Thom Hartmann has written a new book titled The Hidden History of Monopolies: How Big Business Destroyed the American Dream. He has decided to offer it for free, a chapter at a time, on his blog.
He writes:
Because the Founders set up America to be resistant to the coercive and corruptive influence of monopoly and vested interest, the monopolists didn’t have any direct means of taking over the American government. So, two processes were necessary.
First, they knew that they’d have to take over the government. A large part of that involved the explicit capture of the third branch of government, the federal judiciary (and particularly the Supreme Court), which meant taking and holding the presidency (because the president appoints judges) at all costs, even if it required breaking the law; colluding with foreign governments, monopolies, and oligarchs; and engaging in massive election fraud, all issues addressed in previous Hidden History books.
Second, they knew that if they were going to succeed for any longer than a short time, they’d need popular support. This required two steps: build a monopoly-friendly intellectual and media infrastructure, and then use it to persuade people to distrust the US government.
Lewis Powell’s 1971 memo kicked off the process.
Just a few months before he was nominated by President Richard Nixon to the US Supreme Court, Powell had written a memo to his good friend Eugene Sydnor Jr., the director of the US Chamber of Commerce at the time.32 Powell’s most indelible mark on the nation was not to be his 15-year tenure as a Supreme Court justice but instead that memo, which served as a declaration of war against both democracy and what he saw as an overgrown middle class. It would be a final war, a bellum omnium contra omnes, against everything FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society had accomplished.
It wasn’t until September 1972, 10 months after the Senate confirmed Powell, that the public first found out about the Powell memo (the actual written document had the word “Confidential” at the top—a sign that Powell himself hoped it would never see daylight outside of the rarified circles of his rich friends). By then, however, it had already found its way to the desks of CEOs all across the nation and was, with millions in corporate and billionaire money, already being turned into real actions, policies, and institutions.
During its investigation into Powell as part of the nomination process, the FBI never found the memo, but investigative journalist Jack Anderson did, and he exposed it in a September 28, 1972, column in the Washington Post titled, “Powell’s Lesson to Business Aired.” Anderson wrote, “Shortly before his appointment to the Supreme Court, Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. urged business leaders in a confidential memo to use the courts as a ‘social, economic, and political’ instrument.”33
Pointing out that the memo hadn’t been discovered until after Powell was confirmed by the Senate, Anderson wrote, “Senators . . . never got a chance to ask Powell whether he might use his position on the Supreme Court to put his ideas into practice and to influence the court in behalf of business interests.”34
This was an explosive charge being leveled at the nation’s rookie Supreme Court justice, a man entrusted with interpreting the nation’s laws with complete impartiality. But Anderson was a true investigative journalist and no stranger to taking on American authority or to the consequences of his journalism. He’d exposed scandals from the Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, and Reagan administrations. In his report on the memo, Anderson wrote, “[Powell] recommended a militant political action program, ranging from the courts to the campuses.”35
Powell’s memo was both a direct response to Franklin Roosevelt’s battle cry decades earlier and a response to the tumult of the 1960s. He wrote, “No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack.”36
When Sydnor and the Chamber received the Powell memo, corporations were growing tired of their second-class status in America. The previous 40 years had been a time of great growth and strength for the American economy and America’s middle-class workers—and a time of sure and steady increases of profits for corporations—but CEOs wanted more.
If only they could find a way to wiggle back into the minds of the people (who were just beginning to forget the monopolists’ previous exploits of the 1920s), then they could get their tax cuts back; they could trash the “burdensome” regulations that were keeping the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat safe; and the banksters among them could inflate another massive economic bubble to make themselves all mind-bogglingly rich. It could, if done right, be a return to the Roaring Twenties.
But how could they do this? How could they persuade Americans to take another shot at what was widely considered a dangerous “free market” ideology and economic framework that had crashed the economy in 1929?
