Apathy and Our Totalitarian Future
By Jonathan Taylor
Counter Punch
June 17, 2013
The thing the American public is not understanding about the
implications of the NSA scandal is this: encroaching totalitarianism
can move slowly, in stages.
1. Surveillance:
First is a dramatic increase in the amount of surveillance and data
collection undertaken by private actors and the state.
This forms the surveillance state, which thanks to a number of
important whistleblowers we are now finally recognizing.
2. Criminalization:
The state now has a vast pool of information about everybody.
They will want to use it to further the control and force mechanisms
they already exert through criminalization and incarceration.
We are likely to see more behavior criminalized then previously,
and in fact we are, as various forms of political dissent become
criminalized and the prosecution of non-violent activists, drug
users, poor people who cannot pay off their debts etc. continues
to be a priority.
Most importantly, whistleblowers, individuals who try to inform the
public about the extent of the surveillance state or about criminal
acts by the state are singled out for excessively harsh prosecution,
obviously meant as a deterrent.
Meanwhile, to reinforce our apparent helplessness, military or law
enforcement agents who abuse their positions or even brutalize or
kill unnecessarily are in most cases protected by their bureaucracies
and the justice system.
Police abuse and repression become normalized, as was seen in the
reaction to the Occupy movement.
Among the public this increases paranoia and fear.
3. Public acceptance:
The public is not entirely happy about these developments but feel
unable to do much other than accept them for a variety of reasons.
One is because of perceived threats to their security caused by
terrorism, real or imagined.
Another is because of real and imagined fears of the consequences
of dissent, and the knowledge we are being watched.
And finally most people are otherwise busy trying to survive in a
harsh capitalist economy with an ever-diminishing safety net, and
endless entertaining distractions.
Unfortunately, the end result of this is a totalitarian state.
A state which reserves the right to kill anybody anywhere in the
world at any time and which reserves the right to collect all the
data it wants about anybody anywhere in the world.
A combination which implies:
“We will be watching everything, everywhere, all the time, and
if you get out of line you may be killed.”
The overwhelming majority of both Republicans and Democrats
are culpable in creating this situation.
The intention may not be to make the US into a globalist totalitarian
killing machine run by spooks, sellout figureheads and the 0.01%, but
that will still be the outcome if we do not stop this.
Apathy means giving in to a potentially irrevocably bleak future.
We cannot afford the luxury of it.
Jonathan Taylor is a Professor in the Geography Department at
California State University, Fullerton.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/14/apathy-and-our-
totalitarian-future
Monday, June 17, 2013
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Manning and Snowden in 2016?
Boundless Patriotism
By Frank Scott
Dissident Voice
June 12, 2013
While media stenographers echo the regime’s charges against
whistleblowers who represent democracy far more than the
government and its loyal servants, Americans have an opportunity
to respond to real patriotism with support for its foremost
practitioners.
No elected official – so far – has come forward to stand up for
the rights of the imprisoned Bradley Manning and the hunted
Edward Snowden.
It may be too much to expect any of our corporate owned or rented
elected, “representatives” to stand for anything but great wealth,
the military and Israel, but Americans who’ve rallied to Manning’s
support need to increase their efforts to include Edward Snowden
before the cyber-police take further control of our minds on the
road to totally destroying any notions of free speech and privacy.
Suppressing dissent has always been a part of the American
creed but kept to minorities, reassuring most people that
they indeed were free to speak, especially if they had nothing
to say that threatened ruling power.
From the Alien and Sedition acts passed shortly after the nation’s
founding to the Palmer Raids of the early twentieth century,
punishment of those who threatened systemic stability by calling
attention to its shaky foundation was the order of the day.
A mad rush to collect data on Americans became stronger during
the Cold War that saw suspected communists, socialists and others
who dared challenge minority rule placed under police state control.
During the 1960s when the anti-war and pro-civil rights movements
led more citizens to question and often confront authority, the
suppression of dissent grew more violent but again seemed to only
threaten minorities, leaving the great majority feeling safe as long
as it remained uncritical, obedient or fervently supportive of any
denial of democratic freedom to evil “others”.
In the name of democracy and freedom, of course.
But after the 911 attacks on New York and Washington, whatever
slight caution may have existed vanished as realistic fear of
terrorism replaced fictional fear of communism.
It was frightening enough to cause another rush of government
intrusion into the lives of citizens, allegedly to save them from
further terror attacks.
While this argument still works for misinformed innocents, true
believers and cynics who fully accept mass murder and deceit as
necessary functions of the American marketplace, it is losing its
strength among a growing minority.
This group responds to the information offered by these brave
Americans who “blow the whistle” on the treachery of minority
state power and face severe punishment for daring to speak out.
Manning and Snowden voluntarily acted as members of a budding
democratic state, in contrast to the bought and paid for media
wimps and political pimps who express outrage at these courageous
men who perform genuine public service and thereby threaten
corporate government and its subservient employees faithful to
private rule.
Manning performed heroically as a member of the armed forces and
continues to pay a hellish price for his bravery, while Snowden, also
acting on his conscience and still hopefully free, was operating in
the marketplace for private profiteers who have latched onto the
multi-billion dollar business of collecting information on Americans
and using it the way every thing in this economy is used to benefit
some at the expense of all.
Trillions of our tax dollars have gone to a military industrial complex
we were warned about long ago and they have created a permanent
at war state with military bases all over the world.
Now, during capitalism’s return to pre-social democratic pretensions
that have religious market forces back in control and the public
sector under total assault, cybernetic domination has become more
profitable with hustlers getting taxpayer money under the guise of
protecting them from outside attack by destroying inside freedoms
and making a helluva lot of money in the process.
These military and cybernetic profiteers represent a greater threat
to the nation than any terrorists who would disappear if we brought
our military home and ended our support of regimes hated by their
people who then loath us even more for doing so.
A primitive public sector that bailed out the economy for a
generation has come under assault in a return to pre-Great
Depression capitalism, with uncontrolled market forces that
impoverish the many to enrich the few.
Billionaires and millionaires are doing better than ever and
their servant professional class is just fine, for the moment.
But the majority of working people dubbed a middle class during
the generation of credit buying are slipping into more dangerous
conditions.
And those already at the bottom are facing survival problems
more deadly than at any time since the last depression.
