Two words and their current-historical importance need to be examined in light of two recent events.
Those words are: "crisis" and "socialism."
The first word must be examined in light of the recent announcement by the Federal Reserve that they are going to be gradually selling off the bonds they bought during the quantitative easing phase. Quantitative easing followed the bailouts and stimulus but received less attention as it is more arcane. I would have liked to see more follow up to Sanders' audit of the Fed if that was possible in relation to quantitative easing. That would have allowed us to know which assets were being acquired by the taxpayers. At any rate, I have maintained that the quantitative easing program acheived its goals and I continue to maintain that the decisions of the Fed are well calculated to keep the economy chuggin along. Its just that there were better alternatives.
You see, the word "crisis" was deployed by the media to create the misimpression that the extortion which occured in 2008 was the result of unpredictable processes. In fact, it was a phase of transition where powerful interests were securing their grasp of the financial, economic, and political sectors of the country. Though we are witnessing the slow reconciliation of the public to the fact of the Trump presidency we also see that political crisis remains a tactic of the radical right which now seeks to further their agenda by dismantling Medicare. Fortunately, Trump has at least a minimum of inclination and ability to stave off actual crisis by forging an understanding across the aisle. Something Obama was unable to achieve, and therefore just as much a credit to the participating Democratic leadership.
So, the word "cirisis" is properly understood as "extortion". Which brings us to our next point.
Admiral Stavridis recently wrote a piece for Time magazine about Venezuela, pinning its current woes to the socialist program initiated by Hugo Chavez. This and Trump's speech about Venezuela demonstrate a key point to those able to see a little bit into the situation by examining the facts. When a right-wing politician talks about socialism bringing destruction, they want you to believe that socialism is the cause of all the trouble their reactionary agenda brings as punishment to those who seek greater democracy and economic justice.
Technically, we in the U.S. live in a sort of socialist system. Historically, the definition or parameters of the word are actually any sort of secular government. The agenda of the right is not fascist; fascism is the merger of state and corporations. The anti-socialist stance of the right is consistent in being defined as such in that it seeks to replace the secular state with the private state. Corporations no longer have need of secular government, they can govern themselves and us as well.
The truth of my proposition here is found in the very topic I introduced this discussion with. For the maintenance of the relationship between prices and wages through artificial means is precisely the hallmark of a socialist political economy, speaking in economic terms.
Would that the people ruled. But it never has been the case. We have achieved political concessions, but these are now at risk of being lost. Trojan horses tempt. Shall we do away with the Electoral College? And who will control the process once we subject the Constitution to revision? No, the instruments of the state are not giving way to some greater ideal of freedom for the masses but to an unknown future in which the weapons of mass destruction remain in the hands of those few who jealously gaurd their power. What future could come of this situation? To speculate is to be aware of that dire consequences may arise not out of crisis but out of eventualities of gradual provenance. A bright future for some, who undersstand their happiness from within their bubble of protection. For others, disaster.
The work of peace and justice is not easier in the absence of crisis. The agenda of community organization, issues advocacy, constituent democracy, and anarchy are still nascent in the minds of the public. Only diligent struggle will forward the true Revolution!