|
Truthout...
Class Warfare, the
Final Chapter
Tuesday 15 March 2011
by Michael Pirsch
“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class,
that’s making war, and we’re winning.” - Warren Buffett to The New York
Times, November 26, 2006
There is overwhelming evidence that we are entering the final chapter
of class warfare in the US. Today, in the “public arena,” it is
forbidden to say class warfare, and many citizens do not regard
themselves as working class. The assault on language comes compliments
of the propaganda apparatus, which includes: public relations,
marketing, corporate media and the entertainment industry,
universities, think tanks and so on. Its purpose is to distract our
attention from serious matters so we can focus on trivial matters -
usually involving consuming. Edward Bernays, the founder of the modern
propaganda industry, described the process:
Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an
invisible government. We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes
formed, our ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of ...
in almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or
business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking we are
dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the
mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull
the wires that control the public mind.[1]
In addition to inventing the propaganda model still in use today,
Bernays’ model created support for World War I, first in England and
then in the US, calling the war to save Morgan’s billions the war for
“making the world safe for democracy.”
We have been overwhelmed by the propaganda apparatus to the point that
it controls our thought processes, causing us to become relentless
shoppers, even against our own interests. It controls our thinking in
the public sphere so that we support the wealthy elite, even against
our own interests. Far too many of us have been rendered thoughtless
and clueless as to what it means to live in a democratic society. It is
not democracy because the government says it is; it is democracy when
the masses are informed and act through their delegates to develop
policy that promotes the general welfare. Today there are two sovereign
nations that exhibit more democratic tendencies than all others:
Venezuela and Bolivia. Because of their efforts to build democracy,
both sovereign nations have been under attack by the US. In Venezuela,
the US sponsored a coup in 2002. In Bolivia, the US government has
sponsored a secessionist movement made up of the wealthy elite, whose
tactics includes murder of government supporters. The Bolivian
government expelled the US ambassador for his role in the
destabilization attempt. Both Venezuela and Bolivia have adopted new
constitutions which were the result of a process that involved all
citizens and especially both countries’ indigenous populations, who
were previously completely excluded from any role in government. Both
countries have improved access to their medical systems, increased
literacy and established local spaces where democracy can be practiced.
This shift causes the US empire considerable distress, because the
empire fears the spread of real democracy more than anything else.
An essential element in a democracy is the development of a critical
consciousness that allows us to resist succumbing to the siren call of
the propaganda apparatus. Hugo Chavez, in a 2003 interview, spoke of
the need to develop critical thinking:
It seems to be part of a larger social defect in the US - that’s a
society that should really develop some kind of response to the
intellectual battering that seems to take place daily. I sincerely hope
that one day the US public will develop some kind of critical
consciousness, that they will remove the veil from their eyes and see
the media powers for what they are. No part of the human community can
live entirely on its own planet with its own laws of motion and cut off
from the rest of humanity. They must be critical, and make it their
personal responsibility to humanity and morality to discover the
truth.[2]
Eduardo Galeano, well-known Latin American author and critical thinker,
continued in the same vein:
Never have so many been held incommunicado by so few. More and more
have the right to hear and see, but fewer and fewer have the privilege
of informing, giving their opinion and creating. The dictatorship of
the single word and the single image, much more devastating than that
of the single party, is imposing a life whose exemplary citizen is a
docile consumer and passive spectator. Never before have so few fooled
so many.[3]
What better time than now for the wealthy elite to crush any chance of
developing any critical thought. A substantial majority in the US have
been so overwhelmed by the consumer/celebrity culture that distracts
from the real situation that they are now fearful of harboring a
critical thought, let alone speaking critically about the surrender of
democracy to the wealthy elite. No matter what outrage the wealthy
elite throws at us all, every indicator suggests there would be little,
if any, resistance to that outrage. In fact, now is the best time for
the wealthy elite to finally win the war and put into action all the
highly repressive measures passed by Congress this decade. The
repression already authorized, if put into full effect, would make the
US a recognizably totalitarian state.