In this context, market profiteers are feasting on public money as
corporate capital’s government fires public workers and hires private
firms to do for only some of us what those public workers once did
for almost all of us.
Schools, libraries, and post offices are closed and programs for
the poor and elderly are slashed or completely ended, while the
stock market booms and luxury goods sell at historic rates.
Millions of pets in America live at a higher material standard than
hundreds of thousands of human beings and the inequality gap
between animals and people is growing as fast as that between
the 1% and the rest of us.
In this madhouse of growing military expenditures and increased
warfare, the threat to Americans from terrorism also rises as we
create more people who hate us.
Whistleblowers who try to alert the public to a reality that hardly
exists on the propaganda outlets of corporate media are seen as
more dangerous than all past “subversives”, and it may be that
authority’s fears are finally getting something right.
The examples set and the information released by Manning and
Snowden is most dangerous to minority power since it is being
shared, discussed and given thought by far more than were ever
aware of past injustices to minorities while a majority either slept
or contentedly enjoyed the trickle down profits for their service.
Now, hundreds of millions the world over understand that humanity
faces a problem that is global, and here in the headquarters of
empire awareness of the role we play in that problem is growing,
thanks in part to communications not yet completely in control of
the 1%.
That control is being sought every day and courageous patriots like
Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden, who risk their freedom in
doing so, are making it possible for people to get a greater sense
of this reality and do something about it before the situation gets
beyond our control.
While the corporadoes are already doing financial planning for
the employees they will run in the next election, social change
advocates should be realistic enough not to think it’s possible,
but it’s symbolically probable that a campaign for “Manning and
Snowden in 2016” might be a way to garner support for these
two American heroes.
And realistic or not, you know they represent infinitely more
integrity, bravery and dedication to the American people than
whatever toadies the corporate parties will present.
Frank Scott writes political commentary which appears in print
in the Coastal Post and The Independent Monitor and online at
the blog Legalienate.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/06/boundless-patriotism-manning-
and-snowden-in-2016
By Frank Scott
Dissident Voice
June 12, 2013
While media stenographers echo the regime’s charges against
whistleblowers who represent democracy far more than the
government and its loyal servants, Americans have an opportunity
to respond to real patriotism with support for its foremost
practitioners.
No elected official – so far – has come forward to stand up for
the rights of the imprisoned Bradley Manning and the hunted
Edward Snowden.
It may be too much to expect any of our corporate owned or rented
elected, “representatives” to stand for anything but great wealth,
the military and Israel, but Americans who’ve rallied to Manning’s
support need to increase their efforts to include Edward Snowden
before the cyber-police take further control of our minds on the
road to totally destroying any notions of free speech and privacy.
Suppressing dissent has always been a part of the American
creed but kept to minorities, reassuring most people that
they indeed were free to speak, especially if they had nothing
to say that threatened ruling power.
From the Alien and Sedition acts passed shortly after the nation’s
founding to the Palmer Raids of the early twentieth century,
punishment of those who threatened systemic stability by calling
attention to its shaky foundation was the order of the day.
A mad rush to collect data on Americans became stronger during
the Cold War that saw suspected communists, socialists and others
who dared challenge minority rule placed under police state control.
During the 1960s when the anti-war and pro-civil rights movements
led more citizens to question and often confront authority, the
suppression of dissent grew more violent but again seemed to only
threaten minorities, leaving the great majority feeling safe as long
as it remained uncritical, obedient or fervently supportive of any
denial of democratic freedom to evil “others”.
In the name of democracy and freedom, of course.
But after the 911 attacks on New York and Washington, whatever
slight caution may have existed vanished as realistic fear of
terrorism replaced fictional fear of communism.
It was frightening enough to cause another rush of government
intrusion into the lives of citizens, allegedly to save them from
further terror attacks.
While this argument still works for misinformed innocents, true
believers and cynics who fully accept mass murder and deceit as
necessary functions of the American marketplace, it is losing its
strength among a growing minority.
This group responds to the information offered by these brave
Americans who “blow the whistle” on the treachery of minority
state power and face severe punishment for daring to speak out.
Manning and Snowden voluntarily acted as members of a budding
democratic state, in contrast to the bought and paid for media
wimps and political pimps who express outrage at these courageous
men who perform genuine public service and thereby threaten
corporate government and its subservient employees faithful to
private rule.
Manning performed heroically as a member of the armed forces and
continues to pay a hellish price for his bravery, while Snowden, also
acting on his conscience and still hopefully free, was operating in
the marketplace for private profiteers who have latched onto the
multi-billion dollar business of collecting information on Americans
and using it the way every thing in this economy is used to benefit
some at the expense of all.
Trillions of our tax dollars have gone to a military industrial complex
we were warned about long ago and they have created a permanent
at war state with military bases all over the world.
Now, during capitalism’s return to pre-social democratic pretensions
that have religious market forces back in control and the public
sector under total assault, cybernetic domination has become more
profitable with hustlers getting taxpayer money under the guise of
protecting them from outside attack by destroying inside freedoms
and making a helluva lot of money in the process.
These military and cybernetic profiteers represent a greater threat
to the nation than any terrorists who would disappear if we brought
our military home and ended our support of regimes hated by their
people who then loath us even more for doing so.
A primitive public sector that bailed out the economy for a
generation has come under assault in a return to pre-Great
Depression capitalism, with uncontrolled market forces that
impoverish the many to enrich the few.
Billionaires and millionaires are doing better than ever and
their servant professional class is just fine, for the moment.
But the majority of working people dubbed a middle class during
the generation of credit buying are slipping into more dangerous
conditions.
And those already at the bottom are facing survival problems
more deadly than at any time since the last depression.
In this context, market profiteers are feasting on public money as
corporate capital’s government fires public workers and hires private
firms to do for only some of us what those public workers once did
for almost all of us.
Schools, libraries, and post offices are closed and programs for
the poor and elderly are slashed or completely ended, while the
stock market booms and luxury goods sell at historic rates.
Millions of pets in America live at a higher material standard than
hundreds of thousands of human beings and the inequality gap
between animals and people is growing as fast as that between
the 1% and the rest of us.
In this madhouse of growing military expenditures and increased
warfare, the threat to Americans from terrorism also rises as we
create more people who hate us.
Whistleblowers who try to alert the public to a reality that hardly
exists on the propaganda outlets of corporate media are seen as
more dangerous than all past “subversives”, and it may be that
authority’s fears are finally getting something right.
