The Wake of Destruction Caused by Fundamentalist Capitalism

Monbiot summarizes the effects of our religiously-flavored free-market devotion:

By the mid-1990s, the doctrine of market fundamentalism – also known as neoliberalism – had almost all governments by the throat. Any politicians who tried to protect the weak from the powerful or the natural world from industrial destruction were punished by the corporate media or the markets. This extreme political doctrine – that governments must cease to govern – has made direct, uncomplicated action almost unthinkable. Just as the extent of humankind’s greatest crisis – climate breakdown – became clear, governments willing to address it were everywhere being disciplined or purged. Since then, this doctrine has caused financial crises and economic collapse, the destruction of livelihoods, mountainous debt, insecurity and the devastation of the living planet. It has, as Thomas Piketty demonstrates, replaced enterprise with patrimonial capitalism: neoliberal economies rapidly become dominated by rent and inherited wealth, in which social mobility stalls. But despite these evident failures, despite the fact that the claims of market fundamentalism have been disproven as dramatically as those of state communism, somehow this zombie ideology staggers on.

And the problems are going to get worse. When corporations and the rich control so much of our government, the problems affecting the majority of us are ignored for the problems that directly affect the rich and powerful. As more and more cash flows directly from the wealthy to the government, and Republicans work harder to pry open those floodgates a little more each day, it will accelerate the decay.

Follow the money

It's still amazing that people want to use the "they both do it" excuse to blame politicians of both parties for being in the pocket of big-monied interests. The disparity between the parties is amazing, and the fact that the GOP has pushed hard for unlimited, anonymous campaign donations, while Democrats have pushed back with campaign finance reform laws, tells the whole story.

Follow the money, and you'll find the truth.

In financial terms, the Republican Party and its candidates are now more in line with their ties to corporate America and the rich. They have turned increasingly to large contributors — donors who make gigantic donations to “super PACs” and “social welfare” organizations that claim tax exempt status under the 501(c)4 provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. So far, 501(c)4 committees have successfully avoided publicly identifying their donors. No matter how used to all this we’ve all become, the numbers are striking. The amount of money flowing into federal campaigns — for Congress and the presidency — has been growing rapidly, doubling from $3.1 billion in 2000 to $6.3 billion in 2012. While overall spending increased by more than 100 percent from 2000 to 2012, spending by secretive political nonprofits, which do not disclose donors, has exploded 13-fold, from $24.9 million in 2000 to $335.7 million in 2012. Four out of every five dollars, or $269.5 million, raised by tax-exempt groups, most of which claim to be “social welfare organizations,” go to pro-Republican and conservative groups. These political nonprofits have become a key source of indirect support for Republican candidates. As Figure 2 shows, spending by conservative nonprofits has grown from $2.5 million in 2000 to $269.5 million in 2012. Liberal nonprofit spending has gone from $21.9 million in 2000 to $58.5 million in 2012.

Some disturbing trends are already emerging about the inability to regulate coordination between lobbyists, ultra-wealthy donors and campaigns. The influence of this money is more worrisome by the fact that the FEC can't seem to keep up with campaign finance disclosures anymore. A lot of this stuff comes down to common sense. If you vote for the party who is now helping billionaires to buy elections, you're contributing to the problem. Why is there even a "debate" on whether or not the Koch's SuperPAC is corrosive to our democracy?