Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Paranoia Strikes Deep
Last Thursday there was a rally outside the U.S. Capitol to protest pending health care legislation, featuring the kinds of things we've grown accustomed to, including large signs showing piles of bodies at Dachau with the caption "National Socialist Healthcare." It was grotesque - and it was also ominous. For what we may be seeing is America starting to be Californiafied.
The key thing to understand about that rally is that it wasn't a fringe event. It was sponsored by the House Republican leadership - in fact, it was officially billed as a G.O.P. press conference. Senior lawmakers were in attendance, and apparently had no problem with the tone of the proceedings.
True, Eric Cantor, the second-ranking House Republican, offered some mild criticism after the fact. But the operative word is "mild." The signs were "inappropriate," said his spokesman, and the use of Hitler comparisons by such people as Rush Limbaugh, said Mr. Cantor, "conjures up images that frankly are not, I think, very helpful."
What all this shows is that the G.O.P. has been taken over by the people it used to exploit.
The state of mind visible at recent right-wing demonstrations is nothing new. Back in 1964 the historian Richard Hofstadter published an essay titled, "The Paranoid Style in American Politics," which reads as if it were based on today's headlines: Americans on the far right, he wrote, feel that "America has been largely taken away from them and their kind, though they are determined to try to repossess it and to prevent the final destructive act of subversion." Sound familiar?
But while the paranoid style isn't new, its role within the G.O.P. is.
When Hofstadter wrote, the right wing felt dispossessed because it was rejected by both major parties. That changed with the rise of Ronald Reagan: Republican politicians began to win elections in part by catering to the passions of the angry right.
Until recently, however, that catering mostly took the form of empty symbolism. Once elections were won, the issues that fired up the base almost always took a back seat to the economic concerns of the elite. Thus in 2004 George W. Bush ran on antiterrorism and "values," only to announce, as soon as the election was behind him, that his first priority was changing Social Security.
But something snapped last year. Conservatives had long believed that history was on their side, so the G.O.P. establishment could, in effect, urge hard-right activists to wait just a little longer: once the party consolidated its hold on power, they'd get what they wanted. After the Democratic sweep, however, extremists could no longer be fobbed off with promises of future glory.
Furthermore, the loss of both Congress and the White House left a power vacuum in a party accustomed to top-down management. At this point Newt Gingrich is what passes for a sober, reasonable elder statesman of the G.O.P. And he has no authority: Republican voters ignored his call to support a relatively moderate, electable candidate in New York's special Congressional election.
Real power in the party rests, instead, with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin (who at this point is more a media figure than a conventional politician). Because these people aren't interested in actually governing, they feed the base's frenzy instead of trying to curb or channel it. So all the old restraints are gone.
In the short run, this may help Democrats, as it did in that New York race. But maybe not: elections aren't necessarily won by the candidate with the most rational argument. They're often determined, instead, by events and economic conditions.
In fact, the party of Limbaugh and Beck could well make major gains in the midterm elections. The Obama administration's job-creation efforts have fallen short, so that unemployment is likely to stay disastrously high through next year and beyond. The banker-friendly bailout of Wall Street has angered voters, and might even let Republicans claim the mantle of economic populism. Conservatives may not have better ideas, but voters might support them out of sheer frustration.
And if Tea Party Republicans do win big next year, what has already happened in California could happen at the national level. In California, the G.O.P. has essentially shrunk down to a rump party with no interest in actually governing - but that rump remains big enough to prevent anyone else from dealing with the state's fiscal crisis. If this happens to America as a whole, as it all too easily could, the country could become effectively ungovernable in the midst of an ongoing economic disaster.
The point is that the takeover of the Republican Party by the irrational right is no laughing matter. Something unprecedented is happening here - and it's very bad for America.
- Posted in




90 Comments so far
Show AllThis "fringe element" is running the discourse in this country, and the Obama administration is cowering under their attacks. Van Jones' firing and ACORN are just two examples where these bullies have won, without even a modicum of a "fight" from the Obama administration.
