What is infuriating is that we are not only ignoring but exacerbating humanity's greatest threat, namely sea level rise, desertification, conflagration and climate change, simply to enhance the profits of the merchants of death. We think we have an immigration problem now. What will we do with all the immigrants from low coastal lands (nearly 1/3 the world's population) when they are displaced from their homes by rising seas?
Sadly, we are following "leaders" who have no vision into the abyss.
YES. We need to find the strength to show those leaders they've gone too far. When a thief gets away with stealing, they don't stop until someone else stops them. It's on us to show the government that they've gone too far.
I only take offense to your mention of communism. Communism is communal ownership of property. It has become a slur, but it is so confusing a slur, because Democrats were never anything remotely close to Communists. And throughout my entire life our intelligence services have devoted themselves to smearing Communism, turning it into something it never was.
If you think the rich in America today have too much wealth and the common people have too little, your agreeing with Communism.
But I definitely agree with your point on celebrating our differences and ethnicities. Someone wrote recently about losing our fables and our myths and tales and those were essential to understanding the world. Sorry I can't remember who it was, they were more eloquent than I am here.
The US was never really going to allow a peace dividend to emerge. The overarching ideology of Global Manifest Destiny and the final emergence of a unipolar world after the Soviet collapse was THE moment the imperialists were waiting for. “Peace dividend” talk was for domestic consumption, so much claptrap.
They wasted no time in moving forward with global hegemony, the first Iraq war, Serbia, expansion of NATO-all by the end of the 90s. Of course, as you pointed out, it was off to the races after 9/11. Too bad for the imperialists that all this empire has an economic cost, and that the laws of economics do not stand aside for the mighty American Empire. This empire too will fall due to imperial overstretch as surely as all the other empires have. Trouble is none of those failing empires had nukes. It may end up being a peace dividend of the kind suggested by Tacitus.
My worry is for the American people, who are purposely made poor, and that this won't change until we demand that it change. Power concedes nothing without a demand. They know. All those politicians know this is a scam. They all know. We've got to educate people. Nobody is coming to save us. No single politician or candidate will ever change this. We must demand it change. And until then they're gonna keep escalating the atrocities, if it makes them more money. We're gonna keep watching all these people die, all these CHILDREN DIE. We are the only restraint on government, that is why they spend so much money dividing us and making us dumb.
Those below grant the power upwards. We concede it.
And then we collude in oppressing ourselves if necessary in the name of that formalised concession.
Don't we? Not difficult. Not abstruse. Just simple fact.
Bunch of people: We need organisation. Okay, where to start. Need a leader. Okay got one. What can the leader do. He can have this power. When he orders this we do it.
Deal.
Or even simpler and blunter: from whence cometh the police who lock you up? From the people.
Once the people understand and then decide to take their own power into their own hands: bang! Job done.
People are ignorant and asleep today.
There is virtually no one telling them these simple truths. No one showing the way. No one.
You're right about power! It is OURS but we have to TAKE IT.
I agree with everything you wrote except the need for a single leader. Any single person can be corrupted. It's more valuable to convince our friends and families that this is not just wrong, it is unacceptable. I think what you mean by leader (maybe) is that we need some kind of structure to organize and show our power. I agree with that. But I also don't despair that we don't have it. There's a quote about history, where it proceeds slowly then in one second it all changes. That is kind of what I envision - the masses won't rise until they see others rise. But when it starts, we will fight and we will make them scared of us again.
Hello and thank you. My poor writing led you to misunderstand. It was kinda shorthand. I was outlining a scenario and sequence of thoughts/events. Perhaps this way puts it better:
Scene: A bunch of people.
clamour: 'we need organisation'
cry: 'where to start?'
cry: 'we need a leader'
later: 'ok, got one. what can he do?'
cry: 'he can have this power: when he orders things we do it'
end.
It was intended of an illustration of how things work and how the power gets delegated UP, not down. Give by us to them.
See? That make it clearer?
The point being there is NO power until we create and give it.
By acquiescing with in this case the idea of obeying we create the power to demand obedience.
And then WE give that power - which exists and because WE made it - to THEM.
So I am saying quite the opposite of '..don't despair that we don't have it' - I am saying we do have and only we have it. Only we.
It comes from us and we give it.
And so I also don't go along with 'the masses won't rise until they see others rise' because 1. I think the 'rising' is in truth when proper simply a sudden understanding in the mind and 2. 'seeing others rise' is simply not this kind of 'rising' at all: i.e. awareness, but mostly simply dumb riot.
Lastly 'make them scared of us again' is not the point at all. It is not necessary. Not desirable and not necessary.
'They' are the ones we choose. In the choosing, obviously we can unchoose. That's all we need. They have to obey. That's all we need.
But before then is what I have been trying to say: the only power they have is what we give them. We can always withdraw that power. They are then powerless. Powerless is all we want of them. We don't need or care about their fear.
To finish contemplate again what IS their power? It is the power to make us hurt ourselves.
I say again: all we have to do is to refuse to hurt each other and we've remove their power instanta.
For us to 'rise up' to not hurting each other doesn't require the firing of a single round.
Doesn't require the moving of one step.
It simply requires the understanding to rise in every person's head.
And what better time in the history of all mankind for such a thing to possibly happen?
When in ten minutes some meme, some knowledge, some fact, some idea can spread completely around the world and be known to us all.?
"Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace." Attributed to Calgacus, by Tacitus in the Agricola
The Jewish bankers are not alone among the bankers. I hate it when anyone singles out one specific group when the others are guilty of the same offense.
Do any of you remember the cartoons of Gahan Wilson in Playboy magazine decades ago? One that will always remain with me showed a solitary individual standing in a desolate area of nothing but small stumps where trees used to stand extending to the horizon. Haggard, slumped, battle scarred and holding an assault rifle, a sickly grin is on his face. The caption is "I won!"
"Constant wars and preparations for the same destroy democracy and lead to spiritual death." Very wise words, indeed. And, sad to say, this is exactly what the USA has been undergoing for the last 60+ years. It's a slow, painful, ugly process, not something that occurs overnight. But one can see the symptoms everywhere, and each year the descent into spiritual death becomes more evident. What will it take to turn this nightmare around? It seems to me there are 2 essential pre-requisites before any transformation is possible: 1) a complete and absolute rejection of the ideology of American Exceptionalism; and 2) a complete and absolute dismantling of the MICIMATT complex. These are the 2 pillars upon which the terminal disease of American militarism and war making rest. Learning to live with other human beings around the world in peace and harmony, respecting the rights of all human beings to live free from exploitation and oppression, and creating a global system which respects the distinct cultures that all contribute to the human spirit---this kind of humanity is fundamentally incompatible with American Exceptionalism and the MICIMATT complex. A choice must be made, a transformation must take place. As Rosa Luxembourg proclaimed back in 1915, "Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or descent into barbarism." Unfortunately, thus far, no one has been able to come up with a strategy to avoid the descent into the abyss.
You are right in what you write, Charlie, but the key to change is the removal of private money from election campaigns, beyond small independent donations. The Supreme Court sealed our fate with Citizens United. With Congress completely captive to lobby power (Israel's a perfect example) we the people are powerless. We must take power from those who not only hold it but control the process that could take it from them. Thus, change is impossible.
Do they even make all the bombs and bullets here in the US?
There IS an alternate framework, but our government censors it. It's called Modern Money Theory, or Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and it's simple. The money system of a federal government that prints its own money is completely different from how money works at the state, local, and individual level. *Note if you search this on Google, start with Michael Hudson. There's a lot of propaganda about MMT since the billionaires benefit from the public's ignorance.
