Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 27 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 27 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

The Right Believes It Has the Supreme Court Votes to Overturn Labor Law

[In These Times, via Naked Capitalism Water Cooler 10-22-2024]

 “The foundational 1935 labor law protecting workers is unconstitutional, according to major corporations and right-wing zealots who believe they have enough votes on the Supreme Court to overturn it. In the latest sign that anti-union forces will doggedly press the matter, a federal judge for the Northern District of Texas enjoined the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from processing any allegations of employer violations of workers’ rights. The National Review hailed the decision as ​’A Welcome Blow to the NLRB.’ This is after Elon Musk’s SpaceX won a similar injunction against the NLRB before the Western District of Texas in July. Both cases will work their way up to the Fifth Circuit Court, which has served as an expressway to steer anti-regulatory legal appeals to the Supreme Court ever since Trump packed it with right-wing ideologues. ‘I don’t think a lot of labor folks are focused on this right now,’ says Stephen Lerner, a fellow at Georgetown University’s Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. … ‘This is the culmination of a 50-year anti-union agenda.’… But, in trying to repeal all the rights and protections workers gained during the New Deal, including the limited protections that workers currently enjoy for organizing and engaging in collective bargaining, killing the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (also known as the Wagner Act) would also mean the lifting of a host of restrictions on unions’ ability to carry out solidarity activism and effective economic sanctions. Are unions prepared for a return to ​’the law of the jungle?'”

MASTER PLAN Bonus: How Democrats Lost The Courts

[The Lever, October 22, 2024]

In this exclusive Master Plan bonus episode, David Sirota interviews former Senate Leader Tom Daschle, who led Democrats’ fight against George W. Bush’s plan to pack the federal courts with conservative judges — and paid the ultimate political price.

Daschle’s success stalling Republicans’ judicial picks in the Senate made him a prime target of the master planners — so they had him ousted from Congress and filled his South Dakota Senate seat with their own corporate candidate.

Sirota and Daschle discuss the Federalist Society’s influence in transforming the judicial nomination process into an ideological purity test. They also weigh in on the last major campaign finance legislation — the McCain-Feingold Act of 2002 — and whether similar reforms could even be possible in post-Citizens United America.

MASTER PLAN Bonus: The Federalist Society’s “Pipeline For Power”

[The Lever, October 22, 2024]

DAVID SIROTA: ...To understand the roots of the Federalist Society, we spoke with Lisa Graves. She worked in the Department of Justice and on the Senate Judiciary committee and is now the founder of True North Research, a dark money watchdog organization. We heard from Graves briefly in Episode 7, but wanted to share the extended interview she did with producer Laura Krantz. Their conversation began with an overview of the four men who have been integral to the success of the Federalist Society: Ed Meese, C. Boyden Gray, Jay Sekulow, and Leonard Leo.

LISA GRAVES: Ed Meese was there near the beginning of the Federalist Society when it was created in 1981 as I mentioned, and Meese had served as Attorney General under Ronald Reagan. And he is certainly considered one of the fathers, or, you know, godfathers, in essence, of The Federalist Society from that period, and has been active in it throughout this, you know, these past 40 years, in a variety of ways. C. Boyden Gray, the highest role that he had in government was as White House Counsel for George Herbert Walker Bush. He helped select Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court to replace the great civil rights leader, Thurgood Marshall — he was someone who had an active opposition to civil rights or, you know, core civil rights laws. 

Thomas had served in the Reagan administration in the EEOC in a way that many people in civil rights community consider to be destructive, not supportive of that institution. And C. Boyden Gray had a had a key role in that as White House Counsel, but he also had a role in the selection of David Souter to go to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that is the nomination and confirmation of a judge who, you know, is considered to be a Republican or having Republican roots, but he was not sufficiently doctrinaire.

When George W. Bush became president, C. Boyden Gray was not White House Counsel during that period, but he was operating on the outside, and he was seemingly determined to help make sure that, you know, ideologues were put on the bench. And so from the outside of the administration, he launched a thing called the Committee for Justice, CFJ, which was an attack machine to attack the Democrats for opposing any of these Bush nominees who were at the circuit court level, largely drawn from the ranks of The Federalist Society….

... in many ways, this so-called movement that The Federalist Society has been at the helm of was in part in reaction to Brown v. Board of Education, and whether they were going to try to justify it or not, along with opposition to the Roe v. Wade decision, which was built on a really important case called Griswold v. Connecticut, which recognized a right to autonomy in reproductive decisions that states could not limit, for example, women from accessing contraception. And so there's a whole host of decisions by the court in the 20th century, including decisions affirming major public policies like social security and programs to, you know, protect labor rights and more, and the Federalist Society and Leo and these men have you know worked for years to try to undo those precedents by, in part, by this appointment process of personnel being policy….

LISA GRAVES: The Powell Memo expressly targets the courts as a lever of power… Lewis Powell [was] a lawyer for the tobacco industry, he had been instrumental in trying to prevent the federal government from regulating tobacco, despite the fact that the tobacco industry knew full well that its products caused cancer... He also had been a lawyer advising the city of Richmond, as it was contending with Brown v. Board of Education. And though he wasn't the most outspoken of the white segregationists at that time, he helped put forward policies to pave the way for white kids to attend, you know, private institutions in order to not be subject to racial integration.

And in Powell's memo, of the things he wrote was that businesses needed to play a more active role in influencing Congress, in influencing universities and influencing the courts. And he singled out the courts as a particularly important lever of power. And then just 10 years later, The Federalist Society was created. A number of institutions or entities were created in the aftermath of the Powell Memo — the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Heritage Foundation, ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council … there was a concerted effort over the next 10 years to implement the Powell Memo through creating these entities ... and infusing them with cash from sort of proto-billionaires ... to advance an alternate vision for our constitution….

... one of the things that happened was that Leonard Leo became actively involved in trying to destroy the role of the American Bar Association in evaluating potential judicial nominees for the federal bench….

...the Bush administration basically outsourced the pre-selection process to the Federalist Society to Leonard Leo, and they were involved. I know for a fact that they were involved in 2001 in contacting potential circuit court nominees and asking them how they voted. Did they vote for George W. Bush or not? As a precondition, for the Federalist Society recommending them for circuit judgeship….

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 20 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 20 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

MASTER PLAN, Ep 10: The Master Planners’ Heist Of The Century

[The Lever, October 15, 2024]

By 2010, the master planners had firmly gained the upper hand. Their victory in Citizens United allowed corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections, giving business interests unprecedented power in politics. But the master planners’ onslaught wasn’t quite over. In this episode, we show how they embarked on a bold heist to crack the vault protecting democracy itself. It’s the heist story of the century, in three acts.