At a time when the country truly needed a "bold" leader who would take on these "crazies," Obama has allowed these people to control the national discourse which could lead to disastrous results.
jbarret1-
caught an old "All in the Family" show the other day, first time I've seen it in years. Realized the GOP is now run by Archie Bunker, the Dems by Michael. The US public is Edith and Gloria. We are so screwed.
How do you know the whole thing wasn't scripted from the beginning. Our political leaders are just shills, meant to cajole an ignorant population.
"Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their
lies come true." -Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
This is the same liberal crap that characterizes all the articles about the 'right' that I see on CD, but I'm surprised to see Krugman wasting his time regurgitating the same idiocy.
The hoi polloi right is not paranoid ! The US is being destroyed from the ground up. The economy is being destroyed. The schools are being destroyed. The racial makeup is being destroyed. Culture is being destroyed. Marriage is being destroyed. Civility is being destroyed. The mythic figures, Washington, Jefferson, et. al., are being destroyed. The mythology is being destroyed. Religion is being destroyed. Life itself is being destroyed by the abortionists.
Many of the rights' calamities are cheered by 'liberals' like Krugman. That does not lessen their impact on the right.
Well, that should do for now. You get the idea. You may not agree with the rights' leaders, or their philosophy, or their opinions on current issues, but to call them paranoid, in view of the above list of calamities, is idiotic.
You were your own best rebuttal with that paranoid, racist rant. BTW, I am a Liberal, Jefferson and Washington were Liberals, Ike was a Liberal, etc. Liberal is only a "dirty word" to paranoid right-wing nutjobs.
And this destruction of America that you describe, how is that a bad thing?
The USA is being destroyed from the inside out,not from the ground up.
The economy is destroying itself, because that is the nature of ponzi schemes.
The schools are being destroyed, hmm could be past tense on that one.
Culture is being destroyed? the destruction of bacteria is a good thing.
Marriage is being destroyed? Marriage is a concept which is solely dependent on the behavior of the participants and or, that you might be a closet gay.
Civility is being destroyed because it is used as a facade to cover the truth.
The mythic figures are being destroyed, because, well, illusions generally implode.
Religion is being destroyed because the participants insist on exclusivity, which is a violation of physics, where two or more absolutes cannot occupy the same space.
Life itself is being destroyed by the abortionists. I'll have to agree with you on this one.
[And this destruction of America that you describe, how is that a bad thing?]
Paraphrasing Diz, if you don't know, I can't explain it.
[The USA is being destroyed from the inside out,not from the ground up.]
Well, it ain't the ground up, inside out is closer, you're right.
[The schools are being destroyed, hmm could be past tense on that one.]
Ain't that bad enough for you?
[Culture is being destroyed? the destruction of bacteria is a good thing.]
Wow. European culture, science, music, art, etc., is the glory of the human race. It has made us gods almost, able to conquer everything except death. To not understand this EMPIRICAL reality indicates you are some sort of hopeless ideologue.
[Marriage is being destroyed? Marriage is a concept which is solely dependent on the behavior of the participants and or, that you might be a closet gay.]
Who said I'm in the closet? (Joke). Marriage is being destroyed, you may think that's a good thing, but surely you can understand that there is another point of view.
[Civility is being destroyed because it is used as a facade to cover the truth.]
Nope. Civility is it's own virtue. It doesn't hinder the discovery of truth.
[The mythic figures are being destroyed, because, well, illusions generally implode.]
Well, it's the dancing on the graves that is a little distressing.
[Religion is being destroyed because the participants insist on exclusivity, which is a violation of physics, where two or more absolutes cannot occupy the same space.]
There are a lot of inevitable factors destroying religion. But in the US Christianity is under deliberate attack by, let's call them non-Christians. The problem here is that Christianity is the basis for whatever morality exists in the US. It ain't perfect, but it's better than nothing.
[Life itself is being destroyed by the abortionists. I'll have to agree with you on this one.]