And the key point is that the federal government creates money out of whole cloth. If you and I had a currency printing machine in our closet, then we too could be like the feds.
This whole dogma that implies the federal government's debts are the same as people's debts is HOW they get away with swindling us. "We don't have the money to do these vast social welfare programs." I'm sure everybody here responds, "But they sure have money for war. Hmm, that's weird."
You smell a rat because it is a rat. Everything you hear or read in mainstream media is promoting a false assumption- that the federal government must make money (via taxes) to spend money. That is simply bullshit, and the purpose of the doctrine is to DISCIPLINE LABOR. In 2020, when government spent billions on Covid, did they go to their checking account and transfer the money from their account to the banks, big business, and some dregs to states and the unemployed? NO. They got on the computer and typed the money into existence.
Then, when we couldn't buy toilet paper because the US has so little industry, (we hardly produce anything, our GDP is credit card late fees and mortgage interest, etc)- When toilet paper became scarce because OUR GOVERNMENT allowed industry to leave so we have no toilet paper, the price went up. But here's the kicker- when toilet paper came back in stock, did the producers lower the price? NOPE. Supply/demand pricing is only a tiny part of the story. The prices went up LARGELY because the sellers raised their prices. Period.
You smelled a rat because rats abound, and then those rats have the GALL to blame US WORKERS for high prices.
To learn more, look up Michael Hudson- he's the most prominent American scholar of MMT.
We're never going to see a peace dividend because the whole framework is a lie meant to subjugate workers. But there's hope. All we have to do is unite. All we have to do is come together and scare the government. March on DC. If you had 5 million protestors in DC shouting about this money scam, you'd be amazed how they'd suddenly change policy. Just like FDR did, to save capitalism. Government will continue to scam us until we show them we've had enough.
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
1. A disclaimer at the outset: I'm not an economist nor even academically qualified in any way to discuss economics. With that in mind, first, as i see it, a) MMT is a theory; not a fact. i.e. it's a framework of ideas about how money 'flows; through a currency-creating government; of relationships between taxing and spending, etc.
b) Though there are many fans of MMT in the social media world, it appears to me from some commentary that is a lot of oversimplification, leading to misinterpretations, as well as leaps to unfounded conclusions. One of the latter which I've frequently encountered is that, because a state can print its own currency (which, in many cases is not backed by a fungible asset like gold), "debt therefore doesn't matter". i.e. debt doesn't matter because the state can simply just issue more paper currency.
While that seems true up to a point, it is ONLY up to that point. What has largely allowed the U.S. to run such massive debt is not just because it (through the Fed) controls monetary policy AND controls the supply of currency. We must include in our considerations its relationship to the global economy, foreign trade- and foreign-owned debt.
As long as the U.S. maintains the hegemony of the U.S. dollar as the world's standard reserve currency, all is good. But this will eventually fold, just as the Empire itself will. Other nations, including obviously the BRICS bloc, have already signaled that the dollar's current standing as global reserve currency is being willfully eroded.
(As an aside, a few previous efforts to bypass the petro-dollar have led to Washington-conducted regime change operations and assassinations (e.g. Qadafi)....illustrating how dependent Empire is upon the supremacy of its coin).
With the U.S. National Debt including substantial amounts of liabilities to foreign states (and China, is, I believe, the largest holder), should the dollar lose perceived value against other currencies (because it is no longer required to do business), those other debt-holders will be encouraged to dump their treasury notes / bonds. depressing their value, and making it difficult for the U.S. to maintain any sense of balance in foreign trade.
This is unsustainable, of course; and I conclude that the U.S. standard of living is going to take a serious hit vis a vis the rest of the world, because of this debt. We are already seeing that R's are gunning to cut social spending. Some D's in the past have signaled their willingness to accept some concessions thereto, as well. As the D's have become the even louder War Party, of course, they're caught... they can't keep ratcheting up defense spending while pretending to care about health care, education, infrastructure, and that 'third rail' that is Social Security and related safety net provisions. Yet those who run the system know full well that they must continue to suppress any dissenters (such as Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela) and continue to flex muscle around the globe in order to keep that dollar hegemony. At the same time, the debt massively grows to fund that house of cards. Fed policies have helped keep it standing, but the greater global implications suggest it is not going to stand much longer.
Secondly, re. "5 million protestors in DC...", I don't think you'll get them going by talking about a money scam. There is indeed, a kind of scam, as suggested in the above; but it's too complicated, and when distilled to simplistic slogans, is too easily debunked.
That said, I agree that large-scale dissent in the streets is likely to be needed, and I don't exactly have the answer to what the 'battle cry' should be. And even more importantly, public, in-the-streets protests are just one facet of what will be needed. I'd suggest that if people really want to organize effectively, they have to do it strategically, and that is likely going to require people organize their resistance in the ways they still have some power. That would include such things as strategic, sustainable boycotts, divestments, labor actions (sickouts, strike, etc.), and any other non-violent actions that can be organized to "perturb" the economic interests of those currently running the show.
An excellent summary, Roger. I would only add that when the end comes (the loss of dollar control of the global economy) the collapse will be swift and irreversible. Like runs on banks, there will be little warning of it coming. Military power will have absolutely no ability to stop it.
Large scale dissent in the streets is seen as needed only when you limit your thinking of the state of reality.
Limit it to believing that only a coterie at the top could and would or can 'fix things'.
That being the case 'large scale dissent' is needed in the streets in order to frighten them or something. Isn't that right? That's what you want your 'large scale dissent' for?
But that, of course, simply reinforces their positions. Simply cements into place their power. Simply sets in stone the injustice the inequity and the marginalisation of human beings, the people, reality.
Reality.
For the reality is that everything is with the people. Power. Ability. Everything.
We do not live by the grace of the gangsters at the top. They live by our grace. We are the fools who put them there. We are the fools that gave them 'power over us'.
And that latter is even more incredible for that 'power over us' is the 'power' to order us to make war on ourselves. Is what it always is. It is always the power to order one section of us to make war on the rest.
And we stupidly blindly obey never thinking never questioning what we're doing.
It should be obvious as soon as we start hurting each other that we are obeying bad commands and it should be implicit in all of our 'conceding power', 'handing power up the chain', 'granting power' that we do it NOT in order to cause any harm to ourselves.
And we should not obey such commands.
The powerful actually would love to see us frantically, violently protesting in the streets for it reinforces their position, it avoids the question of the validity of their position.
They laugh for right there we applaud them as we protest against them: for aren't the protesters ringed about by us, the police, our own selves, the people and don't they generally obey them? Aren't they dispersed in the end by the people? Aren't some of them then caught up and prosecuted and fined and imprisoned by the people for having the temerity to be angry with the powerful?
See? Total misdirection of energies from start to finish. Misunderstanding of the nature of the problem.
We should not look to them for solutions in such cases. Find the solutions within ourselves.
Some will say that is what having an election and changing them is. But it is not. Apart from the awkwardness and slowness and vulnerability and etc. of it what that does in the end is simply seek to establish another 'power bloc' that will gave a stamp of approval to the actions we know are right.
That's very clear. Explicit most of the time. 'We need a govt that will legislate this' is an example of it.
No. If we want 'that' then we just do it. We don't need it rubber stamped by any government at all.
Decisions should be ours, not theirs. It is written in the ostensible design: government of the people BY the people. Or in the job descriptions: 'representative OF the PEOPLE'.
