The Pukes who induced the Great Depression were callous, greedy, thieving, repressive bastards serving the callous, greedy, thieving, repressive super-rich of their day. These "robber barons" thought nothing of brutal attacks on trade unionists--they preferred slave labor; they cared nothing about millions of Americans literally starving and homeless, and multi-millions of others around the world, as long as they themselves could get richer and richer; they spewed the same crapola about "the free market" and "rugged individualism"; they were "fat cats," millionaire industrialists, banksters, war profiteers and exploiters of every kind, who preached "austerity" for the poor, but not for themselves. They indulged in every extravagance, while millions starved, lost their jobs, homes, farms and businesses, and ended up in the streets, in rags.
They obstructed everything that FDR tried to do. They hated him. They called him a "dictator" and a 'traitor' for doing the right thing (helping the poor majority, regulating the market and banksters, taxing the rich, bringing a social conscience to the presidency). They were crude and mean and without conscience. They were clearly engaged in class warfare--not only socially with their cliques of wealthy elites that excluded Jews or Catholics or "Negroes" but also by their power over government to vastly increase their wealth at the expense of the poor. The Taft-Coolidge-Hoover appointments to the Supreme Court were very similar to the Reagan-Bush-Bush appointees now. The court that FDR had to deal with declared every "New Deal" act of congress "unconstitutional." They had no "solutions" other than the rich getting richer and they utterly, adamantly, cruelly opposed the government giving any help to the poor.
The wealthy and their Puke politicians of the '20s through the '40s certainly meet the definition of "sociopaths." That is why FDR ran for and won FOUR terms in office! There was no alternative.
There was a period in the middle part of the last century during which Pukes went into hiding--from the 1950s through the 1970s (Eisenhower to Reagan)--and tried to seem like "human beings." They gained cache from Eisenhower (who was content with the "New Deal" and something of a progressive--but he was never really a Puke). The wealthy tried to gain good opinion through philanthropy because they were in such disrepute. (It wasn't out of the goodness of their hearts, for the most part, believe me--it was public relations for a return of the ruling class.) Their operatives in the secret government murdered a progressive president (JFK) and tried to blame it on "the communists" (with whom JFK was negotiating, through back channels, for world peace, i.e., peaceful competition between the two economic systems).* Their final illusion trick was to impeach Nixon--who was not a member of the rich elite--even as they laid the ground work for their vast, fascist, transglobal corporate empire of today. Standard Oil, United Fruit Co., the MIC war profiteers, the banksters, the multi-millionaires, the corporate 'news' monopolists, et al, were all re-grouping during this period of "nice Republicans" ('50s through '70s) for the final push to end the "New Deal" with such thoroughness that it (and U.S. democracy) could never make a comeback.
That final push started with Reagan--the regime that implemented the re-write of the tax code to greatly favor the rich; the de-regulation of the banksters (resulting in the looting of Savings and Loan institutions who had been enriched by small savers); the destruction of "downtowns" and small business--and thus the strength and coherence of organizable communities--with corporate monopolies over goods and services; the vast expansion of the power of the corporate media to lie with impunity (end of the "Fairness Doctrine" on our public airwaves), including even the corporatization of "rock 'n' roll on the radio (last bastion of rebellion), and much more. These fascist measures were brought to fruition, beginning with Reagan, but were prepared earlier under the guise of Puke "moderation.
The Reagan "fruition" also included illegal, Congress-forbidden war against Nicaragua because the rebels there wanted justice for the poor--i.e., defiance of express Constitutional limits on war--and a vast increase in military spending and the power of the MIC. It also included the media creation of a "nice guy" fascist, Reagan, who was actually a bloody-handed monster (TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND Mayan peasants in Guatemala slaughtered with Reagan's collusion, among other atrocities).
All of the above horrors under Reagan (and I consider the end of the "Fairness Doctrine" one of those horrors) were cooked up--planned, devised--by the Pukes of the 1950s through 1970s. Republican mildness during that period was an illusion, a cover. They were never "mild" or "centrist" and they were never loyal to this country and our people. They were loyal to money (their own). Eisenhower called them out at the end of his term, when he spoke of the "military-industrial complex" as a grave threat to democracy. He was speaking of the corporations who were taking over the country and its military and who were, in his view, anti-democratic.
This (Eisenhower's warning) was late '50s, during the very period when the Pukes were trying to look "mild" and "centrist" to overcome their rotten legacy of the '20s through '40s (their war against the poor and their conscienceless, self-seeking greed). They didn't dare preach what they really believed in: naked greed. Everybody still knew--could still remember---what these "fat cats" had done to the country in the '20s and had tried to continue to do in the '30s and '40s.
The Pukes of the 1920's, '30s and '40s were very like our Pukes today: openly preaching a gospel of greed. While in "hiding" (trying to look socially responsible, in the '50s through '70s period), they laid the ground work for their fascist comeback, by, for instance, ramming through an amendment to the Constitution limiting the president to two terms, so that no "New Deal" could ever happen here again.**
There are differences, yes. The magnitude of concentrated wealth and power is much bigger now and its global scale is more vast. But that is a difference in size not in kind. There were some "fat cat" capitalists in the earlier period who were willing to accommodate U.S. labor--for instance, Henry Ford. He wanted his workers to be able to afford his cars. (He was the original Keynesian!) But he was a rare bird among the capitalists. Most wanted cheap, slave labor with no rights, and used private and government militias to violently repress the labor movement, even as the banksters were foreclosing on millions of small farmers and the "Wall Street" speculators were inducing the Great Crash.
