To Tame the Savageness of Man

If unrestrained by established codes, man will try to accumulate unto himself all the comfort, satisfaction and wealth that he can through whatever means necessary That is an awful attitude to hold about humanity, but it is a defensible thesis.
by Charlie Leck

No pabulum in this blog! I write about regulation and why we do it – why we write laws for individuals and corporations and why they must be strictly enforced.

Left unattended, without regulation, audit and supervision, mankind, I think, would be a savage beast.

Why do I think that?
It comes, I guess, from years of observation. Mankind has a huge, nearly insatiable appetite. He will do what he may to satisfy his craving. Take it as an old man’s observation!

There are certainly enough human examples in this country and around the world and they needn’t be so celebrated as Genghis Khan. Bernie Madoff will do quite well, thank you very much. And here, locally, so will Tom Petters and Denny Hecker. (You national readers can insert names from your own regions.)

This is why societies try (and have always tried) to order themselves and establish standards of behavior through rules of law.

A long, gloomy and tiring dissertation could be at hand, I suppose, but I will not go there. To be brief, I will say it succinctly: I worry about the adored themes of political dissertation in these days that call for deregulation of industry and commerce – these camouflaged calls for more freedom to operation, compete and succeed. In my lifetime I have seen too many examples of deregulation’s failure and the chaos and pain that such failure can bring. Most recently, you need only look at the mortgage lending and banking industry’s performance over the last two decades.

I do not trust the Koch Brothers! Don’t ask me why? I would struggle with an answer. It is the same inner, common sense that made me so shake my head in disbelief when I heard mortgage companies advertising that they had hoards of money to lend even to people who could make no down-payment whatsoever and even to people who had serious past histories of poor credit. You want to know just how bad the Koch brothers are, well google exactly that sometime and then sit back for hours and hours and read about these bad asses.

I don’t trust Karl Rove. I don’t trust Dick Cheney. I don’t trust Mike George (the sole funder of Strong America Now that supports Newt Gingrich). I don’t trust Newt Gingrich and his voracious appetites. I don’t trust Peter Thiel, who funds the Super Pac called Liberty, and all the personal and corporate freedom that he calls for. I also tend not to trust John Peterman of Whiteco Industries even though he made a contribution of a couple of thousand to Barack Obama’s campaign. He gave a million bucks to the American Crossroads Super Pac. In 2007, John McCain, for some reason, returned all the money that John Peterman gave to him. McCain didn’t like money from John Peterman.

I don’t mean to single these gentlemen out. They are only a few of the very successful businessmen and lobbyists who are calling for more deregulation and greater freedom for companies to operate as they please. Businesses and businessmen free from audit and oversight and regulation are like the proverbial “kid in a candy store.” Sticky fingers are a problem!

Do I sound too pessimistic and negative? I was a student of social theories (how societies organize and comport themselves). It’s too bad, but societies need laws, regulation and organization to keep their people from becoming savages. Things like that haven’t changed. It is as old as the earliest civilizations. Businesses need serious regulation also.

To close, had the banking, lending and mortgage industry been more seriously regulated we probably would have avoided the tough last few years we’ve gone through.

“The aim of mankind should be to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.” [Edith Hamilton]

The above quotation, used by Bobby Kennedy in his extemporaneous remarks on the occasion of Martin Luther King’s assassination, has often been attributed to Aeschylus, but that is likely not correct. The extraordinary expert of Greek mythology and history, Edith Hamilton, used it a number of times in her speeches and often in explaining the necessity to check the appetites of ancient societies. However, it was certainly a theme of many of the plays of the ancient Greek playwright.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

The Skeptics about Global Warming are just Dead Wrong!

“Now let me explain why you should not be a skeptic, at least not any longer.”
by Charlie Leck

Don Shelby, a hot-shot newsman up here in Minnesota, wrote a very interesting story on the MinnPost site that I want to recommend to you. It’s about one of the most prominent scientist-global-warming-skeptics who has now admitted he was wrong! Richard A Muller is a professor of physics at the University of California and leads the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project (BEST) that the crowd of nay-sayers about global warming were betting on to prove that warming is a bunch of hokey. Unfortunately (or fortunately) Muller was led to quite the opposite conclusion.

It’s a very important and interesting story and Shelby has written it well. Be sure to read it – especially if you’ve had doubts about global warming!

The Koch brothers are significant funders of BEST. I gave you a long dose about them and their quirky political positions in yesterday’s blog. They can’t be happy about Muller’s new position.

Here are some interesting comments from Shelby about this…

“In other words, the skeptical funders of the study just backed the wrong horse. Charles Koch helped pay for a study that says everything Charles Koch believes in is wrong.

