Author: statusquobuster

Liberals, progressive and Democrats should think critically about the negative impacts of widespread media bias on American democracy.  There simply is no doubt that virtually all mainstream media regularly show their strong bias against president Trump and his administration.  These media have convinced themselves that they are working to save American democracy from an incompetent, corrupt and dangerous president.  And those on the left eat up the negative coverage, which means more money for the anti-Trump networks, newspapers and magazines.  Never mind that he was elected fairly and legally.

It seems that the leftist media would only be happy if Trump was driven out of office by any means.  Such a victory would confirm the undemocratic power of a free press that replaces a military coup with a media one..

Here is my point: More Americans should seriously consider the larger question of whether such a perversion of freedom of the press undermines our democracy.  Why?  Because instead of fairly presenting genuine news the opinion loaded negative coverage has the goal of bringing down Trump and overturning the election result.  The press establishment overwhelmingly filled with liberals and progressives wanted Hillary Clinton and refuse to accept defeat.  After all, despite a mighty effort, the media failed to elect Clinton.  It continues to seek retribution by bashing Trump and ignoring the many failings of the Clinton campaign.

The press probably feels some responsibility for Trump’s success during the primary season.  Coverage of Trump’s beating up of his Republican opponents was extreme.  Now the press is getting even.

To dispel any doubt about the widespread perception of media bias, consider a June 2017 Rasmussen survey of likely American voters.  “Fifty percent (50%) think most reporters are biased against the president, up two points from January.  Just four percent (4%) think most reporters are biased in Trump’s favor.  Given the president’s testy relationship with the media, however, it’s not surprising that 76% of Republicans and 51% of voters not affiliated with either major political party believe most reporters are biased against the president, a view shared by only 24% of Democrats.”  Perhaps the most important finding is that “Nearly 90% of voters who Strongly Approve of the job the president is doing think most reporters are biased against Trump and rate media coverage of him as poor.”

These results support the view that all the negative coverage may strengthen the Trump base, which largely have stopped reading and listening to what they think is fake news.  News based on reporting of facts has been replaced by opinion and a near total emphasis on what Trump says rather than on what he and his administration have does.  In other words, rhetoric preempts accomplishments, and those positive accomplishments from a conservative perspective are also viewed negatively by the leftist press.  Information about governance is purposely kept out of the media limelight to allow Trump rhetoric to get endless vicious criticism.

Often, such surveys are dismissed.  So consider the 2017 study prepared by the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard.  It revealed what reasonable people would consider a disturbing level of media bias against president Trump.  Here are the fractions of negative news coverage towards Trump: CNN and NBC, 93%; CBS, 91%; New York Times, 87%; Washington Pose, 83%.  FOX had the most equal coverage, with 52% negative.

Those who like the biased anti-Trump media coverage should reflect on how all that coverage robs them of getting solid information on myriad local, state and world events.  In other words, the biased media dominance inevitably leads to a dumbing down of the public about what is really happening that merits news coverage as well as details about what is happening in the sphere of public policy.  Journalism itself has been degraded to such a degree that for much of the population no one believes anything coming from the opinion-loaded media.  Apologists for the left and right unload opinions rather than enlightening information and analysis.  Rational people do not trust the press.

The core issue is whether the press is giving itself too much credit for presenting the truth.  In fact, what is happening is the presentation of opinion not objective facts that reveal the truth.  Truth requires objectivity and a concerted emphasis on undisputed facts.  Instead, opinion, even in so-called news stories, is routinely presented.

Biased media hiding behind freedom of the press should disgust all Americans.  We all are being robbed of huge amounts of news and information.  Amazingly, for example, network CBS news used its whole hour broadcast to presenting anti-Trump laced coverage of the recent Charlottsville event.  That is virtually a nightly occurrence at CNN where only anti-Trump diatribes are presented in multiple shows.  The front pages of the main newspapers are the same.  Real news from all over the country and the world is not given to the public the way it used to be.

The credibility of the media has taken a lethal blow.  What they deem good for their business now will ultimately backfire as Americans for years to come seek and find alternative news sources or eliminate news from their lives.  A truly informed public is needed for a quality democracy, and we are losing that.

Yes, a free press is vital for democracy.  But a deeply biased press is not.

As to these crazy times, Ruben Navarrette Jr. summed them eloquently: “President Trump and the media deserve each other.  Both are driven by ego and take criticism personally. Both will twist the facts to defend themselves and push their agenda.  …Americans are fed precooked narratives by the Fourth Estate.  We’re told what’s important and what isn’t, what to focus on and what to ignore, and — above all — what to think.  …I sure miss journalism.”  So many of us do.

[Joel S. Hirschhorn was a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association; he has authored five nonfiction books, including Delusional Democracy – Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government.]

For some years I have used the term “delusional democracy” to describe the condition of the US.  It seemed obvious to me that the vast majority of Americans have deliberately chosen to fool themselves.  They have been brainwashed to believe what no longer is true.  Become convinced that you do not live in a true and terrific democracy, or that your democracy is the best in the world.

I stopped believing this myth many years ago.  All the objective evidence I saw over fifty years of paying intense attention both as a citizen and someone who worked within the political system showed me that American democracy had steadily declined in quality, integrity and effectiveness.  And now in this 2016 presidential race you have powerful and painful evidence that we are saddled with a delusional democracy.  Thank Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump for opening your mind and eyes to reveal this revolting truth.

Delusional democracy refers to delusional Americans.  So this year the key question for you to consider is whether you still choose to keep falsely believing that American democracy is worth being proud of.  I just cannot see how Americans can accept these two major party presidential candidates as reflecting a first rate democracy.  They are, in fact, a major embarrassment that should make every American, regardless of their political party loyalty or previous political beliefs, cringe at the ugly reality that these two presidential candidates are worthy of any respect, loyalty or votes.

How could it come to this?  Two world class liars.  Two of the most widely known untrusted and untrustable unpopular politicians ever produced here or anywhere.  Two sick narcissists in it for themselves, not the country.

The US political system produced this reality.  A two-party duopoly serving the rich and powerful, corporate contributors and many special interests, but not the ordinary, general public is what we have had for a long time.  What gave this nation awful economic inequality, destruction of good paying middle class jobs in manufacturing, and horrendous national debt also gave us these two losers.  Can you settle into voting for the lesser of two evils, when each of the two evils makes you gag?  Evil does not accurately describe these two options.  Choose the lesser of two embarrassments, of two calamities, of two democracy destroyers.

