Last month, editors at The Nation magazine published 13 mini-essays on the subject of how to make capitalism “less destructive and domineering, [and] more focused on what people really need for fulfilling lives” written by lefty thinkers in business, activism and politics.
The proposals—which include a drastic restriction of the concept of limited liability and the placement of a public watchdog in the boardroom of every major U.S. corporation—are all aimed at hammering private enterprise into a machine that serves the public interest, as those politicians and lawmakers who granted the United States’ first corporate charters intended. The most urgent suggestion may come from L. Randall Wray, professor of economics at the University of Missouri, who proposes the creation of a federal program that would provide a job for every unemployed person through a “government-provided ‘employer of last resort’ program.”
Click through to the article and scroll down to see the full list of essays, plus a vigorous rebuttal by Villanova University humanities professor and avowed socialist Eugene McCarraher. —ARK
William Greider at The Nation:
The Nation asked a playful question and got back serious answers. Imagine you have the ability to reinvent American capitalism: Where would you start? What would you change to make it less destructive and domineering, more focused on what people really need for fulfilling lives?
... At some point, it will become obvious that our economy will not truly recover until American capitalism is refashioned, stripped of its self-aggrandizing excesses and made to serve the interests of society rather than the other way around. As our commentators observe, this will require deep structural change, not simply new policies. Their essential approach is to reach into the guts of corporate capitalism and fix the wiring. That means changing both rules and operating values. It involves democratizing reforms that will compel business and finance to share decision-making and distribute rewards more fairly.
This vision can be called “inclusive capitalism,” as one essay suggests, or a genuine fulfillment of “democratic capitalism,” as another author proposes. Whatever it’s called, the essence is a fundamental redistribution of power and money. Obviously, this will require a stronger government (though not necessarily a bigger one) that stops subsidizing the maldistribution of wealth and income through its tax code and spending programs. Government has to recover some of the economic levers it purposely abandoned in the era of deregulation, a move that encouraged the obscene inequalities.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
ALEC’s model legislation reflects long-term goals: downsizing
government, removing regulations on corporations and making it
harder to hold the economically and politically powerful to account. Corporate donors retain veto power over the language,
which is developed by the secretive task forces. The task forces
cover issues from education to health policy. ALEC’s priorities for
the 2011 session included bills to privatize education, break
unions, deregulate major industries, pass voter ID laws and more.
“Dozens of corporations are investing millions of dollars a year to
write business-friendly legislation that is being made into law in
statehouses coast to coast, with no regard for the public interest,”
says Bob Edgar of Common Cause. “This is proof positive of the
depth and scope of the corporate reach into our democratic
processes.”
Through the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange
Council, global corporations and state politicians vote behind
closed doors to rewrite state laws that govern your rights. These
so-called “model bills” reach into almost every area of American life
and often directly benefit huge corporations. Through ALEC,
corporations have “a VOICE and a VOTE” on specific changes to
the law that are then proposed in your state. DO YOU?
“Any rational person can look at what these corporations are
doing through ALEC and on their own and know that essentially
for-profit corporations are writing legislation in Arizona,” said
Caroline Isaacs, AFSC program director. “The spirit of the
law—which I think most of us believe is there to prevent money
from buying undue influence in politics—is clearly being violated.”
WG: Whatever it’s called, the essence is a fundamental redistribution of power and money. Obviously, this will require a stronger government (though not necessarily a bigger one) that stops subsidizing the maldistribution of wealth and income through its tax code and spending programs.
Yes, the above sums it up. The answer is in the form of a duality:
• It is by means of taxation that we de-incentivize the worst practices of capitalism - that is, its greedy accumulation and reckless risk-taking to obtain professional rewards.
• It is by means of tax revenues that Public Services are allowed to enhance the well-being of all citizens.
Two examples of Public Services are Universal National Health Care and Tertiary Education tuition subsidies. Both are key investments in terms of Human Capital, that is, the ability and capacity of our work-force to optimize gainful employment.
And they are only two policies of a Progressive Agenda that could reform America, directing it away from the sterile accumulation of capital (for the sole sake of accumulation) towards more productive means to enhance national well-being.
Which does not mean, as the Rabid Right remonstrates, that we are all made to earn equally our daily bread. It means only to diminish the currently vast national Income Inequality to reasonable proportions such that all citizens obtain their fair share of the economic pie that they work so hard to create.
