By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent interview on Marc Maron’s “WTF” podcast, Barack Obama directly criticized organizations that have conceded to the Trump administration. He urged these entities to resist being “bullied” into actions that contradict their values. Obama also commented on Trump’s use of the National Guard, calling it an undermining of democracy. Furthermore, he discussed the evolution of political communication, particularly the influence of podcasts, and highlighted Texas state Rep. James Talarico as an example of effective engagement in these platforms.
Read the original article here
Obama rips concessions that businesses and others have made to Trump, a practice that highlights the pervasive influence of money and power in contemporary American politics. The very act of these concessions, whether viewed as subtle manipulations or blatant bribes, underscores the troubling reality of an oligarchy where the wealthy and powerful often dictate the rules of the game. These actions are a stark illustration of how corporations and other entities prioritize financial gain, sometimes at the expense of ethical considerations or the well-being of the broader public.
Concessions is a euphemism, and perhaps “bribes” is a more accurate term to describe the willingness of corporations and individuals to curry favor with Trump. This exchange, in which powerful entities seemingly pay to play, suggests a system where access and influence can be bought, further eroding the integrity of democratic processes. It’s a situation that resembles a third-world country’s corruption rather than the democratic ideals America strives for.
The criticism further extends to the perceived failures of previous administrations to address the underlying issues that enabled Trump’s success. The focus shifts to the long-term implications of actions taken or not taken, and the subsequent impact on the political landscape. The commentary raises the question of whether Obama’s approach, filled with centrist policies, contributed to the current state of affairs by not addressing the structural inequalities that led to Trump’s rise.
The argument also delves into the motivations of those making concessions, arguing that they are driven by self-interest rather than a genuine concern for public good. Tax cuts and deregulation become the driving factors, illustrating the core issue of profit over ethics that has been central to American political discourse for decades. The willingness to support corruption in exchange for financial benefits showcases a dangerous trend of unchecked profit motives within the corporate sphere.
The discussion also probes the role of societal forces and media that both enable and profit from the current system. The conservative media is identified as a vital player, shaping public opinion and acting as a mouthpiece for the interests of power, which fosters a culture of acceptance and justification for such actions. This commentary underscores the importance of media literacy and critical thinking when engaging with the current political atmosphere.
The idea of a non-existent free market and the prevalence of government manipulation is brought into the discussion. The narrative implies that the market is controlled by those who wield political power, giving them the ability to shape the economy to their benefit. This highlights the interplay between political and economic influence, and the dangers of concentrated wealth and power.
Finally, the underlying economic theories which underpin the current situation are examined. The argument puts forward “End State Capitalism” as a significant factor, where business and state interests merge. The concept of end-stage capitalism is put forward, suggesting that those benefiting from the system are now willing to seize even more power, thereby leading the nation toward a more authoritarian state.