Yes. That Powell memo was and continues to be chilling, though, this type of battle has been ongoing since the 1700s. My concern is and has been since the 1970s, that the Democrats have turned, and often still turn, a blind eye to the steady takeover efforts of ALL segments of government, local and statewide, including the courts. Time a…
Yes. That Powell memo was and continues to be chilling, though, this type of battle has been ongoing since the 1700s. My concern is and has been since the 1970s, that the Democrats have turned, and often still turn, a blind eye to the steady takeover efforts of ALL segments of government, local and statewide, including the courts. Time and time again the conservative "think tanks" and the RNC have pumped out a steady, streamlined daily set of propaganda talking points that nearly all of the media regurgitate. The Democrats have nothing like that. When something is repeated enough, people start believing it and as we see with the Maga cult, will seldom change their "beliefs" even if those beliefs are to their own detriment. Now the Magas are being further primed to commit violence if the presidential election does not produce results to their liking. Are. We. Ready? I doubt it.
Indeed Carol -and that is my call for a comprehensive progressive framework -legislation and policy geared toward addressing a sweeping set of societal imperatives intended to evolve the US toward democracy, equity, and justice.
The Powell memo is brilliant, and not vitriolic, however its incremental implementation over time -truly a slow-motion revolt against our system, with no apparent long-term opposition has certainly been chilling. I have written about it and talked about it for over 20 years now -seemingly, a voice in the wilderness (with too few others). I'm grateful when donations pour into helping to elect good people -but we really need people to step up and resource the fundamentals -any meaningful democracy requires an educated, informed, and engaged society. And all three pillars have been successfully eroded for multiple generations.
Amen, George, as to how "we really need people to step up."
Further amen to the next part of that sentence of yours, that good souls "resource the fundamentals."
But let's get very clear about these fundamentals. They are human. And for this our best Dems really, truly, often, and powerfully ought to be citing, stressing, zeroing in on the humanities that get these fundamentals human.
Dems should be holding public events, in groups of Dem speakers two, three, and four -- all equipped to cite each other's good programs at national, state, and local levels. More, that they be also equipped to cite American humanities that center the human in a land under organized attack, as you note, since August 23, 1971.
That Powell memo eventually geared its far-right foundations to offshore the millions of working-class jobs, to reduce the Supreme Court to bribed, perjured theocrats, and in many other organized, well-funded ways to poison the land in debilitating divisiveness. But before this, its foundations (Heritage, Hoover, ALEC) attacked higher ed, with the plan to gut humanities everywhere there, so all elites evermore would be totally out of touch with effects of the great predation.
Then, suck humanities out of K-12, replaced with the living dead of standardized testing.
You've aptly, eloquently got the scenario facing us, George.
Of course. Educated people, those who entertain critical thinking and discussion, can see right through him, and would probably not vote for him. Educated people are harder to take advantage of and con. He has no use for them.
Except, Celeste, perhaps the educated who see a way to “work” it to their advantage. My brother lives in a location (no state taxes) where wealthy folks have purchased multi-million dollar properties (mostly as second/vacation homes) & he is stunned by their support of TFFG because his self-serving policies benefitted their bottom line.
The right wing prefers drill and kill, memorize and this is how to do it policies. Evidenced all the holders of Ivy League degrees in the house and senate who are maga loyalists! No rational thinking skills needed!
I am also a history major and I know that people can write or rewrite history to suit themselves. When in grad school taking a class in 19th century American history, I had to read five additional books per term(3) and write book reports on them, as well as reading the 4-5 assigned. So I shortly decided to focus on books about slavery and read 14. It was interesting to note how the tone changed through the years. Now we have many more books including one about cotton slavery which I haven't finished because it is so upsetting.
Historiography has indeed changed! when i was in HS some decades ago we were absolutely taught Lost Cause history of the South, with the evil carpetbaggers, etc. thank goodness the discipline has reexamined assumptions.
The sad, thing about "majors," Carmen, shows in how isolated all are from other silos.
Central stress on humanities could connect the human in the deliberately, mutually-isolated silos. So, too, could an essaying program centering the human in all departments, communities, nations and cultures.
Ah, but once upon a time there was a curriculum of required courses that helped to engender that broader understanding you reference, Phil. I agree that isolating one discipline from others dilutes the effectiveness of perspicacity and critical thinking that a liberal arts degree was/is supposed to confer.
Even worse, Carmen -- the billionaires feed this myopia.
In the same way Citizens United put the rich on steroids, Project 2025, and the end of the Chevron Precedent both aim to strip Americans of health, safety, and environmental regulators -- so the billionaires can freely stalk the land.
They don't want schools schooling anybody in ways to see fellow Americans.
As wonderful as the Alabama win was to the state legislature the abysmal turnout (14% or so) exemplifies the erosion of the three pillars you mention George. Educated, informed and engaged…I have never understood nor accepted the choice people make to not exercise the hard earned right to vote.
In Australia, voting is mandatory. The fine is small ($20) - but it sends a symbolic and clear message. "This is your country and your democracy. It's your responsibility to participate."
According to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), 16.4 million people were enrolled to vote in the 2019 federal election. Of these, 92% voted.
Australia has one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. Since voting became compulsory in 1924, over 90 percent of those registered have voted in every federal election. Compulsory voting means every eligible Australian citizen (18 years or older) is required by law to enroll and vote. For more information about elections, visit the Australian Electoral Commission website.
Bill, do you have any information as to how knowledgeable Australian voters are? I can see uninformed voters choosing virtually anybody simply to fulfill their obligation and avoid a fine. If it results in a better civically-informed roster, then I'm all for it.
