Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiA Shattering Moment in America's Fall From Power
The global financial crisis will see the US falter in the same way the Soviet Union did when the Berlin Wall came down. The era of American dominance is over
Our gaze might be on the markets melting down, but the upheaval we are experiencing is more than a financial crisis, however large. Here is a historic geopolitical shift, in which the balance of power in the world is being altered irrevocably. The era of American global leadership, reaching back to the Second World War, is over.
You can see it in the way America's dominion has slipped away in its own backyard, with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez taunting and ridiculing the superpower with impunity. Yet the setback of America's standing at the global level is even more striking. With the nationalisation of crucial parts of the financial system, the American free-market creed has self-destructed while countries that retained overall control of markets have been vindicated. In a change as far-reaching in its implications as the fall of the Soviet Union, an entire model of government and the economy has collapsed.
Ever since the end of the Cold War, successive American administrations have lectured other countries on the necessity of sound finance. Indonesia, Thailand, Argentina and several African states endured severe cuts in spending and deep recessions as the price of aid from the International Monetary Fund, which enforced the American orthodoxy. China in particular was hectored relentlessly on the weakness of its banking system. But China's success has been based on its consistent contempt for Western advice and it is not Chinese banks that are currently going bust. How symbolic yesterday that Chinese astronauts take a spacewalk while the US Treasury Secretary is on his knees.
Despite incessantly urging other countries to adopt its way of doing business, America has always had one economic policy for itself and another for the rest of the world. Throughout the years in which the US was punishing countries that departed from fiscal prudence, it was borrowing on a colossal scale to finance tax cuts and fund its over-stretched military commitments. Now, with federal finances critically dependent on continuing large inflows of foreign capital, it will be the countries that spurned the American model of capitalism that will shape America's economic future.
Which version of the bail out of American financial institutions cobbled up by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke is finally adopted is less important than what the bail out means for America's position in the world. The populist rant about greedy banks that is being loudly ventilated in Congress is a distraction from the true causes of the crisis. The dire condition of America's financial markets is the result of American banks operating in a free-for-all environment that these same American legislators created. It is America's political class that, by embracing the dangerously simplistic ideology of deregulation, has responsibility for the present mess.
In present circumstances, an unprecedented expansion of government is the only means of averting a market catastrophe. The consequence, however, will be that America will be even more starkly dependent on the world's new rising powers. The federal government is racking up even larger borrowings, which its creditors may rightly fear will never be repaid. It may well be tempted to inflate these debts away in a surge of inflation that would leave foreign investors with hefty losses. In these circumstances, will the governments of countries that buy large quantities of American bonds, China, the Gulf States and Russia, for example, be ready to continue supporting the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency? Or will these countries see this as an opportunity to tilt the balance of economic power further in their favour? Either way, the control of events is no longer in American hands.
The fate of empires is very often sealed by the interaction of war and debt. That was true of the British Empire, whose finances deteriorated from the First World War onwards, and of the Soviet Union. Defeat in Afghanistan and the economic burden of trying to respond to Reagan's technically flawed but politically extremely effective Star Wars programme were vital factors in triggering the Soviet collapse. Despite its insistent exceptionalism, America is no different. The Iraq War and the credit bubble have fatally undermined America's economic primacy. The US will continue to be the world's largest economy for a while longer, but it will be the new rising powers that, once the crisis is over, buy up what remains intact in the wreckage of America's financial system.
There has been a good deal of talk in recent weeks about imminent economic armageddon. In fact, this is far from being the end of capitalism. The frantic scrambling that is going on in Washington marks the passing of only one type of capitalism - the peculiar and highly unstable variety that has existed in America over the last 20 years. This experiment in financial laissez-faire has imploded.While the impact of the collapse will be felt everywhere, the market economies that resisted American-style deregulation will best weather the storm. Britain, which has turned itself into a gigantic hedge fund, but of a kind that lacks the ability to profit from a downturn, is likely to be especially badly hit.
The irony of the post-Cold War period is that the fall of communism was followed by the rise of another utopian ideology. In American and Britain, and to a lesser extent other Western countries, a type of market fundamentalism became the guiding philosophy. The collapse of American power that is underway is the predictable upshot. Like the Soviet collapse, it will have large geopolitical repercussions. An enfeebled economy cannot support America's over-extended military commitments for much longer. Retrenchment is inevitable and it is unlikely to be gradual or well planned.
Meltdowns on the scale we are seeing are not slow-motion events. They are swift and chaotic, with rapidly spreading side-effects. Consider Iraq. The success of the surge, which has been achieved by bribing the Sunnis, while acquiescing in ongoing ethnic cleansing, has produced a condition of relative peace in parts of the country. How long will this last, given that America's current level of expenditure on the war can no longer be sustained?
An American retreat from Iraq will leave Iran the regional victor. How will Saudi Arabia respond? Will military action to forestall Iran acquiring nuclear weapons be less or more likely? China's rulers have so far been silent during the unfolding crisis. Will America's weakness embolden them to assert China's power or will China continue its cautious policy of 'peaceful rise'? At present, none of these questions can be answered with any confidence. What is evident is that power is leaking from the US at an accelerating rate. Georgia showed Russia redrawing the geopolitical map, with America an impotent spectator.
Outside the US, most people have long accepted that the development of new economies that goes with globalisation will undermine America's central position in the world. They imagined that this would be a change in America's comparative standing, taking place incrementally over several decades or generations. Today, that looks an increasingly unrealistic assumption.
Having created the conditions that produced history's biggest bubble, America's political leaders appear unable to grasp the magnitude of the dangers the country now faces. Mired in their rancorous culture wars and squabbling among themselves, they seem oblivious to the fact that American global leadership is fast ebbing away. A new world is coming into being almost unnoticed, where America is only one of several great powers, facing an uncertain future it can no longer shape.
179 Comments so far
Show All"The fate of empires is very often sealed by the interaction of war and debt. That was true of the British Empire, whose finances deteriorated from the First World War onwards, and of the Soviet Union. Defeat in Afghanistan and the economic burden of trying to respond to Reagan's technically flawed but politically extremely effective Star Wars programme were vital factors in triggering the Soviet collapse. Despite its insistent exceptionalism, America is no different. The Iraq War and the credit bubble have fatally undermined America's economic primacy. The US will continue to be the world's largest economy for a while longer, but it will be the new rising powers that, once the crisis is over, buy up what remains intact in the wreckage of America's financial system."
For Bush to continue the war on Iraq is ridiculous. Both realistically and economically. John Gray laid it out plain and clear. "The fate of empires is often sealed by the interaction of war and debt." We should've learned from our past or should I say BUSH should've learned from our countrie's past. We are often taught to learn from our mistakes, but in this case, Bush didn't take that into consideration. Instead, he took his mistakes and made it bigger. He made it bigger by letting the war go on for this long, and insisting on sending and keeping the troops in the middle east. The impact of the war costs us lives and millions of dollars. I don't understand why he's been in office for its full presidential term.
As others have stated, America is seen as the almighty, powerful country. Many third world countries look up to us. Many DREAM of coming to the states. Because of the bailout, America has made a fool of itself. All this talk about how other the world should use us as its model for a better government and ruling is now.. just all talk. The world now sees us as an empire slowly crumbling in its own mistakes and everyone is watching.. pointing at us and laughing.
Maybe America shouldn't have tried to gain as much power as it did. Maybe America should've focused on AMERICA and most importantly, it's citizens. Maybe that would've saved us from the bailout. Maybe we wouldn't have made the same mistakes as we did in the past.
Our country is suppose to be a democracy, but from what I see, we are far from it. Yeah, America tries to involve its citizens, but its really the big corporations, the ones that MAKE all the money that controls the decisions around here. As Akon says, "Cash rules everything around me.."
I totally agree with John Gray. He awakened us by his articles. He made us realized the cause and effect of America's ecomonic problem. This problem that were facing we'll bring so much impact to my fellow citizen and to other countries. Before other countries will look up to U.S. as a country of wealth and power. But now they see America falling... again? Is this a Deja Vu for all of us?
