Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why I am a Socialist
The corporate forces that are looting the Treasury and have plunged us into a depression will not be contained by the two main political parties. The Democratic and Republican parties have become little more than squalid clubs of privilege and wealth, whores to money and corporate interests, hostage to a massive arms industry, and so adept at deception and self-delusion they no longer know truth from lies. We will find our way out of this mess by embracing an uncompromising democratic socialism-one that will insist on massive government relief and work programs, the nationalization of electricity and gas companies, a universal, not-for-profit government health care program, the outlawing of hedge funds, a radical reduction of our bloated military budget and an end to imperial wars-or we will continue to be fleeced and impoverished by our bankrupt elite and shackled and chained by our surveillance state.
The free market and globalization, promised as the route to worldwide prosperity, have been exposed as a con game. But this does not mean our corporate masters will disappear. Totalitarianism, as George Orwell pointed out, is not so much an age of faith as an age of schizophrenia. "A society becomes totalitarian when its structure becomes flagrantly artificial," Orwell wrote, "that is when its ruling class has lost its function but succeeds in clinging to power by force or fraud." Force and fraud are all they have left. They will use both.
There is a political shift in Europe toward an open confrontation with the corporate state. Germany has seen a surge of support for Die Linke (The Left), a political grouping formed 18 months ago. It is co-led by the veteran socialist "Red" Oskar Lafontaine, who has built his career on attacking big business. Two-thirds of Germans in public opinion polls say they agree with all or some of Die Linke's platform. The Socialist Party of the Netherlands is on the verge of overtaking the Labor Party as the main opposition party on the left. Greece, beset with street protests and violence by disaffected youths, has seen the rapid rise of the Coalition of the Radical Left. In Spain and Norway socialists are in power. Resurgence is not universal, especially in France and Britain, but the shifts toward socialism are significant.
Corporations have intruded into every facet of life. We eat corporate food. We buy corporate clothes. We drive corporate cars. We buy our vehicular fuel and our heating oil from corporations. We borrow from corporate banks. We invest our retirement savings with corporations. We are entertained, informed and branded by corporations. We work for corporations. The creation of a mercenary army, the privatization of public utilities and our disgusting for-profit health care system are all legacies of the corporate state. These corporations have no loyalty to America or the American worker. They are not tied to nation states. They are vampires.
"By now the [commercial] revolution has deprived the mass of consumers of any independent access to the staples of life: clothing, shelter, food, even water," Wendell Berry wrote in "The Unsettling of America." "Air remains the only necessity that the average user can still get for himself, and the revolution had imposed a heavy tax on that by way of pollution. Commercial conquest is far more thorough and final than military defeat."
The corporation is designed to make money without regard to human life, the social good or impact on the environment. Corporate laws impose a legal duty on corporate executives to make as much money as possible for shareholders, although many have moved on to fleece shareholders as well. In the 2003 documentary film "The Corporation" the management guru Peter Drucker says: "If you find an executive who wants to take on social responsibilities, fire him. Fast."
A corporation that attempts to engage in social responsibility, that tries to pay workers a decent wage with benefits, that invests its profits to protect the environment and limit pollution, that gives consumers fair deals, can be sued by shareholders. Robert Monks, the investment manager, says in the film: "The corporation is an externalizing machine, in the same way that a shark is a killing machine. There isn't any question of malevolence or of will. The enterprise has within it, and the shark has within it, those characteristics that enable it to do that for which it was designed." Ray Anderson, the CEO of Interface Corp., the world's largest commercial carpet manufacturer, calls the corporation a "present day instrument of destruction" because of its compulsion to "externalize any cost that an unwary or uncaring public will allow it to externalize."
"The notion that we can take and take and take and take, waste and waste, without consequences, is driving the biosphere to destruction," Anderson says.
In short, the film, based on Joel Bakan's book "The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power," asserts that the corporation exhibits many of the traits found in people clinically defined as psychopaths.
Psychologist Dr. Robert Hare lists in the film psychopathic traits and ties them to the behavior of corporations:
- callous unconcern for the feelings for others;
- incapacity to maintain enduring relationships;
- reckless disregard for the safety of others;
- deceitfulness: repeated lying and conning others for profit;
- incapacity to experience guilt;
- failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behavior.