The goal of winning the war is to control all of the wealth and all of
the people in the US and in the rest of the world, including, of
course, governments. This victory is being accomplished by the
combination of the financial services and military-related industries,
which, in addition to lobbying for the continuation of several wars in
the Middle East (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia,
Palestine, Iran, etcetera) is now also engaged in stealing government
benefits from the citizens of Ireland, Spain, Greece, Latvia, England,
France and the US. All governments are cooperating with the market
(primarily Wall Street and London banks) by terminating long-running
programs designed to promote the general welfare. The stolen money is
being given by the governments to Wall Street and its felonious
partners in European banks - however, large, passionate demonstrations
and massive student and worker strikes mark the reaction in Europe.
Our time is coming. Soon, Congress will once again deliver more tax
cuts to the wealthiest people on the planet, at a time when perhaps
more than 60 percent of the American people is at severe economic risk.
This time also marks the beginning of the process of ending Social
Security and replacing it with mandated contributions to Wall Street,
which - for a fee, and with no guaranteed return - manage individual
workers’ retirement accounts. Wall Street’s management of what used to
be Social Security will - through commissions and other fees that are
not a cost in the present Social Security system - reap an obscene
amount of money, maybe in the hundreds of billions annually.
In addition to depriving the federal budget of the income necessary to
provide the most basic services by eliminating taxes for the wealthy
elite, we have committed ourselves to conducting “endless war” wherever
and whenever it suits the wealthy elite’s purpose. The combination of
tax cuts and funding for the endless wars during a “jobless” recovery
ensures we will have a citizenry best described as desperate and
clueless. The “endless” war is one of the greatest frauds perpetrated
upon the citizens of the US. A failed trillion dollar intelligence and
defense system results in 9/11; then, lies are perpetrated by the
president, the Congress, the military and the intelligence apparatus;
those lies are, in turn, supported enthusiastically by the propaganda
apparatus, and we commit international war crimes by invading Iraq and
Afghanistan. The US’s empirical bullying has made the world much more
dangerous, not safer. The more we terrorize people, the more terrorists
we create. Our feeding of the financial services and military
industries is sucking the spiritual, economic and physical life out of
us - just as Dwight D. Eisenhower predicted.
During the summer of 2009, the Obama administration fired the first
volley in the renewed battle led by the wealthy elite to eliminate
Social Security. It announced a freeze in the cost-of-living adjustment
(COLA) to Social Security recipients for the years 2010 and 2011. This
was the first time in 30 years no COLA would be received. Never mind
the cost increases in all necessities and the fact that no one was
publicly calling for a freeze. The freeze was absolutely unnecessary
and cruel. Social Security recipients are also required to pay more
each month for basic Medicare coverage. Many elder workers are fired or
laid off well in advance of their retirement age. It is cheaper to hire
someone to work for less than the eliminated elder worker. The
consequences of refusing increases to Social Security, raising the
retirement age and lowering benefits is a recipe for eldercide.
Social Security is not a government-funded program. Employees’
deductions are matched 100 percent their employers. There is simply no
other tax money involved with Social Security. Medicare is something
else, although funded with part of the Federal Insurance Contributions
Act (FICA) tax. Private insurers and the pharmaceutical industry were
allowed to participate in Medicare and could be considered somewhat
responsible for the miserable shape it is in.
Obama is setting up this system on behalf of the wealthy elite, who
were among his earliest and largest financial backers in 2008.
According to the Congressional Budget Office and the Social Security
Administration, with no changes whatsoever, Social Security will remain
solvent until 2037. That is 27 years from now. Even with unemployment
projected to remain at 20 percent or higher - which means FICA receipts
will remain low or decrease further - Social Security is not the
problem it is made out to be, especially considering all the current
crises, such as endless war, global climate change catastrophes,
jobless recovery and so on. So, why did Obama propose a two percent cut
in FICA for employees? If you earn $1,000 per paycheck, you will
receive a $20 “bonus” each payday. However, if Obama’s proposal of a
federal sales tax passes, that $20 will go right back to the US
Treasury. That two-percent cut will definitely speed up the day when
Social Security outgo exceeds income. At that time, the entire
propaganda apparatus will be let loose to clear the way for Wall Street
to take over Social Security. What a deal! You give me about $480 per
year (unless there is a federal sales tax) and I give you several
trillions of dollars to burn through. This is why critical thinking is
so important. The wealthy elite dangle about $40 a month in front of
debt-ridden, have-a-job-but-afraid-of-losing-it people, get hundreds of
bought members of Congress to shill for it and, bingo, the door to
steal Social Security is wide open.