As economic crisis have undermined development and growing violence and conflicts have threatened peace and stability, world leaders have called a revival for global financial crisis. I can't even imagine that this is happening to America. America is suffering with a lot of debts. I heard that the money that is involve in the bailout is from the tax of many workers, it is the tax that was taken to "US" employee from every paycheck we receive. It is not even fair to do that. Many innocent people were suffering while the other rich investors of the banks get even more richer.
I ALSO AGREE WITH THIS ARTICLE IT IS A VERY INTERESTING ARTICLE WHICH I WOULD HAVE NEVER READ IF MY ENGLISH TEACHER HADNT ASSIGNED IT AS HOMEWORK...I AGREE WITH JOHN GREY HE IS HONEST AND TELLS YOU ALL THE FACTS HE STARIT UP TELLS YOU HOW AMERICA IS GOING THROUGH SO MANY FINACIAL PROBLEMS AND ABOUT THIS CURRUPT IN THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
adigee7117 said the politics should give average americans the right to voice their opinions.
I think it's just because American people don't like to vote. So basically, only a few of their voice are heard. In order to save our country, we have to act, let them know our opinions by voting, don't let frauds rule the voting system. Government will probably keep on making decisions leading to self destruction, unless we all vote.
The important thing is we have to fight against corruptions. If people in Washington DC keep making more money for their own, then America is done. No matter if we bail out or not, we will go down soon again.
Unless America can pull itself together and get the economy back up and running, the rest of the world is going to go under with us. The United States may rely on other economies of the world to stay afloat, but so many other countries rely on us as well. If we drown, nearly everyone drowns.
To save the economy, we really need to downsize our government and reduce spending on useless programs and research. To save to economy, there needs to be less pork barreling; so much useless pork barrel legislation has slipped through in the past few years, it's jaw-dropping. Research on the Olive Fruit Fly, development of a lobster biscuit of dogs, and so much more has gone into bills that have been passed by the Senate and the House, and yes, even the President.
How do we downsize the government and reduce spending? Voting a democrat into Presidency isn't going to help. The Democratic Party encourages (useless) public programs (which drains the government budget to no end.) The Democratic Party encourages taxing of the working poor, which basically encourages them to go onto these public programs, thus causing more taxing. (It's a full circle, can't you tell?) The Democratic Party is the party that pressed for the deregulation of banks, thus lowering the standards to get loans for homes, thus leading to the sky-rocketing foreclosure rates of today. Because these standards were so low, and banks were not allowed to "discriminate" against those who they believed would not pay them back, people bought above their means. Now the economy is screwed.
...The last thing the world needs right now is a Democrat in office.
Almost.
The second-last thing the world needs is a Democrat in office.
The last thing the world needs is a Republican.
I agree with this article because America has lost its edge. I think its funny how Americans were telling other countries how to run banks the same way we were running banks but in the end the other countries that ignored us, such as china, have better bank systems then the present. Other countries that have invested in the America think that they aren’t going to get their money back because America is having a downfall. Overall the world is going to go against America in the end, because we aren't doing anywhere close to expected.
This is an excellent article. The era of American Dominance is over. Is that because other countries get stronger or something is wrong with our polity or economy?
As a new immigrant I don’t know a lot about America’s Presidential Election, but what I know is President Bush’s times should be over, and times of big business and wealthy people should be over.
When I was in China, it was impossible to hear about the horrors and failures of communism. Americans were hearing about the economic problems which happened in China and the horrors of communism in the last century, while they were not hearing about the failures of capitalism in the capitalism media.
Will bailout save America’s economic collapse? How can we stop it from happening again? There are so many problems we still need to think about.
I agree with John Gray. I think that he basically says everything that america's goverment has done to get us where we are now. Its worse now then ever, and the hole is too deep to try and climb out. All the times there were chances to straighten out what was wrong. Were ignored and that just made things more difficult.
With all of the wars in the past, and the continuous debt that is mentioned in John Gray's writing. Shows the proof of what is happening and there is no denying it now. The goverment was ignorant to its surroundings and showed no interest in the important issues. Only what they wanted done right then and there.
The economy is waaaay down and then theres also global warming. America is defninetly in one of its worse times in history. People are just now starting to realize this a little to late. Other countries are now waay more in control and powerful then america. America is the one now who is in debt and need of help and assitance.
Unquestionably, I concur to John Gray’s approach to America’s current state. It is incredibly clear that it’s power is quickly declining minute after minute and day after day. I know this because when people have to forfeit their scarce money to fueling their tanks rather than filling their growling bellies. I see it in my community through the signs of the homes that are being foreclosed, but I also know many feel the commotion surfing through the channels of the television shows and the current statistics that have to deal with money. In my eyes, money can be considered a “weapon of mass destruction.” It may not contain any nuclear substances, but it is immensely destructive to the environment and living species here on planet earth. It’s not the people in Washington D.C in the pin skirts or the ties or basically the usual people that live the lavish lives that feel most of the destruction. Quite frankly, it’s the people in the working class and the people in other countries that usually experience the mess. Due to the fact that “America has always had one economic policy for itself and another for the rest of the world,” all the destruction of money and the diminishment of US power isn’t just going to effect the people here, but also the countries imperialized abroad(Gray). Taking the Philippines into consideration, it’s the remittances of OFW’s(overseas Filipino workers) that are sent back to the Philippines that prop up the economy so they are going get a hit on it all as well. I really like how this article is really informative and it ties America’s history to now, but there’s literally just one thing missing.
It’s the facts and the problems that’s really only being said, but sadly it just doesn’t express any solutions that we Americans can do. Throughout the passed few weeks I’ve just been hearing problem after problem and I’m really getting sick and tired of it. Do we really need to wait for a few days for the next president to be elected for problems to fixed? It’s not one individual that’s going to fix the problems, it’s the people that should be coming together trying to fixing them. In America we’re taught to focus on one person that will save us and we see this through the books and media when it’s really the people that have united that makes the change. In the next few days as problems will continue to compile in our homes and our nation, educate yourself, come together, or try to find your solution.
I think the United States today have many issues regarding government, media, and American citizens. Many voices want the right thing in the united states but aren't getting to be heard by the government. The government only focuses on what they should do to make things right and blocking the people's opinions out of it. If this is a country where freedom of speech is adressed, the politics should give average americans the right to voice their opinions. I personally think that Obama is winning the election so far, and if he becomes president or wins the election, that nothing severe will be added to our history. Further, i hope he does everybody right and he maintains the country well as he promises.
It sounds like to me that the American government is so focused on certain issues to such an extreme that it looks like other things are failing or going wrong because of it. And they are unaware of the consequences it will bring?
The author is comparing our current economy to the one we had coming out of the Second World War and letting us think about the central position of America in the world. While Bush was concentrating too much on Iraq war, our markets were melting down. We are undeniably facing a huge economic crisis and the main reason is because the American government has no control over the banking system. The important thing the US government has to do now is to bail out these banks to avoid having a crisis like that of the great depression; which means we have to borrow more money from other countries but, the money the US is borrowing from other countries are mostly used to fund our military work. With that said, because most of our finance comes from foreign businesses, they are the countries that will have the greatest effect as to how our future economy will be. Although, America holds the economic power of the world, this global power will and may soon diminish because of the way our economy is going.
In my perspective, now is not the time for blaming on the Bush administration. It is the time for Americans to put our hands together to help our economy. Hopefully, the new administration will lead our country in the right direction and to help us overcome this crisis. However, there are enormous challenges for our country and it may take a long time to renovate and get back the super power that America had after the Second World War.
Hoanganh sez: "In my perspective, now is not the time for blaming on the Bush administration."
I agree. Now is the time when we should be impeaching Bush & Co. or trying them for murder.
The blaming can be done later.
John Gray is detailed telling us what happen in the U.S today. The financial crisis is worse day by day, people are losing job, stocks are dropping. Even the Bailout was signed into law, but people still have to wait until it works.America is not a successful country any more, because of the economy.
