How The U.S. Dictatorship Works

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

A recent article in the Washington Post described how the current US tax-‘reform’ bill is being shaped; and it describes, basically (at least as far as tax-law changes are concerned), the operation of a US dictatorship by the super-rich.

First of all, however: there is no longer any realistic question as regards whether the US in recent decades has been a dictatorship, or instead a democracy. According to the only scientific analysis of the relevant data, that has been done in order to determine whether the US is a dictatorship or a democracy, the US is definitely a dictatorship that’s perpetrated by the extremely richest, against the public-at-large; in other words: the US Government functions as an aristocracy, otherwise referred-to as an oligarchy, or a plutocracy, or a kleptocracy; but, in any case, and by whatever name, it’s ruled by a tiny number of the extremely wealthiest and their agents, on behalf of those few super-rich, against the concerns and interests and needs of the public (everyone else). So: instead of being rule by the public (the “demos” is the Greek term for it), it’s rule on behalf of a tiny dictatorial class, of extreme wealth — by whatever name we might happen to label this ruling class.

That study, by professors Gilens and Page, explained that it examined “1,779 instances between 1981 and 2002 in which a national survey of the general public asked a favor/oppose question about a proposed policy change,” and it compared those public-policy preferences, by the public, versus the public-policy preferences regarding those same issues, by the super-wealthiest; and, it found that only the public-policy preferences by the super-wealthiest and their paid agents, made any discernible difference, at all, in the likelihood that a given public policy ultimately became enacted into law, in the United States. Whereas the public-policy preferences of the wealthiest do, at far higher than mere random chances, become enacted into laws, the public-policy preferences of the public are (except in political rhetoric and promises — frauds perpetrated to deceive the public) ignored, in the United States.

Here is an excellent six-minute video describing the methodology and findings in that landmark study...

And here is a commentary by former US President Jimmy Carter, in which he says that he knows it’s true.

He said this not on the basis of examining thousands of cases and doing the statistical analysis of the data, like Gilens and Page had done, but just on the basis of his observations of how the US federal government has been functioning in recent decades. And, of course, the scientific study is vastly more reliable than is any individual’s mere opinion about the matter.

Furthermore, there exists evidence that even in some local or state governments in the United States, considerable corruption exists, and therefore an extreme slant prevails in favor of the rich. During June 2016, I headlined about this, “Here Is How Corrupt America Is”, and opened:

The best reporting on the depth of America’s dictatorship is probably that being done by Atlanta Georgia’s NBC-affiliated, Gannett-owned, TV Channel “11 Alive,” WXIA television, its “The Investigators” series of local investigative news reports, which show, up close and at a cellularly detailed level, the way things actually work in today’s America. Although it’s only local, it displays what meets the legal standards of the US federal government in actually any state in the union; so, it exposes the character of the US government, such that what’s shown to be true here, meets America’s standard for ‘democracy’, or else the federal government isn’t enforcing federal laws against it (which is the same thing as its meeting the federal government’s standards).

What was exemplified in this reporting by that excellent investigative team could be called “corporate organized-gangsterism,” and this gangsterism was being led by an operation, “ALEC,” that was founded by politicians whose careers are funded by the Koch brothers and some other US billionaires.

Furthermore, as was mentioned briefly at the opening here, a recent issue of the Washington Post’s “PowerPost” section was titled "The Finance 202: Tax overhaul's big test comes now”, and it described in detail what was shaping the Trump Administration’s tax-overhaul bill. This article reported that the lobbyists were shaping it 100%. It’s a superb nitty-gritty, down among the weeds, description, of the monetary deals, the horse-trading, that were being made, not only for corporations, but for the wealthiest non-business lobbies, including ‘nonprofit’ ones, but almost all of these lobbies, too, depend overwhelmingly upon billionaires for their funding. What’s being carved-up and served, is being carved-up from governments, and being served to the super-rich. (After all: conservatives say “Government bad, business good,” and Republicans are the conservative Party; so, it’s taking from government, and going to business.)

