Why Demographics and Toxic Doctrine Mean the Republican Permanent Majority Can Never Be, So Hail the Democratic Permanent Majority

As you may recall, once upon a time – it was called the end of the 20th century – a famed Republican strategist named Karl Rove had a marvelous scheme to make the Grand Old Party the majority political organization going well into the 21st century. And he had the perfect presidential candidate to make his dream of a conservative Republican leaning “ownership society” come true.

How is that project working out?

In 2002 I was driving cross country when All Things Considered ran a 10/13 story about a then new book by Democratic strategists Judis and Texeira called The Emerging Democratic Majority that predicted that overwhelming demographic trends would inevitably give the Democratic Party a decades long lock on the electoral majority.

How is that prediction working out?

Now that the results of the 2012 campaign are in, with a Democrat winning reelection for the second time since the world war (might have been three reelections had Kennedy not been killed), with liberals whipping Republican butt, and the New Deal remaining a major part of the American landscape, we can come to a solid conclusion.

Every major election cycle there are claims that the losing party is in really big trouble and unlikely to recover for years, all the more so when they lose big. Every major election cycle there are counterclaims that the claims that the losing party is in really big trouble are exaggerated. And that has been generally true.

But the days when the two parties were roughly equivalent are, as Judis and Texeira predicted, coming to and end as population demographics and the dysfunctions inherent to the party of Lincoln combine to drive the GOP to permanent minority status. That means the US is on its way to become a less exceptional, less conservolibertarian nation as it becomes a more normal, progressive — and hopefully successful — 1st world country.

Republicans should be afraid, very afraid.

This is how bad things are for the political right. The GOP has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections (the only win was with an incumbent during an economic bubble and a war on terror) — if not for the electoral college, we might have had a straight series of Democratic presidents since 1992. In that electoral college the Republicans used to have the big advantage. From 1968 to 1988 the Republicans averaged 417, Democrats a wee 113. That was then, this is now. The Democrat has averaged 327 in the last six elections with a range of 251-379, the Republican a pathetic 210 with a 159-286 range, the last value being dangerously close to the 270 needed to become president. Both parties have been shrinking to the favor of independents, but the party of the left persists in being larger than that of the right. Matters promise to only get worse for the Grand Old Party.

Getting back to Karl. His scheme was to make the American majority into “owners,” of real estate and stocks. Being part of the moneyed class they would now be fiscal conservatives prone to vote Republican. Seniors would be bought off with assistance in paying for their drugs, while the first steps to privatize Medicare and Social Security into stock investment schemes would begin.

Karl to his credit knew the demographic facts. Because Hispanics are fast expanding as a major part of the population, a large minority or even better a majority of Latinos had to be brought into the GOP fold. The last thing the Republicans needed was a repeat of the Pete Wilson debacle when the California governor so offended the enormous Latino electorate of the state with a GOP white base boosting anti-immigration stance that the Great Bear State was rendered permanently Democratic.

What grand strategist Rove needed was a vehicle with which to carry out his splendid plan. That would be a Republican politician who was playing on the national stage, who was proLatino — and who was sufficiently malleable. Who might that be? Why George Bush Jr. of course. One reason Bush was ideal was because he had carefully courted the Hispanic electorate when he was governor of Texas. Even better, Bush was not a man driven to be president the way most top tier candidates are. In their search for the White House typical presidential aspirants are willing to drop their aides if that is necessary to achieve their consuming goal of the presidency. That would not serve Karl’s purposes, so the more dependent Bush would do fine.

As it was, Karl’s dream almost failed from the get-go as Bush lost the popular vote, and only squeaked into 1600 Penn. Ave. based on the problematic mess in Florida and the GOP dominated Supreme Court. One reason Bush was a mediocre president was because he was more the vehicle of Rove than his own man. That had the ironic effect of weakening Rove’s internally defective plan. And the Republican base committed sabotage against itself by denying Bush the immigration reform his party so desperately needed.

Desperately, because the Republican Party was already well on its way to becoming a political club of white southern baby boomers in a country were minorities were 12% when Reagan was elected and 29% when Obama was solidly reelected. The shocking racioethnic state of the allegedly 21st century GOP was on display at their Tampa convention when the audience looked a lot like a reunion of the sons and daughters of the Confederacy. Which it is, with 92% of Repubs being white, and half from the south. One can make the case that a reason the Republican conclave did not give Romney a post convention bounce was because lots of American’s rolled their eyes at the amazing lack of diversity. This is the 21st century, not the 20th the fossiliferous GOP languishes in.

