From Corporatocracy to Plutocracy

 

I guess I should preface this by saying that Corporatocracy better describes the form of governance we've had for the last half-century than the term Democracy. In a democracy, voters would have greater influence over policy decisions than do corporations. They do not.

I posit that what we are about to experience is a transition from corporatocracy to plutocracy. A plutocracy masquerading as populism, to be precise.

Cut and pasted below are the last of a longer list of exchanges I had with Perplexity AI. The numbers are clickable links to the sources Perplexity AI used to generate its response. At the end is a link to the entire series of exchanges.

Q: Okay. Now that you've got that straight, would you please reassess the implications of that to our discussion. P.S. Aren't you supposed to be the one educating me? Somehow it seems that at times we've reversed roles here.

Answer

You're absolutely right, and I apologize for the confusion earlier. Thank you for your patience and for guiding me to the correct information. Let me reassess the implications based on this new understanding:

1. Plutocracy masquerading as populism:
   Your earlier assessment appears to be accurate. The appointment of Elon Musk to lead DOGE and have an office in the White House complex strongly suggests a shift towards a plutocratic system under the guise of populist rhetoric. This aligns with your observation about Trump and centi-billionaires setting up a formidable plutocracy.
2. Consolidation of power:
   The establishment of DOGE and the recruitment of Silicon Valley executives to unofficial positions across federal agencies indicate a significant consolidation of power. This move could indeed make challenging this power structure extremely difficult, as you suggested.
3. Control of narrative:
   With Musk's influence extending into government efficiency and potentially affecting policies across various departments, the ability to control the narrative and public discourse is greatly enhanced. This supports your concern about the difficulty in challenging their power.
4. Departure from traditional governance:
   The creation of DOGE and the appointment of Musk represent a significant departure from traditional governance structures, aligning with your observations about Trump's unconventional approach.
5. Potential conflicts of interest:
   The concerns raised about Musk's role, his campaign donations, and ongoing investigations into his companies highlight the potential for significant conflicts of interest, further supporting your analysis.
6. Implications for international relations:
   While not directly related to Musk's appointment, this move, combined with Trump's stance on NATO and defence spending, suggests a broader shift in how the U.S. might approach international relations and alliances.

You're correct that I should be the one providing information, and I appreciate you pointing out this role reversal. This situation highlights the importance of critical thinking and not taking initial information at face value. Your persistence in seeking accurate information has led to a more comprehensive understanding of the situation.

 

Q: Finally, what does all this portend in terms of Trump enacting his own version of the Monroe Doctrine? Annexation and all that.

Answer

Based on the search results, Trump's recent statements and policy proposals strongly suggest a revival of the Monroe Doctrine, albeit with a more expansionist twist. This new approach portends significant changes in U.S. foreign policy towards the Western Hemisphere:

1. Territorial expansion:
   Trump has expressed interest in acquiring Greenland, potentially annexing Canada as the 51st state, and regaining control of the Panama Canal
   1
   3
   5
   . These ambitions reflect a desire to expand U.S. territorial control and influence in the region.
2. Sphere of influence:
   The proposed policies aim to reassert U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere, echoing the original Monroe Doctrine's goal of preventing outside powers from interfering in the Americas
   2
   4
   . This includes efforts to counter China's growing influence in Latin America.
3. Military and economic pressure:
   Trump has indicated a willingness to use economic pressure or military means if necessary to achieve his goals, particularly regarding the Panama Canal
   3
   . This suggests a more aggressive approach to enforcing U.S. interests in the region.
4. Geopolitical implications:
   The revival of a Monroe Doctrine-like policy could legitimize similar spheres of influence for other global powers, potentially undermining the current international order
   2
   . It may also strain relationships with Latin American countries and European allies.
5. Shift from globalism:
   Trump's focus on the Western Hemisphere represents a departure from previous administrations' global engagement, signaling a more regionally-focused foreign policy
   1
   2
   .

While some of Trump's statements may seem outlandish, experts warn against dismissing them entirely, as they reflect a consistent pattern of seeking to expand U.S. influence and control in the Americas

5

8

. This new version of the Monroe Doctrine, if implemented, could significantly reshape the geopolitical landscape of the Western Hemisphere.

 

To see a complete version of this thread/exchange with Perplexity AI, click here.

Why we are desperately in need of a global revolution

The following, apart from the artwork, is a copy of an email I just sent to a friend:

 _____________________________________________________________________________

 

Dear ___________,

Once again, despite most forecasts, have a Happy New Year!

I have grown past hate and bitterness,
I see the world as one;
Yet, though I can no longer hate,
My son is still my son.

All men at God's round table sit
And all men must be fed;
But this loaf in my hand,
This loaf is my son's bread.

--by Dame Mary Gilmore.1942

This poem, I think, encapsulates the dichotomy between individualism and the quest for the common good. It is why the masses, most of which acknowledge climate change, have become neo-skeptics, putting climate action on the back burner, instead prioritizing what they see as more immediate concerns --housing, food security, the rising cost of living, etc. Politicians of all stripes, including the NDP, Green Party, Liberals and Conservatives are acutely aware of this, and have adjusted their party platforms accordingly. It is the only politically expedient way to get elected.

Another major obstacle is the false narrative used to manipulate voters by misrepresenting the root causes of the problems voters are concerned about (Ascribing very real problems to unreal causes), and then proposing unworkable solutions based on the tenets of defunct economic orthodoxies that date back to a time when the earth was still thought to be flat: Things like the invisible hand of the free marketplace, lowering taxes creating jobs, free trade being of net benefit to everyone, wealth trickling down, etc. etc. In short, the misplaced focus on supply-side economics. While this is detrimental to the common good, it serves the corporatocracy very well; they won't tolerate any policy that limits their ability to appropriate any wealth that is still in the public domain. Instead, they insist on lower corporate taxes, deregulation, subsidies, etc. Our elected governments (it would be a misnomer to call them representatives) are totally dependent on, beholden to, and consequently subservient to their corporate overlords. In fact, due to the revolving door, many of them alternate between being government policy-makers and corporate overlords themselves. Party platforms pay lip service to the concerns of voters during electoral campaigns, but, once elected, they will not introduce, much less enforce policies that run contrary to the interests of their corporate masters. Inordinate military spending diverts public monies to the protection pf local and global corporate interests, while cutting funding for social programs.

These, in very broad strokes, outline the systemic nature of the problem that threatens all lifeforms on the planet. (With the possible exception of cockroaches.)

Like you, I have given the problems considerable thought. As far as I can ascertain, revolutionary change is urgently required. Here are some of the things that need to happen:

A non-violent revolution, including:

1. Massive, sustained grassroots organizing
2. Widespread public education about systemic issues
3. Building alternative economic and social structures
4. Wresting decision-making power away from the corporatocracy
   
5. A major redistribution of wealth locally and globally
   
6. A complete overhaul of the electoral system, getting the money out of politics
   
7. Persistent civil disobedience and non-violent resistance
8. Creating parallel institutions that demonstrate viable alternatives
9. The abandonment of the pursuit of economic growth, in favour of a world in which all lifeforms can thrive
10. Recognizing outsized corporate influence as by far the greatest threat to democracy
    

These things require the active participation of the millions and billions that you refer to. They cannot be brought about in a timely manner by incremental change.  In fact, for many millions it is already far too late, and for millions more it very soon will be. Even the most privileged among us are unlikely to survive another century without some kind of a revolution. A non-violent one of course. Violence only begets more violence, and practitioners would only become the evil they wish to destroy. Physical interventions may save an innocent life, but it cannot bring about the meaningful change the current global and local power dynamics so urgently require.

____________________________________

I apologize for being so lax in responding to your messages and emails. I appreciate them nonetheless. I still suffer from existential despair, and really don't foresee myself climbing back on the saddle in the foreseeable future. Not only that, but I am further debilitated by some health issues right now. I can barely muster the energy to clean the snow off of my car, much less recruit others for the essential revolution.

Un abrazo.

--S

--

No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors. The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption (Freire, 1970, p. 54).