Since the Iraq War, our country is buring money because the War. Bush attack Iraq without thinking about the finance, he make the worst problem before he leaving office to the next president to fix it up. WWIII has been going on, America between Iraq, Russia between Georgia. War makes the financial crisis and the fear in people's heart. I think America have to take at less 6 year to fix the economy, it is time to decide our cure economy now, we want our country prosperity again.
I agree with John Gray and I think that he is telling a facts. The financial crisis of America is almost a heavy respondsibility. And the America is already losing a power as they fall deeper into a financial crisis. America can not be a longer a successfil country without the financial.
The super power os America is disappear gradually, and it instead just a ordinary country. The sitation of America's finance is become a really badly from day by day. Why the America's finance is really badly becuase of the war.
For example, how come the price of gas is growing up, because the war between US and Iraq. In cast of supposing that the US have not a war with Iraq then the price of gas is certainly not growing up. Also why the US have a war with Iraq is because of the government's policy.
The next president is come into being soon. Even if each of president-elect who's win the election i would not think that he have a ability to fix the finance problem of the economy in the US, but also i hope that when the new president who's win an election that he can reduce the amount of war, and try to fix up the fiance problem, and to get back the super power for America. I think it is the only dream for all American.
I agree with John Gray. I think we are not as powerful as before and we definitely fell behind from other countries. The reason why we fell behind is because of our Government. Bush decided to have a war in Iraq and he willing to spend a huge amount of money onto the war mainly to show other country how powerful we are. But for me, showing our power to global isn't mean anything to me because our financial economic would be the most important for us. If he didn't decide for the war, Our country wouldn't have to send tons of money into the Iraq war and our Economy wouldn't collapsed.
The Iraq war has a lot to do with putting our country into extreme financial debt. There is no way we can continue to support the Iraq war when we have no money to support our own country. Bush's decisions that he made for our country are what put us in this horrible situation. Because of him, it will take decades before we can clean up this mess.
I agree to John Gray, I think he should a lot of facts that we need to face from this point on. America has no longer a successful country without its economy. Even before, we run this country with total confidence because we have what it takes to be a powerful country. I agree with his statement that without our economy we are nothing. I never knew how difficult things are today, it is like forbidden us from our problem to end. We even put everything on the line, Bush made it worst for America. He should not been re-elected for 8 years. Now we are having our next biggest financial crisis long before the Great Depression.
This is not an easy job for who ever is next in line for president. Even if Obama wins the election i would not think he will fix our problems in economy. even if McCain wins he will never finish our problems in Iraq if he continues to fight in war. I think it is up to people to decide whether we fix it now or never. the government is our backbone for everything. I think its time for the people to react and defeat this problem crisis in economy.
This is serious for all of us Americans but to all countries that has been part of United States partnerships. This is the time that America should think inside the box and do not worry about the war in Iraq. ever since we been there we never get our answers through our 9/11 terrorist attacks. i believe we should end it and worry about our financial economic problems. this is the right time to do it and not tomorrow, not the next day, not next month, not net year, it is now to decide how we are going to cure this virus in our economy.
I agree with him that this economic crisis we are experiencing is huge. The collapse of our economy is the collapse of our own American dreams as well. While our government stands as financial advisers to other nations, our own nation seems to be taken for granted. America which is known as the super power is no longer super power, instead just ordinary. Weakness I saw for America being behind is unfixed decisions created by the government while other countries like China is consistent on their ambitions. Bush wanted to bring up our economy before he leaves office, but is it worth it? It would approximately take 11 years before our economy gets back to normal. What will end up happen to us now?
In my perspective, the melt-down started when our government decided to give out half of the unexpected budgets to military and weapons for war, huge mistake the government should have not done. They could have use the money for more usable reasons that could benefit citizens. Ever since the war in Iraq, US became weak and helpless, Bush declared that we won but not financially. If only Bush stopped sooner, we will not lost huge amount of money and the bailout crisis could have been solved early.
Other countries are being affected by our disease, the only cure is up to solutions our government could come up with which I think would no longer matter. For instance, the Philippine economy is falling apart indeed, it drop from 7% to 4.1% stated on the news last October 1, 2008. US lessen export from the Philippines, as a result, peso (Philippine currency) might drop to its lowest rate once again. Philippines also drop their tourism income because US citizens minimizes their fun time because of the financial crisis. A lot of people got laid off on jobs which causes them to go broke. They also stated in the news that the shipments and sending money to the Philippines will take longer than before because of lose funds.
THIS IS CRAZY!! WAKE UP AMERICA!!
OMG!! DISS JUSS RUINED MY DAY!!
I agree that we are losing power as we fall deeper into this financial crisis. Who knows what any other country has planned for us when we are forced to withdraw from our usual military commitment. World War III?
Bush is an idiot. CHYEAH!
oh yeah and i agree with missxlicia.
I agree that deregulation allowed banks to become greedy as there was little oversight from the government. US as a superpower nation is becoming a thing of the past.
The Iraq war has a lot to do with putting our country into extreme financial debt. There is no way we can continue to support the Iraq war when we have no money to support our own country. Bush's decisions that he made for our country are what put us in this horrible situation in the first place. Because of him, it will take decades before we can clean up this mess.
In my eyes Sept.11 th seemed like a window opprotunity for BUSH to send in troops where the alledgedly terrorist were at? Yet they (our government) sent many Iraqi leaders ot of the country. But yet that's another discussion in its own.
The democracy is having this huge headache due to our political leaders being in charge of our financing and so-on. Like the article mentioned," An American retreat from Iraq will leave Iran the original victor."
Who fucking gives a shit who's the winner here. Like Pesident Lyndon B. Johnson had the chance to withdraw our military from the Vietnam War, he didn't due to the reason he didn't want to be the first American President to lose a war(Notes on the State of America)(89)."
Our democracy needs to pay more attention to wherew all our funding is going towards. I do understand to have military posted up around the world, and so on but common get the facts straight. Do you really think someone can actually fly two not one but two planes into New York City. People its time to wake up and smell the 5 dollar starbucks that you just bought and realize that our government is ...nevermind. And on that note im out!
Lately I can't help but wonder if there is not an opportunity for a left-right coalition coming together in America as a real force of oppostion to politics as usual. We're not quite there, but a populist uprising against the endless transfer of wealth to the rich is growing. I visit antiwar.com everyday and see the similarities of view between many conservatives and liberals when it comes to foreign policy and war. Now we have conservatives at least as much as liberals fighting the 700 billion transfer of our money to the rich. If people get their priorities focused, perhaps good things will ultimately result.
I have never experienced a bullie until now, but i quess everyone was right when they said "the bullie always get what they have comin to them". America for so long have done wrong to others just to achive the American dream, and now its time for all the other countries to sit back and watch as the bullie fall. America have always tried to enforce its beliefs on others, by way of war, but now they need the help of the same people they where once trying to bullie. Now the question is will they help?
America down fall is due to greed, for the love of money. America government was so raped up into the finacial sytem that they forgot what they where trying to accomplish when they became independent. America the land of bullies and the greedy. The Ameraican government would have done anything to get ahead even blow up a building full of people.
The Bitch is goin' down!
WW11 pulled te country out of the depression because industry insured every body was put to work making ships, tanks, jeeps, clothing, all trash was recycled into new materials. the prosperity continued because of education provided by the government. People Had dreams again. all of the remaining war surplus was put to use in society for many fudemental things.
this current war is only about greed, Haliburtn and KBR have moved ofshore to
NOT PAY TAXES ON TAXPAYERS MONEY.
all employees are contractors mostly not even us citizens, no healthcare no taxes no SSN.
OUTRIGHT THEFT OF US MONEY BY CHENEYS FRIENDS
soldiers bought their own equipment, used trash to fix equipment while
BUSH SAT ON HIS ASS
to not even ensure Armor suppplied to troops and soldiers who used 300 dollar "KBR monogramed" towles to wipe up the blood.
THIS WAS THEFT OF OUR NATIONS WEALTH ON THE GRANDEST SCALE EVER!!!!!!
It is doubtful, at this point, that the world mourns the passing.
New Zealand is looking awfully good now folks. :)
So in the end Reagen was right but he should have applied it to all things. from all citizens, all media, all regulators, and all of those who watch the watchers
TRUST BUT VERIFY!!!!!!!!!!!!
