Naomi Klein: The Problem With Hillary Isn’t Just Her Corporate Cash. It’s Her Corporate Worldview.
...While Clinton is great at warring with Republicans, taking on powerful corporations goes against her entire worldview, against everything shes built and everything she stands for. The real issue, in other words, isnt Clintons corporate cash, its her deeply pro-corporate ideology: one that makes taking money from lobbyists and accepting exorbitant speech fees from banks seem so natural that the candidate is openly struggling to see why any of this has blown up at all.
To understand this worldview, one need look no further than the foundation at which Hillary Clinton works and which bears her family name. The mission of the Clinton Foundation can be distilled as follows: There is so much private wealth sloshing around our planet (thanks in very large part to the deregulation and privatization frenzy that Bill Clinton unleashed on the world while president), that every single problem on earth, no matter how large, can be solved by convincing the ultra-rich to do the right things with their loose change. Naturally, the people to convince them to do these fine things are the Clintons, the ultimate relationship brokers and dealmakers, with the help of an entourage of A-list celebrities.
So lets forget the smoking guns for the moment. The problem with Clinton World is structural. Its the way in which these profoundly enmeshed relationshipslubricated by the exchange of money, favors, status, and media attentionshape what gets proposed as policy in the first place.
For instance, under the Clintons guidance, drug companies work with the foundation to knock down their prices in Africa (conveniently avoiding the real solution: changing the system of patenting that allows them to charge such grotesque prices to the poor in the first place). The Dow Chemical Company finances water projects in India (just dont mention their connection to the ongoing human health disaster in Bhopal, for which the company still refuses to take responsibility). And it was at the Clinton Global Initiative that airline mogul Richard Branson made his flashy pledge to spend billions solving climate change (almost a decade later, were still waiting, while Virgin airlines keep expanding).
In Clinton World its always win-win-win: The governments look effective, the corporations look righteous, and the celebrities look serious. Oh, and another win too: The Clintons grow ever more powerful.
At the center of it all is the canonical belief that change comes not by confronting the wealthy and powerful, but by partnering with them. Viewed from within the logic of what Thomas Frank recently termed the land of money, all of Hillary Clintons most controversial actions make sense. Why not take money from fossil-fuel lobbyists? Why not get paid hundreds of thousands for speeches to Goldman Sachs? Its not a conflict of interest; its a mutually beneficial partnershippart of a never-ending merry-go-round of corporate-political give and take.
...
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)This system must be abolished. It is is just pure influence peddling and corruption on a cellular level.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)dana_b
(11,546 posts)and every time I read more about the Clinton Foundation I get a nasty taste in my mouth.
harun
(11,348 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 9, 2016, 03:39 PM - Edit history (1)
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)And your political knowledge is null and void.
mckara
(1,708 posts)She's a TRUE progressive!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)In her "Big Bird as Chairman Mao" outfit.
Who is her designer??? She really needs a new one. Did a poll tell her to use him?
pangaia
(24,324 posts)lostnfound
(16,189 posts)But yes, I agree.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Well then,, a CANADIAN National Treasure.
But, maybe we can borrow her now and then.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)government for years when Clinton was SoS. They got a taste of such power, such potential for milking the whole world that she will stop at nothing to get that power back as POTUS. Can you imagine the power it would give to the Clinton family criminal enterprise?
Duval
(4,280 posts)And it scares me. I'm sorry she is now attacking Bernie (unfairly), but if the gloves come off from both sides, based on her record she will not win. Despite what the DNC is trying to do, we will fight back harder than ever.
840high
(17,196 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Maybe THE most important post in weeks -- AND THE most dead on the money, important bit of truth about planet earth.
In fact it is so good, that even though I am on a diet, I think I just may honor you by having a grilled ham, tomato and cheese on rye!!!
NRaleighLiberal
(60,019 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)stupidicus
(2,570 posts)hence the good cop/bad cop, etc, analogies.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)I read about that a day or two ago along with several other shenanigans -- as I recall
With republicans, it's always a struggle to determine if their bs is a result of gross dumbasshood or dishonesty, and with the thirdwayers it's ignorance or largely, at least, tacit support for what they've done and propose to do.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)Thank you, Naomi.
appalachiablue
(41,171 posts)'Relationship Brokers' is right like 'The LAND of Money' $$, Thomas Frank's dead on naming again.
humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)There will be no change with her, more of the same and we will all pay...
TryLogic
(1,723 posts)isn't that illegal?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Exactamundo!
zentrum
(9,865 posts)for Naomi Klein.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)stunningly bizarre. We 're going to see those two back in the WH, for real?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Nothing wrong with Hillary's world views:
her views are the views of most of l
the Dem party: which are politics of
caring and sharing. The GOP are about
business not people.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)I can tell you that there most definitely is something wrong with Hillary's world views.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)you are silly
glowing
(12,233 posts)direction that the Democratic Party chooses to head... This continued, scorched earth path of taking monies from corporations and special interests OR to be "the people's party" once again. Will FDR rise to the top or the Third Way/ DLC crowd. The Clintons brought us this way in the first place. So, it only makes sense that the fight is on with another Clinton.
And if the DLC types win, they will fracture the party completely. The Republican Brand, for as much trouble as they have winning the White House, they do win the local, county, state and US house/ senate... Especially during mid-term elections when less people participate as a whole. So, as obsolete as they should be as a national party, they are pretty much in control of most of the state's and in charge of elections and counting the vote.
This election could ruin the Democratic Party forever. It cannot win without the minority, women, and working poor/ poor people OR the activists that do the free GOTV. This could be the last time the party is relevant. It's a fight for sure. I'm hoping the people prevail!
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Sanders has only been a talker
glowing
(12,233 posts)Proving that anyone got it would be setting policy that pro-actively put money and plans behind enacting renewable sources of energy. What it would look like is buying out electric companies and making it a public trust again. It would look like hiring massive amounts of people to re-place people in "sunny states" roof tops with solar. Bringing out the shelved or bought out battery designs that work (but are kept from market by oil, gas and even car manufacturing companies). What it would look like is removing oil subsidies. What it would look like is changing transportatio means for the country, removing oil based transit so that we don't have to be the ME peace keepers anymore. It would look like training and educational directions toward these sustainable resource needs.
These are the items that need to be accomplished. And if we take the lead on this, other countries will follow. We had a space race; we need an "energy race" that's similar (and it doesn't mean new off shore drilling or building more pipelines).
In the future there should be no oil or gas money because there are no needs for oil or gas. It should be as obsolete as the dinosaurs!
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)She should release the transcripts of her speeches and show us how she told Wall Street to cut it out.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)This should not be acceptable to the party of FDR, but it is no longer the party of FDR. It's the party of the Third Way.
FDR: "I welcome their hatred". HRC: "I welcome their money".
polly7
(20,582 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)years of public service.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)above the health of the planet should not be given more power.
Plus all of these corporations could change function to green energies or cleaning up the planet, mass transit for example--and not only remain functioning but would serve humanity..
Greed does not work anymore (if it ever did) and there is a lot of work to be done.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)The truly powerful feed ideology to the masses like fast food while they dine on the most rarified delicacy of all: impunity.
Naomi Klein