Consider this way of thinking about this ugly reality.  Once a democracy has become delusional playing the game of being responsible citizen and voting no longer makes sense.  It is more like joining a criminal conspiracy to maintain the illusion that we have a legitimate democracy.  Voting no longer is the path to have a revolution to restore American democracy.  That is exactly where we have arrived.  When most Americans have little respect and trust for Congress or just about every other institution and most believe we are on the wrong track, then how can you still cling to the belief that voting is what you can and should do?  When it comes to Trump and Hillary how can you still keep deluding yourself that you live in a legitimate democracy worth voting in?

An important 2014 academic study of a huge number of policy actions found that “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.  In other words, voting by citizens does not shape our nation.  We do not have an authentic democracy.  We have more of an oligarchy that is controlled by rich and powerful elites.  Voting is a distraction, something to make you feel good and responsible.  Of course, sometimes it looks like the general public gets what it wants.  Yet “they fairly often get the policies they favor … only because those policies happen also to be preferred by the economically-elite citizens who wield the actual influence.”  The big conclusion: “if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.”  This fits my model perfectly: we have a delusional democracy.

Here is what I think is the correct action this year.  Boycott the presidential election.  Do not vote for anyone for president.  What does this accomplish?  It would create incredible historic data on very low voter turnout for the presidential election.  It would send a clear message to both major parties, the political establishment, the media, and the whole world that Americans have recognized the truth about our delusional democracy.  This could spark true political revolution for the next presidential election.  You ask, depending on what you now believe, but how can I live with that awful Trump or that awful Hillary getting elected president?  So be it.  It is more important to create conditions for major, true political reforms than to worry about an awful person in the White House.  We need a good long game.  Worry less about how a president may harm our nation and more about the critical need to recognize and fix our delusional democracy by taking back the power that the power elites have had for a long time.

There is a wonderful graph on Wikipedia showing US presidential election turnout over history.  From about 1840 to 1900 it was varying around 75 percent to 80 percent.  Then it declined steadily until about 1920, and from then to recent times it varied from around 50 percent to 60 percent.  My main point is that you need some imagination and think about the many impacts of reducing turnout to say 30 percent.  The whole world would interpret that as the rejection by Americans of their political system.  It would be an incredible historic shock having the potential to remove the legitimacy and credibility of the current two-party duopoly.  Our corrupt, delusional democracy would have received a bullet.  Demand for truly reforming and fixing our political system would take on energy.  Remember, the historic data showed this sharp decline in turnout happening once before.  It can happen again, with your help.  Boycott this presidential election.

Fixing our democracy is far more important than your vote this year.  Yes, you may feel bad that the candidate you most hated won your state and maybe the Electoral College, or that you did not show support for a third party candidate.  But you can and should feel good that you have non-voted against the status quo, broken political system.  Feel great that you want to fix our delusional democracy.

In so many other democracies the public create massive street protests and many times this kind of action produces political and government reforms.  It has become clear that the street protest strategy has not and will not happen on a large enough scale to produce deep reforms in the US.  Nor has forming new reform-oriented organizations done the job.  It is far easier and more convenient for the vast majority of Americans to see the light and boycott this presidential election.

Vote for whatever else on your ballot is important to you.  But boycott the presidential election.  That non-vote is truly a message-vote and driving force for major political reforms.  If you continue to believe that ordinary participation in elections will fix our nation, then you have not faced history and reality.  You remain delusional.

Better to choose to make American democracy great again by standing up to a corrupt system.

Recently, Jonathan Cymberknopf wrote a very upbeat article where he makes it sound like third party presidential candidates in 2012 achieved remarkable, even historic, success.  He provides considerable data on how a number of third party candidates did better in 2012 than in the previous presidential election.  For many years I strongly advocated third party options and even was a state chairperson for a major third party.  But over time I realized what a fool’s effort third parties are for presidential elections and also for nearly all congressional ones.  Why?  Because anyone who thinks clearly and understands the US electoral system should know that the system is so rigged against third parties that they are mostly a wasted effort.  Worse even, and this is my major point, because third parties provide a kind of high pressure escape valve for very unhappy Americans to express their anger and frustration.  In so doing, they perversely help to sustain the very corrupt, dysfunctional two-party system they reject and want to change but cannot possibly do.

Let me further explain.  As someone who worked within the federal and state political system for a long time I am totally convinced that the American political system has become a farce, actually an evil system for the vast majority of Americans.  Why?  Because this political system has become the tool for sustaining the upper, wealthy class and is destroying the middle class and succeeding in creating a two-class society.  Economic inequality is now at its highest level.  This has resulted because the rich, upper class controls the political system through money that more than earns a terrific return on the funds invested, because the political system has also corrupted the economic system.

We desperately need a second American revolution.  But it will not and cannot come through elections.  Elections merely represent a delusional notion that American democracy still works, when in fact it is nothing more now than a delusional democracy.  Beyond the top 1 percent so talked about as the very wealthy grabbing nearly all the increases in economic growth and prosperity, it is probably the top 10 percent or more that enjoys fabulous lives.  There really are two economies.  The one for the top on the economic ladder is working wonderfully.  They are gobbling up luxury cars, jewelry and all kinds of products, eating expensive foods at home and in fancy restaurants, getting the very best medical care, and experiencing the joys of luxury travel and entertainment.  The lives of some 30 million Americans are truly wonderful.  But the remaining vast majority of Americans who constitute most of the voters are leading very, very different economic lives with much diminished quality of lives and considerable economic insecurity.

So, rather than celebrate that less than 2 percent of voters supported third party presidential candidates and, in so doing, legitimized the US electoral system, what the country really needs are millions of Americans more forcefully attacking the status quo that the two-party plutocracy uses to serve and protect the upper, wealthy class.  Americans who happily and proudly vote and work for third party candidates are delusional if they think that their actions are helping to bring down our corrupt political system.  They need to realize that in a perverse way they are protecting and sustaining the status quo political system.  It would be far better if many millions of Americans who, as expressed in virtually all surveys and polls, have no trust and confidence in both major political parties and all the elected politicians chose to express their discontent by NOT voting in elections.  Yes, that is what we need.  We need to concretely show our rejection of the political system by not honoring it through voting.

The sad joke is that not much more than half of eligible voters actually vote, far worse than in other advanced, industrialized nations.  What the goal of Americans who correctly see both major parties as rigidly corrupt and useless for most citizens should be is to attack the legitimacy of the political system by cutting voter turnout substantially.

