My response to one NY Times reader regarding the Supreme Court . . .

[Terence Stoeckert]

68. Original times comment writer responds.

I am the original writer of the NYT comment to which markppessinger responded on April 3. I have only just this evening become aware of the long thread of comments in response to his posting of a truncated version of my original commment.

Let me first present the entire comment as written for the Times


"We have finally arrived at the point where every new development in the political/economic realm makes clear that that our supposed "democratic" system is no such thing. Call it what you will, our system should be recognized for what it is, broken, out of control, and unredeemable.

That our system is broken is not to imply that it doesn't work well for the ruling class. That the benefits for the privileged few come from the hides of the working class (i.e. the 99%) is one thing. Of much greater importance is that the agenda of the ruling class proceeds without any regard for the future of the planet and of the human race.

If reform is impossible, then a revolution is needed. What kind of revolution? How to proceed? Many paths are possible, none are easy. Let me suggest two places we might start.

First, stop voting. At the least, never again vote for the lesser of two evils. Again, if the system is irredeemable, then the sooner it fully breaks, the better off we will be in the long term. Working for the election of Democrats leads to nothing but heartbreak. That energy is better spent elsewhere. The more the tea-party and like minded elements succeed, the quicker the collapse of the system will arrive. Scarry? You bet.

Second, stop spending. Stop buying useless stuff that you don't need. Stop discarding perfectly good stuff because something new comes along. In every subsequent year, spend even less. This is where we have leverage.

Of course, more will be needed."


I would hope that a quick perusal of the full comment will dispel any notion that I am an agent provocateur from the right.

The point about voting is an example of older ideas common amongst revolutionaries of the early twentieth century. "Worse is better," or "heighten the contradictions." The central idea that I wish you to consider is that complicity in a sham political process whilst the future of the planet and of the human race is in question can best be described as 'burying one's head in the sand." I maintain that the system is irreparably broken, that accumulated wealth and the consequent power to undermine democratic process that it grants, makes reform thru the compromised electoral process impossible. Something far more radical is needed.

To provide some examples of what I have in mind, I am reproducing the texts of several other comments of mine published online at the Times in recent weeks. I don't represent that these ideas are necessarily the best, but instead offer them as a basis for discussion. Several things to keep in mind. First, Thomas Piketty's new book, "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" makes it clear that the trend towards greater disparity in income and wealth is very likely to continue indefinitely. As that process plays out, the democratic process, such as it is, can only be further compromised. Second, "It's the planet stupid"


COMMENT 1. The Ruling Class has waged class warfare with extraordinary success for nearly a half century, while consistently attacking any and all progressive initiatives as, wait for it, class warfare.

In this regard, the latest Ryan Plan is welcome in that it certainly "heightens the contradictions" in a transparent way.

Th question to be asked is, "if you find yourself on the losing side of an undeclared and inescapable war, perhaps it is time to mobilize.



COMMENT 2.The main problem is not that we no longer have capitalism, but that we no longer have democracy. To be precise, the demise of democracy has led to stage lV capitalism. And we all know what comes after stage lV.

There is a way to salvage the situation. That is for working people, people whose standard of living is based on a wage or a salary, to awaken to the fact that we have been on the losing end of class warfare for near on to half a century. Now that would truly be a "great awakening".

In a sports crazed culture like our own, perhaps the recognition that we have been on a 40-year losing streak can help to mobilize and raise class consciousness and class solidarity. As our best coaches have told us, we must work together to achieve success. Or, in old fashioned terms, organize, organize, organize.

We must also learn to think differently. For instance, can we turn the vast amounts of money flooding Congressional districts with the aim of further eroding democracy against the spenders, the Kochs and the Adelsons

One suggestion, don't counter the attack ads with attack ads. Instead respond with humor and ridicule, in the manner of John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Bill Maher. Hire the best comedy writers available and set them to deconstructing the other side's ads, with their lies and disinformation. This will both cost far less and be more effective. Anyone familiar with Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly's pained responses to Colbert's zingers will understand the point.


COMMENT 3. Paul Krugman asks "What happens to the Congressional Budget Office if a party that has learned that lying about numbers works takes full control of Congress? What happens if it regains the White House, too?"

"Turn this around for a moment, and go back in time 6 years. What happens if "they" win the White House, hold 60 seats in the Senate and control the House? Nothing of consequence, as it turned out, other than bitter disappointment for those of us who supported Obama with such fervor.

Prof. Krugman seeks to scare us with the prospect of a Republican flood tide. Well granted, that's scary. But Electing the "democrat behind door A" would be like patching a failing damn when what it really needs is to be shut down and completely rebuilt. Yes patching the damn may temporarily forestall a collapse, but only at the cost of insuring that when the collapse does occur, it will be far more catastrophic.

We must stop burying our heads in the sand and recognize that our political process is thoroughly broken, probably irreparably. (Do I need to elaborate?) Something much more radical than politics as usual is needed.

Consider the Montgomery bus boycott. Can we use similar tactics against the corporate elites, elites who have so twisted the terms of trade in their favor that they must now feel nearly invulnerable. Think, what else might we try?

It has always been class warfare, and we, working people earning a wage or a salary, have been on the losing side for a long time.