Bill, not the only parallel. I've watched with sick bemusement over the past several decades as the ribbons and baubles of our military "leaders" have surpassed those of the 70s-80s era Soviets. The rise in doo-dads mirrors the decline in military effectiveness. DoD today is simply a jobs program and a cash laundry for congress...
Amen!! Out with the old, petrified has-beens, the unrepentant Cold Warriors who control the "uniparty" and are addicted to US global hegemony. In with leaders who understand a new, multipolar world order is emerging where the peoples of the world live under codified international laws that are not applied arbitrarily by a global hegemon and where the governments of the world come together to tackle the real pressing issues facing the survival of all life on this planet, namely climate change and the scourge of war, militarism and the existence of all nuclear weapons.
Thank You for another Thought Provoker, Bill. Permit me to share some of the thoughts it provoked:
~ 1. For those interested in the statistics, see FiscalNote’s Lydia Stowe’s 06Feb23 piece “How Old is the 118th Congress?” at https://fiscalnote.com/blog/how-old-118th-congress . It includes the individual age of every member of Congress, the breakdown by age groups, the average ages of each Chamber by party, and the percentage of members of Congress representing each Generation, from the Silent to GenZ.
~ 2. America’s “Gerontocracy” is but one element and manifestation ~ a sign and a symptom ~ of the Plutocratic thus Autocratic, hence Oligarchic [and obtw, Patriarchal] Aristocracy that is America’s Ruling Political Class.
~ 3. To beat one of my favorite Dead Horses about a People getting the system of government, practice of governance, and rule of governors that they “deserve,” the first question that popped into my mind on reading this was: “So WHO keeps sending all these Old Farts back to Swampland? And Why do they keep doing that?”
~ 4. The Problem is not that America has a plutocratic, autocratic, oligarchical, mostly patriarchal Ruling Political Class that uses its Money to buy and sell, own and operate, and command and control the nation’s elected politicians and their annointed appointees.
The Problem is the established, accepted, and acted upon belief that the proper function and purpose of this system of government and governance is the meeting of the Human Needs and the satisfaction of the Human Wants of SOME of the Citizens, even when and as that requires the violation of the Human Rights of the rest of the Citizenry, and the ignoring of the Human Responsibilities of all of that Citizenry.
It is a system of government and governance created and operated of, by, and for all those “Special Vested Interests” competing via “Donations” to those Politicians for access to that government’s political and legal power, administrative authority, and most importantly, its spending capability, so as to satisfy the individual, group, organizational, and/or institutional donors’ agendas of those VSIs.
And as a result, the Human Needs of a significant portion of Americans ~ Health, Prosperity, Security, Literacy, the Pursuit of Wants, and Peace ~ are not met. And the Human Rights ~ Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and the Pursuit of Happiness ~ of an even greater portion of Americans are ignored and violated.
THAT is The Problem. And as long as that Problem ~ America’s system of government and governance focused on meeting the Needs and satisfying the Wants of Some of the Citizens ~ is permitted to continue to operate, finding “new” faces to run as candidates and to become those elected Politicians will change absolutely nothing. Just the specific beneficiaries and victims of the system.
True, Jeff. Just look at AOC. She came in as a reformer who said she'd be happy to have only one term in Congress if it meant she could effect real change. She is now Pelosi-in-training.
It's "play the game" or get ejected. AOC likes the game and is staying to play.
And the people who voted for her the first time will send her back. After all: What can possibly be bad about having a Pelosi-WannaBe representing You in Congress? Especially if she makes it to the top of the garbage heap?
While gerontocracy is clearly a marker of a dying societal model, I think invoking perestroika and glasnost, that, for how well intentioned, resulted in a tragedy for the USSR and most of the people of USSR and the pulverization of a centuries old geopolitical entity in a number of disfunctional cleptocratic states, ripe for looting by their elites and their western supporters, is not the best you should wish for the united states, unless you think that karma is deserved
Fair point. The concepts are sound -- openness in governance and the need to restructure for the benefit of the many instead of the few. The devil's in the details -- or maybe the devils just mess with the details to ensure nothing fundamentally changes, which is what Biden promised the owners and donors when he announced his candidacy.
