 |
DEMOCRACY IN ECONOMICS
There are many different ways of being defeated, destroyed, isolated or crushed. “Gulags” or concentration camps are definitive statements of the absence of political democracy. It’s possible that a political democracy can coexist with an economic autocracy or oligopoly. Totalitarian aspects of an economic structure can bring death and destruction just like concentration camps to whole classes of people, different sexes, races and religious groupings. So, while there are broad promises and acts related to political democracy, a disproportionate number of blacks live in poverty, migrant workers from the Caribbean, South America and Mexico work for slave wages and women constantly bump the “glass ceiling”. So, the political side of democracy makes broad promises of almost unlimited individual hope, equality and attainment of expression. It is, however, limited, contained and eviscerated by the overwhelming power of organized influence groups and well financed economic interests. The economic side isolates, suffocates and strangles masses of people within the same society. Generally, only threats of major social unrest cause the economic autocrats to grant more financial freedom. The “Boston Tea Party, Shay’s Rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion, the Anti Rent War in New York’s Hudson Valley, the Haymarket “Affair” or Massacre, Coxey’s Army, the labor movement, the growth of the Communist Party in the 1930’s, the civil rights marches and race riots in the 1960’s are excellent examples of such unrest.
There is no question, however, that any progress made in democratizing economic structure comes as a “grant” from the controlling forces. The chapter, which deals with lobbying should make that perfectly clear. In America, the princes and princesses of economics are also those, who control the political structure of the country. Their control is tied to institutions and traditions, which protect their interests. This protection of interest is usually at the cost of the rest of the society. The adverse consequences are assessed against all income brackets, low to upper middle income, but not the autocracy. This process has been more than adequately demonstrated by the major shifts of wealth reported by the Bureau of the Census in recent years.
The ability to have truly equal opportunity is not tied solely to the freedom of political expression, it is tied to equal access to financial opportunity. Even the homeless can make a political statement without fear of being imprisoned. A family that just lost its home as a result of foreclosure caused by an “asset adjustment” can’t get a loan at the bank. Their gulag is their car on the street, no health insurance, no college tuition money and complete loss of self respect.
The broad economic grants, which the financially strong bestow upon themselves through manipulation of the government, are inherently unjust. Sometimes during periods of populist and progressive movements, attempts are made to dampen the unjust brutality of a statutory and legal system, developed to protect the rich and influential. Excess profits or “War Profits” taxes, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, rent control and tax deductions for interest on mortgages are some good examples of democratizing financial opportunity.
The present process also generates a subcutaneous chameleon effect, or an under the skin adaptation of character, by legislators, bureaucrats and even judges. While their outward appearance seems to be public interest, they have actually assumed the inner character of those, who financed their campaign or bought their last meal, case of wine or prostitute. They become guardians of the undemocratic financial system, which protects their sponsors. The government no longer serves the “well spring” of their authority - - the people; but allows that mandate to stagnate.
Quotation from Chapter VIII, Revitalizing America, by Donald L. Cleveland, found at www.Revitalizingamericabook.com and at Barnes & Noble.
|
|
