The Fourteenth Banker Blog

August 16, 2010

More Talk of Revolution

Filed under: Running Commentary — thefourteenthbanker @ 8:44 PM

Outside the beltway, members of both major parties agree, America is bust. Both liberal and conservative principles have been completely obliterated by the current First and Second Estates, who have no loyalty except to their own interests.  This is the stuff of revolution. Paul Craig Roberts of the Reagan years describes the conundrum accurately, adding his voice to David Stockman’s, then drives home the emergency measures to prevent an implosion. What is interesting on both cases is that while some vestiges of their prior political leanings remain, the crisis of today rises above political philosophy and traditional party lines. The class war is against the American people who I refer to as the Third Estate. It is a war for plunder. Roberts:

To borrow from Lenin, “What can be done?”

Here is what can be done. The wars, which benefit no one but the military-security complex and Israel’s territorial expansion, can be immediately ended. This would reduce the US budget deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars per year.  More hundreds of billions of dollars could be saved by cutting the rest of the military budget which, in its present size, exceeds the budgets of all the serious military powers on earth combined.

US military spending reflects the unaffordable and unattainable crazed neoconservative  goal of US Empire and world hegemony. What fool in Washington thinks that China is going to finance US hegemony over China?

The only way that the US will again have an economy is by bringing back the offshored jobs. The loss of these jobs impoverished Americans while producing oversized gains for Wall Street, shareholders, and corporate executives. These jobs can be brought home where they belong by taxing corporations according to where value is added to their product. If value is added to their goods and services in China, corporations would have a high tax rate. If value is added to their goods and services in the US, corporations would have a low tax rate.

This change in corporate taxation would offset the cheap foreign labor that has sucked jobs out of America, and it would rebuild the ladders of upward mobility that made America an opportunity society.

If the wars are not immediately stopped and the jobs brought back to America, the US is relegated to the trash bin of history.

President Obama continues under the influence of the mystic Rasputian trio, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, and Timothy Geithner. When will Obama realize that he has been beguiled?

His first act of independence can be to appoint Elizabeth Warren and tell her to “sic em”.



  1. See I’m not sure anymore that Obama has been beguiled. Whose to say that he’s not positioning himself to go do things after he’s kicked out of his fancy White House.

    Afterall that’s what the Dodds and the Summers and the rest do. Why do we even expect anymore that Obama is any different, who knows which Caymen Island deal he’s already got his eyes on.

    Let’s get real, the axis of evil runs from Washington to Wall Street and inorder to keep fooling the people they have to blame the Muslims and Afganistan or else their own evil might come to light.

    Comment by Vocalbanker — August 17, 2010 @ 8:04 AM | Reply

    • Let’s get real, the axis of evil runs from Washington to Wall Street and inorder to keep fooling the people they have to blame the Muslims and Afganistan or else their own evil might come to light.

      WELL SAID, Vocalbanker! Hear! Hear!

      Remember a few years back when anyone said anything about how much richer the rich were getting on the backs of the rest of us (about the time of the Medicare PartD and the attempts to privatize SS. The Rethuglicans in Congress shouted, “Class warfare!” I was wishing even then that SOMEONE would stand up and say, OUT LOUD, “YOU BET YOUR SWEET PATOOTIE IT’S CLASS WARFARE, AND YOU GUYS STARTED IT UNDER RONNIE RAY-GUN.”

      Comment by Sandi — August 17, 2010 @ 5:52 PM | Reply

  2. Excellent post. Have you given consideration that perhaps the first estate is mostly defended by the republican party, and the second estate is mostly defended by the democratic party, and we as a nation lack a 3rd party to defend the 3rd estate?

    Both parties have done a good job of co-opting the 3rd estate. This analysis might be enough to provide the germination of a true 3rd estate party.

    Comment by Trainwreck — August 18, 2010 @ 10:38 PM | Reply

  3. Oh and before anyone claims it, the tea party is not a defender of the third estate. They are merely an apparatchik of the republican party.

    Comment by Trainwreck — August 18, 2010 @ 10:44 PM | Reply

    • Not sure why this comment did not show up, but I am commenting to my own comment, because it is not showing!

      What I originally posted:

      Excellent post. It seems to me that the republican party represents the first estate, and the democratic party represents the second estate, but as of now we lack a party that represents the third estate. This analysis is an excellent call for a third estate party. Any serious thinker knows that there are common elements that can seriously unite the third estate against both the first and the second. The third estate just needs the energy and will to do it (and some serious leadership).

      Comment by Trainwreck — August 18, 2010 @ 10:50 PM | Reply

      • I would agree that from a voting standpoint, republicans tend to affiliate with the first estate and democrats with the second. In the case of republicans, they often perceive their interests to be united with the first estate and there are many ways this ideological loyalty is reinforced, though not really rewarded. A higher number of democrats are probably actually rewarded for their affiliation if they are either public servants or members of the stronger unions. However, their ideological loyalty is betrayed by the elites marriage with the first estate and the ultimate damage this does to the greater middle class. Additional political parties would do this country good. A single third party seems unlikely because the interests of the third estate from a political standpoint are too varied. Their economic interests would have to trump all the social and other priorities that determine how they vote. I doubt those economic interests would prevent infighting for more than one or two election cycles. I think several parties that would keep loyal members and work to form coalitions would be more durable. But first the courts would need to break down the impediments to additional parties equal access and funding. Thank you for your thoughts.

        Comment by thefourteenthbanker — August 21, 2010 @ 1:44 AM

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at