No need to trust if you truly verify. After that, accountability must be a constant. We can't say he/she/they did the right thing (or what he/she/they said they would), and then go back to sleep. To KEEP government honest, people must REMAIN vigilant. Let's quit believing in the veracity and/or goodness of human personalities. The pigs get very lazy being fed in their pen, before they get eaten. We look to the government to tell us how to save ourselves--and they are all too glad to give us the answers we want to hear. But they only really tell us how to fatten ourselves up for the slaughter. We shun and ignore those who try to tell us the truth because it's not what we want to hear. There is a kind of comfort in having a 'marshmallow' mind; it takes no effort to roll downhill. The voters vote for whomever tells them the prettiest lies and/or paints the prettiest picture, and promises vengeance against anything and anyone who dares to challenge this illusion. We will give you everything for free they say. In fact, we will even LOWER your taxes and give you BETTER jobs (after we give the ones you have to someone else).
That is how they get voters to vote for them; the voters do not let themselves see the disconnect, the true horror of what's being done either to them or in their name. They should know that their ignorance will not absolve them from the consequences though. Reality has a Will of Its own.
How stupid can people be as they see debt pile up astronomically, both personally and nationally? It's like they're in a drunken stupor.
God help us all once the hangover comes on.
Gee, many of the comments in this thread are incoherent. Things are shaky out there, eh? Lots of scary shit going on. Hysteria, also. What I am writing probably sounds incoherent, too. Ever since McCain nominated Palin, I've been uneasy and made more so all the time. How can it be that our national discourse has been so degraded that we have Vice Presidential nominees, a heartbeat from the Presidentcy, muttering gobbledegook on national television and yet, according to the media, people still say they will vote for McCain? How can anyone risk the human future to McCain's erratic, intemperate, reckless nature? Come on, after he risked the human future on Palin, why would anyone listen to him at all? And yet we take him seriously. The media reports on him. He is treated civilly.
The only media that openly challenges him is The View and Dave Letterman.
The whole world has gone mad, well, the American world.
I never had much respect for the women chattering on The View but, by golly, Joy Behar came right out and asked McCain about his lies. And Dave Letterman showed us video of McCain's dishonesty. What have we been reduced to when an inane talk show and a comedian are the only media speaking truth to power?
I think this British writer has it right: America's days as the superpower are just about over. We have tried to impose our sick economic system on the whole world. It is right and just that our economy should collapse. I am sorry many will suffer as we continue our downward slide. I resent, deeply, that most of the folks who did this to us will remain rich and privileged and little people will suffer instead. Lots of inequity, much injustice.
I wish someone could convincingly explain to me why millions and millions of middle class voters have consistently voted against their own economic interests time after time. I wish someone could explain to me why these same voters vote against their own interests and wage cultural wars against trivial matters like gay marriage.
This world the venal neo cons are so rigidly determined to create: why would anyone, including them, want to live in it?
The coming recession/depression should do alot to focus people's attention on matters which are much more important than gays and abortion. Only the wackiest evangelicals will look for scapegoats in the gay and pro-choice crowds when the economy collapses. "Millions and millions of middle class voters" have had the good fortune to cruise along quite nicely for many decades and opine about trivialities endlessly, but when the shit hits the fan, who gives a crap about a couple of gays marrying?
"I wish someone could convincingly explain to me why millions and millions of middle class voters have consistently voted against their own economic interests time after time. I wish someone could explain to me why these same voters vote against their own interests and wage cultural wars against trivial matters like gay marriage."
I will try to explain. Progressives are as blind to the negative consequences of gay marriage and abortion as Conservatives are to the evils of fundamentalism in free market ideology. Both are aggressively ignorant in these matters. Both are extremists who are blinded to their extremism. Progressives chose to risk the presidency by supporting gay marriage and abortion as central themes resulting in a twenty five year fundamentalist economic orgy. Progressives are as guilty as Conservatives. Those who are blind to this reality are a part of the problem.
These are primarily 'wedge issues,' which politicians use like a magician uses legerdemain to distract the audience from seeing what is really taking place. That being said, there are many types of 'special interests' that use elections to bring their 'issues' to the forefront, meaning they have an agenda to aggressively promote. Rather than focusing upon what is most important to the whole; they only care about what is most important to them--at the moment.
Your premise is ridiculous. Progressives never considered abortion or gay marriage to be "central themes". Those are red herring issues used by fundamentalist Christian conservatives to stir up their ignorant base-- successfully. Though progressives take the opposite stand on those issues than conservatives, they never consider these top level issues, or bring them up as important campaign or policy issues.
I suggest you read "What's the Matter with Kansas" by Thomas Frank for a cogent explanation of why people vote against their own interests.
Everyone should own a hamster. They make good watch dogs.
I do not believe that Stone's premise is inconsistent with Frank's thesis. Nixon, and his Republican successors, successfully used the Republican strategy of splintering New Deal coalitions among non-wealthy voters by emphasizing the social issues. And Democrats played along with that far too often. Long ago the Democrats should have left the social issues alone and they would have been better off. But many who gained power in the Democratic Party were focused on the social issues and other Democrats decided to go along with it for party harmony. And after losing elections for this, rather than recognizing the problem and then abandoning the fight over social issues, there were Democrats who compensated by going after Wall Street money and turning the party into the socially liberal corporate party. Clinton was very successful with that approach, but then it turned into a disaster for the party, the country, and the world.
I can't really argue with your analysis, yet even if it's lost some elections for the dems, I'm glad they took up the cause of social liberalism. Somebody has to stand up for minorities or you end up with Nazis or Taliban or at best a lesser version of these.
As a nation we are no more than the product of our willful ignorance and all consuming greed
The world is watching and enjoying every minute as reality bites ameriKa on its fat ass. Now Mr Putin wants to dump his nation's 200 billion of US Treasury Bond scrip..then China and then the oil Sheiks propped by their Izraeli ameriKan death squads.
It can only get better (for the rest of the planet at any rate).
Onward thru the fog to our titanic destiny with what's his face!
I feel and am not alone we have wittnessed a complete control issue here. From elections, media, military and police forces. Just look at what has happened.
DIEBOLD, results that can be changed
LOCK STEP MEDIA ON KEY ISSUES, and no real questions being asked.
WARS without ends that only serves a few companies, oil and other countries.
PEACEFUL protests that ALWAYS get into a fight and police brought in OR no media coverage at all so no outside support.
POLITICIANS who want to make a change then all of a sudden some secret from the passed is public and they drop out OR get no media coverage if there is no dirt.
America has slowly over the last 8 years been controlled and it continues today.
PS: I can see one day if it isn't already the internet being used to trap those who are not lock step with sites like this. I don't feel I am being overly paranoid but when you start to add it up America and other countries are heading in that direction. Perhaps with America being one of the leaders.
The economy of the USSR and now the economy of the US have both had problems because of the lack of moral values. Either type of economy can do quite well when it is backed by good moral values, although communisy has the advantage.
I agree with John's analysis - to the extent that it's based on the facts he possesses. I don't think however that he has all the facts. Still, I like what he conveys. It's a useful examination.
When America is truly done as this world's superpower, that will be when this world is done. That's what the Christian Bible indicates.
"China's rulers have so far been silent during the unfolding crisis. Will America's weakness embolden them to assert China's power or will China continue its cautious policy of 'peaceful rise'?" This is exactly the problem. As much as I bemoan the fact that nations do not seek peace, the fact is that they have foolishly created a monstrous world system that ensures that the power that goes peaceful will also get devoured. Aggressor nations like the United States are as doomed - if endless military spending, aka welfare for the rich, is a bad thing - as they are godless.
It's like international capitalism, a monster that will devour it's servants, who gave it life and worship it, as quickly as it will those - the majority - who were the intended victims, efforts by the political partners to protect their class notwithstanding, fully anyway. So the capitalists run from their monster which bears down on us all, taking their money and ours in the process, allowing them to run faster and further. But there are limits and they are imposed by a higher power.
