Sometimes turkeys vote for Christmas

Its not Obama stupid! The trouble is global

capitalisms gridlock

by

Kumar David-

November 15, 2014

If Lankas voters elect President Mahinda Rajapaksa for a third term I
guess you can say the turkeys have voted for Christmas; they are in for a
battering, basting and roasting. However, my focus today is on the US
Congressional poll of 4 November where a Republican wave gave it
majorities in both Houses (Senate and House of Representatives) after
many years. Obamas legislative plans are dead in their track for the
remaining two years of a now lame-duck term. Budgets will be deadlocked,
the US will be disadvantaged in foreign interventions, and I wont be
surprised if the Tea Party lunatic fringe, though its clout has shrunk, tries
to impeach Obama on trumped up charges. Unlikely, but I dont put
anything beyond the ravings of these weirdos.
The Republicans won big; they have secured 52 Senate seats and may pick
up one more when the run-off vote is held in Louisiana in January. The
GOP majority in the House has increased and it defeated several key
incumbent Democratic Governors in unexpected overturns. There was class
bias embedded in the voting, but layered under a general swing, it was
less visible. Exit polls show 89% of blacks and 63% of Hispanics voted
Democrat, while 64% of non-white graduates and 57% of over 65s voted
Republican. What inflicted greater damage on the Democrats was that the
angry well-heeled made it to the polls, while a sizable number of middle-

class Democrats stayed home. The swing was based more on

disillusionment than, as one BBC commentator put it, "On any distinctive
agenda painted by the Republicans; there was no Contract-With-America
that voters endorsed or were asked to endorse". This is perhaps the most
negative election in American history; nobody was for anything, everybody
was against someone or something; billions were spent in lurid negative
advertising; only 40% of the electorate even bothered to vote.
However there is a silver lining. Two
years is time enough for this gosling
public to behold wacky rednecks in
action and to chew on its own plight at
the oven door; this could smooth
Hilary Clintons passage to the White
House. Incoming Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell vowed to work
with Obama on issues where they can
agree such as trade agreements and
tax reform. He also promised to make
the dysfunctional Senate pass bills.
Republican leaders are acutely aware
of their dilemma but can they control
their wild bulls in the House even
though leaders breathe a sigh of relief
that "most wacos have been cast
aside"? The usually manageable
Senate will also be somewhat
troublesome this time since three Tea
Party oddballs are in the GOP cohort
(Rand Paul of Kentucky, Marco Rubio of
Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas). All
have presidential ambitions, albeit unrealistic, so this will not be an easy
circus for GOP leaders to keep in harness.
A superficial story
Is it fair to call the US voter chicken brained when the economy has been
in doldrums since 2008? Obama was first elected in November that year.
Should not incumbency bear the costs of economic failure on so grand and
global a scale? According to exit polls the biggest reasons for the swing
were disappointment with the economy and disillusionment with Obama.

However, I believe the reasons for the economic flop are not subjective
errors of individuals or group. Crisis was as inevitable as night follows day,
given the drift of global capitalism over the previous decades. The decline
of production (the real economy), the new hegemony of vapid finance
capital, asset and housing bubbles, and Chinas economic assent, all this
could not have been prevented. Its not Obama stupid! The trouble is
global capitalist gridlock.
Allow me to cast doubts about two oft accused culprits. First is, low
interest rates, easy credit, rising debt and above all encouragement of the
shift to a finance economy, all on Alan Greenspans long watch. True all
this contributed to the transformation of the US from a production powerhouse to a land in a finance capital trance. However had Greenspan as Fed
Chairman, not gone along, he would have been replaced by a pliable
person. It was not Greenspan, Bluespan or any other individual who drove
these processes; in the 1990s and 2000s US capitalism was going through
these mutations as the only way in which it could to prolong its death
rattle, albeit temporarily.
Secondly, purists pour imprecations on Greenspans successor, Ben
Bernanke, and Treasury Secretaries Henry Paulson and Timothy Geithner
for shoving loads of cash at a palpably moribund economy, holding interest
rates down to near zero, and bailing out all the great corporate names. But
had they not done so half the banks, finance houses, mortgage trusts and
many of Americas famous brand names would have gone bust leading to
massive layoffs, evaporation of life-savings, evictions from homes and
therefore social unrest. Figuratively, the revolution would have come to
America. I reckon it pretty contradictory that some who want these
bastions of capitalism thrown under the train are themselves staunch
devotees of capitalism in the abstract; an inconsistency I never could
fathom.
There is a paradox to this mid-term election; the backlash on the economy
hit Democrats and Obama just as the economy had began an upturn. The
unemployment rate is down to 5.8% and over 200,000 jobs are being
created each month, well above the normal need of 200,000. GDP growth
at 1.7% is better than Europe, which teeters on the brink of yet another
recession, and energy prices are way down. Conversely the income and
wealth gap shows no sign of closing, wages are stagnant and the benefits
of the mild and maybe temporary upturn are not filtering down.

I have no intention of defending Obama or the august gentlemen named in

the paragraphs above, and to read me in this way would be to
misunderstand what I am trying to say. My point is that to blame teamObama for the economic despair in America is about as intelligent as
faulting meteorologists in the littoral states for the occurrence of a
tsunami. In so far as they voted against Democrats because Obama didnt
(couldnt) fix broken capitalism, American voters were baying at the moon.
To put it bluntly, there is nothing magical under pluperfect heaven anyone
can do to plaster over moribund capitalisms recurring crises. The mass of
voters all over the world are a on the dumb side; emerging trends dont
affect polls till six to twelve months later.
The deeper reality
Though both Obama ("I have heard you") and Republican leaders ("We will
work with the President") vow bipartisan sincerity, will it succeed or will it
unravel before you say Obamacare? I fear there is too much ill-will, too
many personal vendettas, and undue partisan angst on both sides to make
optimism sanguine. More important, there is deep divergence on core
issues such as class and economy, health-care, and moral issues (abortion,
homosexual rights), though it may be possible to get some bipartisan
overlap on immigration reform and foreign policy but dont bet even on
that.
The central conflict is: Should America allow big business free reign to
flourish in the expectation that this will drag the whole economy up with it,
or should it be managed capitalism with a fair share set aside for the
middle and more menial orders. The former road entails big business and
finance capital friendly policies (tax cuts or further concessions for the
financial and corporate sectors and prosperous classes, labour market
reforms, and deep amputation of legacy sectors social welfare and
health-care in particular). The second approach implies robust measures to
correct Americas obscene wealth and income gap, ironing out Obamacare
with the intention of moving to a universal public health-care system,
minimum-wage legislation, and active intervention in education policy. The
chasm is deep and I doubt if it can be bridged.
Listening to Obamas one hour post-election speech, I read as follows
between the lines. Yes, superficially he will play bipartisanship, but deeper
he has decided "Screw You!" He will push what he thinks is good, paying
little heed to Republicans. He is fed up with a Congress which repeatedly

and calculatedly sabotaged everything he sought to do. Now its revenge

time. He will inflict PR damage on them to aid Hilarys presidential bid.
Republicans now in control of both chambers bear full legislative
responsibility for the economy and the budget; the Presidents role is
executive (not entirely since he holds veto powers). If the economy
stumbles, or there is gridlock in Washington, its mostly Republican
backsides that get burnt. Good!
Posted by Thavam