As minorities fast approach a third of the population on their way to half, it is simply not possible for a national party to be as big or bigger than the other one and therefore win most elections unless it includes a large contingent of minorities. Many Republicans know this. Many Republicans talk a lot about how the party needs to recruit lots of minorities. The problem is that they have no mechanism for developing a major minority cohort.

One reason they can’t is because a good chunk of the core Republican base is anti-immigration. That this may represent opposition to illegal immigration does not matter electoral demographics wise. One way or another most Latinos are really ticked off at the party that they perceive puts them down, and won’t vote GOP. And the anti-immigration base is not going elsewhere, the Republican Party will always be their refuge. So the GOP can kiss off the Hispanic vote.

And a good chunk of the GOP base is bigoted against blacks, as I detail at americanmoralspublicreality.org/index.php/shocking-news-anne-coulter-lies-about-number-ameroracists. Because the Republican Party is the right wing ideological party it cannot bring in voters by finding out what is their thinking and then trying to work that into the party line. Instead it is the lecturing and hectoring party that spends its time telling everyone that dares disagree with their conservolibertarian line — which is the great majority of blacks — that they are wrong, that they need to recognize that they are wrong, and that they must then become right thinking Republicans in order to be true blue Americans. That works just great. They are slapping blacks across their faces.

The GOP is the southern white party because that’s the strategy they opted for back in the 1960s. LBJ lamented that getting the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed turned over the south the Republicans. But in the end it is not the gift to the opposition Democrats feared. It is more like a delayed action mine. The southern strategy worked well enough to keep the Republican party in contention as long as southern whites made up a big enough portion of the electorate. But they no longer do, and blacks resent the Repub southern strategy, the GOP’s being the refuge of racists, and being told that their progressive opinions are errant. So the GOP can kiss off the black vote.

And there is the atheism vote. It’s growing. Fast. God believing theists still make up 80% of the population, but only a minority of them are dedicated church going theoconservatives (www.scienceandreligiontoday.com/2012/05/30/is-atheism-increasing-at-the-expense-of-theism). The mainline churches have long been withering, nowadays so are the conservative sects as they prove unable to recruit sufficient youth who are increasingly irreligious and atheistic. Atheists have expanded fourfold since the 1960s, far outpacing the growth of Mormons. Perhaps a quarter of atheists are Ayn Randian libertarians, but even some of them won’t vote GOP because of the party’s being in bed with the religious right. The great majority of atheists are progressives who won’t vote GOP for both religious and socioeconomic reasons (www.pewforum.org/Unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx). This problem is only going to get worse for the Republicans as the country secularizes like the rest of the west.

Then there are your singles. There are more of them, and the never married tend to be more Democratic than the married. The Democratic Party is the modern Rainbow party of the still new century.

The GOP is running on demographic fumes without a station to pull into to tank up – kind of like many living in the post-Sandy fuel shortage that helped out the Obama campaign (note that climate change boosted the Democratic victory). But by no means is the great Republican problem just demographic. Their toxic doctrine is also poisoning their prospects. The GOP has gone way too far into right wing land for the American majority. They have become the radical party of a Bizarro World amalgam of social Darwinist, Ayn (uberatheist) Randian little government individualism on the economics hand (www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/from-jesus-socialism-to-capitalistic-christianity/2011/08/12/gIQAziaQBJ_blog.html), and Biblical Godly social values imposed by big government on the cultural hand.

It’s a recipe for electoral minority status because most Americans are either social and economic progressives, or moderate centrists. As David Brooks is pointing out to his fellow conservatives, Hispanics, blacks, Asians, Indians and so forth tend to be culturally more attuned to collectivist economics than whites on the right. The chronic belief of those on the far right that the American silent majority is really a collection of conservatives who will someday vote to make a new Reagan president and the Senate and House solidly and perpetually GOP if only the “liberal” lamestream media will stop deceiving the nation — and they can find the right candidate to entrance the voters — is sheer delusion. It is a misapprehension that repeatedly blows back on the Republicans.

