The Duality of Mr. McCain… Centrism RIP?

The Duality of Mr. McCain… Centrism RIP?

Former Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter last month said the Pentagon’s F-35 program manager told him he had kept the fees high because he liked the Lockheed executive in charge, and the company official had said he would be fired if the fees fell below 85 percent.

Carter, who was the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer at the time, made the remarks at a university event on May 16 and they were reported by InsideDefense.com on May 30.

“This is, of course, totally unacceptable. It is the kind of cronyism that should make us all vigilant against, as President Eisenhower warned us over 50 years ago, the military-industrial complex,” McCain said in a speech on the Senate floor on Monday.

- McCain questions 'cronyism' on Lockheed F-35 program - Reuters

By J.M. Hamilton (9-1-2018)

U.S. Senator, John McCain III, will be laid to rest tomorrow.  The Senator – the product of two generations of Navy Admirals - was born on August 29, 1936.  And it could be said that the Senator was born a second time on October 26, 1967, when he was shot out of the sky, while flying over North Vietnam (assisting in carrying out Operation Rolling Thunder against the North Vietnamese government).

What to make of the soldier, the Navy pilot, the Senator, and his repeated attempts at running for the highest office in the land?  Much has been written since his death: the mainstream news media (owned by major corporations) has been predictably laudatory, while articles in the alternative press, magazines, & journals of opinion have been more nuanced and at times, flat out critical.

For some the Senator drives up stark images, bordering on the extremes of “good & evil,” but for others, Mr. McCain brings up mixed emotions. 

Certainly as a soldier – fighting on behalf of America – the man should be celebrated, and as w/ nearly all soldiers commemorated and honored.  As JMH has argued many times, the women and men who serve all too often do so under extraordinary circumstances, w/ far too little pay and even less praise.  Moreover, we can disagree about US involvement in any war (debating politics and its extension, war, is quintessentially American); but when citizens find a war to be objectionable, our criticism should not be aimed at the women and men who serve, but rather, directed at leadership: from the US Congress, right up to the POTUS.

So today, Mr. John McCain, Navy pilot, deserves to be paid the same respect we should be paying all military personnel that serve.  As a Senator – who served upon, and ultimately headed up the Senate Armed Services Committee – arguably, and perhaps, US citizens should view Mr. McCain in a differing light.  That is in view of the tremendous power the Senator held over the US military, in terms of its funding and our Armed Forces' use & misuse.

We are all products of our environment, and Senator McCain was no exception.  His belief system would have been shaped by his upbringing w/in a military family; and undoubtedly, Senator McCain would have seen America as a great beacon of hope, particularly on the heals of WWII, communist containment in North Korea, and ultimately, with the defeat of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall.

America, it seemed, truly was exceptional, and our intentions honorable, and - in the minds of many Americans – unquestionable.  And so it is with many of the soldiers who serve, but the same cannot always be said of US political leadership (particularly in recent times), and the billionaires that pull their strings.

The Senator was a member of a tribe of establishment republicans that is recent decades had clearly lost its way.  The writing was on the wall after Vietnam, America was not destined to win every war, nor was bombing the hell out of our enemies - the one size fits all solution to every foreign policy problem  - the answer.

Senator McCain was renowned for speaking his mind, and, to his credit, had no problem directing his ire at the military industrial complex.  But his anger often fell short.  In the aggregate, the Senator did not withhold funding from incompetent & recalcitrant defense contractors, nor did he seek to break up the MIC cartel (for purposes of greater competition, efficiencies, and to better preserve taxpayer dollars).  Moreover, Senator McCain never saw a war he didn’t like; he left in place the 2001 AUMF – to the present day (basically, letting Congress off the hook from its responsibilities); and when faced w/ second and third Vietnams – that is failed nation building w/in Afghanistan & Iraq - his solution was to double, & triple, down. 

Throw more bombs & money upon the bonfire of atrocities & failure.

As is often the case w/ America’s foreign policy, from Vietnam forward, war often serves no real objective, and has become little more than a money making venture, for: war profiteers; jingoist; neocon cheerleaders & think tanks; and commercial interests w/ designs upon the natural resources of our targeted “enemy.”  (Did Iraqis or Syrians fly planes into the World Trade Center?  Nope.  But the Saudis sure as hell did.)  Hence, we are running up on two decades of failed nation building in Afghanistan and Iraq.  In both instances, exaggerated fears of terrorism have been amplified to justify, and sell, these wars, while the true winners - the MIC & Big Oil (read Exxon Mobil) - make out like bandits.  

(Meanwhile, the true terrorist – homegrown, entitled, white American males, sponsored by your friendly gun lobby, the NRA – run around shooting up the place.)

Some liberals have accused Senator McCain, and his selection of his 2008 VP nominee, Sarah- Cuda- Palin, as: stirring up trouble; the drawing of a direct line to POTUS Trump; & resulting in the subsequent disintegration of the establishment Republican party.

