General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Clinton Not Progressive Enough? Depends Upon What You Mean By Progressive [View all]HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)The concept of politics around separated philosophies of social liberalism-economic conservatism currently functions best as rhetoric that obfuscates the damage pro-corporate economic policy is doing to society.
It isn't hard to understand how the pro-corporate view came about in the southern democratic politics post WWII. It isn't hard to understand how in politics success of some politician was copy-catted by others.
So, it isn't hard to see how many democrats got very comfortable with the idea that trying to entice corporations to states and regions to bring about development was a good and permanent thing.
But it isn't permanent. It worked in its context of the pre WWII development of a US that had created great asymmetry in industrialization. It works for some countries because asymmetries exist on a global level. It works for corporations not bound to nations and with no restrictions to trade.
But, that policy doesn't work well anymore for US domestic economy and US standard of living and access to and security of education, health-care, housing, nutrition etc.
And with respect to sovereign rights to control commerce within a national border, for the good of a nation, the policy that promotes TTPT treaty and TTAT&I, that approach puts oligarchs structurally/institutionally in charge of the entire world.