Cause & Effect In The Headlines on The Same Day

On April 2nd, two news reports at OpEdNews were coincidentally documenting both the cause and the effect of the aristocracy’s growing control over the United States Government.

One story, “First-Ever Political Study of Top 1% Has Found Extreme Conservatism, Intense Political Involvement,” summarized the findings in a landmark research-report which found that America’s top 1% voted almost at a 100% rate (99%), and that their policy-preferences on key issues of social policy, such as taxes and wealth-inequality, were enormously more conservative and pro-Republican than were the American public’s; and also that the top 1% were themselves overwhelmingly Republicans and were big-money Party-donors.

The other story, “Supreme Court Traitors Sell Out America Again With McCutcheon Decision,” described the result of this intense monetary support from the aristocracy for the Republican Party: a 5-to-4 Republican decision (all Democrats were in the 4-vote minority against it) pulling the last stopper off of the ability of the top 1% to buy the U.S. Government. All 5 of the Court’s Republicans voted to tear down just about the last remaining barrier to effectively total control of the U.S. Government by the rich and the super-rich.

Taken together, those two articles — one describing the cause, the other describing the effect — show where this country is going, and how and why it’s going there.

To blame “Big Government” for America’s ills is foolish and is exactly what those aristocrats have paid their propagandists to promote as being the source of this country’s malaise, and the controlling aristocrats know that the problem is instead who controls the government, and how corrupt they are and are causing the U.S. Government to become.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.


This entry was posted in Business / Economics, Politics / World News and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Eric

    Here is a list of the biggest political donors

    I had to scroll down to number 17 before finding the first republican. I also remember that, when he was still a US senator, Obama got more Goldman Sachs money than anyone else in that august institution.

    • cettel

      Act Blue and the labor unions that are atop those mega-donors lists are bundled small contributions. It’s not like Rove’s American Crossroads or the Kochs’ network of megadonors, who aren’t even included in the listing you linked to.
      Bottom line: You ignore that the super-rich are heavily Republican and donate overwhelmingly to the Republican Party. You ignore what this article documents. Instead you attack Act Blue as if it’s comparable to JPMorgan/Chase, Exxon, the Kochs, American Crossroads, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, etc. Bull. And not relevant to my news-report.

      • Eric

        First of all, I did not “attack Act Blue”. I posted a link. Speaking of links, here is one about the US Chamber of Commerce

        • cettel

          Previously opensecrets was consistently showing that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce dwarfed Act Blue, but now the figures are totally rewritten there. Something is wrong or was wrong there.

  • diogenes23

    the US has the same govt system as Iran. the supreme court having the final word. somehow the balance of power is off here.

  • Susanne Webber

    This author is comfortable placing our plutocracy in terms of parties. This doesn’t mean we have apolitical jurists, quite the opposite, but for oversimplification purposes it’s red team team vs blue team.
    We haven’t had a Democracy for decades yet that’s taboo to mention, only when the death of Democracy is otherwise codified by Judicial activity does the riff-raff agitate, perhaps the affect lags decades behind the cause. Both corporate parties are fine with government providing explicit subsidies to finance, defense, as well as defending the wages of highly paid professionals (lawyers, doctors) Government can be as massive as it needs to be to serve the plutocracy. The hope lies with millions of people who see the American dream as a lie, and will overwhemingly force the rich to pay their fair share. This horrifies them, they’ll scream envy, but in the end they’ll fall as they always have.

  • dave john

    If the two main US political parties are the same, why does more money go to the Republicans?

    • USA_objector

      Unlike Eric, corporations have no allegiance to EITHER party, they donate to BOTH presidential candidates. Agreed that the Supreme Court decision was a sh#tshow, but it’s nothing that the Diebold voting system can’t fix.

      Both parties are equally corrupt, bought and paid for by offshore money, and both parties actively work to pass shockingly traitorous legislation. Isn’t Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein attempting to suppress the second amendment rights of bloggers? FISA, SOPA, ACA, Fast and Furious, IRS scandals, NSA, domestic kill lists, endless wars, Homeland security, porno scanners, false flags, attacks on the Second amendment! higher taxes. . . They are both bought and paid for, Eric S.

      • dave john

        Good points. So why the disparity of funds?

      • Darnell Explosovitch

        Are 2nd amendment rights of bloggers more important than their 1st amendment? Aside from the 5th amendment and other appartently more important aspects of the Bill of Rights (which has never lived up to it’s expectations in more that 200 years and is ignored by the corporate gun monkeys) the allegation that more money goes to one party is false and overly simplistic, as big money flows continuously. Your votes are meaningless, indeed which party passed the a health care law that protects coporations from lost profit? That’s right, both of them. Obama didn’t go skeet shooting after each of the most recent military base shootings, and the offical “other party” puts on a show about how they are going to “repeal this” or “cut spending over there” so there are cosmetic differences on display always. The public has to be worked over continuusly, keep them confused, off balance, angry, partisan, harmless and childlike.