I'm not sure how well that system would work here, though -- I'm much more in favor of getting rid of outside money in politics, at least on the federal level, and having publicly-funded campaigns. Each party would be financed via a quasi-public group.
Bill, I just read an article in the Concord {NH} Monitor about Gov Sununu's speech that he just gave. In it:
"The country’s current political system, with PAC donations driving multi-million dollar campaigns, is what deterred him from running for Senate in 2022, when Republican leaders hoped he would challenge current U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan.
" “They’re pushing to get me elected based on something I might not even believe and that’s screwed up, right?” he said. “The fact that someone can write a $250,000 check to a PAC and no one ever sees it or knows where it comes from, that’s bogus.” " (per Concord Monitor)
Yet he apparently offered no solution.
And I'm no Sununu supporter, by a long shot, but his words are true here. Unfortunately, he also pledged to vote for Voldemort, because he'll put Repub administrators in place, which he said would be better than "President Harris". He speculated that Biden won't last 5 more years (but failed to opine on whether Voldemort will preside from prison.)
I would say that a degree from even a prestigious school like Harvard does not insure thoughtfulness or critical thinking. Book learning does not equate wisdom either. Human beings can fall prey to greed, lust for power, etc. no matter how educated they are.
Bill, I’m for ranked choice open primaries. I’m also for proportional awarding of electoral college votes. That would help to get rid of the idea of “swing states”. If every state awarded electoral college votes by percentage of votes, then every state would contribute to each candidate. Those voters in mostly blue or red states who currently think that, being in the small minority , their presidential votes don’t matter since the state “always goes in the red/blue column”, might come out and vote.
"proportional awarding of electoral college votes" Yes! Sounds like real democracy! Sounds like people's votes in a National Election having VALUE. Having a half dozen states determine the election undermines voter turnout everywhere.
All States, except for Maine and Nebraska, have a winner-take-all policy where the State looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. Maine and Nebraska, however, appoint individual electors based on the winner of the popular vote within each Congressional district and then 2 "at-large" electors based on the winner of the overall state-wide popular vote.
While it is rare for Maine or Nebraska to have a split vote, each has done so twice: Nebraska in 2008, Maine in 2016, and both Maine and Nebraska in 2020.
I have a question about ranked choice voting -- RCV-- (which has made me queasy for some time), and forgive my being ill-informed and possibly paranoid: How does RCV work in the case of hand recounts? It's easy enough (though laborious) to recount single votes, but having to tabulate 2nd or more choices adds complexity.
My paranoia comes from my deep distrust of electronic systems which can be hacked (look at how voting machines were stolen in AZ and I believe GA in 2020 by those pretending to be concerned with vote-rigging.) Hand recounts in both states proved the election wasn't stolen; would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
Doug, the recount would be more extensive since it would be multilayered, with the loser’s votes being reallocated to their 2nd choice candidate. Perhaps, to make things easier, there could be multiple stacks for A’s votes depending on the choices: Ab, Ac, Ad, etc. then Ba, Bc, Bd…
I think that ranked choice would result in less-partisan candidates and, eventually, in fewer recounts due to partisanship “If I lost, it must be because the vote was rigged!” As I recall, 50 years ago, recounts were rare; now they’re a standard part of election denialism.
True, Mary, but such recounts also serve to prove election integrity. Georgia was forced to count votes THREE TIMES, and each recount showed Biden won.
As to mail-in voting, making ballot access easier and auto-registration, I still don't get why Repubs are so against those ideas. Maybe it's because their policies are anathema to young voters especially, and the American public generally. Their calculus has been "if we can't persuade them with our ideas, we'll make it harder for them to vote for candidates we oppose (starting with gerrymandering and work outward), and we'll put in place judges who are sympathetic to our policies."
Such howls are being made now about anything Dems do. But public funding of campaigns wouldn't include endorsement of party, platform or candidate -- it would only provide the funding to get the message out.
Until Citizens United is overturned, it will never happen in the U.S., and probably not even then.
Overturning Citizens United..., yeah. We didn't even flinch when that one got greased in. Such disgusting use of noble sounding words..i.e., "citizens united"...., "heritage" foundation...., "make America great (again, yet)..., "right to life"..., huh? And on and on. Like a cleverly baited hook. ha.., "CLEVER" .., such an inocuous, yet insidious word describes the way we've been reamed.
Glenis, I totally agree with your mom! For years I have wondered why we seem to be in a perennial “election season”. No wonder it’s so expensive, and exhausting too….perhaps that’s one reason folks tune out….like all those “Medicare” Advantage ads on TV/mailers….snore….
A good point Christine. I think much of it is a happy (for the GOP) by-product of toxic, negative political campaigns. Many folks working paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by think the system is so corrupt and poisoned -they don't want to be involved. It is self-disenfranchisement.
George, perhaps naively, I truly thought that the whole purpose of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution WERE that "comprehensive progressive framework" for how a nation of individuals could come together and rule themselves without a king or dictator!
Good point John. A springboard to be sure. The founders also knew it was imperfect and had hope that we would evolve toward a more perfect union. Instead we had Reagan, 'W', Trump, MT Greene (as I now know to call her), and 'Justice' Clarence.
I know there are smarter, more capable people in Georgia. One wonders if Georgia voters simply wanted her out of the area and sent her to DC thinking she couldn't possibly find her way back?
Robin, and in partnership with student aid loans, created a life altering debt crisis for so many. Having worked in Univ student aid for over 40 years & counseling students on their debt level (and implications & strategies to best deal with them), I recommend John Oliver’s recent showcasing of this issue—he is spot-on:
So now is the time for baby boomers to reverse their legacy. To take a stand and create a vision for America.