“Over his career, Muller has said so many awful things about so many good scientists that they are not likely to let him off the hook. Grudges are hard things to let go. But I hold no grudge against Muller, even though his behavior, on occasion, has been ungentlemanly and hurtful. So, let me say it takes guts for Muller to stand up and say he was wrong. I admire facts and knowledge, and apparently, so does Muller. He couldn't run from them. No one can, no matter how hard we try to wish them away, no matter how much the facts harm our vested interests, your political leanings or how often you argued with your brother-in-law about the poor quality of the temperature measurements. It made you sound smart, then.”

Shelby then goes on to say some interesting and important things about skepticism itself. It’s really good reading! Go for it!

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

America as Oligarchy

For this blog, I take my cue from my wife, who keeps talking about America as oligarchy!
by Charlie Leck

Your morning reading assignment is to read Paul Krugman’s column, Wisconsin Power Play. As you read, keep in mind that a lot of money from the Koch Brothers (Kansas billionaires) went into the election campaign of Wisconsin’s new and very conservative governor. Here’s a NY Times story about that, too, if you’re interested.

In his column, Krugman is suggesting a developing oligarchy in America. My wife has been saying that to me for over a year now.

The wealthy are “feeling their oats” and testing their wings in America’s political currents. They and big corporations are finding they can have major influence in American politics. The U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows corporations to make enormous contributions to political campaigns is already wreaking havoc on political outcomes in national and state politics.

An oligarchy is not a tool of democracy. It is a replacement, or substitute, for democracy. Under an oligarchy, the pretense of a democracy can be kept alive while the democracy really doesn’t function.

Too wild a concept? Keep your eyes open!

Think about this comment that Krugman makes…

“...For what’s happening in Wisconsin isn’t about the state budget, despite Mr. Walker’s pretense that he’s just trying to be fiscally responsible. It is, instead, about power. What Mr. Walker and his backers are trying to do is to make Wisconsin — and eventually, America — less of a functioning democracy and more of a third-world-style oligarchy. And that’s why anyone who believes that we need some counterweight to the political power of big money should be on the demonstrators’ side.

“…In principle, every American citizen has an equal say in our political process. In practice, of course, some of us are more equal than others. Billionaires can field armies of lobbyists; they can finance think tanks that put the desired spin on policy issues; they can funnel cash to politicians with sympathetic views (as the Koch brothers did in the case of Mr. Walker). On paper, we’re a one-person-one-vote nation; in reality, we’re more than a bit of an oligarchy, in which a handful of wealthy people dominate.

“Given this reality, it’s important to have institutions that can act as counterweights to the power of big money. And unions are among the most important of these institutions.”

Ladies and Gentlemen and Children of All Ages…
the gap between America’s wealthy – its super wealthy – and our middle and poorer economic classes is growing wider and wider; while, at the same time, the very wealthy individuals and corporations are assuming more of a prominent role in politics. That could otherwise be called an oligarchy. Certainly, it is a serious weakening of the democratic institution about which our nation has long boasted.

For this, you can send a thank-you-note to the five conservative members of the United States Supreme Court. In our form of democracy, there is nothing – no single event – that can do more damage to the basic system of fair government than a poor Supreme Court decision.

Of course, the least you can do is read the two pieces I recommend to you above.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Is it Ignorance or is it Brobdingnagian Greed?

The Koch Brothers are generously funding an initiative on the ballot in California this fall that would kill AB 32 – a clean energy bill that was hailed by environmentalists as an important achievement.
by Charlie Leck

You can see from the title that my “word of the day” came through this morning; and it’s recommended that I try to use it three or four times on the day I get it, so you are my pigeons this morning. Yet, it is not a misused word in this context; rather, it is very appurtenant here!

Brobdingnagian \brob-ding-NAG-ee-uhn [adjective]
Of extraordinary size; gigantic; enormous

I suggest you read the New York Times editorial of 20 September 2010 about “The Brothers Koch and AB 32.”

Here’s an extraordinary example of the power that wealthy, corporate moguls have in America and how they can mess with and manipulate our political systems far beyond the ability of normal, everyday citizens.

The Koch Brothers are providing huge sums of money in a campaign for a ballot initiative in California that will kill a law that is providing great hope that climate change can be slowed and our dependence on foreign oil reduced. The law, however, threatens to reduce the bottom line at Koch Industries. The billionaire brothers also happen to believe “global warming” is nonsense.

So, this California law that aims at reducing carbon dioxide emissions is in danger of being repealed. Such greed and stupidity should no longer surprise or shock me. I guess it doesn’t, but it does still make me angrier than hell!

“The Kochs and their allies are disastrously wrong about the science, which shows that man-made emissions are largely responsible for global warming, and wrong about the economics. AB 32’s many friends – led by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California – have therefore mounted a spirited counterattack in defense of the law.” [New York Times, 20 Sept 2010]

What’s a guy in Minnesota to do about such ignorance and brobdingnagian greed?

_________________________

You can email Charles Leck
or you can sign-in to post a comment on the blog
or you can click on “follow” in the top right hand corner