So: is it any wonder why Gilens and Page found what they did? They found that "economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.” (By “mass-based groups” was being referenced what the left often calls “movements” or “grass-roots” organizations. After all, what happened from “Occupy Wall Street”? Nothing. It was a big waste of time and effort. Authentic movements get marginalized, because the billionaires’ ‘news’media despise them. Fake ones, such as the Kochs’ “The Tea Party ‘movement’,” get weaponized, because the billionaires’ ‘news’media treat them extensively, and often grant them respect. Top-down’s the way, in any dictatorship. That includes in America.)

Here is another excellent video - this one 10 minutes long - summarizing the Gilens and Page study...

The only major difference between Republican politicians and Democratic ones, then, is that, whereas Republican ones don’t even need to pretend that they oppose limitless greed (since limitless greed that’s carried out by frauds instead of by outright physical violence — which latter type of coercion is the type that’s employed more by lower-class crooks, anyway, and those are the type of crooks who fill our prisons, not the type who fill our boardrooms — is, essentially, supported by Republicans’ ideology, as ‘being entrepreneurial’ and ‘competitive spirit’), Democratic politicians do need to make that pretense (since their voters are liberals, and liberals don’t share the conservatives’ “Greed is good” libertarian faith). But the outcomes, even when Democrats are in power, are vastly more helpful to the billionaires, than to the public. 

Does this mean that Democratic (or liberal) politicians are necessarily more hypocritical than Republican ones are? No. Whereas Democrats pretend to be opposed to the system’s favoring the super-rich, Republicans pretend to be opposed to “sins” and other religious-based shiboleths. Both Parties can win and retain power only by deceiving (defrauding) the public, and serving the billionaires, though in different ways — some conservative, and some liberal. Virtually everything else than that service to billionaires (and to centi-millionaires) is just frauds by politicians, because, at least after around 1970, only the richest 1% or (usually far) less are actually being served by the US federal Government. It’s not the billionaires that are defrauded by politicians; it is clearly the public that is being defrauded by them.

The public are served only to the extent that the public’s interests are the same as the billionaires’ interests. And the Gilens and Page study found that the public’s policy-preferences are simply ignored — not ignored in the political rhetoric, but ignored in the political outcomes.

The US Government, thus, is of a few people (the policymakers), by the billionaires, and for the billionaires. And that’s just an established fact.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tebow's picture

Time to start flipping tables.

BobEore's picture

Dictatorship... yabbayabba...
Oligarchs... yabbayabba
Elites.... yabbayabbagabba goo
Moar fairy tales from Dr Zeuss...
not a mention of srael firsters fistin Merika ...
cause the can!

Knock Knock
WHo's there>?

It's Joesph Schmiel... your second generation Lubavitch Landlord... AND ... your rent's overdue. We're kickin you outta your home.... Amerika... your wife, your kids, your dog, get em all outta here now.

But but... yu can't do that!
Yes. We. Can. We bought this building, the mayor, the police, fair n square... using your tax dollars to do it! And now we write the laws sez what goes in this business. You go, loser.

But this is America... and we was born here!

Good for ya chump... if you're real lucky, maybe you'll die here too... now move your ass outta my building!

Strategic Culture... aka talmudic culture vultures ...wagin the war on yu!

monk27's picture

Idiot troll. The most annoying kind...

MonetaryApostate's picture

He's just being real, though we can't agree with everything he says, he must know the pain we have felt for years.

I've seen what he's talking about first hand.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

Well if Jimmy Carter and Princeton say it is so it must be true! NOT.  

What bugs me here is yet another sort of lefty analysis that really is of no use.  How do you calculate the probability of any given individual law is passed?  You can't do that.  You need ensemble data of identical laws.  That's a given no happen.  

That and the "oh those darn republicans don't even need to pretend".   They pretend plenty.  The dig was slipped in so the bias turns me off from any further input from this source.  

My basic gripe here is as follows:  Left finally gets something right but it's by accident because their powers of analysis are so impaired as to make them look retarded.  EXAMPLE: George Bush and Iraq.  They called Bush a criminal / liar etc.  but the core reason was Saddam sold oil in dollars and private central banks rule.  

So I would encourage you lefties to be more diligent and actually do a little homework.  As per Jordan Peterson you are known for not be conscientious.  I find your work to be sloppy to the point of uselessness.

