It is interesting that what you have outlined, where virtually all aspects of our society are controlled by a relatively small group of sociopaths (including all news and entertainment), basically defines what many now call The Blob. It is too big, too all encompassing and too out of control to even be limited to MICIMATT. As you say, it now includes all aspects of our modern capitalist/militarist system. So of course it is going to be difficult for the powerless people enmeshed in The Blob's sphere of influence to have any effect on what The Blob does, or does not do. The problem boils down to a simple question, how does the public have any way whatsoever of changing the system that they have been born into? Then add on top of this the fact that The Blob divides people based on their team preferences (Red vs. Blue), you have a recipe for total gridlock in any pushback. Until the Red and Blue Team voters realize they are being played, and join forces, things will only get worse.
When You ask “How does the public have any way whatsoever of changing the system that they have been born into?”, John, You ask what’s called in the parlance “a bottom line, bullet-hits-the-bone” question.
The first step ~ and problem ~ in bringing the “Reds” and “Blues” together to do anything ~ let alone change that System ~ is, as You point out, getting them to agree that they Both ARE in fact being played, precisely How they are being played in the same ways but with different playthings, and exactly Who and What is doing that playing.
And the next step ~ in the unlikely occurrence that the first step actually happens ~ is for them to agree on exactly How that System needs to be changed, and, more importantly, what New System will take its place after the Change. And that is probably exactly when the Reds and Blues will stop talking and working together.
America does not have a "capitalist/militarist system." It has a corporatist/militarist system; more accurately termed a Fascist system.
Corporatism is not Capitalism.
It is simply a not-too-subtle variant of 20th century Fascism in which there is private ownership of property and the factors of economic production, distribution, and consumption with virtually total government control of those factors.
The only difference between Corporatism and Communism/Socialism, etc is that private ownership. In either case, it is The State that controls the economy.
I agree that the US and its vassals have a neo-fascist quality, but they have taken it a step beyond old-fashioned fascism. It is a much more modern melding of state, capital, corporations, entertainment, education, academia, police, spy, think tank, news and other information systems. I think we need a new name for it, because fascism is not really sufficient. In fact, until you actually pinpoint who is really in charge, it is difficult to explain just exactly what The Blob has morphed into. Who exactly is in charge? It isn't the president of the US. Some would argue that a conglomeration of the military, spy agencies and the extremely wealthy have formed a cabal that actually pulls the strings.
Hi John: For a new name, how about what some folks have termed "Fascism with 21st century American characteristics," and others "Fascism with an American Face"? Or "Participatory Fascism," "Democratic Fascism," "Friendly Fascism," and, ultimately, even just plain old "Good Fascism"?
My vote is NeoFascism [to go along with its kith and kin, NeoLiberalism and NeoConservatism}.
And like i said: “America does not have a ‘capitalist/militarist system.’ It has a corporatist/militarist system; more accurately termed a Fascist system….It is simply a not-too-subtle variant of 20th century Fascism… .”
It has taken far, far more than merely “a step” beyond that 20th century breed, John. As You point out, it is using everything that advances in the natural, social, and psychological sciences and hard and soft technology have made possible to nourish, maintain, sustain, and grow that mega-melded and -melding Blob.
And as far as “Who exactly is in charge?” i would argue that it is whoever is “in charge” of America’s Autocratic/Oligarchic/ Plutocratic Deep State, consisting of the military-industrial-congressional complex, the banking-finance-printing press web, the techno-infotainment-education matrix, the petro-food-pharmo and guns-n-drugs cartels, the medical-legal-lnsurance cabals, and the surveillance-secrecy-security panopticon.
Because whoever is in charge of that owns and operates, and commands and controls the politicians and bureaucrats at center stage in America's reality-tv extravaganza; and America's $ 1 = 1 Vote system of government and governance that gets, puts, and keeps them there.
A good reminder that those of us in favor of peace need to set aside differences in order to more effectively work for that peace. As an anarcho-capitalist I want a peace dividend to be retuned to those who created the wealth in the first place. A Democratic Socialist will certainly have different ideas. However, this discussion is theoretical only until we actually generate said peace dividend.
Let us set aside these differences, which do not matter presently, and work toward diminishing the power of the empire. I am certainly willing to work with anyone, of any ideological stripe who genuinely wishes to end US imperial violence. Peace now!
That "peace dividend" will not be secured until a critical mass of people come to a consensus as to what to do with it once it is realized. Otherwise, why would anybody commit to making a peace dividend happen if there was no plan for how it would be used once it became available?
