FTA: "What's missing is how ["responsible capitalism"] translates into practical governance, for instance in regulation, taxation and the allocation of sparse resources. As a result, many bankers, among the notorious "1%" of the richest and most powerful, continue to rule very much OK – for now. But an awareness is growing across the political spectrum, and on both sides of the Atlantic, that a radical recalibration of capitalism is essential, not least because the wealthiest and least productive are in danger of allowing their own avarice to sabotage the very system on which they have become so hideously bloated."
Outrage is an interesting analysis, and I also recommend. It is quite infuriating that no serious policy person is even attempting to fix any of the inequities in our system--the things that caused the mess in the first place. But, the thing that irks me about Reich is that when he was in a policy position, he was part of the problem, the pro-bank Clinton machine that helped to repeal all the New Deal protections and realize the Reagan Utopia. When asked about this in an interview promoting Outrage he basically said, "My bad." Its easy to play armchair quarterback, but he fumbled when they gave him the ball. That said, he is still correct now, and should be taken way more seriously by policy makers. I suppose the problem (for us) is that for those in power there is no problem. The wealth of the already wealthy (who are the direct or de facto policy makers) has skyrocketed recently. Why fix a system that ain't broke?
The only solace is that history shows that the many will eventually triumph (temporarily) over the few. A system based on deceit, cronyism and tyranny is doomed to collapse. The media need to be a democratizing influence somehow (like, say, call bullshit loud and clear when they smell it). Murdoch has technological advantages that make him Hearst on steroids, so he's been able to exploit far more people than anyone has ever dreamed. But, I'm a firm believer that the truth >> lies, however the truth is the tortoise to the hare that is lies. This isn't ideological, but rather that lies necessitate bigger lies to justify and sustain them. Eventually, the whoppers have to get so out of proportion that even the most gullible among us can't believe them. The fact that Fox News hit a ten year ratings low this week heartens me, but its a small step in the right (left?) direction.
"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Think about that for a minute. What it says, essentially, is "television is not gaining viewers. At all." This related article is almost as awesome. It indicates the same thing about cable news networks, while also pointing out that Fox News viewers are the most "get off my lawn" of any of them. You can read between the lines on this - essentially, TV viewers are DYING OF OLD AGE. Religion is facing a similar problem. So is the Republican Party. Basically, the entrenched guardians of bullshit that have had a heapin' helpin' of butt-hurt ever since the Vietnam War are slowly but steadily going into That Good Night and the world is a better place for it. Gay marriage is acceptable to a majority of Americans for the simple reason that all the ancient crusty homophobes who were totally cool with calling people faggots and queers are dropping like flies. I'd wager we have a black president for the simple reason that most fans of segregated water fountains are finally fucking dead.
Perhaps the most important article on media I have ever read is this one. The fact to observe is that the median age of all viewers of every network increases one year, every year. - Theodore Parker
This is heartening to hear, but when you think about it, isn't it true that the next generation is also likely to get stuck up (and possibly exploit) some social or economic (or political) issue, and 60 years from now we can say the same for them (that they're dying out and everything will be cool)? Or do you think that we're reaching a point where basically everyone is relatively reasonable about everything and society will be overall better? I feel like you can argue for both, but in the latter's defense, life 50 or 100 years ago was a LOT worse than it is now, for everyone. Perhaps progress really can't be stopped, and maybe we're almost at the "finish" line. That said, come new technologies and ideas/concepts (such as transhumanism or augmentation), there are likely to be new groups of people that will be persecuted and exploited by our own, supposedly liberal generation.
I think it's hard for anyone to say anything authoritative about the subject as it relies on history that hasn't been written yet. I think we can say that the Baby Boomers were a demographic anomaly and that any opinions formed and reinforced through mass media are going to have a tough time maintaining market share against opinions and ideas that self-generate organically. The modern Republican party is an anomaly. Once the generation that has been indoctrinated into an ideology that runs contrary to their interests have died out, there will be no one to replace them. It isn't so much about what people believe, it's about what they've been convinced to believe.
You're right about the anomaly part, and I really hope what you say holds true in the future. Nevertheless, we won't have a perfect world, but hopefully things will get better.
Thanks for the material. Will read. Your words about the black prez beg for this from Max Plank:A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.