Thursday, February 2, 2012

Romney, the voice for working Americans: US politics in full swing

Seems the Republicans have found their man
It appears that the US bourgeois represented by the Republican Party have found their man in Mitt Romney.  He's the best of a bad bunch for them.  The thing is that he needs to be a little more skillful in the way he handles himself.  The capitalist class is in the drivers seat given that they control's the state and the two political parties in US society that have a monopoly over political life.  But elections are pesky things and in such a volatile period anything can happen.  An advantage they have is that millions of Americans have withdrawn from the process altogether recognizing that there is no real choice.

Elections cost billions of dollars in the US as the candidate's private lives and other sordid details of their failings are plastered throughout the media.  Obama is expected to raise over $1 billion dollars.  The US is indeed the best democracy money can buy.

Romney slipped up again the other day saying that he is "..not concerned about the very poor"  "We have a safety net there", he added, "If it needs repair I'll fix it.".   Romney says he's not concerned about the "very rich" either" as he's one of them and presumably knows enough about this group and that it's doing very well thank you. No, Romney is for "very heart of America, the 90%,95% of Americans who right now are struggling."

Well, that's nice to know that Mitt is for almost the same people that the Occupy Movement is, the 99%. It's that "middle class".  We're a unique nation you see. I know we have a capitalist class because the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times and other serious journals of this class talks about this all the time. Newt Gingrich has been referring to them of late as well. We have a capitalist class and a middle class and poor people, even very poor people, but there are no workers here.

The Wall Street Journal is trying to help Mitt become a little more effective in getting his message across that he's a "compassionate conservative".  Damn, the terms they come up with here. The Journal is going to keep tabs on Mitt and help him as he goes along. No more "I like to fire people please".  It was bad enough Newt got a hold of it but what if the Union hierarchy takes it up?

First thing Mitt is to attack the interference of the public sector in the affairs of the private, like how they run their businesses, whether they hire Unionized workers or undocumented workers who are "willing" to work long hours for starvation wages.  Freedom shouldn't be obstructed by government. Mitt should go on the offensive about the perils of government and the "Growing dependency on government and its corrosive effect on human dignity."

Mitt's not talking about the defense contractors and investors who rely on massive government spending on predatory wars for their profits, or private equity wasters like himself who fall under the carried interest 15% tax rate or the other little gems the private sector gets from the state.  Just look at the Savings and Loan scandal or the present crisis, no problem nationalizing private debt or toxic assets.

Yep, that disabled guy on SSI and the few million on unemployment benefits that certainly won't keep a roof over your head are really milking the system and losing their dignity in the process.  The problem is that these destroyers of human dignity, "Medicaid, unemployment insurance, food stamps and the like are almost 50% more generous than they were in 2007" according to the WSJ, are "disincentives to work".

The Journal's editors are a little concerned about Mitt continuing to speak in "class terms", trying to convince the average American that he can identify with them.  It's best to avoid this "class" term especially as the Democrats are better at it. Everyone has opportunity in America.  If you work hard anyone can become Mark Zuckerburg who hopes to pull in a $28 billion windfall with the coming Facebook IPO.  In the twisted logic of the capitalist class the Journal explains that by saying that he is not concerned about the poor who live off government hand-outs but is concerned about the "middle class" who don't,  Obama will use "turn this in to an argument for hooking the middle class on more government."

The rich have always though of workers and the poor in this way.  That any social services and government assistance, even in times of need, simply encourage the non capitalists in society to become more like the capitalist class and earn money without working. Carnegie and others always opposed such assistance as unemployment assistance and health care.  From their point of view what other way can they look at the world?  Any government interference in to the private sector undermines their propaganda that jobs, social services and life itself, in other words, production, can only thrive in a capitalist mode of production.  Plus, in a real sense, any public investment crowds private capital out of the market and reduces opportunity for profit making. Public expenditure is fine when profits are not an issue, or in times of crisis when losses mount like the present; trillions of government assistance has flowed their way.

The Journal editors are willing to help Mitt along in the coming struggles between which section of the capitalist class will get to plunder the wealth of society and the planet, after all, as far as the Republican sector goes they don't have much choice out there unless someone comes along late to save the day. Maybe the pimp Donald Trump although he's expected to endorse either Mitt or Newt in the next few days. Meanwhile the WSJ advises Mitt to sit down with Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels and Jeb Bush among others and get some lessons in political theater.

As for workers, we have no voice of our own so in the main, the propaganda of the unelected rulers of society will rule the airwaves for the next 10 months. It's like being dropped in the middle of the Gobi desert with no water and no compass.

No comments: