertisers have rendered the lives of the working class and the poor invisible, are as reviled as the ruling elites themselves.

The loss of credibility has also given rise to new, often spontaneous groups, as well as the lunatic fringe that embraces conspiracy theories such as QAnon. None of these groups or individuals, whether they are on the left or the right, however, have the organizational structure, coherence and ideological cohesiveness of radical movements of the past, including the old Communist Party or militant labor unions. They traffic in emotional outrage, often replacing one outrage with another. They provide new forms of identity to replace the identities lost by tens of millions of Americans who have been cast aside. This energy can be harnessed for laudable causes, such as ending police abuse, but it is too often ephemeral. It has a tendency to transform political debate into grievance protests, at best, and more often televised spectacle. These flash mobs pose no threat to the elites unless they build disciplined organization structures, which takes years, and articulate a vision of what can come next. (This is why I support Extinction Rebellion, which has a large grassroots network, especially in Europe, carries out effective sustained acts of civil disobedience and has a clearly stated goal of overthrowing the ruling elites and building a new governing system through people's committees and sortition.)

This amorphous, emotionally driven anti-politics is fertile ground for demagogues, who have no political consistency but cater exclusively to the zeitgeist of the moment. Many of those who support demagogues know, on some level, they are con artists and liars. But demagogues are revered because, like all cult leaders, they flout conventions, are outrageous and crude, claim omnipotence and disdain traditional decorum. Demagogues are weaponized against bankrupt well-heeled elites who have stripped the public of opportunities and identities, extinguishing hopes for the future. A cornered population has little left but hate and the emotional catharsis expressing it brings.

The engine of our emerging dystopia is income inequality, which is growing. This bill does nothing to address this cancer. The bottom 50 percent of households in 2019 accounted for only 1 percent of the nation's total wealth. The top 10 percent accounted for 76 percent. And this was before the pandemic accelerated income disparity. More than 18 million American depend on unemployment benefits, as businesses contract and close. Nearly 81 million Americans struggle to meet basic household expenses, 22 million lack enough food and 11 million say they can't make their next house payment. Only deep structural reforms accompanied by New Deal-type legislation can save us, but such changes are an anathema to the corporate state and the Biden administration. History has amply demonstrated what happens when income disparities of this magnitude afflict a country. We will be no exception. Lacking a strong left, the United States will in desperation embrace authoritarianism, if not proto-fascism. This will, I fear, be Biden and the Democratic Party's real legacy.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Bidenomics Beats Reaganomics and I Should Know - I Saw Clintonomics Fail Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9643"><span class="small">Robert Reich, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Monday, 15 March 2021 08:37

Reich writes: "When I was labor secretary welfare ended but now it's back and three-quarters of Americans - and many Republicans - approve."

Robert Reich. (photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Robert Reich. (photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images)


Bidenomics Beats Reaganomics and I Should Know - I Saw Clintonomics Fail

By Robert Reich, Guardian UK

15 March 21


When I was labor secretary welfare ended but now it’s back and three-quarters of Americans – and many Republicans – approve

quarter-century ago, I and other members of Bill Clinton’s cabinet urged him to reject the Republican proposal to end welfare. It was too punitive, we said, subjecting poor Americans to deep and abiding poverty. But Clinton’s political advisers warned that unless he went along, he would jeopardize his re-election.

That was the end of welfare as we knew it. As Clinton boasted in his State of the Union address to Congress that year: “The era of big government is over.”

Until Thursday, that is. Joe Biden signed into law the biggest expansion of government assistance since the 1960s – a guaranteed income for most families with children, raising the maximum benefit by up to 80% per child.

As Biden put it in his address to the nation, as if answering Clinton: “The government isn’t some foreign force in a distant capital. No, it’s us, all of us, we the people.”

As a senator, Biden supported Clinton’s 1996 welfare restrictions, as did most Americans. What happened between then and now? Three big things.

First, Covid. The pandemic has been a national wake-up call on the fragility of middle-class incomes. The deep Covid recession has revealed the harsh consequences of most Americans living paycheck to paycheck.

For years, Republicans used welfare to drive a wedge between the white working middle class and the poor. Ronald Reagan portrayed black, inner-city mothers as freeloaders and con artists, repeatedly referring to “a woman in Chicago” as the “welfare queen”.

Starting in the 1970s, women had streamed into paid work in order to prop up family incomes decimated by the decline in male factory jobs. These families were particularly susceptible to the Republican message. Why should “they” get help for not working when “we” get no help, and we work?

By the time Clinton campaigned for president, “ending welfare as we knew it” had become a talisman of so-called New Democrats, even though there was little or no evidence that welfare benefits discouraged the unemployed from taking jobs. (In Britain, enlarged child benefits actually increased employment among single mothers.)

Yet when Covid hit, a new reality became painfully clear: public assistance was no longer just for “them”. It was needed by all of “us”.

The second big thing was Donald Trump. He exploited racism, to be sure, but also replaced economic Reaganism with narcissistic grievances, claims of voter fraud and cultural paranoia stretching from Dr Seuss to Mr Potato Head.

Trump obliterated concerns about government give-aways. The Cares Act, which he signed into law at the end of March 2020, gave most Americans checks of $1,200 (to which he calculatedly attached his name). When this proved enormously popular, he demanded the next round of stimulus checks be $2,000.

But Trump’s biggest giveaway was the GOP’s $1.9tn 2018 tax cut, under which benefits went overwhelmingly to the top 20%. Despite promises of higher wages for everyone else, nothing trickled down. Meanwhile, during the pandemic, America’s 660 billionaires – major beneficiaries of the tax cut – became $1.3tn wealthier, enough to give every American a $3,900 check and still be as rich as they were before the pandemic.

The third big thing is the breadth of Biden’s plan. Under it, more than 93% of the nation’s children – 69 million – receive benefits. Incomes of Americans in the lowest quintile will increase by 20%; those in the second-lowest, 9%; those in the middle, 6%.

Rather than pit the working middle class against the poor, this unites them. Some 76% of Americans supported the bill, including 63% of low-income Republicans (a quarter of all Republican voters). Younger conservatives are particularly supportive, presumably because people under 50 have felt the brunt of the four-decade slowdown in real wage growth.

Given all this, it’s amazing that zero Republican members of Congress voted for it, while 278 voted for Trump’s tax cuts for corporations and the rich.

The political lesson is that today’s Democrats – who enjoy popular vote majorities in presidential elections (having won seven of the past eight) – can gain political majorities by raising the wages of both middle class and poor voters, while fighting Republican efforts to suppress the votes of likely Democrats.

The economic lesson is that Reaganomics is officially dead. For years, conservative economists argued that tax cuts for the rich create job-creating investments, while assistance to the poor creates dependency. Rubbish.

Bidenomics is exactly the reverse: give cash to the bottom two-thirds and their purchasing power will drive growth for everyone. This is far more plausible. We’ll learn how much in coming months.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 Next > End >>

Page 170 of 3432

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