Stop feel-good voting for third party candidates and reject the current electoral system altogether.  Do that and think more about other ways to destroy this system.  Think in terms of a political boycott just as you would an economic boycott against a company.  Never delude yourself that by electing Republicans or Democrats you will see the many necessary, fundamental changes for restoring true democracy and honoring the values of the Constitution.  The one most powerful tactic to restore democracy and economic freedom is removing all private money from the entire political system.  That requires a constitutional amendment, and that can only happen through an Article V convention that recently Mark Levin so powerfully advocated in his new book, but which he, sadly, failed to present the full truth about, namely that Congress has already failed to obey the Constitution and recognize the sufficient number of state applications for a convention.

This failure of Congress, like so many other circumstances, decisions and events, only further proves just how awful American democracy has become.  And it shows just how much we need millions of Americans to fight for what is necessary, rather than think that third party candidates are the answer.  Interestingly, third party presidential candidates have not made the Article V convention option a major campaign issue, just as Republicans and Democrats have ignored this constitutional option.

Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through

Highly Respected Conservative Embraces Article V Convention Option

Joel S. Hirschhorn

No matter what else he has done, what conservative radio host and author Mark Levin does in his new book The Liberty Amendments has made him a hero for me.  For many years I have been writing articles on the wisdom of using something in the US Constitution that I believe offers the only constitutional path to urgently needed reforms of the political system.  I also co-founded the national nonpartisan group Friends of the Article V Convention.  Mark Levin has become the most notable, highly visible person to also come out loudly, advocating the first time use of the Article V convention option.

The good news is that someone who commands significant media attention has recognized both the wisdom and need for using what the Founders had the good sense to give us.  He forcefully makes the case for a convention of state delegates that would have the same constitutional authority as Congress has for proposing constitutional amendments.  And just like all the amendments that now exist and which originated with Congress, those coming from a convention would still have to be ratified by three-quarters of the states.  Levin recognizes that this high hurdle pretty much rules out truly nutty amendments, from either a conservative or liberal perspective, from ever becoming a reality.  Nor can a convention totally rewrite our Constitution.

Most importantly, as I and others have repeatedly said for years, Levin has come to the conclusion that rather fear an amendment convention Americans should more fear sticking with the current corrupt, dysfunctional government system that has brought the US down into what I called a delusional democracy.  Levin like so many others sees no hope to fundamentally fix our system by voting either for Republicans or Democrats, because of what I call a two-party plutocracy ruled by rich, powerful and corporate elites dedicated to maintaining the status quo.

Elections now are the instrument for sustaining the status quo, not reforming the system itself.  People need to understand that there have been many years when one of the two major parties controlled both the presidency and both houses of Congress, including two years under President Obama, four years under President George W. Bush, two years under President Clinton, and four years under President Carter, for example.  Even with such dominance, neither party truly reformed the system or loosened the grip of rich and powerful elites, nor did Supreme Court decisions.  Politicians keep lying and breaking promises.  More than 40 percent of political campaign contributions now come from the top 0.01 percent, the super-rich.  For nearly all Americans the choice is not between elections and an amendment convention.  The choice is between continuing to make stupid decisions or use what the Founders gave us.  Mark Levin has seen the light and now we need many millions of Americans to also get smart.

Now for the bad news.  Levin’s new book presents the case for a large number of specific constitutional amendments.  History has shown that many earlier attempts to use the convention option that were based on advocacy for specific amendments all failed.  I happened to like most of Levin’s amendments.  But the sad fact is that no matter how sensible any specific amendment may appear to most people, there will always be many people and groups willing to fight against it.  The historic result has been that the process of using the convention option has gone down to failure because of opposition to specific amendments.  In other words, the key to success is placing far more emphasis on the process offered by the Constitution to get systemic, core reforms through the states, recognizing that Congress will never propose true, fundamental reforms.

Moreover, Levin has not paid much needed attention to the ugly reality that there has already been a sufficient number of state applications to Congress for a convention (two-thirds of states), but Congress has intentionally violated the Constitution by not calling for the first convention, as Article V requires.  Friends of the Article V Convention has presented a wealth of data, analysis and information on this reality.  Someone with so much celebrity as Levin needs to forcefully inform the public and his many supporters that Congress has long stood in the way of using the convention option, obviously because it fears sharing the power to propose amendments.  This holds for both Republican and Democratic members of Congress.

The battle for fixing and, indeed, saving the US, in other words, requires fighting on two fronts.  First, convince many millions of Americans that the convention strategy is now what is needed.  Second, also convince the public that Congress must be made to honor and obey the Constitution, and the individual oaths of office all members take.  For too long Congress has ignored the states, not even creating an official mechanism for counting state applications for a convention.

Like so many others, David Limbaugh had written against using the convention option, but now he admits: “Like Mark, I was originally skeptical of the idea that we should support the calling of a constitutional convention in an effort to rein in the federal government and restore the power of the states and our individual liberties. But that’s because I hadn’t fully explored what that process would entail.”  We need many more people on the right and left to rethink their positions.

But already, soon after initial attention to Levin’s new book, many people are posting very negative and poorly informed positions against using the convention option on websites.  If these people have any critical thinking skills, then they should realize that rather than fearing a convention, they should fear the status quo and continued national decline because of the awful two-party plutocracy that feeds the thirst for power among both Democrats and Republicans.  There has been an incredible amount of brain washing from the right and left against using the convention option.  Look at what we have now: a truly delusional democracy with each branch of the federal government failing, robbing citizens of their money, liberty and hope.

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through his Delusional Democracy book website.]
http://articlev.wix.com/statusquobuster

African Safari Trip of a Lifetime

Joel S. Hirschhorn

The most amazing thing I learned on my first safari trip is that elephants have the most incredible, very long black eyelashes.  Second, lions could not care less about nearby trucks and people, nor lights at night.  Third, though giraffes seem to walk slow and gracefully, their legs are so long that they cover long distances very quickly.

Countless people from all over the globe book African safari tours because of the widespread desire to see exotic, beautiful animals in their native habitat.  I can attest as someone who has traveled very widely internationally for decades that taking a safari vacation is one of the best, most rewarding things a tourist can do.  I want to share some things I have learned from my recent trip that can help others make good decisions, because these safari tours are pretty expensive.  The toughest decision is what tour company to select of the great many in the market.

A critically important issue is how many game drives you actually get, usually one in the early morning and one in the evening at safari lodges.  These drives in specially designed vehicles usually last for three hours or more and can be very rough rides over dirt roads and sometimes directly into the bush landscape.  Each vehicle has a ranger who drives and provides information continuously to usually four to six guests in the vehicle.  He also has a rifle that is always at hand, just for that remote possibility of an animal charging people.  Check out this reference for general information on safari trips.