In that hardline Repub fantasy land, all true Americans that they hope and dream are the majority want lots of economic liberty with little in the way of government business or environmental regs or socialism, tiny taxes especially for the wealthy “job creators,” a minimal safety net so those in distress can rely on private charities, free market health care in which the insurance industry charges what it can and excludes those with preexisting conditions, culminating in an end to Medicare sooner or later, plus ultimate elimination of social security, combined with the government making abortion murder, and teaching youth abstinence until marriage while suppressing use of contraceptives. And the godly masses will all flock to church on Sabbath mornings while rejecting Darwin’s diabolical theory, and the sly secular scientist’s global warming scam.

Actually, those on the hard right are conflicted about what they want America to do, versus what they sense Americans will go for especially in the near term. That is why conservative pols often run as “stealth” candidates. A libertarian Republican runs for higher-level office who talks about “reforming” social security, rather than outright saying they want to liquidate the socialist Roosevelt’s scheme. Or a creationist runs for a school board talking all about traditional family values while not mentioning that one of their priorities is to get the creator into and evolution out of the classroom. Then there is the project to impose “regulations” on abortion clinics that are actually designed to exclude the constitutional right to the procedure in whole states.

Romney proved to be the stealth candidate exemplar. After running hard right in the Tea Party dominated primaries, picking a TP running mate, and continuing to be pretty darn conservative for weeks after the convention, he suddenly went Etch-A-Sketch centrist in the debates (with such a straight face that he came across as the psychopath he may well be www.opednews.com/articles/Is-CEO-LDS-Romney-a-Succes-by-Gregory-Paul-121009-20.html), flummoxing Obama in the first one (knowing that the demographics ensured his reelection is another possible reason Obama did not pay due attention to his initial debate performance). By the last TV contest Romney had evolved into Mr. Dove who could hardly agree more with the foreign policy of the man he wanted to replace.

Fortunately for the Democrats, hard-line Republicans can keep their true wants and intents in check only so much and or so long. Many right wing candidates and especially office holders believe in their theories and doctrines so ardently, and live in conservobubbles that prevent them from realizing that most think their opinions creepy to scary, that at some point they cannot help torpedoing themselves by saying or doing something that reveals their actual desires and designs.

So we had Todd Akin, bless him, casually telling the world that because women who are really raped rarely if ever get pregnant banning all abortions is not a problem for women of true virtue (www.opednews.com/articles/The-Theocon-War-on-MAINSTR-by-Gregory-Paul-120902-646.html). Followed by Richard Mourdock who allowed that sure, raped women do get pregnant, but it is a gift from God so banning abortions is not a problem for women of true faith – and those who are not. The two guys ended whatever chances the GOP had of gaining the Senate while helping alert the nation that a major chunk of the right holds views of women inherited from the Victorians and shared to some extent with the Taliban. This when two thirds of Americans consider nonadulterous nonmarital sex acceptable, and even more do it. Also giving the nation a better idea of what many on the right really think was serial divorce Rush Limbaugh who denounced the all American Sandra Fluke for being a slut for daring to defend the contraceptives most Americans support the use of in front of a congressional panel. Meanwhile Grand Old Party governors and state legislatures have been passing a host of regulations to hinder access to abortion when most voters think Democrats handle the abortion issue than Republicans. So Virginia becomes the state of the vaginal probe, aiding Obama’s electoral college win while sending a Democrat to the Senate.

Social security and Medicare remain the thirds rails that give those naïve enough to touch them a nasty electoral shock – one that Romney got when he selected the known privatizer Ryan for his running mate and tossed away Florida. The conserves prattle on about closing the FDA, EPA and drill, baby, drill when most folks care a lot about safe food, clean air and water, furry wolves and great whales, and realize that the nation has to get off its addiction to fossil fuels for a host of reasons. Nor does Republican talk of shutting down the Department of Education go over well when the US is losing ground teaching wise to other nations with more extensive central government effort in education than exists here.

And most Americans gasp in eye rolling revulsion at how much of the right actually takes seriously the fringe socioeconomics contained in bad novels likeAtlas Shrugged. We have an entire nation to run here, it’s not a college bull session on arm chair philosophical economics (www.opednews.com/articles/Debate-Advice-For-Joe-Bide-by-Gregory-Paul-121007-370.html). It is not surprising that most Americans being middle class favor the moderate-progressive policies that favor their cohort over the 1%. Only ideologues believe that that the 99% can be remade to be so ardently pro-upper crust that they want to bend over backwards to give the rich all the breaks on the speculation that that the aptly named trickle down scheme works (in mirror of the communist dream of remaking men into egalitarians). The possibility that the US will become a full blown libertarian country is about the same as its going communist. Zero.