All righty.
we all believe in something allan it just may not be what you
believe. and actually a stronger argument could be made that
christianity killed america. just check out "the family"
jerry falwell dobson etc. every religion is really about
controlling people!
It is now awfully apparent what the result is when the vaunted "compassionate" women and minorities are presented the pinnacles of power: the same DEM thing - no justice (Pullosi Punch and Judy CONyas, WITH the Bushists) and no peace (or even PROMISED single-payer peace of mind - Buffalo Soldier-in-chief, Barracks Obomber)!
The Democrats are the new Republicans therefore the Republicans are still in power.
The over-the-top demonstrations of the Sarah Palin crowd merely serve to push the country even further to the right.
A scheme that'll deliver 40 million new customers to corporate insurance is labeled "socialism'.
And you can honestly say the corporate right is losing?
Yes Cygnus. Truly absurd. American English no longer means anything. We watch in amazement.
The strong engine currently driving this absurdity is not the silly little princess Palin. It is the Pentagon and PSYOPS. But the source of absurdity will be found in the beginning of America; amongst its premises. Perhaps it is Puritan exceptionalism.
Other than this I really do not know how to help.
It is an unhappy time.
You're preaching to the choir.
I've posted here numerous times about Operation Mockingbird, the CIA's infiltration of the media.
Raw Story recently revealed that the Pentagon Pundit program exposed by the NY Times may still be in operation.
http://rawstory.com/2009/10/pentagon-officials-confirm-bush-propaganda-program-ended/
We have only propaganda.
The news is gone.
And with it Democracy.
"Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true." -Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
and they're way ahead of us.
Maybe the goal of the right is to make the country ungovernable. Ungovernable means the status quo and that means corporate dominance.
New Jersey is explained by paranoia? Maybe somebody is overdue for a gold pocketwatch.
When you create a vacuum, it pulls in all kinds of garbage.
Krugman likes to blame the right, but the vacuum is being created by the Democrats.
The Democrats are stuck, because they serve the same masters as the Republicans. The Republicans are discredited, so the masters handed the ball off to the Dems. Ha Ha!!
I'm convinced that if Democratic leaders would actually do something progressive, many people would support them--including many of those lost souls on the right. And I think that would probably spell the beginning of the end for Limbaugh and the rest of his slimy crew, too.
But the Dems will never do anything significant, and the Limbaughs of the world know it.
So how come the Krugmans don't?
Krugman nails it. The crazy violent GOP is scary and could come to power far more easily than we might think. That would be a true nightmare.
"Californicated" would have been better than "Californiafied", though, but I am sure Krugman thought of that and could not get it past the editors.
Krugman, fail. Last Thursday, a coward shot up Fort Hood. "The crazy violent GOP..."? Please be rational with your slurs.
The point is that the takeover of the Republican Party by the irrational right is no laughing matter.
-------------
Wrong.
The takeover of the Republican Party was accomplished by the Democrats.
Escalation of Afghanistan, corporate Insurance instead of health care, Patriot Act renewal, coverup of torture and war crimes, domestic spying, assassination by drones, military commissions, bank bailouts etc.
Dirty deeds once largely the domain of the Republicans now done dirt cheap by the party of the working man.
The irrational Palin crowd, with an assist from the media, simply pushes the scale further rightward, rendering the liberal/conservative debate meaningless.
And all this, so obvious, escapes a man with a Nobel Prize?
"Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true." -Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
The Democrats, now standing stark naked in the light, are busy manufacturing the lies, and here is Paul Krugman, making prophecy.
The Republicans will protest anything that the Democrats are about to pass but this protest that Krugman talks about is entirely irrelevant. If the Republicans were in power, this same bill would have passed and quietly and the Democratic activists would be doing the protesting. Whenever the Republicans do takeover, they will do nothing to remove this legislation other than weakening the Public Option when their insurance buddies bug them to. Feel free to distract us with fake paranoia from the GOP while ignoring the real outrage from the public that will find out the fraud that this bill really is. As usual, we the taxpayers will pay more taxes directly or otherwise and receive no bang for the buck.