And yet, under the American legal system, corporations have the same legal rights as individuals. They give hundreds of millions of dollars to political candidates, fund the army of some 35,000 lobbyists in Washington and thousands more in state capitals to write corporate-friendly legislation, drain taxpayer funds and abolish government oversight. They saturate the airwaves, the Internet, newsprint and magazines with advertisements promoting their brands as the friendly face of the corporation. They have high-priced legal teams, millions of employees, skilled public relations firms and thousands of elected officials to ward off public intrusions into their affairs or halt messy lawsuits. They hold a near monopoly on all electronic and printed sources of information. A few media giants-AOL-Time Warner, General Electric, Viacom, Disney and Rupert Murdoch's NewsGroup-control nearly everything we read, see and hear.
"Private capital tends to become concentrated in [a] few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones," Albert Einstein wrote in 1949 in the Monthly Review in explaining why he was a socialist. "The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights."
Labor and left-wing activists, especially university students and well-heeled liberals, have failed to unite. This division, which is often based on social rather than economic differences, has long stymied concerted action against ruling elites. It has fractured the American left and rendered it impotent.
"Large sections of the middle class are being gradually proletarianized; but the important point is that they do not, at any rate not in the first generation, adopt a proletarian outlook," Orwell wrote in 1937 during the last economic depression. "Here I am, for instance, with a bourgeois upbringing and a working-class income. Which class do I belong to? Economically I belong to the working class, but it is almost impossible for me to think of myself as anything but a member of the bourgeoisie. And supposing I had to take sides, whom should I side with, the upper class which is trying to squeeze me out of existence, or the working class whose manners are not my manners? It is probable that I, personally, in any important issue, would side with the working class. But what about the tens or hundreds of thousands of others who are in approximately the same position? And what about that far larger class, running into millions this time-the office-workers and black-coated employees of all kinds-whose traditions are less definite middle class but who would certainly not thank you if you called them proletarians? All of these people have the same interests and the same enemies as the working class. All are being robbed and bullied by the same system. Yet how many of them realize it? When the pinch came nearly all of them would side with their oppressors and against those who ought to be their allies. It is quite easy to imagine a working class crushed down to the worst depths of poverty and still remaining bitterly anti-working-class in sentiment; this being, of course, a ready-made Fascist party."
Coalitions of environmental, anti-nuclear, anti-capitalist, sustainable-agriculture and anti-globalization forces have coalesced in Europe to form and support socialist parties. This has yet to happen in the United States. The left never rallied in significant numbers behind Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader. In picking the lesser of two evils, it threw its lot in with a Democratic Party that backs our imperial wars, empowers the national security state and does the bidding of corporations.
If Barack Obama does not end the flagrant theft of taxpayer funds by corporate slugs and the disgraceful abandonment of our working class, especially as foreclosures and unemployment mount, many in the country will turn in desperation to the far right embodied by groups such as Christian radicals. The failure by the left to offer a democratic socialist alternative will mean there will be, in the eyes of many embittered and struggling working- and middle-class Americans, no alternative but a perverted Christian fascism. The inability to articulate a viable socialism has been our gravest mistake. It will ensure, if this does not soon change, a ruthless totalitarian capitalism.
- Posted in




106 Comments so far
Show AllA-FucN-Men
One reason we haven't united is because of our lack of education due to compulsory schooling. There is a new book out last week addressing that problem by John Taylor Gatto... Weapons of Mass Instruction: A Schoolteacher's Journey through the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling. http://tinyurl.com/92bdwt
Americans have been trained to accept the corporate fucking and like it. Utopia in America won't happen for generations if at all unless people are free to think for themselves from childhood on. For the rest of us maybe Europe or Canada is the answer, if any would accept us? I don't have generations to wait.
Well put. It's one thing to pander to the fascists but when they do it with glee and attack us for not playing go-along-get-along, then I know they're really fucked. Might as well give them the death penalty if we're gonna win better representation that doesn't betray us.
None of us have generations to wait, I agree. That is one reason I am homeschooling my children. I had the honor of meeting Mr. Gatto at a homeschooling conference. He is funny and wise. He has generously put his book "Underground History of American Education" on his website for free. www.johntaylorgatto.com Another free book online, kind of a primer for why it's not a great idea to give representatives from American oil, gas and car companies free reign in the halls of power: www.9112010.com This one is fiction, but contains a lot of wonderful essays. I hope that all of you reading these words can check out these books. Both authors simply want the truth to be told and accepted and that is why they are writing for free. But I think the larger truth we need to remember is that as long as corporations have the same rights as humans, truth will remain skewed. Vote with your dollars.