I certainly agree with all you say here, Bill, but we aren't going to get anywhere changing the MICIMATT situation until we can get a third party. I believe that a majority of Americans are thoroughly fed up with both the Republican party and the Democratic party. I know I am, and I have no intention of voting for either Biden or Trump or De Santis or whoever. Neither party is going to reduce the budget we offer the Pentagon. Did you see the article by Nader and the chart? We spend 10 times more on military than Russia, three times more than China and more than virtually all the rest of the nations put together.
We have a debt ceiling argument going on but I note that neither party is suggesting lowering the amount the military gets and we have no politicians willing to fight for that, that I can see - certainly no one in the current Democratic administration, and of course no one in the GOP either. I wonder if you could suggest a method to put together another party? One that would appeal to the majority of people in this country that want to improve our infrastructure, our education, our health etc. and have no interest in pursuing the insane wars our two parties are offering
Our government is so out of touch with the people they constitutionally are suppose to represent. How? They and the think tanks surrounding our capitol would rather spend trillions defending our myopic definition of democracy around a world then defending democracy here in the USA. We the people want universal health care. We want freedom of expression (but not behind a gun, thank you). We want good paying jobs, good schools,universities and trade centers to educate our citizens, our children at a cost affordable to all. We want to end our endless wars. We want a tax system that takes from the wealthy and distributes that excessive wealth to needed social programs. What the hell happened to our government where spending trillions on killing, maiming and starving and policing/sanctioning citizens/nations around the world takes president over our rights here in America. Her our politicians at state and federal levels are supresses democracy.
How?
by legislating:
-voting suppression rights -woman rights
- LGBT rights
-education rights (banning of books) denying the unwealthy the right to higher efucation.
-freedom of expression rights
- lastly denying the individual the right for his/her vote to have equal weight in presidential elections.
Get mad citizens. Get involved. We need to get back to basic rights of liberty, egality, fraternity or else present right leaning policies will bring us all down to a Hitlerian fascist state.
We already have a quasi-"Hitlerian fascist state." All that is lacking to make it no longer quasi is another 9/11. Or another Pandemic. Or another Great [Greater?] Depression.
And when those who benefited most from the first 9/11, Pandemic or Great Depression determine that they have even more to gain from a second one, who and/or what is going to stop them?
And the only alternative that is being offered is "left leaning policies" that will pave the way for a Stalinist communist/social democratist, democratic socialist state.
Well, if I assume vis a vis your comment you are left-leaning over right. So you'd lean (I'm guessing) more toward state/societal rights over individual rights. This draws you(us) toward the "communist/social democratic, democratic social state. If we assume within either state some form of capitalistic commerce will exist I would like to hash it out with you and others what that state would look like and how to get there (from here). *peace*
Hi Dennis: First of all, i’m curious. What about my comment led You to believe that i am a “left-leaning over right”? And what exactly is a “left-leaning over right”?
In any event, Your guess that i would lean to state/social rights over individual rights is wrong. i believe that so-called “state/social rights” are a fiction invented by those who wish to use the legal power, administrative authority, and, particularly, the spending ability of government at all levels ~ particularly at the Federal level ~ to advance their particular agendas.
And the start point for any consideration of what a government SHOULD “look” like is to answer a simple question: “What is the Purpose and Function of Government?”
Why do Humans have Government? What is its Function and Purpose? What is it supposed to do and How is it supposed to do it?
My belief is very simple, based on the following start point: That there is a difference between Human Needs and Human Wants on the one hand, and Human Rights and Human Responsibilities, on the other.
It is, then. the proper function and purpose of Government to protect and defend the inalienable Human Rights of Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and The Pursuit of Happiness of the Citizens of its jurisdiction against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
It is NOT the proper function and purpose of Government to Meet those Citizens’ Human Needs and/or Satisfy the Wants of Health, Prosperity, Security, The Pursuit of Wants, and, above all else, Peace.
And the reason that is so is because the only way Government CAN Meet the Needs and Satisfy the Wants of some of its Citizens, is to violate the Rights and cancel the Responsibilities of the rest of the Citizens.
Hope that clears up whatever confusion You had, Dennis, about my thoughts and feelings about all this. And then, of course, there is Your second question: “HOW [do we] get there from here?” But first, let’s agree on where “there” is, shall we? Have a Great day. ~ jeff
Sorry, I misread your commentary. In your reply, I found you more direct in explaining your position. You are an YP Reyired Airman. I'm assuming that's how you pursued your philosophy of: "to protect and defend the inalienable Human Rights of Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and The Pursuit of Happiness of the Citizens of its jurisdiction against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Well, 1st let me thank you for your service.
It must have been hard to spend your life in service defending a government that pursues many of the things you adamantly dislike about our current social/capitalistic/forever-at-war nation/system.
Tell me; how do you deal on a daily bases with jextoposioning of your dedication your life of service to a government you find so repulsive to your philosophy.