Actually of course we have government of the people by coteries, cabals, gangs.
And 'representatives' simply represent one or other cabal.
We need more than dissent in the streets, we need dissent at the ballot box.
63% of Americans don't like either the Democratic or Republican parties, yet we can't raise a viable third party. So, given the choice between two evils, we vote for the lesser evil in fear that the greater evil will win if we vote for a third party. What kind of logic is that?
We need to find someone with vision and sensible priorities, and rally around him/her (whoever) come election day. That's the way we take back our government. If we don't, we are doomed.
I wouldn't myself want to suggest that we ignore electoral politics altogether. Indeed, it is worth supporting truly principled, wise people with the backbone to continue to work for the people- i.e. our broad collective interests . Given the trends over the last 5 decades that I've observed, however, I believe much more energy and focus must be given to organizing along the lines of what I described, where people use their only remnant power- their collective ability to shape and 'perturb' the economy and economic interests of those who write and implement the laws.
Roger, you wrote "it is worth supporting truly principled, wise people with the backbone to continue to work for the people- i.e. our broad collective interests" and I agree. However, the principle thing needed by anyone running for high office is name recognition and in our culture that means celebrity as few follow politics. It's no accident that we've had such as Reagan and Trump, both of them media stars, or that we saw more than one Kennedy put up for the presidency, so also for the Clintons and the Bushes.
I think Cornel West exemplifies the kind of candidate you would like to see, but the first thing I run into when mentioning him to others is "never heard of him" and I doubt that later on they check him out.
I thought you were gonna say "the problem is money in politics". Name recognition is more a trick used by those with money. But it is one of many tricks.
Listen, I was all for Cornel West but I do not think the guy is serious after he hired Hillary Clinton's former advisor Peter Daou. I loved Cornel when he announced his run but he's done the opposite of what a serious candidate would do to win. I mean I don't think the greens are serious about opposing Dems, but Cornel even just disassociated from them!!!! I mean doesn't that mean he won't be on the ballot in 90% of states?
Truly, I was so excited about Cornel West. Until I heard him defend Joe Biden for an hour on Jimmy Dore. It was soul crushing.
Yes, there are some fundamental barriers to getting good/capable people elected, and you touch on one (name recognition / celebrity). Closely related, of course, is $$, which both corrupts and compromises and in any case, easily controls (in a controlled info media setting) what the electorate sees, and effectively, how they think. The electoral system itself being so completely compromised and corrupted, this is one more reason why I personally put so little faith or effort in making the needed changes electorally.
We have to stop looking for a saviour. WE are the saviour. The people have got to learn to make use of this fantastic new tool: the internet and our smartphone connectivity to it - and 'talk to ourselves' and find out all we need to know about any issue and what we all think about it. And then command that be done. And that requires no change in our organisation at all.
Even to the commanding. The mechanism is already there. Those elected reps are to be commanded: Do This. That's what they're there for.
Only it has NEVER been done.
Has it?
Think about it. We 'give up' from the world go and don't even try to elect a representative of ourselves - do we, really? Even the most avid lover of a Party knows he is electing not a representative of himself but of that Party - a small claque of vested interests somewhere he knows not of.
No. We choose one of two options generally and then let them go their own way with our fingers crossed.
ENTIRELY the wrong thing.
Rather we elect anyone - literally anyone at all, doesn't matter - and then figure out en masse what we went and then TELL THEM TO DO IT.
You either get what I mean or you don't.
Rallying around someone else is craven following and abdication of your own rights and responsibilities and complete perversion of what democracy is supposed to be about.
The problem with TELLING THEM TO DO IT is THEY DON'T LISTEN. Furthermore, THEY don't have to listen. WE don't make the rules - THEY make the rules. Yes, WE elect them to make the rules, but, in getting to make the rules, THEY also get to select the candidates, and THEY only select candidates who will follow THEIR rules. So WE only get to choose between selectively chosen candidates who follow THEIR rules and not our wishes.
The THEY I am talking about are the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties. Compared to WE, the voting public, THEY are a very small group of people, but THEY truly have our political system wired to support their patrons rather then their constituents. As a result, the only things they listen to are the desires of their patrons and the counts at the ballot boxes
As for a "savior", I argue that it is necessary to look for leader. To build an organization requires money and leadership. Once an organization is on its feet, a good manager can take over, but it takes a true leader to get it to that point. No organization in the world has ever achieved success without leadership. To win elections, you need organization (in politics we call them parties). The two primary political parties are well managed but are committed to serve their patrons whose desires are not consistent with the needs of their constituents. The other political parties are fledglings that are still attempting to fly, but lack the necessary leadership for growth.
We need to free ourselves from bondage to the Democratic and Republican parties and to do that we need to build an organization to defeat them at the ballot box. Regardless whether we attempt to rejuvenate one of the existing "other" parties or build an entirely new party, we will need money and a leader. Without the leader, it won't happen.
The point you avoid is that we do not tell them what to do. We run around with the mantra 'what's the use' and don't tell them, that's what we do.
AND it is not so important to 'tell them what to do' and have them do it in this instance, whatever it is. What is important is to demonstrate to them that this is the way it is going to be. In other words it'll take time to tame them because we've had this paradigm for a long time.
The two party system has to be broken.
It gets broken by putting the fear of the electorate into the individual politician. And we do that by:
. Zoning on on the guy and 'telling him what to do' and demanding accounts of his doings on a regular basis - monitoring constantly and let him know he'll be voted out - him, individualy, if he doesn't do what we ask.
. Following through.
And all this is managed not by building organisations with leaders which are going to end up simply as another political party with appropriate corruption and coercion but by the electorates having it dawn in their consciousness that THIS is what democracy IS: the people governing.
The people cannot govern unless the people govern.
I don't understand how you expect change to occur without expressing a need for change. I feel your comment is talking in ideas and concepts more than real suggestions at change. Sure, power has no power but that which we give it. But tell that to my husband's boss. Talk in the realm of doable action and I'll engage more.
We can use that as an example. It has been the way for centuries.
Right so here we are in some slave labour place (exaggerate your husband's problem a bit for the sake of effect) where all the slave labour is being hounded and persecuted to the extreme.
Right?
Now imagine everyone wakes this morning with the idea that they are people and they will not hurt people and they will identify anyone who tells them to hurt people as the real enemy.
So in that workplace today none of the workers get persecuted. Because none of the workers tasked with persecuting will persecute.
This non persecuting runs right up the chain with no one persecuting anyone until we get to the top monster who rants and rails but can do nothing.
Forgive me if, as I suspect, I don't fully understand your point here. I don't see how large scale, organized and peaceful public dissent, such as Rachel seemed to advocate and which I think will be a necessary part of the broader public response, reinforces the positions and power of the establishment. Nor do you explain this.
Keep in mind, I am not advocating for 'frantically, violently protesting'.... I specifically mention nonviolent protest. Such as Gandhi helped inspire and organize. And such as led to the eventual U.S. withdrawal from Viet Nam. (of which I was part.)
There are two purposes for this: one, to wake up / educate the rest of the public and give them the courage to join. Second, to embarrass & weaken that establishment, by making it clear that the leadership lacks the public support and mandate to continue policies (such as warfare, massive military spending and its resultant massive indebtedness (now est. at a bit under $100K per American citizen).