Home schooling isn't a bad idea when done right and when parents can actually afford it. In this day and time when both couples have to work to keep economically afloat, home schooling ain't easy. Am I missing something here?
Dear Cynthia,
Thanks for the 9112010.com link. I'm about 3 chapters into this and I'm already concluding I need to pass this along to a large number of my correspondents. Many of us are.... cynical. Yes, we have people in Washington who were perfectly willing to sacrifice 3,000 of their fellow citizens for the sake of greed and power. This is why I feel it is essential that Bush and his criminal co-conspirators be brought to trial. Failing to do so will end the "good" America we've been taught to believe in. The corrosiveness of allowing Bush et al to walk free will forever be a mark of ignominy upon this nation. Sadly, it would appear that the gutsiest thing Obama is considering is the possibility of some sort of whitewash 'truth and reconciliation' show trial about Gitmo. That simply will not suffice.
***
As far as your prescription to "vote with your dollars", I'd rather not. In fact, I'm pretty keen on the messages of the Adbusters and of Reverend Billy and The Church of Stop Shopping. Let's give the planet a rest. Lord knows we're strip mining it at a completely unsustainable rate today.
Salaams, Ray
Cynthia,
Thank you very much for that 9112010 link. That site is awesome.
I homeschooled two kids despite four states trying to put me in jail for not forcing my kids into the brainwashing. I say "homeschooled" but really I un-schooled them, teaching them nothing they didn't show interest in. After dropping out in second grade my son reluctantly took the ACT at 16 and got a 29 composite and 35 for reading comprehension. He decided to learn algebra on his own and taught himself in a month good enough for a 26 on the math portion. The only reason he was willing to take the test was to be accepted in college. Otherwise tests are 100% useless as are 99% of the nonsense that passes for curriculum.
Gatto's new book explains why American citizens would allow a W Bush for 8 years. It may be the most important book I have read explaining why we are so fucked up. Anyone who went to compulsory schooling in America needs to read it, you will either cry or get pissed about what was done to you.
I agree. But "public" education itself is not the problem, it is the corporate indoctrination that insidiously infiltrates our schools like almost every other aspect of our society. Our educational system, whether public or private, is not set up to create critically thinking people actively involved in decisions that affect their lives, but rather socialized consumers that accept the status quo. We are indoctrinated to believe that the Market and democracy are inseparable, while in reality the two are in bitter conflict.
Unless you were born into an activist family, an American must spend years working against the grain of our society to see clearly. A big problem we have now is that the "Left" (if there is such a thing, as it is so fractured) are not connected to their rich progressive/leftist history or, even to each other. We don't know our own strength. We are the victims of a "divide and conquer" imperial system.
It is worth noting that most of our left-leaning or progressive organizations and thinkers (e.g. The Nation etc.or Naomi Klein) are reform oriented, not revolutionary. A revolutionary ethos would be required for some form of socialism to exist. Capitalism doesn't like to be reformed (regulated). Our recent history should be all the evidence that we need. Capitalism is a cancer. You don't reform a disease, you eradicate it.
If you go to Europe then you're a dependent on the keepers of secular/socialist policies there. Another option is to yourself become one of the keepers of secular/socialist policies in your hometown/home country. So you can go to your town council meeting and propose a new town charter that dedicates the town council actions to upholding secular/socialist policies.
For example, the building codes prioritize environmental/social sustainability, harmony, and health as opposed to the current priorities of economic growth at all cost, support of economic/social hierarchy, domination/submission, socailism for the rich, capitalism for the poor, militarism, imperialism, racism, elitism, conquest, destruction, profit from chaos.
YOU are the keeper of secular/socialist/localist policies, dispersed power, enlightenment, equity and justice for all. Freedom with responsibility. Limits on enterprise size and limits on asset ownership to ten man-powers. Hippocratic "do no harm" requirements for organizations. Fully free information for everyone everywhere forever.
