that's a superficial read. america has it's own problems, yahweh knows, but here the discipling and organizing forces are corporate and billionaire power, as america is a true oligarchy. in russia putin has really organized the state where ultimate political power rests with himself. this war has demonstrated it to be true, as it goes ag…
that's a superficial read. america has it's own problems, yahweh knows, but here the discipling and organizing forces are corporate and billionaire power, as america is a true oligarchy. in russia putin has really organized the state where ultimate political power rests with himself. this war has demonstrated it to be true, as it goes against the economic interests of the vast majority of russia's billionaires. "power vertical," they call it in russia.
I read a lot of random things, but i cant remember anyone referring to the Us as an oligarchy.. Describing it in so many words, perhaps- but the word oligarchy is so specific and final it seems better than any description. Maybe this is hindsight, but putins east german pic is terrifying, thats a little napoleon if ive ever seen one, if not a ted bundy to boot. Do you think oligarchy is a compromise between roughly equally strong power factions when one cant win outright, that otherwise would just be a dictatorship? When one thinks about power in the Us in oligarchical terms, my first impression is how much it is always rearranging and shifting alliances over time. Why doesnt one faction ever win in the Us- or does it? Am i right to think most polities usually end up with a single power faction rather than true oligarchy?
"Inverted totalitarianism" seems unnecessarily confusing of a term, although the article looks interesting. (There, too, the author says the democracy in the streets doesnot effect the actions of the govt, like in the article about russia).
In my comment, i said shifting alliances, not shifting allegiances. Im 42 y o, and in my life the ruling elite has changed, maybe dramatically, with the younger billionaires entering themix, and stayed the same in other ways. But it changes around even from election to election sometimes-if it didnt, there would be no outcry from clintons backers when trump won, etc. Its curious and confusing, and perhaps gives the impression of actual democracy to the uninformed.
that's a superficial read. america has it's own problems, yahweh knows, but here the discipling and organizing forces are corporate and billionaire power, as america is a true oligarchy. in russia putin has really organized the state where ultimate political power rests with himself. this war has demonstrated it to be true, as it goes against the economic interests of the vast majority of russia's billionaires. "power vertical," they call it in russia.
I read a lot of random things, but i cant remember anyone referring to the Us as an oligarchy.. Describing it in so many words, perhaps- but the word oligarchy is so specific and final it seems better than any description. Maybe this is hindsight, but putins east german pic is terrifying, thats a little napoleon if ive ever seen one, if not a ted bundy to boot. Do you think oligarchy is a compromise between roughly equally strong power factions when one cant win outright, that otherwise would just be a dictatorship? When one thinks about power in the Us in oligarchical terms, my first impression is how much it is always rearranging and shifting alliances over time. Why doesnt one faction ever win in the Us- or does it? Am i right to think most polities usually end up with a single power faction rather than true oligarchy?
"Inverted totalitarianism" seems unnecessarily confusing of a term, although the article looks interesting. (There, too, the author says the democracy in the streets doesnot effect the actions of the govt, like in the article about russia).
In my comment, i said shifting alliances, not shifting allegiances. Im 42 y o, and in my life the ruling elite has changed, maybe dramatically, with the younger billionaires entering themix, and stayed the same in other ways. But it changes around even from election to election sometimes-if it didnt, there would be no outcry from clintons backers when trump won, etc. Its curious and confusing, and perhaps gives the impression of actual democracy to the uninformed.
yes. putin began consolidating his power -- using his old kgb and leningrad buddies as sort of security state boyars -- long before the sanctions hit.