220
Oligarchic leaders are not competent or trained to rule as they have a conception
that blinds them to the fact that the realm of politics is different in kind from the
realm of finance (Skultety 2011, p. 100). I have argued that effective leadership in
democracies requires knowledge of all three of the elements of political economy,
namely economics, political science and sociology and their underlying philosophies (Venton 2015, 2016, 2017). These are well beyond the paradigms of economics and finance.
The measure of success of the oligarchic nation is ever increasing national
wealth. This success is achieved by maximizing Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
each year, saving some it from consumption, and real productive assets and using
the rest to increase financial wealth. Unlike democracy, there is no good purpose to
this success because wealth leaves unanswered the purpose for which it is being
amassed. The political objective of the oligarchic regime is good order which is
defined by the temperament of the oligarchic leaders which tends to favor the accumulation of their private wealth which is included in the wealth of the nation.
In America today, oligarchy prevails in an informal way which differs from the
ancient way of formal structure. The result is the same, namely that of a selfinterested elite who are obstructing or operating contrary to the general welfare [i.e.,
the common good]. Broadly two approaches of the oligarchic elite are to use their
money to influence elections and to shape the opinion of the public (Neill
2011, p. 34).
5.2 Oligarchy and Neoliberal Capitalism
In his book, Can Democracy Survive Global Capitalism?, Robert Kuttner traces the
decline from a decent economy in America of the 1960s to its adoption of neoliberal
capitalism that began in the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan’s administration
(Kuttner 2018). Canada was not far behind. The Canadian Federal government’s
massive austerity measures in the middle 1990s to balance the budget, reflected
what political scientist Matt Fodor described as a solidification of the neoliberal
counter revolution in Canada (Fodor 2013, pp. 109–112). However, the antecedents
of this austerity began 25 years earlier around 1970. After 1970, Canadian federal
and provincial governments reduced the very high tax rates that had been introduced to finance World War II but had been maintained for 25 years following the
war. The reductions after 1970 included:
• A 59% reduction in federal corporate income tax rates from 37% in 1970 to
15% in 2012
• Repeal of the federal estate tax on inheritances in 1971
• An average 54% reduction in the 1969 highest marginal income tax rates for the
highest 1% of income earners
• An average 32% reduction in the 1969 highest marginal income tax rates for
middle income earners
P. Venton
Oligarchic leaders are not competent or trained to rule as they have a conception
that blinds them to the fact that the realm of politics is different in kind from the
realm of finance (Skultety 2011, p. 100). I have argued that effective leadership in
democracies requires knowledge of all three of the elements of political economy,
namely economics, political science and sociology and their underlying philosophies (Venton 2015, 2016, 2017). These are well beyond the paradigms of economics and finance.
The measure of success of the oligarchic nation is ever increasing national
wealth. This success is achieved by maximizing Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
each year, saving some it from consumption, and real productive assets and using
the rest to increase financial wealth. Unlike democracy, there is no good purpose to
this success because wealth leaves unanswered the purpose for which it is being
amassed. The political objective of the oligarchic regime is good order which is
defined by the temperament of the oligarchic leaders which tends to favor the accumulation of their private wealth which is included in the wealth of the nation.
In America today, oligarchy prevails in an informal way which differs from the
ancient way of formal structure. The result is the same, namely that of a selfinterested elite who are obstructing or operating contrary to the general welfare [i.e.,
the common good]. Broadly two approaches of the oligarchic elite are to use their
money to influence elections and to shape the opinion of the public (Neill
2011, p. 34).
5.2 Oligarchy and Neoliberal Capitalism
In his book, Can Democracy Survive Global Capitalism?, Robert Kuttner traces the
decline from a decent economy in America of the 1960s to its adoption of neoliberal
capitalism that began in the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan’s administration
(Kuttner 2018). Canada was not far behind. The Canadian Federal government’s
massive austerity measures in the middle 1990s to balance the budget, reflected
what political scientist Matt Fodor described as a solidification of the neoliberal
counter revolution in Canada (Fodor 2013, pp. 109–112). However, the antecedents
of this austerity began 25 years earlier around 1970. After 1970, Canadian federal
and provincial governments reduced the very high tax rates that had been introduced to finance World War II but had been maintained for 25 years following the
war. The reductions after 1970 included:
• A 59% reduction in federal corporate income tax rates from 37% in 1970 to
15% in 2012
• Repeal of the federal estate tax on inheritances in 1971
• An average 54% reduction in the 1969 highest marginal income tax rates for the
highest 1% of income earners
• An average 32% reduction in the 1969 highest marginal income tax rates for
middle income earners
P. Venton