For someone who finds less and less in common with the Democratic party and seeks to figure out who I am politically, this is quite a courageous and bracing essay. We would expect nothing less from Chris Hedges.
I am trying to remain optimistic about Obama. It's not easy. I'm more uneasy about his picks for key cabinet positions than I am his pick for minister at his inauguration but taken all together, it is clear he is not trying to "bond" with the likes of me.
Not sure why you find anything in common with the Democratic party. Are you a corporate CEO who doesn't like right wing religious nuts? A right wing religious nut who doesn't like corporations? I suggest that you are actually a Green, as are a majority of the people in the US. That's how they answer issue polls; there's just a lot of nasty projection onto Green making it unacceptable for people to admit that's what they are. The sooner all of you come around the better. Don't like the party? Make it better. Don't like the candidates? Become one. Can't do that with the D party.
Trying to remain optimistic about Obama is a full time job. whassa matta, you got nothin better to do? Why even try to fight your inner wisdom and convince yourself he is something he clearly is not? Whether you buy it or not that's a losing battle. Treat him like a hostile witness and get on with the questioning.
Why are you fighting it? Come over to the Green side.
You folks in the Green Party need to start fighting on local and state levels. And please stop conceding to the Democrats or they'll never learn. It's just like Libertarians conceding to the Republicans and look what happened. By the way, you Greens and Libertarians actually have a lot in common than you think. Just ask Ron Paul.
I'm absolutely with you on the Greens' need to build from the "bottom" up, act at the local and state level, and on the need to stand for things and not surrender. Of course if the Democrats know the left will always fold and vote for them to keep Republicans from winning they will ignore us and go where the money and center-right votes are.
But Ron Paul? don't think so. He has some ideas I/we agree with, (Habeas corpus, no NAFTA) but he seems not to notice that corporations exist. He thinks if government goes away we will all live happily forever, wants to abolish FEMA, the Education and Energy Departments, (might need that last one to help save us from the climate-change caused collapse of civilization--which he doesn't believe in, of course).* He supports shootouts on airplanes, (by pilots with their own machine guns)
He said: "We don't get our rights because we're gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our Creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way. So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn't the issue of homosexuality. It's the concept and the understanding of individual rights"** Paul...stat[ed] that he would not discharge troops for being homosexual if their behavior was not disruptive.
So Paul essentially believes whatever prejudices we have, it's OK to keep and act on them, denying rights to anyone to keep them from being "disruptive", and apparently, allow any other behavior, like rape and torture, etc. as long as the victims can be prevented from speaking out and thus being disruptive. So all you need to get rid of gays, women, minorities, etc. is for someone else to be act out and say the gays, etc. caused it. I think this is great! We can use it to get communists, anarchists and witches, keep meddling environmentalists and people with big feet out of the army and teaching positions.... There's no end to the use of this principle.
He also opposes civil rights, voting rights, and campaign finance reform and thinks money is speech and can't be limited. He has some good ideas, but his ideas about the basic things like this, if carried out, would absolutely prevent those others from ever coming about, because corporations (and in some cases, states and individuals) don't want the world to work the way he seems to think it would with drastically reduced federal power. As with other libertarians. An OK idea in theory, I guess, except in the end it would lead to a horrible, horrible world.
*Yes, it's been a hindrance so far, but that's because we keep letting corporations control elections. Enough of us vote for one of the 2 corporate parties every time to assure continued control of government by corporations.
** "Transcript of June 5 "CNN/WMUR/New Hampshire Union Leader" Republican presidential debate". CNN. 2007-06-05. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0706/05/se.01.html. Retrieved on 2007-10-23.
Well, thats one view. Every problem to Chris is a nail, so he always brings a sledge hammer.
He did make some good points however, especially about Corporations.
i don't think it is chris who is wielding the "blunt hammer". unfortunately, its our "leadership" who hawks the same tried/tired old solutions wherein all problems "appear to be nails." we need some new problem-definitions: then, solutions.
Though I hold to my opinion on this article by Chris and his solutions .....I can't disagree with your statement....at all about the rest.
.Thomas, I find this trend of yours to oversimplify, to criticize or damn with faint praise rather tedious, dont you? I would love to see, every so often, a detailed post enumerating your exact positions or reasons for diagreement. That would certainly be refreshing.