I am a baby boomer and believe ours was a generation that was distracted by the shiny objects brought by moderate wealth....big homes, vacations, fancy cars, helping our children get ahead. I remember, following politics, but being caught up just enough in my daily efforts to live the good life, I cherished the wins for the common good and believed we would survive the losses.
I knew Reagan was bad, I knew certain twists and turns moved us ahead as a generous society. But never took the time to understand the complex set of actions that were in play to undermine our society, our environment, and our children's future.
So how can we forge ahead with a think tank driven by the many patriotic politicians in the House and Senate who have brilliantly defended democracy?
I don't think of the DNC -because any political organization would have a politics-first context. And I don't think of it as any one thing Susan. I see more of an "ecosphere" approach. That is a loosely-coupled network of entities that serve a common purpose -toward democracy, justice, and equity, while rebuilding a foundation predicated upon education, information, and engagement.
It would require funding to be economically viable, an accessible and engaging vision as to what would be the tangible milestone results produced over a year, two years, and so on, organizational leadership in each specific area of societal imperative, and an overarching leadership to tie it all together. Then the tactical components around communication and messaging. Helping to educate people, and continuing to evolve and refine the vision.
May I suggest that "we" consider SM participation? Several cohorts (Millennials, Gens XYZ) need more civil discourse/civics education. When memes on YouTube, for example, influence 10's of thousands, can we ignore the media? Most of us here are aging and idealistic, but for all our best intentions, we fall short of passing the baton. Yesterday, I read that Gen Alpha, still children, have received almost all their social conditioning via SM. They are poor readers and are falling behind in school (if they attend at all) and, as a group, lack empathy.
I will try to find the article and get back to you (I scan the NYT and read The Guardian.) Ahh, here it is: (Daily Mail is not the best journalism, as you probably know. My apologies if I offended your family.) I believe these children are younger than teenagers.
"Fears are growing for the 'feral' Generation Alpha cohort of kids
There are over two billion iPad obsessed, TikTok-numbed youngsters
Poor parenting among Millennials is blamed for raising a doomed generation."
Incremental really is the cornerstone. Every potential opportunity to gain an inch adds to or opens another tranch. No regretting a setback, nothing is ever a devastating loss, everything can add something, every March or rally picks up one or two supporters, a lesson, some intelligence. I've thought the Right to Life campaign over the past 50 years was the best example of the enevitability of incrementalism. Keep plodding away. Never a great gesture or big win all battle. Just keep the masses plowing the field, picking u] a scrap that just might be possibly useful.
Yes. Whittling away, patience and time. And as education eroded, information is consolidated, and people have less time for engagement (as Unions were weakened and power shifted to employers) they had to work harder and longer for less -the water in the pot heated a little more at a time until it was too late.
Yes, where is the left-leaning - or even moderate’s - think tank? It’s almost passed the time for a new silent majority to emerge … one that helps steer this ship called Democracy along the path intended by our country’s founders! [No mean intentions intended by this example].
The conservative “think tanks” came about because those “on the right” [no matter how wrong they maybe] felt and feel that most of our nation’s academic institutions seem to have a monopoly on presenting the liberal (progressive) views in American society. Googling or searching Wikipedia for the two that you mentioned should provide the answer to the question you posed.
Thanks Jenn -- I just checked them out. I've heard the name before, but really don't know anything other than what I just read. Hopefully their influence is like a river, where it's said "still waters run deep."
JL, I have long wondered this as well, but then noticed that the uber-right wing groups are backed by BIG money. Are there many (any?) big money centrists-progressives that could bankroll such endeavors? It seems like those really wealthy folk like to have more-than-enough and share it with efforts/orgs that back the “more for me & mine” philosophy. I notice, too, that because running for office is SO expensive, most folks making it into office either have money already, or are bankrolled by folks who perceive they can call in favors down the line—and, if fundraising wasn’t a perennial “dialing for dollars”, maybe that time could be better spent, I don’t know, on actually legislating? . No wonder so many policies enacted send resources trickling up to the “haves”.
There are some on the left (yeah, Soros, McKenzie Scott—Bezos’ ex; Gates, Steyer & a few others) but not at the number w/ deep pockets on the right/far-right. One story I like is about a fave of mine 30’s-40’s actress Carole Lombard (married to Clark Gable). She would tell Clark that she loved to pay her taxes & as she liked helping her country. Sadly she died in an airplane crash at just 33 years old; I have read she was identified only (mostly) by a lock of her blond hair, which was given to Clark. Edit: got interrupted making this comment & now forget what my point was about Carole Lombard…decided to leave it in anyway (check out the old movies she’s in if you like classic films).
Thank you for the link! Powell’s appointment to the stench court was a reward for being the propaganda minister (aka their Goebbels) of the corporate and alleged free market moguls! Apparently, choir boy kavanaugh ‘earned his seat’ by doing the leg work for little bush in 2000 and writing a sleazy final report for the useless Whitewater investigation! And I bought into the ‘Justice is blind’ B.S.
The only way for our democracy to survive is to REbalance the court!
A friend told me, 30 years ago about the think tanks and their agenda. I had no idea but I learned. Others are still where I was 30 years ago. Time for a message update.
I think of Brookings as being apolitical. You're right, there are definitely left-leaning (or - leading, as you aptly wrote!) think tanks, but I can't think of any names at the moment.
Good catch, Ellen! I edited my misspelling. As to Brookings, I always thought of them as center-left, but a quick read of its wiki page places them all over the political spectrum, depending on who is being quoted.
As a non-profit 501(c)3, they must be non-political. I've always enjoyed E.J. Dionne's writings -- he's a Fellow, and certainly left of center.
