UNITED? Not so much…

UNITED?  Not so much…

“The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one:  Don’t let it happen.  It depends on you.”

- George Orwell

By J.M. Hamilton (4-22-2017)

In George Orwell’s masterpiece 1984, Mr. Orwell describes a totalitarian state run by a ruling oligarchy and a dictator.  The antagonist in the book tells Winston what the fate of the world has in store: "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."

Authoritarian or totalitarian regimes run by oligarchy, it’s all the same: a vicious assault on individual and personal freedoms, and hegemonic control over the economy and political arena.  All around the globe democracy is in retreat, and often it is the West who has done the greatest harm to freedom and democracy, by propping up dictatorships.

Oligarchy is not limited to dictatorships like Russia, however, but oligarchy can be found here in the United States, in advocacy groups and trade associations, like the Business Roundtable and The U.S. Chamber.  Thanks to the Citizens United decision, these institutions (aka the oligarchy) have unfettered control over both political parties in the United States, the President, and similar institutions exist in Europe, if not w/in the E.U. governing body, itself.

The Oligarchy, globally, knows that money equals power, and with large sums of money they can purchase entire governments or reign w/in said governments.  Barring that, the oligarchy has set up extra-judicial & supranational courts (via free trade agreement), run by and for multinational interests.  Large sums of money are most easily accumulated w/in markets dominated by cartels and monopolies --- the antithesis of capitalism (true capitalism is best defined by competition and many competing entrants into the marketplace, all the better to keep monopolistic/monopsony powers & wealth in check).

Throughout the U.S., sector after sector within the economy has all too often been dominated by cartel and monopoly.  As that has occurred, an imperial CEO has arisen, along w/ their cadre of C-Suite generals.  Within these suites limited or little dissent is tolerated, group think often abounds, boards are often co-opted and in bed with management, chairmanships are often awarded to the CEOs, themselves, and yes, even shareholder's rights have come under attack.  Multinationals love dictatorships, because instead of bribing an entire legislative body, they only have to purchase a single individual.  Which might explain the oligarchy’s negative disposition towards democracy, the least evil of all alternative forms of government.

These cartels are interested in several things: profits, return on equity, stock appreciation, market concentration, top line growth, and management compensation (not necessarily in that order).  Personal freedom, employee welfare, democratic institutions, societal strength & cohesion, customer satisfaction, and the wellbeing of nation states do not enter into the corporate equation, except as possible disrupters to profits…. If any of these things become disruptive enough to the bottom line or create stock volatility, they must be addressed, contained, and controlled.

In short, Mr. Orwell’s oligarchy has arrived, and the sound heard around the globe is that of humanity being stomped.  Let’s look at some recent examples.

1)  Earlier this month United Airlines – a member of the Airline cartel – used jackbooted thugs to drag a paying customer off an aircraft.  The CEO, Mr. Munoz, failed to recognize the gravity of the situation, initially, and implied that the paying customer was the problem.  After United’s stock tanked, losing close to a billion in market cap, Mr. Munoz suddenly found his humanity and on the third try, apologized to the passenger.  The airline cartel has been treating customers like cattle for years, with more extreme seating configurations, less personal space, and extra charges for everything under sun (excepting – so far – oxygen).  Give these bastards time and they’ll find a way to charge us for the air we breathe at 40,000 feet.  And the silver lining – no, unfortunately, not an updated airline passenger bill of rights – but recent word that Mr. Munoz will not be awarded United’s coveted chairman’s role.  Seems the board either didn’t like Mr. Munoz’s recent behavior, or more likely, said behavior’s impact upon the stock valuation.