The brain-washing machinery has been so efficient in this country for so many decades that some people are afraid to mention the words “socialism” or “alternatives to capitalism” for fear they will have their doors kicked in and end up accused of treason. Consequently they don’t know anything about possible ways to change anything. Besides, brain-washers constantly tell them that change is “dangerous” or “unpatriotic” or “won’t work.” Brain-washing has painted us into a corner and we are afraid to step out of it.
Most of us only have one pair of shoes and we have to show up for a job interview tomorrow.
By THX 1133 is not in the movie..., July 11, 2011 at 2:37 am Link to this comment
I love how people still want capitalism; just modify
it to make it more friendly, you know, like Casper
the Friendly Ghost.
Keynes is better than the “Chicago School”
(Freidman), but it still depends on perpetual growth
forever.
The earth cannot survive that; one cannot have
infinite growth when one has finite resources.
It’s going to take a fundamental change in
how/what/the way in which we think.
That I fear is a bridge too far for the average
American, much less the Chinese, Indians and the
Third World, who want some of what we have; there
just isn’t enough to go around.
Where once we could’ve lead the way on our good will
and benevolent reputation; we’ve blown the hell out
of that and we spent our leadership capital on stupid
wars and campaigns of terror in the name of the GWOT.
We’re running on empty and no refill in sight…
Dr. Eugene McCarraher has good points, perhaps he will be
interested in Socialized Capitalism in competition with Privatized
Capitalism. Here are a couple of his internet works that gerard was kind enough to tell us about:
Eugene McCarraher (last of those in The Nation offering his views) has a couple interesting videos on YouTube, and other brief statements, etc., obtained by Googling his name. The video is clear in showing the fallacies of “corporations as persons” and explains the historical (“mystical”) roots and progression of corporations and why “personhood” of corporations must and can be revoked.
If Privatized Capitalism is to be rethought, Privatized Capitalism
will have to be rethought in the context of its own competition for
its own survival, in the same way that Privatized Capitalism has
advocated since its origin for those who provide labor for
Privatized Capitalism as a work force.
If Capitalism is to be rethought, there should be two different and
distinct forms of capital, social capital and private
capital.
There should also be two different and distinct forms of Capitalism, socialized capitalism that employs social capital, and privatized capitalism that employs private capital.
Privatized Capitalism should be in competition with Socialized
Capitalism for its survival and to the extent that Privatized
Capitalism cannot compete with Socialized Capitalism in “survival
of the fittest” competition, Privatized Capitalism should cease to
exist.
The “Economic Cycle” is about the cyclical rescue of Privatized Capitalism and Private Capital with Social Capital, without benefit to the Greater Social
Community for the cyclical recapitalization of Private
Capital with SOCIAL RESOURCES; this must END.
Any claim to rethink Capitalism that allows for Social Capital to be
used to cyclically rescue Private Capital and Privatized Capitalism
at PUBLIC EXPENSE of Social Capital, as has been the case since
the advent of Privatized Capitalism, is nothing more than MORE OF
THE SAME “WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY” AT PUBLIC EXPENSE
using Social Capital to rescue Private Capital, and this practice
must end.
If Social Capital, an asset used to provide a revenue stream, can
be used to rescue Private Capital, an asset that provides a
revenue stream, the asset that provides a revenue stream that is
Social Capital can be used separate and apart from Private
Interests to provide a revenue stream for Social Benefit without
giving the benefit of the revenue stream away to Private Interests
at PUBLIC EXPENSE.
I have spoken at great length about Social Capital and Socialized
Capitalism on Truthdig forum and suggest that those who have a
real interest, read what I have posted on the Truthdig forum on
the topic of Social Capital and Socialized Capitalism.
The Nation magazine has no credibility. They are shills for the pro-war, corporate corrupted Democrats.
If you are interested in a site where articles are “allowed” that are NOT apologists for the Dems or the corporate, pro-war SYSTEM that they protect then please visit firedoglake.
For others participating in the kabuki theatre of the Nation magazine and all the other “progressive” blog sites, please. Especially those who want to blog, bloviate and do nothing but talk.