Up front on a special seat sits a tracker who, in the daylight, is continuously examining the ground for evidence of specific animals.  At night the tracker continuously directs a large flashlight into the bush to spot the eyes of animals.  It is truly amazing how the trackers actually locate various animals, including lions, elephants, leopards, rhinos,  giraffes and many more so that guests can get up close to magnificent creatures.

On my tour there were blankets for passengers because of the chill in the morning and nighttime hours.  In the morning there was also a much appreciated hot water bottle.  Midway during the drives drinks and snacks are served.  Upon return from drives there is a sumptuous breakfast and dinner.

Everything is done to make it easy for people to take pictures of the wildlife, often getting extremely close to the animals.  Most people take many hundreds of photos on these trips.

For months my wife and I researched a great many African safari tours and finally selected the Tauck company and its South Africa: An Elegant Adventure tour; it offered eight animal drives in two different safari areas in Kruger Park; and the itinerary included seeing more than just wildlife in safari regions, including Cape Town and surrounding areas as well as Johannesburg and Victoria Falls.  Second, we had the distinct impression that it would be a luxury tour with true first class hotels and other amenities.  Other tours at lower cost, perhaps half as much, mean roughing it and this may appeal to many people.

Let me emphasize that we absolutely loved our trip just as everyone else we met while traveling who were on different tours, mostly because of so many wonderful experiences seeing all the animals in glorious settings.  Local guides and staff were excellent.   Yet there were some disappointments.  Of the five hotels the first three were wonderful five star hotels with great food and amenities, including the waterfront Cape Grace hotel in Cape Town and the two safari lodges, Tinga and Sabi Sabi.  But all the satisfaction of staying there set us up for disappointment.

The last two hotels did not live up to the Tauck reputation for elegant accommodations and supplying comfort to its clients.  The rooms at the DaVinci hotel in Johannesburg were in the two star category, small, poorly designed and dysfunctional in many respects.  The tour director upon hearing complaints justified the hotel on the basis of its location, the safe Sandton suburb with interconnected underground malls.  But nearby was an Intercontinental hotel and the Saxon Boutique Hotel that would surely offer superior rooms.  Whatever safari tour companies you consider, question them not only about what hotels or lodges they use but also what type rooms in them you will get; all too often tour companies like Tauck buy the cheapest rooms.

You definitely want to see Victoria Falls if you travel to Africa; they are truly electrifying.  Boat rides along the Zambesi River that feeds the falls are usually included in tours; ours was wonderful, including close up views of an elephant and a hippo.  But disappointing was the much acclaimed Victoria Fall Hotel.  While the location, grounds, exterior and public rooms define a historic, elegant five star venue, nearly all the guest rooms were quite small with very old and drab furnishings and poor views.  There are some very fine rooms which a few people on the tour got (including suites), which raises ethical questions why some people were better treated by Tauck.  Our room was so awful with a thick smell of tobacco that we demanded and received a different room, which still was a one star accommodation.  There are other hotels and lodges in the Victoria Falls area that merit consideration when researching possible safari tours, including The Kingdom, a modern hotel, and the luxury Royal Livingstone Hotel.  If you go to the falls, definitely go to the local market where artisans sell their goods; the variety and prices are just about the best we saw on our entire trip.

Tauck proclaims that it offers personalized service with each guest treated as an individual, with their own needs understood, and most safari tour companies also seem to promise this.  However, we did not experience this.  Unlike luxury, small ship cruises where the cruise director and other staff go out of their way to make you feel cared for, at no point did the Tauck tour director seek to discover whether or not we were fully satisfied and having all our needs satisfied.  In particular, it was very disappointing that the tour director did not facilitate shopping at local artisan venues, especially in Victoria Falls.  Lastly, there is a valid view that Tauck tours like other companies are relatively small group ones, but there were 31 people in our group, not exactly small and intimate.  Pay close attention to any safari tour company with regard to group size.

Most important, give serious thought to going to Africa for a memorable safari tour.

Occupy Movement: Next Step Convergence

Joel S. Hirschhorn

There is a growing convergence of thinking about where the US Occupy movement should go as a next step to turning its values, concerns and commitments into changing what most Americans see as broken government under control of corporate interests.  When it comes to political and social movements, history shows us that they usually fail not because they disappear, but rather because they become marginalized, unimportant despite a core group of committed people and groups.
They lose popular appeal and support or never expand beyond a small early group of supporters.  The nation and many supporters move on.  Other movements grab the interest of the most informed, dissident-type people seeking truth, justice or change.  A good example of such a failed contemporary movement is the 911 truth effort.  The groups, websites and true believers keep on pushing their objectives a decade after the historic event.  But the goal of revealing what really happened that the official government story does not divulge is like a moldy piece of forgotten food in the refrigerator.

Movement death by inattention happens despite good resources, charismatic leaders and even great organization and communication skills.  Critical mass of public support simply never materializes, in large measure because diverse segments of the population never buy into the central arguments of the movement.  The Internet is littered with websites of activist groups that persist despite clear evidence of decay and wide disinterest.  True believers have a mission in life tied to their egos that prevent them from admitting defeat.  They do not move on.

The biggest mistake that passionate advocates for a cause make is overestimating their ability to reach critical mass and underestimating the competition of other movements with greater appeal which rob them of both attention and supporters.

Make no mistake; I totally and enthusiastically support the Occupy movement because it offers the prospect of producing reforms to fix our broken government and attracting very wide public support for a nonviolent Second American Revolution.  What worries me, however, is that many of its participants seem over confident, as if they cannot fail.  On the other hand, I have become impressed by a convergence of thinking about what the next big step for the Occupy movement can and should be.  I will briefly identify examples of this convergent thinking.

Canadian author Erich Koch has written a compelling article: An Objective for the U.S. Occupy Movement: A Constitutional Convention.  He buys into the view that the Occupy movement could embrace the thinking of Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig who has presented the case for amendments to fix Congress.  Like others Koch is correct in saying that “No one in the movement would disagree with its main point: the fundamental problem is the corruption of Congress.”  Unlike others, Koch recognizes the path for obtaining reform constitutional amendments is using the provision in Article V for a convention of state delegates, having the same power as Congress in proposing amendments that still must be ratified by three-quarters of the states.  It has never been used despite many hundreds of state requests for a convention because, clearly, Congress and most status quo forces fear such a convention.

