Tuesday, March 5, 2019

The Ruling Class Managerial Revolution: Overthrowing the U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights

The Evolution of the Ruling Class Managerial State:
James Burnham in his book, The Managerial Revolution published in 1941, had as a central thesis that as the size of government increased, the bureaucracy would develop its own managerial class identity and work to promote its own class interests. Being that Burnham was formerly a marxist and friend of Trotsky, he used marxist class analysis to formulate this concept. However, even if other predictions made in the book did not come to pass, this managerial class theory proved prescient.

Burnham's later book, The Machiavellians, published in 1943, further argued that an elite class (including the managerial class) would form and further coalesce power with only the trappings of democracy remaining. One thing Burnham failed to notice or disregarded was the importance of the New Deal. This would not only form the basis of today's managerial state but as Garret Garrett points out in The Revolution Was it was in fact the start of the managerial state's overthrowing of the constitution and principles on which the U.S. was originally founded.

Burnham's work was later expanded on by Samuel Francis to include the concept of anarcho-tyranny and explored the concept of managerial capitalism. What Francis did not foresee was that managerial capitalism and the managerial state, rather than conflict, would form a mutually beneficial cooperative relationship similar to that of feudal lords and their vassals. This relationship is how the present defenestration of the constitution takes place.

The Problem of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights:
The present managers and planners of our government policy find the constitution to be too restrictive for them to implement their organizational blueprint for a top down centrally planned and managed society. They believe this system is best and tend to conflate what is best for them as a class, is best for the country. The plebs will be taken care of through the noblesse oblige of a vast welfare state, low level civil service jobs or what jobs are still allowed them through managerial capitalism. The outlines of this blueprint was first sketched in the early 20th century and fleshed out in the 1930's in the wake of the great depression. Under FDR the "brain trust" and their think-tanks fellows concluded that a government modeled on the Soviet system, adjusted and better scientifically planned and managed was the wave of the future. However, parts of the New Deal were found by the U.S. Supreme Court to be unconstitutional and were struck down while other policies of the Roosevelt administration that were arguably unconstitutional were unchallenged and remained in place. But that is a story for another day.

The constitution and the bill of rights was an impediment to the planners that had to be removed or worked around in such a way as not to be challenged in the courts or to arouse public opposition. But if it were done by banks and corporations, whose actions are not constrained by the U.S. constitution, not even the government's fingerprints would be found. Then through these private entities closing bank accounts, refusing credit or loans, and the deplatforming on social media of dissidents on the right, at the government's behest, then the constitution's bill of rights could be de facto overthrown and the plebs would be none the wiser.
It would be the perfect crime.

When one considers the bailouts of the American auto manufacturers and the banks, one must realize that this government largess was not given without certain strings attached. As well the same goes for the Silicon Valley tech giants who have received government contracts. Also there is the wall of costly regulations and fees that are in place which favor and protect big businesses with the necessary capital and army of lawyers and consultants to help navigate byzantine local, state and federal laws and regulations.

One may wonder why popular conservative and dissident right content creators be deplatformed, forced out of bank accounts or banks would refuse loans or credit to businesses like firearm dealers when these content creators and businesses make money for all these entities. What business person in their right mind would kick money out of bed?

It must be noted that the government, as a model of power, always has the upper hand over private industry, which is a productive model that only has influence or persuasion. But where too big to fail bailouts, lucrative state and federal contracts and regulatory walls are the carrot, there is always the stick of unevenly applied anti-trust legislation and governmental investigations (legislative and law enforcement) that can be brought to bear. To fuel any legal investigations, there is much information to be found in the NSA databases and failing that, petty process crimes will do. Even the big players on Wall Street who pay the political establishment very well are not immune from prosecution.
Power always rules over wealth and influence. And power never lets wealth and influence forget this.

Nevertheless, the carrot is generously given and the stick used sparingly in return for banks and corporations playing the puppet villains by doing the dirty work of suppressing political dissidents on the right. Beguiling the angry plebs and diverting them from seeing the sly hand of the managerial puppeteers is the price to pay for influence. Contrary to all commonly held beliefs, as vassals unswervingly loyal to their lords' agenda, it is a match made in heaven. And the result is our post-constitutional soft tyranny managerial oligarchy of today.


Donald Cavaioli



















No comments:

The People's Republic of China and Hong Kong the Special Administrative region: One Country, Two Systems- A House Divided Against Itself

" A house divided against itself, cannot stand . I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do n...