The Alarmist's picture

Dennis: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior.

King Arthur: Well, I am king.

Dennis: Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. If there's ever gonna be any progress...

Peasant Woman: Dennis! There's some lovely filth down here... Oh! How do you do?

[Dennis joins the Peasant Woman in the nearby filth patch]

King Arthur: How do you do, good lady? I am Arthur, king of the Britons. Whose castle is that?

Peasant Woman: King of the who?

King Arthur: The Britons.

Peasant Woman: Who're the "Britons"?

King Arthur: Well, we all are. We're all Britons, and I am your king.

Peasant Woman: Didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.

Dennis: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship! A self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working classes...

Peasant Woman: Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again.

Dennis: Well, that's what it's all about! If only people would--

King Arthur: Please, please, good people, I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?

Peasant Woman: No one lives there.

King Arthur: Then who is your lord?

Peasant Woman: We don't have a lord.

King Arthur: What?

Dennis: I told you, we're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as sort of executive officer for the week...

King Arthur: Yes...

Dennis: ...but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting...

King Arthur: Yes I see...

Dennis: a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs...

King Arthur: Be quiet!

Dennis: ...but by a two thirds majority in the case of more...

King Arthur: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!

Peasant Woman: "Order", eh? Who does he think he is?

King Arthur: I am your king.

Peasant Woman: Well, I didn't vote for you.

King Arthur: You don't vote for kings.

Peasant Woman: Well, how'd you become king, then?

[Angelic music plays...]

King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.

Dennis: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Arthur: Be quiet!

Dennis: You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

Arthur: Shut up!

Dennis: I mean, if I went around saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

Arthur: [grabs Dennis] Shut up! Will you shut up?!

Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!

Arthur: [shakes Dennis] Shut up!

Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed!

Arthur: Bloody Peasant!

Dennis: Ooh, what a giveaway! Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about! Did you see him repressing me? You saw it, didn't you?

house biscuit's picture

We're all hoping you didn't spend too much time on that...

SybilDefense's picture

Thank you for that. A flying circus indeed

BobEore's picture

Idiot troll. The most annoying kind...
Wrong agin dope!



bUT... BUTTHEAD... if you wanna enter yurself in both categories...

I think we can work something out for ya!

BullyBearish's picture

your first comment read like a section from mein kampf where the author describes the breakdown of the german culture...

house biscuit's picture

Oh, that's where you're wrong; there's plenty worse trolls

There's the kind of slow kid that starts threads with a post that says 'duh'

There's the ones that post bible verses & song lyrics- somberly- as if they have meaning

There's the ones full of bravado, casual racism, & impotent revenge fantasies, here to vent their spleen

There's the ones so for or against Lord Orange

Also the ones who you can tell have poured their soul into a novel-length screed nobody will read

And finally, the 12 yo humor or, worse, piggybacking a useless comment onto a (rare) good joke.

Compared to these, BobEore's post gets a Pulitzer

RationalLuddite's picture

I'm agnostic,  but JC certainly got that bit right. Tried to warn us all. Hell -It was the only time he really lost his cool even!

We gotta learn the hard way it seems. And this time ... wow kids - this time really is different.  This time entropy and chaos are real. We are entering the liminal zone ... Appreciate everything you have now guys. 2018's gonna get interesting 

Escrava Isaura's picture

RationalLuddite: ……….2018's gonna get interesting 

Not 2018. 2027/2032 because 80% of the crude oil will be gone, meaning it’s over for everyone.


Oh boy, Jimmy Carter talking about democracy? What a joke from a guy that was part of the Trilateral Commission.

First, US was never a democracy. Founding fathers and first Americans hate democracy.

Second, if a person wants to understand how we got here, meaning under the current social ‘capitalist’ structure, first thing you have to do is to understand the left and right ideologies well; and that’s perpetrated by about 10% of the population. The other 90% are just their puppets.

Third, if you want to understand what’s coming, you need to drop all the current notions ‘propaganda’ such as solution, better & worse, socialism & capitalism, liberal & conservative, religion be that Christian or whatever, and so on thinking. We are a product of evolution. And evolution doesn’t care about the meaning of life.