I agree, the D/R Duopoly is just a phony charade of "good cop, bad cop". They are both working for the Corporate Mafia.
Margaret Atwood's cautionary novel 'The Handmaid's Tale' is bearing bitter fruit.
She foresaw where the US could go over 20 years ago. So far she is pretty dead on.
She predicted a world of rampant ecological disaster, repressive religious government in the US, and looming civil war.
Have fun now.
I can't for the life of me figure out what Krugman means by "Californiafied" in relation to some rabid Right-wing Republican demonstration with its usual inappropriate graphic paraphernalia, in this case a photo from the Holocaust. Even if he intended "Californicated", the meaning is inapt. I have to wonder if he has personal issues with the Left Coast. That, at least, I could understand since I myself have personal issues with the enduring East Coast bias in our media.
Beats me.
It may have something to do with the old "California, land of extremes" twaddle.
K seems pretty NYC/NYT monied "liberal-democrat" as opposed to progressive, Dem or otherwise. He is a cautious commentator, and not less so when he is inaccurate. He seems to approve of the current dead whale 1900-page health insurance bill, so he probably lumps the teabaggers together with principled holdouts like Kucinich or Bernie Sanders as "extreme."
Apparently K experiences groups of people who don't accord with what I suspect is his self-described moderation as "Californian" in their simultaneous accord and variety.
I dunno. I hope someone has a better explanation.
Jill, I think you are directing attention in a very smart direction with your comments. It is a kind of good cop (who you call elites) and bad cop (the rabid conservative, authoritarian protestors) routine. (At the level of style only.) My only suggestion is to reflect on the labels used to categorize the non-progressives of whom you write. I think that "oligarchy" and "elites" are not the best terms. I do like Wolin's term "totalitarian" to describe the system, although I think Charles Derber's term "corporate regime" is better. (His book is titled "Hidden Power".) Both together—totalitarian corporate regime—is even better than either alone. I think "plutocracy" is a bit better than "oligarchy."
Following your logic, we need a non-violent, constitutional, progressive revolution, not against rabid authoritarian conservative protesters but the plutocratic corporate regime itself. And I think it best when we reveal, as you have done, the true adversary of progressives, that we describe What Is To Be Done, thus the reference to revolution, above. But "revolution" must be qualified as progressive, non-violent, and constitutional, for if not, it conjures up images of the French Revolution, with its violence, which is a non-starter. The decent side of the American public, a sizable majority (Google "progressive majority") will not support revolutionary violence of any kind.
I'd like to know your thoughts Jill on these ideas.
Yep, it's all about the Class War. I just declared war on Goldman Sachs, or what was generally known as the Money Power 100+ years ago. Yes, 100+ years ago. The Class War has been going for a long time and the other side's been winning too long.
I've come to the conclusion that it's us against them--no holds barred, no quarter given--as that's how we've been treated for far longer than 100+ years--that the only good Plutocrat is a dead Plutocrat. That sentiment may offend the folks wanting to win the Class War through non-violence, a goal I think impossible to achieve given our enemy's use of lethal force so often.
"But "revolution" must be qualified as progressive, non-violent, and constitutional, for if not, it conjures up images of the French Revolution, with its violence, which is a non-starter." –(Earthian)
As wheedling a piece of unctuous, sentimental nonsense as I've yet read on this blog. Worthy of decrepit, moribund sites of liberal tedium like the "Daily Kostapo" or the "Hullabaloo" blogs.
You want a 'decaffeinated' revolution, good 'liberal' that you are. Revolutions are not folded out like origami patterns or pre-arranged to suit the tepid tastes of bourgeois civil libertarians. Where there is revolution, there is counter revolution and hence violence.
