-Caveat Lector-   <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">
</A> -Cui Bono?-

>From polyconomics.com

{{<Begin>}}
POLYCONOMICS, INC.
MEMO ON THE MARGIN

January 21, 2000
Jude Wanniski's Quick Supply-Side History of the 20th Century
Fall Semester: Supply-Side University Economics Lesson #15
To: SSU Students
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: Pat Buchanan and the Reform Party

At the moment, as unlikely as it seems, Pat Buchanan genuinely believes he sees
a path to the White House via the Reform Party. In this last lesson of the
semester devoted to the political side of the political economy, I’d like to
explore the conditions that have given rise to what Buchanan sees, whether or
not he is successful. My own estimate is that the time is ripe for the Reform
Party to pull together a broad coalition of Americans who feel disenfranchised
and that if it does not happen this year, the political realignment the voters
seem to be looking for will simply be postponed to the next election cycle.

Serious third-party candidacies throughout history have sprung up when the two
major parties for one reason or other are not connecting with the wishes of the
broad electorate. In parliamentary systems, a new political party can take root
in a single legislative district and spread from there. In our federal system,
the focus is on the presidency, which primarily sets the direction of the
nation. If neither major party produces a nominee who embodies the leadership
possibilities that seem promising, the discontent in the body politic will
generate one or more candidates of third parties. By threatening to drain off
support from one major party or the other, they tug it in a direction that may
be more satisfying to the electorate as a whole. Traditionally, such
candidacies are around single issues or themes, which prevent them from doing
more than tug at the big boats. What we have in the Reform Party this year is
the potential for a full-scale, soup-to-nuts candidacy that is capable of
putting together a broad coalition of discontented voters -- from those who
would not vote otherwise and from those who fully intend to vote, but are so
unhappy with the major party nominees that they can be peeled away. We actually
saw this happen in 1998 when the Reform Party candidate, Jesse Ventura, shocked
the political world by winning the governorship of Minnesota. He won defections
from both parties, but his victory was made possible by an unexpectedly large
turnout of people who would not have bothered to vote if he had not presented a
reasonable alternative.

What Buchanan sees is two major parties that are incapable of sufficiently
changing direction to attract the discontented. He correctly observes that both
are wholly committed to the central Political Establishment that represents as
little change as possible, the status quo. This has not happened before in U.S.
history, as far as I know, because one or the other major party always has been
able to adjust during the course of a campaign to win back those who are moving
toward the alternative. We can already see this in the fact that the four men
who are said to produce the likeliest winner -- Gore, Bradley, Bush and McCain -
- have each said they would support the monetary policies of Federal Reserve
Chairman Alan Greenspan and none of them would support a cut in the capital
gains tax. If you accept my argument that Greenspan’s monetary policy benefits
the elites at the expense of ordinary people, and that a lower capital gains
tax always benefits ordinary people who are without capital and has been
opposed by the elites, you can easily see how the Establishment now seems
assured that one of their men will be elected. Only the Republican Steve Forbes
would upset the status quo on economic policy, but his campaign has left voters
with a confused picture on social and foreign policy. As a rank amateur at
politics, he thus far has not shown he knows how to go about winning and his
great wealth has been squandered on pushing sterile themes.

Buchanan has been around the political track as a Republican candidate for the
presidential nomination, in 1992 and 1996. His weakness, though, is that he has
never run as a Reform Party candidate. He is brand new to the kind of coalition
building required to outvote the major party candidates. If you think of the
Establishment as the top half of a pyramid and the masses of ordinary people
being the bottom half, you can easily see that the most extreme points of
difference are at the bottom corners. The task of a Buchanan is to find common
ground with other populist leaders, including those whom he would normally only
meet on the opposite side of a Crossfire debate. The fact that he has been
willing to make a black Marxist, Lenora Fulani, a co-director of his campaign
was the most interesting sign that he may know what he must do to pull off a
Ventura-style victory at the national level. Fulani, the only woman to run for
President on the ballots of the 50 states, knows third-party politics as well
as anyone in the country. If he wins the Reform Party nomination, overcoming
what might be a serious Donald Trump bid, it only will be because Fulani
devoted herself and her followers to the effort. If he goes on to win the
presidency in November, it only will be because he could with her help assemble
and hold together the pitchfork coalition that now seems so unlikely.

The fact that Fulani is a “Marxist” only means she appreciates the political
insights of Karl Marx, not that she is a “communist” or even a socialist. In
essence, Marx was a populist, who early in life concluded that the folks at the
bottom of the pyramid had to unite in order to dominate the elites at the top.
He was only 30 years old when he wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848 with
Frederick Engels. If you want to do justice to this lesson, you should read
that document in order to see how social and political forces appear and
reappear. You will find Marx inveighing against globalization and “Free Trade,”
in terms not dissimilar to Buchanan’s complaints today. It will help, as you
read it, to realize that as Marx grew older, living in London, he observed that
the lives of ordinary Englishmen improve as the political system became more
democratic and real wages rose in a steadily expanding economy.

By the time he died in 1883, he was insisting he was not a “Marxist,” of the
revolutionary variety we observed in 1848. Here, though, is Marx writing
several months before the Manifesto, about the situation in Germany.

The bourgeoisie was becoming aware of its own strength, and was determined to
break the chains wherewith feudal and bureaucratic despotism had fettered its
commercial enterprise, its industrial capacity, its united activities as a
class. Some of the landed gentry had already devoted themselves to the
production of commodities for the market; this section had identical interests
with the bourgeoisie, and made common cause with it. The petty bourgeoisie was
discontented, grumbled at the burden of taxation, complained of the hindrances
that were imposed upon its business activities, but had no definite programme
of reforms that might safeguard its position in the State and in society. The
peasantry was weighed down, partly by the burdens of the feudal system, and
partly by the extortions of usurers and lawyers. The urban workers were
partners in the general discontent, were inspired with an equal hatred for the
government and for the great industrial capitalists, and were being infected
with socialist and communist ideas. In a word, the opposition consisted of a
heterogeneous mass, driven onward by the most diversified interests, but led,
more or less, by the bourgeoisie....

Marx admired the accomplishments of the bourgeoisie -- the new capitalist class
that had overcome feudalism in the previous century, but he also knew that once
settled, they would be as protective of their entrenched interests as the
feudal lords in preventing competition from below. Only “active, universal
suffrage,” said Marx, would enable the masses to keep society fluid instead of
stratified. This is exactly what the Reform Party is about. We have come a long
way in the last 150 years, of course, but as long as there is history, there
will be entrenched interests at the top of every political pyramid, trying to
use political and financial muscle to keep their gravy train going as fast as
it can. And there will be entrenched interests at the bottom of the pyramid
trying to slow things down. As the political year unfolds, this is the dynamic
to watch.


{{<End>}}

A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soap-boxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to