Jonathan Haidt on how to frame Trump

See Robert Reich's FB post on this, copied below.

"So far this campaign season, anti-Donald Trump forces have spent close to $70 million on ads attacking Trump — more than triple what Trump has spent on his entire campaign. But the ads haven’t been working. In fact, they might even be helping Trump, who in the latest polls is neck-and-neck with Hillary Clinton.

Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at N.Y.U., has wise advice for all anti-Trumpadours: Don’t try to win over Trump supporters just on the basis of logic and reason. Trump isn’t appealing to them through logic or reason. He’s appealing to their gut. So go for their gut. For example:

1. Trump asks his followers to think of everything in terms of winners and losers. So show how much of a loser Trump really is. Give voice to the long parade of former customers and partners who regret ever dealing with him because Trump cheats, exploits, and deceives. Show he’s a con man, and we are his biggest mark yet.

Sanders on the Green Party

From this article, showing Sanders' practicality in the face of what we've got instead of what we should have. We can still work for the latter, a long-term project, while facing the realities of the present.

“I don't know the leadership of the Green Party, but I respect what they're trying to do. They're focusing on very, very important issues. But I think right now — what is it, three, four months before an election — you're gonna end up having a choice. Either Hillary Clinton is going to become president, or Donald Trump. If we were in Europe right now, in Germany or elsewhere, the idea of coalition politics of different parties coming together — you've got a left party, you've got a center-left party, coming together against the center-right party. That's not unusual. We don't have that. We have and have had [two parties] for a very long period of time — and I know a little bit about this, as the longest serving independent member of Congress.”

Trump as master manipulator

In Mark's FB post on Trump he mentions Lakoff's piece and it is exactly the dynamic that LP discusses in the comments, differentiating the different sub-groups in the Trump field and how they are subconsciously manipulated (as are we progressives), regardless of their 'intelligence.' Therein Lakoff did not make out Trump to be a buffoon. He did accurately depict him as a liar and manipulator, which is true. But he also gives him credit for being highly proficient at framing, consciously or not.

Moral framing is critical to influencing people subconsciously and Trump is given due credit. That he uses it for his own ends via lies and bigotry doesn't mean framing is wrong per se and cannot be used with facts and care for everyone. It's something not a whole lot of liberals understand, as per Lakoff they are still stuck in Enlightenment 'reason' while the conservatives tend toward business degrees where they learn how to frame things in order to sell them. In that regard Trump is an able salesman, even though what he's selling in junk.

On participatory syntegralists and kennilinguists

The following excerpt is from an interview with Sloterdijk called "Man and machine will fuse into one being." I posted it in the Transcendence thread discussing the movie by that name. It is interesting on the above noted distinction (syntegral and kennilingus), issues addressed in the film.

"The concept of 'anthropotechnics' thus refers to the entire autopoiesis, or self-creation, of 'mankind' in its many thousands of cultural specializations. It is empirical, pluralistic and egalitarian from the ground up — in the sense that all individuals, as heirs to the memory of mankind, are free to surpass themselves.

"Ray Kurzweil’s idea of 'singularity,' by contrast, contains futuristic, monistic and elitist elements. Although 'singularity,' according to its logical and rhetorical design, is meant to integrate mankind as a whole, it is evident that it could only encompass a tiny group of exceptional transhuman individuals."

Trump's sacrifices

Lampooning Trump's lame comeback to the father of a fallen war hero's actual sacrifice, Borowitz does it again here, copied below.

AMES, IOWA (The Borowitz Report)—Presidential candidate Donald Trump revealed a little-known episode of personal heroism from his youth on Saturday, telling an Iowa audience that he narrowly avoided capture in Vietnam by remaining in the United States for the duration of the war.

“The Cong were after me,” Trump said, visibly stirred by the memory. “And then, just in the nick of time, I got my deferment.”

The former reality-show star said he had never shared his record as a war hero before because “I don’t like to boast.”

Progressive change within and outside the Dem Party

Here's a good article by the Democratic Socialists of America. It addresses Sanders' current strategy of changing the Dem Party from within versus a move to developing a progressive third Party. So why can't we do both of those things simultaneously, like Reich suggests?

Some issues with Clinton

A few right off the top of my head on how she's changed her tune. She used to back the TPP, now she doesn't. She used to back the Keystone Pipeline, now she doesn't. She refused to back a new Glass-Steagall bill, now she does. She used to want to raise the minimum wage to only $12, not she agrees with $15. She used to block breaking up the big banks, now she supports it. She fought making college tuition free and now backs it. She used to support the TPP, now doesn't.

Conservatives agree the DNC beat the RNC

See this article for several examples. They are dismayed that the Dem convention sounded much more like GOP American values than the shit sandwich named Trump served up at their convention.

Barney Frank and Cornell West

Go at it on Real Time last night over the best way to implement a progressive agenda, and the right candidate to do that.

Clinton should own her evil image

In this new rule Maher thinks Clinton should accept and manipulate the evil image created of her by the conservatives. After all, it works for Trump so why not use that strategy to manipulate his feeble-brained and bigoted supporters?

Cornell West on a train that never leaves the station

On Real Time last night Maher tries to get West to see that Trump would be a disaster, and that voting for Stein achieves that disaster. So Maher offers up an analogy of two trains, one going to your destination and one that doesn't. Granted the Clinton train gets there a bit slower but the the Trump train goes in the opposite direction. West doesn't believe the Clinton train is going where he wants and the Stein train is. But the Stein train never leaves the station so one can never reach their destination.

Sanders on Real Time last night

He starts by noting that we must remain focused on defeating Trump, a very real and serious danger to our country. They addressed the Bernie or bust bullshit. Then he said we must continue the revolution by staying involved, either running for office or fully supporting candidates with a progressive agenda. The revolution isn't over; it's just getting started.

Talk is cheap

In this clip Hartmann discusses the next step on Clinton and the DNC's platform. He says progressives can respond in two ways to her speech: 1) Say she's just full of shit and continue to demonize her while in effect voting to crown Trump; 2) Tentatively support her but still doubt she's sincere so get involved to hold her accountable to the platform. I choose the latter because the stakes of a Trump Presidency and full GOP control are a disaster, to use one of Trump's best words. And how do we know this? Maybe take a look at the history of both of their actions?