They cling, lost, to their rickety mansion model. The elites have never wanted a safe, intact mansion in which all contributed equally and benefitted equally. Our brave Benefactors in power have always, even when they considered the workers to be 'their' workers, only wanted to dominate, dictate and take. The idea of pulling together with the rest of us to create a system that works for everyone terrifies them. If they can't see and guarantee an outcome in which they are okay, then they aren't interested. The exploitation and suffering of others must continue. So let's call it the natural order and hopefully that will make the transgression feel better.
The game the elites play is 'riches for the strongest'. My message to the majority has always been: See that game for the destructive project it is. Eschew it. It's death-dealing and isn't based on 'living' reality. How you survive is not only important, but it is all that's important. The end of winning the evil game of 'riches for the strongest' does not justify the ungoldly means.
They have accepted the gift of mysterious lawlessness. It's not really mysterious - to those who have not accepted it. Evil is evil and goodness is goodness. But, Once you've been corrupted, then you can allow yourself to start seeing things differently. You can observe the way professionals, including your cultural, religious and political leaders, sin, shamelessly and knowingly, and because you've now slipped yourself, you can find that deliberate, wilfull lawlessness to be mysterious. "Oh, I guess bad must sometimes be good," will be the conclusion you draw from your observations. You can even view looking at things that way as a talent. Psychologists call it cognitive dissonance, which is what you experience when you hold (not just compare) two conflicting ideas at the same time. The evil you excuse will become your excuse to transgress. Smart folks and idiots alike can walk that path, for it has more to do with the heart than the head.
Look at the darkness in America where so many very clever folks in banking, the financial sector and in politics have been busy breaking laws, making bad ones and not making other good ones, so as to make those acts of destruction themselves rules to live by. Darkness is it's own reward. Those brilliant minds have a hard time grasping the degree of their destructiveness. I was reminded of that the other day when I watched (on YouTube) Sarah Palin, a servant of power like McCain, in an interview with Katie Couric. It was hard to believe that powerful people have become so full of attitude, arrogance and cynicism that they could try to place such idiots in the most powerful political posts on the planet just for their own gain. Probably the party is over for Palin. And for McCain. Is it also over for America? If so, then it's also over for this ungodly world. And that's a good thing.
As with other things, the bible also floats.
Following the collapse of the USSR, a friend of mine commented that, as Marx once observed, all societies contain the seeds of their own distruction.
Most people don't even realize that making the world a better place is impossible. You're focusing on unrealistic tasks. As such, to me you're just one that talks about it. Either that or every thing you help, you hurt something else that's beneficial. -- Every single thing you can do to make the world a better place is worse for someone else. It's impossible to make it absolutely better for everyone. Some idealists would focus on balancing the world out. Not realizing that it's through the extremities of contrast ... it's through difference that we gain an appreciation for anything. We appreciate happiness because we experience pain. Without pain we wouldn't even know what happiness is. The extremes and contrast is necessary. If everyone in the world was equal, there would be no disparaging beliefs, feelings, or anything of the sort. There would be none of the things people define to be life.
As such, war and destruction is necessary. In order for anything to be created something MUST be destroyed. You cannot give to one thing without taking away from another. Life is already synchronous / balanced. The world is already balanced. The problem is people search for balance in the middle.
Balance is not always found in the middle.
So maybe you want to make it a better place by stopping the wars. If so, you're being hypocritical ... warring in order to stop the wars. Funny.
You're just adding to the noise.
If you're gonna try to stop wars, maybe you should try to stop the one within you.
If you perceive my previous response to be selfish, you perception of selfishness is incomplete. Anything you identify with ... is selfish. Understand, listen carefully ... identity ... identify ... identi-T-y ... identi-F-y ... identity IS the ego. Ego is the SELF. As such, the moment you spat something which you identified with you were being selfish. Everything you were saying was selfish. I was advocating the removal of ego. I was advocating being understanding. The removal of ego is the ONLY thing that can stop wars, because ego IS the source of war. I was advocating, focusing on someone else's desires instead of our own. Focusing outside of myself on another's desires, and not "my" desires for them ... their actual desires. Yet, you thought / deluded that I was being self-centered in that?
You really weren't paying attention.
I say the world is fine as it is, and have no complaints ... because I don't look down upon anyone. I accept what they do, how they are. I am understanding of them. That is the absence of ego, and the removal of war.
Yet, it's possible you still won't even see it ... because you won't look beyond your identity.
Do you even understand that worrying is always selfish? It doesn't matter who you are worried about. If you worry about anything, it's always purely about you. If you want to stop wars or anything of the like, it appears you have a long way to go. You're still a fighter, as such you're still creating wars.
"If you're gonna try to stop wars, maybe you should try to stop the one within you."
People do not see that they are identified, that is the problem; they do not self-observe, but try to change the outer, thinking that will make them feel better. Selfish? Perhaps. Ignorant? Definitely!
"I say the world is fine as it is, and have no complaints ... because I don't look down upon anyone. I accept what they do, how they are..."
No the social world is not 'fine as it is'; it is destructive and insane. Why? Because the individual is capable of awakening, of transcending his or her ignorance, but prefers the false 'comfort' of being inwardly asleep. He or she does not realize that meaningful change can only come from within. We cannot cure a sick tree by culling its unsightly branches, but only by nourishing its roots. And the tree of humanity is indeed sick. You are correct, though, you cannot force anyone else to see and/or understand this.
Otherwise, I agree with most of what you say. Awaken yourself and that will light the candle in others. On some level, many will feel your transformation. There is always resonance on levels we do not fully understand, but are attracted to. Understanding and discernment come later, along with dissolution of the ego, if we are willing to work.
So you tell me to think about the community ... I am, and the community is not the world. The community comes long before the world. The community is not even our country. Do you seriously think that your vote will make a difference like they advocate to you? If the problem is the government itself, even if you got the next few presidents in office which are on similar pages all of which are trying to promote the same change ... it would still take a few generations to change the government. Nothing short of a true global catastrophe will change this government quickly. So regardless of who's in office, you're just getting more of the same.
Oh, lowered taxes? Is that true change to you? Or are you so focused on the war? -- Every single thing you can advocate that a president will do for the better is a drop in the bucket. See ... me, I don't care about the costs going up, NOT because I have so much and can afford it, but because I will adapt, and make due WITHOUT complaining about it like you. It doesn't mean I struggle less, it just means I bitch and worry less. However, I can assure you that I'm the type of person that sits on the streets with homeless people, feeding them personally, and talking to them individually. -- I give everything I have to someone else.
I "purely" focus on the community. If I am so focused on the community, please explain to me when do I have the time to focus on the world or even be concerned with it? The world is irrelevant to me. So before you preach biased perceptions at least try listening, instead of just judging. However, that's often difficult to do when one feels so strongly and is being self-centered / egotistical. -- The fact that you're trying to advocate right and wrong, that alone is egotistical. Better or worse, right and wrong are always relative. One's preferences are never better or worse than another's.
Ironically "righteousness" is often the very cause of the things you complain about.
People who believe they are so more right than another, and lose their sense of unity.
Do you realize that the cause of wars is not because it's the bad versus the good ... but it's usually the good versus the good? Two sides which think they are doing the right thing, but neither side is willing to truly hear the other. Both sides which think the other's bad / wrong / worse simply because they clash, and if they perceive themselves to be good / right / better ... then the opposing side must be bad / wrong / worse. But it's a fact that the good cannot fight bad.
Have you ever seen a "truly" weak man fight a strong man? The weak man would get slaughtered. Good and bad are complimentary, they can never clash. Ying and Yang do not clash, they co-exist, they thrive off of one another, support, push and pull one another. They do not destroy one another. -- People get it confused because society has confused it. "Opposite" means to oppose, to stand or go against. Yet, imagine a strong guy opposing a weak guy. It just wouldn't happen. Imagine a negative side of a magnet opposing a positive side. It just wouldn't happen. But yet positive is opposite of negative right? Nah, that's bullshit ... the TRUTH is ... both sides MUST be positive, or both sides MUST be negative, in order for them to reject / oppose. And that's a fact of life.