After reading scores of your efforts here I can say with all honesty that I dont know who you are or what, if anything, you stand for. Not to say you arent a nice guy and all, but really.......
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Oh well, we centrists are a tedious lot. We tend to see both sides of an argument. As to this conflict I can assure you that you can't see what my position is on this, because I simply can't reach a definitive answer.
Both sides have right and wrong on their side. I can't just say..."oh the poor Palestinians."
Things I'm sure of.
The Israeli have a better historical claim to the land....the original boundaries.
The Israeli have a better legal claim to the land by the vote of the UN and
International law.
The Palestinians are pawns to the militant's. Otherwise this would have been
settled long ago.
The only reason I can see tactically or strategically to fire Rockets into Israel is to stir the pot.
The Israeli are wrong to blockade Gaza.
Egypt is wrong to close her borders to Gaza.
Thats about it.
To which you will probably reply, if you don't know more than that, shut up, unless replying to a particular point. Which may be just the ticket. Please...no cheers from the peanut gallery.
edit...two things...I just heard Bush back Isreael, which strengthens Hamas's case (sort of kidding) and I was completely unaware of the Mecca accords.
.This is about more than a legal right of Israel to exist. They do of course have such a right. Yet so do the former residents that were displaced by Israel, all 750,000 of them.
The seeds for this unending violence came when two basic occurrences took place. Great Britain changed its mind about ceding their colony to the new state and armed and incited the indigenous Arab population there thinking that further slaughter of those who survived the holocaust would bring about a world wide clamor for British involvement. Israel ousted the aforementioned three quarters of a million folks. Obviously they did this to retain a majority in the new nation, and the tone was set as early as 1937 when David Ben Gurion mandated that the displacement of up to one million current residents ( Arabs) would be necessary to achieve autonomy.
But, after sixty years of this war, after the retaliatory redoubling of Israels responses to a few rocket attacks, after the blockading of food , medicine and money
a call for sanity is much in order. Had Israel responded with compassion and intellect rather than to its fear of another holocaust Hamas, Hezbollah, et al would have had no fodder on which to feed and grow stronger. It is almost asif Israel provokes and refuses to take any step to alleviate the problems. That leads me to believe they have an ulterior motive, one that needs the death and maiming to come to fruition....awful huh?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
"That leads me to believe they have an ulterior motive, one that needs the death and maiming to come to fruition....awful huh?"
That it is. I read P Buchanan's's column about the Gaza Blitz, this added to your posts, including this one, which reminded me of the British strategy, you had mentioned the turning over of the forts, added in the Mecca accords which I was unaware of and I may be a lot closer to an answer for me than I was.
I really hadn't paid as much attention as I should because we have almost as bad, even deadlier problem on our Southern border as you know, Darfur is more serious, some African problems are as close, Pakistan and India are far more dangerous...not to excuse some of my ignorance, just fact.
Hillary has a far better chance of getting something done than Sleeza ever did. The change to Obama could help, should help simply because he's not Bush.
If you get a chance read PB's column, I'd be interested to hear your impression.
.As one addicted to The McGloughlin Report on PBS I am familiar with Pat Buchanan, one rather intelligent SOB to be sure. I always find myself nodding along with his discourse, right up to the time he reaches a silly conclusion...Hey, that's sort of like I do with your posts too...I would love to read the article, can you link to it?
You continue to look in the wrong places and to the wrong people for relief of problems. At least in my opinion.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
"Hey, that's sort of like I do with your posts too"
Pat and I are very pleased to provide entertainment, I've been watching McGloughlin forever. Not all the conclusions, surely! Seriously I try to catch a bit of everybody. I balance the Nation thats about as far left as you can get with Human Events which is about as far right as I'd care to go. Human Events stops short of Limbaugh mostly.
"I would love to read the article, can you link to it?"
I think you have read it. I posted it for NYCartist and you may have mistaken it for my posting. I put, "here's Pat Buchanan's article" above it.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/29-6#comment-1101262
If you did, tell me how to avoid that happening again...in fact as I'm asking advise, should I post a whole article like that or just link it?
Just in case ....http://buchanan.org/blog/2008/12/pjb-bush-obama-and-the-gaza-blitz/
Happy New Year!
.I read and responded there and again just now.....