Maher's convention edition

They discuss Clinton's speech, consensus being it was her best ever. They also discuss how long and hard she's been demonized to the point that even so-called progressives participate instead of seeing her humanity. I personally connected to her humanity last night, but online I'm seeing the hate spewed from the more fanatical liberal contingent. I must admit I've been there but now recognize how my own ideology blinded me to so much of the good and humane things she's done. Then they made the obvious comparison with the other convention, a stark contrast.

Clinton gets my support

Very good speech last night. I found myself relating to her as a caring, decent and committed human being. I am also guilty of demonizing her due to a few of her policies. But having looked over here entire body of work and voting history she is quite progressive in a number of areas. So despite still having reservations about those few areas she gets my vote and support. She is far  better than the alternative.

I'm also really tired of the frothing so-called liberal ideologues who can't see the forest for the trees and are blinded by their hate. Love trumps hate on both sides of the isle.

Maher on the Bernie Bros

Continuing from the last post, Maher said last night (22:35): "This disease on the left of purity gotcha. That going after your friends who are a little bit different than you, as opposed to [for example Trump] [...] You cannot be pure enough for so many people. Unless you're complaining you don't exist." The other liberal guests compared them to armpit-braiding, petulant children.

There is a real choice and a big difference

Maher's DNC edition on the very real difference between the candidates.

Colbert on the evil of two lessers: werd

Starting at around 3:40 of the video below. Given the choices, one needs to make a choice on who is worse. If not, things will get far worse.

President Obama on the collaborative commons

Following up on this post, and indicative of the emerging collaborate commons and P2P, this is an excerpt from President Obama's speech last night. The full speech is in the video below.

"And I promise you, our strength, our greatness, does not depend on Donald Trump. In fact, it doesn't depend on any one person. And that, in the end, may be the biggest difference in this election – the meaning of our democracy. [...] We're not a fragile people. We're not a frightful people. Our power doesn't come from some self-declared savior promising that he alone can restore order as long as we do things his way. We don't look to be ruled. Our power comes from those immortal declarations first put to paper right here in Philadelphia all those years ago: we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that we, the people, can form a more perfect union. [...] America's never been about what one person says he'll do for us. It's about what can be achieved by us, together, through the hard, and slow, and sometimes frustrating, but ultimately enduring work of self-government."

Progressives make progress in the Dem Party

At 2:20 Hartmann and guest discuss the leaps and bounds progressives are making in the Party.

Bernie Busters have gone insane

I'm still arguing with these ideologues on FB. I've long agreed that the establishment Dem Party is corrupt; I can't stand them either. My point is that they are the lesser of the two evils. At least progressives like Sanders and his movement can have some effect on that Party. Trump and the GOP will have nothing to do with progressive ideals and will make things much worse. Just the few examples I provided on the Dem Party promising the breakup of big banks and separating speculative from regular banking could prevent another crash. There is no doubt Trump and the GOP will not do those things and their continuing deregulatory frenzy will lead to the next crash.

Hillary is not a leader, she is a follower

So said Rosario Dawson in her pre-DNC speech to Sanders delegates. Even though Clinton did not originally support a number of Sanders issues, our people's movement led by Sanders got her to follow on those issues due to our numbers. The Dem Platform is another example of our power. So we need to keep Clinton's feet to the fire from now on to implement this agenda. This is our movement, and it's up to us to see this through.

Our Revolution

The next phase in the Sanders'/people's movement, Our Revolution. An excerpt from this article:

"The Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. senator [...] told USA Today in an exclusive interview published Friday that he plans 'to launch educational and political organizations within the next few weeks to keep his progressive movement alive.' Additionally, according to the newspaper:

Sanders plans to support at least 100 candidates running for a wide range of public offices—from local school boards to Congress—at least through the 2016 elections. And he'll continue to raise funds for candidates while campaigning for them all over the country. He said he probably will campaign for Tim Canova, a progressive primary challenger to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, who chairs the Democratic National Committee.

Bernie or bust whiners and enablers

I've encountered quite a few of them online. Surely there is agreement that Sanders is about class consciousness and equality? So now that he's supporting Clinton all that's out the window? Has anyone considered why he's supporting her instead of Stein? Just a sell out? Did you hear his speech?
E.g., Sanders said the following. You really think you'll get anything at all like that from the GOP? And how did we get such a platform? It wasn't just Bernie but we the people who supported him. And we the people will hold Clinton and the Dem Party accountable to that agenda unless we're too busy whining about not getting perfection. Sanders:

Colbert on death, taxes, Hillary

From his show last night, his psychedelic vision brought on by a stale cheese steak of the Bernie Bros facing the inevitable.

Robert Reich & Chris Hedges debate

What's next for our political system. I used to be more on the Hedges side, now I'm with Reich. There is a big difference between Clinton and Trump, and Reich is right that at least we can build on the Sanders movement under her. Under Trump and the GOP it will be set back indefinitely if not irreparably. The Dem platform and Clinton's own proposals responded to Sanders' agenda; the GOP platform and Trump (for the most part) go in an entirely different direction. It is far from the same if either gets elected, Hedges' claim.

The next Buddha will be a collective

In the wake of the Sanders campaign it is now up to us, those in the movement to carry the agenda forward and enact it into policy. It was a common theme at the DNC last night, that we're in this together. Gone are the days of the lone hero like a Trump; it takes a village, as the old cliche was revived last night. Along those lines remember the Bauwens' essay by the above title, how the P2P phenomenon is about exactly that sentiment, and how it is already being implemented in this new world. Us politicos should learn from the already abundant literature on the topic to guide us in building our movement into a viable political force.

Trump and Putin

In this FB post Reich comments on this article. In light of the rumor that it was a Russian hack that got the DNC emails, and that Russia wants Trump to win, the following facts from Reich are intriguing, to say the least. Quote:

Connect the following 7 dots. Do you see a pattern?

1. Trump's debt load has grown dramatically over the last year, from $350 million to $630 million. At the same time, he’s been blackballed by all major US banks.

2. Post-bankruptcy, Trump has become highly reliant on money from Russia -- most of which has over the years become increasingly concentrated among oligarchs close to Vladimir Putin.

3. Paul Manafort, Trump's campaign manager and top advisor, spent most of the last decade as top campaign and communications advisor to Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister and then President whose ouster in 2014 led to the on-going crisis and proxy war in Ukraine. Yanukovych was and remains a close ally of Putin.