2)  Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly – not only has a huge ego – but apparently quite an appetite for the ladies in the office.  Mr. O’Reilly’s body count grew so high, and the allegations piled up so fast, that advertising revenue took a hit, as major corporations and multinationals abandoned Mr. O’Reilly and his show.  Several months ago Roger Ailes, the former chairman of Fox News, resigned over similar allegations.  Mr. Murdoch, the owner, finally decided to cut his losses, and with a neat $25 million severance package, showed Mr. O’Reilly the door (like United, the NY Times reported that Fox's stock had slipped 6%).  Mr. O’Reilly was, of course, known for his right-wing punditry and was clearly aligned w/ the establishment and the oligarchy.  The very same establishment and oligarchy that believes money equals freedom of speech, which in turn allows them to purchase entire governments.  Upon learning of Mr. Bill’s behavior, the 99% urged corporate sponsors to abandon his show, or face possible boycott.  It was then that Mr. O’Reilly proclaimed boycotts (aka voting w/ one’s wallet) to be “un-American.”  Therefore, billionaires buying democracies and governments with their money is “American,” and yet, Americans using their purses and wallets to vote in the market place is “un-American.”  Interesting.

3)  Mr. Jamie Dimon, CEO of fabled J.P. Morgan, said in his annual shareholder letter this year that something is wrong with America, and specifically, he lamented the plummeting number of publicly traded companies on the stock exchange (presumably as bad for America and investors).  What Mr. Dimon failed to mention (as pointed out by JMH previously, & Bloomberg’s Gadfly column) is Wall Street banks have played an outsized role in the M&A activity that: has crushed the U.S. economy; stagnated worker wages; led to ever growing wage & wealth inequality; and created consolidation in industry after industry.  Wall Street, of course, profits mightily by promoting their M&A expertise & guidance, earns underwriting fees from leveraged debt issuance, and then, profits from said debt’s returns.  Mr. Dimon is correct to worry about the drop in the number of publicly traded companies; and now, it would only be proper – and intelligent – for him to recognize Wall Street banking’s role in the formation of economy crippling cartels & monopolies.

There’s no end to the oligarchy’s madness.  Our government has literally become run by a profit center ethos, during a Neo-gilded Age.  Time constraints forbid JMH from affording too many more examples, but there are plenty more.  For instance, Lockheed has sold the nation a trillion dollar - plus - albatross, called the F-35.  After continuous delays in development, this lemon is not combat ready (and may never be), but arguably poses a threat to our national security by redistributing funds to Lockheed’s monopolistic coffers, instead of directing money to the women and men who place their lives in harm’s way & serve the U.S.  Bloomberg recently publishing a piece explaining that the fighter, conceivably, could be hacked.  Sadly, the money wasted on the F-35 could have been allocated towards paying down the national debt, or directed to the one in five U.S. children living in poverty.  

Even a trillion dollars is not chump change.

The newly proposed United seat configuration; time to take off the gloves?

It didn’t take our new President long to drop his populist mask, Mr. Trump is one very frustrated billionaire and never dreamed, apparently, that government could be so challenging.  Having failed on his economic agenda of gutting Obamacare - so as to afford tax cuts for the wealthy - he’s turned to issuing EOs (executive orders) by the bushel.  POTUS Trump appears highly attracted to dictators and authoritarian types, whom also legislate by decree.

Mr. Trump’s cabinet is made of billionaires and multi-millionaires, and the aforementioned Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber, along w/ many multinational CEOs, clearly have Mr. Trump’s ear.  Sounds a lot like oligarchy to me.

Hence, an entire cavalcade of EOs establishing industry deregulation studies, or expressing the POTUS’ desire to begin deregulation for:  Big Pharma; Wall Street Banking; Gun manufacturers; Internet service providers; Coal & Big Oil; Tax inversions for the oligarchy (that’s where companies flee offshore, leaving the 99% to pay multinational taxes); Ending the orderly liquidation of banks, so that Wall Street remains TBTF; et al.

While some of these deregulation plans may require Congress’s assistance/complicity (see an important Politico piece on the Congressional Review Act), POTUS could also unwind existing regulation through inaction, slowing down a pending regulation process via his cabinet appointees, and failing to fight for existing regulations contested w/in the courts.

