Reactionary Politics

Now that Mrs. Clinton is the “established” front-runner, the gaming begins.

The game is reactionary politics, competing for who has the most practical means of reacting to the harm done when it happens.

When financials operate to yield the default-risk premium, Mrs. Clinton will be right there to help reduce the suffering, strongly opposed by right-wing reactionaries because it reduces the natural effect of economic desperation.

(Supposedly, that is why the Republican Party is opposed to Mr. Trump. He says he will reduce the effect of economic desperation, which right-wing reactionaries do not consider to be their “natural identity”–or YOURS–by default.)

Wall Street works real hard yielding to the premium by default. The game is then to argue about how much relief there will be, which is to measure how much suffering can be allowed to happen, to sustain the premium over time, without junking capitalism by default.

Maintaining an inhumane form of producing economic value, pathologically determined to do harm and yield a measurable benefit described as the public good, is really hard work! Socio-economic elites will be busy making it look like there is a democratic-republican process in place to yield the public good, having then the force and legitimacy of public authority on demand.

We have two right-wing factions playing the game, yielding to the threshold of what Clinton calls the practical means of getting things done. This produces only a marginal benefit for the vast majority, and a huge benefit for a very small number of people (her clientele) over time–and she knows it!

HRC is the perfect elite recruit. She claims to be a progressive. She will, however, allow things to “just happen” through “arcane” financial means that are so inscrutable it is impractical to try and regulate it without “unanticipated triggers”–just accidentally triggering the harm to be done that yields the default-risk premium.

As a practical matter, Hillary Clinton is exactly what “We” can’t afford!

Even though, as a matter of objective reality, risk cannot actually be reduced, it is possible to make it “just happen” by default. No, this does not mean the risk can be created. Wall Street does not create risk, but it can determine the probability it will occur.

The risk is always there. The probability it will occur is an on demand attribute of “the risk” to be managed in risk dimensions. That’s why Sanders was saying we need to break it up into smaller dimensions, so that when it “just happens” it does not push masses of people (probably YOU!) into default. There is nothing “arcane” about it!

If you want to give it an arcane interpretation, and do yourself harm in the name of “practicality”–vote for Hillary Clinton!


About griffithlighton

musician-composer, artist, writer, philosopher and political economist (M.A.)
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s