The examples set and the information released by Manning and
Snowden is most dangerous to minority power since it is being
shared, discussed and given thought by far more than were ever
aware of past injustices to minorities while a majority either slept
or contentedly enjoyed the trickle down profits for their service.
Now, hundreds of millions the world over understand that humanity
faces a problem that is global, and here in the headquarters of
empire awareness of the role we play in that problem is growing,
thanks in part to communications not yet completely in control of
the 1%.
That control is being sought every day and courageous patriots like
Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden, who risk their freedom in
doing so, are making it possible for people to get a greater sense
of this reality and do something about it before the situation gets
beyond our control.
While the corporadoes are already doing financial planning for
the employees they will run in the next election, social change
advocates should be realistic enough not to think it’s possible,
but it’s symbolically probable that a campaign for “Manning and
Snowden in 2016” might be a way to garner support for these
two American heroes.
And realistic or not, you know they represent infinitely more
integrity, bravery and dedication to the American people than
whatever toadies the corporate parties will present.
Frank Scott writes political commentary which appears in print
in the Coastal Post and The Independent Monitor and online at
the blog Legalienate.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/06/boundless-patriotism-manning-
and-snowden-in-2016
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Corporatocracy, Corporatism, Fascism
Corporatocracy, Corporatism, Fascism
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because
it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini
By Jim Kirwan
Rense.com
June 9, 2013
This is indeed a fascinatingly and disgusting story, premised on
absolute control over all people.
Back when people were actually almost "free" (immediately after
WWII), when public education was not just another empty promise,
and the trend in life was toward a better tomorrow for everyone,
at that time "control" was in retreat, and progress was the theme
of every hour.
Now what we have is control of every idiotic facet of everyday
existence, rules for every waking act, every thought that is not
controlled is seen as the enemy of the state (the corporatocracy).
Our entire way of life has been stolen and shall never return to
the lazy and hopeful days of living and loving, of joy and promise,
with the possibility for doing real and meaningful things with one's
own life, not to mention being able to envision a better world for
more and more people, whose lives were so far below the levels
we enjoyed.
Instead of that promise, instead of that possibility, what we
have now is the outright worship of Mistrust, of Fear, and of
Paranoia, along with obscene profits for those who have purchased
all the politicians, and who control every facet of this once nearly
free society.
If American life were a sporting event, today's game would be one in
which all the officials and the referees had all been pre-purchased by
what would obviously be the winning team.
Now companies "police" their own activities, deciding for themselves
when they've gone too far, or stolen too much.
The original point behind government providing a watchdog over
industry, was to keep the playing fields equal, between players and
owners.
Now the games continue but only the owners win anything, the
players are degenerating from just being slaves to becoming
everyday targets for anyone who hates their owners:
Hence the Iraq's of this world will focus the herd's mind on what
it really means to be an American today (a blood-stained thug,
whether in a uniform, or with a contract and a pen) - we are
attempting to steal all that's still sacred, in what has become a
profane and truth-less world.
Like Humpty-Dumpty we will never be able to put the world back
together again, not here anyhow.
Too much has been lost in too many generations that have passed
through this new agenda of "me first, me only."
In that process all guidelines have been destroyed, and there is
no longer any "out-of-bounds" everything is now fair game: and
now the world KNOWS this for what it actually means, which is
a rather subdued type of anarchy that favors only the very rich.
Whether nationally or internationally, what we have consecrated
by our actions is the outlaw behavior of the corporatocracy, world
wide.
It is therefore not surprising that Bush would want to claim the
mantle of 'Dictator for All the Known World,' even though he is
nothing but the token puppet in the front row.
He can do this because the bought and paid for US Congress will
not really give him any trouble (if they did they'd all be charged
with aiding and abetting all the crimes committed so far) and the
courts have already made clear their preferences: so the only
thing left in opposition is the besieged and downtrodden public.
Those same people who must pay for all this criminality in dollars
and in blood.
However, the public listens to the mouthpiece that has become
the outlaws wholly owned whore.
Completely owned and operated by those same interests that
are behind the corruption, what they tell the world has little to
do with actual truth, or the facts of anything that happens in
the world today.
If the public is to understand anything at all, then they will have to
rely on their own gut instincts and what they can find on the net to
corroborate or dispute what they suspect.
This is why the games we play today are so fraught with corruption,
deception and duplicity, on nearly every side, but humanity has
survived before when threatened by empirical demands, so perhaps
there may yet be an opportunity to reverse this insanity that has
become a cancer on the world.
If not then we'll all be returned to the Dark Ages once again,
but this time on a planet that's been nearly destroyed by our
lapsed custodianship, because we are obviously unfit to manage
for ourselves, never mind for others, in the real life of this world.
http://rense.com/general62/corporatocracy.htm
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because
it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini
By Jim Kirwan
Rense.com
June 9, 2013
This is indeed a fascinatingly and disgusting story, premised on
absolute control over all people.
Back when people were actually almost "free" (immediately after
WWII), when public education was not just another empty promise,
and the trend in life was toward a better tomorrow for everyone,
at that time "control" was in retreat, and progress was the theme
of every hour.
Now what we have is control of every idiotic facet of everyday
existence, rules for every waking act, every thought that is not
controlled is seen as the enemy of the state (the corporatocracy).
Our entire way of life has been stolen and shall never return to
the lazy and hopeful days of living and loving, of joy and promise,
with the possibility for doing real and meaningful things with one's
own life, not to mention being able to envision a better world for
more and more people, whose lives were so far below the levels
we enjoyed.
Instead of that promise, instead of that possibility, what we
have now is the outright worship of Mistrust, of Fear, and of
Paranoia, along with obscene profits for those who have purchased
all the politicians, and who control every facet of this once nearly
free society.
If American life were a sporting event, today's game would be one in
which all the officials and the referees had all been pre-purchased by
what would obviously be the winning team.
Now companies "police" their own activities, deciding for themselves
when they've gone too far, or stolen too much.
The original point behind government providing a watchdog over
industry, was to keep the playing fields equal, between players and
owners.
Now the games continue but only the owners win anything, the
players are degenerating from just being slaves to becoming
everyday targets for anyone who hates their owners:
Hence the Iraq's of this world will focus the herd's mind on what
it really means to be an American today (a blood-stained thug,
whether in a uniform, or with a contract and a pen) - we are
attempting to steal all that's still sacred, in what has become a
profane and truth-less world.