On the other side of the coin, raising the dollar limit upon which FICA
is taxable (right now, nothing above $106,000 is taxed) would keep
Social Security solvent into the next century. A simple solution to a
projected problem, but politically impossible because, although 70 to
80 percent of the population might support this, what counts is what
the top one percent wants.
Why all this fuss over something that might pose a problem 27 years
from now? The wealthy elite passionately hate Social Security because
it represents a major victory by the rest of us during the classic
battles of class warfare during the 1920’s to the 1940’s. It represents
fruit from the tree of democracy. People who were in nearly the exact
position we find ourselves today - except that they had no safety net
at all - organized, agitated for and won a federal jobs program, a
mortgage foreclosure moratorium, unemployment insurance, minimum wage
and Social Security, among many other benefits they fought for and won.
That era represents a major retreat for the wealthy elite in its
relentlessly waged class war in the US. The wealthy elite hate
democracy unless they can own it.
Another motive just might be the trillions of dollars Wall Street would
like to get its hands on. Most private sector defined pension plans
have been dumped on the federal pension guaranty corporation (which
pays pennies to the dollar on what pensioners previously received).
Public pension plans are also being targeted, feeding the insane
position that goes something like this: “if I am down, I am going to
drag down everybody like me.” How else to explain the media and
political flacks droning on and on about spoiled, bloated public
workers with fat pension plans? Obama’s cynical ploy of freezing
federal employees’ pay is a bow to these tactics. It is amazing how
often we hear of the great financial sacrifices made by presidential
appointees and how much more they could earn in the private sector. Of
course, the benefits accruing from their corrupt behavior while in
public office are not factored in. The fate of 401(k) plans and
individual retirement accounts must not be discussed as Wall Street
awaits its chance to steal from the poorest citizens of the US.
Other crises that seem to be forgotten include: the Savings and Loan
rip-off following deregulation by Reagan (cost: over $500 billion); the
stock market bubble of the Clinton-Bush years (401(k)s and IRAs wiped
out); corporate manufacturing’s flight from about 1975 on (and the
associated loss of middle-class jobs and status); and the most recent
fraud visited upon us, the fraudulent mortgage-backed securities bubble
made possible by Clinton administration deregulation (its related
losses still unfolding).
Clinton’s current financial situation is suggestive. When he left
office in 2001, reports had him owing $10-15 million in legal fees.
Since then, thanks to speaking fees, a salary from his nonprofit
foundation and investments, he can afford to blow $5 million or more on
his daughter’s wedding. One is left to imagine Obama’s hidden
retirement plan should he deliver Social Security (after George W.
Bush’s failure to do so became the “greatest disappointment” of his
presidency). All former members of Congress, the president, vice
president and cabinet officials should be required to submit detailed
financial reports for at least five years after they leave office. If
it seems they have become unusually rich (like Clinton), they should be
investigated and, if warranted, indicted.
The list of priorities that need to be addressed in the federal budget
should not in any way, shape or form include Social Security, unless
the real intent is to steal it. Once the deed is done, it is all over.
Tax cuts are vital to the wealthy elite. They hate the federal income
tax and have opposed it since its enactment in 1916. Beginning in the
Carter era, the wealthy elite have been blasting away at what remains
of their meager tax rates (that is, the maximum marginal rate after
custom-made individual deductions). Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II
and Obama all have participated in the endgame for progressive
taxation. Obama has even gone so far as to reduce the estate tax, which
only applies to about 2 percent of taxpayers. Ironically, reducing the
estate tax has come to be very important to many who will never inherit
an estate that would qualify to be taxed: the power of the propaganda
apparatus again.
