Don’t get me wrong, I completely support SSM (single-sex marriage) and am thrilled the courts, including SCOTUS have decided to get out of the way of justice. Not only is this great for providing rights to an oppressed group of people but I love seeing the religinuts get smacked down (they gloated a bit too much over HobbyLobby’s discrimination so they’re getting the scorecard evened out).
I think SCOTUS is pulling one of the standard magician’s tricks. Distract you with one hand (or activity) while then pulling the trick with the unnoticed hand. Since liberalism has embraced rights it sees these victories as the glass half full and, in some ways, fails to notice what the other hand is doing, i.e. and esp. on voting rights.
After all what SCOTUS really is is the patron of corporate privilege. So the rich get everything they want from SCOTUS. But even SCOTUS has to play coalition politics, so the religinuts and gun nuts get a few wins as well and even the libertarians even get some mentions.
The rich don’t really care about SSM, it hardly affects them at all. At worst, it’s neutral to their continuing grab of all wealth and at best it actually gets them some more goodies. So their position is simple – let the libs have a token win in an area that doesn’t affect us while we continue our theft and the libs will be so distracted by their “win” their response to their losses will be muted.
What SCOTUS really cares about is the political power for the rich to continue to rule. That’s what Citizens United and anti-voting rights is all about – keep the rabble away from the polls and/or feed them unlimited BS through political ads. The Repugs will rule forever and thus feed their masters, the greedy rich. Now denying voting rights in Texas, at least this election cycle is probably irrelevant, but come 2016, where Texas with its rising majority could throw the whole election, so let’s make sure those folks can’t vote and thus maybe put someone in national office that might begin to reverse the income disparity the rich have accumulated since Reagan.
So let’s cheer the win for the good guys, over one group getting rights, but let’s not lose sight of what affects many more of us a lot more.
I don’t get hot and bothered about income disparity over “fairness” (I do actually, but that’s secondary). I really go along with the idea that when the rich get too much success exercising their greed, they: a) will dampen economic growth for everyone else, b) will do stupid stuff with their money and create a new bubble-and-panic that will make 2008 look tame, and, c) their greed will continue feeding the nonsustainable growth, esp. through favoring old money and anti-environment.
The real threat the vast majority of us face today is the depletion of resources and the destruction of the environment critical to human survival (at least most of us, since the rich will hire their private armies to continue to control an increasingly dystopian world). Ebola and ISIS show us another side of the global economy. No longer can the rich countries (and their elites) keep the bad stuff “over there”. It’s going to come to our shores. So technologically advanced countries may be able to build infrastructure against rising waters, but as vast parts of the globe are ravaged by starvation resulting from climate change and resource depletion what ISIS is doing in a screwed up part of the world is going to spread to other places and then to the rich countries. This is the threat we’ll all see and that is way more important.
So SSM, great, but don’t let SCOTUS fool you they’ve still stealing out of your pocket and the consequences of that are going to be really really bad.