How these deregulation plans help Mr. Trump’s political base, by passing social costs onto the consumer & taxpayer – while further enriching the oligarchy – isn’t quite clear.  For example, Mr. Trump ran for office by pointing out the evils of Wall Street.  By eliminating the resolution authority of the government, how exactly does another round of bank bailouts help the taxpayer or our national debt?  How does gutting Dodd-Frank help Americans, or small & mid-sized banks, if it isn’t replaced w/ Glass Steagall.  One wonders how Americans feel about their privacy being invaded & sold by cell phone and internet service cartels?  Placing guns into the hands of the mentally challenged appears to be another winner for gun manufacturers, but probably sets Americans up for the next Newtown massacre.  You can’t make this up… these are some of the changes/proposals contained w/in Mr. Trump’s EOs.  Big carbon getting a pass on polluting America's air & water?  

There's no regulatory bridge that the Trump administration isn't willing to burn.

Interestingly, some members of the MSM, and so-called left of center news organizations, have heralded Mr. Trump’s about-face (and Goldman $ach’s Mr. Gary Cohn’s rise w/in the administration), as growth and a return to “normalcy.”  The very establishment “normalcy” that has brought the nation war w/out end, Wall Street bank bailouts, tax cuts for the oligarchy, decreased assistance and services for those Americans in need, and a national debt that – at last count – exceeds GDP by a ratio of 105%.

Trump rightfully vilified China during his campaign, and promised to hold a protectionist Sino-oligarchy to account; but now our fearless leader appears to be frittering that position away – likely at the behest of US multinationals, who exploit Chinese slave labor – in return for China placing a leash upon its pitbull, North Korea.

We certainly do live in interesting times.  If you listen carefully, in the distance, we can hear the oligarchy’s hobnailed boots stomping away upon the global stage.  Or, as Mr. Orwell put it, stamping away upon humanity's face.

If the examples above show Americans anything, it’s not to count on our government, or oligarchy owned politicians, or the ballot.  Instead cast your votes at the cash register or through boycott(s).  It’s the only thing our rulers - the oligarchy - respond to.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2017

The Tempting of the Plutocracy

The Tempting of the Plutocracy

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

–     9^th Amendment to the Constitution

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

-       14^th Amendment, Section One, to the Constitution

Every age and generation must be free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generation which proceeded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies.

-       The Rights of Man, Thomas Paine

By J.M. Hamilton (4-3-2017)

Approximately thirty years ago, President Reagan nominated Robert Bork to be a member of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).  Some of my older readers may remember Mr. Bork as Mr. Nixon’s legal assassin from Saturday Night Massacre fame.  Mr. Bork was subsequently rejected by the U.S. Senate, and in 1990, he released a book, entitled: The Tempting of America.

In The Tempting of America, Mr. Bork outlined how the Supreme Court had been politicized, since its founding, but specifically lamented the judicially activist courts from FDR forward.  “Judicial activism,” at least as outlined by Mr. Bork, is characterized by finding rights within the Constitution – where, per conservative jurist, none are said to exist; legislating from the bench; and whereby a jurist’s personal biases, predilections, and prejudices are utilized to rationalize a decision.

This is as opposed to Mr. Bork’s methodology, “Originalism.”  Originalism is the belief that the Constitution should be interpreted literally, and utilizing revolutionary American history to further help clarify, the framers' intent (e.g. the Federalist Papers).

Judicial Activists believe the Constitution is a living breathing document, designed to evolve to meet the needs & standards of today’s citizens.  While Originalist (often associated with, strict constructionist) believe the Constitution is frozen in time, and should only be interpreted from the perspective of white men (from over 240 years ago), many of whom owned slaves and nearly all, believed women and children to be inferior.

As outlined by Jill Lepore, recently in the New Yorker, both Originalist and Judicial Activist have been in an academic & historical arms race, post-Bork, so that both sides of the judicial divide can rationalize their decisions using history.  And not just American revolutionary history, but per recent rulings, both sides – republican & democrat appointees-  have utilized history going back as far as ancient Rome and Greece.