Sanders' DNC speech

Excellent job Bernie. You thanked all your supporters for the hard work they did. You reiterated that the movement must go on. You showed how the movement improved the Democratic Platform in a much more progressive direction. You told us how our voices were heard in the concessions Clinton made to include our issues, like free college tuition, a public option for healthcare, opposition to the TPP and the Keystone pipeline, and reinstating the Glass-Steagall bill. Our hard work did not go to waste even if you're not the candidate. We need to keep active and hold Clinton's and the DNC's feet to the fire to make good on their promises or we'll vote them out next time around. It's a far better and humane vision for all of us than the alternative.

Love trumps hate in Michelle Obama's speech

This was a perfectly pitched framing about progressive values without once mentioning Trump, or using any of his hateful, divisive framing. A perfect example of the framing that Lakoff is also talking about, putting progressive values in a positive light instead of reacting to the negative values of opponents. "When they go low, we go high." One of the best political speeches I've ever heard. Bravo First Lady.

The Party Platforms

Again, from the same site as the previous two posts:

Democratic Party is a Populist-Leaning Liberal. 

 

Republican Party is a Hard-Core Conservative.  

The other candidates on the issues

Continuing from the last post, and using the same website, here are the following conclusions. See the site for the many details on several issues.

Hillary Clinton is a Hard-Core Liberal.



Donald Trump is a Moderate Conservative.

Tim Kaine on the issues

Earlier I posted on how some progressives are having a fit over Clinton's VP choice. I heard Hartmann talk about his record this morning but it hasn't been posted on YouTube yet. So I checked with this website which explores every political leader on the issues. Confirming Hartmann, Kaine is a left liberal on most issues, granting that on a few he is more corporate and conservative leaning. See the link for the many specific issues, including votes. The below is their graph:

Tim Kaine is a Populist-Leaning Liberal. 

Another Clinton problem

See this 538 analysis on Clinton trying to win over Sanders voters. The problem is that a significant number of them were never in the Democratic Party fold to begin with. Sanders incited quite a few heretofore politically inactive people to get involved and vote. And now that he's out many of them could give a shit about politics again. It is unlikely Clinton will get them excited, given her corporate history. Even Sanders supporting her now won't likely do the trick either.

Winton's discussion of Trump

Following up on this post, some discussion has ensued in response to Tim's post. See them for context. My response follows:

Yes, the broader socio-economic conditions, awash in neoliberal capitalism, has created such inequality across the 99% that the rage among the masses has reached a tipping point. To wit, Trump beating all the establishment Republicans. Sanders would likely have done the same were it not for DNC rigging. So the table is amply set for either a progressive or regressive revolution. Hartmann gives a good summary here.

Given Clinton is more of a neoliberal than progressive, at least some of the disillusioned liberals will turn to Trump or go to Stein. Trump has a real chance of winning, and Michael Moore thinks he will. Given Trump's undeniable propensities, his giant ego one of them, and the socio-economic conditions as they are, the zeitgeist could very well swell that ego to such potentials.

Why Peter Thiel wants Trump

See this article. Thiel hates democracy because it gets in the way of unbridled capitalism. He likes Trump because the latter considers that democracy only applies to certain folks and not others, certainly not Mexicans, Muslims or women. Trump runs his businesses like a dictator and screws over his labor force time and again, as well as shifting jobs overseas where he can take advantage of even lower wages without benefits or other socialist fluff like healthcare or worker safety regulations. He's also proudly admitted that he takes full advantage of buying off politicians, which only reinforces oligarchic control and further weakens democracy. It's easy to see why Trump and Thiel are a match made in hell for the rest of us.

Clinton Cash

The new movie was just released, below.

More on Trumpler

Following up on the last post, here's the article in which the Chomsky video was embedded. Some excerpts:


"Comparisons to Hitler and Mussolini may have worn out their usefulness in elections past—frivolous as they often were—but the Trump campaign’s overt demagoguery, vicious misogyny, racism, violent speech, actual violence, complete disregard for truth, threats to free speech, and simplistic, macho cult of personality have prompted plausible shouts of fascism from every corner."

"Chomsky discusses Germany’s plummet from its cultural and political heights in the 20s—when Hitler received 3% of the vote—to the decay of the 30s, when the Nazis rose to power. Though the situations are 'not identical,' they are similar enough, he says, to warrant concern."

"Hitler’s rise to power is instructive. Initially dismissed as a clown, he struggled for political power for many years, and his party barely managed to hold a majority in the Reichstag in the early 30s. The historical question of why few—in Germany or in the U.S.—took Hitler seriously as a threat has become a commonplace."

Chomsky on Trump and Germany in the 30s

Starting around 3:00 in this video Chomsky makes the comparison of the US's current state to Germany and the rise of Hitler, especially how Trump is channeling that anger. He says the two situations are not identical but nonetheless similar.

Tim Winton on Trump

Nice post from Tim Winton here. An excerpt follows that highlights the consequences of not holding your nose and voting for Shillary. Yes, she sucks but this?

"So now we are seeing a massive rise of fury that is being tapped by the Trumps of the world and their petty demagogue fanboys. It is very hard to see how this will not end badly. For those of you who are paying attention, perhaps the most clear-eyed and qualified commentator on the destructive dynamics of neoliberalism, Noam Chomsky, has just stated that the takeover of the Republican party in the US by the reactionary forces lead by Trump could well be the most serious threat ever faced by humanity."

Trump's nomination speech notes

Uncovered by StickyLeaks:

CA has a good solar power day

In this article CA powered 6 millions homes with solar power on a good day recently. And that was from large solar plants, without counting the solar energy generated from over 500,000 private home units. CA's renewable energy initiative in leading the US.

Maher's monologue on Trump

He gets us laughing to at least temporarily alleviate the outright panic we're feeling about the next Hitler.

Take our country back...to the 50s

In Maher's New Rule he accurately points out what exactly Trump and the 50s generation want to do: regress to that time when white misogyny and bigotry was the accepted norm like Mad Men.

Trump to purge the federal government of any critics

See this article, noted that Chris Christie said one of the first things on Trump's agenda should he be President is to purge the government of anyone not blindly loyal to him. The Jew who wrote the piece said he's not particularly fond of Hitler comparisons but this move was strikingly akin to Hitler's first move on taking office. Trump has also talked about tighter control on the press, another dictator move. Yes, this could very well be the Fourth Reich folks. Also see the Reuters story on this.

The bar has hit rock bottom

From the Borowitz Report:

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report)—A group of scholars who have been monitoring the descent of the bar over the past few decades have concluded that the bar can no longer be lowered, the scholars announced on Friday. The academics, led by Professor Davis Logsdon, of the University of Minnesota, published their conclusion after their research definitively found that the bar had finally dropped to its lowest possible position.

“For those who thought the bar still had room to be lowered, our findings resoundingly contradict that assumption,” Logsdon said. “The bar is now essentially flush with the ground.”

Does Clinton want to lose this election?

I don't think she's conscious of this self-sabotage. Like all the other corporate Dems she thinks all the progressives will just come along for her given the nightmare that is Trump. But with Kaine as her VP pick she has just pissed off many, if not most, of the very progressives she needs to win this election. Kaine supports the TPP, off shore drilling, fracking and Wall Street deregulation. While Clinton has said she's against all that, her VP pick does just the opposite and is a better indicator of what she'll do in office. Yes, the pick placates the corporate Dems and their Wall Street overlords, but it certainly only gives the millions of progressives further ammo to vote elsewhere. These establishment Dems are just in such a bubble that this costly mistake might just elect the Hitler on the other ticket.

GOP strategist: the night our party died

In this video Nicole Wallace, a GOP strategist for over 20 years, said:

"The Republican Party that I worked for for two decades died in this room tonight. We are now represented as a party by a man who believes in protectionism, isolationism and nativism."

Real Time GOP Convention edition

Here is the show from last night, with guests Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Heather McGhee, and Robert Reich.

More Warren on Trump

Continuing from the last post, this is the first part of her Colbert interview. Yes, people are rightfully angry but "Donald Trump does not have the answers."

Senator Warren on Trump

On the Colbert show last night. She said the Democratic message is something like "we're in this together." Quite a different message than Trump, unless by together he means old, rich, white guys.

Olbermann gives Trump the psychopathology test

Using the Hare Psychopathology checklist. Guess where Trump scores?

Bill Moyers on Trump's coronation

See the full text here. It was all doom and gloom that only Trump could save us from: "I alone can fix this." Blatant dog whistles were sounded to rile "the angry, resentful, disaffected white American" against all manner of invaders, including the evil Democrats with their human rights and all that commie shit.We should be afraid all right America. But not from Trump's imagined enemies but by Trump and the GOP.

More with LP

Continuing from this post, more follows. For additional comments look here and following posts:

Layman Pascal Arguably you picked up on the preamble to my first remark and that led to topic diversion :) I've been agreeing with your reading of the themes. I think it applies broadly to several potential emergences of interpersonal technology and systems that have a postmetaphysical momentum which could provide the new rudder on the materialist boat.

I think we're looking at a general emergent convergence which, viewed technologically, is an ephemeralization, acceleration, bio-fusion and intelligence amplification. It is unreasonably feared but also not guaranteed to be benevolent... Something largely dependent in whether similar patterns can co-emerge in different genres.

Edwyrd Burj Ah, the RIFT folks. I though the film made clear that it was unreasonable fear, since the AI only healed people and connected them. I found it a metaphor for how the regressive, militaristic capitalists AND retro-romantics feared it for different reasons and thus joined forces. The former feared its ability to disconnect from the capitalistic energy monopoly using entirely renewable energy sources, as well as its socialist and communist undertones. The latter, while into those undertones, were afraid of the possibility of an AI's ability to go transhuman and thus use and abuse humanity for its insidious agenda, even though there was no evidence of such an agenda.

John Stewart on GOP contortions

He took over Colbert's show last night for comments on the GOP gymnastics (at around 1:00 in the video below).

Robert Reich on Trump's acceptance speech

From his FB post below. He compares it to the communist witch hunts of the 50s but won't go back to Hitler in the 30s. Too bad he's accepted the regressive framing that to compare Trump to Hitler is PC. I saw Hitler revived in Trump's speech, and to hell with being called PC by a fascist Party.

"It was the most negative, fear-mongering acceptance speech in presidential history – completely devoid of uplifting vision or inspiration. Trump’s America is endangered by violent enemies within and without, and the entire rationale for his election is to keep the nation safe from them.
Not since the communist witch hunts of the 1950s or the urban riots of the 1960s have America’s fears been stoked like this. Trump is demagogically turning the economic and racial anxieties of the white working and lower middle class into a monstrous paranoia. He has a chance of succeeding if Hillary and the Democrats don’t counter next week with a powerful and credible message of hope."

Hartmann on the election inflection point

It is a BFDeal that he compares to the 1932 elections. The US and Germany were the hardest hit by the depression. The US went to way of FDR's social democracy, while Germany went the way of fascist Hitler. We are at the same inflection point. Granted Clinton is no FDR social democrat and Sanders would have been far better. But unlike Hartmann being unwilling to say that Trump is another Hitler, I will say it. These are the stakes.

Hartmann on a Trump Presidency

Who gets hurt by this? Not us well-off, white progressives, except for our privileged pride. Is our pride worth the damage to come for so many others? And to the environment from climate change deniers? If you think the Big Shill will be that bad than your privileged ideology is blinding you.

The liberal Trump defense

I also posted this on the FB IPS forum. In the following response I am in complete agreement about Shillary. But it is just a spoiled brat's way of saying "fuck it, I don't care how it hurts millions of people because I am mad." Joseph's response, quoting another:

"If I get another admonishing finger wagged in my face - just one - along the lines of "What, you want a President Trump," there will be asses kicked sideways in all directions. I've had it.

I WARNED YOU about what a vulnerable bad-idea candidate Clinton is. But no, she's the fucking Anointed One, the only one that can win until she fucking loses. By all rights, she should be 25 points ahead of Trump across the board, but she's not, because she's a fucking terrible candidate and you know it. She's got more baggage than Samsonite.

Discussion with LP on the movie Transcendence

Continuing from this post, I also posted it on FB IPS forum. Here's is the discussion with LP so far:

Layman Pascal Movies, like everything else in culture, should be judged by their quality not by their forms of content and the material we associate with them. So Transcendence is kind of awful. However the residual optimism of its finale is edifying and certainly we can draw parallels (not between the film and reality but perhaps between what the film reminds us of and reality) with the emergence of better technology and more advanced, faster adapting procedures of intelligence upon which our hopes must be based.

Edwyrd Burj I disagree that movies should be judged purely by their quality, if by that you mean story line, plotting, character development etc. But you're entitled to your opinion. My only focus was on its content and implications, and how that relates to themes this thread. On that score its good quality in my book.