First, the schemers needed to take out the security cameras: The disclosure laws that in some instances still required the names of big-money donors to be reported. In a perverse act of mental gymnastics, petrochemical tycoon Charles Koch’s Americans for Prosperity sought to eliminate these laws by weaponizing a 1950s ruling that had protected civil rights activists in the Jim Crow South.

In the second part of the heist, the schemers went after the last remaining cops on the beat. They manufactured a scandal at the IRS, the country’s last remaining campaign finance regulators, over the targeting of so-called “social welfare” nonprofits — many of which were fronts for dark money groups.

Finally, the master planners needed a getaway plan, a way to prevent prosecutors from coming after them as they made off with the loot. They found their opportunity with the appointments of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

As high-profile bribery and corruption convictions fell, the message was clear: The system is rigged, and political officials are ready to play for pay.

 Key findings referenced in this episode include:

• See the evidence from the case in which a Virginia jury convicted former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife Maureen for accepting $175,000 in gifts and loans from a businessman — including a $10,000 white leather coat, shopping sprees, use of a Ferrari, and a $6,500 Rolex.
• In the 2016 case McDonnell v. United States, a wave of amicus briefs flooded the Supreme Court attacking the legality of the anti-bribery laws used to convict the former Virginia governor. Chief Justice John Roberts cited these briefs as evidence of “bipartisanship,” but they mostly came from influential figures in the money and politics sphere, including corporate lobbyists and Federalist Society members like John Ashcroft and Ted Olson. Other notable supporters filing briefs included Christian Right attorney Jay Sekulow and Citizens United mastermind James Bopp Jr. Even Justice Lewis F. Powell’s former corporate law firm joined in, representing a coalition of elite business owners.
• Indicted New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ lawyers recently filed their first motion to dismiss the bribery and fraud charges lodged against him, heavily relying on Supreme Court rulings that have weakened anti-corruption laws. The motion points to overturned convictions in corruption cases discussed in this episode, including those of McDonnell, former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, small-town mayor James Snyder, and New York power broker Sheldon Silver.
• Read law professor Zephyr Teachout’s article on how both liberal and conservative justices on the Supreme Court have expressed skepticism about anti-corruption law, narrowing the definition of corruption and limiting public power.

Over half of African nations spend more on interest rates to creditors than public health: Report 

[Down to Earth, via Naked Capitalism 10-19-2024]

Mehrsa Baradaran, The Quiet Coup: Neoliberalism and the Looting of America (New York, W.W. Norton, 2024)

p50

In 1970, the G-77 unveiled its plan for a "New International Economic Order," which advocated for self-determination for each country and the fair distribution of world resources. Among other things, the G-77, OPEC, and other coalitions of the Global South demanded autonomy to sell—or not to sell—to transnational corporations that had become permanent fixtures in their nations and in their politics. The proposals included imposing trade barriers to keep foreign investors out, a practice that was routine among most of the Western nations, including the United States during the era of Bretton Woods. Small nations could not build their economies without atriffs and capital controls, which allowed native industries to grow without having to compete with better resourced nations. Their main area of concern was with the power of transnational corporations including the multinational coal, copper, and diamond miners, and their political influence.

The dilemma for Western nations after the age of formal empire was ideological and material. They could not maintain economic dominance if former colonies became sovereign democratic nations, and they couldn't use brute force to maintain that dominance without abandoning their democratic principles. It was this challenge, not Keynesianism or communism, whose ideal solution was neoliberalism.

Controlling the resources of former colonies in the absence of political domination was a delicate diplomatic maneuver—one that the members of the [Mont Pelerin Society] were well equipped to handle. In the 1950s and 1960s, MPS debates started focusing on such issues as the uneasy relationship between national sovereignty and international trade and the growing threat that revolt represented….

P 52
While the Global South imagined a future different from the past, the noeliberals worked painstakingly toward a future that was similar to the past—or as close as possible The basic feature of that plan was to counteract rising national power of the former colonies by undercutting the power of all states to regulate corporations. Neo- liberal intellectuals began fighting against the very idea of sovereignty itself. Speaking at The Hague about the future of international in 1955, founding MPS member Wilhelm Röpke noted that "to diminish national sovereignty is most emphatically one of the urgent needs of our time."" The neoliberals sought a new international economic order, one very different from the G-77's bid for a flattening of the trade hierarchy among nations; this néoliberal world order would instead seek to augment the power of corporations and capital over that of national governments….

P60
…To Hayek, all state action, especially toward "international cooperation," was indistinguishable from serfdom. He favored the total privatization of industry, removing Bretton Woods barriers, and—although MPS members disagreed vehemently on this last part—a new monetary order, which would be based on either purely private money or a, floating exchange rate of currencies. Hayek's system would free capital to be invested worldwide, weakening state social safety-net spending but maintaining the economic strength of the Global North, given its vast capital advantage. If the new "sovereign" nations wished to build their native industries, they could apply for a "development loan" from the IMF and World Bank. Experts from these NGOs would then offer "technical assistance" to the new governments to help them tighten their budgets and promote trade.

Just as politicians in the United States adopted neoliberal ideas to perpetuate the domestic racial order, the Western powers overall adopted neoliberal ideas to tame independence movements and launder their own efforts to continue subjugating the Global South….

Poorest countries in worst financial shape since 2006, World Bank says 

[Al Jazeera, via Naked Capitalism 10-16-2024]

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 13 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 13 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

America Is Lying to Itself About the Cost of Disasters 

Zoë Schlanger, October 5, 2024 [The Atlantic]

...This mismatch, between catastrophes the government has budgeted for and the actual toll of overlapping or supersize disasters, keeps happening—after Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Maria, Hurricane Florence. Almost every year now, FEMA is hitting the same limits, Carlos Martín, who studies disaster mitigation and recovery for the Brookings Institution, told me. Disaster budgets are calculated to past events, but “that’s just not going to be adequate” as events grow more frequent and intense. Over time, the U.S. has been spending more and more money on disasters in an ad hoc way, outside its main disaster budget, according to Jeffrey Schlegelmilch, the director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia Climate School….

The U.S. is facing a growing number of billion-dollar disasters, fueled both by climate change and by increased development in high-risk places. This one could cost up to $34 billion, Moody’s Analytics estimated. Plus, the country is simply declaring more disasters over time in part because of “shifting political expectations surrounding the federal role in relief and recovery,” according to an analysis by the Brookings Institution….

...A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that every dollar of disaster preparedness saves communities $13 in damages, cleanup costs, and economic impacts. But since 2018, the government has set aside just 6 percent of the total of its post-disaster grant spending to go toward pre-disaster mitigation….