The only time our society gets "opposite" accurately is when they are referring to two sides of "the same thing". However, that kind of opposite is merely physical position. Thus the opposite side of a quarter, the opposite side of a magnet. It's not possible for the physically opposite side of something to be joined, because they are already joined. But the moment you try to compare opposites which are not part of the same item, it becomes perceptual ... and they cease to oppose. It's just not possible.
Thus, in wars ... BOTH sides are the good guys, or both sides are the bad guys. But people aren't willing to see that, they don't want to hear how the other side is good, they don't want to be understanding. They are being selfish, focusing on what they want to. Perceiving one thing to be more beneficial than the other. They are being egotistical and lacking unity (ego is one's identity separate from others, thus it's the beginning of all conflicts, all perceptions of differences, ego is the absense of unity ... so whenever someone lacks unity, they are being egotistical). -- As such, you indirectly are the cause of the very things you dislike. In order to unify one must be at least willing to truly listen to something outside of themselves. Not just the things that coincide with them.
Your very blog was being egotistical and causing conflict.
Yet, you say "I'm" being self-centered right? Just because you're redirecting your selfishness. Smh. It's all slight of hand. It's a fact that you are being self-centered. Prove that you're not being selfish by actually unifying, trying to be understanding of the situations you fight against. As a martial artist you should understand the lessons of finding stillness, clarity, and acceptance ... unless your teachings were the inverse.
An article like yourself, suggests that there is nothing we can do because the problem is too big. Therefore, you sit on your dumbass in the lotus position of your choice and decide to do nothing.
After being called "self-centered" by a number of people:
I'm a borderline sociopath. I can watch a school bus of children burning alive, and it wouldn't bother me even slightly. I'm not actually a sociopath, I'm an INTJ(http://typelogic.com/intj.html) personality type (one of the rarest, so people like me arent very common) ... however, we're often confused with sociopaths. -- It's not that we don't care (sociopaths don't care), it's that our brains work differently than most people's ... so we care about different things, but we care.
Most of you are so busy listening to your own feelings on the matter that you're not truly listening, while trying to claim another's being self-centered? Any time we reject someone's desires, we're being egotistical. As such, your responses were egotistical. Yet, you're preaching.
Listen.
Listen.
I'd rather concern myself with things I can actually do something about, than bitch about things I cannot. A person who's dying, or has died ... they have nothing to worry about. They are either already gone, or will be. The people who are truly suffering are the ones left behind. I'd rather tend to those people. As such, I won't be concerned with the children in the bus ... I'd be concerned with the parents. Most people would look at the situation and turn it into being about them ... focusing on how they would feel if they were in the situation. "OMG what if that was my children on the bus?" As they relate, they focus on themselves. It's impossible to relate to something, without focusing on yourself.
As such, they turn another's plight into their own.
It's similar to stealing the other person's spotlight. Selfish. Egotistical.
Which ironically is what you did in your reply. I'd rather focus on them, instead of myself (instead of focusing on what I feel about it). I'd rather tend to them, instead of my thoughts (contemplating and worrying, I'd rather do than wish or hope). I'd rather act, than contemplate. -- So when it comes to a global scale, I really don't care .. since there are plenty of people in front of me that could be tended to. Plenty of people in my life, that I would neglect as I'm focusing on those who are not. You can't give energy to one thing without taking away from another. I bet you'd justify leaving you wife at home to struggle by herself, in order for you to be able to to tend to the homeless in another country. You'd neglect one community in favor of another. My approach seems selfish, because I'm attending to the community I'm actually in. However, that would be the case wherever in the world I am. -- My priorities are straight. Parents neglect their children as they watch the news and care about the world. -- I'd rather care about the child, because to me they'd be the world.
Everyone else could die for all I care. I mean that, sincerely.
My original post from a week ago:
I don't know anything about the details of the elections ... never did, never will. -- Many of us dream big and hope to change the world, but I think the world is fine as it is and have no complaints. Many of us, enjoy talking about world issues ... deluding that they are addressing things which are bigger than ourselves. However, the irony is, it's an issue simply because we perceive it to be ... and as such, we're merely addressing ourselves using something else as the object / focus. -- And in the process of complaining and adding to our issues, we add stress to our day ... egotistically rejecting instead of accepting. We advocate our beliefs, as if our perception is absolute. When our preferences are truly relative.
So ... it's all a matter of perspective. Which side is right, which side is wrong? Both sides are equally right, and wrong ... at all times, in all matters. It's all about are we willing to see the other side of the story, or do we want to stay within the confines of our identity. -- I try to be understanding of all sides. To see beyond my ego, beyond my own desires for myself and others. To such a degree that I would even do something which is contradictory to my beliefs if ... I care enough about them, and it's what they want (clearly state they want). To do what they desire, instead of telling them to do what I desire ... since I know that my desires may actually hurt them, in a way that they do not want. -- I'm not worried about their desires hurting me, since it's probable that it can't ... and even if it did I'm okay with pain. So I have nothing to worry about. I'd enjoy it either way (not masochistic, but appreciative of the pain we gain in life, as well as the fortune. Hence why I think the world is fine as it is, because I appreciate life as it is).
--
I'm Republican, but if I cared enough to vote I'd go with Obama. Not because I perceive him to change policies. I think ultimately they are all salespeople, and will spin things in a way that will sway the masses. What others who are influenced decide to buy into or reject depends on their stance and the other's delivery / salespitch. I never even had a problem with Bush. The only thoughts about him that came to mind, was sometimes I felt sorry for him because so many ridiculed him. -- Anyway, I'd go with Obama, simply because he's black.
Even if he merely perpetuated what exists, him being black and in such a position ... that alone will make things more accessible to others (and promote some kind of balance). If Hilary won against him ... I would've voted for her for similar reasons. I was actually more for Hilary than Obama. I think her being in office would've been more impactful, not because of her stance ... but because of her sex. Get a stupid woman in office, and that would just further cement reasons why women shouldn't be in office. However, although I do not know her position on things ... I know is that she would have been adequate representation. Yet, I knew it was more acceptible by people, to have a someone who's black and a man in office ... before they allowed a woman. People aren't that big on significant change, they need smaller steps. Next election it would be more probable that a woman can win. Regardless, I would've voted for her.
However, I do not care enough to actually vote.
For regardless of the outcome, I'd accept what comes ... and adapt just as easilly, without any qualms nor complaints.
Yikes!
No kidding!
"However, I do not care enough to actually vote."
Good for you. Go take some more valium, dude.
The end of the American Empire. I wish I had a Euro for every time I've heard that one.
And if the premature bleating of the loudmouth on the bus keeps you from realizing that this time it's for real, you're a fool. Empires don't always die in a weekend as did the USSR. Then again, people who were watching the right things carefully (not little Condi) saw that the USSR had been teetoring for quite a while, so it wasn't all in one weekend after all.
Same with the US. Obviously, a lot a power and prestige evaporated with the Vietnam humiliation. Etc. Until now, with a debt that is out of control (do you have any inkling of how much we have to work just to pay for the interest on our debt!??) a balance of trade completely unsustainable, 2 wars that are hugely expensive disasters, and now the whole financial sector nationalized. If you don't know what this means, you might want to keep that to yourself.
Try reading my comment once more, it's called irony.
Ooooops! You know...I had an inkling, but I drew my gun too fast and then of course I wanted to fire it. That you used the Euro, of course, should have lit the bulb...it didn't quite.
I'm practically blushing. Touche. And I like irony...when I get it, obviously. And it was pretty good. Too subtle....? Naw. I just plain missed it.
Cheers.
Reading this mornings news, Europe is having similar bank failing, bail out, issues as well. I don't know what to do with my $375 I withdrew from Washington Mutual. Buy shovels and squash seeds?
I keep hearing this is laissez-faire capitalism, but it's not really. Someone has to pay for the government, for the military. They want to privatize everything, but not quite, not as long as they can gain from the military and government kickbacks.
But the real reason it's not laissez-faire is because of the way taxes are taken. So long as the rich can avoid paying the invisible hand is being guided. And the rest of us are being spanked by it.
