Monday, October 4, 2010

Friedman and Krugman: 2 third-party visions

Last week (9/28) Tom Friedman's column discussed the desireability of a true third party in the U.S. He said that the will was there, and that all that was needed was a leader who could capture the imagination of all the disgruntled "citizens from centrist Republicans to independents right through to centrist Democrats". Poor Tom: as usual his heart is sort of in the right place, but his brain is not fully activated. It was that way when he supported Bush's war in Iraq: all that was needed was for U.S. troops to install democracy in one state -- Iraq -- and the rest of the middle-east would soon come around. He knows: he heard it on the (Arab) "street" (as he put it). (Does Friedman actually speak Arabic?)

Today, (10/3) Paul Krugman brings us down to earth. He points out that with an easy flick of its wrist, the billionaire's club called the "conservative movement," spearheaded by the Koch family and presented by the Fox ministry of propaganda, easily took over the Tea Screamer movement. The so-called "centrists", who have discovered their anger but not books and newspapers, and never seem to master the history of events even as recent as a few years ago, easily became opponents of Social Security and healthcare reform and proponents of tax breaks for multi-millionaires and de-regulation. So much for third party viability.

1 comment:

  1. The leader we need isn't here. If there is to be a third party, a Bernie Sanders/Paul Newman figure has to appear to inspire America to look beyond the dollar sign and reason that when people have no money, they can't spend it. Sanders points out that the tax rates have been skewing toward the top one percent and the middle class is becoming a vanishing species. Put them together, add in the technology that could provide for universal participation, erase the big money campaigns and we just might pull out before it's too late.

    ReplyDelete