Meanwhile, costs of these disasters are likely to balloon further because of gaps in insurance. In places such as California, Louisiana, and Florida, insurers are pulling out or raising premiums so high that people can’t afford them, because their business model cannot support the current risks posed by more frequent or intense disasters. So states and the federal government are already taking on greater risks as insurers of last resort. The National Flood Insurance Program, for instance, writes more than 95 percent of the residential flood policies in the United States, according to an estimate from the University of Pennsylvania. But the people who hold those policies are almost all along the coasts, in specially designated flood zones. Inland flooding such as Helene brought doesn’t necessarily conform to those hazard maps; less than 1 percent of the homeowners in Buncombe County, North Carolina, where the city of Asheville was badly hit, had flood insurance….

But some of these measures, such as adopting stronger building codes, tend to be unpopular with the states that hold the authority to change them. “There is a sort of quiet tension between states and the federal government in terms of how to do this,” Schlegelmilch said. The way things work right now, states and local governments would likely end up shouldering more of the cost of preparing for disasters. But they know the federal government will help fund recovery.
Plus, spending money on disaster recovery helps win elected officials votes in the next election. “The amount of funding you bring in has a very strong correlation to votes—how many you get, how many you lose,” Schlegelmilch said. But the same cannot be said for preparedness, which has virtually no correlation with votes. 

[TW: “a sort of quiet tension between states and the federal government,” which the rich are exacerbating by their lavish funding of the stridently anti-government conservative and libertarian movements, and, more importantly the corruption of the judiciary so that it provides judicial legitimacy and bite to these anti-government ideas and policies, as in Loper-Bright. As tragic as these disasters are, progressives should be planning beforehand how to use the inevitable public clamor for disaster relief as climate change worsens, and direct that clamor against the anti-government conservative and libertarian movements that are the root cause of unprepardeness. As Stoller writes below: “we are entering a world beset by climate change, which will require a different political order [but] the bulk of our leadership class is still in thrall to a finance-friendly model of industrial fragility.]

What Happens if a Hurricane Smashes Tampa?

Matt Stoller, October 08, 2024 [BIG]

...All of that is a way of saying that hurricanes are really dangerous, and involve massive sums of money and important questions of market power and shortages. And that’s especially true today, with our monopolized and thus fragile supply chains. For instance, when North Carolina got hit with immense rain from Hurricane Helene a few weeks ago, it killed hundreds of people, and also knocked out a mine making 90% of the key pure quartz on which the semiconductor industry depends. To take another example, the American Hospital Association has already asked the President to declare a national emergency due to a shortage of IV fluids as a result of the disaster….

((One factory about 35 miles east of Ashville supplied 60% of the nation’s IV fluids...))

….So what’s the right approach to addressing the resulting crisis?

The response will require more state capacity. Clearly there’s search and rescue and immediate crisis response, which requires a lot more funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). We’re going to need a permanently larger FEMA, since climate change has dramatically increased the pace of natural disasters. The government should probably just rebuild and then make all cell phone service free in the area for the next two months, and find a way of extending Medicaid to everyone so no one has to deal with billing. Or they could just temporarily nationalize hospitals.

What we can learn from the Covid crisis and the CARES Act is that we should immediately be sending resources to individuals and small businesses in the area. A quick disbursal of cash to everyone in the region, as well as a revival of the Paycheck Protection Program for small business loan/grants, would help people afford basic necessities, and keep businesses alive. Bank regulators should also freeze credit reporting and student debt payments for people in affected counties.

Given the potential crisis of Florida property values and all the financing attached to those, we need to think about bank solvencies. To address the possibility of a financial crisis, Congress should stop working through the Federal Reserve, which is too focused on helping private equity and large banks and far too opaque. Instead, the government should structure a new public bank called the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. It should be run by the FDIC, and be allowed to use the Fed balance sheet for loans, which would all be publicly posted.

We can also learn some lessons from the post-Katrina moment, as well as what happened during Covid, and the CARES Act. What we can learn from Katrina is that it’s important to do as much within the government as possible, instead of through contractors….

... we are entering a world beset by climate change, which will require a different political order. Last July, I wrote a piece on how we are forgetting the lessons from Covid. We are still highly dependent on China, and the fragility of our supply chains hasn’t improved. And that’s because, while there are some good policymakers in positions of authority like Lina Khan and Rohit Chopra, the bulk of our leadership class is still in thrall to a finance-friendly model of industrial fragility. And this dynamic is as much an ideological problem as anything else….

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 6 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – October 6 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

Kamala Harris’s Wall Street charm offensive begins to pay off 

[Financial Times, via Naked Capitalism Water Cooler 10-04-2024]

“Two finance executives close to Harris said she had reassured them that she could appoint new officials to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission who would take a less aggressive stance than current respective chairs Gary Gensler and Lina Khan.”

Rev. William Barber II demands focus on poverty, proposes debate format to 'put facts out'

James Powel, October 3, 2024 [USA TODAY, via Common Dreams]

As the nation reviewed the vice presidential debate between Ohio Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz Tuesday night, Rev. William J. Barber II noticed one group of people missing from the conversation: the poor.

The founder of Repairers of the Breach, The Poor People's Campaign and the Director of the Center for Public Theology and Public Policy at Yale told USA TODAY in an interview Wednesday that the presidential race, and by extension the vice presidential debate, was not revealing solutions for the nearly 38 million people living in poverty in the country….

Progressives Must Act Now to Shape Kamala Harris’s White House

Jeff Hauser, Kenny Stancil October 2, 2024 [American Prospect]

Now is the time for progressives to weigh in on jobs that don’t require Senate confirmation….

...But beyond independent agencies and the Cabinet, there are many influential White House positions for which Senate confirmation is not required. Harris has no excuse for not taking her best swings here. In the same vein, progressives have no excuse for not advocating for the best possible nominees—and preparing to register disapproval if warranted.

As a general principle, Harris should appoint individuals who have a demonstrated commitment to furthering the public interest, rather than entrenching corporate power or seeking personal advancement. This means appointees’ résumés should reflect careers spent advocating for the common good—including experience in federal, state, or local governments as well as other public-sector or nonprofit work—as opposed to careers spent working on behalf of Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and other nerve centers of corporate America. Moreover, given the need for an all-of-government approach to solving our myriad and overlapping crises, the people Harris names should also have the ability to creatively leverage available power to drive change.

