2016 Postmortem

Last edited Sat Jun 27, 2015, 10:42 AM - Edit history (1)

I'm going to cut and paste a post from another thread. It just a thought that gets to why the left is so frustrated with the economic wisdom of Washington - whether it be from the likes of Paul Ryan or Claire McCaskill.

Rank and file Democrats expect Democrats to work within the economic framing of tried and true
Keynesian economic theory and not work within the framework of the proven disastrous framework of RW Milton Friedman and Leo Strauss. Unfortunately, many Dems as well as the President work within that frame which provokes both confusion and frustration on the left.

The radical right wing economic philosophy that has guided and governed the USA for 40 years is so entrenched that many believe it's the only philosophical perspective. The lore of this disaster capitalism is that it's age old common wisdom. Ayn Rand is required reading in Community College economic classes. This dangerous economic policy is taken for granted as the only way.

In an age of mind bending wealth for the upper 1%, but crushing financial hardship for the 99%, the "Very Serious People", are discussing severe austerity measures and cutting Social Security and Medicare and/or raising the the eligibility age. WIC and SNAP programs are slashed in the name of austerity and shared sacrifices. It's "very serious people" bargaining with our lives to take life saving money away from the elderly and the poor and the ill to give back to the ultra rich.

One cannot strengthen and augment life saving programs like Social Security and live within the austerity of Friedman. The two philosophies do not reconcile at all. If you work within their economic framing, then you are ceding that their worldview is correct, it's just a matter of degrees. Those who protest these horrible ideas are branded as "radical leftists".

Washington's self important economic common wisdom is unsustainable for the common American.

The rise of the Occupy Wall Street, the Fight for $15! in conjunction with Black Lives Matter, as well as Rolling Jubilee all give voice to the needs of the people. Whether by design or happenstance, these movements demonstrate the Theory of the Rhizome put forth by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, two leftist thinkers that most in the mainstream don't even discuss. For the past 40 years, leftist thinkers have been elbowed out of the way to make room for free trade and trickle down economics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhizome_(philosophy)

I don't know why the wiki link isn't working so I'll add the original text here:

http://danm.ucsc.edu/~dustin/library/deleuzeguattarirhizome.pdf


These movements, that are routinely mocked and tittered about have changed the discussion in this country. We are now discussing Wall Street corruption. We are now talking about living wages paid to hard working people. We are now discussing crazy drug policies that criminalize whole communities. We are now discussing police violence against people of color. We are now discussing the corrupt bail system, and the coercive and punitive nature municipal ticketing of people of color. We are now discussing the privatized neo-debtor's prisons. We are now discussing canceling crippling student loan debt and free tuition.

Change is happening and the "very serious people" better take notice.

I'm so grateful for the introduction of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century into the economic bloodstream. We now have more to discuss in Community College economic classes other than the Atlas Shrugged "textbook".

I thank Thomas Frank for this essay, because I think it gets to the root of why the left is so frustrated with the economic policies of the center right of the Democratic Party. It also clarifies Claire McCaskill's attacks on Bernie Sanders as being "too liberal" and a radical.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could ask our Presidential candidates who are their governing economic and political philosophers? I know that would help me decide who to vote for.