Sunday, October 9, 2011

Left and right complementary rather than antagonistic on this one


The Occupy Wall Street protests are obviously targeting Wall Street, i.e. the giant banks.

The Occupy the Fed protests – led by Alex Jones, the Oathkeepers and other conservatives – are targeting the Federal Reserve.*

While some are trying to weaken these two movements through a divide-and-conquer strategy, the truth is that they are two sides of the same coin.

Specifically, the corrupt, giant banks would never have gotten so big and powerful on their own. In a free market, the leaner banks with sounder business models would be growing, while the giants who made reckless speculative gambles would have gone bust. See this, this and this.

It is the Federal Reserve, Treasury and Congress who have repeatedly bailed out the big banks, ensured they make money at taxpayer expense, exempted them from standard accounting and the criminal and fraud laws which govern the little guy, and encouraged them – through “moral hazard” – of becoming even more reckless.

Indeed, the government made them big in the first place....
Read the rest of the post at Washington's Blog, Occupy Wall Street and Occupy the Fed: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Washington's Blog is often out of paradigm but it is a useful aggregator of information on important subjects. This post is particularly significant in that it shows how the left and right are complementing each other in the attack on the financial freewheeling and fraud, and political corruption that has led to economic chaos.





6 comments:

googleheim said...

On the right hand side, you have the creative destructionistas - they are conservative neoliberal ( I don't get that nomenclature still Matt Franko ) and they advocate the violent upheaval of losing parties in the financial system - MUCH LIKE MARXISTS !!!

On the left hand side, you have the creative integrationistas - they are liberal ( neoconservative ? ) and they advocate the soft upheaval by way of nonviolent protesting - not at all like marxists.

So now I hope you are thoroughly confused and ready for some weirdness ! ? ! ?

Anonymous said...

Alex Jones, conspiracy theorist??

beowulf said...

"Alex Jones, conspiracy theorist??"

Interesting fellow (and yes a Ron Paul fan through and through). As conspiracy theorists go, he is The Beatles and Glenn Beck is The Monkees.

Rolling Stone had a great profile of him this spring.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/talk-radios-alex-jones-the-most-paranoid-man-in-america-20110302

beowulf said...

The goal should be to put the unelected Fed under the authority of the elected president... and then elect better presidents. Ironically, the path to democratic control of the financial system runs through the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote last year:
"The people do not vote for the Officers of the United States. They instead look to the President to guide the assistants or deputies subject to his superintendence. Without a clear and effective chain of command, the public cannot determine on whom the blame or the punishment of a pernicious measure, or series of pernicious measures ought really to fall."
http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=8&xmldoc=In%20FCO%2020110701130.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR&SizeDisp=7

Tom Hickey said...

Gerald Celente is pushing direct democracy.

DirectDemocracyNow

One person one vote, not one $ one vote

beowulf said...

Tom,
Before pushing any reform plan, some thought should be given to the veto points in our system of government.

The Senate filibuster rules are one veto point, Obama's team was criminally incompetent wasting a year rounding up 60 Senate votes for healthcare reform when he could have passed HCR his first summer in office with a 50 vote + VP reconciliation bill.

Another veto point is the Supreme Court. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm rather dubious "direct democracy" is compatible with Article IV.
"The United States shall guarantee
to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government..."