Daily News

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS AND ANOTHER RETROSPECTIVE ON THE 2012 (S)ELECTION

Yesterday was my favorite holiday of the year, that quintessentially American holiday called Thanksgiving, where we tend to gather with family and friends, eat lots of turkey and/or ham, watch some football games (or, if you're like me, studiously avoiding them), and having long and fun conversations. Well, yesterday was no different for me, though much of my family circle is now constricted, and the groups around the table are smaller, but the conversation is no less lively, and as one might expect, was this year centered on the recent US presidential (s)election.

Readers here will recall, during the endless, and endlessly boring and off-putting, Republithug primaries, that I did indeed write a few blogs about the whole dismal process, and about the dismal personages populating it. One of the most off-putting was Senator Rantorum, favored candidate, at that time anyway, of the warvangelicals and religious fundamentalists that dominate that party's right wing, and send so many of us fleeing from it to our votes of "no confidence." Similarly, in recent days, I blogged about the "if you don't vote (for our pre-selected answers) you have no right to complain."

I've been listening, since the election particularly to the Republithugs trying to figure out "what just happened to us?" and, while many remain hopelessly clueless, there are a few lights that are on here and there, and one of them is former Reagan administration advisor Paul Craig Roberts, whose retrospective I think is eminently worth sharing on this day we in America are raiding the refrigerator and eating left over turkey sandwiches:

The Special Interests Won Again

Roberts has it exactly correct: the issues that needed to be debated were not, and particularly the sprawling burgeoning national security state that the Bush administration expanded upon, and that the Obama administration expanded even further. The only presidential candidate of any stature to voice concerns over these matters was Ron Paul, and we all saw how quickly the GOP establishment resorted to fraud and other shenanigans to silence him and his supporters, and to deny him delegates. For a Reagan advisor to call it like it is: an insane drive for hegemony leading to inevitable confrontation with Russia and China, is significant.

More significant is the fact that Roberts, like so many, was one of the leading voices calling for a vote of no confidence in either party or candidate. Take note: a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during the Reagan Administration, no longer has confidence in the GOP, and was calling for a vote of no confidence.The fact that the talking heads on Faux news have little to no time for interviews of figures such as Roberts, while they have endless time for interviews of Dick Morrison, Karl Rove, and other architects of their own disaster, speaks volumes, and what it speaks is:

No Confidence.

See you on the flip side.

5 thoughts on “PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS AND ANOTHER RETROSPECTIVE ON THE 2012 (S)ELECTION”

  1. chris–

    Feel free to quote me when you contact Roberts. I’m sure he’s seen the point that it’s grossly hypocritical of someone who worked in the Reagan administration to make these points without also repudiating the Reagan’s policies.

  2. On Thanksgiving, a lot of us reflect on “giving thanks” and upon those who may have been “adjusted” to: too little or next to nothing to eat.

    I’am reminded of those “structual adjustments” and support provided to developing countries by the World Bank, IMF, and various donor govt.s of developed countries. Their “policies” threw many ancient agricultural practices into chaos, AND, Suprise!, the largest transnational corporate agribussinesses were THE ONLY ones who gained.
    All in all,, the solution that NONhungry people FORCED upon hungry people had RUINED local livelihoods and wrought agricultural, ecological and financial DISASTER across the face of the Earth.

    (Forget any pathetic pleas to Transnational Mercy.)

    Decolonize Economics!

  3. And pretty much the same points Roberts correctly makes about the Obama and GWBush administration can readily be made about the Reagan administration.

    When Roberts says:

    “The sacrifice of the natural environment to timber, mining and energy interests was not an issue, except to promise more sacrifice of the environment to short-term profits.”

    He needs to look in the mirror and acknowledge his responsibility for these Reaganesque policies.

Comments are closed.