Available Now! (click cover)

America's Counter-Revolution
The Constitution Revisited

From the back cover:

This book challenges the assumption that the Constitution was a landmark in the struggle for liberty. Instead, Sheldon Richman argues, it was the product of a counter-revolution, a setback for the radicalism represented by America’s break with the British empire. Drawing on careful, credible historical scholarship and contemporary political analysis, Richman suggests that this counter-revolution was the work of conservatives who sought a nation of “power, consequence, and grandeur.” America’s Counter-Revolution makes a persuasive case that the Constitution was a victory not for liberty but for the agendas and interests of a militaristic, aristocratic, privilege-seeking ruling class.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

This Partnership Will Endure

My letter to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette appeared Sunday:

Paul Greenberg’s recent column on the government vs. Goldman Sachs was excellent. But he missed one important point.

He writes: “It happens with partners. So long as the business is growing, the money’s rolling in, and everything’s coming up green, they’re the best of friends. But when business sours and profits wither, the other partner becomes the cause of it all, a total incompetent and maybe a thief to boot.”

Very true. But the key partnership in this matter is Washington and Wall Street, which have always been cozy despite their differences. They’re fighting now only because things have gone sour. But the partnership will go on -- to the detriment of the American people. It’s state capitalism, not the free market, folks.



Kevin Carson said...

I've got to start paying closer attention to the Demozette letters page. It'll be interesting to see if you get any response.

BTW, I've been meaning to write Greenberg for some time about a quote he took from Kropotkin re American black "conservative" G.W. Carver: "What do they have to conserve?" Despite the impression Greenberg got from that little quip, Kropotkin was quite Burkean in his medievalist affection for "little platoons" like folkmotes, guilds, etc.

Sheldon Richman said...

I missed Greenberg's quoting Kropotkin. I usually have to force myself to read his columns, and I skip a lot of them. I've gone after him over his annual tribute to Robert E. Lee. I'll have to dig that one out and post it here.

Kevin Carson said...

Ah, yes--the annual RE Lee tribute. And its nothing but cultural conservative hagiography for Marse Robert, while dismissing the idea of secession in principle. Just like his annual MLK tribute, which celebrates the sanitized MLK that the neocons can approve of (which is little more than the "I Have a Dream" speech).

Greenberg seems like a nice enough guy, and I like his style (someone indebted to Faulkner and the King James Bible is a refreshing change from most newspaper editorialists), but when you look through the stylistic gravitas to the substance, it's little more than repackaged talking points from TownHall magazine.