Cheers
PS Governments, I think, kind of evolve. That evolution is formed by the folks that reside in it. Our aristocratic forefathers who formed our nation via the writing of the Constitution were, IMHO, were biased toward maintaining this privilege of nobility? of privledge?. What bugs the hell out of me is the fact it was the common man that gave his service in achieving our I dependence with their blood and guts yet our Founding fathers gave them so few basic rights over the rights for themselves (and their class). But I digress.
Since that conception of government -way back then to now- many amendments have been installed thru an evolutionary process where we the people not we the privileged or slowly achieving more rights. This evolution, until recently, has many inadequacies but has moved the needle more toward equality toward all its citizens. Recently our government has been de-evolving thru recent SCOTUS acts, voting rights, wemon rights, other nations rights, etc etc.
That's it for now but enjoyed our conversation to date.
Hi Dennis: First of all, i have no idea what a ”YP Re[t]ired Airman” is; other than the fact that i am not one. i’m a retired US Army Master Sergeant with 28 years service, including 22 on active duty, including two years in Vietnam in the 60s and two years in the pre-OPERATION DESERT STORM [ODS] Middle East in the 80s.
At the time i was in the Army, my attitude about America and its government in the last three decades of the 20th century was completely different than it is now. So it wasn’t hard being in the service at all.
That began to change for me shortly after ODS was launched when i learned of the meeting between Saddam Hussein and America’s Ambassador to Iraq ~ April Glaspie ~ in which she told him that his border dispute and other problems with Kuwait were HIS problem and not America’s. And a week later, Iraq invaded and overran Kuwait, and Bush the Elder launched ODS. [ https://adst.org/2016/02/a-bum-rap-for-april-glaspie-saddam-and-the-start-of-the-iraq-war/ ]
And what really kicked in the change in my attitude about this country and its government was the revelation in the fall of 1992 that the Congressional Testimony about the “Incubator Babies of Kuwait” that ultimately sold the American People on ODS and “liberating Kuwait from Saddam” was complete and total BULLSHIT.
It was at that point that i began a serious and extended study of the history of America and its dealings with the rest of the world, beginning with The Spanish-American War and the so-called “Sinking of The Maine” in Havana Harbor, long since exposed as more complete and total BULLSHIT. And of course, everybody knew that that “Incident” in the Tonkin Gulf back in August 1964 that paved the way for what the Vietnamese People term “The American War” was also complete and total BULLSHIT.
i retired in 1998 when my Wife was diagnosed with the breast cancer that would kill her 10 years later. And then 9/11 happened and ~ by the morning of 9/12 ~ i had absolutely no doubt whatsoever that what this government and its media were telling and selling the American People and the World about what happened on 9/11 was the absolute Ultimate in complete and total BULLSHIT.
And i saw the link between the BULLSHIT that was perpetrated back in 1990 regarding Kuwait and the BULLSHIT that was being perpetrated on 9/11. The biggest thing ODS accomplished was to enable America to establish a full-time combat ready presence in the Middle East, something it had been trying to figure out how to do since the end of World War II, if not World War I.
And in doing that in the nation of Islam’s Holiest Sites, it thus set the stage for Osama bin Laden and Da Boyz [who worked for us during our Holy Crusade against the USSR in Afghanistan back when Bozo was on the throne] and, ultimately, 9/11; thus ultimately enabling America to launch its “Forever War,” which has recently entered its next phase as “Cold War II” in Ukraine and soon in East Asia.
In any event, You asked: “Tell me; how do you deal on a daily bases with jextoposioning of your dedication your life of service to a government you find so repulsive to your philosophy.”
First of all, i don’t “deal” with it because there is nothing to “deal with.” As i just explained: My ideas, beliefs, and attitudes about America, its government, and its relations with the rest of the world are completely different today. And what i thought, felt, and believed back then before ODS and 9/11 is totally and completely irrelevant.
To clarify: "YP Retired Airman" is the writer/creator of the site, i.e. me. I think Dennis thought it somehow referred to you, Jeff, or perhaps to us collectively.
I'm very sorry to hear about what happened to your wife. Just devastating. Cancer sucks; I lost my mom to it when I was 16.
That's hard to do when there are so many guns on those streets in the hands of people just looking for an excuse to be able to use them. Starting with those folks in the business of law enforcement.
In any system of government, a police force will be required to safeguard that system. How they do so is the question to be resolved. "Shot 1st ask questions later" exemplified by many of our citizens and security system and our government would have no place in a system I would aspire to create.
You comment that the MICC has won the struggle for societal dominance, Bill. In the sense that the military gets the biggest, unquestioned share of discretionary spending, that's true. I'd submit, though, that corporations, en masse, totally control society, and military-oriented concerns are "only" a part of that bloc.