Trump and the GOP are definitely the far greater evil

After watching some of the GOP convention, and reading even more about it, Trump and the GOP must be defeated in the next election. Watching some of Trump's and the others' speeches I could swear we went back in time to Nazi Germany. I know the regressives say it's politically incorrect (PC) to play the Nazi card, but in this case reality and accuracy trump (so to speak) so-called PC. So-called, by the way, because Trump and the GOP continue to conflate progressives calling them racist xenophobe demagogues as PC when in fact they are indeed racist xenophobe demagogues. Of course, since they gave up on facts they can no longer tell the difference, and explaining it away as PC is just more red meat in their Nazi--there, I said it--delusional plan for another fascist takeover.

Maher interviews Trump's ghostwriter

On a special GOP convention issue of Real Time. The Schwartz interview starts at 22:20.

Carpool karaoke with Michelle Obama

Missy Elliott joins in a bit later.

The Dem establishment and Alan Grayson

In this video she explains that the establishment corporate Dems, including the President, are supporting Alan Grayson's opponent for the Senate. That opponent was a life-long Republican until recently and his policy votes show it. Grayson, like Sanders, is an outspoken proponent of progressive policies. Hence the corporate Dem establishment must stop him, and Sanders, from actually representing we the people. One simply cannot deny what the current Dem Party is all about unless, like in this post, they are in complete denial.

Today's GOP platform

Following up on this post about the old GOP, Hartmann discusses what's in the 2016 platform in the video below: Obamacare repeal, monopoly control to ISPs, cuts to Medicaid, privatizing Medicare, ignoring global climate change agreements, expansion of fracking, the Keystone Pipeline, more oil and gas drilling, privatizing government services, requiring Bible study in public schools, replacing public schools private schools and on and on. This is exactly what you'll get nationally with a Trump Presidency. Those states with GOP majorities have already proven it.

Why Clinton suppporters are still mad at Sanders

Good article here. A main reason is that Sanders' policies force them to look at themselves in the mirror. Clinton supporters don't want to face the fact that to do so means they support fracking, disasterous free trade deals, more fossil fuel drilling, carbon pollution, letting Wall Street skate and non-universal health care. So instead of facing those facts they rationalize that Sanders is the bad guy for not just giving it to these corporate agenda items for the sake of...what exactly? Selling out?

The Shatner game

New economics

There's a new school of economics that cannot be incrementally implemented from the old school; as it has fundamentally different premises that must be entirely replaced. Initially the field of economics, in order to become respectable (unlike the soft sciences), turned to mathematical models based in physics. But for the math to work it had to pretty much take out the human element and reduce incentive to self-interest to make the equations work. I.e., humans had to fit into idealized mathematical models as if the latter were indeed something akin to Plato's ideal forms to which we much accommodate.

Tape Face

His second performance on AGT last night was better than the first and got him through to the live Las Vegas show.

Melania Trump defends herself on Colbert

She defends against the charges of plagiarism in this rebuttal.

The devolution of the GOP

This article shows where the GOP used to be compared to what it is now. In Eisenhower's time their platform increased minimum wages, expanded social security, promoted unions, increased hospital construction, increased medical research, expanded federal aid to the poor and public housing, ended racial discrimination in the federal workforce, expanded immigration, cut the military budget while still effectively conducting war and so on. Today's GOP is the complete antithesis to all of the above programs.

Transcendence revisited

See this prior post, and the prior post linked therein. I just re-watched the movie last night. I'm still convinced it is a metaphor for the emerging collaborative commons a la Rifkin, with the Internet of Things being a key. The plain old internet has already transformed our human neurology. Our individual consciousness has always been socially conditioned, which is even more the case now through computer tech and instantaneous world-wide communication. Implanting chips in brains for a more direct connection is really not that far off.

Rifkin documented not only 3-D printing but it's bio-medical applications, including printing human body parts. Enhancing the human body with nano-tech is not really all that far off either. This is the next phase of human evolution, human-machine hybrids a la the Borg. But as the movie made clear, an individual retains his autonomy and unlike the Borg is not controlled or surpassed by the hive mind. This form of autonomous individuals working collaboratively together via tech connections already exists and works quite well. Taking the tech to the next level can also take us to that next level.

Trump's ghostwriter interview

Following up on this post, ABC's interview with the ghostwriter.

Trump's wife steals Michelle Obama's 'best' words

In her address to the GOP convention last night. If you think that's bad, wait till Trump steals all of your wealth to feed the oligarchy if he becomes President. Lying, cheating and stealing is part of their very privileged nature because after all they deserve it.

Some dance to remember, some dance to forget

Something triggered this memory.

Trumpiness

Colbert introduced us to the term truthiness, which means something that feels true but has no actual basis in truth. Now he introduces Trumpiness, where it doesn't even feel true; it just feeds our feelings of fear, hate and rage. Welcome to good ole, down-home American fascism fueled by a demagogue.

More Colbert at the GOP convention

This previous post of Colbert at the GOP convention was just a poor, on-the-spot phone video. Last night Colbert did a full report that contextualizes that video, below. Very funny.

Trump's ghostwriter reveals the truth

See this article. The author that worked closely with Trump on Art of the Deal said of Trump that he's a liar, sociopath, narcissist, unable to concentrate, lacks any conscience, and much more. See the original piece here. That's your candidate GOP, created lock, stock and barrel by all the dog whistles you've blown over the years.

The Future of Economics

Following up on the last post, some excerpts from this article. 

"In the early 21st century, just as in the late 19th, economics in general makes the assumption that individuals operate autonomously, isolated from the direct influences of others. A person has a fixed set of tastes and preferences; when choosing from a set of alternatives, he or she compares the attributes of those alternatives and selects the one which most closely corresponds to his or her preferences."

"Generations of policymakers have been raised to have a mechanistic view of the world, and a checklist mentality: to achieve a particular set of aims, draw up a list of policies, and simply tick them off. It is a comforting environment in which to live, being seemingly dependable, predictable and controllable. [...] They are justified in order to make the imperfect world conform to the perfect one of economic theory. "

"The social and economic worlds of the 21st century are simply not at all like this.

Colbert hijacks the Republican convention

And pokes fun at their chosen one for President. He is then quickly ushered from the stage.

Homo economicus

See this article. The above is the model most economists use to describe human economic activity. Given  the findings then basically these economists are at the intellectual level of chimps. No surprise there.

Per wikipedia the term means: "The concept in many economic theories portraying humans as consistently rational and narrowly self-interested agents who usually pursue their subjectively-defined ends optimally." Per the article:

"In our work we’ve tried to test some of the basic predictions made by the Homo economics model using some simple tools from behavioral economics applied across a diverse swath of human societies. Not only do we find that the Homo economicus predictions fail in every society (24 societies, multiple communities per society), but instructively, we find that it fails in different ways in different societies. Nevertheless, after our paper “In search of Homo economicus” in 2001 in the American Economic Review, we continued to search for him. Eventually, we did find him. He turned out to be a chimpanzee. The canonical predictions of the Homo economicus model have proved remarkably successful in predicting chimpanzee behavior in simple experiments. So, all theoretical work was not wasted, it was just applied to the wrong species."

New ridesharing alternative in Austin

See this article. See, the sharing economy can actually be about sharing without a giant capitalistic corporation being the reigning paradigm. A teaser excerpt:

"Austin demonstrates how the sudden loss of an unregulated would-be monopoly (or an Uber, Lyft duopoly in this case) can create an opportunity for people to re-imagine how these services can be better designed and governed to serve the public. It's also a case study in how cities can encourage city-scale enterprises to be democratically-owned and operated by locals for locals, ensuring that the public interest comes before shareholders' interests."

Who's happier?

See this IPS discussion on the debate between Sam Harris and Jonathan Haidt on liberal vs. conservatives. Then see this recent article exploring new findings on the happiness factor in liberals and conservatives. From the latter:

"It’s a finding that’s been replicated again and again: Ask political conservatives and liberals to rate their happiness, and conservatives come out ahead. [...] But a paper published in the March 13, 2015, issue of Science seemed to turn the happiness gap on its head by showing that when happiness is measured using behavioral cues, liberals come out ahead."

Pokemon Go... away

Seriously.

The Trump/Pense logo

Apparently the new logo featured below was quickly taken down because it was obvious what it indicated: A Freudian slip that revealed exactly what that ticket is all about.

Hackathons

Continuing from the last post, see this article. An excerpt:

"Beating bureaucracy isn’t just one more re-org. What’s needed is an approach that’s emergent, collaborative, iterative, and inescapable; one that “rolls up” rather than “rolls out;” something more like an open innovation project and less like Mao’s cultural revolution. 

"In recent years, organizations as diverse as Ford, Netflix, and Google have used hackathons to invent new products and solve thorny operational problems. (Facebook’s ubiquitous “Like” button grew out of a hackathon.)

Bad review of holocracy

See it here. It's pretty much the same with the AQAL model, because like holacracy it's a top-down ideology obsessed with complexity. When issues arise from the ground, including people, they have to be bent to fit the model instead of checking to see where the model fails.

Bauwens on the phase transition to a commons economy

See his Huffpost blog post here. I appreciate how the external production system precedes the internal political/social changes, a point I've reiterated. That the Sanders movement almost succeeded is an indication of how close the latter is starting to catch up, given the Millennials participation. I especially liked the following excerpt showing how the new economic model is gaining momentum by how much capitalism is having to appropriate it, like Uber etc. But the time is coming when the new structure and overtake the old structure. See the article for much more. The excerpt:

Maher on all work and no play

Good New Rule commentary on how we all have to not only work overtime but take work home, or just live at work. If we don't someone else will take our jobs. It's a statement on how the worker can no longer enjoy a life outside of work because we are now all owned by the job. Otherwise we don't have a job and starvation is just a bit worse than the job itself.

Maher interviews Frank Luntz

Luntz is the spin meister for the Republicans. Whatever he tells them to say comes out of all of their mouths (and wherever) repeatedly ad nauseum (and ad diarrheum). The interview gets really confrontational throughout, but I agree with how Luntz opened saying (at 1:40): "The problem for Hillary Clinton is she's not authentic, she's not straightforward. Bernie Sanders said what he meant, meant what he said. Bernie Sanders should have been the Democratic nominee, not Hillary Clinton. And frankly Bernie Sanders should have run as a third Party candidate. And the reason why is because he has a clearly defined set of principles, a clearly defined set of ideas, and that Hillary Clinton is a corporate Democrat. You would have three distinctly different philosophies."

Reich on Trump's VP pick

This should confirm that Shillary, while the lesser evil, is still far better than this evil. From his FB post:

Mike Pence -- Donald Trump’s pick for vice president -- is one of the most extreme right-wing officials in America. Let us count the ways:

1. As governor of Indiana he signed the “license to discriminate” bill allowing Indiana businesses to deny service to gays.

2. He has tried to halt the settlement of Syrian refugees in the state.

3. His position on abortion is so extreme that, as a member of congress, he voted for legislation that would give “personhood” rights to embryos, and defund Planned Parenthood.

The great value shift of our time

See this article and the video below. An excerpt from the former; please read it for more details.

"Michel Bauwens recently spoke at the Harvard Berkman Center to give his big-picture analysis of the economic and social transition now underway.  The hour-long video of his talk provides a clear explanation for why peer production is flourishing and out-competing conventional business models and markets.  It’s all part of an epochal shift in how value is created, argues Bauwens. Citing major transitions of the past – from nomadic communities to clans; from clans to class-based, pre-capitalist societies; from pre-capitalism to capitalism – Bauwens said, 'We’re in a period of history in which a marginal system of value is moving to the center of value-creation.'”

Yet more Democratic Party corruption

I received an email today from Representative Grayson, who is running for the Senate. Therein he notes that the Senate Majority PAC, run by Senator Reed and the Dem establishment, are running a $1 million ad buy against Grayson and for his corporate Dem opponent. As you may know, Grayson is not only one of the most progressive representatives in Congress but also one of the most productive, having written more bills and passed more amendments that any other. And the Dem establishment wants to defeat him for Senate and install yet another corporate crony. The evidence just keeps accumulating as to what the Dem establishment is all about, and it isn't we the people.

Let's get political

Following up on the last post, I also appreciated Marco's call for more social justice and political activism. I've been calling for social/political enaction in this movement for years, and doing my small part along that line. Imho that is the way to make the greatest impact for the most people, since that was indeed the theme of the last Integral Theory Conference. The Sanders movement is just the tip of that iceberg. (Selling the AQAL model to capitalists, conscious or otherwise, only reinforces the status quo a la the Clintons.) The rest is up to us. The progressive third party thread explores a variety of options to get involved.