There was a time when the wealthy elite actually paid substantial
taxes. The purpose of taxing the extraordinarily rich is to prevent an
aristocracy from developing and to maintain a true democracy, a feat
Aristotle recognized as impossible in the face of great income
inequalities. Now, after over 35 years of cut, cut, cut for the rich,
we have the most powerful aristocracy in history, and they are waging
war against the rest of us. If you follow the results of studies that
show the disparity of wealth in the US, you will see the flow of money
from the bottom 90 percent to the top 1 percent over the 60 years
between 1950 and 2010. The statistical evidence of the existence of
class war is the direct result of the wealthy elite’s ownership of
Congress, the executive branch and the courts.
Wealth is the value of everything you own minus debt.
Disparity of Wealth
In 1933, the wealthiest one percent of the population held 33.3 percent
of the wealth. In 1974, the wealthiest one percent held 19.9 percent of
the wealth.
In 2007, the wealthiest one percent held 65.4 percent of the wealth.
In 1933, the bottom 90 percent held 66.7 percent of the wealth.
In 1974, the bottom 90 percent held 80.1 percent of the wealth.
In 2007, the bottom 90 percent held 34.6 percent of the wealth.
Federal Tax Rates (after custom-made individual deductions)
1974 Capital gains tax rate: 35 percent
1950 Highest marginal tax rate: 90 percent
2005 Capital gains tax rate: 15 percent
2005 Highest marginal tax rate: 34 percent
Average Real Income Change 1973-2000
Average real income of bottom 90 percent: -7 percent
Average real income of top 1 percent: + 148 percent
Average real income of top 0.1 percent: + 343 percent
[4]
Average Amount of Wealth Held by Persons: 2009 Census
Single Black Women: $100
Single Hispanic Women: $120
All White Men: $43,800
All White Women: $41,500
All Black Men: $7,900
Amount of Wealth Held by Families: 2009 Census
1986 Black Family Wealth: $2,000
2009 Black Family Wealth: $5,000
1986 White Family Wealth: $22,000
2009 White Family Wealth: $100,000
Full-Time Minimum Wage, Adjusted for Inflation
1968: $18,262
2004: $10,712
[5]
There is a common thread running through these statistics: the events
that have eroded our quality and quantity of life have been controlled
and orchestrated by the wealthy elite, and they are not finished yet.
The picture is one dominated by racism, militarism and corporate
control of government - three vital ingredients of fascism.
Post-racism, indeed.
The story of class warfare would not be complete without a look at the
behemoth military-security apparatus. A bipartisan Congress has passed
draconian legislation during the past nine years that essentially
leaves our Constitution with rights intact - at least, the right to own
guns, and the unlimited corporate right to influence elections. All
totalitarian repressive tactics such as unchecked surveillance,
imprisonment without charge, summary execution, the right to a lawyer,
the right to know the charges brought against you and confront your
accuser, and so on, have been destroyed by legislation and presidential
fiat. In addition, the military and military tactics and equipment have
been inserted into local law enforcement, with the purpose of shutting
off avenues of dissent and/or dealing with dissent by the use of
overwhelming force (think Pittsburg G-20). We live inside a nation that
has already built the legal and physical infrastructure (the latter
partly contracted to Halliburton) so that hundreds of thousands can be
pulled off the street in a single day, imprisoned without charge and
denied access to contact with family and legal representation.
When Obama announced his creation of the deficit commission, he
suggested all military and domestic security spending were off limits
for discussion. If a candidate proposes serious reductions in military
and domestic security spending, that candidate is toast. The pols
whimper that it is political suicide to propose serious cuts in
military and domestic security spending; not doing so guarantees the
slaughter of millions - as we have seen in the Middle East and every
other place our war-happy generals practice their craft.