What follows is a brief overview of key jobs and some lessons on what to look for—and look out for.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 29 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 29 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

The Quiet Coup: Neoliberalism and the Looting of America — EXCERPTS

Mehrsa Baradaran (New York, W.W. Norton, 2024)

Introduction

Ideologies that have developed memelike qualities, like race and religion, have been some of the most potent forces shaping human history, especially when they have fused with the law. Racial hierarchy began as ideology to justify plunder and slaughter—those who murdered unjustly, like the Spanish conquistadors or British slave traders, blamed their crimes on their victims' "inherent" inferiority and a meme was born in the world. Before the wholesale theft of indigenous land, the law justified it. In the early nineteenth century, Chief Justice John Marshall deemed that the indigenous tribes in America could not own or sell their land on account of their inherent "savagery." The law thereafter demarcated property rights as the exclusive domain of white men, paving the way for manifest destiny, the seizure of 1.5 billion acres of land for private ownership, and the genocide of millions of indigenous people. Marshall built his legal opinion on precedent and theory provided by the British philosopher John Locke, whose theory of property law was popular in Great Britain in the late 1600s at the height of the British slave trade. It was "natural" and just, noted Locke, that "the creator” had endowed only "the industrious and rational" white men with the right to own land and people. It was also expedient. Ideologies persist through replication exactly because they evade detection, and through the process of replication, they evolve. For example, the ideology of patriarchy once reinforced itself through property laws like coverture and primogeniture that prohibited women from owning property. Once an ideology is embedded in legal code, its silent perpetuation is guaranteed.

Patently immoral practices like colonial subjugation, slavery, land theft, Jim Crow, segregation, and forced labor lasted so long that the theories that once justified them—like divine decree—no longer did the job. Instead of addressing the injustices that racist ideologies had created, often, those with the most to lose went looking for new ideologies Ito justify their unfair position at the top: first, Christianity; then Darwinian science; then the pseudo-scientific babble of "human IQ" testing; then, as was the case at the end of the 1960s, economics.

xxx
As John Adams once wrote to Thomas Jefferson (20 June 1815), 'Power always sincerely, conscientiously... believes itself Right. Power always thinks it has a great Soul, and vast Views, beyond the Comprehension of the Weak; and that it is doing God's Service, when it is violating all his laws." 19 Such was the object of the neoliberal revolution in legal theory: to infuse raw power with a soul—and snuff out the discretion that is law's dynamic living heart.

The law is the most powerful engine through which ideologies can become self-replicating engines. John Locke's theory of property as the endowed right of white men to use and to produce worked like witchcraft—the natural world, which had sustained societies for thousands of years, could suddenly be taken by force, enclosed, and tilled for the sole profit of one man, with trespassers punished. The conversion of land into one person's permanent property was not permissible under the indigenous populations who had long occupied it, nor was such a thing permissible anywhere in the world except Europe—and even there, only after the enclosure movements of the 1600s. The brilliant and prolific philosopher Locke happened to be under the patronage of Anthony Ashley Cooper, one of the richest men in England (who later became the First Earl of Shaftesbury); he was first hired as Cooper's personal doctor, but as the earl entered politics to advocate for more property rights, Locke's star rose alongside his. And property laws were passed in legislatures and handed down over time, carrying memes from men long dead with ideas long denounced.

Law codified land into assets and has been extending the market into new frontiers ever since—from corporate shares and derivatives to NFTs—transforming abstract ideas into tradable assets. A similar alchemy transformed gold into money by smelting an image onto a coin, then transformed gold coins into bank notes emblazoned with the image of a king, queen, or president. Initially, it was gold's malleability that made it ideal for coinage. But with the rise of empire and Great Britain's dominance of the global trade in gold, the gold standard became yet another ideology to preserve power. Locke's theories about gold being the highest source of value on account of its scarcity have been as impossible to dislodge from monetary theories as his ideas about race have been from property laws. But Locke was wrong—gold was not valuable. Then, as now, money's value derived from the image on the coin. Money is a symbol of people's trust in the government that issued it. Gold's scarcity was not the source of its value, but it was one of the causes of hundreds of years of wars in Europe over the scarce metal. While empire based on the gold standard and justified by white supremacy fell to the global horror of World War II, the underlying logic of both lingered. Unaddressed and unexamined, these bad ideas continue to breed distrust in our societies and scarcity in our economies. The greatest villains of our modern times are rarely human beings but the zombie ideas of dead men that continue to shape our societies.

FAR FROM BEING a battle between capitalism and communism, as so many historians have painted the era's conflict, the global revolutions of the 1960s were the only world wars that involved the entire world. Truly, the world had turned upside down as a globe dominated by a handful of empires became a world with over a hundred independent nations—each demanding equal sovereignty on the world stage. The possibilities were breathtaking and the 1960s saw the first worldwide conversation between and among peoples speaking to one another. Neoliberalism was the successor ideology of empire. Gone were the gunboats, colonial governments, and talk of civilizing savages. Instead, development loans, sovereign debt markets, and transnational corporations became the face of power in the Global South. The guns did not disappear of course, but were traded on global markets from distributors to trade-friendly governments.

After decades of relentless activism by Black Americans across every legal domain, the American South's chokehold on the law finally broke and the Constitution's promise of equality was secured for all Americans. The last stages of the civil rights movement forced the quiet oppression of southern law to show its teeth and claws

[TW: I am greatly encouraged that Baradaran identifies John Locke as one of the major causes of bad political economy. As I have noted a number of times, it was Locke’s ideas of private property that made liberalism so insidiously destructive of the founding philosophy of civic republicanism, leading us to our present megacrises. 

[Baradaran’s book is an excellent accompaniment to The Lever's epic and important series on The Master Plan (see below). She discusses some people who The Lever series has not mentioned yet, such as Ayn Rand acolyte and neoliberal enforcer Alan Greenspan, who played a central role in Richard Nixon’s 1968 campaign, and the development of conservative economics as a cloak for outright racism.]

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 22 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 22 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

What is the deep state? (YouTube video) 

(Jeffrey Sachs, John Mearsheimer, YouTube, via Thomas Neuburger, God's Spies, 06-20-2024]

This video segment is taken from a symposium at which Sach and Mearsheimer offered their views on U.S. foreign policy. The whole thing is worth a listen, but I’ve cued this to start at the point where the question, “What is the deep state?” is asked and answered.

Note: The answer relates to foreign policy only, not the broader question of “Does the Establishment State try to influence domestic politics?”

“Sachs: My experience ... is that there's a deeply entrained foreign policy. It has been in place in my interpretation for many decades. But arguably a variant of it has been in place since 1992. I got to watch some of it early on because I was an adviser to Gorbachev and I was an adviser to Yeltsin, and so I saw early makings of this though I didn't fully understand it except in retrospect.

“But that policy has been mostly in place pretty consistently for 30 years, and it didn't really matter whether it was Bush Senior, whether it was Clinton, whether it was Bush Jr., whether it was Obama, whether it was Trump.

