During the 1930s, President Franklin D. Roosevelt had a movement behind him consisting of New Dealers. Consequently, Roosevelt was able to achieve a number of overdue reforms such as Social Security.
Nevertheless, Roosevelt did not see himself as being in charge. In The Age of Acquiescence (2015), Steve Fraser quotes President Roosevelt telling Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau at the end of 1934 that "the people I have called the 'money changers in the Temple' are still in absolute control. It will take many years and possibly several revolutions to eliminate them."
Eight decades later as Nomi Prins has made clear in All The Presidents' Bankers (2014), the money changers are still in control. Nothing less than fire and the sword can dislodge them.
Yet, and it will forever be the case, America has commentators who really believe that a president can change things but refuses to do so because he prefers the way that they are.
Unless there is a major disaster, such as the Great Depression, or a lessor challenge, such as stagflation for which solutions were scarce, a president without a movement is outgunned by powerful private interest groups, and sometimes even if he has a movement.
Private interests were empowered by the Republican Supreme Court's decision that the purchase of the US government by corporate money is the constitutionally protected exercise of free speech.
To be completely clear, the US Supreme Court has ruled that organized interest groups have the right to control the US government.
Under this Supreme Court ruling, how can the United States pretend to be a democracy?
How can Washington justify its genocidal murders as "bringing democracy" to the decimated?
Unless the world wakes up and realizes that total evil has the reins in the West, humanity has no future.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