Like Humpty-Dumpty we will never be able to put the world back
together again, not here anyhow.
Too much has been lost in too many generations that have passed
through this new agenda of "me first, me only."
In that process all guidelines have been destroyed, and there is
no longer any "out-of-bounds" everything is now fair game: and
now the world KNOWS this for what it actually means, which is
a rather subdued type of anarchy that favors only the very rich.
Whether nationally or internationally, what we have consecrated
by our actions is the outlaw behavior of the corporatocracy, world
wide.
It is therefore not surprising that Bush would want to claim the
mantle of 'Dictator for All the Known World,' even though he is
nothing but the token puppet in the front row.
He can do this because the bought and paid for US Congress will
not really give him any trouble (if they did they'd all be charged
with aiding and abetting all the crimes committed so far) and the
courts have already made clear their preferences: so the only
thing left in opposition is the besieged and downtrodden public.
Those same people who must pay for all this criminality in dollars
and in blood.
However, the public listens to the mouthpiece that has become
the outlaws wholly owned whore.
Completely owned and operated by those same interests that
are behind the corruption, what they tell the world has little to
do with actual truth, or the facts of anything that happens in
the world today.
If the public is to understand anything at all, then they will have to
rely on their own gut instincts and what they can find on the net to
corroborate or dispute what they suspect.
This is why the games we play today are so fraught with corruption,
deception and duplicity, on nearly every side, but humanity has
survived before when threatened by empirical demands, so perhaps
there may yet be an opportunity to reverse this insanity that has
become a cancer on the world.
If not then we'll all be returned to the Dark Ages once again,
but this time on a planet that's been nearly destroyed by our
lapsed custodianship, because we are obviously unfit to manage
for ourselves, never mind for others, in the real life of this world.
http://rense.com/general62/corporatocracy.htm
Thursday, June 6, 2013
The 25 Rules of Disinformation
The 25 Rules of Disinformation
By H. Michael Sweeney
Vigilant Citizen.com
June 06, 2013
These 25 rules are everywhere in media, from political debates, to
television shows, to comments on a blog.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it, especially if you are a
public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen,
and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.
Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which
can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise
sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare
you!” gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.
Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of
venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other
derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well.
This method works especially well with a silent press, because
the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such
“arguable rumors”.
If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this
fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in
fact.
4. Use a straw man.
Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument
which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and
the opponent to look bad.
Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your
interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or
select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.
Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears
to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually
avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.
This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy,
though other methods qualify as variants of that approach.
Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-
wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”,
“radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual
deviates”, and so forth.
This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the
same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run.
In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the
opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be
fielded, or simply ignore any answer.
This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor
environments where a steady stream of new identities can be
called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning,
simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing
issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that
would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the
opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias.
This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and
present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae”
to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t
so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why
or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb.
No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid
discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make
any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have
logic, or support a conclusion.
Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news.
A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of
high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or
were already easily dealt with.
Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man
issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency
plans.
Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered,
can usually them be associated with the original charge and
dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current
issues, so much the better where the opponent is or was involved
with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.
Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road”
and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight,
was made, but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow
it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just
isn’t so.”
Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later.
Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming
clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more
serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.
Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime
and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as
too complex to solve.
This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose
interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with
an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual
material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions.
Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand
completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with
contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses.
If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address
the issue.
17. Change the subject.
Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find
a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial
comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable
topic.
This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with
you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order
to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.
If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and
draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them
look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material
somewhat less coherent.
Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance,
but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can
further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they
are to criticism”.
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs.
This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule.
Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in
public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that
is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be
at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely
destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon).
In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you
to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid
sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that
statements made by government or other authorities have any
meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence.
Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and
manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful
tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution.
This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies
for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from
the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered
investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize
all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened,
the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when
properly handled.
For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure
a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is
sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators.
Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find
the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when
seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered
officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth.
Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or
influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific,
investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes
favorably.
In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so
authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions.
If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive
issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable
events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as
such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics.
If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents
from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to
address issues is removed entirely.
This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or
destruction of their character by release of blackmail information,
or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish.
If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and
you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the
kitchen.
This list is taken from Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth:
The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney.
http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-25-rules-of-
disinformation
By H. Michael Sweeney
Vigilant Citizen.com
June 06, 2013
These 25 rules are everywhere in media, from political debates, to
television shows, to comments on a blog.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it, especially if you are a
public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen,
and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.
Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which
can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise
sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare
you!” gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.
Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of
venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other
derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well.
This method works especially well with a silent press, because
the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such
“arguable rumors”.
If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this
fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in
fact.
4. Use a straw man.
Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument
which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and
the opponent to look bad.
Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your
interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or
select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.
Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears
to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually
avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.
This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy,
though other methods qualify as variants of that approach.
Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-
wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”,
“radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual
deviates”, and so forth.
This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the
same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run.
In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the
opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be
fielded, or simply ignore any answer.
This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor
environments where a steady stream of new identities can be
called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning,
simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing
issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that
would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the
opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias.
This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and
present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae”
to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t
so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why
or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb.
No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid
discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make
any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have
logic, or support a conclusion.
Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news.
A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of
high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or
were already easily dealt with.
Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man
issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency
plans.
Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered,
can usually them be associated with the original charge and
dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current
issues, so much the better where the opponent is or was involved
with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.
Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road”
and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight,
was made, but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow
it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just
isn’t so.”
Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later.
Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming
clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more
serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.
Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime
and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as
too complex to solve.
This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose
interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with
an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual
material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions.
Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand
completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.
This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with
contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses.
If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address
the issue.
17. Change the subject.
Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find
a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial
comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable
topic.
This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with
you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order
to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.
If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and
draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them
look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material
somewhat less coherent.
Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance,
but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can
further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they
are to criticism”.
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs.
This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule.
Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in
public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that
is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be
at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely
destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon).
In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you
to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid
sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that
statements made by government or other authorities have any
meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence.
Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and
manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful
tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution.
This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies
for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from
the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered
investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize
all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened,
the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when
properly handled.
For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure
a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is
sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators.
Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find
the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when
seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered
officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth.
Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or
influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific,
investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes
favorably.
In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so
authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions.
If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive
issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable
events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as
such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics.
If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents
from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to
address issues is removed entirely.
This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or
destruction of their character by release of blackmail information,
or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish.
If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and
you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the
kitchen.
This list is taken from Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth:
The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney.
http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-25-rules-of-
disinformation
Sunday, June 2, 2013
Dear America
Dear America
By The Rest of the World
Afghan Info War.com
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Dear America,
Your government is corrupt.
Your bankers are holding you as collateral.
Your military is being used to terrorize and occupy small,
helpless countries.
Their resistance is not "terrorism."
Your media sells you propaganda and lies.
Your water is fluoridated.
You're distracted by television.
Your wars are not about freedom.
Your wars are about greed, resources, control, and ownership
of central banks.
You have more in common with us than you have with your
billionaire politicians.
We want peace.
We want to live happily with our families.
The rest of us see these things.
Why can't you?
You have the power to change things.
Please, wake up.
Sincerely and lovingly,
The Rest of the World
http://www.afghaninfowar.com
By The Rest of the World
Afghan Info War.com
Sunday, June 02, 2013
Dear America,
Your government is corrupt.
Your bankers are holding you as collateral.
Your military is being used to terrorize and occupy small,
helpless countries.
Their resistance is not "terrorism."
Your media sells you propaganda and lies.
Your water is fluoridated.
You're distracted by television.
Your wars are not about freedom.
Your wars are about greed, resources, control, and ownership
of central banks.
You have more in common with us than you have with your
billionaire politicians.
We want peace.
We want to live happily with our families.
The rest of us see these things.
Why can't you?
You have the power to change things.
Please, wake up.
Sincerely and lovingly,
The Rest of the World
http://www.afghaninfowar.com
Friday, May 31, 2013
The Social Costs of Capitalism
The Social Costs of Capitalism
By Paul Craig Roberts
CounterPunch.org
Friday, May 31, 2013
When I was a graduate student in economics, the social cost
of capitalism was a big issue in economic theory.
Since those decades ago, the social costs of capitalism have
exploded, but the issue seems no longer to trouble the economics
profession.
Social costs are costs of production that are not born by the
producer or included in the price of the product.
There are many classic examples: the pollution of air, water,
and land from mining, fracking, oil drilling and pipeline spills,
chemical fertilizer farming, GMOs, pesticides, radioactivity
released from nuclear accidents, and the the pollution of food
by antibiotics and artificial hormones.
Some economists believe that these traditional social costs
can be dealt with by well defined property rights.
Others think that benevolent government will control social
costs in the interests of society.
Today there are new social costs brought by globalism.
For developed countries, these are unemployment, lost consumer
income, tax base, and GDP growth, and rising trade and current
account deficits from the offshoring of manufacturing and tradeable
professional service jobs.
The trade and current account deficits can result in a falling
exchange value of the currency and rising inflation from import
prices.
For underdeveloped countries, the costs are the loss of
self-sufficiency and the transformation of agriculture into
mono-cultures to feed the needs of international corporations.
Economists are oblivious to this new epidemic of social costs,
because they mistakenly think that globalism is free trade and
that free trade is always beneficial.
Economists are also unaware of the social costs of deregulation.
The ongoing financial crisis which requires massive public subsidies
to “banks too big to fail” is a social cost resulting from government
accommodating Wall Street pressure to deregulate the financial
system by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, by removing the position
limits on speculators, by preventing the CFTC from regulating
derivatives, and by turning the Anti-Trust Act into dead-letter law
and permitting massive economic concentrations.
The social costs of successful corporate lobbying is enormous.
But economists who believe that markets are self-regulating imagine
that an enormous gain in efficiency has occurred, not massive social
costs.
In order to keep the deregulated financial system afloat, the
Federal Reserve has monetized trillions of dollars of debt over
the last several years.
Real interest rates have been driven into negative territory.
Retirees are unable to earn any interest income on their savings
and have to draw down their capital in order to cover their living
expenses.
The liquidity injected into financial markets by the Federal Reserve’s
policy of quantitative easing has produced huge bond and stock
market bubbles.
When they pop, more American wealth will be wiped out and more
jobs will be lost.
Consider just one example of the social costs of jobs off shoring.
When US corporations produce abroad the goods and services that
they market to Americans, the goods and services that flow into the
US arrive as imports.
Thus, the trade deficit rises dollar for dollar.
The trade deficit means that the US has imported more than it has
earned in foreign currencies by exporting. For most countries this
would be a problem, but not for the US.
The US dollar is the world reserve currency, which means that it is
the means of international payment and that foreign central banks
hold US dollars as reserves to secure the values of their own
currencies.
With the passage of time, this advantage becomes a disadvantage,
because foreigners use the dollars gained from their trade surpluses
to buy up American income producing assets.
They buy US Treasury bonds and US corporate bonds, and the
interest income leaves the country.
They purchase US companies, and the profits, dividends and
capital gains leave the country.
They lease Chicago’s parking meters and American toll roads,
and the revenues flow abroad.
The enormous outflow of income streams creates a large current
account deficit for the US, which means that foreigners have even
more surplus dollars with which to buy up more US assets.
In other words, a chronic trade deficit is a way to redirect a
country’s revenues and profits into overseas hands.
The ownership of a country changes from its own citizens to
foreigners.
According to Reuters, in 1971 foreign companies owned 1.3%
of all corporate US assets.
By 2008 foreigners owned 14.2 percent of all US industries, including
21.5% of mining, 25% of manufacturing, 30.2% of wholesale trade,
12% of information industries, 12% of real estate, 15% of finance and
insurance, 25% of professional, scientific, and technical services, 11%
of entertainment and recreation and 11% of accommodation and food
services, according to a report from Economy In Crisis.
Numerous famous American brand names now are companies owned
by foreigners.
Budweiser belongs to a Dutch company.
Alka Seltzer belongs to a German company.
Firestone belongs to a Japanese company.
The magazines Car and Driver and Woman’s Day are owned by a
French company.
Gerber baby food and Purina dog food belong to Swiss companies.
Hellman’s Mayonnaise and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream belong to UK
companies.
Many thousands of former US companies have moved into foreign
control as a result of the US trade deficit, which is swollen by the
off shored production of US corporations.