Stay here or Common Dreams, Op Ed News, Huff Post, Daily KOS etc etc.
I don’t know of any cases of monopoly which did not rely on state power. In the early stages of capitalism, monopolies were often granted before anything else happened. I don’t think it’s an accident that the rise of capitalism parallels the rise of the modern state. In a way, ‘socialism’ of the form in which the government, that is, the ruling class totally controls the economy is the final stage of capitalism where everything has been absorbed by a single monopoly backed by the government’s monopoly of coercive force. This arrangement has not been found to work well in practice, partly because it inhibits the same dynamic nature of capitalism which assures its dissolution.
A socialist indicts the selfish benefit of
capitalism, a system which is wasteful, corrupt,
disorganized and inhumane. After all, to work
efficiently, capitalism requires that profits must be
made as close to the poison line as possible.
Adam Smith probably didn’t foresee the role that
government would/could play in aiding and abetting
capitalists in their drive toward ever greater
profits. (He did warn against monopolies/cartels/trusts which he saw as inevitable
should a government not step in and stop them before
they could get a foothold in the system.)
Classic case of an aiding and abetting government was
the $180 billion in government money that went to
AIG, a corporation that was obligated for $500
billion when it had 5 times less than that in assets.
(It should be mentioned that the government allocated
$160 billion, total, to the states - $20 billion less
than what was allocated to one corporation.)
I have read, but can’t verify, that Smith towards the
end of his life came to the conclusion that his model
of capitalism would be ruinous to the well-being of a
society’s people and should therefore be scrapped.
Every dynamic system is ‘corrupt’ in the sense that it contains the seeds of its own destruction or transformation into something else. And capitalism is certainly a dynamic system, just as it says in the Communist Manifesto. If the elites have become cannibalistic, they will destroy themselves all the sooner. This does appear to be happening now in the United States, but other capitalist systems, like those of China, Russia and India are still apparently rising. In the more mature capitalist states, the successor entities, the cooperative and communes I mentioned, are already being developed and are beginning to gain some traction.
get real Anarcissie, we’re not going to have a proliferation of cooperatives and communes because a culture based on inequality will find ways to make them irrelevant. The elite know how to exert their influence and they won’t stand for it, just look at how hellbent they are on privatizing. The end result of capitalism is cannibalism. And who cares if it’s traditional or not—capitalism is inherently corrupt and therefore will always seek to break its own rules and hang itself.
On the Nation, I piped up: ‘Capitalism is already being abolished, or rather, replaced, by the growth of cooperatives, communes, and other worker-owned enterprises. This process continues the processes which brought it into being in the first place. It is true that it is degenerating in the United States, but that is due more to the culture of public fraud, war and imperialism than to the defects of traditional capitalism.’ Highly condensed, but maybe someone over there will read it.
By BryanM, July 9, 2011 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The jobism mindset itself is the problem. Technology destroys jobs, it doesn’t make them. Automation ensures that job growth isn’t going to outstrip the birth rate, perhaps ever again.
Thinking of “jobs” as the solution is not realistic. When scarcity isn’t really a problem, it’s a waste of everyone’s time. Google The Useless People of Japan to see an example of jobism taken to the extreme. Everyone would be better served paying people to just stay home, and not teleport a couple tons of steel a hundred+ miles every week.
gerard - Good comment. Your observation that Americans have been “conditioned” to think in some fairly common cliches couldn’t be more spot on. The problem is that most of the cliches have been manufactured and beaten into the American consciousness for over 30 years now.
We desperately need to change; however, I’m afraid it’s too late. There isn’t going to be any grand metamorphosis of our collective nature in this country. We’re too goddamn greedy…...........
Eugene MaCarrager: “No amount of goods can compensate for the damage wrought on human nature by the deliberate nurturance of our vilest qualities. The desecration of the values we claim to hold most dear is the primary reason we should want to abolish, not reinvent, capitalism.” That pretty much says it for me. At this point, even the word “capitalism” has been cliched to death and has come to mean little more than economic and cultural domination.
It was a bummer wading through most of the comments, which, instead of contributing anything at all, just trotted out the usual cliches. Judging from your common blogger, this is a country that desperately needs to change, yet its “responders” are still mostly hanging on reactively to what they have been “conditioned” to believe and support, even though those beliefs are proving themselves to be no longer practicable—if they ever were worthy. Never mind, I tell myself. It is also impossible to defend the indefensible forever.