Thanks for your voice. You have know idea how comforting it is to hear advocates such as yourself voicing nonmilitary solutions to worldly problems. Would the days of barbarians be gone.
I agree that when a high age number is coupled with a rigid, backward-looking mindset, it's time to make way for new ideas. I don't necessarily agree that advanced age = being locked into the past and unproductive concepts. While old age and reactionary or inelastic views very often go hand-in-hand, I wouldn't broom everybody over, say, 75 as being unproductive. It's the mindset---or infirmity, as the case may be---that's the problem, not the year on the birth certificate.
The examples you cite are definitely illustrative of your premise, Bill, but there are plenty of exceptions to the rule. Einstein published well onto his 70s, for example, and Picasso was still creating notable works well into his 80s. Lily Tomlin is 83, Rita Moreno is 91, and Dame Maggie Smith is going on 89. True that none of those people is running the government, but my point is that elderly isn't synonymous with hidebound or incompetent. George Santos is only 35. ; )
You have a point, Denise, and it applies to term limits as well. One has to go by the individual rather than have a blanket age or term limit. The problem is that even going by the individual it's clear that someone in the condition of Feinstein is no longer an independent agent. Obvious as it is, there is no way to remove her. Fortunately, she has said she will not be running in 2024. McConnell has two more years with no announcement that this will be his last term. A similar problem concerns the very old behind the wheel. Surely there must be a way short of death or a tragic accident to limit the danger to society of incapable people in positions of power. We all need to keep in mind Elsa's song about letting it go, in this case it being power.
Well....I've seen suggestions over the years about implementing some kind of test to qualify as a House or Senate candidate, every time, to gauge minimal competence, knowledge, and psychological stability. I don't know who'd devise it, but I think it would be a good idea across the board, especially for those like Feinstein. Also, create a process similar to that outlined in the 25th amendment for congressmen and senators.
For others in power, friends, family, and advisors should have the courage to tell them when it's time to step down.
As for the issue of driving, maybe require a vision/reaction test every year after a certain age, say 72 or 75. I guess that could be said to be discriminatory, but it would also be practical and in the interest of safety on the roads.
Thank you Bill; I'm so pleased to FINALLY see some articles about the octogenarians who are locked into power. I hope it is beginning to sink into the minds of the public. Can we have some more about the insane mindset of the generals and admirals etc. who keep sending our children off to stupid wars?? And thank you to Alex who provided me with laughs and a new website of hilarious satire to share with friends. I just emailed it to a bunch of them.
Ranney: The Admirals and Generals don't send American Children off to stupid wars without: 1] Being ordered and thus permitted to do so by the President; and 2] Having their fun and games OKd and appropriated for by the Congress.
jg, I'm well aware of that and I'm also aware that at the very least the last 4 presidents we've had (Obama, Bush Trump and Biden) have asked for and taken the advice of the joint chiefs of staff at the Pentagon and also the people they have appointed to the State Dept etc. and every one one them seem to advise our presidents to go to war. Could it have something to do with the well paid cushy jobs so many of them acquire when they retire and get hired by the "industrial" part of the military/ industrial cabal that Eisenhower warned us about? I wonder if there is anyone now on the joint chiefs that is opposed to going to war to preserve our empire? Bill, do you know if there is? As far as I can figure out, the last president to genuinely oppose war was Jack Kennedy and the CIA assassinated him. Read "JFK and the Unspeakable " by James Douglas; it's well documented in there.
No need to stop at Obama, ranney. Every President who has ever waged a war anywhere has done so on the advice and recommendation of his senior military staff. And on the advice and recommendation of his senior diplomatic and intelligence staffs, as well.
And the primary reason his Generals and Admirals typically advise their President to go to war has little, if anything, to do with some cushy post-retirement gig. It has much, much more to do with the fact that the only thing those Admirals and Generals know anything about ~ and at least ostensibly know how to do ~ is Waging War. The fact that they haven’t won a war in 78 years is besides the point.