But the biggest exposure of all political time of what the Repub upper crust really thinks was Mitt’s being caught at waving away about half of the nation as income tax free moochers not to be considered worthy of his class’s attention – never mind that much of his class does all it can to minimize their taxes by one means or another. Much but not all of the right has been trying to explain away the statement, but it is clear enough. It is not so much that Romney may believe what he said, or was pandering to his elite donors, what is important is that the truth is out and can never be effectively denied. The deceit that it is the liberal elites that for some reason have it in for the ordinary American has been permanently counterbalanced by the now well documented knowledge that a lot of the “job makers” are in it for themselves, and create jobs only by accident if then (www.americanmoralspublicreality.org/index.php/romneys-and-the-republicans-job-creation-snow-job-and-how-mitt-rubbed-out-lots-of-small-business-owners). The Boca Raton recording did in seconds what those like Thomas Frank have been trying to tell the nation for years. And it will never go away – just replay the video.

The beauty of all this is how the Republican-turn-off-the-American-majority-machine is the gift that will never stop giving the electoral edge to the Democrats. There will always be plenty of right wing Republicans who cannot keep themselves from saying or legislating what they think and want. This used to be the Democrat’s problem, in that the liberal wing had so much influence on the party that it turned off the American center in the 70s and 80s, until the Clinton led centrist program corrected the predicament. The Dems could do that because they are the party of governance, the party that understands that compromise is necessary to run a democracy. So progressives have proven willing to swallow some of their greater desires as part of a longer term project to make America into a more socioeconomically successful, normal 1st world country. Now it’s the Republican’s big problem in the opposite direction. But unlike the compromise friendly Democrats, there is no apparent means by which the more ideological GOP can tame its oversized right wing and tack to the center.

That brings us to the under appreciated irony of how FoxNews is damaging the Republican brand without really trying. Superficially it seems that FN – which gets a bigger audience than centrist CNN and progressive MSNBC combined — is the best thing to happen to the GOP since Reagan. So much so that it is often called the media organ of the party. But this is grossly incorrect. FN could be the mouthpiece of the GOP only if the latter directly controlled its content and operations. But the owner and operator is Rupert Murdoch, a man of immense wealth and influence and desire for more wealth and influence who never does what he is told by others. To him FN is a cash cow that has the nice side effect of allowing him to push his conservatism across the land. The Roger Ailes who often gets blamed for what’s on Fox is merely Murdoch’s employee whose job depends upon doing what the latter wants. So FN is about what Rupert desires, not what the Republican establishment such as it is needs. Things are so out of control for the GOP that FN is to a great extent setting the agenda for the Grand Old Party, rather than the reverse as it should be for the long term prospects of the party. So Republicans who try to go centrist are sure to be shot down by the FN pundits and correspondents who, along with their talk radio allies led by Rush, can turn the fury of millions of listeners against the compromising deviants. The result is that the party is even less able to undergo the moderating reform it needs to get more of the minority and centrist vote. It does not help when on 9/7 a stricken FoxNews Bill O’Reilly and company go on to further slander the 47% now 51% of the country as Democratic voting slackers. By doing that they tacitly acknowledge that they have lost the country. Limbaugh and Coulter have explicitly said so (with Coulter noting that the loss was not attributable to Romney’s mistakes). He and she are correct.

And there is how some guy with no credentials like Grover Norquist has bent most of what is supposed to be a national party to his will by scaring them into signing his no new taxes pledge, in violation of the oath of office which must not be subsumed to other oaths that constrict the independence office holders need to defend the Constitution and serve the public as needed. Not the best idea when most Americans want the 1% to cough up more dough to help run the country. Which begs the question of who is in charge of the Grand Old Party?

Back in the day Will Rogers would get a big laugh with the line “I am not a member of an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” But these days, having long ago shed the virulent southern white racist wing and tamped down the near future dreams of progressive, the Dems have got their act pretty much together. You could see it at their convention which was run like a tight yet happy ship. Nowadays the old joke applies best to the GOP, which is hardly a national party, and has spun out of the control of what is left of its establishment. You could see the disarray at their convention where many of the speakers – seeing a loser – hardly mentioned Romney to their own benefit. It was kind of like watching events on the captainless Costa Concordia as it rolled like a sick elephant onto its side, never to recover. And the grass roots Democrats have a far superior get out the vote machine, one that the more elitist Republicans can never match.

And there is the simple fact that the Republicans don’t want to run the government they love to loath as the main source of the nation’s problems. That’s a huge quandary. For a party to be successful it has to convince a majority of voters that they are doing a good job of running the ship of state. Because the Republicans want to get rid of much of the government rather than run it well, they hope the resulting demonstration of government incompetence will convince the citizenry that government does not work and needs further trimming. But that’s a double edged sword because lots of Americans see what’s going on and get ticked off at how the Republicans are running the government that no modern country can do without into the ground. So the mishandling of Andrew and Katrina by the Bush’s and their incompetent FEMAs were disasters for the Repubs, while the positive handling of hurricanes by Clinton’s and Obama’s competent FEMA’s were good for the Dems. The same applies to the uncompromising, my way or the highway hyperpartisanship that seems to sabotage the Democrats, but in the process blows back on the Republicans. In the long run it’s a losing strategy.

In 2012 the Democrats relied on the demographics that are fast shifting in their favor – markedly more so than even in 2008 – and general GOP foolishness to win despite a mediocre economy. With the economy as it is and all the PAC money that flowed their way, the 2012 election should have been a walk on the park for the Republicans (conversely, had the economy been further along towards recovery, then the Republican candidate would have been going through the motions against an unassailable Obama). And it would have been for Romney, had he been able to run from the get go as the moderate conservative from MA. Any other of the Tea Party pleasing primary contenders somehow been nominated the Repubs very probably would have done worse. Ayn Rand fan Ryan would have gone down in flames and is likely to do so if the party gets crazy enough to ever nominate him or any one similar. The primary problem was not the candidate – who proved more capable than many thought in at least the first debates – it’s the party.

The Tea Party has been badly defeated. They won the 2010 election via a combination of reactionary no compromise tactics, a weak response from progressives dispirited by their high expectations not being met by Obama, and by pretending to be all about economics when they are also a lot about hyper social conservatism that inevitably came to the fore. The Tea Party’s pushing extreme candidates into general elections increased the Democratic lead in the Senate. Even if Romney had won, the TP would still have lost because Mitt would have won by going all middle of the road at the end, there not being nearly enough TPers to elect a president. Occupiers are not dancing in the streets, but they made what may be a vital contribution – the terms 99% and 1% are permanent parts of the language – to a victory that is closer to their longer term goals than the alternative would be.

Also a loser was the obstructionist, no compromise, constant campaigning, do everything to defeat the Democrats GOP/TP strategy. This bugged the electoral majority enough that they went for the Dems who, because they sincerely want to run the government, are more prone to compromise to keep the public sector humming along.

Voter suppression? A marginal tactic that can work only as long as there are still enough GOP white voters to make it worth the backlash that gets lots of angry Democrats to the polls in revenge. Parties that are not desperate do not resort to trying to hinder the right to vote.

And one wonders if the right wing wealthy will be willing to pour so much of what they have acquired into future GOP presidential and senatorial candidates if all they are going to get is electoral bupkis. Rove, in his desperate effort to revive something of his Permanent Republican Majority, ran an lavishly funded Super Pac complex that was victorious in zero cases. The billion or so spent by outside funders did not bring them the White House, and lost them ground in the Senate and maybe the House. The fat cats might find they are better off putting their money into lower level campaigns. And the lavish funding of the right can blow back. By pumping money into the supposedly grass roots Tea Party starting in 2009, the GOP elites thought they were doing themselves a favor. But the ginned up movement fooled those who helped invent it into thinking the country really was going conservolibertarian, hiding the reality that the demographic shift was gutting the Republican Party. The exceptional conservative propensity towards reality denial is so entrenched that it tripped them up in election. Lots of them including Rove actually thought that the mainline pre-election surveys were understating the probability of a Romney victory, leaving them stunned the evening of 11/6. Exemplified by the meltdown on FoxNews as Rove, watching the last dregs of his GOP majority run down the drain, went into hyper denial about Ohio. Meanwhile progressives were accurately prepped for victory by Nate Silver’s most excellent scientific analysis.

