
June 2017 2 9
change is a hoax is “dead wrong and not believed by the
majority of Americans”.
“How in God’s name do you make public policy in defi-
ance of science?” he thundered, to applause.
Trump was “lying through his teeth” when campaign
-
ing when he said he was on the side of the working class
and at this stage in the cycle was the least popular Presi-
dent in history. He’d duped the people into believing he
was on their side. Sanders said that 28 million Ameri-
cans do not have health insurance and Trump’s measures
would throw a further 23 million out of health cover.
Trump plans to cut $800bn from Medicaid, which helps
the poor, over the next decade and to defund Planned
Parenthood which serves the poor with abortion and
family-planning services, while, at the same time, pro-
viding a $300bn tax break to the wealthiest two percent
of Americans.
Trump’s Budget proposals are even worse, as he
wants to cut $2.5tr from programmes that help the poor
over the next decade while giving the same amount in
tax breaks to the top one percent. He said Trump’s
Budget proposals are “the ugliest and most destructive
attack” ever by an American President on the working
class, middle class, and poor people of America.
His most incisive attack was on those who think they
can champion equality in issues of feminism, abortion,
racism and homophobia while not addressing the issue
of the very richest, the 1%: of social inequality.
He let loose on the very richest, particularly in
America:
“The top one tenth of the top 1% has almost as much
wealth as the bottom 90%. 20 people in America own
more than the bottom half.
The richest 1 per cent of the world’s 7.3 bn people now
own as much as the rest of the world put together. Eight
men own the same wealth as the 3.6 bn people who
make up the poorest half of humanity.
After the Great Recession the total wealth owned by
the top 1% of the population in the US grew from 35% to
37%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew
from 85% to 88%. 52% of all new income generated in
America goes to the top 1%. One family, the Walmart
Waltons, owns more than the bottom 42% of the Ameri-
can people. Under Trump’s proposals, that family would
get a $50bn tax break over a decade”.
It was blistering.
And statistical.
His most memorable attack was on the Democrat
party for not representing the disenfranchised, for wast-
ing time on fundraisers, for cultivating Wall St.
After an hour of rhetoric from Bernie, McWilliams ush-
ered him to a faux-livingroom set where he prodded him
with questions, each of which necessitated a McWil-
iams’ hand revolution, every answer generating furious
foppish nodding.
McWilliams lounged the smug lounge of the initiate,
head tilted in the general direction of Bernie at an angle
twenty degrees north of what anyone who doesn’t run
their own hedge fund would have adopted.
However, there was an appropriate response from one
of the world’s most people-attuned political practition-
ers: every time McWilliams asked a question from the
intimate bay of yellow-lamp-lit armchairs where he and
Bernie nestled, Bernie rose and addressed the audience,
his back to the great man.
Much worse than the optics of having an event for a
radical leftie pre-paid and over-priced for a bourgeois
book festival in a lavish amphitheatre that usually hosts
blockbuster musicals, was the misconstruction of Sand-
ers’ politics.
At one point McWilliams seemed to make common
purpose with Sanders, both being “people on the Centre
or Centre-Left”. But this is a failure of imagination. To
be clear: Bernie is on the radical left; McWilliams is a
clever analyst whose whole body of work has eschewed
a leftist, egalitarian or socialist perspective and is nota
-
ble for its smugness not its radicalism.
He did well to collar Sanders to appear at his festival
but sitting on twin armchairs and chaperoning him to the
Presidential Park do not make for a match of politics.
Between the analytical maestro and the international
hero of the left.
This event should have been chaired by Vincent
Browne or Claire Daly. Even Bernie, who apparently had
spent the day touring genealogy outputs with his and
the McWilliams families, mostly avoided radicalism:
even his pleas for equality centred on the 1%, the billion
-
aires, the only class of wealth not represented at the
event. Even when asked if he opposed Ireland’s offshore
tax facilitations he fudged, failing to note the single-
mindedness and egregiousness of our regime. None of
the questions was radical.
It should have been fleshed out that Bernie is Mr
Equality of Outcome; McWilliams and the furiously clap-
ping, and ovationing, southsiders are Mr and Mrs
Equality of Opportunity, which welcomes hedge funds.
There was a mismatch, which disembowelled the
event, the visit.
His most incisive attack was on those who
think they can champion equality in issues of
feminism, abortion, racism and homophobia
while not addressing the issue of the very richest,
the 1%: of social inequality
Everybody, with David