Friday , October 23 2020
Home / Real-World Economics Review / The two-party, one-ideology, neoliberal state

The two-party, one-ideology, neoliberal state

Summary:
From Ikonoclast – Origianlly a comment on Are corporate CEOs worth  million? The time for nice debates alone is over. The time for voting and direct action to radically change our entire political economy has arrived. Debates, voting and direct action all have to operate in concert. Any one or two are powerless on their own. In a two-party, one-ideology state, where the wealth and power elites have captured the parties, voting on its own is useless. No matter who you vote for you still get a neoliberal capitalist apologist or right wing reactionary. The two-party, one-ideology, neoliberal state, is a ratchet and hold system. The right (or ultra-right as it is now) ratchets up the neoliberal measures and tightens the law and order screws on the people. The faux-center (really a

Topics:
Editor considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Dean Baker writes Government-granted patent monopolies gave Purdue Pharma incentives to push opioids

Lars Syll writes What is ‘effective demand’?

Editor writes The wayward rise of machina-economicus

Dan Crawford writes Open thread October 19, 2020

from Ikonoclast – Origianlly a comment on Are corporate CEOs worth $20 million?

The time for nice debates alone is over. The time for voting and direct action to radically change our entire political economy has arrived. Debates, voting and direct action all have to operate in concert. Any one or two are powerless on their own. In a two-party, one-ideology state, where the wealth and power elites have captured the parties, voting on its own is useless. No matter who you vote for you still get a neoliberal capitalist apologist or right wing reactionary. The two-party, one-ideology, neoliberal state, is a ratchet and hold system. The right (or ultra-right as it is now) ratchets up the neoliberal measures and tightens the law and order screws on the people. The faux-center (really a mid-right) candidate set, if they win, then essentially hold the system at the current point. Real reform does not occur.

Debate handled properly provides logical and moral suasion. Non-violent Direct Action also known as civil resistance can include sit-ins, strikes, workplace occupations, street blockades, hacktivism or counter-economics. Violent direct action may include political violence, assault, sabotage, arson and property destruction. I for one don’t advocate violent direct action for moral, strategic and tactical reasons. (I will expand on that if people want me to.) “By contrast, electoral politics, diplomacy, negotiation, protests and arbitration are not usually described as direct action, as they are electorally mediated.” [1]

Debate, as logical and moral suasion for left politics can and will recruit supporters of the same class and naturally ally classes to the cause. There is an exception of one class which should be a natural ally class of left politics but is actually recruited to the reactionary right by anti-intellectual, nationalist and racist appeals. These are the anti-intellectual, nationalist and racist elements of the working class. Debate will line up supporters and move some “undecideds” into your column. Debate will have no effect on capitalists, their supporters and apologists, nor any effect on anti-intellectuals, fascist-like nationalists and racists. Left logic and suasion are force-less on those who will lose by the implementation of greater equality. It is also force-less on those too brutish to possess empathy and/or too unintelligent or brainwashed to understand their own enlightened self-interest. These classes understand only one thing and that is power; brute power or kinetic force as the military and security theorists call it. Kinetic force means blows and bullets essentially.

The demonstration of logical and moral suasion power is force-less on the capitalists and their reactionary working-class element supporters. Not all the working-class is reactionary of course. The next demonstration is the demonstration of numbers. People can be intimidated by numbers alone. The true object of peaceful demonstration and non-cooperation is to show great numbers, if possible. The great numbers show a potential for power and an implicit threat in peaceful form. Peaceful numbers shows a hinted threat of violence at least as a threat of just resistance to unjust oppression and violence. Voting is way of counting support, counting the numbers, as well as a method of changing governments.

If many logically and morally powerful arguments are marshalled, and then many numbers are marshaled on the streets, in the workplaces and in cyberspace and then many votes are marshaled at the elections, there is or can be a multiplicative or synergistic effect. It will require this kind of overwhelming demonstration of people power to change political economy in the West: to do things like kick CEOs into the street (with the fair option of returning as a real worker) and to augment boards of owners with workers and social stakeholders. Only when workers and all social stakeholders predominate in decision making will the system of oppression and exploitation be substantially changed. Owners (and owner-managers) are only one category of social stakeholder. Why are they privileged over all the rest?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *