$

'Tying material goods to non-material desires ensures people are never satisfied with what they have".
--The Guardian.

"Jewish money, Jewish donations to the Conservative Party" had led to a pro-Israel "bias" in the Conservatives [said Gerald Kaufman]. 

Corbyn's response: 'There is no place for antisemitism or racism.'

Now, call me obtuse, but how is an allegation about influence controversial or antisemitic? I mean, all sorts of groups vie for political 'influence' (to put it politely). From multinational corporations to the oil industry; from pharmaceutical companies to agribusiness; from bankers to the military industrial complex. In fact, even this picture of things is outdated since it supposes there is some independent political realm that can (or cannot) be influenced. It seems fairer to say that the power structure comprises a series of interlocking parts, all greased by George Washington.

The dividing line between the media and the political is, for example, increasingly fuzzy. Not just because the media moghuls want to have political power and the politicians court the media in order to serve their purpose. It's also that media people are public figures and politicians are media celebrities (or at least aim to be so in an age of the spectacle). Everyone's part is interchangeable in this game. 

And both have an interest in promoting the circulation of trivia, an interest in keeping the bread and circuses rolling-and interest is the name of the game, the only language that either understands.

To say: 'to know the price of everything and the value of nothing' is increasingly of little relevance today since there is no independent 'value' outside the nexus of exchange. Pushpin, my dears, is as good as poetry.