You speak of "reality", yet then say, "No. If we want 'that' then we just do it. We don't need it rubber stamped by any government at all. "
As if you, and some undefined "we" already can somehow control foreign policy, what $$ the U.S. sends and to whom, what trade agreements this nation holds with others, how the money flows between financial institutions, etc. Is there some magic wand that gives such power? Or perhaps you can illustrate what you have in mind with a successful example in history?
'Everything you hear or read in mainstream media is promoting a false assumption- that the federal government must make money (via taxes) to spend money. "
Actually, that's not quite the way it works today. Our government actually borrows money to pay for war using bonds that will have to be paid back by our children and grand children through their taxes. In the meantime, the rich, instead of paying taxes, lend the money to the government for war with the promise they will get it back with interest in the future (via our children's and grand children's taxes). It's truly a win-win for the rich and just one more way they manage to transfer wealth from the poor to the rich.
That's only part of the story. You do understand we could all have free healthcare, with no need to collect tax money to pay for it? Yeah, you're right about this, but it's not mutually exclusive with my comment. All debt denominated in dollars can be erased. Period. It's not an opinion, it's true.
Unfortunately the Palestinians at this Pt. don't want Peace --only Freedom..! Think about that. Sometimes I think the Human Race is the true fluke of the Universe, and it-- the Universe would be better off without us...! Too bad also that true Visionaries like Carl Sagan and Albert Einstein weren't immortal. My Monday musings for what its worth.
Yet I believe that if humanity suddenly, magically disappeared, eventually another species would find itself able to exert control and would use it as we do. Life itself is tenacious and each example of it struggles for domain, over continents as we do or like bacteria in a petri dish. The problem for us it to gain control over desire, evolution will not help us there, we must do it through reason that takes will to employ, of which we are capable, but that must overcome the emotion that comes naturally to us without prompting in our every waking moment.
"You're an interesting, strange Species not like any other, and you wouldn't believe how many there are--- Intelligent, but savage. Do you want to know what I find is beautiful about You? You are at your very best when things are at their worst." Starman 1984
I caught an excerpt of Scott Pelly's interview of President Biden. Biden was doing his usual expressionless mumbling until Pelly asked him if he thought the US was capable of supporting the war in Ukraine and now this potential war for the US in Israel. Biden's face came alive, a big smile broke out as he gleefully reminded Pelly that the US is the strongest power ever in the history of the world.
This is the perfect example of what runs through the minds of the powerful in DC. They are bewitched, transfixed, completely taken with what in sports is expressed by fans of winning teams by WE'RE NUMBER ONE! What follows this mindset is that all others are to bend to our will and that we can never bow to any country that questions our will. Echoing GW Bush, we are the deciders on issues far beyond our country, anywhere in the world.
"We can (or at least think we can), therefore we shall!". Morality, or any concern for Life at all, are not part of the equation for these soul-less creatures.
I couldn't believe what Biden said on his 60 minutes interview. The question was is the U. S. taking on too much with wars in the Ukraine and the Middle East. Biden's answer was that the U. S. is not only the most powerful nation on the face of the earth, it is also the most powerful that has ever existed in history. In other words the U. S. is boss, can do whatever it wants and to hell with everyone else. That attitude is truly mind boggling and scary.
If I walk into your house and establish myself in the kitchen and say it is mine and in future everyone eats what and when I say cooked how I say we have a parallel. Like this:
Half of you are delighted, maybe the mischievous kids or something. The other half are pissed.
So for the sake of the 'bigger' half or because you're not sure what the hell's going or a mixture of whatever you leave me there and eat when and when and how.
But discontent grows.
And gets to where some are always marching up and down outside the kitchen and kicking up a fuss in the living room and even out in the lawn.
And eventually you all get mightily organised and formal and get a really impressive ruckus and parade going that attracts my attention so I say 'what's doing'?
And you say 'well we don't like this and that..'
So I say 'okay then, this lot of you do this and that lot of you do that and then this that and the other will happen and it will all come right'.
And you all start in on doing these things.
Where am I now?
Esconced in my power that's where I am.
That's one attempt at an explanation. I lost confidence in it as it progressed but finished it anyway.
Here's another go:
We have a mechanism for making the government do our will. The WHOLE apparatus is nominally set up for precisely that purpose.
To march up and down is to tacitly - no, overtly - declare that mechanism to be null and void and acquiesce in the tacit agreement that they can continue doing as they please until such times as we march up and down again.
It is a reversion to the slave revolt in Rome and will inevitably end the same way.
It is the adoption of the manners, habits, rights, customs and destiny of the slave.
how about that? Any better?
One last:
How Nero laughed as he watched Rome burn, they say.
Well think about it: there you are up in your penthouse. You know you've stolen and are stealing millions and even billions. You perhaps even know that you are engaged in something filthy as so many of them are.
And you look down and in the street there are thousands milling around and shouting, screaming, waving flags and banners.
And they are hedged about by other thousands all dress in uniform with guns etc.
And you smile.
Because you know the numbers and the guns and the power is all on your side but more
You know that whichever way it goes you are watching the people fight the people, not yourself.
Just as they do in Ukraine. Just as the USA smiles to see Ukraine stab itself to death.
How about that one? Get it?
Your last para or so I think intimates that the people don't have the expertise to make learned judgements. Balderdash. All the expertise is with the people. Departments, office, laboratories, research centres, blah, blah, blah throw up the expertise and decide matters of scientific fact and so on that give rise to these expert decisions you're claiming people couldn't come up with.
People came up with them in the first place. People can and would and should continue to come up with them. The people are not the common ignorant rabble you seem to think they are: fit only to wave banners, march up and down, sing songs and get rubber bulleted. The people are everyone. The people are all.
They simply need to become conscious of themselves as an entity. You ask for examples from history. No, no, no, fails utterly to comprehend what we are on about here. Topicality. NOW! Talking about what people today, now, should be doing in the light of what today, now IS!
It is the age of emancipation of people by virtue of the internet and the ubiquitous smartphone. Each one of us connected to all the others at all times and with all the knowledge, the data, the history, the expertise, the calculating power of the world at our fingertips. NOW is when the masses can begin to BE.
Don't you see? No? Oh well. Okay. Go get your banner. Have a good march.
I reckon the USA will get peace the minute it gets a people. Because I think currently it has no people. Not effectively. It is run by an out of control cabal. The people simply don't matter.
That's the same all over the Western world.
We still think and act like slaves.
Like medieval peasants.
We expect to be lorded over.
We assume only the lords know what's going on.
We assume only the lords can make the right decisions.
We assume it is all 'above our heads', 'above our station'.
We assume too much and we assume all wrong.
There is something missing and we're all running around like headless chickens looking for it, demanding someone come up with it - but no one ever does. No one ever can. Because it is us.
What is infuriating is that we are not only ignoring but exacerbating humanity's greatest threat, namely sea level rise, desertification, conflagration and climate change, simply to enhance the profits of the merchants of death. We think we have an immigration problem now. What will we do with all the immigrants from low coastal lands (nearly 1/3 the world's population) when they are displaced from their homes by rising seas?
Sadly, we are following "leaders" who have no vision into the abyss.
YES. We need to find the strength to show those leaders they've gone too far. When a thief gets away with stealing, they don't stop until someone else stops them. It's on us to show the government that they've gone too far.
I only take offense to your mention of communism. Communism is communal ownership of property. It has become a slur, but it is so confusing a slur, because Democrats were never anything remotely close to Communists. And throughout my entire life our intelligence services have devoted themselves to smearing Communism, turning it into something it never was.
If you think the rich in America today have too much wealth and the common people have too little, your agreeing with Communism.