Lewis Powell had an answer, and he reached out to the Chamber of Commerce—the hub of corporate power in America—with a strategy. As Powell wrote, “Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations.” Thus, Powell said, “the role of the National Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital.”37
In the nearly 6,000-word memo, Powell called on corporate leaders to launch an economic and ideological assault on college and high school campuses, the media, the courts, and Capitol Hill. The objective was simple: the revival of the royalist-controlled “free market” system. As Powell put it, “[T]he ultimate issue . . . [is the] survival of what we call the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.”
The first front that Powell encouraged the Chamber to focus on was the education system. “[A] priority task of business—and organizations such as the Chamber—is to address the campus origin of this hostility [to big business],” Powell wrote.38
What worried Powell was the new generation of young Americans growing up to resent corporate culture. He believed colleges were filled with “Marxist professors” and that the pro-business agenda of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover had fallen into disrepute since the Great Depression. He knew that winning this war of economic ideology in America required spoon-feeding the next generation of leaders the doctrines of a free-market theology, from high school all the way through graduate and business school.
At the time, college campuses were rallying points for the progressive activism sweeping the nation as young people demonstrated against poverty, the Vietnam War, and in support of civil rights. Powell proposed a list of ways the Chamber could retake the higher-education system. First, create an army of corporate-friendly think tanks that could influence education. “The Chamber should consider establishing a staff of highly qualified scholars in the social sciences who do believe in the system,” he wrote.39
Then, go after the textbooks. “The staff of scholars,” Powell wrote, “should evaluate social science textbooks, especially in economics, political science and sociology. . . . This would include assurance of fair and factual treatment of our system of government and our enterprise system, its accomplishments, its basic relationship to individual rights and freedoms, and comparisons with the systems of socialism, fascism and communism.”
Powell argued that the civil rights movement and the labor movement were already in the process of rewriting textbooks. “We have seen the civil rights movement insist on re-writing many of the textbooks in our universities and schools. The labor unions likewise insist that textbooks be fair to the viewpoints of organized labor.”41 Powell was concerned that the Chamber of Commerce was not doing enough to stop this growing progressive influence and replace it with a pro-plutocratic perspective.
“Perhaps the most fundamental problem is the imbalance of many faculties,” Powell pointed out. “Correcting this is indeed a long-range and difficult project. Yet, it should be undertaken as a part of an overall program. This would mean the urging of the need for faculty balance upon university administrators and boards of trustees.” As in, the Chamber needed to infiltrate university boards in charge of hiring faculty to make sure that only corporate-friendly professors were hired.
Powell’s recommendations targeted high schools as well. “While the first priority should be at the college level, the trends mentioned above are increasingly evidenced in the high schools. Action programs, tailored to the high schools and similar to those mentioned, should be considered,” he urged.
Next, Powell turned to the media, instructing that “[r]eaching the campus and the secondary schools is vital for the long-term. Reaching the public generally may be more important for the shorter term.” Powell added, “It will . . . be essential to have staff personnel who are thoroughly familiar with the media, and how most effectively to communicate with the public.” He advocated that the same system “applies not merely to so-called educational programs . . . but to the daily ‘news analysis’ which so often includes the most insidious type of criticism of the enterprise system.”
Following Powell’s lead, in 1987 Reagan suspended the Fairness Doctrine (which required radio and TV stations to “program in the public interest,” a phrase that was interpreted by the FCC to mean hourly genuine news on radio and quality prime-time news on TV, plus a chance for “opposing points of view” rebuttals when station owners offered on-air editorials), and then in 1996 President Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which eliminated most media-monopoly ownership rules. That same year, billionaire Rupert Murdoch started Fox News, an enterprise that would lose hundreds of millions in its first few years but would grow into a powerhouse on behalf of the monopolists.