A Cooler Century? Wait and See
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By MarthaA, July 15, 2011 at 5:17 pm Link to this comment
American Legislative Exchange Council EXPOSED,
ALEC’s model legislation reflects long-term goals: downsizing
government, removing regulations on corporations and making it
harder to hold the economically and politically powerful to account.
Corporate donors retain veto power over the language,
which is developed by the secretive task forces. The task forces
cover issues from education to health policy. ALEC’s priorities for
the 2011 session included bills to privatize education, break
unions, deregulate major industries, pass voter ID laws and more.
“Dozens of corporations are investing millions of dollars a year to
write business-friendly legislation that is being made into law in
statehouses coast to coast, with no regard for the public interest,”
says Bob Edgar of Common Cause. “This is proof positive of the
depth and scope of the corporate reach into our democratic
processes.”
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/07/13-8
Through the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange
Council, global corporations and state politicians vote behind
closed doors to rewrite state laws that govern your rights. These
so-called “model bills” reach into almost every area of American life
and often directly benefit huge corporations. Through ALEC,
corporations have “a VOICE and a VOTE” on specific changes to
the law that are then proposed in your state. DO YOU?
http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed
“Any rational person can look at what these corporations are
doing through ALEC and on their own and know that essentially
for-profit corporations are writing legislation in Arizona,” said
Caroline Isaacs, AFSC program director. “The spirit of the
law—which I think most of us believe is there to prevent money
from buying undue influence in politics—is clearly being violated.”
http://www.alternet.org/story/151627/inside_alec,_the_koch-funded_group_behind_right-wing_state_laws?page=entire
Report thisBy Lafayette, July 11, 2011 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment
TAX & SPEND
Yes, the above sums it up. The answer is in the form of a duality:
• It is by means of taxation that we de-incentivize the worst practices of capitalism - that is, its greedy accumulation and reckless risk-taking to obtain professional rewards.
• It is by means of tax revenues that Public Services are allowed to enhance the well-being of all citizens.
Two examples of Public Services are Universal National Health Care and Tertiary Education tuition subsidies. Both are key investments in terms of Human Capital, that is, the ability and capacity of our work-force to optimize gainful employment.
And they are only two policies of a Progressive Agenda that could reform America, directing it away from the sterile accumulation of capital (for the sole sake of accumulation) towards more productive means to enhance national well-being.
Which does not mean, as the Rabid Right remonstrates, that we are all made to earn equally our daily bread. It means only to diminish the currently vast national Income Inequality to reasonable proportions such that all citizens obtain their fair share of the economic pie that they work so hard to create.
Report thisBy gerard, July 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm Link to this comment
The brain-washing machinery has been so efficient in this country for so many decades that some people are afraid to mention the words “socialism” or “alternatives to capitalism” for fear they will have their doors kicked in and end up accused of treason. Consequently they don’t know anything about possible ways to change anything. Besides, brain-washers constantly tell them that change is “dangerous” or “unpatriotic” or “won’t work.” Brain-washing has painted us into a corner and we are afraid to step out of it.
Most of us only have one pair of shoes and we have to show up for a job interview tomorrow.
Report thisBy THX 1133 is not in the movie..., July 11, 2011 at 2:37 am Link to this comment
I love how people still want capitalism; just modify
Report thisit to make it more friendly, you know, like Casper
the Friendly Ghost.
Keynes is better than the “Chicago School”
(Freidman), but it still depends on perpetual growth
forever.
The earth cannot survive that; one cannot have
infinite growth when one has finite resources.
It’s going to take a fundamental change in
how/what/the way in which we think.
That I fear is a bridge too far for the average
American, much less the Chinese, Indians and the
Third World, who want some of what we have; there
just isn’t enough to go around.
Where once we could’ve lead the way on our good will
and benevolent reputation; we’ve blown the hell out
of that and we spent our leadership capital on stupid
wars and campaigns of terror in the name of the GWOT.
