Reply #19: Yeah, those things would help...

[punpirate]

... the way I've been seeing the situation of late, though, is that item 1 won't get fixed by the current corrupt Congress, nor will item 2, because neither of those items are of any advantage to either the `pugs or a fair number of Dems (those that believe that all they need to do is regain the presidency and a majority in at least one house of Congress by running campaigns with the least amount of controversy possible).

What the whole country has to realize--not just progressives, not just dedicated Dems--is that the current governmental system has been corrupted. It's been corrupted by the very large amounts of money available to corporations and the wealthy to effectively buy the loyalty of the country's politicians. Professional lobbying, the K Street phenomenon, is part of that process, for example.

This is not meant to seem defeatist. It's not saying that the situation is hopeless, nor is it suggesting that everyone, inclusively, has been corrupted. It's mostly an acknowledgment of how things work right now--on both sides of the aisle.

The right wing (which is where most of the nation's wealth resides) has been quite clever in dividing the nation by using the media--particularly in its promotion of the culture wars--so, I think what is necessary to accomplish the changes which would at least minimize the corruption is the recognition of many, many people that they've been duped (as I suggest in another post).

I've been giving a lot of thought and research to this subject, lately, and what has made this situation possible is the concerted effort of the right wing to make its own interests those of the larger public. The right wing has always promoted excessive defense spending because, first, it has the most to lose from some radical change in government or invasion and second, because it profits mightily from that spending--it's an indirect means of transferring tax dollars to the wealthy. This has been accomplished by a very long program of disinformation.

Second, the right has always tended to authoritarian government because the average person will be more compliant (to government wishes and corporate interests) if he or she is living in relative fear. The Bushies have simply taken that notion to a new level--increased economic uncertainty, new laws to promote fear of loss of rights if one misbehaves at all, an endless war on "terror," a neverending stream of warnings about imminent threats, and perhaps most importantly, there is the governmental message to go shopping to take one's mind off of everything with which the government is scaring them.

The media has been cooperative in this effort because it, too, is now part of an oligarchy which depends upon (and expects) gifts from the government in exchange for its cooperation with government--tax breaks, decreased regulation and the opportunity for further consolidation to maintain or increase profitability. (Note here that the media isn't just the media. A study was done recently about the cross-connections between corporate media board members who also sat on the boards of non-media corporations, and the cross-fertilization--and, therefore, the multiplicity of interests--was considerable.)

But, what I think happens, every once in a while, is that the economic situation becomes extreme enough that people figure it out--they get it, no matter what the propaganda, the disinformation, the spin to which they're exposed. Then they demand changes. When that happens, all the attempts to divide the country don't work nearly as well.

Cheers.