At the end of his book, Mr. Bork was afraid that the Constitution & the SCOTUS were being perverted and politicized far away from the framers' intent, which only Originalist can mysteriously divine.  Moreover, Mr. Bork feared that SCOTUS was being kidnapped to legislate from the bench a liberal agenda.

Of course, it may have never crossed Mr. Bork’s mind that the Originalist doctrine could be utilized to legislate the plutocracy’s, or the GOP’s, agenda from the bench, including but not limited to: corporations are people, except for when it comes time to hold said corporation accountable for criminal behavior & civil infractions (because said corporation, and its leadership, are too big to fail/jail); and the worst of the lot, money equals freedom of speech, where plutocrats are free to buy entire governor’s mansions and federal and state legislative bodies.

The reality is the tables have turned. Our apolitical SCOTUS jurists, in lieu of legislating from the bench a liberal agenda, are now legislating the plutocracy’s retrograde & reactionary neoliberal agenda: where women are chattel; minorities are placed at the bottom of the economic & political food chain; money talks; and only billionaire’s opinions count. 

All of this is rather insane, including the fairy tales we tell our children throughout grade and high school, that the unbiased person in the black robes – w/out fear or prejudice – like an angel descended from the heavens – has come down to divine the law and impart justice to us mere mortals.  Think about it… a lot like the bull the elite’s peddle about America being a meritocracy.  All one has to do is check out Judge Gorsuch’s privileged upbringing, the schools he attended, and his high placed billionaire connections to lance that meritocratic boil. 

If you’ve never been in a courtroom, ask any lawyer who has…  the courtroom is the most politically charged environment many U.S. citizens will ever encounter, outside of - possibly – a POTUS campaign rally.  It's time to bury this fable once and for all:  Judges are political, and they – as humans - bring all sorts of baggage with them into their courtrooms.  All judges have biases, egos, and are entirely human; and to pretend otherwise, whether you’re a democrat or a republican, plays directly into tyranny’s hands.

Judge Scalia was a homophobe, misogynist, and a racist.  Judge Gorsuch was placed on a list of possible SCOTUS nominees, from the ultra-rightwing Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society, because he most closely resembled Mr. Scalia’s judicial philosophy (which comes right from the Bork playbook).  Orange Julius Caesar picked Gorsuch off the list, and now the judge is before another apolitical body, the U.S. Senate, for approval. 

Why was Mr. Gorsuch picked?  Let’s be clear: It wasn’t because he was a liberal; it wasn’t because of merit; it wasn’t because of his preternatural ability to divine the law of the land & read our deceased founders’ minds; but yes, it was because Mr. Gorsuch’s judicial philosophy, and political views, most closely resembled Justice Scalia’s - and the rightwing ideologues at the Heritage Foundation & the Federalist Society. 

In short, Mr. Gorsuch can be counted on to do the plutocracy’s bidding, at the expense of the little guy.  Of course, it was the little guy that POTUS Trump swore he’d protect, in order to get elected to the nation’s highest office.

And just like all of Trump’s campaign commitments and promises, as of late, here comes Gorsuch and his attendant baggage.

The irony in all this, as pointed out by Ms. Lepore, is the founders weren’t Originalist…. And if they were, the American colonies – or provinces - would still be a part of the Commonwealth and swearing allegiance to the Queen.  No, our founders – unlike the cowards w/in today’s federal and state legislative bodies – were radicals and revolutionaries, who placed their lives on the line for what they believed in.  They renounced the tyranny of the elite: the Crown, and the British aristocracy.  Today, we have new tyranny in America: the tyranny of a crony/rigged economic & political system (where monopolistic profits are privatized & losses socialized); the tyranny of experts, many of whom have been proven repeatedly wrong; and a financial aristocracy.

Sound familiar?