We’re running on empty and no refill in sight…
By MarthaA, July 10, 2011 at 9:20 pm Link to this comment
Dr. Eugene McCarraher has good points, perhaps he will be
interested in Socialized Capitalism in competition with Privatized
Capitalism. Here are a couple of his internet works that
gerard was kind enough to tell us about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rb7J0gUtkY
http://vox-nova.com/2007/12/03/eugene-mccarraher-on-capitalism-abortion-and-the-culture-of-death/
Report thisBy Morpheus, July 10, 2011 at 7:48 pm Link to this comment
If people only new. Well, you can. We don’t to be slave to our government, big business and the banks.
Wake up America. It’s time…
“THE REVOLUTION HAS STARTED”
Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )
FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM
Report this“Spread the News”
By gerard, July 10, 2011 at 6:51 pm Link to this comment
Eugene McCarraher (last of those in The Nation offering his views) has a couple interesting videos on YouTube, and other brief statements, etc., obtained by Googling his name. The video is clear in showing the fallacies of “corporations as persons” and explains the historical (“mystical”) roots and progression of corporations and why “personhood” of corporations must and can be revoked.
Report thisBy ThomasG, July 10, 2011 at 2:25 pm Link to this comment
If Privatized Capitalism is to be rethought, Privatized Capitalism
will have to be rethought in the context of its own competition for
its own survival, in the same way that Privatized Capitalism has
advocated since its origin for those who provide labor for
Privatized Capitalism as a work force.
If Capitalism is to be rethought, there should be two different and
distinct forms of capital, social capital and private
capital.
There should also be two different and distinct forms of Capitalism,
socialized capitalism that employs social capital, and
privatized capitalism that employs private capital.
Privatized Capitalism should be in competition with Socialized
Capitalism for its survival and to the extent that Privatized
Capitalism cannot compete with Socialized Capitalism in “survival
of the fittest” competition, Privatized Capitalism should cease to
exist.
The “Economic Cycle” is about the cyclical rescue of
Privatized Capitalism and Private Capital with
Social Capital, without benefit to the Greater Social
Community for the cyclical recapitalization of Private
Capital with SOCIAL RESOURCES; this must END.
Any claim to rethink Capitalism that allows for Social Capital to be
used to cyclically rescue Private Capital and Privatized Capitalism
at PUBLIC EXPENSE of Social Capital, as has been the case since
the advent of Privatized Capitalism, is nothing more than MORE OF
THE SAME “WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY” AT PUBLIC EXPENSE
using Social Capital to rescue Private Capital, and this practice
must end.
If Social Capital, an asset used to provide a revenue stream, can
be used to rescue Private Capital, an asset that provides a
revenue stream, the asset that provides a revenue stream that is
Social Capital can be used separate and apart from Private
Interests to provide a revenue stream for Social Benefit without
giving the benefit of the revenue stream away to Private Interests
at PUBLIC EXPENSE.
I have spoken at great length about Social Capital and Socialized
Report thisCapitalism on Truthdig forum and suggest that those who have a
real interest, read what I have posted on the Truthdig forum on
the topic of Social Capital and Socialized Capitalism.
By Michael Cavlan RN, July 10, 2011 at 1:56 pm Link to this comment
The Nation magazine has no credibility. They are shills for the pro-war, corporate corrupted Democrats.
If you are interested in a site where articles are “allowed” that are NOT apologists for the Dems or the corporate, pro-war SYSTEM that they protect then please visit firedoglake.
For others participating in the kabuki theatre of the Nation magazine and all the other “progressive” blog sites, please. Especially those who want to blog, bloviate and do nothing but talk.
Stay here or Common Dreams, Op Ed News, Huff Post, Daily KOS etc etc.
firedoglake
or
New Progressive Alliance
Report thisnewprogs.org
By Anarcissie, July 10, 2011 at 10:09 am Link to this comment
I don’t know of any cases of monopoly which did not rely on state power. In the early stages of capitalism, monopolies were often granted before anything else happened. I don’t think it’s an accident that the rise of capitalism parallels the rise of the modern state. In a way, ‘socialism’ of the form in which the government, that is, the ruling class totally controls the economy is the final stage of capitalism where everything has been absorbed by a single monopoly backed by the government’s monopoly of coercive force. This arrangement has not been found to work well in practice, partly because it inhibits the same dynamic nature of capitalism which assures its dissolution.