But I definitely agree with your point on celebrating our differences and ethnicities. Someone wrote recently about losing our fables and our myths and tales and those were essential to understanding the world. Sorry I can't remember who it was, they were more eloquent than I am here.
Please don't post anti-semitic quotes. They will be removed. Thanks.
The US was never really going to allow a peace dividend to emerge. The overarching ideology of Global Manifest Destiny and the final emergence of a unipolar world after the Soviet collapse was THE moment the imperialists were waiting for. “Peace dividend” talk was for domestic consumption, so much claptrap.
They wasted no time in moving forward with global hegemony, the first Iraq war, Serbia, expansion of NATO-all by the end of the 90s. Of course, as you pointed out, it was off to the races after 9/11. Too bad for the imperialists that all this empire has an economic cost, and that the laws of economics do not stand aside for the mighty American Empire. This empire too will fall due to imperial overstretch as surely as all the other empires have. Trouble is none of those failing empires had nukes. It may end up being a peace dividend of the kind suggested by Tacitus.
My worry is for the American people, who are purposely made poor, and that this won't change until we demand that it change. Power concedes nothing without a demand. They know. All those politicians know this is a scam. They all know. We've got to educate people. Nobody is coming to save us. No single politician or candidate will ever change this. We must demand it change. And until then they're gonna keep escalating the atrocities, if it makes them more money. We're gonna keep watching all these people die, all these CHILDREN DIE. We are the only restraint on government, that is why they spend so much money dividing us and making us dumb.
The thing is power is a myth.
Power is conceded from below you know?
Those below grant the power upwards. We concede it.
And then we collude in oppressing ourselves if necessary in the name of that formalised concession.
Don't we? Not difficult. Not abstruse. Just simple fact.
Bunch of people: We need organisation. Okay, where to start. Need a leader. Okay got one. What can the leader do. He can have this power. When he orders this we do it.
Deal.
Or even simpler and blunter: from whence cometh the police who lock you up? From the people.
Once the people understand and then decide to take their own power into their own hands: bang! Job done.
People are ignorant and asleep today.
There is virtually no one telling them these simple truths. No one showing the way. No one.
You're right about power! It is OURS but we have to TAKE IT.
I agree with everything you wrote except the need for a single leader. Any single person can be corrupted. It's more valuable to convince our friends and families that this is not just wrong, it is unacceptable. I think what you mean by leader (maybe) is that we need some kind of structure to organize and show our power. I agree with that. But I also don't despair that we don't have it. There's a quote about history, where it proceeds slowly then in one second it all changes. That is kind of what I envision - the masses won't rise until they see others rise. But when it starts, we will fight and we will make them scared of us again.
Power to the people!
Hello and thank you. My poor writing led you to misunderstand. It was kinda shorthand. I was outlining a scenario and sequence of thoughts/events. Perhaps this way puts it better:
Scene: A bunch of people.
clamour: 'we need organisation'
cry: 'where to start?'
cry: 'we need a leader'
later: 'ok, got one. what can he do?'
cry: 'he can have this power: when he orders things we do it'
end.
It was intended of an illustration of how things work and how the power gets delegated UP, not down. Give by us to them.
See? That make it clearer?
The point being there is NO power until we create and give it.
By acquiescing with in this case the idea of obeying we create the power to demand obedience.
And then WE give that power - which exists and because WE made it - to THEM.
So I am saying quite the opposite of '..don't despair that we don't have it' - I am saying we do have and only we have it. Only we.
It comes from us and we give it.
And so I also don't go along with 'the masses won't rise until they see others rise' because 1. I think the 'rising' is in truth when proper simply a sudden understanding in the mind and 2. 'seeing others rise' is simply not this kind of 'rising' at all: i.e. awareness, but mostly simply dumb riot.
Lastly 'make them scared of us again' is not the point at all. It is not necessary. Not desirable and not necessary.
'They' are the ones we choose. In the choosing, obviously we can unchoose. That's all we need. They have to obey. That's all we need.
But before then is what I have been trying to say: the only power they have is what we give them. We can always withdraw that power. They are then powerless. Powerless is all we want of them. We don't need or care about their fear.
To finish contemplate again what IS their power? It is the power to make us hurt ourselves.
I say again: all we have to do is to refuse to hurt each other and we've remove their power instanta.
For us to 'rise up' to not hurting each other doesn't require the firing of a single round.
Doesn't require the moving of one step.
It simply requires the understanding to rise in every person's head.
And what better time in the history of all mankind for such a thing to possibly happen?
When in ten minutes some meme, some knowledge, some fact, some idea can spread completely around the world and be known to us all.?
"Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace." Attributed to Calgacus, by Tacitus in the Agricola
Yes. A famous passage from Tacitus. My favorite translation ends this way:
"They make a desert and call it 'peace.'" "Solitude" doesn't quite capture the devastation of imperial dominance.
I tend to think of it as reverse alchemy. Instead of turning lead into gold we are turning gold into shit.
The Jewish bankers are not alone among the bankers. I hate it when anyone singles out one specific group when the others are guilty of the same offense.
not knowing any of it beyond what i just read from you two gentlemen I'd like to suggest 'wilderness'
Do any of you remember the cartoons of Gahan Wilson in Playboy magazine decades ago? One that will always remain with me showed a solitary individual standing in a desolate area of nothing but small stumps where trees used to stand extending to the horizon. Haggard, slumped, battle scarred and holding an assault rifle, a sickly grin is on his face. The caption is "I won!"
Terribly appropriate.
"Constant wars and preparations for the same destroy democracy and lead to spiritual death." Very wise words, indeed. And, sad to say, this is exactly what the USA has been undergoing for the last 60+ years. It's a slow, painful, ugly process, not something that occurs overnight. But one can see the symptoms everywhere, and each year the descent into spiritual death becomes more evident. What will it take to turn this nightmare around? It seems to me there are 2 essential pre-requisites before any transformation is possible: 1) a complete and absolute rejection of the ideology of American Exceptionalism; and 2) a complete and absolute dismantling of the MICIMATT complex. These are the 2 pillars upon which the terminal disease of American militarism and war making rest. Learning to live with other human beings around the world in peace and harmony, respecting the rights of all human beings to live free from exploitation and oppression, and creating a global system which respects the distinct cultures that all contribute to the human spirit---this kind of humanity is fundamentally incompatible with American Exceptionalism and the MICIMATT complex. A choice must be made, a transformation must take place. As Rosa Luxembourg proclaimed back in 1915, "Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or descent into barbarism." Unfortunately, thus far, no one has been able to come up with a strategy to avoid the descent into the abyss.
You are right in what you write, Charlie, but the key to change is the removal of private money from election campaigns, beyond small independent donations. The Supreme Court sealed our fate with Citizens United. With Congress completely captive to lobby power (Israel's a perfect example) we the people are powerless. We must take power from those who not only hold it but control the process that could take it from them. Thus, change is impossible.
Do they even make all the bombs and bullets here in the US?
There IS an alternate framework, but our government censors it. It's called Modern Money Theory, or Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and it's simple. The money system of a federal government that prints its own money is completely different from how money works at the state, local, and individual level. *Note if you search this on Google, start with Michael Hudson. There's a lot of propaganda about MMT since the billionaires benefit from the public's ignorance.
And the key point is that the federal government creates money out of whole cloth. If you and I had a currency printing machine in our closet, then we too could be like the feds.
This whole dogma that implies the federal government's debts are the same as people's debts is HOW they get away with swindling us. "We don't have the money to do these vast social welfare programs." I'm sure everybody here responds, "But they sure have money for war. Hmm, that's weird."