The policy of chasing lowest labor cost abroad, that is, of pursuing
absolute advantage, the antithesis of comparative advantage which
is the basis of free trade, is the redirection of US profits, capital
gains, rents, interest, parking meter and toll road fees into foreign
hands.
Thus, there is a high social cost from corporate executives pursuing
short-term profits in order to maximize their performance bonuses.
The profits from off shored production are not indications of
economic efficiency and social welfare.
Most likely, the social costs to the US of off shored production are
larger than the profits gained, making jobs off shoring a net loss
to the US economy.
There is little doubt that the social costs of GMOs exceed the
profits of Monsanto.
But don’t expect mainstream economists to pay any attention.
They are still waxing eloquently about the advantages of Globalism’s
gift of the New Economy of high unemployment and low wages,
financial crisis and dollar erosion.
Paul Craig Roberts is a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury
and Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book is
The Failure of Laissez-Faire Capitalism.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/31/the-social-costs-of-
capitalism
By Paul Craig Roberts
CounterPunch.org
Friday, May 31, 2013
When I was a graduate student in economics, the social cost
of capitalism was a big issue in economic theory.
Since those decades ago, the social costs of capitalism have
exploded, but the issue seems no longer to trouble the economics
profession.
Social costs are costs of production that are not born by the
producer or included in the price of the product.
There are many classic examples: the pollution of air, water,
and land from mining, fracking, oil drilling and pipeline spills,
chemical fertilizer farming, GMOs, pesticides, radioactivity
released from nuclear accidents, and the the pollution of food
by antibiotics and artificial hormones.
Some economists believe that these traditional social costs
can be dealt with by well defined property rights.
Others think that benevolent government will control social
costs in the interests of society.
Today there are new social costs brought by globalism.
For developed countries, these are unemployment, lost consumer
income, tax base, and GDP growth, and rising trade and current
account deficits from the offshoring of manufacturing and tradeable
professional service jobs.
The trade and current account deficits can result in a falling
exchange value of the currency and rising inflation from import
prices.
For underdeveloped countries, the costs are the loss of
self-sufficiency and the transformation of agriculture into
mono-cultures to feed the needs of international corporations.
Economists are oblivious to this new epidemic of social costs,
because they mistakenly think that globalism is free trade and
that free trade is always beneficial.
Economists are also unaware of the social costs of deregulation.
The ongoing financial crisis which requires massive public subsidies
to “banks too big to fail” is a social cost resulting from government
accommodating Wall Street pressure to deregulate the financial
system by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, by removing the position
limits on speculators, by preventing the CFTC from regulating
derivatives, and by turning the Anti-Trust Act into dead-letter law
and permitting massive economic concentrations.
The social costs of successful corporate lobbying is enormous.
But economists who believe that markets are self-regulating imagine
that an enormous gain in efficiency has occurred, not massive social
costs.
In order to keep the deregulated financial system afloat, the
Federal Reserve has monetized trillions of dollars of debt over
the last several years.
Real interest rates have been driven into negative territory.
Retirees are unable to earn any interest income on their savings
and have to draw down their capital in order to cover their living
expenses.
The liquidity injected into financial markets by the Federal Reserve’s
policy of quantitative easing has produced huge bond and stock
market bubbles.
When they pop, more American wealth will be wiped out and more
jobs will be lost.
Consider just one example of the social costs of jobs off shoring.
When US corporations produce abroad the goods and services that
they market to Americans, the goods and services that flow into the
US arrive as imports.
Thus, the trade deficit rises dollar for dollar.
The trade deficit means that the US has imported more than it has
earned in foreign currencies by exporting. For most countries this
would be a problem, but not for the US.
The US dollar is the world reserve currency, which means that it is
the means of international payment and that foreign central banks
hold US dollars as reserves to secure the values of their own
currencies.
With the passage of time, this advantage becomes a disadvantage,
because foreigners use the dollars gained from their trade surpluses
to buy up American income producing assets.
They buy US Treasury bonds and US corporate bonds, and the
interest income leaves the country.
They purchase US companies, and the profits, dividends and
capital gains leave the country.
They lease Chicago’s parking meters and American toll roads,
and the revenues flow abroad.
The enormous outflow of income streams creates a large current
account deficit for the US, which means that foreigners have even
more surplus dollars with which to buy up more US assets.
In other words, a chronic trade deficit is a way to redirect a
country’s revenues and profits into overseas hands.
The ownership of a country changes from its own citizens to
foreigners.
According to Reuters, in 1971 foreign companies owned 1.3%
of all corporate US assets.
By 2008 foreigners owned 14.2 percent of all US industries, including
21.5% of mining, 25% of manufacturing, 30.2% of wholesale trade,
12% of information industries, 12% of real estate, 15% of finance and
insurance, 25% of professional, scientific, and technical services, 11%
of entertainment and recreation and 11% of accommodation and food
services, according to a report from Economy In Crisis.
Numerous famous American brand names now are companies owned
by foreigners.
Budweiser belongs to a Dutch company.
Alka Seltzer belongs to a German company.
Firestone belongs to a Japanese company.
The magazines Car and Driver and Woman’s Day are owned by a
French company.
Gerber baby food and Purina dog food belong to Swiss companies.
Hellman’s Mayonnaise and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream belong to UK
companies.
Many thousands of former US companies have moved into foreign
control as a result of the US trade deficit, which is swollen by the
off shored production of US corporations.
The policy of chasing lowest labor cost abroad, that is, of pursuing
absolute advantage, the antithesis of comparative advantage which
is the basis of free trade, is the redirection of US profits, capital
gains, rents, interest, parking meter and toll road fees into foreign
hands.
Thus, there is a high social cost from corporate executives pursuing
short-term profits in order to maximize their performance bonuses.
The profits from off shored production are not indications of
economic efficiency and social welfare.
Most likely, the social costs to the US of off shored production are
larger than the profits gained, making jobs off shoring a net loss
to the US economy.
There is little doubt that the social costs of GMOs exceed the
profits of Monsanto.
But don’t expect mainstream economists to pay any attention.
They are still waxing eloquently about the advantages of Globalism’s
gift of the New Economy of high unemployment and low wages,
financial crisis and dollar erosion.