I think you're perfectly confused and I don't think you understand 'laissez-faire'. You seem to think that term is somewhat positive. 'Laissez-faire' simply means capitalism allowed to do what it wants...no rules...no regulations to speak of. And those rules that do exist can be avoided or ignored with impunity. Of course, it's perfectly laissez-faire capitalism, which is obviously perfectly stupid. The economy and the financial sector need rules as badly and as obviously as the school-yard. No rules, the bullies rule. In the economy, the bullies are the big money people who run after obscene profits with total freedom.
To support your ridiculous contention, you offer: "Someone has to pay for the government, for the military"?? Of course someone has to pay for gov't expenses and all those guns etc.: Our taxes, you and me. If there were rules, if it wasn't totally laissez-faire, corporations would not be able to manipulate the system to have DoD and the Pentagone spend fortunes (buying from those corporations!!) for weapons we don't need or for weapons needed to fight imperialistic wars so that US capitalists can make $$$...in...oh...where would be an example....I know! Iraq!! For instance.
We (the people) through our government (democracy) do not make the real choices about our society--the corporate sector does. It has total freedom to do what it wants. It went after obscene profits with methods and tactics that were derided by people who knew, but they kept going...because they were making incredible profits. When the system crashed they come running for taxpayers to bail them out.
Of course it's laissez-faire and it's just as stupid as it sounds. Everything in life needs rules and regulations. Everything.
Excellent points. The only thing that I have to add is the term that goes along with laissez-fair, caveat emptor - "let the buyer beware".
Oversight:
We're being raped and they're setting up bleachers.
FREE AMERICA
REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY
American global leadership will end only when all foreign military bases are closed, our troops are brought home, and our nuclear weapons platforms are rusting in their silos and hangers, or alongside graveyard wharves. This is how the USSR fell. Unless America falls as hard, it will be "business as usual".
You're dreaming...hallucination is more the word. The USSR had to pull out of Afghanistan, as we had to pull our of Vietnam. But the bases in Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc., etc., were not removed before the USSR disintegrated.
We're done. Appearances will be kept up for some years yet, but don't worry, in terms of global economic and military dynamics, we're done. Nobody is going to mess with us militarily (that was never a possibility...look at a map of the world.) And we have nukes.
But we're done pushing people around. US hegemony, so real and so profitable for our corporations....is done.
I'm glad to see that you agree with me, though you should try reading my post before thinking. After the USSR disintegrated, the posts in neighboring satellites were closed down because the troops were not paid so they came home, leaving equipment behind. I worked with what was left of the Soviet military in the 1990s at abandoned military outposts throughout the former Soviet Union; many troops had not been paid in years but they kept coming to work in the hope that they would receive a pay check. They survived because their wives made and sold candles, etc. Or they sold military hardware on the black market. There was no accounting and hardware was for the taking.
Okay, I guess I misunderstood and fired a bit too quick and hard. You certainly don't seem to need me to explain what happened there. Fantastic experience you had, BTW. Must have been something to experience that.
I travelled 'behind the curtain' in 79 (Russia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, E. Germany, etc.) and met lots of people on both sides (for and against communism) but to see the Russian soldiers everywhere, in places like Czechoslovakia, was jarring. Locals mostly hated them, of course, and you almost had to feel sorry for the soldiers who really seemed out of place, but were just young men 'doing their job'.
It 'smelled' like it couldn't go on much longer. This fellow I met in Prague had lots of interesting and funny things to say (I found the Czechs really friendly and hospitable). He was talking one time about the fertile lands in his country and that they produced really good beef..."for the people", he said, "the people of Moscow"! He said they didn't see one bit of it; it all got shipped to the centre of the empire.
Thanks for the great info. That's very interesting.
The United States has not really been a superpower for quite a while, except militarily. In that we reign supreme. Now that it is the only superpower we have left, we are much more dangerous! The world, including the citizenry of the United States, has never been this much at risk.
The surface has not even been scratched on the economic debacle before us; not in the U.S. nor the world at large. Maybe this is the reason Tony Blair has taken a teaching position here in the U.S. of A; knowing that after following Bush's lead on Iraq and Economy, it will not be safe for him at home.
I suppose we could use that last superpower. We could just default on our debt, nationalize all foreign owned entities and tell the rest of the world "What are ya' gonna do, invade us". Of course this would mean that we would also have to return to producing what we use ourselves, as opposed to buying it from half way around the world. Oh, and we would probably need to pull our military back from the seven hundred and some odd countries where we now have a military presence. George W. has already set the precedent, "I am not bound by any agreements made before I became President".
Economic Globalization has been a catastrophe, for the people and the planet. How much of our energy resources have been used, and how much of the environmental degradation of the planet and quality of life (planet wide) has occurred as the result of moving stuff around in order to increase the opportunities for making a profit off of it?
I agree with the gist of your post.
However, "...pull our military back from the seven hundred and some odd countries where we now have a military presence." ??
You probably mean 700 or so bases...?? Wikipedia claims that the US has bases in 36 countries (there are around 200 countries in total on the planet).
Sorry. I suppose I should have previewed my post better. However, countries-bases, what real difference does it make?
Also, I am really tired of Wikipedia being used as a/the diffinitive source of information. It is just fucking lazy. Wikipedia is chocked full of accurate information; it is also chocked with information that is not even close to reality.
The American citizen who voted for the ruling elite are to blame.
They should get what they deserve, ruin.
Interesting proposition. Just how do you propose to accomplish it? What I mean is, how do you plan to proportion the ruin so that it only afflicts those who voted for the ruling elite?
Why would anyone blink an eye about these occurrances? It is all the name I shall never speak has strived for a total social, political and financial ruin, all dumped in the laps of my grandchildren. I live in another part of the World half of the year and they are suffering badly, being that where my house is that country still has odd credit lending. Insofar as mortgages, cars and the like. You pay 1/2 up front and payoff the remainder within 3 years time. Many countries in the EU have stopped their lending and are fearful. We are no more no less, I fear it's been so long they look to us as the Titular Head of all That Suceeds, they feel loss believe it or not and I live in a Muslim country.
B.O.R.D.C. is a grand organization, we can pledge our asses until the Fourth is given back or they stop arresting us for exercising our First @ not allowing whatever it was we were supposed to have the power to end the almost thourough decimation of the actual Constitution of the United States, as if we were able to elude the Stassi that will kick our door in at 2 am and we can do nothing, nothing, so if we have any Power at all I would hope we should swear the same allegiance to what the Framers had in mind when they penned what I never leave home without. For if this Constitution had been adhered to we would not be where we are now, I assure myself daily by feeling the pocket size copy in my rear pocket all highlighted and dog eared but it is my muse for my fight, my fight to live and do every damn thing I can to see that person charged with WAR CRIMES for it is no less....
BillofRights
>>if Obama wasnt going to totally repudiate, denounce and end the neocon Imperial project, ending this insane spending on Imperial delusions of grandeur that are destroying this country, that I would vote for McKinney.<<
GO FOR IT! Excellent idea. We should all do that!
"if Obama wasnt going to totally repudiate, denounce and end the neocon Imperial project, ending this insane spending on Imperial delusions of grandeur that are destroying this country"
He's NOT. In fact, he's "the neocon Imperial project" with a different wrapper
"I would vote for McKinney."
INDEED
Some people remember exactly where they were when they heard the news of JFK's assassination. Others remember where they were on 9/11. I remember the day that Americans elected Saint Ronald. Nothing has surprised me much since.
I vividly remember walking in front of a TV during the campaign and the Great Communicator was bleating one of his folksy, simplistic pieces of foolishness, and it stopped me cold in my tracks. I remember exactly the look on his face.
What sent a shiver up my spine was simply this thought: "People are going to fall for that shit and elect him". At that moment, I just had that premonition. And it seemed so utterly stupid, depressing, and frightening that he would make an impression with that bull, but I felt he would.
I told my sister: "He's going to win". I don't get depressed easily, if at all, but I didn't sleep well that night.
Thank You
I was 19 years old when America went crazy and elected that Nazi, placing the corporations firmly at the helm of the power of this once great country.
