Hm. So what do you guys thing is going to replace capitalism as our next form of gov't?

I was just reading Daniel Schorr's recently-published memoir/autobiography and he remarked at one point at the eerie normalcy that followed initial revelations about Watergate. That included Nixon's landslide reelection in 1972.

I find recent months similarly eerie. The procession of Enrons, Tycos and Worldcoms (Ummmm, 4 billion.....no....7 billion!) appears to be never-ending. If there was anything left of a social contract between incorporated America and average citizens, what shreds that existed are now gone. Yet, it is pretty quiet out there. No burning tires at the barricades, few if any CEOs targeted for jail (or revenge killings!)....business as usual?

I don't mean to suggest that the implications of recent corporate events are limited to the U.S., but that the U.S. is (to me) the most eerie embodiment of this "business as usual" near-silence.

Watching WTO demonstrations over the past few years, including those in Seattle, I can't say that I leapt to identify with those folks marching in the streets. A big part of that was the unfocused heterogeneity of those crowds -- do I have to be a member of PETA and follower of the Dalai Lama in order to qualify to march?? Lately, though, those gaggles that seemed on the fringe seem less so.....yes, some of the anti-WTO protests still seem unfocused in retrospect, but I feel like I have a much stronger appreciation of what is being railed against.

A few months back I read a book called Weath and Democracy by Kevin Phillips. I have since given copies to a few friends. What the heck, I offer the following: I'll buy a copy of this and send it to the first BBS denizen who expresses an interest in reading it -- on the condition that they do read it and that they pass the book along.

I won't belabor W&D here, but the many charts and graphs conveyed the following to me:

- Wealth continues to concentrate in the hands of the few even as an illusion of increasing middle-class prosperiity has convinced some to the contrary.
- Laissez-fair capitalism does not exist. It is only laissez-faire when it is the average person's fortunes/pension that are going down the tubes.
- It really doesn't matter who is in power. With a few small exceptions (read: FDR) it doesn't matter. Democrat or Republican administration? Clinton or Bush? Doesn't matter.

All of this coming from a former Nixon operative and (now excommunicated) Republican.

Anyhow, what Phillips provides is a statement of the problem (I shouldn't lead anyone to believe that the book is difficult to read or enjoy -- I found it easy to read.) but what it does not provide is a particular solution. Likewise, some of my discomfort with anti-WTOistas is the lack of a coherent solution.

Well, I don't have the answer, but (and the reason I engaged in this long-winded excursion) is that I think Loren's ironic, smiley-fied question is *the* question.