From Reagan’s inauguration speech in 1981 to this day, the single and consistent message heard, read, and seen on conservative media, from magazines to talk radio to Fox, is that government is the cause of our problems, not the solution. “Big government” is consistently—more consistently than any other meme or theme—said to be the very worst thing that could happen to America or its people, and after a few decades, many Americans came to believe it. Reagan scare-mongered from a presidential podium in 1986 that “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
Once the bond between people and their government was broken, the next steps were straightforward: Reconfigure the economy to work largely for the corporate and rich, reconfigure the criminal justice system to give white-collar criminals a break while hyper-punishing working-class people of all backgrounds, and reconfigure the electoral systems to ensure that conservatives get reelected.
Then use all of that to push deregulation so that they can quickly consolidate into monopolies or oligopolies.

Here is the actual Powell memo.
Click to access powell-memo.pdf
LikeLike
I recommend reading this. It’s only 34 double-spaced pages and (not surprisingly) you get a much better sense of the memo than you get from Hartmann’s summary. One of many interesting things about it is the degree to which its themes, particularly regarding campus politics and speech, are so familiar today.
LikeLike
Mission complete!…sad to say.
LikeLike
David Pepper, former Ohio Democratic Party chair, announced he will be on MSNBC at 10:45. He may be discussing a paper he wrote in law school that won an award. The paper addressed the outcome of SCOTUS’ gutting of New Deal legislation (and, FDR’s response).
LikeLike
Yes. We have to keep reminding ourselves of this “Powell” program and somehow make more people aware of it. The testing mania, fostered–foisted–by both political parties on public education, was also a big part of the overall backlash from conservative interests. In a sense, the digitalization of learning was like the monetarization of all aspects of life–everything has a number and a price.
Attending an education college–Ohio State–in the late ’50’s and early ’60’s–we were taught that the only good or useful questions on a test were open-ended ones, or essays, etc. Encourage–require–your students to think outside the box.
All this was an anathema to the “money changers” who dominated not only the Republican Party, but much of the American power structure.
And amen, to the importance of the Fairness Doctrine and “equal time” provisions. No, they weren’t really equal, but they helped. I was Central Ohio Coordinator for the Mondale campaign in ’84, and when Reagan came to Columbus, a fawning press gave him tarmac-to-tarmac coverage. So I called the dominant TV channel and asked for equal time. We didn’t get equal, but we did get to send a Democratic spokesperson to the station and get his comments on the air in a quality time slot. That doesn’t exist today.
As an old man, now, I worry about what kind of nation and world we are leaving the next generations. It would be hopeful to think the pendulum swings back and forth, and will swing back progressively–but with schools and the media in mostly lockstep with the corporate profit-is-all-that-matters mentality, and with communication largely controlled by profit-demanding industries and individuals, I’m not sure I can see a silver lining.
If we could find a way to increase the reach of blogs like this, it would help.
And, again, I suggest, from my union background, boycotts of key advertisers should be considered. And I also keep remembering how the United Auto Workers rose from the dust of fruitless organizing drives and occupied the auto plant in Flint, Michigan in 1936.
To be successful, we must think outside the box.
LikeLike
After cutting through the biographers’ blather about the “gentlemanly manner” of Justice Lewis F Powell Jr., what one learns is that the sadistic racist, Robert E Lee, was a man that Powell greatly admired. Powell described in writing, “my unbounded admiration for Robert E Lee,” on the occasion that he gave his son a Lee biography.
Powell’s family in America dated back to 1635 when his English ancestors settled in the James River area of Virginia. Powell grew up in the capitol of the Confederacy.
His confirmation to the Court was a dark day in American history with a resulting concentration of wealth and power destroying democracy. His memo guaranteed the power of right wing exploiters like Charles Koch.
LikeLike
Too many admired Lee at that time. We’re still paying for it.
LikeLike
Both parties are to blame for allowing corporations and billionaires to gain so much power. Maybe Democrats are less responsible, but they have failed to defend the working class. Clinton’s NAFTA gutted the working class that never truly recovered from this misguided embracing of neoliberal policy. When I read The Constitution, it presents an ideological commitment a government of, by and for the people, not private companies.