The US empire has expanded to include over 800 overseas military
facilities, ranging from city-sized bases to single building outposts
in 63 countries - not counting the bases in Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan,
Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.[6] The US empire military budget including
cost of war (which is not included in the annual defense budget) is
over $1 billion, slightly less than one-half (46.4 percent) of what all
other countries on the planet combined spend.[7]
The power the US military wields is felt in every country on the
planet. The US military is “supported,” with hardly any dissent, not
only by the Democrat and Republican members of Congress, but also,
presumably, by over 90 percent of the electorate, if you count total
votes in each Democrat versus Republican race for House, Senate and
president. This one-party/war-party system has produced unconditional
love of war and expansion of empire. Thus, a vote for Democrats or
Republicans is an endorsement of empire. There is no question that the
one-party system has consistently supported military expansion across
the globe. While many of the people who voted for Democrats may be
offended by a claim that their votes endorsed empire, that is the
result, if not the intent, of their votes. Meanwhile, polls show that
more than half of those polled do not support an American empire. Count
one more success for the propaganda apparatus.
Perhaps you might remember the $12 billion “lost” in Iraq in 2002.[8]
The money was shipped from the US to the Green Zone in Baghdad. The
money arrived shrink-wrapped on pallets and disappeared. No real
investigation took place, but why investigate what was already known?
The scandal didn’t get much play in the media either. A lack of media
play creates a lack of concern by the masses. That $12 billion could
certainly fill a lot of holes in a budget whose deficit is tirelessly
evoked, alongside a “perception managed” campaign against Social
Security, in one of the last gambits in the 160-year-long class war.
But promoting the general welfare is not one of the wealthy elite’s
concerns.
That the wealthy elite hate democracy is beyond question. The WikiLeaks
of State Department cables exposed that hatred over and over again. All
governments are expected to do the bidding of the US empire, especially
when those demands are contrary to the actions and thoughts of that
government’s own citizens. Specific examples of the hatred of democracy
include: the 2000 vote in Florida; the kidnapping , during a US-backed
coup in Venezuela, of President Chavez in 2002; the 1992 and 2004
kidnapping of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide (Aristide won
the 2002 election with over 92 percent of the vote); the allowing of
the criminalization of Aristide’s political party, Famni Lavalas; the
support for the ouster of Honduras President Manuel Zelaya and for the
resultant coup government; the support for Israel’s policies of
overturning the most democratic election in Arab history in Palestine
by jailing victorious Hamas legislators and exacting severe collective
punishments against the Palestinians in Gaza by blockade, and, later,
by a massacre.
Another example of elite disgust with democracy was offered during
September 2008, when Congress was ordered to bail out the wealthy
elite’s bankers. Prior to the first vote, I called over 120
Congresspeople at their Washington offices. After the House rejected
the bailout, I called about 20 Senators. The calls to the House
revealed that each member’s office was receiving a torrent of phone
calls. These calls were not part of an organized effort, but came out
of genuine and passionate opposition. I was informed by the staff of
various members that over 90 percent of the callers opposed the
bailout. After a few phone calls to Senate members, it became apparent
that the senators would not listen to the people and would follow the
orders of the wealthy and bail out the banks.
Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democrat from California’s 27th District
(comprising Sherman Oaks and Northridge) spoke on the House floor
during the second attempt to pass the bailout. He revealed that more
than one House member was told that martial law would be declared if
the House failed to pass the bailout.[9] The obscene wealth of the
elite was threatened by democratic activity of the nation’s citizens.
The bailout and how it was executed remains one of many examples that
our wealthy elite hates democracy.
We really have very little space in our lives to practice democracy as
it is meant to be practiced. The union movement has engaged in sporadic
dances with democracy, but those were finished with the creation of
mega-size “local” unions. Nearly all of the successes by the rest of us
in this class warfare have been due in no small part to the extent that
democracy still exists in the unions. Now, there are still a few locals
that practice real democracy internally, and they are the most
successful unions today. Our greatest achievement in the class struggle
took place during the staggering increase in union membership that took
place between 1933 and 1947. Our long slide to the bottom began with
the anti-solidarity Taft-Hartley legislation that severely limited
freedom of association and expression for all citizens except the
wealthy elite. It continued with the Red Scare, which drove some of the
most dedicated, compassionate organizers in the US out of jobs and
careers - a brilliant tactic by their adversaries because it also
effectively disappeared from our knowledge the notion of organizing for
positive social change. The legacy of the Red Scare continues today as
dissidents are conflated with terrorists. Fear and more fear keeps us
under control.