Koch cited a great article by Alesh Houdek: Has a Harvard Professor Mapped Out the Next Step for Occupy Wall Street?  Most is a review of Lessig’s book.  Correctly noted about using the convention option is “it bypasses the usual means of reform (Congress, presidential elections, etc.) which the lobbyists and other interested parties have learned so well to manipulate. And lastly, such a convention would be free to propose solutions that would otherwise be subject to be stricken as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.”  This is critical to understand.  Houdek concludes: “Properly presented, the strategies and aims of Lessig’s book could make it the handbook the protesters have been looking for — and provide a pathway for them to ride out the winter ahead.”

Dan Froomkin also has presented the same case in: Lawrence Lessig’s New Book On Political Corruption Offers Protesters A Possible Manifesto.  He quoted what Lessig himself had said in an article about the Occupy movement and the concern that I share, namely that the Occupy movement “will become too diffuse and not focused” on the root issue of corruption of government.  And that the movement will only grow “if a wide range of people can be part of it.”  This requires coalescing around an issue “as fundamental as the corruption of the system.”  Only a constitutional amendment can fix the corrupting impact of money in politics.  This is also the focus of Dylan Ratigan’s fine effort, except that the use of the convention path has not been emphasized.

A specific call for an Article V convention was made by the pro-Occupy US Day of Rage group: “We are organizing a coordinated national campaign at local and state levels, including where necessary the occupation of state capitols, in order to demand an article V constitutional convention be called to restore representative democracy to our nation.”  A set of specific reforms to be fix the corruption-money problem are presented.

The 99 Percent Declaration group has also presented an important statement centered on the call for a National General Assembly, where delegates would formulate a petition of a list of grievances that would be delivered to the main parts of the federal government on behalf of 99 percent of Americans.  A suggested list of grievances includes the need for constitutional amendments to achieve solutions, but only for a few of the issues.  Not explicitly acknowledged, however, is that constitutional amendments, not ordinary laws, would be necessary for other solutions, such as term limits for Congress and abandoning the Electoral College.  Moreover, there is no specific recognition that serious amendment reforms will not be proposed by Congress, and that an Article V convention is needed.  Inattention to method was also the shortcoming of a similar list of solutions by Ralph Lopez.

Author Scott Turow has presented: How Occupy Wall Street Can Restore Clout of the 99%.  His recommendation to the Occupy movement is “work across the nation for a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to regulate the expenditure of private money on elections.  … The best antidote to this imbalance of income and influence would be to greatly reduce the role of private funding in our elections.  …As for the Occupy Wall Street movement, it has been criticized by some for not having a realistic agenda, even though polling shows that millions of Americans, including me, are sympathetic to the basic message of the protests.”  His prescription: “rally around a single goal and reinvigorate their movement.”  Fine, but missing from his analysis is the recognition that Congress will never propose reform amendments, only an Article V convention will do the job.

This sampling of recent writings clearly shows convergent thinking that the Occupy movement can and should focus on key reform constitutional amendments and, second, that some better informed critical thinkers recognize, this requires advocacy for using the Article V convention option that Congress has refused to honor.

As to Occupy movement success, I want again to emphasize that there is always competition for the attention and support of concerned Americans who recognize how broken our system is.  In particular, the well financed Americans Elect effort is impressive.  Because it is offering an alternative path to nominating a presidential candidate in 2012, over 2 million Americans have already signed up to be delegates for a web convention, with millions more very likely as the mainstream media keeps giving this effort attention.  The Get Money Out campaign has over 250,000 signatories.

Disgust with the two-party plutocracy is surely shared by Occupy participants and supporters.  But for movement success based on enticing many millions of Americans, the Occupy movement cannot ignore competition such as Americans Elect.  This means that the Occupy movement must explicitly start making the case to the broad public why their effort can achieve more of what is needed.  This is easily done.

Here are some key concepts that the Occupy movement could use.  No matter who is nominated by Americans Elect, the odds are that either the better financed Democrat or Republican candidate will win the presidency.  This may just require spending even more millions of dollars on campaigns.  And whoever is nominated by the group will likely be strongly linked to one of the two major parties, rather than some courageous reformer and enemy of the status quo.  Moreover, this group does not offer a realistic path to getting the key reforms of the system that most of us see critically needed, such as constitutional amendments, already recognized by many Occupy supporters.

A sign of trouble for the Occupy movement is a recent national poll that found: “In the latest survey, 33 percent voiced support for Occupy Wall Street, down from 35 percent in a previous poll, while opposition to the movement climbed from 36 percent to 45 percent. Twenty-two percent were unsure.”  These results are worse than earlier polls.  From the left, Chris Bowers commented: “the decline in Occupy Wall Street’s image is probably more connected to the increasingly negative coverage of the clashes between protesters and police than it is to declining support for movement’s message.”  Now is the time to move the message from what is wrong to solutions, using an Occupy Congress approach.  Otherwise, this view from the conservative right might prevail: “OWS will linger … but I’d argue we’ve seen the movement’s high tide. It will now recede into a mere annoying shadow of itself as support is withdrawn by political figures and organizations.”

True, Occupy movement success is not inevitable.  The movement must better define what success means and how it can be achieved if it is to attract and keep the support of many millions of Americans.  It needs specificity for its solutions that ordinary Americans can relate to.  Never underestimate the power and commitment of status quo forces to maintain control over the political, government and economic system that has so harmed most Americans.  The fight against the Occupy movement mostly seen as local police violence against peaceful demonstrators and protesters as well disinformation from some news outlets and pundits are nothing compared to what could be mounted if the movement is viewed as more threatening to the status quo delusional democracy with its delusional prosperity.

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through delusionaldemocracy.com.]

As recently presented in the New York Times, there is global respect for and use of the classic and brilliant work by Gene Sharp “From Dictatorship to Democracy.”  It is credited for empowering many actions around the world to overthrow dictatorships, including recent actions in the Mideast.  My thesis is that his ideas, strategies and tactics, a handbook for revolution, can and should be applied to the US where there is a form of corporate dictatorship operating.
American dictatorship and tyranny is masked by an electoral system that no longer functions with integrity, fairness or efficiency and, therefore, acts to sustain the more hidden and ignored corporate dictatorship inflicting enormous harm on vast numbers of Americans.  In many ways the uniquely American form of dictatorship is far more sinister, indiscernible and powerful than classic dictatorships where one recognized person, military junta or family rules ruthlessly.  