If only it were that simple.  Rather, the straight line to the GOP establishment crack up – and the pending Demo establishment crack up (already well under way) - is directly correlated to the failure of the political duopoly to serve the American people.

The political duopoly makes a great show of their differences over social issues – which keeps the 99% conveniently divided & distracted – but when it comes to economic and foreign policy, particularly w/in the US Senate, the two parties are virtually indistinguishable.

“Centrism” implies a grounded – moderate – political center, but the two establishment political parties (of which, Senator McCain was very much joined) are both highly immoderate.

Bailouts for banks & billionaires; unlimited war; trillions for an unaccountable/unauditable DOD/MIC; tax cuts for the wealthy; elections owned and operated by the donor class; captured fiscal, foreign, monetary, regulatory, & tax policies (an owned SCOTUS?):  There’s your centrism, and there lies the establishment of both political parties, finally, exposed to the sanitizing light of day.

Senator McCain did not beget Trump, but centrism & the political establishment  - with its worship of the billionaire/multinational class – did beget Trump (just as failed centrism produced a strong Sanders candidacy).  The irony is - that despite all the gnashing of teeth surrounding POTUS Trump - when it comes to economic & foreign policy issues, he’s been as establishment as they come (more tax cuts for the wealthy; more austerity for everyone else; more reckless deficits; and surprise, surprise, more war w/out end).

Trump’s genius lies not in his actions, but in the political theatre & sideshow he utilizes to keep the nation distracted and divided, as the 1% quietly cart off the remaining spoils of our bankrupt US government (in a Neo-Gilded Age).

Don’t blink or you’ll miss it.

Two US presidents appeared at Senator McCain’s funeral today to deliver eulogies, one a Democrat, and the other a Republican.  Both presidents are considered centrist, both establishment politicians, and on economic & foreign policy issues, one would be hard pressed - particularly in regards their delivered outcomes & results - to find all but a sliver of daylight between the two of them.

No wonder the GOP establishment is dead.  No wonder the Democratic party now finds itself in the midst of its own Tea party like revolution… chalk it up to failed centrism.  

Along with Senator McCain may centrism rest in peace.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2018 

Arson

Arson

The world is too big to fail... the fossil fuels industry is not.

By J.M. Hamilton (8-19-2018)

The world is ablaze.  

To drive the point home, we have the following from the New York Times piece: 2018 Is Shaping Up to Be the Fourth-Hottest Year. Yet We’re Still Not Prepared for Global Warming.

This summer of fire and swelter looks a lot like the future that scientists have been warning about in the era of climate change, and it’s revealing in real time how unprepared much of the world remains for life on a hotter planet.

The disruptions to everyday life have been far-reaching and devastating. In California, firefighters are racing to control what has become the largest fire in state history. Harvests of staple grains like wheat and corn are expected to dip this year, in some cases sharply, in countries as different as Sweden and El Salvador. In Europe, nuclear power plants have had to shut down because the river water that cools the reactors was too warm. Heat waves on four continents have brought electricity grids crashing.

And dozens of heat-related deaths in Japan this summer offered a foretaste of what researchers warn could be big increases in mortality from extreme heat. A study last month in the journal PLOS Medicine projected a fivefold rise for the United States by 2080. The outlook for less wealthy countries is worse; for the Philippines, researchers forecast 12 times more deaths.

Globally, this is shaping up to be the fourth-hottest year on record. The only years hotter were the three previous ones. That string of records is part of an accelerating climb in temperatures since the start of the industrial age that scientists say is clear evidence of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

And even if there are variations in weather patterns in the coming years, with some cooler years mixed in, the trend line is clear: 17 of the 18 warmest years since modern record-keeping began have occurred since 2001.

And if climate change wasn't bad enough, the death toll caused by pollutants is astounding, w/ one in six deaths attributed to pollution related illnesses.  That's quite a body count, and largely preventable.  Given the level of renewable energy science, and the ever decreasing costs of deploying same, it’s entirely unacceptable.  That is for the benefit of the Coal and Oil & Gas industries, we continue to poison the planet, and kill millions of humans annually.  The number of animal species, due to man’s interaction w/ the planet, is on a steady decline.  Our seas and oceans?  Rapidly, turning into lifeless, contaminated, carbon & plastic vats.

Climate change' toll upon humanity is catastrophic.  However, there's also considerable property damage associated with climate change, the incalculable harm it does the global economy (by foisting the social costs of climate change on unrelated businesses and already cash strapped federal, state, & local governments), not to mention the hidden tax carried by the world's citizens.

The costs, however, are not as hidden as they seem:  It's been reported that the US pays $20 billion in direct subsidies, annually, to the fossil fuels industries (including recipients, like the libertarian - antigovernment - Koch Bros.).  Factor in the aforementioned health costs, a US military that fights endless wars in occupation of Middle East oil fields, and these indirect/social costs add up - per the IMF, for a subsidy we all pay - to the tune of $5.3 trillion per annum.  You read that right, trillions, not billions. 