“After all, who did Trump hire? He hired John Bolton. Well, duh, pretty deep state. That was the end of ... they told, you know, he [Bolton] explained this is the way it is. And by the way, Bolton explained also in his memoirs, when Trump didn't agree we figured out ways to trick him basically.”

….

“MEARSHEIMER: When we talk about the ‘Deep State,’ we’re really talking about the Administrative State. It is very important to understand that starting in the late 19th and early 20th century, given developments in the American economy, it was imperative that we develop — and this is true of all Western countries — a very powerful central state that could ‘run the country.’ And over time, that state has grown in power.

“Since World War Two, the United States has been involved in every nook and cranny of the world, fighting wars here, there, and everywhere. And to do that, you need a very powerful administrative state that can help manage that foreign policy. But in the process, what happens is you get all of these high-level, middle-level, and low-level bureaucrats who become established in positions in the Pentagon, the State Department, and the intelligence community — you name it. And they end up having a vested interest in pursuing a particular foreign policy.

“That particular foreign policy that they like to pursue is the one the Democrats and the Republicans are pushing. That’s why we talk about tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum with regard to the two parties. You could throw in the deep state as being on the same page as those other two institutions….”

[TW: This is an important glimpse into the thinking of USA ruling elites. But just as important was what was said, is what was not said. There was no discussion of cooperation between nations on solving global problems, in line with what I have identified as a core principle of civic republicanism: one major role of government is to encourage people to do good by increasing humanity’s power over nature. There was no mention whatsoever of climate change, which absolutely will require global cooperation, probably on an unprecedented level. How about an international effort to help Mexico build a second Panama Canal? Or a crossing of the straits of Gibraltar, now considered an insurmountable engineering challenge. Wouldn’t it be much better to focus energies and resources on such projects?

[Increasing humanity’s power over nature: that’s what sewer systems and water distribution systems did — projects which are probably the single largest factor in tripling the average human life expectancy in the past three centuries. Sewer systems and water distribution systems are primary examples of increasing humanity’s power over nature. Not just power over flows of water, but power over the spread of bacteria and viruses. 

[The “realism” discussed by Sachs and Mearsheimer emphasizes competition — just like neoliberal “free market” economics. The real way to avoid nuclear war is to emphasize the cooperation of the human family in solving the problems we call face. The old paradigms of thought must be banished and replaced. For example, the idea that economics is about how “society allocates scarce resources” (taught in all “classical economics” texts and courses in the West), must be replaced by the understanding of civic republican political economy that the foremost economic task of any society is to overcome scarcity and provide abundance by increasing the power of humanity to understand and prudently control natural resources, then to distribute that abundance equitably to all of humanity. One major international cooperative project that cries out for attention and support is to build sewer systems and water distribution systems throughout the entire world, most especially areas in Africa and South American which do not now have them. There should not be any people anywhere on the globe who are forced to spend large parts of their day filling the basic need of securing enough clean water to drink, bathe, and cook.

[Eight years ago, China proposed an international $50 trillion project to build an electric power grid to bring solar and wind generated electricity from the polar and equatorial regions of the world, to the more populated regions that use the electricity. It is a great strategic mistake to ignore such proposals. ]

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 15 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 15 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Russia / Ukraine

Russia will be ‘at war’ with NATO if Ukraine long-range missile restrictions lifted, Putin warns

Avery Schmitz and Michael Conte, September 13, 2024 [CNN]

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned NATO alliance leaders that a move to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of longer-range Western missiles to strike deep inside his country would be considered an act of war.

“This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us,” Putin told reporters on Thursday.

Putin says NATO will be "in the war" if U.S. or allies let Ukraine fire long-range missiles at Russia 

Haley Ott,  September 13, 2024 [CBS News]

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Thursday that a decision by the U.S. or its NATO allies to allow Ukraine to use Western-supplied long-range missiles to hit targets deep inside Russia would be viewed as NATO's direct participation in the war, which he said would significantly change "the very nature of the conflict."

"Flight assignments for these missile systems can, in fact, only be entered by military personnel from NATO countries. Ukrainian servicemen cannot do this. And therefore, it is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is a question of making a decision whether NATO countries directly participate in the military conflict or not," Putin said in response to a question on Thursday.

"If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries, in the war in Ukraine," the Russian leader added.

Strategic Political Economy

Master Plan, Ep 5: How Corporations Became People

David Sirota and The Lever staff, September 10, 2024 [The Lever]

In Master Plan’s fifth episode, we explore how an unlikely catalyst — Robert Kennedy’s 1968 assassination — created an opportunity for his Senate replacement to manufacture the first and perhaps most important blow against America’s new campaign finance laws: Buckley v. Valeo. With a supporting cast including James Buckley, John Bolton, Charles Koch, and Robert Bork, this U.S. Supreme Court case was the first to frame the fight against campaign finance regulations as a crusade for free speech and third-party rights.

The master planners were just getting started. While Buckley v. Valeo blew the lid off limits to certain kinds of campaign expenditures, Big Business also wanted to ensure that corporations could spend as freely as their human counterparts. This is where the master planners’ sleeper agent on the Court, Justice Lewis Powell, would work behind the scenes to deliver an expansive ruling that created the foundation for Citizens United.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 8 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 8 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

Justice Alito reports German princess gave him $900 concert tickets

Associated Press, September 06, 2024 [via DailyKos]

Justice Samuel Alito reported Friday that he accepted $900 worth of concert tickets from a German princess, but disclosed no trips paid for by other people, according to a new financial disclosure form.

The required annual filing, for which Alito has often sought an extension, doesn't include details of the event tickets gifted by socialite Gloria von Thurn und Taxis of Germany….

[TW: I begin with seemingly innocuous news item because it bears directly on today’s condition of  political culture in USA. The rest of the Associated Press story lists a number of other gifts and courtesies Justice Alito has accepted, and sees nothing else peculiar in the gift by Gloria von Thurn und Taxis.

[Now, Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution: 

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

[I am not going to write anything more on this Section other than to note its obvious importance as part of the Constitution of a republic in a world dominated and mostly ruled by monarchies and oligarchies. What I want to draw attention to are some of the comments in the DailyKos story:

Sep 06, 2024 at 06:36:03 PM  — WTF is a German Princess?

Sep 06, 2024 at 06:40:10 PM —Germany hasn’t been a monarchy for more than 100 years….

Sep 06, 2024 at 06:46:09 PM — Germany still has princesses?

[Ganesh Sitaraman makes the very astute observation in his 2017 book, The Crisis of the Middle-Class Constitution: Why Economic Inequality Threatens our Republic that Americans’ historic dislike of monarchies began to disappear after World War Two, when nazism, fascism, and communism came to be perceived as greater threats than oligarchy, and USA elites embraced a “special relationship” with the United Kingdom. To this day, the largest embassy by far in Washington DC is the British. 

[But the threats of oligarchy and monarchy did not actually recede; they merely disappeared in the shadows cast by the Cold War. Very few people wondered what had become of the vast fortunes controlled by the former oligarchs of Europe. Perhaps people did not want to ask such potentially embarrassing questions of our new-found anti-communist allies.

[Thurn und Taxis is one of the oldest and nastiest of the European "black nobility." In the 15th through 18th centuries, the family became one of the richest in the world by operating the postal service used by Europe's royal families to communicate with each other. In 2017, the family's net worth was estimated at around $ 2.5 billion,  “including the largest privately owned forests in Europe.” Gloria married into the family by wedding Johannes. Their son, Albert, was, at age eight, one of the youngest people ever recorded as a billionaire when Johannes died, leaving Albert sole designated heir of a $3 billion fortune. 

[The nephew of Johannes was Max Thurn. He was a major power in the Mont Pelerin Society, serving as secretary from 1976 to 1988. This is the period in which the Mont Pelerin Society's economic “neoliberalism” became entrenched in power under Thatcher in Britain and Reagan in USA. The past half century of economic “neoliberalism” has pauperized the working class, destroyed the middle class, and enriched only elites, creating the social conditions in which right wing reactionaries thrive.

[It is a tragedy that the USA public and media are largely ignorant of the bloody history of European oligarchs, and fail to make the connection between inherited wealth, the continued existence of oligarchs like Thurn und Taxis, and the collapse of representative democracies around the world. The corruption of US Supreme Court Justice Alito is just a recent case in point.

[The social milieu Justice Alito is apparently comfortable in should certainly be of great public interest, and even, I strongly suggest, of concern to any intelligence agency that seriously understands the importance of maintaining the United States as a republic.  Another comment from the DailyKos story:

Sep 07, 2024 at 01:09:34 PM — Back in the 1980's I spent the afternoon with the "Kiser Apparent" of Germany while working as an archaeologist for the "very rich". The "Prince" owned catfish farm in Texas. The rich kissed his ass.

[Theorists of civic republicanism warned about the corrupting influence of wealth and luxury. That’s one reason why Section 9 was written. Now consider Donald Trump and who is mentor was: 

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 1 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – September 1 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

John Kiriakou: The Slide Into Authoritarianism

John Kiriakou [Consortium News, via Naked Capitalism 08-28-2024]

The Social Recession Is Accelerating 

Charles Hugh Smith [via Naked Capitalism 08-25-2024]

A reader asked about the term social recession which he'd noted in my book Get a Job, Build a Real Career and Defy a Bewildering Economy. Here is the paragraph:
"Stagnation in opportunities to work and earn (i.e. a financial recession) leads to social recession, a loss of opportunities for adulthood: a rewarding career, family, and a home of one's own. In a social recession, unemployed young people may be mired in adolescent narcissism, eschewing ambitions not just in work but in romance and marriage."….

In the purely financial / economic terms of growth of GDP, household income, corporate profits and the value of assets, the US has only been in an economic recession for a few months in 2008-09 and at the start of the pandemic lockdown. But when measured by the ability of just about anyone willing to work hard and practice basic frugality to buy a house and start a family, the US has been in a social recession since 2009. Demographics / economics analyst Chris H., who tweets as

CH @economica, recently posted charts which reflect this social recession, most strikingly in the collapse of the US birthrate that started in 2009. He asked: "The largest childbearing population in US history has gone on strike...maybe we should know why?"….

The social recession began as a direct result of policy responses to the Global Financial Meltdown in 2008-09, policies that favored capital and those who already owned assets, at the expense of everyone who did not inherit wealth/assets or was too young to buy assets such as houses when they were still affordable to average workers….

As I often note, average wages have stagnated for the past 45 years. This stagnation was tolerable as long as the cost of a house, childcare and healthcare insurance remained somewhat affordable to average workers, but once the engines of financialization transformed the US economy into a Bubble Economy of soaring real estate / stock valuations that then inevitably crash, triggering an even larger bailout / stimulus response that inflates an even greater bubble, the costs of home ownership, childcare and healthcare soared out of reach of all but the top 20%….

GRAPH Wage earners' share of gross domestic income (GDI) declined from 1970's 51% to 43% in 2022. $149 trillion in GDI was shifted from labor to capital.

Did wages rise 10-fold to match the 10-fold rise in the cost of a modest house? No. That is social recession in a nutshell. When this fact is raised in conversation, those in the top 10% protest, but their protest rings hollow, for what they're really saying is: since I'm doing great and all my friends are doing great, everyone's doing great. There's a word for this: denial. Denial cannot solve problems, it can only make them worse.

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 25 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 25 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

How Europe Could Reinvigorate Their Economy

Ian Wlesh, August 22, 2024

Force the US to reduce embassy staffs by 90% and remove all US NGOs and similar organizations.

Nicaragua shuts down 151 more NGOs, including US Chamber of Commerce affiliate 

[Anadolu Agency, via Naked Capitalism 08-23-2024]

How the Pentagon built Silicon Valley 

[Responsible Statescraft, via Naked Capitalism 08-21-2024]

[Yves Smith notes: This was documented years ago in Marianna Mazzucato’s book, The Entrepreneurial State.]

Global power shift

“How China acquires ‘the crown jewels’ of U.S. technology” 

[Pekingnology, via Naked Capitalism 08-19-2024]

Who Benefits From Sanctions? 

[Phenomenal World, via Naked Capitalism 08-19-2024]

‘On “How Sanctions Work: Iran and the Impact of Economic Warfare” by Narges Bajoghli, Vali Nasr, Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, and Ali Vaez.’

A Look at Iran’s First Ever Aircraft Carrier: Shahid Bagheri Promises to Expand Reach of Stealth Drone Fleet

Military Watch, August 21, 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 18 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 18 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

The world will lose $4.7 trillion of revenue in the next decade to tax havens. How did we get here? 

[The Business Standard, via Naked Capitalism 08-16-2024]

American Pharmaceutical Companies Aren’t Paying Any Tax in the United States

Brad W. Setser and Michael Weilandt [CFR, via Naked Capitalism 08-16-2024]

It is an undisputed fact that American pharmaceutical prices are the highest in the world…. However, those high prices do not translate into high reported profits in the United States. Rather the contrary: large pharmaceutical companies generally report losing money in the U.S….

So high prices strangely seem to correlate with large losses. This, of course, is a clear sign that pharmaceutical companies live in a world marked by transfer pricing and tax arbitrage….