Don't bet the farm on 501(c)(3) organizations being apolitical. The Heritage Foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization. It is very political. It a wolf in sheep's clothing.
By legalizing bribery, the High Holy Catholic Federalist Court (HHCFC), formerly known as SCOTUS, has hamstrung the Democrats ability fight against this takeover and still win office. A corrupt SCOTUS, even before the HHCFC takeover, ensured all elected officials be accountable to The Money.
"Money doesn't always equal victory — but it usually does. Sometimes contributions flow to the candidate who is already viewed as being much stronger than his or her opponent. Sometimes the money goes to the less well-known candidate and results in a surge in popularity.
I disagree. Coming from a pro-business and Republican family, I find the memorandum -- or the half-plus that I have read -- simply to be a strategic communications plan to get the business side of the argument into the popular culture, particularly the academy. At the time that memo was written, American free entreprise was under attack, far beyond legitimate criticism for its excesses. What Justice Powell was saying is instructive to all of us concerned with the state of play these days.
As the 'radical left' had insinuated itself (sic) into various facets of American life over several preceding decades, so must business and business-aligned conservatives do the same in the decades following 1970. Republicans got the message while Democrats got confused and complacent. The conservative resurgence had fertile soil in which plant its seeds as the New Deal coalition was breaking down in 1970 and its underlying ideology exhausted.
Simply said, almost all of the F.D.R.-inspired goals had been accomplished, so ¿what now? The Democrats have struggled since, while classical economics, re-packaged as supply-side economics, has reigned triumphant until somewhere between 2000 and 2010. Now its bag of tricks, primarily bankrupting tax cuts, no longer work. What we have seen, I remain convinced, is the pendulum of public discourse arguably swinging from one extreme to the other.
Now the Reaganist ideology is exhausted and its defects, like accepting racism among its followers, well exposed. (As a side note, I am not convinced that the tax cuts primarily led to the prosperity of the information age, but the passage of the bi-partisan "Bayh-Dole Act" in 1980 under Democratic President Carter.) https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2002/12/14/innovations-golden-goose
The answer, in this end of this conservative ascendency, to ¿now what? has been this corrosive mix of Trump's populist demagogy and the single minded pursuit of share-holder wealth maximization; as corrosive as the hard-core Leninism of the New Left. Ironically, these narrow-minded conservatives are employing the same methods of re-writing history decried by Justice Powell. Hopefully the Democratic Party will forge an enduring coalition dedicated to restoring the basic idealism of the New Deal.
What form that will take is above both my pay-grade and I.Q. Knowingly, I expect to be left behind in the middle by y'all. Nevertheless, just for today, we have a common dragon figuratively to slay in Trump and his M.A.G.A. cult; though, I surmise, this particular dragon's head (i.e., Trump) exhales hot air (of flatulence) rather than flame.
The liberals had and still have some think tanks out there. Mostly, though, the liberals policies were coming out of learning institutions. That is why Obran targeted universities in Hungary and why CONservatives here target public universities and liberal arts schools in rhe U S.
I think a second factor must be acknowledged as well; the theft of land by whites from the Indigenous Peoples. Theft and chattel slavery are the foundations that built the wealth of this country. Racism/sexism are its fundamental core beliefs.
Ally, I recently read a short piece that wondered what humans would do if we discovered/visited a world that had an intelligent species, but that were less “advanced” (as defined by our hubris) than we…..didn’t even take a nanosecond to know the answer, tho’ you’d think we would be more “aware” than that now. Probably not, sadly. [At least in the movie Avatar they fought back and prevailed!]
Yes. That Powell memo was and continues to be chilling, though, this type of battle has been ongoing since the 1700s. My concern is and has been since the 1970s, that the Democrats have turned, and often still turn, a blind eye to the steady takeover efforts of ALL segments of government, local and statewide, including the courts. Time and time again the conservative "think tanks" and the RNC have pumped out a steady, streamlined daily set of propaganda talking points that nearly all of the media regurgitate. The Democrats have nothing like that. When something is repeated enough, people start believing it and as we see with the Maga cult, will seldom change their "beliefs" even if those beliefs are to their own detriment. Now the Magas are being further primed to commit violence if the presidential election does not produce results to their liking. Are. We. Ready? I doubt it.
Indeed Carol -and that is my call for a comprehensive progressive framework -legislation and policy geared toward addressing a sweeping set of societal imperatives intended to evolve the US toward democracy, equity, and justice.
The Powell memo is brilliant, and not vitriolic, however its incremental implementation over time -truly a slow-motion revolt against our system, with no apparent long-term opposition has certainly been chilling. I have written about it and talked about it for over 20 years now -seemingly, a voice in the wilderness (with too few others). I'm grateful when donations pour into helping to elect good people -but we really need people to step up and resource the fundamentals -any meaningful democracy requires an educated, informed, and engaged society. And all three pillars have been successfully eroded for multiple generations.
Amen, George, as to how "we really need people to step up."
Further amen to the next part of that sentence of yours, that good souls "resource the fundamentals."
But let's get very clear about these fundamentals. They are human. And for this our best Dems really, truly, often, and powerfully ought to be citing, stressing, zeroing in on the humanities that get these fundamentals human.
Dems should be holding public events, in groups of Dem speakers two, three, and four -- all equipped to cite each other's good programs at national, state, and local levels. More, that they be also equipped to cite American humanities that center the human in a land under organized attack, as you note, since August 23, 1971.
That Powell memo eventually geared its far-right foundations to offshore the millions of working-class jobs, to reduce the Supreme Court to bribed, perjured theocrats, and in many other organized, well-funded ways to poison the land in debilitating divisiveness. But before this, its foundations (Heritage, Hoover, ALEC) attacked higher ed, with the plan to gut humanities everywhere there, so all elites evermore would be totally out of touch with effects of the great predation.
Then, suck humanities out of K-12, replaced with the living dead of standardized testing.
You've aptly, eloquently got the scenario facing us, George.
Our education system has been royally screwed for a long time. An uneducated populace is easier to control.
Absolutely on target! Trump has said he likes uneducated people!!!
How apopro for the most ignorant of our species
Of course. Educated people, those who entertain critical thinking and discussion, can see right through him, and would probably not vote for him. Educated people are harder to take advantage of and con. He has no use for them.
Except, Celeste, perhaps the educated who see a way to “work” it to their advantage. My brother lives in a location (no state taxes) where wealthy folks have purchased multi-million dollar properties (mostly as second/vacation homes) & he is stunned by their support of TFFG because his self-serving policies benefitted their bottom line.
Good point. Short sighted of me.
The right wing prefers drill and kill, memorize and this is how to do it policies. Evidenced all the holders of Ivy League degrees in the house and senate who are maga loyalists! No rational thinking skills needed!
And yet the likes of GWB and DeSantis were history majors. The humanities didn't seem to figure in their brains.
I am also a history major and I know that people can write or rewrite history to suit themselves. When in grad school taking a class in 19th century American history, I had to read five additional books per term(3) and write book reports on them, as well as reading the 4-5 assigned. So I shortly decided to focus on books about slavery and read 14. It was interesting to note how the tone changed through the years. Now we have many more books including one about cotton slavery which I haven't finished because it is so upsetting.
Historiography has indeed changed! when i was in HS some decades ago we were absolutely taught Lost Cause history of the South, with the evil carpetbaggers, etc. thank goodness the discipline has reexamined assumptions.
DeSantis?! Really?? He certainly enjoys rewriting and reinterpreting history for his own benefit.
Yeah, I was a history major, so it gets under my skin.
The sad, thing about "majors," Carmen, shows in how isolated all are from other silos.
Central stress on humanities could connect the human in the deliberately, mutually-isolated silos. So, too, could an essaying program centering the human in all departments, communities, nations and cultures.
Ah, but once upon a time there was a curriculum of required courses that helped to engender that broader understanding you reference, Phil. I agree that isolating one discipline from others dilutes the effectiveness of perspicacity and critical thinking that a liberal arts degree was/is supposed to confer.
Even worse, Carmen -- the billionaires feed this myopia.
In the same way Citizens United put the rich on steroids, Project 2025, and the end of the Chevron Precedent both aim to strip Americans of health, safety, and environmental regulators -- so the billionaires can freely stalk the land.
They don't want schools schooling anybody in ways to see fellow Americans.
As wonderful as the Alabama win was to the state legislature the abysmal turnout (14% or so) exemplifies the erosion of the three pillars you mention George. Educated, informed and engaged…I have never understood nor accepted the choice people make to not exercise the hard earned right to vote.
Me too.
In Australia, voting is mandatory. The fine is small ($20) - but it sends a symbolic and clear message. "This is your country and your democracy. It's your responsibility to participate."
According to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), 16.4 million people were enrolled to vote in the 2019 federal election. Of these, 92% voted.
Australia has one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. Since voting became compulsory in 1924, over 90 percent of those registered have voted in every federal election. Compulsory voting means every eligible Australian citizen (18 years or older) is required by law to enroll and vote. For more information about elections, visit the Australian Electoral Commission website.
https://www.aec.gov.au/
Bill, do you have any information as to how knowledgeable Australian voters are? I can see uninformed voters choosing virtually anybody simply to fulfill their obligation and avoid a fine. If it results in a better civically-informed roster, then I'm all for it.
I'm not sure how well that system would work here, though -- I'm much more in favor of getting rid of outside money in politics, at least on the federal level, and having publicly-funded campaigns. Each party would be financed via a quasi-public group.
Getting rid of big outside money in elections would be Paramount, IMO.
As to voters bring uneducated, not sure how that should be defined. After all, we Harvard educated people supporting antivax ideas and Project 2025!
I would register people to vote automatically at age 18. Then at least make it safe and easy to vote. Mail in voting should SOP.
And ranked choice voting would pull in disaffected voters as well as preventing needless third party destruction.
Bill, I just read an article in the Concord {NH} Monitor about Gov Sununu's speech that he just gave. In it:
"The country’s current political system, with PAC donations driving multi-million dollar campaigns, is what deterred him from running for Senate in 2022, when Republican leaders hoped he would challenge current U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan.
" “They’re pushing to get me elected based on something I might not even believe and that’s screwed up, right?” he said. “The fact that someone can write a $250,000 check to a PAC and no one ever sees it or knows where it comes from, that’s bogus.” " (per Concord Monitor)
Yet he apparently offered no solution.
And I'm no Sununu supporter, by a long shot, but his words are true here. Unfortunately, he also pledged to vote for Voldemort, because he'll put Repub administrators in place, which he said would be better than "President Harris". He speculated that Biden won't last 5 more years (but failed to opine on whether Voldemort will preside from prison.)
I would say that a degree from even a prestigious school like Harvard does not insure thoughtfulness or critical thinking. Book learning does not equate wisdom either. Human beings can fall prey to greed, lust for power, etc. no matter how educated they are.
Bill, I’m for ranked choice open primaries. I’m also for proportional awarding of electoral college votes. That would help to get rid of the idea of “swing states”. If every state awarded electoral college votes by percentage of votes, then every state would contribute to each candidate. Those voters in mostly blue or red states who currently think that, being in the small minority , their presidential votes don’t matter since the state “always goes in the red/blue column”, might come out and vote.
"proportional awarding of electoral college votes" Yes! Sounds like real democracy! Sounds like people's votes in a National Election having VALUE. Having a half dozen states determine the election undermines voter turnout everywhere.
Best idea of the day, Mary.
Found this harsh reality at: https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation
Allocation within each State
All States, except for Maine and Nebraska, have a winner-take-all policy where the State looks only at the overall winner of the state-wide popular vote. Maine and Nebraska, however, appoint individual electors based on the winner of the popular vote within each Congressional district and then 2 "at-large" electors based on the winner of the overall state-wide popular vote.
While it is rare for Maine or Nebraska to have a split vote, each has done so twice: Nebraska in 2008, Maine in 2016, and both Maine and Nebraska in 2020.
I have a question about ranked choice voting -- RCV-- (which has made me queasy for some time), and forgive my being ill-informed and possibly paranoid: How does RCV work in the case of hand recounts? It's easy enough (though laborious) to recount single votes, but having to tabulate 2nd or more choices adds complexity.
My paranoia comes from my deep distrust of electronic systems which can be hacked (look at how voting machines were stolen in AZ and I believe GA in 2020 by those pretending to be concerned with vote-rigging.) Hand recounts in both states proved the election wasn't stolen; would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
Doug, the recount would be more extensive since it would be multilayered, with the loser’s votes being reallocated to their 2nd choice candidate. Perhaps, to make things easier, there could be multiple stacks for A’s votes depending on the choices: Ab, Ac, Ad, etc. then Ba, Bc, Bd…
I think that ranked choice would result in less-partisan candidates and, eventually, in fewer recounts due to partisanship “If I lost, it must be because the vote was rigged!” As I recall, 50 years ago, recounts were rare; now they’re a standard part of election denialism.
True, Mary, but such recounts also serve to prove election integrity. Georgia was forced to count votes THREE TIMES, and each recount showed Biden won.
Doug, the first recount showed integrity. I believe that the second and third were for partisan (“I can’t believe I lost—it must be rigged”) reasons.
No
Kathy, I'm trying to understand who or what you're saying no to. Can you please clarify?
would RCV complicate or muddy the data?
All excellent points, Bill.
As to mail-in voting, making ballot access easier and auto-registration, I still don't get why Repubs are so against those ideas. Maybe it's because their policies are anathema to young voters especially, and the American public generally. Their calculus has been "if we can't persuade them with our ideas, we'll make it harder for them to vote for candidates we oppose (starting with gerrymandering and work outward), and we'll put in place judges who are sympathetic to our policies."
Doug, once again, 45 has spoken the quiet part out loud: “if we make it easier to vote, Republicans will never be elected again.
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/trump-republican-party-voting-reform-coronavirus
True enough, Mary. And he speaks for most Repubs in this case.
Doug, true—imagine having an agenda so unpopular that you only want those who support the agenda to vote.
Brace yourself for the great howl about socialism.
Such howls are being made now about anything Dems do. But public funding of campaigns wouldn't include endorsement of party, platform or candidate -- it would only provide the funding to get the message out.
Until Citizens United is overturned, it will never happen in the U.S., and probably not even then.
Overturning Citizens United..., yeah. We didn't even flinch when that one got greased in. Such disgusting use of noble sounding words..i.e., "citizens united"...., "heritage" foundation...., "make America great (again, yet)..., "right to life"..., huh? And on and on. Like a cleverly baited hook. ha.., "CLEVER" .., such an inocuous, yet insidious word describes the way we've been reamed.
Yup. Like "Americans for Prosperity". It's almost morbidly humorous to see political ads being sponsored by anodyne-sounding PACs
Hello George Orwell.
My mum (aWWII war bride) often spoke of this. She also talked about how much SHORTER their elections were. Ours are ridiculously long !
Glenis, I totally agree with your mom! For years I have wondered why we seem to be in a perennial “election season”. No wonder it’s so expensive, and exhausting too….perhaps that’s one reason folks tune out….like all those “Medicare” Advantage ads on TV/mailers….snore….
A good point Christine. I think much of it is a happy (for the GOP) by-product of toxic, negative political campaigns. Many folks working paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by think the system is so corrupt and poisoned -they don't want to be involved. It is self-disenfranchisement.
Thom Hartman talks about it a lot
George, perhaps naively, I truly thought that the whole purpose of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution WERE that "comprehensive progressive framework" for how a nation of individuals could come together and rule themselves without a king or dictator!
Good point John. A springboard to be sure. The founders also knew it was imperfect and had hope that we would evolve toward a more perfect union. Instead we had Reagan, 'W', Trump, MT Greene (as I now know to call her), and 'Justice' Clarence.
So we have more work to do.
Err.., I get it.. EMPTY GREEN? Ya... DUMPST HER. Too bad we can't just call Waste Management and haul it off. If only it was that simple.
I know there are smarter, more capable people in Georgia. One wonders if Georgia voters simply wanted her out of the area and sent her to DC thinking she couldn't possibly find her way back?
🤣
And academia has enthralled itself to a bureaucratic nightmare of money making proportions as well, turning out products instead of thinkers.
Thinkers are dangerous. Hard to manipulate and control. We just want obedient hyper-consumers. They're good for business.
Sounds like fluoridated drinking water.
I've heard that Brawndo has electrolytes. It's what plants crave.
“Water, you mean like out the toilet?” Loved that movie…who knew it was a prophecy?
Right? A whole new ‘Speculative Documentary’ genre. 🤓
Robin, and in partnership with student aid loans, created a life altering debt crisis for so many. Having worked in Univ student aid for over 40 years & counseling students on their debt level (and implications & strategies to best deal with them), I recommend John Oliver’s recent showcasing of this issue—he is spot-on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN2_0WC7UfU
So now is the time for baby boomers to reverse their legacy. To take a stand and create a vision for America.