When unlimited funds are allowed in elections, corporations and billionaires get an outsized impact on the outcome, and that which benefits most people gets ignored. The fact we cannot pass universal health care, family leave or child care subsidies that most Western nations offer demonstrates the strangled hold that the wealthy have on our government. Now that “corporations are people,” and Citizens United decision is accepted, the wealthy control a lot of the political ads in which they can distort, lie about and convince unsuspecting citizens to vote against their own self-interest.
LikeLike
cx: stranglehold
LikeLike
Well said, RT!
LikeLike
The proof in the pudding is that as the Democrats attempt to wrest control from MAGA, they will say little about what they would actually do about the courts and any private entity. I’m afraid that the reality is that they will nibble around the edges, but not take on the rot in the middle. The filibuster will stay in place, judges will continue lifetime appointments, and Citizens United will remain the law of the land.
LikeLike
You can’t make dramatic change when you can barely, if at all, get majorities of both houses, much less firm majorities.
LikeLike
FDR and LBJ both won in landslide elections, giving them large majorities in both houses of Congress. They were able to pass historic legislation.
LikeLike
Citizens United is the law of the land because of the 2016 election. There was an open seat, the court was tied 4-4, and unfortunately, too many voters either preferred that Trump fill that vacancy, or decided that their priority should be doing everything in their power to prevent a supposedly evil Democrat from filling that vacancy.
Had people cared, it would be the Republicans trying to end lifetime appointments for judges to remove all those progressive federal judges the Democrat had appointed.
I still remember that the 2016 election looked like Trump might win the popular vote and not the electoral college, and he was saying the electoral college needed to go.
I want an election where Dems have the same majorities as LBJ and FDR before we give up on them.
I gave up on Jimmy Carter and believed all the negative “Carter is a right wing tool of the billionaires” propaganda. It wasn’t true. He was not progressive in the least, but he was not a neo-con tool trying to make this country a oligarchy. I just thought he was.
LikeLike
Citizens United was decided in 2010.
LikeLike
Also, Super PAC spending was instrumental in the effort to defeat Trump in 2020 and in the 2022 midterms, and it may be the same this year. Citizens United may be bad policy but it’s not the case that Democrats haven’t benefited from it.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2023/06/record-contributions-dark-money-groups-shell-companies-flooded-midterm-elections-2022/
LikeLike
That doesn’t make it a good thing. The dark money on either side simply means all legislation is in favor of corporate power. This is also why any expectations to reform the Supreme Court are doubtful.
LikeLike
Thats why I noted that it “may be bad policy.” But if it helped defeat Trump in 2020 and does so again this year, I’m glad of it.
LikeLike
Big money in politics is bad, no matter who it helps.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Super PACs buy elections, cancel democracy.
LikeLike
Agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In 1975, the movie Rollerball, starring James Caan, was released. It was about a sports industry run by corporate behemoths who had replaced governments. This seemed outlandish at the time, but now turns out to be quite prophetic. The globalized plutocracy has at least equal power to governments. The autocratic powers are about economic corruption, while the democratic states are losing power to corporate interests. We are in an age when Elon Musk controls half of all satellites that can impact military initiatives and a few billionaires run much of our media and industrial production. Prior to the twentieth century, the predominate governing model was empirical monarchy. After that ran it course ending emphatically with two world wars, progressive ideals and human rights became the predominate aspiration. However, this scared people with money. The result was this ongoing effort to discredit majority rule. What we are struggling with today is a sort of rebirth of monarchy where a few simply believe that no one else is qualified to run anything. In the U.S., polls no longer move the dial in regard to policy. Money legislates. This is our fight in public education. Government is failing to regulate oligarchs who bend the rules to fit their desires and it is working. This, along with bigotry, is what drives MAGA. This perceived rule of the elite. The problem is that they are turning their pitchforks on themselves instead of the culprits. The history of this revolt of the rich is well documented. The effect on the rest of the world doesn’t look good.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Corporation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking Prime Deals Hour.”
LikeLike