Revolutions are never 'qualified' in advance by tendentious pedants and ivory tower academics arguing 'constitutional' niceties. Historically this ilk enlists readily in the cause of reaction, if not counter revolution.To wit:
"What do those who want neither Virtue or Terror want: They want corruption." –(Saint Just)
"If the spring of popular government in time of peace is virtue, the springs of popular government in revolution are at once virtue and terror; virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing but prompt, severe inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue..." –(Maximilien Robespierre)
Try reading Arno J. Mayer's magisterial histotical intervention: "The Furies: Violence and Terror in the French and Russian Revolutions." (Princeton 2000).
–(Jill Bains)
"...we cannot afford is to be distracted from who is actually in power and what they are doing." -- Jill
I, too, have read Jeff Sharlet's, The Family, and Sheldon Wolin's, Democracy Inc.: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism. Both books are very frightening!
"The tea baggers are nothing compared to the elite's level of insanity." -- Jill
I agree with you -- and the "tea baggers" are a perfect distraction. They are angry and they are being encouraged to act out their anger and to keep it coming, so to speak! M$M broadcasts their rallies, etc., creating a spin and ubiquity that are tough to challenge.
In addition, I read a book by Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare, Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work. The authors illustrate why our corporate culture is saturated with cut-throat behavior. In the United States, these men, who are mostly white men, are rewarded for their nasty behavior, earning enormous salaries and benefits, as they claw their way to the top, gaining more and more power as they climb the ladder of success.
A few months ago, I watched a documentary -- The Corporation. This film should be mandatory viewing -- and the DVD version includes additional interviews.
Jill - That was my reaction to this article by Krugman. The article is steeped in the consciousness of one who is economically comfortable and who considers social liberalism as the pinnacle of enlightenment.
I will continue to question whether I am too cavalier about the dangers of the crazy right and their potential to distract and to influence mobs of the discontented. But they seem like small potatoes compared with the ACTUAL activities and the ACTUAL harm being caused by the banks, insurance companies, military profiteers and their enablers in both parties. The politicians use reasonable sounding phrases like "considering all options" and then go ahead with the most rapacious and insane policies and plans.
Joe
"But they seem like small potatoes compared with the ACTUAL activities and the ACTUAL harm being caused by the banks, insurance companies, military profiteers and their enablers in both parties." –(jclinetelle)
–This is correct. They, the troglodyte right wing, are "small potatoes" in comparison. They are a fragment of the larger fascist continuum.
One must also never forget that this kind of rabble fascism does not come to power without the backing of the banks and the higher echelons of finance capital.
One is reminded of Daniel Guerin's classic analysis "Fascism and Big Business," and the rise of the Nazi's in Germany and how deeply imbricated it was with the German ruling classes.
–(Jill Bains)
and after another 8 or so years of Repubs, the Dems will look good again
and nothing will change.
it's the old good cop/bad cop routine.
Wow! you literally took the words outta my mouth (or vice versa), see response below, posted at virtually the same time.
and another poster - Earthian - identified the same game at exactly the same time as you! spooky.
that more people don't see through this is mind boggling. same old cycle every four years or so. give the new guy a chance, get disillusioned and try again. what a con. and MOST third parties are just deputies.
do you ever check out www.wsws.com?
it's where I go for serious analysis.
Krugman here recites what is becoming an increasingly absurd catechism – the media’s story about the “crazies” who fear and oppose so-called “health reform.” That the so-called “progressives” have bought into this transparent effort to divide and manipulate public opinion for the benefit of the insurance industry reveals the bankruptcy of so much “progressive” politics. Working people have every reason to fear and oppose a bill that seems guaranteed to raise costs and reduce benefits – that every step of the way has been compromised by industry lobbying...
If Limbaugh and Beck are repulsive, they nevertheless speak to fears that have been proven valid again and again, i.e. that the Democratic Party has lost all touch with the common people, and is now a fully-owned subsidiary of the corporate oligarchy. Rather than dismissing these fears, the progressive Left should be offering people a better explanation of why they’re losing ground economically. Instead, by doing what Krugman and so many others do, we only add to people’s resentment of their dispossession by policymaking elites...