I am a baby boomer and believe ours was a generation that was distracted by the shiny objects brought by moderate wealth....big homes, vacations, fancy cars, helping our children get ahead. I remember, following politics, but being caught up just enough in my daily efforts to live the good life, I cherished the wins for the common good and believed we would survive the losses.
I knew Reagan was bad, I knew certain twists and turns moved us ahead as a generous society. But never took the time to understand the complex set of actions that were in play to undermine our society, our environment, and our children's future.
So how can we forge ahead with a think tank driven by the many patriotic politicians in the House and Senate who have brilliantly defended democracy?
Would the DNC be capable of such a feat?
Susan, this Boomer must have missed that particular boat! Big homes, vacations, fancy cars…have heard of them tho’!!!!
I don't think of the DNC -because any political organization would have a politics-first context. And I don't think of it as any one thing Susan. I see more of an "ecosphere" approach. That is a loosely-coupled network of entities that serve a common purpose -toward democracy, justice, and equity, while rebuilding a foundation predicated upon education, information, and engagement.
It would require funding to be economically viable, an accessible and engaging vision as to what would be the tangible milestone results produced over a year, two years, and so on, organizational leadership in each specific area of societal imperative, and an overarching leadership to tie it all together. Then the tactical components around communication and messaging. Helping to educate people, and continuing to evolve and refine the vision.
May I suggest that "we" consider SM participation? Several cohorts (Millennials, Gens XYZ) need more civil discourse/civics education. When memes on YouTube, for example, influence 10's of thousands, can we ignore the media? Most of us here are aging and idealistic, but for all our best intentions, we fall short of passing the baton. Yesterday, I read that Gen Alpha, still children, have received almost all their social conditioning via SM. They are poor readers and are falling behind in school (if they attend at all) and, as a group, lack empathy.
So very true Hope. And now you're not only preaching to the choir -I'm trying to be the leader of at least one new orchestra! https://bomdia.substack.com/p/social-media-for-public-good
Way to go, George! Thanks for doing this.
It has been, to use the words of Dave Egger, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering, Underfunded -but still going, Genius (who is Golda Velez by the way).
Where did you read that? I have several grandchildren who remain influenced by family values. (teenagers)
I will try to find the article and get back to you (I scan the NYT and read The Guardian.) Ahh, here it is: (Daily Mail is not the best journalism, as you probably know. My apologies if I offended your family.) I believe these children are younger than teenagers.
"Fears are growing for the 'feral' Generation Alpha cohort of kids
There are over two billion iPad obsessed, TikTok-numbed youngsters
Poor parenting among Millennials is blamed for raising a doomed generation."
By WILL POTTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 02:12 EDT, 23 March 2024
Agree
Incremental really is the cornerstone. Every potential opportunity to gain an inch adds to or opens another tranch. No regretting a setback, nothing is ever a devastating loss, everything can add something, every March or rally picks up one or two supporters, a lesson, some intelligence. I've thought the Right to Life campaign over the past 50 years was the best example of the enevitability of incrementalism. Keep plodding away. Never a great gesture or big win all battle. Just keep the masses plowing the field, picking u] a scrap that just might be possibly useful.
Yes. Whittling away, patience and time. And as education eroded, information is consolidated, and people have less time for engagement (as Unions were weakened and power shifted to employers) they had to work harder and longer for less -the water in the pot heated a little more at a time until it was too late.
Definitely agree 👍
Yes, where is the left-leaning - or even moderate’s - think tank? It’s almost passed the time for a new silent majority to emerge … one that helps steer this ship called Democracy along the path intended by our country’s founders! [No mean intentions intended by this example].
I’ve wondered this for eons.
We need an organization called Friends of Democracy!
The Brookings Institute is the closest one that comes to my mind.
Yep, the quiet group; one that we rarely hear about - a good thing!
Carnegie Institute, Wilson Center........are these democratic?
The conservative “think tanks” came about because those “on the right” [no matter how wrong they maybe] felt and feel that most of our nation’s academic institutions seem to have a monopoly on presenting the liberal (progressive) views in American society. Googling or searching Wikipedia for the two that you mentioned should provide the answer to the question you posed.
Also Center for American Progress
Thanks Jenn -- I just checked them out. I've heard the name before, but really don't know anything other than what I just read. Hopefully their influence is like a river, where it's said "still waters run deep."
As a ‘thinking’ member of our society, I need no propaganda mill to indoctrinate me!
My guide ‘what you do to the least of my brother’s so you do unto me!’ Someone told me that was Christ’s fundamental message!
JL, I have long wondered this as well, but then noticed that the uber-right wing groups are backed by BIG money. Are there many (any?) big money centrists-progressives that could bankroll such endeavors? It seems like those really wealthy folk like to have more-than-enough and share it with efforts/orgs that back the “more for me & mine” philosophy. I notice, too, that because running for office is SO expensive, most folks making it into office either have money already, or are bankrolled by folks who perceive they can call in favors down the line—and, if fundraising wasn’t a perennial “dialing for dollars”, maybe that time could be better spent, I don’t know, on actually legislating? . No wonder so many policies enacted send resources trickling up to the “haves”.
Bill/Melinda Gates? Not sure if I should use the name Soros here.