The average effective tax rate paid in the U.S. (so U.S. tax paid versus global profit) was only 3 percent from 2018 to 2022, well below the typical effective tax paid in the US before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (see the work of Senator Wyden and his staff for more details). 

A Very Good Sign: Kamala Harris Is Going Right at Corporate Greed 

Nick Hanauer, August 16, 2024 [The New Republic]

… Greedy CEOs have milked the average American household for $12,000 since the pandemic. As a businessman, I can explain how they’re doing it. ...if you compare corporate profits in 2019 to the last four years, you’ll find corporations have gouged their way to an almost unbelievable $1.5 trillion in excess profits since 2020—that’s in addition to their pre-pandemic profit rates.

That means the average American household has paid an eye-popping $12,000 in higher prices solely to pump up quarterly corporate profit margins. To put that figure into perspective, $12,000 could buy the average American household more than two years’ worth of groceries….

Over the last two years, CEOs learned they could get away with padding their profits by keeping prices high. We have really great evidence that this is what’s been happening, because CEOs admitted this is what’s been happening.

For example, Procter & Gamble chief financial officer Andre Schulten bragged during a 2023 earnings call that even though the company’s input costs to make diapers had decreased, they were still keeping consumer prices high….

This corporate embrace of price gouging is a new and troubling development in American capitalism. And this is an area I know something about.

I’ve founded, financed, and/or run 43 different companies, spanning a dozen different industries…. I’m deeply acquainted with all the tricks of the trade when it comes to corporate profit margins.

But I’ve never seen executives exult in raising prices like this….

The chasm between corporate costs and profits has never been greater in my lifetime:

• Combined wholesale and retail margins have increased by 25 percent from pre-pandemic times.

• Food and beverage retailers’ profit margins have risen by 29 percent from the pre-pandemic norm.

• And consumer prices have skyrocketed 3.4 times over producer costs over the past year.

Immediately before the pandemic, corporate profits were 9.7 percent of the total gross domestic product. From 2020 to 2023, they spiked to an average 11.2 percent of annual GDP. The disparity between those two numbers amounts to a jaw-dropping $1.5 trillion more of our economy that was transferred over to corporate profits in the last four years.

That money was picked directly from the pockets of American families, who each paid $12,000 more to plump the profit margins of corporations (and that’s not even counting the excess APR rates that have cost the average credit card user $946 over the same four-year period)….

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 11 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 11 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

In 2023 the world’s forests stopped acting as a carbon sink 

[REDD Monitor, via Naked Capitalism 08-10-2024]

At the recent International Carbon Dioxide Conference in Manaus, Brazil, scientists presented preliminary findings that in 2023 the world’s forests stopped acting as a carbon sink. An intense drought in the Amazon rainforest and record wildfires in Canada were part of the reason that forests and other land ecosystems emitted almost as much carbon dioxide as they removed from the atmosphere.

Usually, forests remove about one-quarter of the world’s annual CO₂ emissions from the atmosphere. But in 2023, that carbon sink collapsed, study co-author Philippe Ciais of the French research organisation the Laboratory for Climate and Environmental Sciences told Reuters.

As a result, in 2023, the growth rate of CO₂ in the atmosphere shot up by 86% compared to 2022. Yet CO₂ emissions — which come mainly from burning fossil fuels — only increased by between 0.1% and 1.1%. The explanation is that natural carbon sinks absorbed much less….

'Holy Sh*t This Ad Is Powerful': UAW Says It Knows How to Defeat Trump and the Billionaire Class

Jon Queally, August 10, 2024 [CommonDreams]  

"This is brilliant," said author Naomi Klein in response to new United Auto Workers ad….

"There is only one answer to the threat we face as a nation. The answer is solidarity."

That is the core message directed at the American working class from the United Auto Workers (UAW) in a new ad that frames the nation's current political battle as one between organized workers and the billionaire and corporate classes.

"We stand at a historic crossroads in this country right now," says UAW president Shawn Fain to begin the 2-minute video. "And it's clear Donald Trump represents the billionaire class—that's his base." ….

UAW: Fight For a Better Life

x

x

"The dream of a man like Donald Trump is that the vast majority of working class people will remain divide," says Fain. "They divide us by race. They divide us by gender, by who we love, or where we were born. That's the game of the wealthy, divide and conquer

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 4 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – August 4 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Gaza / Palestine / Israel

US Urged to Condemn Israel's 'Summary Execution' of Two Journalists

Edward Carver, August 02, 2024 [CommonDreams]

A Palestinian journalist on Thursday pressed a U.S. State Department spokesperson to characterize the killings of two Al Jazeera journalists by Israeli forces as summary execution.

The heated press briefing followed an airstrike on Wednesday that killedAl Jazeera reporter Ismail al-Ghoul and cameraman Rami al-Rifee, and sparked global outrage. Israel's military acknowledged targeting al-Ghoul, saying he was "eliminated" because he was a Hamas "terrorist," an allegation the Qatar-based network said was "baseless."

The death toll of Palestinian journalists and media workers now stands at least 108, including several intentionally targeted by Israel forces, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

[X-Twitter, via Naked Capitalism 07-31-2024]

Etan Nechin

@Etanetan23

It's telling Israel (allegedly) can conduct pinpoint operations thousands of kilometers away to a capture target with precision, yet just two kilometers from home, they use 5-ton bombs on families to eliminate minor threats.

Oligarchy

Private Equity Giants Invest More Than $200M in Federal Races to Protect Their Lucrative Tax Loophole 

[Exposed by CMD, via Naked Capitalism 08-02-2024]

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 21 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 21 2024

by Tony Wikrent

Strategic Political Economy

Fight Or Die 

David Sirota, July 18, 2024 [The Lever]

In 2008, I published a book with a straightforward premise: the upcoming era of American politics would be defined by a competition between the left and right to harness the working class’s intensifying rage in a society being pillaged by corporate interests.

It was the twilight of the Bush era, and the country was beginning its nose-dive into recession and turmoil, but hope and change seemed just over the horizon. I predicted that with elements of both political parties in a warrior stance, simmering conflicts over deindustrialization, financialization, and neoliberalism would soon explode and realign politics, birthing some American version of either social democracy or authoritarianism.

The 16 years since The Uprising was released have delivered much of the tumult I imagined. It has been a period of unrest, chaos, and flip-flopping control of government — and yet, amid all that volatility, the decline persisted. Whether medical bankruptcies, foreclosures, lower life spans, spikes in prices, mountains of paperwork, or endless junk fees attached to everything — life in America just kept getting more difficult, annoying, inhumane, painful, and seemingly impossible.

In the political arena, there was a sensation of change, but in real life, there was more of the same.