Your comment set me to wondering---and I truly don't know the answer here, as my historical studies have mostly focused on Europe---has the U.S. always been so military minded? Of course, during the Civil War (not necessarily the Revolution), both World Wars, and possibly Vietnam, the military was a major societal focus. Except for Vietnam, there was a quite natural us-vs.-them mindset, whoever "them" was. U.S citizens at those times looked to the military as literal protectors, and so valued the institution immensely.
But what about at other times? Say, the 1820s through 1850s? Were there lots of military parades? Was a career in the service held up as an absolute, patriotic good (Indian Wars and skirmishes with Mexico aside)? Or the 1920s and '30s?
Where I'm going with this is that it seems to me that most Western countries, including the U.S.,
have always had a martial bent. "Playing soldier" was ubiquitous, I think, and the military has always held civilians in thrall---think July 4th parades.
The difference now is that technology has developed over the past one hundred years. Now, that martial spirit has been weaponized, so to speak, by interested parties (read: Pentagon and profiteers), to become even more pervasive. And in the process, those parties have gotten a lock on government coffers. In sum, my not-well-educated guess is that it's a difference in degree, not kind. Thoughts?
The U.S. didn't have a large "standing," i.e. permanent, military until World War II and after. Even after WWII, demobilization was quick, only to be (partially) reversed by the Cold War and of course Korea and Vietnam.
In the 1920s and '30s, for example, the US Army was small, almost inconsequential compared to the armies of Nazi Germany, France, and the USSR. The US Navy was fairly large but nowhere near as "global" as today's military. So we have had periods in our past when the military was fairly small and also not held in especially strong repute. Indeed, you were better paid if you joined the CCC in the 1930s than if you enlisted in the Army.
The celebration of all-things-military is by design and began during the Reagan administration. It hit a new peak after 9/11 as it became almost mandatory not only "to support our troops" but to salute them as so many heroes.
There was a time when America proudly rejected the militarism and warfare of European countries as a sign of their barbarism versus our enlightenment. Now we are the ones who've embraced weaponry and wars. While this propensity for armed violence has always been a part of America, the celebration of the military -- its exaltation, if you will -- is something new in our lifetimes.
I appreciate the analysis, Bill. From my [admittedly not extensive] reading, by the end of WWII, we were already gearing up for Korea. I read an anecdote (possibly by L. Fletcher Prouty) about an officer on some Pacific Beach in late 1945, asking what was going to happen to a vast pile of materiel, and the officer was told it was going to be shipped directly to a Korean port. The implication being that it had already been determined that was where the next action would take place.
I think the watershed moment you cite with Reagan was when militarism became openly promoted. My bet is that the foundation was laid during WWII, when certain powers-that-were watched the quick U.S. transition to a wartime footing, and began to drool over the possibilities.
There was a huge power vacuum after WWII, Denise. Europe was in ruins. The USSR was exhausted. Japan and China: Japan was wasted; China in a revolution.
Our emergent MIC was not going to waste that opportunity!
I think the U.S. accounted for 40% of the world's economy in 1945. Unbelievable. We had a monopoly on the atomic bomb (well, until 1949). So of course it was our time to dominate. Hubris led us to Korea, Vietnam, and other wars of choice. Meanwhile, a powerful MIC was happy to oblige the vision of American global dominance. And of course we inflated the Soviet threat as a way of ensuring bog money would always flow to the Pentagon.
America today needs a Marshall Plan but in reverse. A Marshall Plan for America. Heck, maybe the Europeans can kick in and show us how to have national health care, better education, almost free universities, and a small military presence. How's that for irony?
I really like your Marshall Plan suggestion! No question that we need common sense solutions in those areas!
Meanwhile, I'm being bashed on another thread for criticizing Dems. I've just been told that either I'm all-in for Dems, or I don't care that fascism will take over, that I have no clue how bad it will be. Given the incidence of such single-mindedness, would the U.S. even accept that Marshall Plan???
I agree. Got the admonition the other day, "You'd better hold your nose and vote for Biden, or we'll have a country like we've never seen before." My prediction is that that will happen no matter who I vote for. "And if you vote third-party, you might as well vote for Trump." Uh....no.
It is interesting that what you have outlined, where virtually all aspects of our society are controlled by a relatively small group of sociopaths (including all news and entertainment), basically defines what many now call The Blob. It is too big, too all encompassing and too out of control to even be limited to MICIMATT. As you say, it now includes all aspects of our modern capitalist/militarist system. So of course it is going to be difficult for the powerless people enmeshed in The Blob's sphere of influence to have any effect on what The Blob does, or does not do. The problem boils down to a simple question, how does the public have any way whatsoever of changing the system that they have been born into? Then add on top of this the fact that The Blob divides people based on their team preferences (Red vs. Blue), you have a recipe for total gridlock in any pushback. Until the Red and Blue Team voters realize they are being played, and join forces, things will only get worse.
