Dictatorship of money and the impotence of the liberal economists
What’s happening in Europe and the US is easily explainable if you just assume we live in a dictatorship of money. No political party is institutionally capable of fighting that reality and every mainstream solution will reinforce the power of those who own. Thus we find ever increasing cuts in social programs, ever reducing security for workers, and ever decreasing taxes on wealth.
Liberal economists like Krugman and Stiglitz provide nothing more than ideological cover for this corrupt system of oligarchy as they completely accept the basic rules of domination. Their calls for more deficit spending are impotent when they simultaneously defend the fundamental paradigm that the only source of purchasing power must come from the rentiers themselves. We should go into further debt today, they say, but always coupled with the dire warning that debt is dangerous and could bankrupt the nation: this line of reasoning will never win public support and, worse, sharply curtails debate on more radical ideas.
We need radical thinking, not futile calls to borrow a bit more from the parasites who rule us. Such thinking must necessarily consist of direct attacks against the concentrated owners of our world and their servants in politics, the media, and academia. For starters, how about marginal tax rates approaching 100% at high incomes, recognition we can create our own fiat purchasing power without relying on the rentier, guaranteed jobs, and severely regulating the monopoly-like power of the mega corporations. Such ideas aren’t even that radical and are at heart Keynesian. But none of our leading “left” economists go near them. The left doesn’t need economists who support concoctions like the natural rate of unemployment, or the grandeur of global “free” trade, or gross inequalities, or gold standard like restrictions on spending, or the freedom of rentiers to hoard money, or who proudly call themselves neoliberal.
In today’s world, if you’re not a radical you’re part of the problem. And Krugman, Stiglitz, DeLong, etc, etc are therefore part of the problem.