Marco Morelli reflects on integral institute

See his reflections here. I especially appreciated the following:

"Which is to say that there was—as the theory itself pointed out and many of us acknowledged at the time—a shadow side to I-I. That was obvious and to be expected. But I think it’s worth making a connection between these internal issues we were experiencing and the commodification of Integral Theory, which I believe—in some subtle and not-so-subtle, unmistakable ways—corroded our integrity. I think it caused us to put our faith in a kind of dogma (a cognitively sophisticated, high-level dogma, to be sure) in place of actual thinking and critical inquiry. This seems to be what happens when one puts more energy into promoting an idea—which requires constantly reiterating a pre-established story or narrative, (which one easily becomes defensive around)—rather than questioning one’s ideas within the context of a broader intellectual debate."

Colbert honors the fallen Sanders

Some perspective on Clinton v. Trump

Good talk from The Young Turks on Sanders' response to critics of his Clinton endorsement. Granted, Clinton ain't no Sanders but she is a lot better than a Trump. I know, that's not ideal and she's not the best choice. But face the fact that if Trump becomes President it will be, in Trump's on best word, a disaster. Does one really want to impose a disaster on the rest of us for some purity test?

Governor Christie no longer picks up Trump's laundry

In this post Borowitz lampoons how Christie has been basically a servant boy to Trump in order to get the VP pick. Now that he didn't he's refusing to pick up Trump's laundry any longer.

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)—Governor Chris Christie, of New Jersey, angrily refused to pick up Donald Trump’s dry cleaning during a tense encounter between the two men on Friday, campaign sources confirm.

The ugly scene unfolded at the billionaire’s offices in midtown Manhattan, shortly after Trump revealed that his Vice-Presidential pick would be Governor Mike Pence of Indiana.

According to Trump aides, Christie stomped into the presumptive Republican nominee’s office and hurled a dry-cleaning ticket onto his desk, telling Trump, “You can pick up your own damn dry cleaning.”

Cornell West supports Jill Stein

See this news story. West said:

"This November, we need change. Yet we are tied in a choice between Trump, who would be a neo-fascist catastrophe, and Clinton, a neo-liberal disaster. That’s why I am supporting Jill Stein. I am with her – the only progressive woman in the race – because we’ve got to get beyond this lock-jaw situation. I have a deep love for my brother Bernie Sanders, but I disagree with him on Hillary Clinton. I don’t think she would be an 'outstanding president'. Her militarism makes the world a less safe place. Clinton policies of the 1990s generated inequality, mass incarceration, privatization of schools and Wall Street domination. There is also a sense that the Clinton policies helped produce the right-wing populism that we’re seeing now in the country. And we think she’s going to come to the rescue? That’s not going to happen."

US Attorney General disgracefully equivocates

It's amazing she refuses to answer simple questions on legality. This is the level of corruption to which our own government has sunk. Despicable.

New Mexico sucks for business

And a lot else too, but let's focus on business for now. In this article it shows how the Republican Governor of NM, as is her Party's wont, gave tax breaks to businesses and still "New Mexico has dropped further than any other state in the annual survey of business climate by CNBC, the financial news network." These facts of course will never penetrate the Party that ignores facts. Meanwhile, we the people are close to literally eating shit. Good job Martinez.

Nader on Sanders' strategic endorsement

This clip reports on what Nader said about the above. He thinks Sanders' endorsement speech sets up Clinton for a fall because it highlights all the commitments she made to the Sanders agenda. When Clinton fails to work for them, and she will, this will show her hypocrisy and set up the Sanders movement for the next election to overthrow the Big Shill. The complete referenced Nader interview is here.

Jill Stein and Plan B

See her article here, also commenting on Sanders' Clinton endorsement. If Sanders will no longer lead the revolution then Stein will gladly pick up the ball.

"Our Green New Deal would create 20 million living wage jobs while solving the climate crisis. Our call to abolish student debt provides relief to tens millions of young people trapped by debt for education that failed to produce the jobs they promised. We can finally make health care a human right."

"I call on the tens of millions inspired by the Sanders mobilization, the 60% of Americans who want a new major party, and the independents who outnumber both Democrats and Republicans to reject the self-defeating strategy of voting for the lesser evil and join our fight for the greater good."

Sanders abandons the revolution

See Kshama Sawant's article here. She is greatly disappointed in Sanders endorsement of Clinton, saying the latter is opposed to everything he just campaigned for. Yes, Sanders got some concessions in the Dem Party platform, but Sawant reminds us it's non-binding and Clinton can and will renege on several of those Sanders planks. Hence, Sawant is endorsing Stein of the Green Party and encouraging others to do the same. She also wants to use the Green Party as a springboard to forming a new party called the Movement of the 99% with Socialist Alternative a leading faction.

Objective mystification

Continuing from the last post, the rest of the chapter echos some of the work done in this and the real/false reason threads. "Individualism is a pretty pure ideology of the market, at least as we have it now" (8). Collectivism is also captured by the market ideology in both conservative and liberal forms. Both are based in a reductionist ontological empiricism that sees individuals as isolated from objectified facts that act upon them, a fetishsized "objective mystification" (9). Bhaskar calls this a form of false reasoning and illusion. (I've noted the same about how the model of hierarchical complexity is also embedded in this ideology that produces both it and capitalism.)

More from Bhaskar on anti-capitalism and libertarian socialism

Continuing from this post, chapter one of Reclaiming Reality (Routledge, 2011) is called "Critical realism, social relations and arguing for socialism." It ain't no form of capitalism. 

"We need to take philosophy seriously because it is the discipline that has traditionally underwritten both what constitutes science and knowledge and which political practices are deemed relevant" (1).

As to some concern on philosophy's relationship to our more immediate, mundane concerns, as well as its real and false reason foundations, here's more:

"Philosophies can confuse as well as enlighten. Two crude philosophical distinctions, between mind and body and reasons and causes, have done untold damage here. [...] Related to the crude dichotomy of nature and society is a crude distinction between basic, bodily (physical) or natural needs such as for food or housing, and higher-order psychological (mental) or spiritual needs such as for respect or self-development. These latter needs are not the object of a separate set of practices, but are intrinsic to the way so-called basic needs are met" (6-7).


