Dear Editor,

I genuinely believe that any American president, and perhaps Canadian or British prime minister, who seriously tried to implement truly humane, progressive policies — a significant reduction in military spending, a genuine anti-war effort, universal single-payer health care, writing off student debt, and increasing the minimum wage while reigning in Wall Street — would likely be assassinated, sooner rather than later.

No wonder the Democratic National Committee refuses to allow a Bernie Sanders presidential candidacy, regardless of what Democratic Party members/voters want. Hilary Clinton’s neo-liberalism, unlike Sanders’ fiscal progressiveness, was already known for not rubbing against the big money and power grain.

Fiscally conservative politics, big business interests, and most of the corporate mainstream media resist sufficiently progressive ideas from actually being implemented. Also, Republican representatives are likely manipulating the Democratic Party hierarchy into making the latter’s fiscal policies even more conservative. They all seem to favour big money interests over people.

Meanwhile, powerful business interests can debilitate high-level elected officials through implicit or explicit threats to transfer or eliminate jobs and capital investment, thus economic stability, if corporate “requests” are not accommodated. It’s a political crippling that’s worsened by a blaring media that’s permitted to be naturally critical of incumbent governments, especially with regards to jobs, capital transfers, and economic weakening.

I, therefore, see American presidents and Canadian prime ministers as basically being symbolically in charge beneath the most power-entrenched and saturated national interests and institutions. Those elected heads lead a virtual corpocracy, that is, a society dominated by politically and economically large corporations.

Frank Sterle Jr

fgsjr2010@hotmail.com