Every single planet will be gone in the future. Every single star will burn itself out then die. All the current billions of galaxies will be gone and new ones will form.

So, in summary: What comes next for us is liquidation (war) because of the unprofitability and inequality that industrialization and capitalism generate.

To add insult to injury on the industrialization side we have the problem of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics and industrialization are incomparable so, industrialization will be dropped out of the ‘evolutionary’ system.

However, most of humanity, not the tribes in Africa or the Australians Aboriginals of course, depend on industrialization for their survival.

Therefore, without industrialization human survivor will become impossible, meaning, most humans will be dropped out of the evolutionary system as well.

So, enjoy today ‘life’ as much as you can. Don’t worry about left and right propaganda, ideologies, and mystical ‘religions’ believes, because neither incompatibility can change the evolutionary process.

None of us can!    



Singelguy's picture

Although what you say is correct, it is irrelevant since no one lives long enough to witness and or experience the collapse of a star or the formation of a new galaxy. It is a process that occurs over millions of years.
Evolution is ongoing and is not necessarily negative. In the current context evolution will determine an entirely new business model that does not rely on increased population, GDP growth and productivity. It is simply unsustainable on a planet with finite resources. What will replace it remains to be seen. I choose to remain optimistic although I will likely not live long enough to see it.

kochevnik's picture

Escrava is wrong.  Simple minds are correlational.  There is no contradiction between capitalism and sustainability.  Capitalism causes noone to have 13 children in arid lands, or print fiat currency to pormote exponential population growth beyond soil fertility

Without fossil fertilizer human population about 1 billion and almost nobody dies of famine from oil volatility and wars

Escrava is in idiot for promulgating vary same socialist system which supports feral financialism. In her model rich have wealth and it trickles down to the common man. So how did wealthy become wealthy? Simply she supports kleptocracy, theft and murder for her currency irrigation system

Dincap's picture

Though her comment may be too fatalistic or teleological it is not at all simple. Rather simple is your mind that cant understand and go beyond simple slogans and annoying insults.

Capitalism besides contains internal contradictions which create povertu for the most independently of the absolute number.

kochevnik's picture

Yes you see internal contradiction between investing and return because you are a thief. Poverty is not created by pure capitalism. Rather the unable fall behind, as in nature

NOMO's picture

There is a reason for all of this chaos and upheaval ---> The Altered States of America It is a long read but details why things are like they are and offers solutin to the problem as well.

ParticularlyStupidHumanoid's picture

As if "dictatorship" exists in the US. This is ridiculous. There's so much propaganda against Fascism, because bankers hate a strong leader who can oppose them.

MonetaryApostate's picture

You didn't read far enough, he explains America is a Kleptocracy.

Nevertheless, I've outline a lot of the evils the ultra rich abuse us with on my blog extensively, & what the future looks like for the world.

ThanksChump's picture

The starving masses will stand, as usual.


We have no starving masses yet. Everyone thinks they have something to lose, so they want someone else to stand for them.

A Sentinel's picture

I am so tired of “Republicans represent the wealthy (limitless greed)” crap. And I’m a reformed Republican. I used to do polling, committee - all that crap. But it took boehner and McConnell for me to see the RINO for what it is and scam-assistants like trey gowdy and all their false outrage before making deals with the commie Obama (I still maintain that the communist bent is far stronger on the left.)

I digress again but when they did have numbers of actual constitutional conservatives in the party, they weren’t for “the rich” and THAT is based on a VERY dangerous lie. The left’s big lie about capitalism. Capitalism is about ownership, indeed, but that’s the only grain of truth they offer. The point of property ownership is the ability to freely enter into trade. Surely not all trade is freely chosen (taxes come to mind) but that trade that IS freely chosen is that human being’s attempt to do his best. He wouldn’t freely trade if he didn’t think he’d be better off after trading and neither would the other guy. And another thing: they wouldn’t but windfarm power or carbon credits or freaking Obamacare.

The assumption of capitalism is that while not necessarily always right, the free agent acts in his best interest more efficiently than anyone else possibly could.

Communism and statism more broadly is based on the fundamental denial of self-determination. THEY know best: You’re not qualified.