The corporate ruling class has often been exposed but still maintains its power.  The recent excellent article “Why Isn’t Wall Street in Jail?” presents yet another fine analysis, for example, of how corporate rulers have escaped prosecution and punishment.  It showed that “a veritable mountain of evidence indicates that when it comes to Wall Street, the justice system not only sucks at punishing financial criminals, it has actually evolved into a highly effective mechanism for protecting financial criminals. This institutional reality has absolutely nothing to do with politics or ideology — it takes place no matter who’s in office or which party’s in power.”

Another article exposed the plutonomy and noted that the top 20 percent received nearly half of all income generated in the US — 49.4 percent — and the ratio of the income of the top 10 percent of Americans to the poor has risen from 7.69-to-1 in 1968 to 14.5-to-1 in 2010.  Just as conventional dictators steal from their nations, America’s corporate rulers rob US wealth and get away with it because they have succeeded in controlling government and public policy.  This explains why a noted New York Times columnist discussed the “corporate stranglehold on American democracy.”  A dictatorship is all about control.

To say this differently, a sophisticated and powerful plutocracy has hijacked an electoral democracy and behaves just like a dictatorship in critical ways, despite a citizenry that believes it has freedom and liberty secured through the US Constitution.  The middle class is being destroyed and the general population no longer has any realistic expectations of rising affluence.  Economic oppression should be the chief driver of revolution.

In other words, just as in many dictatorships, like the Mubarak regime in Egypt, there can be elections, various freedoms, and many media enterprises.  But the American plutocracy hides in plain sight a false or phantom democracy based on the widespread delusional belief that reforms of government and politics can still be achieved through elections and the equally delusional belief that there is legitimate representative democracy serving public interests.  In sum, Americans have a delusional democracy.  Various corporate interests, especially banks and other financial entities control and manipulate the American system, especially the economy, making its dictatorship far more difficult to discern, oppose and overturn.  Most Americans seem to want to cling to the fiction that they still have a great democracy, which only reveals their stupidity and inability to think critically.  Only continuing widespread economic hardship is likely to pierce the psychological defenses against seeing the ugly truth of American tyranny.

The path to achieving true and deep reforms of the US political and government system must be reframed in terms of Sharp’s methodology rather than through pursuing different candidates and platforms within the two-party plutocracy, where each major party is controlled by corporate and other special interests that make voting and elections the means by which the corporate dictatorship is sustained.

Presidents, administrations and Congresses change, but the mostly invisible elite, corporate powers through smart use of money maintain control to serve their own economic interests.  Power stability is maintained even though there is the appearance of political change.  Unlike places like Egypt and Libya where there are highly visible dictators, in the US there is no such glaringly visible target for revolutions to overthrow.  This makes dissidents and dissatisfied citizens stuck victims that keep trying fruitlessly to get reforms through the dysfunctional political system even when they wage reform campaigns such as the Tea Party movement.  The other tool of the dictatorship is massive distraction perpetrated through myriad entertainment, sports and gambling options, as well as political campaigns, for example.

All this means that nonviolent revolution in the US is probably even more difficult than in traditional dictatorships.  But that does not mean impossible.  It is instructive, however, to keep in mind that during the still painful Great Recession probably a third of the US population has suffered incredibly as indicated by huge numbers of unemployed, underemployed, hungry, foreclosed, homeless, working poor and people without decent health insurance.  Meanwhile, as in countries with traditional dictatorships, in the US there is an upper class that does not suffer.  Corporate elites, in fact, have continued their successful rape of the US economy.  What is different is that even though most of this large wealthy upper class, probably 50 million or more Americans, does not directly participate in the corporate dictatorship, it benefits from it.  Note that just 5 percent of earners account for 35 percent of all consumer spending.  Another large fraction of the population works in all levels of government and also benefits from the corrupt status quo political system.  Both groups stabilize the corporate dictatorship and the two-party plutocracy it uses to maintain the illusion of a functioning democracy.

What all this means is that Sharp’s tools for overthrowing a dictatorship has a small fraction of the population that might use them to achieve success through nonviolent revolution.  But generally those active in overthrowing a dictatorship are a small fraction of the population.  This means there are more than enough Americans to overturn the corpocracy.

In other words, what starkly differentiates the US from traditional dictatorships is that the fraction of the population most impacted by a corrupt system does not even think or dream in terms of revolution or rebellion.  While suffering people in a number of Mideast countries clearly are ready for revolution, Americans have been unready for revolution despite being citizens of a country founded on revolution.

What is most ironic about this American shame is the incredibly high level of gun ownership among Americans, including those most victimized by the corrupt system.  They seem to be mentally prepared for a more open form of tyranny against which they would use their guns, but are unready to mount a revolt without guns within the current system.  Of course, as Sharp says: “If you fight with violence, you are fighting with your enemy’s best weapon, and you may be a brave but dead hero.”  Gun ownership in a perverse way makes nonviolent revolution which Sharp correctly concludes is the best route to successful revolution even more difficult in the US.  That is, widespread gun ownership is itself a form of distraction and delusion that perversely sustains the corporate dictatorship.  Americans can keep their guns, while the rich elites keep most of the money and wealth of the nation.  Greed outsmarts guns.

Those Americans who like me thirst for reforms that restore American democracy should download the free Sharp handbook and study its findings.  Sharp has said “If people are not afraid of the dictatorship, that dictatorship is in big trouble.”  Add this: If people are not aware of the dictatorship, that dictatorship is in great shape.

As I am glued to cable stations showing the street battles in Egypt all I keep thinking about is how Egyptians have mustered the courage to fight their government’s tyranny while Americans remain unready to revolt against the peculiar American brand of tyranny.
Of course, the dictatorship in Egypt is far different than what the vast majority of Americans face.  Despite liberty and freedom, our tyranny exists within an electoral, constitutional republic.  But with a two-party plutocracy thoroughly corrupted by corporate and wealthy interests most Americans are victims of a dysfunctional, inefficient and unfair democracy.  How ironic that in the nation with monumental gun ownership among its citizens there is no hint of people giving up on meaningless elections and taking to the streets in massive numbers to protest their corrupt government.
Just this week a new report documented this: Nearly a year and a half into the economic recovery, some 43.6 million Americans continued to rely on food stamps in November, 2010.  That amounts to more than 14 percent of the population that relied on food stamps to purchase groceries, just another result of stubborn high unemployment and low incomes among the employed.  According to the new report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, compared to a year ago the number of people receiving food stamps was up 14.2 percent.  Many other Americans are getting food at various kinds of charities and food banks.  Add to this real unemployment approaching 20 percent in most areas and huge numbers of Americans going homeless and facing home foreclosure.  Does this sound like the best country on Earth that politicians like to jabber about?  Of course not.
The US is in terrible shape, but President Obama lied in his recent state of the union address.  It was not his first time, nor will it be his last time.  But it was one of the biggest possible lies.  The state of union is absolutely not strong.  Anyone with a smidgen of intelligence and critical thinking capability knows that in almost every conceivable way the US is in awful shape for a large fraction of its citizens.