You smell a rat because it is a rat. Everything you hear or read in mainstream media is promoting a false assumption- that the federal government must make money (via taxes) to spend money. That is simply bullshit, and the purpose of the doctrine is to DISCIPLINE LABOR. In 2020, when government spent billions on Covid, did they go to their checking account and transfer the money from their account to the banks, big business, and some dregs to states and the unemployed? NO. They got on the computer and typed the money into existence.
Then, when we couldn't buy toilet paper because the US has so little industry, (we hardly produce anything, our GDP is credit card late fees and mortgage interest, etc)- When toilet paper became scarce because OUR GOVERNMENT allowed industry to leave so we have no toilet paper, the price went up. But here's the kicker- when toilet paper came back in stock, did the producers lower the price? NOPE. Supply/demand pricing is only a tiny part of the story. The prices went up LARGELY because the sellers raised their prices. Period.
You smelled a rat because rats abound, and then those rats have the GALL to blame US WORKERS for high prices.
To learn more, look up Michael Hudson- he's the most prominent American scholar of MMT.
We're never going to see a peace dividend because the whole framework is a lie meant to subjugate workers. But there's hope. All we have to do is unite. All we have to do is come together and scare the government. March on DC. If you had 5 million protestors in DC shouting about this money scam, you'd be amazed how they'd suddenly change policy. Just like FDR did, to save capitalism. Government will continue to scam us until we show them we've had enough.
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
A few thoughts in response:
1. A disclaimer at the outset: I'm not an economist nor even academically qualified in any way to discuss economics. With that in mind, first, as i see it, a) MMT is a theory; not a fact. i.e. it's a framework of ideas about how money 'flows; through a currency-creating government; of relationships between taxing and spending, etc.
b) Though there are many fans of MMT in the social media world, it appears to me from some commentary that is a lot of oversimplification, leading to misinterpretations, as well as leaps to unfounded conclusions. One of the latter which I've frequently encountered is that, because a state can print its own currency (which, in many cases is not backed by a fungible asset like gold), "debt therefore doesn't matter". i.e. debt doesn't matter because the state can simply just issue more paper currency.
While that seems true up to a point, it is ONLY up to that point. What has largely allowed the U.S. to run such massive debt is not just because it (through the Fed) controls monetary policy AND controls the supply of currency. We must include in our considerations its relationship to the global economy, foreign trade- and foreign-owned debt.
As long as the U.S. maintains the hegemony of the U.S. dollar as the world's standard reserve currency, all is good. But this will eventually fold, just as the Empire itself will. Other nations, including obviously the BRICS bloc, have already signaled that the dollar's current standing as global reserve currency is being willfully eroded.
(As an aside, a few previous efforts to bypass the petro-dollar have led to Washington-conducted regime change operations and assassinations (e.g. Qadafi)....illustrating how dependent Empire is upon the supremacy of its coin).
With the U.S. National Debt including substantial amounts of liabilities to foreign states (and China, is, I believe, the largest holder), should the dollar lose perceived value against other currencies (because it is no longer required to do business), those other debt-holders will be encouraged to dump their treasury notes / bonds. depressing their value, and making it difficult for the U.S. to maintain any sense of balance in foreign trade.
This is unsustainable, of course; and I conclude that the U.S. standard of living is going to take a serious hit vis a vis the rest of the world, because of this debt. We are already seeing that R's are gunning to cut social spending. Some D's in the past have signaled their willingness to accept some concessions thereto, as well. As the D's have become the even louder War Party, of course, they're caught... they can't keep ratcheting up defense spending while pretending to care about health care, education, infrastructure, and that 'third rail' that is Social Security and related safety net provisions. Yet those who run the system know full well that they must continue to suppress any dissenters (such as Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela) and continue to flex muscle around the globe in order to keep that dollar hegemony. At the same time, the debt massively grows to fund that house of cards. Fed policies have helped keep it standing, but the greater global implications suggest it is not going to stand much longer.
Secondly, re. "5 million protestors in DC...", I don't think you'll get them going by talking about a money scam. There is indeed, a kind of scam, as suggested in the above; but it's too complicated, and when distilled to simplistic slogans, is too easily debunked.
That said, I agree that large-scale dissent in the streets is likely to be needed, and I don't exactly have the answer to what the 'battle cry' should be. And even more importantly, public, in-the-streets protests are just one facet of what will be needed. I'd suggest that if people really want to organize effectively, they have to do it strategically, and that is likely going to require people organize their resistance in the ways they still have some power. That would include such things as strategic, sustainable boycotts, divestments, labor actions (sickouts, strike, etc.), and any other non-violent actions that can be organized to "perturb" the economic interests of those currently running the show.
An excellent summary, Roger. I would only add that when the end comes (the loss of dollar control of the global economy) the collapse will be swift and irreversible. Like runs on banks, there will be little warning of it coming. Military power will have absolutely no ability to stop it.
I suspect that you're right in this. First, there are signals. Then an unstoppable flood.
I think the loss of dollar control is already happening!
Large scale dissent in the streets is seen as needed only when you limit your thinking of the state of reality.
Limit it to believing that only a coterie at the top could and would or can 'fix things'.
That being the case 'large scale dissent' is needed in the streets in order to frighten them or something. Isn't that right? That's what you want your 'large scale dissent' for?
But that, of course, simply reinforces their positions. Simply cements into place their power. Simply sets in stone the injustice the inequity and the marginalisation of human beings, the people, reality.
Reality.
For the reality is that everything is with the people. Power. Ability. Everything.
We do not live by the grace of the gangsters at the top. They live by our grace. We are the fools who put them there. We are the fools that gave them 'power over us'.
And that latter is even more incredible for that 'power over us' is the 'power' to order us to make war on ourselves. Is what it always is. It is always the power to order one section of us to make war on the rest.
And we stupidly blindly obey never thinking never questioning what we're doing.
It should be obvious as soon as we start hurting each other that we are obeying bad commands and it should be implicit in all of our 'conceding power', 'handing power up the chain', 'granting power' that we do it NOT in order to cause any harm to ourselves.
And we should not obey such commands.
The powerful actually would love to see us frantically, violently protesting in the streets for it reinforces their position, it avoids the question of the validity of their position.
They laugh for right there we applaud them as we protest against them: for aren't the protesters ringed about by us, the police, our own selves, the people and don't they generally obey them? Aren't they dispersed in the end by the people? Aren't some of them then caught up and prosecuted and fined and imprisoned by the people for having the temerity to be angry with the powerful?
See? Total misdirection of energies from start to finish. Misunderstanding of the nature of the problem.
We should not look to them for solutions in such cases. Find the solutions within ourselves.
Some will say that is what having an election and changing them is. But it is not. Apart from the awkwardness and slowness and vulnerability and etc. of it what that does in the end is simply seek to establish another 'power bloc' that will gave a stamp of approval to the actions we know are right.
That's very clear. Explicit most of the time. 'We need a govt that will legislate this' is an example of it.
No. If we want 'that' then we just do it. We don't need it rubber stamped by any government at all.
Decisions should be ours, not theirs. It is written in the ostensible design: government of the people BY the people. Or in the job descriptions: 'representative OF the PEOPLE'.
Actually of course we have government of the people by coteries, cabals, gangs.
And 'representatives' simply represent one or other cabal.
It is ludicrously simple.
We need more than dissent in the streets, we need dissent at the ballot box.