My hunch is that a far bigger motive for always looking for a war to get into ~ or for one to foment ~ is the next couple of years’ national “Defense/Security” Budget, as approved and appropriated by Congress. Whether there is a War going on, or not.
And it’s a shame Eisenhower didn’t do anything about that military industrial congressional cabal/complex while he was President for eight years; instead of just talking about it as he left office. However, that isn’t that difficult to understand at all. Had he taken actual steps against the interests and intents of the MICC, Richard Nixon would have become President a lot sooner than 1968.
And do You think there is anybody in Washington ~ and not just at the Pentagon, but also up on Capitol Hill, and over at Foggy Bottom ~ who would oppose going to war in order to “preserve” The American Empire?
How many Americans ~ if given an actual, real voice on the matter ~ would oppose going to war to preserve that Empire? How many Americans are even aware of the fact that there is an American Empire? When’s the last time there was a legitimate candidate for any elective office in DC who was opposed to war for any reason?
jg I don't think it is quite as bad as you make out - though it's close. Granted the vast majority of people who are elected or work for the government are for maintaining the Empire. But I suspect it's largely because many of them haven't thought about it much, and indeed there are a few people over the years who have not been for war A recent one I would suggest is Dennis Kucinich, who is now managing RFKJR's campaign. Kennedy also is opposed to war along with possibly West and Williamson, so hopefully we'll hear more on that subject if the campaigns start to heat up. Maybe Biden and the DNC will realize that having an election without debates is a major sign of fascism - like Zelensky banishing all political parties in Ukraine that are even remotely liberal (oh yes now he's banished elections, period).
To be perfectly honest, ranney, i think it is worse than i make it out to be.
The reason our elected politicians in DC don’t think much about America being an Imperialist Warfare State/Empire is because the people who vote for and send them there on election day ~ and keep sending them back ~ don’t think about it at all. How else could “The Forever War” have happened and be happening except for the willful ignoring and ignorance of that fact by the American People?
And please don’t volunteer to hold Your breath waiting for the DNC and Biden’s Geriatric Wet Nurses to go along with debates.
Glenn's video certainly did a good job of demonstrating the problem with just few examples, that in reality would be multiplied many times over. The video of the "honorable senator" from California snapping at a reporter for contending she wasn't present while she wasn't says it all. Is there anything more pathetic than the bureaucrat who can't go out with at least some modicum of dignity intact. Must they hang onto their jobs to the grave?!
Another parallel that I've noticed is the sudden embrace of the possibility of UFOs and the like--a similar trend occurred during the last gasp of the Soviet empire's media outlets. https://time.com/3475954/voronezh-ufo-report-1989/
Bill: Given the fate of the Soviet Union as a “sclerotic empire that refused to change,” do You think the United States of America will survive to celebrate its 250th birthday on July 4, 2026, 1,069 days from today? And if it does, will the American People be in any condition or mood to celebrate anything?
My guess, Jeff, is that the U.S. empire will still be around on 7/4/26, but that many, many Americans will have few reasons to celebrate as the country is increasingly hollowed out to enrich the few at the expense of the many.
Good Morning, Bill. i didn’t ask if the American Empire would survive. i asked if the Nation-State of the United States of America would survive.
But the real question is whether or not the American People will continue to go along with and accept that hollowing out as they have passively and meekly gone along with and accepted all the Bullshit that that “enriched few” have been jamming down their throats since the end of World War II, and particularly since 9/11.
Back to that old Dead Horse of a Nation and a People getting the government, governance, and governors they “deserve” because they have in fact gone completely along and accepted all that Bullshit.
Another way of phrasing it is: When will the American People feel, believe, think, and proclaim “¡YA BASTA!,” and then actually act on it?
Bill, not the only parallel. I've watched with sick bemusement over the past several decades as the ribbons and baubles of our military "leaders" have surpassed those of the 70s-80s era Soviets. The rise in doo-dads mirrors the decline in military effectiveness. DoD today is simply a jobs program and a cash laundry for congress...