When You ask “How does the public have any way whatsoever of changing the system that they have been born into?”, John, You ask what’s called in the parlance “a bottom line, bullet-hits-the-bone” question.
The first step ~ and problem ~ in bringing the “Reds” and “Blues” together to do anything ~ let alone change that System ~ is, as You point out, getting them to agree that they Both ARE in fact being played, precisely How they are being played in the same ways but with different playthings, and exactly Who and What is doing that playing.
And the next step ~ in the unlikely occurrence that the first step actually happens ~ is for them to agree on exactly How that System needs to be changed, and, more importantly, what New System will take its place after the Change. And that is probably exactly when the Reds and Blues will stop talking and working together.
America does not have a "capitalist/militarist system." It has a corporatist/militarist system; more accurately termed a Fascist system.
Corporatism is not Capitalism.
It is simply a not-too-subtle variant of 20th century Fascism in which there is private ownership of property and the factors of economic production, distribution, and consumption with virtually total government control of those factors.
The only difference between Corporatism and Communism/Socialism, etc is that private ownership. In either case, it is The State that controls the economy.
I agree that the US and its vassals have a neo-fascist quality, but they have taken it a step beyond old-fashioned fascism. It is a much more modern melding of state, capital, corporations, entertainment, education, academia, police, spy, think tank, news and other information systems. I think we need a new name for it, because fascism is not really sufficient. In fact, until you actually pinpoint who is really in charge, it is difficult to explain just exactly what The Blob has morphed into. Who exactly is in charge? It isn't the president of the US. Some would argue that a conglomeration of the military, spy agencies and the extremely wealthy have formed a cabal that actually pulls the strings.
Hi John: For a new name, how about what some folks have termed "Fascism with 21st century American characteristics," and others "Fascism with an American Face"? Or "Participatory Fascism," "Democratic Fascism," "Friendly Fascism," and, ultimately, even just plain old "Good Fascism"?
My vote is NeoFascism [to go along with its kith and kin, NeoLiberalism and NeoConservatism}.
And like i said: “America does not have a ‘capitalist/militarist system.’ It has a corporatist/militarist system; more accurately termed a Fascist system….It is simply a not-too-subtle variant of 20th century Fascism… .”
It has taken far, far more than merely “a step” beyond that 20th century breed, John. As You point out, it is using everything that advances in the natural, social, and psychological sciences and hard and soft technology have made possible to nourish, maintain, sustain, and grow that mega-melded and -melding Blob.
And as far as “Who exactly is in charge?” i would argue that it is whoever is “in charge” of America’s Autocratic/Oligarchic/ Plutocratic Deep State, consisting of the military-industrial-congressional complex, the banking-finance-printing press web, the techno-infotainment-education matrix, the petro-food-pharmo and guns-n-drugs cartels, the medical-legal-lnsurance cabals, and the surveillance-secrecy-security panopticon.
Because whoever is in charge of that owns and operates, and commands and controls the politicians and bureaucrats at center stage in America's reality-tv extravaganza; and America's $ 1 = 1 Vote system of government and governance that gets, puts, and keeps them there.
A good reminder that those of us in favor of peace need to set aside differences in order to more effectively work for that peace. As an anarcho-capitalist I want a peace dividend to be retuned to those who created the wealth in the first place. A Democratic Socialist will certainly have different ideas. However, this discussion is theoretical only until we actually generate said peace dividend.
Let us set aside these differences, which do not matter presently, and work toward diminishing the power of the empire. I am certainly willing to work with anyone, of any ideological stripe who genuinely wishes to end US imperial violence. Peace now!
Yes, let's unite to secure the peace dividend. Then we can argue what to do with it! :-)
That "peace dividend" will not be secured until a critical mass of people come to a consensus as to what to do with it once it is realized. Otherwise, why would anybody commit to making a peace dividend happen if there was no plan for how it would be used once it became available?
I certainly agree with all you say here, Bill, but we aren't going to get anywhere changing the MICIMATT situation until we can get a third party. I believe that a majority of Americans are thoroughly fed up with both the Republican party and the Democratic party. I know I am, and I have no intention of voting for either Biden or Trump or De Santis or whoever. Neither party is going to reduce the budget we offer the Pentagon. Did you see the article by Nader and the chart? We spend 10 times more on military than Russia, three times more than China and more than virtually all the rest of the nations put together.