There was also a sector of the earlier Pukes who were isolationist--opposed to foreign wars and "foreign entanglements" (the bane of the "Founding Fathers"
. They wanted an insular, protectionist country but not for the purpose of spreading the wealth (and not really for Constitutional reasons), rather for the purpose of insulating our people from the socialist trends in Europe, keeping them ignorant of ideas and conditions elsewhere, and exploiting, robbing, looting and violently oppressing them here. I think you underestimate the open greed, "free market" preaching and brutality of the Pukes during the Taft-Collidge-Hoover period, and have fallen for the false face that they put on during the middle period (Eisenhower to Reagan).
I sympathize. I fell for it, too, for a long time. I never voted for any Pukes but I had the notion that the Puke Party used to be more "moderate"--perhaps because I am a Californian and, for a while, the Pukes here were the environmentalists. Little did I know that those so-called "moderate" Pukes were merely prepping the way for corporate and billionaire acquisition of our public parks, beaches and wildlife preserves. How could these "moderate" Pukes have countenanced Reagan and the raiding of the S&Ls (a crime that has a redwood forest component, in addition to destroying the life savings of middle class and poor people)? Because Reagan gave them huge tax breaks! Their "moderation" went right out of the window under Reagan--because it was an illusion all along, a "front"--while cabals of rich fascists plotted against us in a half century long campaign to destroy our democracy, loot our "commons," bankrupt and eliminate government itself (except in so far as it serves their purposes), hijack our military for resource wars and END the "New Deal."
The "moderate" Puke voters who voted for Reagan were only too willing to be fooled, and the Democrats who voted for Reagan were like the California politico I met during that period, who said, "Now is the time to make money." It was all about greed, and this sudden flip-flip of "moderates" into Reaganites wasn't sudden. It had been prepped in numerous ways, during the '50s to '70s period. Probably masses of Reagan voters were genuinely fooled, but the Puke leaders were not (nor were Dem leaders like that one--Reagan worshipers, i.e., greed worshipers).
One other thing that the Puke Party did during the middle period was to very falsely portray themselves as the champion of small business. They couldn't have been more anti-small business. They in fact DESTROYED small business in this country, with the growth of transglobal corporate monopolies. A lot of small business people bought that garbage, and few survived, and those by being "bought out" and having their businesses looted, their products turned into shoddy crap or eliminated entirely and the workers fired. That is one of the most disastrous alliances forged in the middle period ('50s through '70s). The other was the Puke alliance with racists. That occurred in the '60s during this so-called period of "moderate" Pukism.
I still like to think of a "golden era" of "moderate," non-traitorous, benevolently "conservative" Republicans. But--looking back from today--I no longer believe that it was real. There are too many pointers to illusion. Maybe there were a few sincere Republican politicians and certainly some sincere voters, but the real powers behind that party were downright evil, all along--an evil that spread to our own party. The evil of Corporate Rule.
It's not the "Mad Tea Partyers," the racists, the nazis and the "Christian" nutballs, who have been pushed forward by the Corporate Media as somehow the "mainstream" in this country (NOT true!), who are so dangerous to our country and to our democratic ideals. It is who they are "fronting" for--cabals of billionaire corporatists covertly controlling our laws, our presidents and other "representatives," our military and even our very voting machines. And, by the latter, they can "elect" their servants, and, believe me, they have done so.
The "TRADE SECRET" voting machines, all over this country, controlled largely (80%) by one, private, far rightwing-connected corporation, are the final coup d'etat that Eisenhower warned against 60 years ago.
One, far rightwing corporation OWNS and CONTROLS the "TRADE SECRET" code in most of our voting machines and their lobbyists have prevented any effective auditing of the results! That is Eisenhower's warning about the MIC writ very large, indeed.
You think that those so-called "moderate" Pukes of the '50s through '70s would oppose this? I don't. I think most of them would be envious of the audacity of it. Democrats of that era would have opposed it, very effectively. We have lost that kind of Democrat. The mask of "moderation" is off. Naked greed and corpo-fascist rule has made its comeback. No more need to disguise it as "moderation" or benevolent "conservatism." Pukism never was "moderate" (nor "conservative" in any real sense of the word). It was always classist, racist, elitist, anti-democratic and in service to the very rich few, and, these days, to the transglobal rich--"organized money" formed into corporations that act like countries unto themselves. The Pukes of the 1950s through 1970s would be awash with admiration. It is their dream come true.
----------------------
*(Read James Douglass' "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters"--highly recommended.)
**(The rich have their wealth and their clubs and cabals, to entrench their power. The poor need time to penetrate these mechanisms of power and assert democratic government. This is why "term limits" are so bad. They are a Puke idea, from the '50s--to prevent another FDR from gaining power in the interests of the poor MAJORITY. (They are also now used to foster inexpertise and inexperience in legislative bodies, so that corporate lobbyists can control them and write the laws.) FDR, of course, was re-elected to 3rd and 4th terms partly because of the war, but at last by half because he served the majority and opposed "organized money" (as he put it). The people saw this clearly and saw no reason to vote for anybody else. And the Founders agreed with them--they opposed term limits as undemocratic. They felt that "the people" should have the leaders they wanted with no artificial limit on their terms.)
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read