63% of Americans don't like either the Democratic or Republican parties, yet we can't raise a viable third party. So, given the choice between two evils, we vote for the lesser evil in fear that the greater evil will win if we vote for a third party. What kind of logic is that?
We need to find someone with vision and sensible priorities, and rally around him/her (whoever) come election day. That's the way we take back our government. If we don't, we are doomed.
I wouldn't myself want to suggest that we ignore electoral politics altogether. Indeed, it is worth supporting truly principled, wise people with the backbone to continue to work for the people- i.e. our broad collective interests . Given the trends over the last 5 decades that I've observed, however, I believe much more energy and focus must be given to organizing along the lines of what I described, where people use their only remnant power- their collective ability to shape and 'perturb' the economy and economic interests of those who write and implement the laws.
Roger, you wrote "it is worth supporting truly principled, wise people with the backbone to continue to work for the people- i.e. our broad collective interests" and I agree. However, the principle thing needed by anyone running for high office is name recognition and in our culture that means celebrity as few follow politics. It's no accident that we've had such as Reagan and Trump, both of them media stars, or that we saw more than one Kennedy put up for the presidency, so also for the Clintons and the Bushes.
I think Cornel West exemplifies the kind of candidate you would like to see, but the first thing I run into when mentioning him to others is "never heard of him" and I doubt that later on they check him out.
I thought you were gonna say "the problem is money in politics". Name recognition is more a trick used by those with money. But it is one of many tricks.
Listen, I was all for Cornel West but I do not think the guy is serious after he hired Hillary Clinton's former advisor Peter Daou. I loved Cornel when he announced his run but he's done the opposite of what a serious candidate would do to win. I mean I don't think the greens are serious about opposing Dems, but Cornel even just disassociated from them!!!! I mean doesn't that mean he won't be on the ballot in 90% of states?
Truly, I was so excited about Cornel West. Until I heard him defend Joe Biden for an hour on Jimmy Dore. It was soul crushing.
Yes, there are some fundamental barriers to getting good/capable people elected, and you touch on one (name recognition / celebrity). Closely related, of course, is $$, which both corrupts and compromises and in any case, easily controls (in a controlled info media setting) what the electorate sees, and effectively, how they think. The electoral system itself being so completely compromised and corrupted, this is one more reason why I personally put so little faith or effort in making the needed changes electorally.
We have to stop looking for a saviour. WE are the saviour. The people have got to learn to make use of this fantastic new tool: the internet and our smartphone connectivity to it - and 'talk to ourselves' and find out all we need to know about any issue and what we all think about it. And then command that be done. And that requires no change in our organisation at all.
Even to the commanding. The mechanism is already there. Those elected reps are to be commanded: Do This. That's what they're there for.
Only it has NEVER been done.
Has it?
Think about it. We 'give up' from the world go and don't even try to elect a representative of ourselves - do we, really? Even the most avid lover of a Party knows he is electing not a representative of himself but of that Party - a small claque of vested interests somewhere he knows not of.
No. We choose one of two options generally and then let them go their own way with our fingers crossed.
ENTIRELY the wrong thing.
Rather we elect anyone - literally anyone at all, doesn't matter - and then figure out en masse what we went and then TELL THEM TO DO IT.
You either get what I mean or you don't.
Rallying around someone else is craven following and abdication of your own rights and responsibilities and complete perversion of what democracy is supposed to be about.
AMEN.
"WE HAVE TO STOP LOOKING FOR A SAVIOR."
BINGO.
The problem with TELLING THEM TO DO IT is THEY DON'T LISTEN. Furthermore, THEY don't have to listen. WE don't make the rules - THEY make the rules. Yes, WE elect them to make the rules, but, in getting to make the rules, THEY also get to select the candidates, and THEY only select candidates who will follow THEIR rules. So WE only get to choose between selectively chosen candidates who follow THEIR rules and not our wishes.
The THEY I am talking about are the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties. Compared to WE, the voting public, THEY are a very small group of people, but THEY truly have our political system wired to support their patrons rather then their constituents. As a result, the only things they listen to are the desires of their patrons and the counts at the ballot boxes
As for a "savior", I argue that it is necessary to look for leader. To build an organization requires money and leadership. Once an organization is on its feet, a good manager can take over, but it takes a true leader to get it to that point. No organization in the world has ever achieved success without leadership. To win elections, you need organization (in politics we call them parties). The two primary political parties are well managed but are committed to serve their patrons whose desires are not consistent with the needs of their constituents. The other political parties are fledglings that are still attempting to fly, but lack the necessary leadership for growth.
We need to free ourselves from bondage to the Democratic and Republican parties and to do that we need to build an organization to defeat them at the ballot box. Regardless whether we attempt to rejuvenate one of the existing "other" parties or build an entirely new party, we will need money and a leader. Without the leader, it won't happen.
No.
The point you avoid is that we do not tell them what to do. We run around with the mantra 'what's the use' and don't tell them, that's what we do.
AND it is not so important to 'tell them what to do' and have them do it in this instance, whatever it is. What is important is to demonstrate to them that this is the way it is going to be. In other words it'll take time to tame them because we've had this paradigm for a long time.
The two party system has to be broken.
It gets broken by putting the fear of the electorate into the individual politician. And we do that by:
. Zoning on on the guy and 'telling him what to do' and demanding accounts of his doings on a regular basis - monitoring constantly and let him know he'll be voted out - him, individualy, if he doesn't do what we ask.
. Following through.
And all this is managed not by building organisations with leaders which are going to end up simply as another political party with appropriate corruption and coercion but by the electorates having it dawn in their consciousness that THIS is what democracy IS: the people governing.
The people cannot govern unless the people govern.
I don't understand how you expect change to occur without expressing a need for change. I feel your comment is talking in ideas and concepts more than real suggestions at change. Sure, power has no power but that which we give it. But tell that to my husband's boss. Talk in the realm of doable action and I'll engage more.
what's your biggest problem? Your husband's boss?
We can use that as an example. It has been the way for centuries.
Right so here we are in some slave labour place (exaggerate your husband's problem a bit for the sake of effect) where all the slave labour is being hounded and persecuted to the extreme.
Right?
Now imagine everyone wakes this morning with the idea that they are people and they will not hurt people and they will identify anyone who tells them to hurt people as the real enemy.
So in that workplace today none of the workers get persecuted. Because none of the workers tasked with persecuting will persecute.
This non persecuting runs right up the chain with no one persecuting anyone until we get to the top monster who rants and rails but can do nothing.
Got it?
Forgive me if, as I suspect, I don't fully understand your point here. I don't see how large scale, organized and peaceful public dissent, such as Rachel seemed to advocate and which I think will be a necessary part of the broader public response, reinforces the positions and power of the establishment. Nor do you explain this.
Keep in mind, I am not advocating for 'frantically, violently protesting'.... I specifically mention nonviolent protest. Such as Gandhi helped inspire and organize. And such as led to the eventual U.S. withdrawal from Viet Nam. (of which I was part.)
There are two purposes for this: one, to wake up / educate the rest of the public and give them the courage to join. Second, to embarrass & weaken that establishment, by making it clear that the leadership lacks the public support and mandate to continue policies (such as warfare, massive military spending and its resultant massive indebtedness (now est. at a bit under $100K per American citizen).
You speak of "reality", yet then say, "No. If we want 'that' then we just do it. We don't need it rubber stamped by any government at all. "
As if you, and some undefined "we" already can somehow control foreign policy, what $$ the U.S. sends and to whom, what trade agreements this nation holds with others, how the money flows between financial institutions, etc. Is there some magic wand that gives such power? Or perhaps you can illustrate what you have in mind with a successful example in history?