There is today in the U.S. the possibility for a new coalition of working people, but we are blowing it by ridiculing the “teabaggers.” For a fine discussion of this issue, see Arthur Silber: http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2009/11/tribalism-and-destructive-politics-of.html
"Limbaugh and Beck... speak to fears that have been proven valid again and again, i.e. that the Democratic Party... is now a fully-owned subsidiary of the corporate oligarchy" Do you listen to Beck? How could the DNC be a corporate whore while 'teeming with communists'? There's a logical disconnect there that I just don't get. I don't deny that both parties are corporate whores, but Beck's message is that Stalin just took back the government, NOT Exxon.
Well Beck is right about the Wall Street corporations owning the Dem party. And yet it's all still communism, according to him, even though the richest capitalists in the country are getting everything they want.
Beck just can't get drunk enough to call it Corporate Communism.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
My next door neighbor 20-something is in an Americorps program right now with a dinky stipend. He has so many 20-something roommates helping to cover rent and utilities I'm not sure how many there actually are now. He hasn't had a real job in over a year and a half. But the Americorps people sure are loading him up on pro-Obama economic happy talk. I tried to tell him of the electoral threat posed by the far-right combined with voter dissatisfaction with Obama's banking policy, unemployment, etc., and his response? "No, that could never happen." I replied, "That's what many people said about Nixon's chances in early 1968."
The sad irony is we would be lucky to get a domestic policy moderate like Nixon in power after Clinton, Bush II and Obama. At least Nixon voted to extend many aspects of LBJ's Great Society programs and significantly advanced environmental protections--something no DLC Dimocrat would do today and no Republican.
What can you say?
A handful of wingnuts gets front page attention and millions of demonstrators on the street are invisible.
Increasingly, we and our interests are being ignored.
The Right was totally discredited when Obama and the Democrats were voted in, but the Right has been able to channel very real anger because Obama has demonstrated that he could care less. The anger is totally ignored, misrepresented and channeled via partisan allegiance. It is preferrable to have the anger limited to a fringe element easily manipulated--in that way it can be marginalized.
It is essential to suppress and misdirect the anger.
Krugman: "the country could become effectively ungovernable in the midst of an ongoing economic disaster." Yes, because its been so 'governable' in recent years (/sarcasm).
Is Krugman aware that in CA you need a 2/3rds supermajority to pass a budget or raise taxes? Effectively, one Republican is worth two Democrats in that state. The fact that it doesn't have a functioning Democracy might have a LITTLE to do with CA gridlock. Democracy only works when people are forced to face the consequences of their actions. But if the GOP can prevent the state's business from being done from a minority position, then they effectively get to direct policy without being blamed for directing policy (how could they be blamed, they are the MINORITY party?). It's actually a WIN-WIN for them.
So, for 30 years, the media line is that CA is broken, and in all that time its been a majority DNC state. Who is going to be blamed for the mess? This is why I dislike the GOP, they play the role of anarchist very well. If they don't get a majority position, they make sure nothing can get done. They've gotten so good at this they don't even WANT a majority position. The people they represent, the wealthy, actually do quite FINE when the government falls on its face.
While the takeover of the extreme right-wing is indeed a scary as hell prospect, keeping the Democratic Party in its current form in power is not the alternative. The Dems are not as psychotic, but they are still accelerating our destruction by their steadfast support of conservative policies on nearly all fronts. They will not stop our slide toward a police state, will not stop our militarization of foreign policy, and will not stop corporations from poisoning us in pursuit of their profits.
But what can we do? Progressives have no national leaders right now, at least not any currently in power.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
What can we do? ORGANIZE TO FORM AN UMBRELLA PROGRESSIVE PARTY TO UNITE ALL AUTHENTIC AMERICAN PROGRESSIVES AS FAST AS POSSIBLE.