Paul Craig Roberts is a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury
and Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book is
The Failure of Laissez-Faire Capitalism.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/31/the-social-costs-of-
capitalism
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
And Here We Are
And Here We Are
By David Glenn Cox
The Leftist Review
May 29, 2013
And so here we are, living in an environment Huxley or Orwell could
forecast, but could never foretaste.
It is the enormity of it and the stealthiness of it, which gets next to
you.
Shoving money through the slots as the man with gun and uniform
watches you from the corner of the grocery store on a Friday night.
It requires the suspension of belief and the acceptance of an
un-reality, as Barack Obama names a former cable industry lobbyist
to head the Federal Communications Commission and the Republicans
create a false flag issue out of Benghazi.
It is the one-party state creating a smoke screen, diverting attention
from the real issues of domestic policy.
Divide and conquer, always keep’em guessing, always leave’em
laughing.
Jack Lew is a former hedge fund manager for Citigroup and manager
of its alternative investments unit, with oversight over Citigroup’s
subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and Hong Kong and he’s
the new Treasury Secretary.
Sally Jewell worked for Mobil as an engineer in the oil fields of
Oklahoma from 1978 to 1981. From there she moved on to banking
at Security Pacific and West One Bank, before moving on to the
Titanic disaster of modern banking, the ill-fated S.S. Washington
Mutual.
Jewell escaped the disaster by jumping ship as the iceberg
approached, moving on to become the CEO of REI sporting
goods.
She’s the Secretary of the Interior now and her qualifications for the
job are based solely on chairing several green committees, versus a
twenty-plus-year career in oil, finance and banking.
Who would a thunk it; an oil engineer with background in banking and
the Republicans said what?
The Secretary of Agriculture, former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, was
named Governor of the year by the lobbying group, Biotechnology
Industry Organization.
This after Tom founded and chaired the Governor’s Biotechnology
Partnership.
Let’s forget Vilsack is in the pocket of agribusiness; he’s what
we’d call on the street, a bag man.
Vilsack approved a 15 cent tax, per live Christmas tree. The tax
had been a result of three years of lobbying by the Christmas tree industry.
What was the purpose of the tax? Was it to aid the unfortunate or
to buy meals for the hungry during the holidays?
No, the purpose of the tax was to fund an advertising program by
the Department of Agriculture, promoting the sale of live Christmas
trees.
It is classic Corporate Fascism; industry prompts government policy
to tax the populace, for the needs of the corporation.
Barack Obama never had the sympathies of the right, but he did
have the good will of the middle and of the Left.
Very quickly, Barack Obama disappointed, as the diehards wanted
to take a wait-and-see attitude.
Hope and Change degenerated into disappointment and
disillusionment; not just with Obama, but with the system
in its entirety.
The two-party system resembles two dogs fighting over one piece
of meat; growling and scrapping in a winner-take-all grudge match.
As cunning as they are, they are humans after all, only appearing to
act as dogs and with their cunning, it is altogether a better piece of
performance art, if they only pretend to fight and split the meal backstage.
There is an unspoken belief that Capitalism and Democracy are
somehow chained to the public good — they aren’t.
Capitalism is about making money and maximizing profit; public
good isn’t a pillar of Capitalism and public good isn’t a pillar of
Democracy either.
If they were, I wouldn’t be writing this and you, wouldn’t be
reading it.
Democracy is the alleged public control of government, but first,
you must take control of the party which selects the candidates.
Supporting the American two-party system is like pretending to be half blind, believing one side corrupt and morally bankrupt, while the other side has just a few bad apples, disgracing the nobles.
Forced to defend a Larry Craig or an Anthony Weiner?
Just imagine you have a six figure income and an easy job.
You can take care of your family, provide them with great
government-paid healthcare benefits and, if you don’t screw
up, it could lead to even more money in the future.
That’s the key, don’t screw up.
So would you put pictures of your dick on the internet; would
that be considered screwing up?
Would you consider soliciting other men for sex in the airport
men’s room; would that be considered screwing up?
It has nothing to do with sexual preferences; it’s about being
at work.
About the personal responsibilities of separating work and play
with only an implied understanding of doing the public good.
This list of offenders rolls on forever, as incumbents keep getting
re-elected, no matter how angry the public gets.
There is no office of public good in the United States.
No room where honorable individuals debate the merits versus
the cost.
In Norway, a state oil company does all the drilling with safety as
their priority.
The world’s oil companies bid to buy the oil and the revenue goes
into a national trust fund. Politicians can spend the interest from
the fund, but not the principal.
Here in America, Barack Obama wants to cut lease rates for oil
companies drilling on Federal lands.
The President claims this policy will encourage oil development,
without saying exactly why that idea is superior to a competing
idea — investing in clean renewable energy, like Germany has.
The new Secretary of Defense is a lifelong Republican, who
co-founded Vanguard Cellular, making himself a multimillionaire.
He was also the president of the investment banking firm, The
McCarthy Group, and was the CEO of American Information Systems,
later re-named Election Systems & Software.
After serving twelve years in the Senate, Chuck Hagel served time in
right-wing think-tanks with the likes of Brent Scowcroft and Richard
Lugar.
Hagel serves on the board of Directors of Chevron Corporation.
Think about that, the Secretary of Defense is an oil company
executive with investment banking experience.
The Secretary of the Interior is an oil company engineer and
career investment banker.
The Secretary of Agriculture was named Governor of the year
by a Monsanto funded lobbying group.
Benghazi! Benghazi! Scandal! Murder! Treason! Outrage! Democrats!
Republicans!
All right before your eyes; presto–chango!
The corporate police state is in full flower, as the media obsesses
ad-nausea for endless hours of infotainment; the actual culprits
walk between the raindrops.
As America’s only native criminal class robs the national treasury, like
looters at the Wal-Mart and dare call it Democracy — and so, here we
are.
In regard to propaganda the early advocates of universal literacy and
a free press envisaged only two possibilities: the propaganda might
be true, or the propaganda might be false. They did not foresee what
in fact has happened, above all in our Western capitalist democracies
– the development of a vast mass communications industry,
concerned in the main neither with the true nor the false, but with
the unreal, the more or less totally irrelevant. In a word, they failed
to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.
