The Nobel Prize Laureate in Economics Paul Krugman points out today that the following chart describing employment
decisively refutes the claim of that dishonest mouthpiece for the Corporate Interest the Wall Street Journal, that there is significance to the decline in employment in the coal industry during the Obama Administration.
Let us Greens consider the basis on which this becomes an argument to support the Democratic Party nominee in the fall elections.
If you reject the crumbs as they say ‘trickling down” from the tables of the soi-disant Masters of the Universe you are engaging in what the Consensus School of American History calls “The Paranoid Style” — that is, you say that politics is about something other than the judicious slicing of the pie.
Why is it certifiably insane to discuss anything other than wages and benefits? Because we are at our best when united. Both extremes of Right and Left are to be avoided; that’s what they taught us in Civics Class in the (here Your Intrepid Reporter betrays his age) 1960s.
To the extent that we Greens ask people to vote for fundamental change (where the Democrats offer incrementally better management of an exploitative Empire than the Republicans), we are attempting to deny that teaching; and we ought to acknowledge the fact. The main reason we can offer is that incremental change won’t work.
Our position is the political analog, I argue, to the difference between the “normal science” conducted when everyone agrees with the outlines of the universe of discourse, and “revolutionary science,” which, Kuhn teaches, involves some tectonic shifts in referents.
In times of greater political stress, oh, say, such as in the 1930s in Germany or, um, Japan, then it is not “paranoid” to look outside the regular political Establishment for solutions. Fascists are certainly fascist; but they are rational.