And as to the issue of the relationship of individual consciousness to social structure (and tetra-arising), more from the above citation:

Even Trump is right on (rare) occasion

Revolving door financial corruption

This article lays waste to former Attorney General Holder's claims that he didn't criminally prosecute Wall criminals that caused the crash because there wasn't enough evidence. It also destroys his premise that to do so would create financial havoc. The real reason, and one we always knew, was that he is one of the Wall Street bankers himself. He came from them and returned to them after his 'service' to our country; I mean after his service to Wall Street. Also see this Matt Taibbi interview on the topic from last July. He's always on top of this topic.

Colbert takes the gloves off on Clinton

Rikfin on the reorganization of unions and co-ops

Unions in particular have to update their organizational structures from top-down leaders to a member democracy. As it is we've seen leadership of unions continue to support the capitalist economy and its adherents like the Clintons instead of embracing the collaborative commons economy through membership democracy. Co-ops have the economic democracy but need to engage the dominant economic structure via political engagement. They all must also make choices not to support those capitalistic appropriators of the new tech who feed their own monopolies, like Uber.

The return of origin

Following up on the last post, I commented on it in this IPS thread due to the 'return on a higher dimension' theme. We don't keep getting more and more complex (via deficient rationality) but we fold back into previous levels and more fully integrate them. It's a similar development to Spiral Dynamics, where the so-called second tier is in fact a higher dimension of the first tier. 2nd tier begins with yellow annotated A’-N’ to show its relationship with beige (A-N). Hence 2nd tier is in one sense a return to the 'origin' of beige but with a shift from the subsistence issues in the 1st tier to the 'being' issues in 2nd tier. The image used for this relation is the double helix, which recalls the same image used by Goddard (referenced earlier in this thread) in his similar notion of a return-integration of previous levels.

The structure of history through modes of exchange

See this link which discussed the book by Kojin Karatani. Excerpts with commentary:

"There are four types of mode of exchange:

• mode A, which consists

of the reciprocity of the gift ;

• mode B, which consists of ruling and protection;

• mode C, which consists of commodity exchange; and

• mode D, which transcends the other three. 

Mode of exchange D is not simply the restoration of mode A — it is not, that is, the restoration of community. Mode of exchange D, as the restoration of A in a higher dimension, is in fact only possible with the negation of A."

Bhaskar and libertarian socialism

From Bhaskar, R. Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom (Routledge, 2008):

"Bhaskar's own work was very much devoted to moving beyond that logic [of late capitalism] [...] and remained committed to a (libertarian) form of revolutionary socialism" (xviii).

Here's more, which sounds a lot like the libertarian socialism of the collaborative commons:

Obama signs Monsanto Protection Act

See this article that details that details a rider attached to a spending bill that protects Monsanto's GMOs from judicial review. And it was written by Monsanto and their Congressal lackey. Previously the courts could stop the testing or sale of GMOs if new evidence came to light of its public safety risks. The new bill says if the GMOs were safe when planted then they have to be harvested, no matter what new health hazards are found in the interim. Thank you President Obama for signing it, with my tongue in cheek and your head up Monsanto's ass.

A metaphor for the "all quadrants are equally important" fallacy

The cream memers

Following up on the last post, a couple of other points. Kennilingus assumes that we need a cream of the crop, the best and the brightest, to first model what's next and then lead the masses thereto. I'd suggest that this is a view still stuck in the throws of metaphysical rationality and capitalism. It's very much on display in not only the Republican Party but the establishment Democratic Party. See Thomas Frank's work, for example.

What helps most of us the most?

This is the question posed by Zach in this FB IPS thread. He argues its the techno-economic base and I agree. My responses to that thread follow:

Wilber, Excerpt A:

"Marx was right in that, for most people, the techno-economic base is a major determinant of their consciousness."

I'm with you on this one Zach, and why I'm much more politically active and pretty much now philosophically inactive. Without a techno-economic base founded in the collaborative commons, instead stuck in corporate capitalism, most of us have little chance to 'evolve' psychologically. Hence why the Sanders movement is critical at this juncture in US history.

Seth Abramson on the Clinton email farce

He's an attorney and destroys the FBI chief's twisting of the law to let Clinton off. First off, intent was not required for what Clinton did. But even so, he shows unequivocally that Clinton did indeed meet every standard of intent imaginable. See the link for the numerous points of law as applied to the facts in this case. And this coming from a Democrat who will vote for Clinton, not some crazed Republican. Abramson is not alone among Democrats that have the good sense to actually know that the law was misapplied for purely political reasons. No wonder we the people have lost faith in our current corrupt system. He said:

Meet the new solidarity

Same as the one that the oligarchs destroyed. Except now we have the internet and platforms to organize. So let's get busy then.

The charter school debacle and Clinton

Following up on this post, here's an article reporting on Clinton's speech to the National Education Association (NEA). She was booed during her comments on charter schools. She's been a long-time advocate of them even though they are nothing more that a corporate privatization scheme that has miserably failed to produce results. Just one more example of corporate Shillary's well-meaning but horribly implemented education agenda. Given that both the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers both endorsed Clinton despite rank-and-file denunciation, that should tell us something about how leadership in those organizations has also sold out to corporate interests.

Yes, I know, Trump is way worse. That doesn't though eliminate our responsibility to know exactly what we're getting into with Clinton. And to aspire much higher going forward.

Hmm, "aspire much higher" is a good campaign slogan for the future. 

The two worst-rated Presidential candidates in 70 years

See this article on a new Gallup poll. Actually Trump is the least favorable and most unfavorable candidate in 70 yeas. Clinton though fares little better, her ratings among the bottom four all time lows. Once gain we're left with shit and shittier for choices. I'm getting so tired of living under this corrupt system that leaves us little real choice among those who do little for us.

Where business went wrong

See this article. Some edited excerpts:

"Something in the core teachings of business schools that ensures that firms do not give workers a fair shake. [...] Starting in the 1980s, business schools underwent a transformation in philosophy and orientation that reflected shifts in the economics discipline and in the economy at large. During that time, Wall Street was taking off and American businesses were becoming increasingly financialized —meaning that executives started to base all of their business decisions on the goal of boosting their firms’ stock prices. When corporations become financialized, executives turn their attention away from investing in the productive capabilities of employees, which is the basic building block for rising American living standards. [...] Instead, executives watch the stock market — in large part because their own compensation was increasingly based on the value of the company’s shares."