~ Aldous Huxley
David Glenn Cox is a senior staff writer for TLR and an award
winning author and musician; he is the author of the novel,
“The Servants of Pilate”.
http://www.leftistreview.com/2013/05/21/and-here-we-are/
davidcox/
By David Glenn Cox
The Leftist Review
May 29, 2013
And so here we are, living in an environment Huxley or Orwell could
forecast, but could never foretaste.
It is the enormity of it and the stealthiness of it, which gets next to
you.
Shoving money through the slots as the man with gun and uniform
watches you from the corner of the grocery store on a Friday night.
It requires the suspension of belief and the acceptance of an
un-reality, as Barack Obama names a former cable industry lobbyist
to head the Federal Communications Commission and the Republicans
create a false flag issue out of Benghazi.
It is the one-party state creating a smoke screen, diverting attention
from the real issues of domestic policy.
Divide and conquer, always keep’em guessing, always leave’em
laughing.
Jack Lew is a former hedge fund manager for Citigroup and manager
of its alternative investments unit, with oversight over Citigroup’s
subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and Hong Kong and he’s
the new Treasury Secretary.
Sally Jewell worked for Mobil as an engineer in the oil fields of
Oklahoma from 1978 to 1981. From there she moved on to banking
at Security Pacific and West One Bank, before moving on to the
Titanic disaster of modern banking, the ill-fated S.S. Washington
Mutual.
Jewell escaped the disaster by jumping ship as the iceberg
approached, moving on to become the CEO of REI sporting
goods.
She’s the Secretary of the Interior now and her qualifications for the
job are based solely on chairing several green committees, versus a
twenty-plus-year career in oil, finance and banking.
Who would a thunk it; an oil engineer with background in banking and
the Republicans said what?
The Secretary of Agriculture, former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, was
named Governor of the year by the lobbying group, Biotechnology
Industry Organization.
This after Tom founded and chaired the Governor’s Biotechnology
Partnership.
Let’s forget Vilsack is in the pocket of agribusiness; he’s what
we’d call on the street, a bag man.
Vilsack approved a 15 cent tax, per live Christmas tree. The tax
had been a result of three years of lobbying by the Christmas tree industry.
What was the purpose of the tax? Was it to aid the unfortunate or
to buy meals for the hungry during the holidays?
No, the purpose of the tax was to fund an advertising program by
the Department of Agriculture, promoting the sale of live Christmas
trees.
It is classic Corporate Fascism; industry prompts government policy
to tax the populace, for the needs of the corporation.
Barack Obama never had the sympathies of the right, but he did
have the good will of the middle and of the Left.
Very quickly, Barack Obama disappointed, as the diehards wanted
to take a wait-and-see attitude.
Hope and Change degenerated into disappointment and
disillusionment; not just with Obama, but with the system
in its entirety.
The two-party system resembles two dogs fighting over one piece
of meat; growling and scrapping in a winner-take-all grudge match.
As cunning as they are, they are humans after all, only appearing to
act as dogs and with their cunning, it is altogether a better piece of
performance art, if they only pretend to fight and split the meal backstage.
There is an unspoken belief that Capitalism and Democracy are
somehow chained to the public good — they aren’t.
Capitalism is about making money and maximizing profit; public
good isn’t a pillar of Capitalism and public good isn’t a pillar of
Democracy either.
If they were, I wouldn’t be writing this and you, wouldn’t be
reading it.
Democracy is the alleged public control of government, but first,
you must take control of the party which selects the candidates.
Supporting the American two-party system is like pretending to be half blind, believing one side corrupt and morally bankrupt, while the other side has just a few bad apples, disgracing the nobles.
Forced to defend a Larry Craig or an Anthony Weiner?
Just imagine you have a six figure income and an easy job.
You can take care of your family, provide them with great
government-paid healthcare benefits and, if you don’t screw
up, it could lead to even more money in the future.
That’s the key, don’t screw up.
So would you put pictures of your dick on the internet; would
that be considered screwing up?
Would you consider soliciting other men for sex in the airport
men’s room; would that be considered screwing up?
It has nothing to do with sexual preferences; it’s about being
at work.
About the personal responsibilities of separating work and play
with only an implied understanding of doing the public good.
This list of offenders rolls on forever, as incumbents keep getting
re-elected, no matter how angry the public gets.
There is no office of public good in the United States.
No room where honorable individuals debate the merits versus
the cost.
In Norway, a state oil company does all the drilling with safety as
their priority.
The world’s oil companies bid to buy the oil and the revenue goes
into a national trust fund. Politicians can spend the interest from
the fund, but not the principal.
Here in America, Barack Obama wants to cut lease rates for oil
companies drilling on Federal lands.
The President claims this policy will encourage oil development,
without saying exactly why that idea is superior to a competing
idea — investing in clean renewable energy, like Germany has.
The new Secretary of Defense is a lifelong Republican, who
co-founded Vanguard Cellular, making himself a multimillionaire.
He was also the president of the investment banking firm, The
McCarthy Group, and was the CEO of American Information Systems,
later re-named Election Systems & Software.
After serving twelve years in the Senate, Chuck Hagel served time in
right-wing think-tanks with the likes of Brent Scowcroft and Richard
Lugar.
Hagel serves on the board of Directors of Chevron Corporation.
Think about that, the Secretary of Defense is an oil company
executive with investment banking experience.
The Secretary of the Interior is an oil company engineer and
career investment banker.
The Secretary of Agriculture was named Governor of the year
by a Monsanto funded lobbying group.
Benghazi! Benghazi! Scandal! Murder! Treason! Outrage! Democrats!
Republicans!
All right before your eyes; presto–chango!
The corporate police state is in full flower, as the media obsesses
ad-nausea for endless hours of infotainment; the actual culprits
walk between the raindrops.
As America’s only native criminal class robs the national treasury, like
looters at the Wal-Mart and dare call it Democracy — and so, here we
are.
In regard to propaganda the early advocates of universal literacy and
a free press envisaged only two possibilities: the propaganda might
be true, or the propaganda might be false. They did not foresee what
in fact has happened, above all in our Western capitalist democracies
– the development of a vast mass communications industry,
concerned in the main neither with the true nor the false, but with
the unreal, the more or less totally irrelevant. In a word, they failed
to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.
~ Aldous Huxley
David Glenn Cox is a senior staff writer for TLR and an award
winning author and musician; he is the author of the novel,
“The Servants of Pilate”.
http://www.leftistreview.com/2013/05/21/and-here-we-are/
davidcox/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