Report thisBy felicity, July 10, 2011 at 9:39 am Link to this comment
A socialist indicts the selfish benefit of
capitalism, a system which is wasteful, corrupt,
disorganized and inhumane. After all, to work
efficiently, capitalism requires that profits must be
made as close to the poison line as possible.
Adam Smith probably didn’t foresee the role that
government would/could play in aiding and abetting
capitalists in their drive toward ever greater
profits. (He did warn against monopolies/cartels/trusts which he saw as inevitable
should a government not step in and stop them before
they could get a foothold in the system.)
Classic case of an aiding and abetting government was
the $180 billion in government money that went to
AIG, a corporation that was obligated for $500
billion when it had 5 times less than that in assets.
(It should be mentioned that the government allocated
$160 billion, total, to the states - $20 billion less
than what was allocated to one corporation.)
I have read, but can’t verify, that Smith towards the
Report thisend of his life came to the conclusion that his model
of capitalism would be ruinous to the well-being of a
society’s people and should therefore be scrapped.
By Anarcissie, July 10, 2011 at 9:24 am Link to this comment
Every dynamic system is ‘corrupt’ in the sense that it contains the seeds of its own destruction or transformation into something else. And capitalism is certainly a dynamic system, just as it says in the Communist Manifesto. If the elites have become cannibalistic, they will destroy themselves all the sooner. This does appear to be happening now in the United States, but other capitalist systems, like those of China, Russia and India are still apparently rising. In the more mature capitalist states, the successor entities, the cooperative and communes I mentioned, are already being developed and are beginning to gain some traction.
Report thisBy upgradeyourlife, July 10, 2011 at 8:34 am Link to this comment
get real Anarcissie, we’re not going to have a proliferation of cooperatives and communes because a culture based on inequality will find ways to make them irrelevant. The elite know how to exert their influence and they won’t stand for it, just look at how hellbent they are on privatizing. The end result of capitalism is cannibalism. And who cares if it’s traditional or not—capitalism is inherently corrupt and therefore will always seek to break its own rules and hang itself.
Report thisBy Anarcissie, July 9, 2011 at 8:02 pm Link to this comment
On the Nation, I piped up: ‘Capitalism is already being abolished, or rather, replaced, by the growth of cooperatives, communes, and other worker-owned enterprises. This process continues the processes which brought it into being in the first place. It is true that it is degenerating in the United States, but that is due more to the culture of public fraud, war and imperialism than to the defects of traditional capitalism.’ Highly condensed, but maybe someone over there will read it.
Report thisBy BryanM, July 9, 2011 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The jobism mindset itself is the problem. Technology destroys jobs, it doesn’t make them. Automation ensures that job growth isn’t going to outstrip the birth rate, perhaps ever again.
Thinking of “jobs” as the solution is not realistic. When scarcity isn’t really a problem, it’s a waste of everyone’s time. Google The Useless People of Japan to see an example of jobism taken to the extreme. Everyone would be better served paying people to just stay home, and not teleport a couple tons of steel a hundred+ miles every week.
Report thisBy mrfreeze, July 9, 2011 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment
gerard - Good comment. Your observation that Americans have been “conditioned” to think in some fairly common cliches couldn’t be more spot on. The problem is that most of the cliches have been manufactured and beaten into the American consciousness for over 30 years now.
We desperately need to change; however, I’m afraid it’s too late. There isn’t going to be any grand metamorphosis of our collective nature in this country. We’re too goddamn greedy…...........
Report thisBy gerard, July 9, 2011 at 6:22 pm Link to this comment
Eugene MaCarrager: “No amount of goods can compensate for the damage wrought on human nature by the deliberate nurturance of our vilest qualities. The desecration of the values we claim to hold most dear is the primary reason we should want to abolish, not reinvent, capitalism.” That pretty much says it for me. At this point, even the word “capitalism” has been cliched to death and has come to mean little more than economic and cultural domination.
It was a bummer wading through most of the comments, which, instead of contributing anything at all, just trotted out the usual cliches. Judging from your common blogger, this is a country that desperately needs to change, yet its “responders” are still mostly hanging on reactively to what they have been “conditioned” to believe and support, even though those beliefs are proving themselves to be no longer practicable—if they ever were worthy. Never mind, I tell myself. It is also impossible to defend the indefensible forever.
Report this