Donald Trump’s 2016 win was a reaction to the dissonance — a pressure cooker that finally exploded — but still possibly just a weird anomaly. For shellshocked liberals, the end of his first term felt like the conclusion of a roller-coaster ride, a reversion to a mean, and proof that the competition to harness the discontent had finally been won on the center left.

But as Trump surges and Democrats teeter in this blazing summer of discontent, it’s the 2020 election that seems more like the anomaly — a last rest stop on a wild Natural Born Killers-style jaunt. 2024 feels like the final destination in a journey bookended by two iconic roadside billboards: the “HOPE” poster featuring Barack Obama’s cool gaze, and now the photograph of a bloodied Donald Trump defiantly calling his armies to battle….

 

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 14 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 14 2024

by Tony Wikrent

The Trump Shooting: The Most Shocking Act of a Shockingly Violent Age

Michael Tomasky, July 14, 2024 [The New Republic] 

This was not an abnormal incident. It’s a sign of the times….

ut whatever his motivation turns out to be, his act not isolated. There was the shooting of Republican Congressman Steve Scalise in 2017. The attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Nancy, in 2022. Those are just the headline-grabbers, but political violence, or at least the threat of it, is now a constant in American life.

Threats of political violence against members of Congress have skyrocketed. The Capitol Police investigated 902 such threats in 2016. That jumped up to 3,939 in 2017, and by 2021, the number was more than 9,600, or 10 times the number from just five years before. Hate crimes in 2022 hit 11,288, which is up from recent years (the number was 7,759 in 2020.) Domestic terrorism is on the rise, with the preponderance coming from the political right; the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the Department of Justice, reported earlier this year that since 1990, “far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives.”

Strategic Political Economy

What Liberals Get Wrong about the Right with Corey Robin - Factually! - 236

[Youtube]

x

x

.

Rising Market Power Has Led to the Rise in Far-Right Political Parties 

[ProMarket, via Naked Capitalism 07-02-2024]

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 07 2024

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – July 07 2024

by Tony Wikrent

The (anti)Federalist Society assault on the Constitution

The Weekend at Yale That Changed American Politics 

Michael Kruse [Politico, magazine September/October 2018]

It’s not too extreme to say that one wonky student group founded in 1982 has reshaped the Supreme Court, and the nation. What actually happened at the birth of the Federalist Society? ….

...a few conservative students at elite law schools sensed not anxiety but a moment of opportunity. Inspired by Reagan’s ideology and emboldened by his election, they did something ambitious to the point of audacious. They asked a collection of the country’s most notable right-leaning scholars, judges and Department of Justice officials to assemble at one of the very hubs of liberal orthodoxy, the campus of Yale University. Convened principally by Steven Calabresi, who was at Yale Law, and Lee Liberman and David McIntosh, who were at University of Chicago Law, some 200 people arrived in New Haven, Connecticut, on the last weekend of April for a three-day symposium.

It had a dry title—“A Symposium on Federalism: Legal and Political Ramifications”—and it easily could have been just another set of lectures, of interest only to a small lot of participants and attendees, the kind of higher-ed, corkboard-flyer get-togethers that happen all the time with no broader fanfare or larger lasting consequences. But at this one, as speakers castigated what they viewed as coastal elites and a leftist media and legal establishment and argued for a more “originalist” reading of the Constitution, people present felt a new sort of buzz. In the hallways, between the sessions, the vibe was more than just brainy….

Over the years, the Federalists have honed a disciplined, excessively modest narrative of their origins and purpose—that they are simply a facilitator of the exchange of ideas, a high-minded fulcrum of right-of-center thought, a debating society that doesn’t take overtly partisan, political positions. That narrative is not wrong. It’s just not the whole truth. The full story of that initial weekend—based on interviews with people who were there, as well as the seldom-read words of the speeches recorded in a 1982 issue of the conservative Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy—reveals something different. The effort was, from the get-go, aggressively political. There was a feeling of steeling for a fight….

...Bork, for example, who had been a law professor at Yale and had just become a federal judge, spoke of “the onslaught of the New Deal” and “the gentrification of the Constitution.” Abortion and “acceptable sexual behavior,” he said, should be “reserved to the states.” Pointedly, with Roe v. Wade, he said, the Supreme Court had “nationalized an issue which is a classical case for local control. There is simply no national moral consensus about abortion, and there is not about to be.”….

 “Part of Reagan’s policy was to build up forces in battleground nations in order to help topple enemy regimes,” Calabresi told Riehl, “and I thought of us as kind of the same equivalent in law schools.”

At Yale, Calabresi and a couple of conservative law students formed a student group in the fall of 1981. Eating lunch one day, according to a subsequent telling in the journal at Harvard, they batted about possible names. The Ludwig von Mises Society? The Alexander Bickel Society? The Anti-Federalist Society? The Anti-Federalists, after all, were the ones who sought a more decentralized government at the time of the founding of the country. They landed, though, on the Federalist Society, because it invoked the Federalist Papers and the long-running American debate about the appropriate balance of power between the national and state governments….

...They had the beginnings of buy-in. Now they needed arguably an even more important lubricant. Money. Leveraging a recommendation from Scalia, Calabresi contacted the conservative Institute for Educational Affairs to ask. “As Professor Scalia of the University of Chicago Law School mentioned to you last Wednesday on the telephone, we are interested in holding a symposium,” he wrote early that February in a letter archived among Bork’s papers at the Library of Congress. “Professor Scalia said you thought I.E.A. might be quite interested in sponsoring and funding such a symposium.” Calabresi estimated that it would cost “in the neighborhood of $24,000.” It ended up being closer to $25,000. And it worked. IEA wrote a check that covered most of the cost. The rest came from donors, including the John M. Olin Foundation and the Intercollegiate Studies Institute….

In 1987, Bork’s Supreme Court nomination was scuttled by a liberal-led Senate campaign that used Bork’s own words on issues such as Roe v. Wade—issues he had spoken about at the symposium. It angered and motivated members of the Federalist Society, convincing them they needed to redouble their efforts. “It was a galvanizing defeat,” Hollis-Brusky told me, demonstrating to some of them that they had tried to come too far, too fast. It also reinforced the notion that ideological purity wasn’t the only ingredient to transforming the judiciary. Raw politics mattered as well. And nearly two decades later, the Federalists would cement their power by keeping someone off the court. In 2005, they agitated for the withdrawal of George W. Bush’s nominee Harriet Miers, who had no Federalist Society ties (and a conspicuously scant résumé), leading to the nomination of Samuel Alito, who did. The episode affirmed the way in which the society’s influence had grown. Alito joined fellow Federalist Society contributors Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts….