$125/barrel and rising.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You're blaming de Tocqueville for the last 40 years? So it took 150 years for de Tocqueville's concerns to kick in?

So the "national character" of Americans that he spoke of had nothing to do with that first 150 years which led to the creation of the American middle class? But, in the last 40 years, our national character finally kicked in to start the destruction of the middle class (the nation of shopkeepers de Tocqueville referred to) that had somehow supposedly been created in spite of 150 years of an entrenched and revered American national character?

Actually, what followed the first century of growth through domination by the American national character was the rise and ultimate dominance of American Progressivism. It is that Progressivism, with its required growth of the federal government's size and scope of power--the centralization of American governmental power--resulting (over the last 40 years) in our present administrative state with its highest and most powerful than ever regulatory grip on the American economy accompanied by its inevitable marriage to the larger centralized corporations that have resulted from the failure of the many, more diversified, smaller businesses due to excessive regulatory burdens.

And thus the shrinking of the American middle class. De Tocqueville's notion of an original American national character had less to do with it than the shrinking of the American constitutional character that has been reinterpreted and squashed by the necessities of Progressive authoritarianism.

With the Citizen united decision corporations acquired the ability to own politicians, Russia did also
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

BREAKING: as a result of the trucker’s protest, President Biden has agreed to lower gas prices to $3 on Monday.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

With the Citizen united decision corporations acquired the ability to own politicians, Russia did also
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So then it's not, as you implied, the national character of early to mid 20th century Americans , it's the corporations owning politicians since 2010 that resulted in the shrinking middle class? Did the corporations own the Democrat politicians in 2020?

Seems like if the corporations have the ability to own politicians, they would own all of them from both parties.

Also seems that politicians essentially are competing for positions of high paid slavery.

And so, it seems that the country is one big plantation. The corporations own the politicians; the politicians do the corporations' bidding and pass regulations that benefit the corporations.

And so, instead of a free market competition of a vast number of diverse businesses of all sizes, and a government harnessed by several separations of power and specifically limited constitutional limitations, we have less of the diversity in businesses of varying value, but fewer and larger businesses which centralize the production and sale of products and a larger centralized governmental system with power well beyond that granted in the Constitution.

Sounds like something that would suit Progressive authoritarianism quite well.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So then it's not, as you implied, the national character of early to mid 20th century Americans , it's the corporations owning politicians since 2010 that resulted in the shrinking middle class? Did the corporations own the Democrat politicians in 2020?

Seems like if the corporations have the ability to own politicians, they would own all of them from both parties.

Also seems that politicians essentially are competing for positions of high paid slavery.

And so, it seems that the country is one big plantation. The corporations own the politicians; the politicians do the corporations' bidding and pass regulations that benefit the corporations.

And so, instead of a free market competition of a vast number of diverse businesses of all sizes, and a government harnessed by several separations of power and specifically limited constitutional limitations, we have less of the diversity in businesses of varying value, but fewer and larger businesses which centralize the production and sale of products and a larger centralized governmental system with power well beyond that granted in the Constitution.

Sounds like something that would suit Progressive authoritarianism quite well.

Then why is it enabled by both parties?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Then why is it enabled by both parties?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Insofar as it might actually be the case (I did pose it as questions directed to you), because:

Both parties and the SCOTUS have, to varying degrees, abandoned our constitutional order.

As well, political office has become a path to lifetime employment--during and then after tenure and into retirement.

And, mostly, Progressivism is winning the battle versus constitutionalism.

And a lot of politicians are either corrupt or corruptible, which may always have been true, or might be more so than ever.

[scottw]

I think what we really need to do is decolonize chemistry.....