The great Republican affliction is that it is not possible to run a majority national party centered on angry white baby boomer males, but it certainly is possible to run a minority regional party centered on angry white baby boomer males, and there is not much that the more centrist wing of such a party can do to gain the upper hand over those angry white baby boomer males plus females who dominate the organizational and electoral caucuses, primaries, etc. So a fair number of Republicans who realize the trap their party has gotten into know what needs to be done – moderation of the party religiously, ideologically and politically, more immigrant-Hispanic friendly policies, less racism – but they have little practical idea how to do it, and it is doubtful it can be done. It’s the theme of centrist Republican Margaret Hoover’s American Individualism that even argues that the right must embrace gay rights if conservatism is to have a chance at future relevance. But where are the anti-abortionists, creationists, climate deniers, and libertarians going to go? If they set up one or more new parties that only further shrinks the GOP while further disorganizing the right. Only if the angry white males and females — the main component of the religious right that emerged from political reclusion in the 1970s and could isolate themselves — get discouraged by their growing inability to get the nation back, and drop out of electoral activity will that part of the GOP problem be alleviated, but that too shrinks the party. The religious right that makes up so much of the Republican Party cannot be the dominant confession in a nation where gaydom is accepted as normal. And if the GOP does accommodate homosexual rights, abortion rights, middle of the road immigration reform, modest tax increases, more collaboration between public and private sector, and so forth, then it becomes a me-too party, a pale shadow of the Democratic organization. If immigration reform is enacted it is Obama and the Democrats who will get the main credit from Hispanics, not the Republicans few of whom will vote for it. And the GOP has very long been and always will be the party of the self focused part of the wealthy elite, so its appeal to the masses will always be constrained. Karl Rove was correspondingly and notably naïve. Demographics and ideology preclude the GOP from becoming a permanent majority. It’s remarkable what they have been able to do for so long. Big money does have power.

We can expect that as the nation becomes more minority and atheist oriented that it will become increasingly progressive and proscience. This is a reason that many perceptive Republicans are dismayed at the loss of this election. It was a receding opportunity lost. Making Obama’s reelection all the worse for the right is that Obamneycare will now become firmly entrenched, bringing the US closer to the 1stworld progressive norm of universal health care. With four states including my Maryland (I’m so proud) having broken the string of anti-gay marriage election victories what was a useful GOP wedge issue is turning into a Democratic wedge issue for getting youth voters to show up the polls (www.dailykos.com/story/2009/702089/-The-Gays-Are-Winning:-Why-Thats-Big-Trouble- for-the-Religious-Right). The right is even losing on guns because households that possess heaters is actually dwindling fast due to the demographics of an increasingly older, female run, nonrural/nonhunter population (www.americanmoralspublicreality.org/index.php/the-great-gun-lobbyindustrial-conspiracy). So for the left the future is not going to one of desperately battling with an ascendant right, progressives should have a substantial edge.

It is rare for the member of a party to succeed a previous president from the same party via a normal election. Last happened to the Democrats in 1857, the Republicans in 1929. What makes matter’s interesting is the very real possibility that the demographics and GOP incompetence will for the first time in history favor a string of Democratic successions. A Democratic victory is a real possibility in 2016 if the economy is on the upswing as it is may well be (but see americanmoralspublicreality.org/index.php/the-great-looming-job-crisis-that-libertarians-have-no-clue-how-solve-and-challenges-progressives-as-well), and that incumbent cold have the edge in 2020. This promises to be a further disaster for an increasingly dismayed right because it is likely that the Supreme Court will shift towards being a more progressive institution. If so then a laundry list of progressive preferences will be legally protected and even reinforced regarding reproductive rights, gay rights, election financing, gun control, business regulations and so forth. We will be more like the rest of the modern advanced democracies (which as I have explained elsewhere is a good thing www.opednews.com/articles/Libertarian-World-Economic-by-Gregory-Paul-120906-138.html).

So if you conservatives and libertarians are not panicking yet – you should be.

Follow Us



Updating soon.




© 2013 Economic & Social Justice Reality Report | Views expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor, Editorial Board, ESJRR, or WPRR.