There are some on the left (yeah, Soros, McKenzie Scott—Bezos’ ex; Gates, Steyer & a few others) but not at the number w/ deep pockets on the right/far-right. One story I like is about a fave of mine 30’s-40’s actress Carole Lombard (married to Clark Gable). She would tell Clark that she loved to pay her taxes & as she liked helping her country. Sadly she died in an airplane crash at just 33 years old; I have read she was identified only (mostly) by a lock of her blond hair, which was given to Clark. Edit: got interrupted making this comment & now forget what my point was about Carole Lombard…decided to leave it in anyway (check out the old movies she’s in if you like classic films).
F.Y.I. The Powell Memo via Sheldon Whitehouse:
https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/speeches/the-scheme-1-the-powell-memo
He has also produced same in a book called "The Scheme"
Joan, thanks for the link. Whitehouse is great!
Thank you for the link! Powell’s appointment to the stench court was a reward for being the propaganda minister (aka their Goebbels) of the corporate and alleged free market moguls! Apparently, choir boy kavanaugh ‘earned his seat’ by doing the leg work for little bush in 2000 and writing a sleazy final report for the useless Whitewater investigation! And I bought into the ‘Justice is blind’ B.S.
The only way for our democracy to survive is to REbalance the court!
Thank you for this.
A friend told me, 30 years ago about the think tanks and their agenda. I had no idea but I learned. Others are still where I was 30 years ago. Time for a message update.
Pleased to see quotes around the words think tanks! They are in fact right wing propaganda mills of the basest order! Goebbels would be proud!
There are center-and left-leaning think tanks as well. The closest to my mind is the Brookings Institute, but I'm sure there are others.
I think of Brookings as being apolitical. You're right, there are definitely left-leaning (or - leading, as you aptly wrote!) think tanks, but I can't think of any names at the moment.
Good catch, Ellen! I edited my misspelling. As to Brookings, I always thought of them as center-left, but a quick read of its wiki page places them all over the political spectrum, depending on who is being quoted.
As a non-profit 501(c)3, they must be non-political. I've always enjoyed E.J. Dionne's writings -- he's a Fellow, and certainly left of center.
Don't bet the farm on 501(c)(3) organizations being apolitical. The Heritage Foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization. It is very political. It a wolf in sheep's clothing.
It sure is, Jenn.
By legalizing bribery, the High Holy Catholic Federalist Court (HHCFC), formerly known as SCOTUS, has hamstrung the Democrats ability fight against this takeover and still win office. A corrupt SCOTUS, even before the HHCFC takeover, ensured all elected officials be accountable to The Money.
"Money doesn't always equal victory — but it usually does. Sometimes contributions flow to the candidate who is already viewed as being much stronger than his or her opponent. Sometimes the money goes to the less well-known candidate and results in a surge in popularity.
Even in wave elections, the candidate who spends the most usually wins. This trend is stronger in the House than the Senate but applies in both chambers." https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/winning-vs-spending?cycle=2022
I disagree. Coming from a pro-business and Republican family, I find the memorandum -- or the half-plus that I have read -- simply to be a strategic communications plan to get the business side of the argument into the popular culture, particularly the academy. At the time that memo was written, American free entreprise was under attack, far beyond legitimate criticism for its excesses. What Justice Powell was saying is instructive to all of us concerned with the state of play these days.
As the 'radical left' had insinuated itself (sic) into various facets of American life over several preceding decades, so must business and business-aligned conservatives do the same in the decades following 1970. Republicans got the message while Democrats got confused and complacent. The conservative resurgence had fertile soil in which plant its seeds as the New Deal coalition was breaking down in 1970 and its underlying ideology exhausted.
Simply said, almost all of the F.D.R.-inspired goals had been accomplished, so ¿what now? The Democrats have struggled since, while classical economics, re-packaged as supply-side economics, has reigned triumphant until somewhere between 2000 and 2010. Now its bag of tricks, primarily bankrupting tax cuts, no longer work. What we have seen, I remain convinced, is the pendulum of public discourse arguably swinging from one extreme to the other.
Now the Reaganist ideology is exhausted and its defects, like accepting racism among its followers, well exposed. (As a side note, I am not convinced that the tax cuts primarily led to the prosperity of the information age, but the passage of the bi-partisan "Bayh-Dole Act" in 1980 under Democratic President Carter.) https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2002/12/14/innovations-golden-goose
The answer, in this end of this conservative ascendency, to ¿now what? has been this corrosive mix of Trump's populist demagogy and the single minded pursuit of share-holder wealth maximization; as corrosive as the hard-core Leninism of the New Left. Ironically, these narrow-minded conservatives are employing the same methods of re-writing history decried by Justice Powell. Hopefully the Democratic Party will forge an enduring coalition dedicated to restoring the basic idealism of the New Deal.
What form that will take is above both my pay-grade and I.Q. Knowingly, I expect to be left behind in the middle by y'all. Nevertheless, just for today, we have a common dragon figuratively to slay in Trump and his M.A.G.A. cult; though, I surmise, this particular dragon's head (i.e., Trump) exhales hot air (of flatulence) rather than flame.
The liberals had and still have some think tanks out there. Mostly, though, the liberals policies were coming out of learning institutions. That is why Obran targeted universities in Hungary and why CONservatives here target public universities and liberal arts schools in rhe U S.
Yikes. Sad but true.
I think a second factor must be acknowledged as well; the theft of land by whites from the Indigenous Peoples. Theft and chattel slavery are the foundations that built the wealth of this country. Racism/sexism are its fundamental core beliefs.
Ally, I recently read a short piece that wondered what humans would do if we discovered/visited a world that had an intelligent species, but that were less “advanced” (as defined by our hubris) than we…..didn’t even take a nanosecond to know the answer, tho’ you’d think we would be more “aware” than that now. Probably not, sadly. [At least in the movie Avatar they fought back and prevailed!]