Here’s another irony: Our founders, and patriots of that era, resented being ruled by old dead white men.  Read the Declaration of Independence by Mr. Jefferson; read The Rights of Man by Mr. Jefferson’s dear friend, Thomas Paine.  Both revolutionary documents --– read this carefully, Originalist  –-- said that humanity should not be subjected to the tyranny of rule from beyond the grave.  These authors/patriots believed the earth and our government belonged to the living (not dead white men, or its equivalent, despotism). 

Sounds like our founders are trashing Originalist dogma, from beyond the grave.  What’s that you say, the Declaration of Independence (DOI) is a political/philosophical manifesto, and not the law of the land?  Seemingly, both Messrs. Lincoln and conservative columnist, George F. Will, would beg to differ with you.  Mr. Will, earlier this year, wrote an outstanding piece stating that the Declaration of Independence was, indeed, very much a part of the Constitution and the law of the land.  Indeed, the DOI’s central themes of equality - and the pursuit of life, liberty & happiness - can be found within the bill of rights, not the least of which is the 9th and 14th Amendments.

The founders were brilliant and prescient men.  And my guess is the founders would see right through the Originalist ideology, as little more than a power grab by a tyrannical monied elite (whereby, the ends always justify the means).

You see, the founders wanted the Constitution to be an evolving and living document.  They wanted this great experiment to succeed, which is more then I can say for some of today’s billionaires.  Some of the founders so dreaded issuing a Bill of Rights - because all rights not enumerated belonged to the human race – that they installed a 9th Amendment, that said just that. 

Just to clarify, if the founders didn’t spell it out in the Bill of Rights, all remaining rights – all natural rights - belong to the American people (and both Federal and State governments should not infringe upon these natural rights, period).  In the most liberal interpretation, the 9th Amendment protects nearly any behavior that doesn’t directly infringe upon the life, liberty & happiness/property of third parties, potentially, as a right unto itself.  (That is to say, rightwing, faux, Christians – seeking to legislate their version of morality, or establish Christianity as a state religion – need not apply.)

And then came the 14^th  Amendment, particularly Section One, (aka the equal protections clause). The 14^th Amendment was entirely necessary after the Civil War to insure that all men, and eventually women, were free, equal, and enjoy equal rights & protections under the law.  It’s the 14^th that, up until recently, had allowed SCOTUS to rein in rogue states in the South - who would like nothing more then to operate slave labor colonies, voter oppression, and the new Jim Crow - by means of the privatized prison industrial complex.  (See Nixon’s War on Drugs and the Southern Strategy)

Mr. Bork's book described a battle that continues to this day.  A battle fought by nine jurist, who issue rulings often using an American history that does not reflect well upon this nation or the United State’s awesome potential (i.e. slavery, Jim Crow, manifest destiny, native American genocide, obscene labor practices, robber barons owning the government, neo-colonialism, etc., etc.).  A battle fought by nine jurist, who remain on the court – often for generations – beyond when they were appointed.  A battle fought by nine jurist, who are not popularly elected and can rule until their bodies give out… not unlike, Monarchs.

Justice Scalia was appointed by Reagan in 1986, and he died last year... thirty-long-years-later.  Americans suffered thirty years of Scalia’s despicable beliefs and judicial philosophy, inspired by a man – Bork – who could not make it through the Senate’s confirmation process.

And now, Mr. Trump wants to replace Scalia with a clone, an errand boy for the oligarchy – Judge Gorsuch.   So we can have another thirty years of binary rulings from the Court?

Americans have been subject to the tyranny of SCOTUS, an elitist ruling body if there ever was one, for centuries.  Americans need judicial term limits and SCOTUS candidates who are subject to popular vote.

The plutocracy maybe tempted to game the system and seek out the trifecta.  That is to say, the financial elite own & operate the executive, legislative, and now, the judicial branches of government (thanks largely, to SCOTUS' Citizens United decision).  But, in doing so, the plutocracy – like the British aristocracy & monarchy before them – maybe sewing the seeds of their own destruction.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2017