You're right, Dave. That was partly the subject of my first article for TomDispatch in 2007:
https://tomdispatch.com/best-of-tomdispatch-william-astore-a-military-bemedaled-bothered-and-beleaguered/
Boy isn't that the truth. We have more 4-stars than ever. Disgusting.
Amen!! Out with the old, petrified has-beens, the unrepentant Cold Warriors who control the "uniparty" and are addicted to US global hegemony. In with leaders who understand a new, multipolar world order is emerging where the peoples of the world live under codified international laws that are not applied arbitrarily by a global hegemon and where the governments of the world come together to tackle the real pressing issues facing the survival of all life on this planet, namely climate change and the scourge of war, militarism and the existence of all nuclear weapons.
Thank You for another Thought Provoker, Bill. Permit me to share some of the thoughts it provoked:
~ 1. For those interested in the statistics, see FiscalNote’s Lydia Stowe’s 06Feb23 piece “How Old is the 118th Congress?” at https://fiscalnote.com/blog/how-old-118th-congress . It includes the individual age of every member of Congress, the breakdown by age groups, the average ages of each Chamber by party, and the percentage of members of Congress representing each Generation, from the Silent to GenZ.
~ 2. America’s “Gerontocracy” is but one element and manifestation ~ a sign and a symptom ~ of the Plutocratic thus Autocratic, hence Oligarchic [and obtw, Patriarchal] Aristocracy that is America’s Ruling Political Class.
~ 3. To beat one of my favorite Dead Horses about a People getting the system of government, practice of governance, and rule of governors that they “deserve,” the first question that popped into my mind on reading this was: “So WHO keeps sending all these Old Farts back to Swampland? And Why do they keep doing that?”
~ 4. The Problem is not that America has a plutocratic, autocratic, oligarchical, mostly patriarchal Ruling Political Class that uses its Money to buy and sell, own and operate, and command and control the nation’s elected politicians and their annointed appointees.
The Problem is the established, accepted, and acted upon belief that the proper function and purpose of this system of government and governance is the meeting of the Human Needs and the satisfaction of the Human Wants of SOME of the Citizens, even when and as that requires the violation of the Human Rights of the rest of the Citizenry, and the ignoring of the Human Responsibilities of all of that Citizenry.
It is a system of government and governance created and operated of, by, and for all those “Special Vested Interests” competing via “Donations” to those Politicians for access to that government’s political and legal power, administrative authority, and most importantly, its spending capability, so as to satisfy the individual, group, organizational, and/or institutional donors’ agendas of those VSIs.
And as a result, the Human Needs of a significant portion of Americans ~ Health, Prosperity, Security, Literacy, the Pursuit of Wants, and Peace ~ are not met. And the Human Rights ~ Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and the Pursuit of Happiness ~ of an even greater portion of Americans are ignored and violated.
THAT is The Problem. And as long as that Problem ~ America’s system of government and governance focused on meeting the Needs and satisfying the Wants of Some of the Citizens ~ is permitted to continue to operate, finding “new” faces to run as candidates and to become those elected Politicians will change absolutely nothing. Just the specific beneficiaries and victims of the system.
True, Jeff. Just look at AOC. She came in as a reformer who said she'd be happy to have only one term in Congress if it meant she could effect real change. She is now Pelosi-in-training.
It's "play the game" or get ejected. AOC likes the game and is staying to play.
And the people who voted for her the first time will send her back. After all: What can possibly be bad about having a Pelosi-WannaBe representing You in Congress? Especially if she makes it to the top of the garbage heap?
While gerontocracy is clearly a marker of a dying societal model, I think invoking perestroika and glasnost, that, for how well intentioned, resulted in a tragedy for the USSR and most of the people of USSR and the pulverization of a centuries old geopolitical entity in a number of disfunctional cleptocratic states, ripe for looting by their elites and their western supporters, is not the best you should wish for the united states, unless you think that karma is deserved
Fair point. The concepts are sound -- openness in governance and the need to restructure for the benefit of the many instead of the few. The devil's in the details -- or maybe the devils just mess with the details to ensure nothing fundamentally changes, which is what Biden promised the owners and donors when he announced his candidacy.