Union members did not reject democracy. Rather, following the New Deal
and World War II, an all-out attack was waged against union activists,
with the assistance of Congress of Industrial Organizations
(CIO)-affiliated leaders. This turnabout involved a self-cleaning of
the CIO on behalf of the wealthy elite. Unions were kicked out of the
CIO for being deemed too radical, and some of the radical unions
changed their philosophy to get along. Union democracy has been the
main victim, since union members are more radical than their leaders
and allowing democratic decisions to be made would disrupt the leaders’
cozy relationship with the wealthy elite.
So, today, we are left with no place to learn about and practice
democracy except in our neighborhoods (the physical, not the virtual,
ones). The rest of us cannot begin to compete with the wealthy elite
for access to the media; we cannot compete with the wealthy elite in
the ability to control the propaganda apparatus and the wealthy elite
cannot compete with us in our neighborhoods.
A vital instrument in the propaganda apparatus’ control of our thinking
and thought processes is the television. More than 80 percent of the
funds spent in the 2010 election were spent in the realm of television.
Imagine what would happen if we didn’t watch it. Billions of dollars
would be wasted because the voters did their own research and, through
discussions with their neighbors, decided on the candidate with the
best program, not the best television ads. An achievable dream, as long
as there is unfettered access to a neutral Internet?
Typically, in difficult times, it is neighbors who come to offer
assistance. When floodwaters threaten your home and the military has
come, not to help, but to provide “security.” Our Internet and other
long-distance friends will not be able to help in the wonderful way of
neighbors who cooperate to help each other. We can organize in our
neighborhoods to deal with our common struggles, and, from that,
democracy will grow and grow, until it engulfs the whole nation.
Becoming informed, educating each other, agitating on issues and
organizing can create a sustainable economy through ideas such as
Gardens Not Lawns, Food Not Bombs, community radio, free health clinics
(many doctors would be happy to volunteer), free legal clinics,
transportation cooperatives - the list is as boundless as our
collective imagination. Beginning in our neighborhoods, it is possible
to form an organic, progressive political movement to sweep the land.
The question remains: will we allow the story to be “Class Warfare: The
Final Chapter,” or will we create the alternative by beginning the
class struggle? The base of the wealthy elite has always been led by
the House of Morgan (J. Pierpont Morgan) which lives as a corporate
person in the forms of Morgan Stanley and Morgan Chase, preeminent
leaders in the world’s financial markets. Yes, the very markets that
are “nervous” and “jittery” (real human traits) about countries that
owe them money. Plagued by nerves and jitters, the markets are busy
raiding old-age pensions, family assistance programs and the like all
over Europe - the same prescription followed for years in the so-called
third world and in the US right now.
“Power concedes nothing without a demand - it never has and it never
will....” These are still powerful words spoken by one of our greatest
Americans, Frederick Douglass. The sad truth is that we have not made
any demands since the Civil Rights struggle and the anti-Vietnam War
struggle during the 1950-1970’s. We are at the fork in the road: to the
right is class warfare - the final chapter - and to the left, the class
struggle begins.
A grassroots-based movement, as opposed to the billionaire-controlled,
top-down Tea Party, will be able to effect progressive rather than
regressive programs. It is ironic that the wealthy elite recognize the
value of neighborhood organizing while the left ignores this base. The
Koch brothers-sponsored Tea Party was using tactics advocated by Saul
Alinsky, one of our greatest radical neighborhood organizers. They used
the tactics; what they did not do was hand out Alinsky’s book,
“Reveille For Radicals.” If they had, the Tea Party could have
transformed itself into a truly progressive force.
Finally, it is our right and our duty to replace the corrupted
government with one that works for the public welfare, ensuring that
the wealthy elite never again endanger all life on this planet or
destroy our collective humanity. We are “endowed by our Creator with
certain unalienable rights ... among these are life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness.” We must recognize our government has become
destructive of those ends and reform it. The Declaration of
Independence goes on to say, “mankind are more disposed to suffer while
evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms
to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuse and
usurpations ... reduce them under absolute despotism... “ we must then
accomplish wholesale change. Have you suffered enough, or do you want
more?
Read it with links at Truthout
|
|
|
|