Talk about your intergenerational wealth larceny:  the fossil fuels industry represents an absurd transfer of wealth from this - and future - generations to the Big Carbon robber barons, and their shareholders.  Perhaps rivaling the Wall Street banks and a captured monetary policy.

So what is to be done?  

It was widely reported that twenty state attorney generals banded together, in early 2016, in the process of suing Exxon and others for fraud and suppression of key climate science data.  Exxon countersued and w/ the resources, and government subsidies/welfare, Exxon enjoys, we can see that civil litigation has the potential to drag out for a very long time, in a never-ending war of attrition.  Note too, the fossil fuels industry may prolong civil litigation and wait for regime change (or political party turnover) at the state level.

Rhode Island recently announced that they would sue oil companies, for undisclosed damages, as a result of climate change.

The State of NY is also suing Exxon for securities fraud and misleading investors.

But, as mentioned, civil litigation tends to drag, at a time that the earth and its inhabitants are gasping for breath.  

Is there a better way?

Carr Fire: Redding, California on July 26.  Image: Noah Berger/AP/REX/Shutterstock

Clearly, Exxon, et al., rather than take the high road, and very much like Big Tobacco before them, plans to drag out their biz model - no matter the irreparable harm - as long as they can.  After all, billions in government subsidies, picked up by the US taxpayer - not to mention billions in profits, in a largely oligopolistic industry - are at stake.

One possible alternative might be the criminal charge of arson, and the convening of a grand jury, in applicable states.... say in California for starters (where there is likely to be found throughout the state, highly sympathetic juror panels).

The beauty of criminal prosecution is two fold: one, the sixth amendment guarantees a speedy & public trial; and two, if the criminal prosecution is successful, it should make the subsequent civil trials much easier to pursue and WIN.

Now the crime of arson often varies, to some degree, by state and jurisdiction.  But generally, per Black's Law dictionary, it is thought to be:  

Arson, by the common law, is the willful and malicious burning of the house of another. The word “house,” as here understood, includes not merely the dwelling- house, but all outhouses which are parcel thereof.  Aggravated assault, a harsher offense, is outlined in the dictionary as, “arson accompanied by some aggravating factor, as when the offender foresees or anticipates that one or more persons will be in or near the property being burned."

Post - grand jury or criminal charge, haul in Exxon, its Board of Directors, and Exxon’s C-Suite on the charges of arson & aggravated assault, and the prosecution would have to prove, basically the following:

"The accused must intend to burn a building or other structure.  Absent a statutory description of the conduct required for arson, the conduct must be malicious, and not accidental.  Malice, however, does not mean ill will.  Intentional or outrageously reckless conduct is sufficient to constitute malice.  Unless a statute extends the crime to other property, only a house used as a residence, or buildings immediately surrounding it, can be the subject of arson."

"And, generally, the actual presence of a person within a dwelling at the moment it is burned is not necessary.  It may, however, be required for a particular degree of the crime.  The fact, and not the knowledge, of human occupancy is what is essential.  If a dwelling is burned under the impression that it is uninhabited when people actually live in it, the crime is committed."

That Exxon, et al., knew for decades that climate change was real, and sought to cover it up over the same time frame, is already known.  That behavior - in the quest for profits (in essence, placing monopolistic profits before the lives of individuals and their property) - arguably, defines "malicious behavior."  Moreover, Exxon had to know that turning the planet into an enormous convection oven (or a tinder box soaked in jet fuel) would create the powder keg/inferno the earth has become.

The burning of homes & commercial enterprise, and the taking of lives: check and check.  

Again, in the right jurisdiction, the pursuit of a swift criminal conviction seems like a layup shot.  In this manner, a two pronged legal attack - criminal & civil – maybe the best strategy attorney generals and state prosecutors, serious about fighting climate change, might pursue.

The world is too big to fail... the fossil fuels industry is not.  Is it time for prosecutors to roll out arson charges?

PS:

Interestingly, one very useful ally that is finally coming around against the oil majors is Big Business, itself.  And JMH suspects more corporations and multinationals - aligned w/ state and local government - will only further add to the chorus in the near future.  Bloomberg ran a piece recently where California utility, PG&E and others, had spoken out against the billions in legal claims that it now faces, due to the California fires.  Moreover, the CEO for PG&E is placing blame squarely where it, comparatively, belongs: that is on climate change and the fossil fuels industry.  Could insurance carriers, and reinsurers, be far behind?

Publicly traded insurance carriers, in particular, may have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to litigate, & subrogate, in the recovery of billions in property damages against the oil majors.  Moreover, carriers are well known for pursuing criminal complaints against parties that are responsible for insurance claims & fraud.

As Big Agriculture finds once fertile farmlands turned into desert & scorched earth, it too, is likely to join a rising chorus of corporations & multinationals calling for a swift conclusion to an industry that is a direct threat to life, liberty, & happiness (not just for Americans, but the world’s citizens).

Perhaps felony convictions – meted out to Exxon  - will change a few reactionary minds.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2018