I talk about this article on Podcast by George:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ2-SnNcaLk
Thanks for your voice. You have know idea how comforting it is to hear advocates such as yourself voicing nonmilitary solutions to worldly problems. Would the days of barbarians be gone.
I agree that when a high age number is coupled with a rigid, backward-looking mindset, it's time to make way for new ideas. I don't necessarily agree that advanced age = being locked into the past and unproductive concepts. While old age and reactionary or inelastic views very often go hand-in-hand, I wouldn't broom everybody over, say, 75 as being unproductive. It's the mindset---or infirmity, as the case may be---that's the problem, not the year on the birth certificate.
The examples you cite are definitely illustrative of your premise, Bill, but there are plenty of exceptions to the rule. Einstein published well onto his 70s, for example, and Picasso was still creating notable works well into his 80s. Lily Tomlin is 83, Rita Moreno is 91, and Dame Maggie Smith is going on 89. True that none of those people is running the government, but my point is that elderly isn't synonymous with hidebound or incompetent. George Santos is only 35. ; )
You have a point, Denise, and it applies to term limits as well. One has to go by the individual rather than have a blanket age or term limit. The problem is that even going by the individual it's clear that someone in the condition of Feinstein is no longer an independent agent. Obvious as it is, there is no way to remove her. Fortunately, she has said she will not be running in 2024. McConnell has two more years with no announcement that this will be his last term. A similar problem concerns the very old behind the wheel. Surely there must be a way short of death or a tragic accident to limit the danger to society of incapable people in positions of power. We all need to keep in mind Elsa's song about letting it go, in this case it being power.
Well....I've seen suggestions over the years about implementing some kind of test to qualify as a House or Senate candidate, every time, to gauge minimal competence, knowledge, and psychological stability. I don't know who'd devise it, but I think it would be a good idea across the board, especially for those like Feinstein. Also, create a process similar to that outlined in the 25th amendment for congressmen and senators.
For others in power, friends, family, and advisors should have the courage to tell them when it's time to step down.
As for the issue of driving, maybe require a vision/reaction test every year after a certain age, say 72 or 75. I guess that could be said to be discriminatory, but it would also be practical and in the interest of safety on the roads.
Thank you Bill; I'm so pleased to FINALLY see some articles about the octogenarians who are locked into power. I hope it is beginning to sink into the minds of the public. Can we have some more about the insane mindset of the generals and admirals etc. who keep sending our children off to stupid wars?? And thank you to Alex who provided me with laughs and a new website of hilarious satire to share with friends. I just emailed it to a bunch of them.
Ranney: The Admirals and Generals don't send American Children off to stupid wars without: 1] Being ordered and thus permitted to do so by the President; and 2] Having their fun and games OKd and appropriated for by the Congress.
jg, I'm well aware of that and I'm also aware that at the very least the last 4 presidents we've had (Obama, Bush Trump and Biden) have asked for and taken the advice of the joint chiefs of staff at the Pentagon and also the people they have appointed to the State Dept etc. and every one one them seem to advise our presidents to go to war. Could it have something to do with the well paid cushy jobs so many of them acquire when they retire and get hired by the "industrial" part of the military/ industrial cabal that Eisenhower warned us about? I wonder if there is anyone now on the joint chiefs that is opposed to going to war to preserve our empire? Bill, do you know if there is? As far as I can figure out, the last president to genuinely oppose war was Jack Kennedy and the CIA assassinated him. Read "JFK and the Unspeakable " by James Douglas; it's well documented in there.
No need to stop at Obama, ranney. Every President who has ever waged a war anywhere has done so on the advice and recommendation of his senior military staff. And on the advice and recommendation of his senior diplomatic and intelligence staffs, as well.
And the primary reason his Generals and Admirals typically advise their President to go to war has little, if anything, to do with some cushy post-retirement gig. It has much, much more to do with the fact that the only thing those Admirals and Generals know anything about ~ and at least ostensibly know how to do ~ is Waging War. The fact that they haven’t won a war in 78 years is besides the point.