I know that the RINO wants to control as much as the other lefties. I get that. But to sweep aside capitalism, the notion that YOU KNOW YOUR INTERESTS BEST — I can’t let that go every time.

There may no longer be a difference, but if we muddy ideas, we don’t even know what direction to shoot.

Memedada's picture

Did you read the article? USA is owned by capitalists (=private owners of capital). Damn, the indoctrination in USA has made “wonders”…all your nonsense about “statism”, “communism” etc. are all red flags of a controlled US-pleb mind. I know you’re from US lala-land by just reading your comment.



SubjectivObject's picture

can you differentiate from capitalist per se versus crony capitalist?

it's a challenge for culture to define the terms for capitalistic prerogative and constraint, toward a general fair and equitable public interest, but influence culture that have now and unfairly consolidates power to itself, crony, has grown strong in the absence of any real public awarness and effort.

Memedada's picture


I don’t see any difference between a so-called crony capitalist and a so-called capitalist per se. A capitalist is just someone who owns enough capital to live from it = not being dependent on laboring/wages but living from profit/dividends from capital. And in public discourse (i.e. not in an economic sense) a capitalist is a proponent of capitalism (lots of rent- and wage-slaves in this category hoping to become “real” capitalist themselves one day).

The crony-part is just the capitalist using his economic/capital-power to get privileges, competitive advantages, protection and/or political influence – and why shouldn’t he/she? It is in the name of the game “capitalism” to seek profit-maximization and if buying of the political establishment gives you a market advantages why not do it (if you don’t the next in line does)?

+ see me comment below.

Singelguy's picture

You are correct but the problem is that many people confuse capitalism with crony capitalism. True capitalism works very efficiently. The crony capitalists set the rules to enrich thrmselves and stifle all current and future competition. That eventually backfires and becomes suicidal.

Memedada's picture

Confuse? Crony capitalism is still capitalism (=an ecnomic system based on the private ownership of the means of production). It is the US-indoctrinated serfs who’ve been convinced that capitalism is “meritocracy”. It could be initially (if you’re able to create a fair start to the capitalism game where all starts with the same amount of capital – like the beginning of a Monopoly game), but it will very quickly evolve into the opposite = the first million is the hardest to earn (meaning capital attracts capital). And after only a couple of generations the game is rigged – those who inherit the capital of previously industrious member of the family can sit back and enjoy their privileges of being a member of the ownership/rentier class.  

+ I know you think “free markets” are somehow defining of “true capitalism”, but free markets are not defining of capitalism since you can have free markets in feudal societies (feudally owned enterprises competing in a free markets) and in socialist economies (socially, publicly and/or commonly owned enterprises competing in a free market). The only relevant defining aspect of capitalism is who owns the capital – in capitalism it is privately owned. Everything in US is privately owned today – including the government by all relevant measures… 

BrownCoat's picture

Forget the term capitalism for a minute. Think in terms of freedom. Private property = liberty.

The Philosophy of Liberty



Cloud9.5's picture

Capitalism at the street level is the best system possible.  The assumption that top down central planning can micromanage an organic system is laughable.  Whether you are talking about the great leap forward or land confiscation in Zimbabwe, the result is always the same, famine.  This is why black markets are absolutely essential for totalitarian states.  Without them, basic needs cannot be met for the underclass and the upper class would lose its access to luxuries. A black market is unfettered capitalism.

When the oligarchs created the legal construct of the corporation, it changed the game.  Corporations are immortal.   Mere mortals cannot compete with them.  In time, corporations morph in to monopolies and cartels.  That is not capitalism and it is certainly not free enterprise. 

In the 19th century the Sherman Anti Trust Act was implemented in an effort to break up these cartels.  Very quickly the corporations it was designed to control modified it to break the back of labor unions.  Legal constraints on corporate bad behavior are soon subverted.   Money talks.


The laws of the reset cannot be suspended indefinitely.  Entropy and resource depletion place absolute limits on perpetual growth machines.  This is why the landscape is littered with the bones of failed empires.  Buckle up and enjoy the ride.  At the end of the reset, pure capitalism will flourish for a season.  Then the whole process will begin again.

junction's picture

One sign of a dictatotship is the use of death squads that kill with impunity.  In the last three years, over 75 doctors and naturopaths have met sudden death in one form or another. For example, in July 2017, Dr. Glenn Scarpelli and his wife jumped out of their office window, committing suicide because they allegedly owed a lot of student debt. Neighbors heard screaming first and they left a typewriiren suicide note.  Nothing to see here.