I'd barely left home to start out on my own, when the scared white folks in the 2 generations before mine sold the country out, sold my generation out (and the following generations as well), because of fear. Fear of the "coloreds", the "coloreds" gettin too much, "coloreds gettin in the union", "coloreds gettin uppity","colored buying a better car than I got", "coloreds livin off my hard earned money", "spics movin in", "spics tryin to take my job", "They're on the welfare driving Cadillacs and eatin steak", "They're animals"........I was not to young to remember the white block parties when MLK got snuffed, "they finally got that commie bastard nigger"...... but history is usually written by those attempting to cover their tracks. The Nazi has airports and highways named after it today.
So we have all been made to suffer, out of fear and ignorance, the fear and ignorance exploited by corporations just waiting for the opportunity to take it all....and frack us all up the ars and get the majority to believe that's what patriotism is
Read the Shock Doctrine. The so-called end of our empire is an opportunity for a nosedive into fascism.
Remember, it wasn't the New Deal that lifted the US out of the depression so much as WWII.
Ready for WWIII?
Yeah, we're seeing how wonderful a war is for an economy. That's bullshit.
WW11 pulled te country out of the depression because industry insured every body was put to work making ships, tanks, jeeps, clothing, all trash was recycled into new materials. the prosperity continued becase of education provided by the government. People Had dreams again. all of the remaining war surplus was put to use in society for many fudemental things.
this current war is only about greed, Haliburtn and KBR have moved ofshore to
NOT PAY TAXES ON TAXPAYERS MONEY.
all employees are contractors mostly not even us citizens, no healthcare no taxes no SSN.
OUTRIGHT THEFT OF US MONEY BY CHENEYS FRIENDS
soldiers bought their own equipment, used trash to fix equipment while bush sat on his ass to not even ensure Armor suppplied to to troops and soldiers udes 300 dollar "KBR monogramed" towles to wipe up the blood.
THIS WAS THEFT OF OUR NATIONS WEALTH ON THE GRANDEST SCALE EVER!!!!!!
It's not BS at all. Look at the number of American billionaires! That money is going somewhere! It's a free market frenzy that got out of hand but imagine if there was no war and that national debt to drive our economy. Perhaps our markets would have collapsed even earlier and harder than they are now.
The difference maker today is our eroding reputation, the illegality of the war, and China's emergence. The gist of it all is spread all over the globe with a left click or a right click. America, with all of its propaganda CIA-style, cannot stop the flow of information. Palin would probably speed up the government or corporate-control of the internet. That is why she is being primed for presidency.
WWIII has been going on for a while against the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and so forth - nothing new.
The aim should not be to lift the country out of depression, but to create a more humane model of economics. BUT I doubt the WWIII scenario, or that the wars we have going now is going to get worse - because the US economy is fundamentally different from how it was in the 30s and 40s.
Then, practically all of US's manufacturing was done within the US boundaries. (And of-course Nazi Germany had their own manufacturing as well).
It did not have to borrow (as much) money to conduct its wars. Now, the US has no manufacturing base, and all of its wars are being conducted through borrowed money. That money will dry up, not only because of the US being a bad credit risk, but because those countries are not going to have enough $$$ to lend. An imperialist power that bases itself on paper and fraudulent finance is not going to be able to carry on with its wars for very long.
BUT there is the risk of increased fascism within the US - and this is why progressives should not tie themselves to either of the pro-war/anti-people Obama/McCain duo, or political parties.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
Saalia: "This is undoubtedly wonderful news to Iraqi and Afghan civilians as well as to other civilians who might have been killed in America’s merciless hegemonic wars.
"
I agree to an extent, problem is that the most oppressed groups within the US will suffer, i.e. African Americans, Latinos, immigrant farm workers, white working class etc.
What would be even better, is if the progressive forces unite and make it their agenda to give Nader a robust 15% or more vote *this* election year. That would majorly shake up both the war parties - and send a clear message that change is afoot.
Unfortunately, the only thing coming out of all of this is an even worse noise of vote Obama - even though he has now clearly said that he not only will continue with the war, but also none of the table scrap social programs he promised is going to happen, 'cause of the 1,000 billion (no it is not just 700 billion , it is a lot lot lot more) have to be given to the banks who are holding the country at gun point, with their scare tactics.
The liberals and Democrats are further taking the country down the drain, the people who are supposed to be the watchdogs - and on the side of those who will suffer most - are also advocating for more of the same. It is a seriously pathetic situation.
And all this, when we know that almost 100% of Americans oppose the bailout. For once, the right wing shrill on talk radio is not getting through. Just this once, it seems that Americans have some sense, and are not listening to the garbage from either war parties.
This is the perfect time to mobilize enough people to give Nader a huge vote - and send a clear message - of no more buziness as usual.
BUT I agree, it is good for the rest of the planet if this acts as a brake on the US's war plans.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
The organizing narrative of our time is fear.
Mr. and Mrs. Middle America are afraid of an abstract noun, terrorism, and are also afraid of losing their jobs and their home. They see every day that the price of gasoline and milk and other necessities is out of control. The control that they maintain over their own destiny is next to zero.
Fear is visceral, and it is soothed by emotional appeal rather than rationality. This emotional appeal tends to come from religion and from (apparently) stabilizing social forces, such as government, political parties, police, military, the boss, and so on. By the same token, fear inspires people to reject (apparent) forces of instability: demonstrators, dissenters, members of the underclass who speak up, and so on. The worst of them are more comfortable blaming the 9/11 attacks on feminists and non-Christians, for example, than in considering cause-and-effect.
Our mainstream political parties understand the fear narrative differently, but they both use it as an organizing principle. Republicans successfully exploit fear of "the other," whereas Democrats successfully exploit fear of Republicans.
Both parties gain when things get worse, because the fear that draws their supporters becomes reinforced. Even people who otherwise have a couple of brain cells to bash together refuse to examine why we are where we are; everything gets subordinated to "I'm just afraid of that other guy getting in!" The downward spiral continues.
The effect on mainstream political discourse is a narrowing and a rightward shift, as has been demonstrated post-Watergate and especially since the establishment of the DLC. This may, in part, explain why Democrats fight Greens with a verve and fury that Dems' bipartisan buddies will never see.
So, musawwir, while 15% for Nader or McKinney or even cumulative total vote for progressive parties would shake things up, it ain't happenin'. Fear wins.
Make no mistake: I am committed to supporting a politics that represents decency. The right thing to do remains the right thing to do regardless of how popular. Expecting great change soon is quite another matter.
al Musawwir sez:
"What would be even better, is if the progressive forces unite and make it their agenda to give Nader a robust 15% or more vote *this* election year. That would majorly shake up both the war parties - and send a clear message that change is afoot."
Yeah, I'm sure President McCain would lose all sorts of sleep over it.
Who cares whether a "Presdident McCain would lose any sleep over it"? Voting for either him or Obama is voting for the same mentality and ideology that got the US into this mess in the first place. 15% or more for Nader might be a good start for whomever follows in his footsteps. One thing we can be certain, that the next president of the United States will be more of the same as the two-headed Corporate dragon will continue the slide.
No, it's not and if you don't know the difference, you're too simple to debate these points. I could fill pages with a point-form summary of what I hated about Clinton and co. But it wasn't fascism and not nearly as bad as Cheney/Rove/Bush, et al.
Even Nader said the Bush administration was the worst in history and many times worse than the Dems. Trying to pretend that Gore would have been the same as Bush, or that electing McCain is the same as electing Obama is stupid.
The government was doomed to fail when they began to strive for power rather than right after WW2. Bu$h the inferior and Shotgun Dick pushed into high speed failure because they gave up all effort to do the right thing across the board. Torture, fascism, military occupation, rampant crony-ism, racism, mendacity and financial insanity were completely adopted to achieve personal and political goals in the short term.
As it turns out, truth, debt, peace, freedom and democracy do matter and much more quickly than they figured. I hope justice follows.
Regarding American presidential leadership I perceive the following:
McCain: All ass, no brains
Obama: All brains, no ass
In a time of crisis neither one appears ready.
You forgot:
Nader: All Class, All brains
Ready with solutions to the crisis...
.