My hunch is that a far bigger motive for always looking for a war to get into ~ or for one to foment ~ is the next couple of years’ national “Defense/Security” Budget, as approved and appropriated by Congress. Whether there is a War going on, or not.
And it’s a shame Eisenhower didn’t do anything about that military industrial congressional cabal/complex while he was President for eight years; instead of just talking about it as he left office. However, that isn’t that difficult to understand at all. Had he taken actual steps against the interests and intents of the MICC, Richard Nixon would have become President a lot sooner than 1968.
And do You think there is anybody in Washington ~ and not just at the Pentagon, but also up on Capitol Hill, and over at Foggy Bottom ~ who would oppose going to war in order to “preserve” The American Empire?
How many Americans ~ if given an actual, real voice on the matter ~ would oppose going to war to preserve that Empire? How many Americans are even aware of the fact that there is an American Empire? When’s the last time there was a legitimate candidate for any elective office in DC who was opposed to war for any reason?
jg I don't think it is quite as bad as you make out - though it's close. Granted the vast majority of people who are elected or work for the government are for maintaining the Empire. But I suspect it's largely because many of them haven't thought about it much, and indeed there are a few people over the years who have not been for war A recent one I would suggest is Dennis Kucinich, who is now managing RFKJR's campaign. Kennedy also is opposed to war along with possibly West and Williamson, so hopefully we'll hear more on that subject if the campaigns start to heat up. Maybe Biden and the DNC will realize that having an election without debates is a major sign of fascism - like Zelensky banishing all political parties in Ukraine that are even remotely liberal (oh yes now he's banished elections, period).
To be perfectly honest, ranney, i think it is worse than i make it out to be.
The reason our elected politicians in DC don’t think much about America being an Imperialist Warfare State/Empire is because the people who vote for and send them there on election day ~ and keep sending them back ~ don’t think about it at all. How else could “The Forever War” have happened and be happening except for the willful ignoring and ignorance of that fact by the American People?
And please don’t volunteer to hold Your breath waiting for the DNC and Biden’s Geriatric Wet Nurses to go along with debates.
Glenn's video certainly did a good job of demonstrating the problem with just few examples, that in reality would be multiplied many times over. The video of the "honorable senator" from California snapping at a reporter for contending she wasn't present while she wasn't says it all. Is there anything more pathetic than the bureaucrat who can't go out with at least some modicum of dignity intact. Must they hang onto their jobs to the grave?!
Another parallel that I've noticed is the sudden embrace of the possibility of UFOs and the like--a similar trend occurred during the last gasp of the Soviet empire's media outlets. https://time.com/3475954/voronezh-ufo-report-1989/
Bill: Given the fate of the Soviet Union as a “sclerotic empire that refused to change,” do You think the United States of America will survive to celebrate its 250th birthday on July 4, 2026, 1,069 days from today? And if it does, will the American People be in any condition or mood to celebrate anything?
My guess, Jeff, is that the U.S. empire will still be around on 7/4/26, but that many, many Americans will have few reasons to celebrate as the country is increasingly hollowed out to enrich the few at the expense of the many.
Good Morning, Bill. i didn’t ask if the American Empire would survive. i asked if the Nation-State of the United States of America would survive.
But the real question is whether or not the American People will continue to go along with and accept that hollowing out as they have passively and meekly gone along with and accepted all the Bullshit that that “enriched few” have been jamming down their throats since the end of World War II, and particularly since 9/11.
Back to that old Dead Horse of a Nation and a People getting the government, governance, and governors they “deserve” because they have in fact gone completely along and accepted all that Bullshit.
Another way of phrasing it is: When will the American People feel, believe, think, and proclaim “¡YA BASTA!,” and then actually act on it?
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C2%A1Ya_basta! ]
More from the Babylon Bee: https://babylonbee.com/news/senators-excited-thursdays-lunch-will-now-include-pudding-with-their-strained-peas
The Babylon Bee explains it all: https://babylonbee.com/news/family-torn-between-placing-grandpa-on-hospice-or-having-him-run-for-senate