On Oct 8, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Lenin's Tomb wrote:
> Okay, but it *should* do. This has been a massive expropriation, a
> redistribution of wealth from the working class to the rich.
It looks like we're moving towards some sort of nationalization of the banking system. If we had a left, we could do something with that, and might could someday. There's nothing intrinsically progressive about a nationalization, of course, but it is rich with potential.
And as for this expropriation, what's your alternative? Let it all fall down? Invoke some "better" bailout with no actual chance of adoption? Dismiss the problem as "their" crisis, and not "ours"? What?
> I'm not sure what 'populist' means in this context either.
It means vague appeals to The People as somehow authentic, vs. the non- People who are pantywaist phonies (the right version) or fat cats (the left version). But even in the left version, the class lines are usually very vague - e.g., small biz, which is rarely kind to its workers, nonetheless is part of The People. In fact, the victimization of small biz by big is a favorite theme of left populists - e.g., Ralph Nader. And left populists are susceptible to monetary crankery too (e.g. Dennis Kucinich's weird call for "real" money).