Two Former U.S. Presidents Simultaneously Advocate for a Close Family Member as the Next U.S. President
Americans love to mock the British for choosing -- in the 21st century -- to live under a monarchy and honor the hereditary succession of a royal family. I enthusiastically participate in that derision. Few concepts are as antithetical to reason and democratic liberty as anointing families that are vested with an entitlement to wield power through dynasty and lineage.
Americans love to mock the British for choosing -- in the 21st century -- to live under a monarchy and honor the hereditary succession of a royal family. I enthusiastically participate in that derision. Few concepts are as antithetical to reason and democratic liberty as anointing families that are vested with an entitlement to wield power through dynasty and lineage.
The U.S. officially has no formal royal families, but clearly loves dynastic political power. As the U.S. becomes increasingly oligarchical -- all of its institutions, including its political ones, dominated by a tiny number of extremely rich families -- it is natural that all forms of hereditary power will flourish. There are still examples of people from backgrounds devoid of family wealth or influence attaining political power -- Barack Obama certainly qualifies -- but it's virtually impossible for them to succeed without the overwhelming support of those oligarchical circles.
Dynastic power is not a new phenomenon in the U.S., but this past week featured a particularly vivid illustration of how potent it is. The two U.S. presidents prior to President Obama -- Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- made appearances on the campaign trail to urge Americans to elect their favorite candidate, which, in both cases, happens to be a close family member.
"There's no doubt in my mind Jeb Bush has the experience and the character to be a great president," said George W. Bush, himself the son of a former U.S. president, in South Carolina about his brother. At a rally in Tennessee, Bill Clinton pronounced his wife "the best change-maker I've ever known," and in a separate speech in Florida angrily denounced Democrats who support his wife's opponent by depicting them as the equivalent of the GOP's Tea Party.
Until Jeb Bush proved to be a remarkably inept candidate, it was long expected that the 2016 election would match the son of one former president and brother of another, against the wife of another former president. Further underscoring the dynastic dynamic was that their funding would come from the same sources, numerous powerful factions would have difficulty choosing which candidate would serve their agenda most faithfully, and, as is often true of aristocracies, the two extremely rich families have become very close friends.
Read the full article at The Intercept.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Americans love to mock the British for choosing -- in the 21st century -- to live under a monarchy and honor the hereditary succession of a royal family. I enthusiastically participate in that derision. Few concepts are as antithetical to reason and democratic liberty as anointing families that are vested with an entitlement to wield power through dynasty and lineage.
The U.S. officially has no formal royal families, but clearly loves dynastic political power. As the U.S. becomes increasingly oligarchical -- all of its institutions, including its political ones, dominated by a tiny number of extremely rich families -- it is natural that all forms of hereditary power will flourish. There are still examples of people from backgrounds devoid of family wealth or influence attaining political power -- Barack Obama certainly qualifies -- but it's virtually impossible for them to succeed without the overwhelming support of those oligarchical circles.
Dynastic power is not a new phenomenon in the U.S., but this past week featured a particularly vivid illustration of how potent it is. The two U.S. presidents prior to President Obama -- Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- made appearances on the campaign trail to urge Americans to elect their favorite candidate, which, in both cases, happens to be a close family member.
"There's no doubt in my mind Jeb Bush has the experience and the character to be a great president," said George W. Bush, himself the son of a former U.S. president, in South Carolina about his brother. At a rally in Tennessee, Bill Clinton pronounced his wife "the best change-maker I've ever known," and in a separate speech in Florida angrily denounced Democrats who support his wife's opponent by depicting them as the equivalent of the GOP's Tea Party.
Until Jeb Bush proved to be a remarkably inept candidate, it was long expected that the 2016 election would match the son of one former president and brother of another, against the wife of another former president. Further underscoring the dynastic dynamic was that their funding would come from the same sources, numerous powerful factions would have difficulty choosing which candidate would serve their agenda most faithfully, and, as is often true of aristocracies, the two extremely rich families have become very close friends.
Read the full article at The Intercept.
Americans love to mock the British for choosing -- in the 21st century -- to live under a monarchy and honor the hereditary succession of a royal family. I enthusiastically participate in that derision. Few concepts are as antithetical to reason and democratic liberty as anointing families that are vested with an entitlement to wield power through dynasty and lineage.
The U.S. officially has no formal royal families, but clearly loves dynastic political power. As the U.S. becomes increasingly oligarchical -- all of its institutions, including its political ones, dominated by a tiny number of extremely rich families -- it is natural that all forms of hereditary power will flourish. There are still examples of people from backgrounds devoid of family wealth or influence attaining political power -- Barack Obama certainly qualifies -- but it's virtually impossible for them to succeed without the overwhelming support of those oligarchical circles.
Dynastic power is not a new phenomenon in the U.S., but this past week featured a particularly vivid illustration of how potent it is. The two U.S. presidents prior to President Obama -- Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- made appearances on the campaign trail to urge Americans to elect their favorite candidate, which, in both cases, happens to be a close family member.
"There's no doubt in my mind Jeb Bush has the experience and the character to be a great president," said George W. Bush, himself the son of a former U.S. president, in South Carolina about his brother. At a rally in Tennessee, Bill Clinton pronounced his wife "the best change-maker I've ever known," and in a separate speech in Florida angrily denounced Democrats who support his wife's opponent by depicting them as the equivalent of the GOP's Tea Party.
Until Jeb Bush proved to be a remarkably inept candidate, it was long expected that the 2016 election would match the son of one former president and brother of another, against the wife of another former president. Further underscoring the dynastic dynamic was that their funding would come from the same sources, numerous powerful factions would have difficulty choosing which candidate would serve their agenda most faithfully, and, as is often true of aristocracies, the two extremely rich families have become very close friends.
Read the full article at The Intercept.