In Mary Shelley’s novel, when Victor Frankenstein brought his creature to life, he hoped to advance knowledge and control of nature. Instead, he created an ugly, miserable, murderous monster beyond his understanding and control. From recent events, it would seem that the GOP has accomplished the same end when it fostered the emergence of the “Tea Party” while pursuing a goal of unfettered control of the political system through unlimited political financing.
In this calamity, the Supreme Court has played a critical role in advancing this cause, and driving this dangerous dash toward oligarchy. For the most part, the Supreme Court has been central to the promotion of democracy and justice in the United States, but has also been central to historical tragedies. Certain decisions have had serious negative consequences for many Americans. Among these might be included the decision which became the basis for claiming that corporations are people, the decision that separate could be equal and the interference in Florida’s recount that assured G. W. Bush the presidency. In terms of potential impact on history, however, the Citizens United decision ranks with the decision that changed American history forever, the Dredd Scott decision. As a crushing defeat for the abolitionists, and the more moderate views on the issue of slavery, the Dredd Scott decision almost guaranteed a civil war. Denying the humanity of black people and decisively establishing slaves as chattel, i.e. property, any hope of mitigation was smashed. Any hope of moderation and elimination of slavery by law was eliminated for the, then, foreseeable future, and all that was left was a confrontation between slavery and abolition which would result in a civil war.
Similarly, the long term consequences of unlimited, anonymous money entering the political process (not in the form of lobbying, but in the form of payment-for-service) means that “freedom of speech” is defined as “ability to spend.” The Vox Populi gets drowned out by the “Vox Mammoni.”
One consequence is the decline of political parties, especially the party that seeks to represent the ultra-rich. Where once money went to party committees for distribution to candidates (in addition to what candidates raised for themselves), now any fruitcake with a billionaire sugar-daddy can run for office (often successfully) without recourse to the party.
Coupled with this growing phenomenon is the rise of bitter, frightened, extremist right-wing populists, collectively referred to as the “Tea Party.” This movement was cultivated and bankrolled by Republicans as a tactical device to expand the party’s activist base, but having sown the wind, the Republican Party is reaping the whirlwind. To mix metaphors, the monster they created to advance their cause has turned out to be a “Frankenstein’s monster,” out of control and running amok, financed directly by a comparatively small number of very rich people seeking to control the political process directly and personally without regard to the greater good or the “general welfare,” as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution. (See Robert Reich, Supercapitalism , 2007, for a discussion of the uncoupling of wealth and community in the U. S.)
Left to its own devices, the Roberts court’s effect on history, with regard to democracy, may turn out to be as disastrous as was the Taney court with regard to slavery. Let me draw the analogy thus:
Roberts:destruction of democracy::Taney:protection of slavery.