We have a debt ceiling argument going on but I note that neither party is suggesting lowering the amount the military gets and we have no politicians willing to fight for that, that I can see - certainly no one in the current Democratic administration, and of course no one in the GOP either. I wonder if you could suggest a method to put together another party? One that would appeal to the majority of people in this country that want to improve our infrastructure, our education, our health etc. and have no interest in pursuing the insane wars our two parties are offering
Both parties have rigged the system to make a strong third party almost impossible to form.
Perhaps someone like RFK Jr can run as an independent and offer true choice. I hope so.
RFK Jr has taken himself out of the running to accomplish anything meaningful by publicly proclaiming his belief that there is ‘overwhelming evidence’ that the CIA was involved in JFK's assassination: https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/3993563-robert-kennedy-jr-sees-overwhelming-evidence-cia-involved-in-jfk-assassination/
Our government is so out of touch with the people they constitutionally are suppose to represent. How? They and the think tanks surrounding our capitol would rather spend trillions defending our myopic definition of democracy around a world then defending democracy here in the USA. We the people want universal health care. We want freedom of expression (but not behind a gun, thank you). We want good paying jobs, good schools,universities and trade centers to educate our citizens, our children at a cost affordable to all. We want to end our endless wars. We want a tax system that takes from the wealthy and distributes that excessive wealth to needed social programs. What the hell happened to our government where spending trillions on killing, maiming and starving and policing/sanctioning citizens/nations around the world takes president over our rights here in America. Her our politicians at state and federal levels are supresses democracy.
How?
by legislating:
-voting suppression rights -woman rights
- LGBT rights
-education rights (banning of books) denying the unwealthy the right to higher efucation.
-freedom of expression rights
- lastly denying the individual the right for his/her vote to have equal weight in presidential elections.
Get mad citizens. Get involved. We need to get back to basic rights of liberty, egality, fraternity or else present right leaning policies will bring us all down to a Hitlerian fascist state.
*Peace*
*Not endless wars*
We already have a quasi-"Hitlerian fascist state." All that is lacking to make it no longer quasi is another 9/11. Or another Pandemic. Or another Great [Greater?] Depression.
And when those who benefited most from the first 9/11, Pandemic or Great Depression determine that they have even more to gain from a second one, who and/or what is going to stop them?
And the only alternative that is being offered is "left leaning policies" that will pave the way for a Stalinist communist/social democratist, democratic socialist state.
Well, if I assume vis a vis your comment you are left-leaning over right. So you'd lean (I'm guessing) more toward state/societal rights over individual rights. This draws you(us) toward the "communist/social democratic, democratic social state. If we assume within either state some form of capitalistic commerce will exist I would like to hash it out with you and others what that state would look like and how to get there (from here). *peace*
Hi Dennis: First of all, i’m curious. What about my comment led You to believe that i am a “left-leaning over right”? And what exactly is a “left-leaning over right”?
In any event, Your guess that i would lean to state/social rights over individual rights is wrong. i believe that so-called “state/social rights” are a fiction invented by those who wish to use the legal power, administrative authority, and, particularly, the spending ability of government at all levels ~ particularly at the Federal level ~ to advance their particular agendas.
And the start point for any consideration of what a government SHOULD “look” like is to answer a simple question: “What is the Purpose and Function of Government?”
Why do Humans have Government? What is its Function and Purpose? What is it supposed to do and How is it supposed to do it?
My belief is very simple, based on the following start point: That there is a difference between Human Needs and Human Wants on the one hand, and Human Rights and Human Responsibilities, on the other.
It is, then. the proper function and purpose of Government to protect and defend the inalienable Human Rights of Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and The Pursuit of Happiness of the Citizens of its jurisdiction against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
It is NOT the proper function and purpose of Government to Meet those Citizens’ Human Needs and/or Satisfy the Wants of Health, Prosperity, Security, The Pursuit of Wants, and, above all else, Peace.
And the reason that is so is because the only way Government CAN Meet the Needs and Satisfy the Wants of some of its Citizens, is to violate the Rights and cancel the Responsibilities of the rest of the Citizens.
Hope that clears up whatever confusion You had, Dennis, about my thoughts and feelings about all this. And then, of course, there is Your second question: “HOW [do we] get there from here?” But first, let’s agree on where “there” is, shall we? Have a Great day. ~ jeff
Sorry, I misread your commentary. In your reply, I found you more direct in explaining your position. You are an YP Reyired Airman. I'm assuming that's how you pursued your philosophy of: "to protect and defend the inalienable Human Rights of Life, Liberty, Property, Privacy, and The Pursuit of Happiness of the Citizens of its jurisdiction against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Well, 1st let me thank you for your service.
It must have been hard to spend your life in service defending a government that pursues many of the things you adamantly dislike about our current social/capitalistic/forever-at-war nation/system.
Tell me; how do you deal on a daily bases with jextoposioning of your dedication your life of service to a government you find so repulsive to your philosophy.
