it becomes clearer and clearer to me as we proceed along that Marx had it pretty much nailed: in a capitalist society, democratic government necessarily represents the interests of the capitalists. You can try to mitigate the harshness on the proletariat with regulations and oversight and stuff like that, but in the end, the interests being served are those of the folks that own the means of production, and who need to be able to collect labor’s surplus value in order for those magic GDP numbers to keep pinging.
When I read stuff like this:
On Capitol Hill, Mr. Paulson, facing a second day of questioning by lawmakers, this time before the House Financial Services Committee, tried to focus as much on Main Street as Wall Street.
“This entire proposal is about benefiting the American people because today’s fragile financial system puts their economic well being at risk,” Mr. Paulson said. Without action, he added: “Americans’ personal savings and the ability of consumers and business to finance spending, investment and job creation are threatened.”
All I can think about is the myopia with which the USW hitched its wagon to USX in the 60s and 70s — and you see it here in Pgh even now, and in SWPA and WV with the coal industry and the UMW — in which the interests of the labor unions get subsumed into the interests of the companies the unions work for, until we’re all working frantically to keep the capitalists from taking a bath in the shitstorm they created lest the mills close and we all lose our shirts. Ironically, the orthodox free-market wackos agree that the capitalists have to assume all the risk when they play with their money, and are objecting to the bailout on behalf of the taxpayers. (The wackos just also think the bourgeoisie should get to keep all the winnings when they come up holding the flush — which of course makes logical sense but makes for a very unjust society.)
But of course all of this just illustrates Marx’s point.
Sigh.