Imagine if the President of the USA stood up in front of Congress, the whole nation and the world with the courage to tell the truth: the state of the union is terrible, about the worst in over 100 years.  And that is why Americans have to wake up, pay attention, sacrifice and join together in rebellion to make things much, much better and the hell with conventional politics driven by the worst special interests and the rich.

By telling the lie that the state of the union is strong, Obama removed the necessary motivation for Americans to get their distracted and delusional minds oriented in the right direction.  The nation needs to shift into revolution mode.  Watching the Superbowl will not improve our government.

What Americans must face is the ugly truth that China and other nations are beating the crap out of the US and nothing the US is currently doing has the ability to change this situation and win the global competition.  In just about every objective way that nations can be judged the US is losing the present.  Our educational system for children is a joke; data keep showing that American children are far behind those in many other countries.  Our industrial sector has lost an incredible amount of manufacturing and most large companies now make more money from foreign operations and invest money abroad for that reason.  That explains a huge loss of jobs with no reversal possible.  Our financial sector is awash with corruption, greed and dishonesty.  Our health care system no longer produces healthy citizens, compared to many other nations, despite costing much, much more.  Our physical infrastructure is a disgrace, crumbling and threatening public health and safety.  Upward mobility has largely disappeared and the middle class continues to sink into a lower class.  Economic inequality has skyrocketed with the rich becoming richer and everyone else suffering more and more.  The large number of homeless, hungry, poor and imprisoned Americans defines a nation that has lost its glory.

Just as Americans have watched once great companies disappear (Remember Polaroid?), they need to wake up to the downfall of their own country.  All the talk about jobs is just another monumental deception, because there is no way that millions of new, good paying jobs will be created for many years.  Even more and more Americans face hunger and homelessness as well as joining the working poor.

In stark contrast to the empty rhetoric of Obama, at about the same time a remarkably honest report by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that provides incredibly honest criticisms and explanation of exactly what caused the economic meltdown that millions of Americans are still suffering from.  If President Obama respected its findings, he would use them as the basis for detailing his actions against the entities responsible for the Great Recession.  Here is a sample of the report’s important views:

“The crisis was the result of human action and inaction, not of Mother Nature or computer models gone haywire. The captains of finance and the public stewards of our financial system ignored warnings and failed to question, understand and manage evolving risks within a system essential to the well-being of the American public. Theirs was a big miss, not a stumble.”

The financial industry has gotten away with murder and ended up profiting enormously.  No mystery because it and groups affiliated with it spent more than $3.7 billion on lobbying and campaign contributions from 1999 to 2008.

And imagine if the President would have had the guts to talk openly about the incredibly awful financial predicament of most states!  Many more people will lose their jobs as governments cut spending.

Nothing defines our delusional democracy more than a president providing delusional thinking to mostly delusional citizens.  Make no mistake; this is an epidemic of bipartisan delusion.  This is what makes America exceptional.  A once great nation is sliding down the toilet and most everyone, especially politicians, are lying endlessly as it does, as if the nation’s decay should be ignored rather than honestly combated by its citizens.

Obama said “We do big things.”  Once, the country did big things, but not now.  The best is behind us, the worst is now with us.  The US is stuck in a quicksand of corrupt politics that has been killing the middle class as the elite and rich upper class gets more and more wealth and power.  Republicans like to talk about US exceptionalism; it is a farce.  There is no longer anything exceptional in a positive sense.  That is a terribly bitter and painful truth to acknowledge, but if we do not do so, then how can we possibly fix the many things that are broken?  We cannot.  We are in a massive national state of delusion, hanging on to the fantasy that the nation is still great.  Yes, we need to do big things to restore greatness to the nation, but for that to happen we must first admit the ugly truth and fight American tyranny.

Winning the future, the hot new slogan from Obama, only has meaning if he acknowledges that the nation is losing the present.  Yet Americans remain unready to revolt.  And the Tea Party movement puts its faith in Republicans!  What a disgrace, especially for a nation built on revolution.

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through delusionaldemocracy.com.]

So many intelligent Americans believe, say and do stupid things.  When a large fraction of the population is like this, a nation rots from the inside and succumbs to external forces.

I have always searched for the simplest yet best ways to explain what I see as a multi-decade decline of every aspect of the United States, especially its political system and government.  I keep coming back to the inescapable logic that a large fraction of Americans, regardless of their education, economic status and political alignment, must suffer from delusion.  This delusion produces denial about hugely important subjects and issues.  

Like a law of physics, this combination makes people seem incredibly stupid to others disagreeing with their positions.  Stupid, because they are unable to accept facts and truths that conflict with their views.

This special kind of stupidity is independent of inherent intelligence.  In this case brain power is overpowered by psychological deficiency, namely self-delusion.  

This delusion is not genetically produced, but is a result of external influences, notably political, government, media and corporate propaganda intentionally designed to produce delusional beliefs and thinking.  Who does this?  All sorts of commercial and political interests.  The result is a series of biases and blocks, such as cognitive dissonance, to objective facts and information that creates denial about very important conditions affecting the planet, the nation and individuals.  People afflicted with this deadly combination appear stupid to those outside their mental ghetto that they gladly inhabit, along with similarly afflicted people.

National unity breaks down with countless mental ghettos that span economic, political and geographic boundaries.

Conservatives see liberals as stupid and vice versa.  Democrats see Tea Party adherents (who only support Republican candidates) as stupid and vice versa.  Those seeing climate change and global warming as serious phenomena posing real threats see deniers as stupid.  People who give a high priority to tax cuts that mainly benefit the rich and superrich seem stupid to those who recognize that the wealthiest Americans have hijacked the US economy, as shown by endless statistics that reveal their preferential financial benefits.  Those who reject religions think the religious stupid.  People who shun social networking sites see those addicted to them as stupid.  Growing numbers of obese people seem stupid to those eating healthy and exercising regularly to maintain healthy weights.

A prime example of a mental ghetto is the collection of radical, terrorist Muslims sharing hate and violence and blocking out teachings from authentic Muslims about peace and love.

