As always, please go to the links for the full articles/ op eds.
Beware the Ides of March! Also --
Communitarianism. pic.twitter.com/jV2Vb3wDJV
— Jacob T. Levy (@jtlevy) March 15, 2021
Teri Kanefield explains why Republicans are masters at making up enemies to hide their "sadopolulism":
In a nutshell: Republicans are very good at inventing enemies. Made-up enemies are safest. That's why, to paraphrase George Orwell, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Republicans responded to Biden's bill — which is popular with most Americans — by fueling a massive conservative backlash to what they have termed "cancel culture." Fox News spent days decrying the decision of Dr. Seuss Enterprises (a private company) to stop publishing a few lesser-known Dr. Seuss books, which the estate deemed outdated and racist. This fake controversy, and its perceived threat to the American way of life, is a made-up enemy. Yet Republicans and their media spokespersons spun this as a culture war waged by radical leftists on "Green Eggs and Ham" (a book unaffected by the decision of Dr. Seuss Enterprises). Dangerous to American free speech? Hardly. Excellent distraction from the GOP's Covid-19 obstruction? Absolutely. [snip]
According to Yale history professor Timothy Snyder, Republican leaders' motives are likely deeply cynical. Snyder proposes a concept called "sadopopulism," which refers to politicians who purposefully govern in a way that makes life worse for the bulk their supporters. Snyder presents the strategy in a few easy steps:
- Identify an "enemy."
- Enact policies that create pain in your own constituents.
- Blame the ensuing pain on the "enemies."
- Present yourself as the strongman who can fight the enemies.
In a nutshell, you can't have a white grievance party if your constituents aren't grieving. Policy that keeps the rank and file in pain keeps them angry, and perversely that can help you at the ballot box by directing their anger at "made-up enemies" who — so the story goes — are powered by Democrats who are out to ruin (cancel) American culture. The formula creates a brutal political incentive to embrace policies that hurt their own constituents.
Snyder explains that this formula is commonly used by modern-day oligarchs and would-be oligarchs. If you're a would-be oligarch — if you want both wealth and power — you have no incentive to give more real power to the people but every incentive to make it look like you are fighting for them publicly. (our emphasis)
Dylan Matthews demonstrates why Republicans are so anxious to change the subject from the enormous impact the COVID relief and stimulus bill (the "American Rescue Plan Act") will have on poverty in America, similar to LBJ's war on poverty programs:
With Congress’s passage of the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, another Democratic president with a reputation as a moderate (and who came through the Senate and the vice presidency) is putting his stamp on American policy. The Covid-19 relief bill, which passed the US House on Wednesday afternoon and was signed into law by President Biden on Thursday, is the most far-reaching anti-poverty legislation in more than 50 years.
The American Rescue Plan sends $1,400 checks to adults and child dependents and extends bonus federal unemployment benefits through September (continuing the work done in 2020’s stimulus bills). It also increases the child tax credit for 2021, offers subsidies to help low-income people in states that didn’t expand Medicaid purchase health insurance on the ACA marketplaces, provides housing vouchers for people at risk of homelessness, and boosts the earned income tax credit (EITC) for adults without kids.
Johnson’s war on poverty has gotten a raw deal in historical memory. Ronald Reagan’s quip that “poverty won the war” remains the dominant assessment of Johnson’s efforts. (It certainly didn’t help matters that Johnson escalated US involvement in a real, catastrophic war around the same time.)
But poverty didn’t win the war. When two economists tried to construct a more accurate measure of American poverty between 1960 and 2010, they found that Johnson presided over a massive decline in poverty. In 1960, the rate of consumption poverty in the US was 30.8 percent. By 1972, it had declined to 16.4 percent. Johnson’s efforts appeared to be the main lever cutting the poverty rate nearly in half.
The effects of the American Rescue Plan won’t be quite as massive, but they’ll be in a similar ballpark. By one estimate, overall poverty will fall by a third, and child poverty by over half. Whether Biden ends up matching LBJ’s achievement depends on what he and the Democratic-controlled Congress do in the months ahead.
Some Republican weasels are already trying to take credit for something they all voted against. They know how popular the legislation is and will continue to be. So, Democrats can't let up now. Let's bet on "Making peoples' lives better" wins elections.
Sahil Kapur writes about a "tremendous sea change" in Dems' attitudes toward the filibuster, and one particular change that might garner the support needed to succeed in breaking this tyranny of the minority in the Senate:
Under current rules established in 1975, the onus is on the majority to find 60 votes to proceed on legislation. If 41 or more senators vote against it, the bill stalls and there's nothing the majority can do. [Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff] Merkley calls it "a no show, no effort, silent, invisible" blockade.
A talking filibuster would flip that onus, requiring a group of 41 senators to hold the floor and take turns talking incessantly — to air their grievances with the legislation being considered.
Eventually, Merkley explained, one of two things will happen: The majority party will lose its nerve and pull the bill, or the number of senators present will fall under 41 and enable the majority to advance the bill with a three-fifths majority.
There can be no illusion that, somehow, the filibuster must be ended in its present form in order for major Democratic initiatives to pass, including the "For the People Act," H.R. 1, which will counter Republican voter suppression efforts in multiple states. We shouldn't have to deal with a reactionary rule that has operated as an obstacle to progress and a defender of white supremacy for most of its life. Getting H.R. 1 through the Senate is imperative if we're going to have a fair playing field in our elections from now on.
We conclude in our normal fashion, by recommending a visit over to Infidel 753's blog round- up for a comprehensive array of links to interesting posts from around the Internet. From a colorful squid, to virtual walks through foreign cities (ed.: wow!), to why conflicts over the minimum wage mustn't divide us, Infidel has curated some amazing links once again.
