If we no longer have the capacity to distinguish between moral legitimacy and self-serving corruption, then we might as well eliminate the Middleman and vote directly for Pfizer or Merck. …
Since corporate lobbyists write most of the legislation anyway, why not cut out the intermediaries in the process?
The super-wealthy buy political power via Political Action Committees (PACs and Super-PACs), think tanks and philanthro-capitalist foundations (Gates Foundation, et al.). Now that it takes tens of millions of dollars to buy the conventional “winning campaign,” the political class spends much of its time fund-raising, i.e. lavishing kisses on the derrieres of corporations and the super-wealthy, implicitly promising to do their bidding better than the alternative candidates that the corporations and super-wealthy could buy.
Recall Smith’s Neofeudalism Principle #1: If the citizenry cannot replace a kleptocratic authoritarian government and/or limit the power of the financial Aristocracy at the ballot box, the nation is a democracy in name only.
Politics has been reduced to claiming to serve the public while serving as handmaidens to a neofeudal autocracy. The public would be well-served by stripping away the obfuscating artifice and fakery and revealing just who’s in charge.
Our “democracy” is nothing but an invitation-only auction of political power cloaked with fine-sounding excuses. Politics has always been about money, so this is nothing new; I would love to serve the public interest but gosh-darn it, I need to raise $30 million pronto or I’ll lose my seat at the banquet; we’re the party of noble idealism and public service, blah blah blah….
While the authorities manufacture vast amounts of brand new money — most of which ends up in the accounts of the luckiest asset shufflers — the money that drives politics is going to come predominately from a very small elite. Do you think they have much appetite for reforming the way money is manufactured, to make it fairer for the rest of us?
hat-tip Philip Barton