You surely can think of classes of people who seem stupid, because of a particular belief or viewpoint rather than across-the-board limited intelligence.  With conversations that have nothing to do with their position (or maybe several), you would likely think of them as reasonably intelligent and smart, not stupid.  In other words, stupidity is often topic or issue specific.

Here are two examples of what I call psychological stupidity with their powerful implications for understanding why the nation is seen on the wrong track by so many Americans who cannot unite behind solutions.

There is no mystery why the top 20 percent of the population in terms of wealth votes for Republicans, but they are not enough to win elections.  What makes far less sense is why many more middle class Americans vote for Republicans.  They seem stupid in voting against their own economic interests because Republicans pursue policies that preferentially reward the richest Americans.  This behavior can only be explained by the success of Republican propaganda (mainly trickle down prosperity), lies and deceptions that instill a set of biases and beliefs that enable Republicans to win elections.  A prime example is obtaining broad support for keeping taxes on really rich people low.

On the other side, are millions of people who vote for Democrats because they have been sold rhetoric about reforming the government system, as if Democrats are not also in the pockets of a number of special interests that will not accept truly needed deep reforms.  Why have we not seen President Obama pursue punishment of many people and companies in the banking, mortgage and financial sectors that caused the economic meltdown?  He had received huge campaign contributions from them and then surrounded himself with cabinet officials and advisors from them.  Otherwise intelligent people vote for Democrats because of their psychological stupidity based on false promises of change and reform that they have succumbed to.

Psychological stupidity has become a kind of cultural epidemic that no one is addressing, so it just gets worse.  It invites manipulation and the continuing corrosion and corruption of government.  The rich and powerful know how to take advantage of this stupidity, obtaining government policies and programs they want, selling products and services that consumers do not really benefit from, and grabbing more of the nation’s wealth.  

Those afflicted with psychological stupidity are also likely to exhibit moral superiority, making it even more difficult to have intelligent and productive conversations with them.  Such arrogance strengthens their defenses against facts and information that conflicts with their cherished views.  The answer:  Associate with others having exactly the same views and only get information from like-minded media sources, creating mental ghettos (such as the Tea Party and Fox News) that others can take political or commercial advantage of (Republicans and companies selling gold).

Self-deception is the widespread legal narcotic lubricating the slide of American society into the toilet that other once great nations ended up in.  Maybe this old Arab proverb warrants respect: People who lie to others have merely hidden away the truth, but people who lie to themselves have forgotten where they put it.

Which mental ghettos do you belong to?

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through delusionaldemocracy.com.]

Despite all the hype and rhetoric, only one impact of the midterm elections is assured.  Notwithstanding power shifts from Democrats to Republicans in Congress there will not be any deep, sorely needed true reforms of our corrupt, dysfunctional and inefficient government.  The culture of corruption in Washington, DC will remain.  Hundreds of millions of dollars from corporate and other special interests will assure that.

Voters who think otherwise are either delusional or stupid.  It will not matter whether you voted for Republicans because you wanted to defeat Democrats (or vice-versa), or whether you voted for Tea Party candidates, or whether you voted against incumbents, or whether you voted for what you believe are lesser-evil candidates.  Americans lost however they voted, but it may take time for most to comprehend that.  That is a terribly painful reality, which is why many who chose to vote will resist facing the ugly truth.

When it comes to politics in America, delusion and stupidity are rampant, like a terrible epidemic that has killed brain cells.  Several billion dollars were spent selling candidates this year.  Who profited?  The many media outlets that received the advertising bonanza and companies that supplied mailings, posters and automatic phone calls.  At least all that spending was kept domestic.

Yes, you are thinking that this is the most cynical view possible.  Cynicism beats delusion.  I recommend it.

This is what American history tells us.  Americans have been brainwashed and tricked into thinking that elections are crucial for maintaining American democracy.  That is exactly what the two-party plutocracy needs to maintain their self-serving political system and that is also what the rich and powerful Upper Class wants to preserve their status.  But voting in a corrupt political system no longer sustains democracy.  It only sustains the corrupt political system that makes a mockery of American democracy.  Think about it.

In the months following this election, when unemployment and economic pain for all but the rich remain awful, anyone who pays attention and is able to face the truth will see that there is little chance of genuine government reforms.  Nor will any of the nation’s severe fiscal and spending problems be smartly attacked.  The Republicans will blame the Democrats, the Democrats will blame the Republicans, the Tea Party winners will blame the system, the radio and cable pundits will blabber endlessly, and Jon Stewart and other comics will have an abundance of material to take jabs at.  The two-party plutocracy will triumph.

Every member of Congress will, as before, spend most of their time and energy doing what is necessary to win the next election.  The army of lobbyists will be busier than ever legally bribing politicians to sustain the successful political strategy of the rich and business sector to make the rich and superrich still richer at the expense of the middle class.  Anyone who thinks that winner Republicans will work to overturn economic inequality is stupid or delusional.  A disproportionate and ludicrous fraction of the nation’s income and wealth will go to a tiny fraction of rich and superrich Americans.  Nothing that President Obama or the Democrats have done or championed was aimed squarely at reversing economic inequality and the death of the middle class, which by itself justified defeating them.

President Obama, of course, will continue his self-serving rhetoric with the sole goal of winning reelection in 2012.  The presidency just made him destructively delusional.  Of course he will speak about working with Republicans.  Wait and see.

Here is what non-delusional Americans can hope for: Maybe a decent third party presidential candidate will emerge.  Maybe the Tea Party movement will wake up to the reality that electing Republicans is a terrible strategy for reforming the government and restoring the health of the nation and shift their interest to forming a third party.  I doubt very much whether any of the Tea Party winners in Congress will stand up and aggressively work for and demand true reforms.  The new Republican Speaker of the House is a classic establishment Republican.  Maybe the greatly expanded calls for an Article V convention (mostly by Republicans and conservatives) as the constitutional path to reforms through constitutional amendments will gather more energy (especially from Tea Party people) and finally succeed.

Welcome to the good old USA where citizens, unlike those in Europe, do not riot in the streets demanding justice but keep believing in the nonsense that voting for either Republicans or Democrats will work for them and the nation.

Despair follows delusion.  Despite the endless media hype, the political revolution of 2010 is like a badly made firecracker – a dud.  President Obama, Republicans and Democrats will have learned nothing profound, not enough to dedicate themselves to real reforms.  Along with economic pain, widespread anger will persist as nothing tangible results to make the lives of ordinary Americans a lot better.  Will Americans demand smarter strategies than voting in regular elections with choices between Democrats and Republicans?  What do you think?

[Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through delusionaldemocracy.com.]