And that's why I'm going to workshops on grassroots organizing with CCAN this month, starting this Saturday. It's not something I have much experience in.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Excellent! Outstanding! Another good way to learn how to organize is to go to the US Social Forum or attend an American Friends Service Committee meeting and get with one of their sub-groups. But any practice you can get working with a progressive protest group is a good place to start. The colleges have several groups that are teaching how to organize. Students for a Democratic Society has been semi-reincarnated and are learning about this.
"Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true." -Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
We need to get out there and mingle with the multitudes, build bridges. If we did that, we could form a powerful alliance, despite the lies.
We must remember, a majority of Americans wanted a single payer health care system or at the very least a strong public option that anyone can sign on to. 70% of Americans say global warming is a threat. 4 out of 10 say it's a serious threat.
Back to top!
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
How do YOU suggest going about achieving this progressive unity of which you speak?
"We lack a Constitutional govt. at this time" you say. My reply is to agree at one level. You point out, accurately, that in the economic and foreign policy realms, we have lawlessness. Absolutely. Article 6 (2) declares that "treaties made" are the "supreme law of the land," treaties which include the UN Charter which forbids the "threat or use of force" against other nations, and the Convention Against Torture which forbids torture of any kind in any circumstance, as does our own Bill of Rights. And then there is spying as you point out. We DO need to uphold it, at one level.
At another level, we need to update the document as well, with something like FDR's Second Bill of Rights. Why? To make up for its deficiencies. The Preamble is clear, and the first six articles that form our government undermine the promise of a more perfect union via liberty, justice, the common defense, the general welfare and domestic tranquility. How? We have never had a national referendum on anything, not even president. The Senate is grossly disproportionate. (17 women of 100; a Wyoming senator represents 200,000 people and a California senator represents 18,000,000, a 90-to-one ratio, etc.) The two-party system is mandated by the structure of the legislatures, excluding minor parties from representation. The Senate's conservatism through disproportionate representation creates the Supreme Court's conservatism, leading to Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 turning money into speech, and more. The amending article, Article V, allows half of the 26 legislatures of 13 states, representing as little as five percent of the US population to veto any constitutional amendment. (See Dan Lazare's Frozen Republic and Sanford Levinson's Our Undemocratic Constitution.)
The idea of a non-violent, constitutional revolution is to uphold the rule of domestic and international AND to fix the system to get rid of minority, corporate rule. We need an end to the minority, plutocratic rule of the corporate state or regime. A multiparty system via proportional representation with public financing is what so many nations have chosen. We should too.
For any such revolution to happen, it would require us to do what you call for when you say "The moment we unite to bring about a common good, this corporate state is done." I agree. How do we do that? Politics is power. So I think progressives need to unite POLITICALLY. That will require a strong presence of progressives in state Democratic Party in progressive caucuses *and* a growing Green Party, *and* support for local progressive parties like the Vermont Progressive Party. Six years ago there were no progressive caucuses in state Democratic parties. Now there are 19. (See the list under links and resources at the CPC website.)
Once we have a growing number of progressive political organizations in the Democratic and Green Parties, there would be nothing to prevent us from forming an alliance uniting those groups with independent progressive leaders to help us form plans for activism, between-election political tactics, strategies for our voting bloc, electing progressives in primary elections, threatening incumbents with third party challenges, and more.
These are the choices available to us (and others that we can think of) OR we can simply submit to corporate rule. Hmmmm . . . what should we do?
It is the clarity of your identification of our very scary adversary that makes your argument so important in relation to Krugman's misplaced fears.
"See Dan Lazare's Frozen Republic and Sanford Levinson's Our Undemocratic Constitution.)" –(metal)
–These two books, especially Daniel Lazare's, are quite simply essential reading for anyone hoping to understand America and you perform a service to presciently recommend them here.
–(Jill Bains)
Thanks. I'd also add Steven Hill's 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy and Robert Dahl's How Democratic is the American Constitution?
Fixing the system via electoral and constitutional reform is the key bridge issue that will make sense to many people—progressives, moderates, evangelicals and others left out or hurt by the system. But, as you suggest, it takes a bit of reading. And such reading is well worth it.