Whether the eventual measures taken come from the nominal left or nominal right may be less important than the order in which the major externalities of financialized neo-liberalism de-externalize. The first decade of the 21st Century can probably be taken as a first draft for augmentation under identified emergency conditions of central power, outside of elections, but with broad popular and bi-partisan support.
Unger still wants to answer the young Marx’s call upon philosophers not just to understand the world, but to change it. Wills wants to walk the same path that Unger, with impressive clarity, has marked out – for instance in the six minutes of the YouTube that few even of the mediating intellectuals will consider – but Wills wants to walk it more slowly and carefully, lest America take a detour into Rick Perry’s Texas, perhaps never to emerge, perhaps to dwell there needlessly long at needless cost. The President… has appointments.
Looking forward to Breaking Bad Season 5, I realize that one main reason to be a bigger fan of BB than of the well-regarded House is if, like me, you know you’re a loser – which means “in the wrong from the perspective of a wrong world.”
“A Clash of Models” by James K – latest posting in the League of Ordinary Gentlemen’s virtual symposium under the question “What, if anything, is wrong with inequality?” – resembles previous submissions in that it seems to assume that something called “productivity” is virtually synonymous with “the good,” and furthermore is susceptible to simple quantitative amplification or augmentation – i.e., the more of it the better.
The Citizens United decision and its application joining together and heightening disgust with and alienation from multiple central institutions of republican democracy – Supreme Court, the “free” media, popular elections – with some prospect of contaminating the entire political-ideological superstructure < -> triumph of our self-consciously most ardent patriots.
All successful politicians must by definition adapt to the system which in its pure form – something to be feared – is the system of empty opportunism (we hold empty opportunism to be self-evident). The figure of Mitt represents its nothingness exquisitely, but the meaningfulness of its meaninglessness would have at least as much to do with us and where we are with poor rich Mitt.
Expressed as mere opinion, as mediocritism strongly asserted, what Strauss or any honest human being has to say about certain not-possibly-true possible truths may become effectively indistinguishable from the views of cranks, lunatics, provocateurs, and traitors. To approach such not-possibly-true possible truths at all may mean asking to be counted a Nazi, for example – or even, if not worse than as a clearer and more nearly present danger, a “neo-conservative.”