Cheers
PS Governments, I think, kind of evolve. That evolution is formed by the folks that reside in it. Our aristocratic forefathers who formed our nation via the writing of the Constitution were, IMHO, were biased toward maintaining this privilege of nobility? of privledge?. What bugs the hell out of me is the fact it was the common man that gave his service in achieving our I dependence with their blood and guts yet our Founding fathers gave them so few basic rights over the rights for themselves (and their class). But I digress.
Since that conception of government -way back then to now- many amendments have been installed thru an evolutionary process where we the people not we the privileged or slowly achieving more rights. This evolution, until recently, has many inadequacies but has moved the needle more toward equality toward all its citizens. Recently our government has been de-evolving thru recent SCOTUS acts, voting rights, wemon rights, other nations rights, etc etc.
That's it for now but enjoyed our conversation to date.
Cheers
Hi Dennis: First of all, i have no idea what a ”YP Re[t]ired Airman” is; other than the fact that i am not one. i’m a retired US Army Master Sergeant with 28 years service, including 22 on active duty, including two years in Vietnam in the 60s and two years in the pre-OPERATION DESERT STORM [ODS] Middle East in the 80s.
At the time i was in the Army, my attitude about America and its government in the last three decades of the 20th century was completely different than it is now. So it wasn’t hard being in the service at all.
That began to change for me shortly after ODS was launched when i learned of the meeting between Saddam Hussein and America’s Ambassador to Iraq ~ April Glaspie ~ in which she told him that his border dispute and other problems with Kuwait were HIS problem and not America’s. And a week later, Iraq invaded and overran Kuwait, and Bush the Elder launched ODS. [ https://adst.org/2016/02/a-bum-rap-for-april-glaspie-saddam-and-the-start-of-the-iraq-war/ ]
And what really kicked in the change in my attitude about this country and its government was the revelation in the fall of 1992 that the Congressional Testimony about the “Incubator Babies of Kuwait” that ultimately sold the American People on ODS and “liberating Kuwait from Saddam” was complete and total BULLSHIT.
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony ]
It was at that point that i began a serious and extended study of the history of America and its dealings with the rest of the world, beginning with The Spanish-American War and the so-called “Sinking of The Maine” in Havana Harbor, long since exposed as more complete and total BULLSHIT. And of course, everybody knew that that “Incident” in the Tonkin Gulf back in August 1964 that paved the way for what the Vietnamese People term “The American War” was also complete and total BULLSHIT.
i retired in 1998 when my Wife was diagnosed with the breast cancer that would kill her 10 years later. And then 9/11 happened and ~ by the morning of 9/12 ~ i had absolutely no doubt whatsoever that what this government and its media were telling and selling the American People and the World about what happened on 9/11 was the absolute Ultimate in complete and total BULLSHIT.
And i saw the link between the BULLSHIT that was perpetrated back in 1990 regarding Kuwait and the BULLSHIT that was being perpetrated on 9/11. The biggest thing ODS accomplished was to enable America to establish a full-time combat ready presence in the Middle East, something it had been trying to figure out how to do since the end of World War II, if not World War I.
And in doing that in the nation of Islam’s Holiest Sites, it thus set the stage for Osama bin Laden and Da Boyz [who worked for us during our Holy Crusade against the USSR in Afghanistan back when Bozo was on the throne] and, ultimately, 9/11; thus ultimately enabling America to launch its “Forever War,” which has recently entered its next phase as “Cold War II” in Ukraine and soon in East Asia.
In any event, You asked: “Tell me; how do you deal on a daily bases with jextoposioning of your dedication your life of service to a government you find so repulsive to your philosophy.”
First of all, i don’t “deal” with it because there is nothing to “deal with.” As i just explained: My ideas, beliefs, and attitudes about America, its government, and its relations with the rest of the world are completely different today. And what i thought, felt, and believed back then before ODS and 9/11 is totally and completely irrelevant.
Have a Great day. ~ jeff
ps: i’ll respond to Your PS in a bit.
To clarify: "YP Retired Airman" is the writer/creator of the site, i.e. me. I think Dennis thought it somehow referred to you, Jeff, or perhaps to us collectively.
I'm very sorry to hear about what happened to your wife. Just devastating. Cancer sucks; I lost my mom to it when I was 16.
We the people need to take PEACE to the streets of our communities.
That's hard to do when there are so many guns on those streets in the hands of people just looking for an excuse to be able to use them. Starting with those folks in the business of law enforcement.
In any system of government, a police force will be required to safeguard that system. How they do so is the question to be resolved. "Shot 1st ask questions later" exemplified by many of our citizens and security system and our government would have no place in a system I would aspire to create.