'Everything you hear or read in mainstream media is promoting a false assumption- that the federal government must make money (via taxes) to spend money. "
Actually, that's not quite the way it works today. Our government actually borrows money to pay for war using bonds that will have to be paid back by our children and grand children through their taxes. In the meantime, the rich, instead of paying taxes, lend the money to the government for war with the promise they will get it back with interest in the future (via our children's and grand children's taxes). It's truly a win-win for the rich and just one more way they manage to transfer wealth from the poor to the rich.
That's only part of the story. You do understand we could all have free healthcare, with no need to collect tax money to pay for it? Yeah, you're right about this, but it's not mutually exclusive with my comment. All debt denominated in dollars can be erased. Period. It's not an opinion, it's true.
Death is our most profitable export. Long live the Empire!
"Rarely is any mention made of Russian dead, of Palestinian dead, or for that matter of any dead, as America dominates the global trade in weaponry. "
"We don't do body counts." Gen. Tommy Franks
Our "leaders" total disregard for the harm we do to other peoples is reprehensible and unforgivable.
In fact we DID do body counts in Viet Nam and it wasn't well received by the world. So there is one thing that was learned from that awful war.
That's probably the only thing we learned in that war.
Unfortunately the Palestinians at this Pt. don't want Peace --only Freedom..! Think about that. Sometimes I think the Human Race is the true fluke of the Universe, and it-- the Universe would be better off without us...! Too bad also that true Visionaries like Carl Sagan and Albert Einstein weren't immortal. My Monday musings for what its worth.
Yet I believe that if humanity suddenly, magically disappeared, eventually another species would find itself able to exert control and would use it as we do. Life itself is tenacious and each example of it struggles for domain, over continents as we do or like bacteria in a petri dish. The problem for us it to gain control over desire, evolution will not help us there, we must do it through reason that takes will to employ, of which we are capable, but that must overcome the emotion that comes naturally to us without prompting in our every waking moment.
"You're an interesting, strange Species not like any other, and you wouldn't believe how many there are--- Intelligent, but savage. Do you want to know what I find is beautiful about You? You are at your very best when things are at their worst." Starman 1984
All good points, Fireman, but especially your next-to-last sentence!
Thank-you Denise... "Peace on Earth" Perhaps maybe someday we'll actually have someone really deserving of that Nobel Peace Prize!
Oh, man! You can say THAT again!
Only two things are infinite the Universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former...
Einstein?
I caught an excerpt of Scott Pelly's interview of President Biden. Biden was doing his usual expressionless mumbling until Pelly asked him if he thought the US was capable of supporting the war in Ukraine and now this potential war for the US in Israel. Biden's face came alive, a big smile broke out as he gleefully reminded Pelly that the US is the strongest power ever in the history of the world.
This is the perfect example of what runs through the minds of the powerful in DC. They are bewitched, transfixed, completely taken with what in sports is expressed by fans of winning teams by WE'RE NUMBER ONE! What follows this mindset is that all others are to bend to our will and that we can never bow to any country that questions our will. Echoing GW Bush, we are the deciders on issues far beyond our country, anywhere in the world.
"We can (or at least think we can), therefore we shall!". Morality, or any concern for Life at all, are not part of the equation for these soul-less creatures.
I couldn't believe what Biden said on his 60 minutes interview. The question was is the U. S. taking on too much with wars in the Ukraine and the Middle East. Biden's answer was that the U. S. is not only the most powerful nation on the face of the earth, it is also the most powerful that has ever existed in history. In other words the U. S. is boss, can do whatever it wants and to hell with everyone else. That attitude is truly mind boggling and scary.
To emphasize your point about leaders and calling for peace, Bill, we saw what happened to JFK after he tried to promote peace.....
I received my peace dividend. Forty-three cents. I used it to help pay my taxes.
If I walk into your house and establish myself in the kitchen and say it is mine and in future everyone eats what and when I say cooked how I say we have a parallel. Like this:
Half of you are delighted, maybe the mischievous kids or something. The other half are pissed.
So for the sake of the 'bigger' half or because you're not sure what the hell's going or a mixture of whatever you leave me there and eat when and when and how.
But discontent grows.
And gets to where some are always marching up and down outside the kitchen and kicking up a fuss in the living room and even out in the lawn.
And eventually you all get mightily organised and formal and get a really impressive ruckus and parade going that attracts my attention so I say 'what's doing'?
And you say 'well we don't like this and that..'
So I say 'okay then, this lot of you do this and that lot of you do that and then this that and the other will happen and it will all come right'.
And you all start in on doing these things.
Where am I now?
Esconced in my power that's where I am.
That's one attempt at an explanation. I lost confidence in it as it progressed but finished it anyway.
Here's another go:
We have a mechanism for making the government do our will. The WHOLE apparatus is nominally set up for precisely that purpose.
To march up and down is to tacitly - no, overtly - declare that mechanism to be null and void and acquiesce in the tacit agreement that they can continue doing as they please until such times as we march up and down again.
It is a reversion to the slave revolt in Rome and will inevitably end the same way.
It is the adoption of the manners, habits, rights, customs and destiny of the slave.
how about that? Any better?
One last:
How Nero laughed as he watched Rome burn, they say.
Well think about it: there you are up in your penthouse. You know you've stolen and are stealing millions and even billions. You perhaps even know that you are engaged in something filthy as so many of them are.
And you look down and in the street there are thousands milling around and shouting, screaming, waving flags and banners.
And they are hedged about by other thousands all dress in uniform with guns etc.
And you smile.
Because you know the numbers and the guns and the power is all on your side but more
You know that whichever way it goes you are watching the people fight the people, not yourself.
Just as they do in Ukraine. Just as the USA smiles to see Ukraine stab itself to death.
How about that one? Get it?
Your last para or so I think intimates that the people don't have the expertise to make learned judgements. Balderdash. All the expertise is with the people. Departments, office, laboratories, research centres, blah, blah, blah throw up the expertise and decide matters of scientific fact and so on that give rise to these expert decisions you're claiming people couldn't come up with.
People came up with them in the first place. People can and would and should continue to come up with them. The people are not the common ignorant rabble you seem to think they are: fit only to wave banners, march up and down, sing songs and get rubber bulleted. The people are everyone. The people are all.
They simply need to become conscious of themselves as an entity. You ask for examples from history. No, no, no, fails utterly to comprehend what we are on about here. Topicality. NOW! Talking about what people today, now, should be doing in the light of what today, now IS!
It is the age of emancipation of people by virtue of the internet and the ubiquitous smartphone. Each one of us connected to all the others at all times and with all the knowledge, the data, the history, the expertise, the calculating power of the world at our fingertips. NOW is when the masses can begin to BE.
Don't you see? No? Oh well. Okay. Go get your banner. Have a good march.
I reckon the USA will get peace the minute it gets a people. Because I think currently it has no people. Not effectively. It is run by an out of control cabal. The people simply don't matter.
That's the same all over the Western world.
We still think and act like slaves.
Like medieval peasants.
We expect to be lorded over.
We assume only the lords know what's going on.
We assume only the lords can make the right decisions.
We assume it is all 'above our heads', 'above our station'.
We assume too much and we assume all wrong.
There is something missing and we're all running around like headless chickens looking for it, demanding someone come up with it - but no one ever does. No one ever can. Because it is us.