There is the case of Dr. Nick Gonzalez, a world famous alterrnative medicine MD who died suddenly in 2015.  What killed him is still unknown, it turned out his hreart was in fine shape.

So, we now in the USA have a Murder Inc.staffed by government agents, a sure sign of a dictatorship. 

SybilDefense's picture

I'm a retired DDS. My practices collected over $1.6M in a very small City in PA.  Yet I struggled paycheck to paycheck.  Capitalism is good except for the point where everybody has to get their piece of your capital.  Overhead %65, (industry std), gov tax %32, insurance write-off up to %80.  All said and done, my plumber was wealthier than I with working 3/4 of the hours. I'd jump out the window too... If I could afford a 3 floor residence.

Ask not what the gov can do to you, ask what you can do to the gov

house biscuit's picture

Aw.....look thinks bankers hate fascists


HRClinton's picture

"MAGA You Can Believe In"

"Cuckservative Hope & Change"

Gotta love it, how predictable the poor sheeple are -- always baying for greener pastures. Always willing to be led by shepherds with MVP Personalities, leading them where the herd owners need them to be.

HoyeruNew's picture

finally some 100% real truths instead of the usual BS about econimic freedom and democracy and all the usual BS

ffed's picture

earth be flat, try that one.

Crassus's picture

No, my friend, it's round and where you stand is the center.

This is the lie I have told myself for these seventy years- worked so far. 


7thGenMO's picture

The article states that the oligarchy started to establish control "after around 1970".  It is no coincidence that this occured after a sound, hard money system was replaced with the petrodollar system.  It gave the oligarchs who own The Fed the power to print and buy the country's assets and political power.  This is why The Fed so strenuously objects to an audit - secrecy protects those with the power to print.

Once they are identified, a 100% inheritance tax applied to any amount over a token $1 million or so for each of their offspring will quickly reduce the influence of this oligarchy.  A return to a hard money system is also necessary if The Republic is to be restored.




nuerocaster's picture

Dictatorship? Billionaires? Inheritance Tax? Hard Money? Seriously?

Let's  try 4 overlapping "clubs" controlling most of the resources and wealth of the country.

1. Net tax receivers club. Billionaires, big gov contractors, politicians, bureacrats, civil service, welfare, etc.

2. Leverage club. Those gifted with leverage ranging from high to sky high to infinite. Derivatives, deregulation, and CB tyranny.

3. Monopoly club. The US is loaded with oligopolies and monopolistic practices.

4. Crime syndicate imperialism club. Local kleptocrats do the dirty work now. Add in regular gangsters and tax evaders and it's money launder's world.

How many people do you think you could purge from the wealth transfer gravy train without open revolt?

Not so simple or is it? The OPM rackets can be about diferences in kind, but they can also be about differences in degree and details. There's no one size fits all ideology or ism.










MusicIsYou's picture

Well what, do you think dumb animal Americans are going to grab their pitchforks? No they just do like trapped animals do and self destruct but only Americans will eat themselves and drug themselves to death. When animals are unhappy they just gradually self destruct and that's what Americans do.

dirty fingernails's picture

Americans are too splinteted. Every possible faction is being shattered into smaller pieces and all seem wedded to some immutable "difference" that prevents even rational discussion. Can't  stand with footbal players protesting because they are black. Can't  stand with the college kids because they are libtards. Can't  stand with the conservatives because they donlt agree with changing the sex of your toddler. Can't  stand with her, she believes in a different religion. Can't  stand with him, he's  poor. On and on it goes. It's over. We lost. Too much stupid.

shining one's picture

And the whole situation was created by the power of the media. We know who owns that!

house biscuit's picture

"When animals are unhappy they just gradually self destruct and go shopping; that's what Americans do".

Fixed it; since we don't want to be besides the point

VWAndy's picture

 Corruption folks. Top down corruption.

VWAndy's picture

 They have entry level corruption for beginners.