You comment that the MICC has won the struggle for societal dominance, Bill. In the sense that the military gets the biggest, unquestioned share of discretionary spending, that's true. I'd submit, though, that corporations, en masse, totally control society, and military-oriented concerns are "only" a part of that bloc.
Your comment set me to wondering---and I truly don't know the answer here, as my historical studies have mostly focused on Europe---has the U.S. always been so military minded? Of course, during the Civil War (not necessarily the Revolution), both World Wars, and possibly Vietnam, the military was a major societal focus. Except for Vietnam, there was a quite natural us-vs.-them mindset, whoever "them" was. U.S citizens at those times looked to the military as literal protectors, and so valued the institution immensely.
But what about at other times? Say, the 1820s through 1850s? Were there lots of military parades? Was a career in the service held up as an absolute, patriotic good (Indian Wars and skirmishes with Mexico aside)? Or the 1920s and '30s?
Where I'm going with this is that it seems to me that most Western countries, including the U.S.,
have always had a martial bent. "Playing soldier" was ubiquitous, I think, and the military has always held civilians in thrall---think July 4th parades.
The difference now is that technology has developed over the past one hundred years. Now, that martial spirit has been weaponized, so to speak, by interested parties (read: Pentagon and profiteers), to become even more pervasive. And in the process, those parties have gotten a lock on government coffers. In sum, my not-well-educated guess is that it's a difference in degree, not kind. Thoughts?
A worthy topic of discussion.
The U.S. didn't have a large "standing," i.e. permanent, military until World War II and after. Even after WWII, demobilization was quick, only to be (partially) reversed by the Cold War and of course Korea and Vietnam.
In the 1920s and '30s, for example, the US Army was small, almost inconsequential compared to the armies of Nazi Germany, France, and the USSR. The US Navy was fairly large but nowhere near as "global" as today's military. So we have had periods in our past when the military was fairly small and also not held in especially strong repute. Indeed, you were better paid if you joined the CCC in the 1930s than if you enlisted in the Army.
The celebration of all-things-military is by design and began during the Reagan administration. It hit a new peak after 9/11 as it became almost mandatory not only "to support our troops" but to salute them as so many heroes.
There was a time when America proudly rejected the militarism and warfare of European countries as a sign of their barbarism versus our enlightenment. Now we are the ones who've embraced weaponry and wars. While this propensity for armed violence has always been a part of America, the celebration of the military -- its exaltation, if you will -- is something new in our lifetimes.
I appreciate the analysis, Bill. From my [admittedly not extensive] reading, by the end of WWII, we were already gearing up for Korea. I read an anecdote (possibly by L. Fletcher Prouty) about an officer on some Pacific Beach in late 1945, asking what was going to happen to a vast pile of materiel, and the officer was told it was going to be shipped directly to a Korean port. The implication being that it had already been determined that was where the next action would take place.
I think the watershed moment you cite with Reagan was when militarism became openly promoted. My bet is that the foundation was laid during WWII, when certain powers-that-were watched the quick U.S. transition to a wartime footing, and began to drool over the possibilities.
There was a huge power vacuum after WWII, Denise. Europe was in ruins. The USSR was exhausted. Japan and China: Japan was wasted; China in a revolution.
Our emergent MIC was not going to waste that opportunity!
I think the U.S. accounted for 40% of the world's economy in 1945. Unbelievable. We had a monopoly on the atomic bomb (well, until 1949). So of course it was our time to dominate. Hubris led us to Korea, Vietnam, and other wars of choice. Meanwhile, a powerful MIC was happy to oblige the vision of American global dominance. And of course we inflated the Soviet threat as a way of ensuring bog money would always flow to the Pentagon.
America today needs a Marshall Plan but in reverse. A Marshall Plan for America. Heck, maybe the Europeans can kick in and show us how to have national health care, better education, almost free universities, and a small military presence. How's that for irony?
That's "big" money. Though if it goes to the swamp, maybe it becomes "bog" money. :-)
Hmmmm....bog money....forever preserved until its remains are unearthed in a thousand years!
I really like your Marshall Plan suggestion! No question that we need common sense solutions in those areas!
Meanwhile, I'm being bashed on another thread for criticizing Dems. I've just been told that either I'm all-in for Dems, or I don't care that fascism will take over, that I have no clue how bad it will be. Given the incidence of such single-mindedness, would the U.S. even accept that Marshall Plan???
Not surprised. The Dems have nothing to offer except "We're not Trump." So they're resorting to scare tactics.
I refuse to vote for Biden/Harris or Trump/Trump Toady.
I agree. Got the admonition the other day, "You'd better hold your nose and vote for Biden, or we'll have a country like we've never seen before." My prediction is that that will happen no matter who I vote for. "And if you vote third-party, you might as well vote for Trump." Uh....no.