Linking is facilitated by such as this:
a colon indicates what follows is an intact message and quotes " " indicate the words are not your own.....works for me..If this site was a bit less primitive we could use italics or bold to highlight and make more coherent. Of course that is just one item on my wish list....Imagine if we could somehow see if there were responses to our posts without laboriously rereading all responses to the articles again and again....and again.
Heck, imagine an ignore function.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
VOLUNTARY SIMPLICITY!
One of the reasons the Left can't get it together is the "more Left than thou" syndrome. While the Right has been accused of putting up tests for purity, the Left is doing the same thing. Someone is not environmentally aware enough, or is not anti-war enough. Even being a regular churchgoer has become taboo no matter what progressive causes they support. For some, if you don't support Nader or the Greens your leftist credentials you're just another right wing corporate whore.
While a diversity of opinions is a wonderful thing these purity tests are off putting. Imagine what this looks like to someone who is exploring and trying to find a home in the Left?
Help reduce the National Debt - TAX CHURCHES!
What you said, doubled. A post that is past excellent. And very important points made.
Thanks. That's something I've been wanting to say for a long time.
Help reduce the National Debt - TAX CHURCHES!
Amen!!!
And as long as you tell us to shut up and support GOP-lites as "Democrats", your wish of taxing churches ain't gonna come true.
"if you don't support Nader or the Greens your leftist credentials you're just another right wing corporate whore. "
Name me one single Democrat who ain't a Republican. If you wanna play the "Buddy Bears" version of go-along-get-along shit, be my guest but aren't you sick and tired of getting betrayed by the same Democrats who promise you one set of things and then flip-flop to the rabid rightwing once in office? Yes, the so-called "left" has its issues and pandering to the "right" is what's killing them.
"Name me one single Democrat who ain't a Republican." I don;t know Kucinich seems to fit. Now here is your challenge: Name me one progressive group that won't give a person shit for, say, owning a gun or not being 100% pro-choice.
Help reduce the National Debt - TAX CHURCHES!
Thanks for providing that sad but truthful info about Kucinich in the party. I can see why Ralph Nader and Cindy Sheehan never wanted to join that second Republican party that calls itself "Democrat".
Thanks for providing that sad but truthful info about Kucinich in the party. I can see why Ralph Nader and Cindy Sheehan never wanted to join that second Republican party that calls itself "Democrat".
"Name me one progressive group that won't give a person shit for, say, owning a gun or not being 100% pro-choice."
The DLC and the Democratic Party. If this country had go-along-get-along "buddy bear" DLCers such as yourself back in 1945, America would have been speaking German and wearing lederhosen. Your idiotic obsession with social issues is why you so-called "liberals" are all fucked up. So how's your state of MISERY (MO) doing? Had enough of getting economically bulldozed? If not, keep on railing about guns, churches, and abortion. You're only making false accusations and trying to appease the rightwing Republican NAZIs. Abortions went up under Republican rulings, gun control doesn't exist and is a red herring and Democrats aren't stupid to bring it up, and churches are already losing church goers thanks to the economy rotting to the core.
"Help reduce the National Debt - TAX CHURCHES!"
Too bad the Democratic Party ain't even gonna try. If you wanna tax the churches, you need REAL PROGRESSIVES, not phoney fakes that you keep begging us to accept.
.All you note is that there are those on both sides who lack vision and intellect, so what else is new? Opinions run strong, especially on subjects such as this one which involve ones religion and cultural imperatives. I have seen little in the way of purity tests, only great angst and emotions.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Politician got on his jogging shoes,
Must be running for office, got no time to lose.
He been suckin' the blood out of the genius of generosity,
You been rolling your eyes - you been teasing me.
From Bob Dylan
Hoa binh
"the nationalization of electricity and gas companies,"
Would you give the electricity and gas companies to Bushite Republicans to administer? Not today at least. That's the problem with nationalization.
Why not give equal shares of non-transferable stock in these companies directly to the people instead of to the best government money can buy?
"The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population."
The problem is that the representatives of the people can be bribed or coerced. We the People cannot. http://ni4d.us/
"Coalitions of environmental, anti-nuclear, anti-capitalist, sustainable-agriculture and anti-globalization forces have coalesced in Europe to form and support socialist parties. This has yet to happen in the United States. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights." "
If We the People owned equal shares of non-transferable stock in our public treasure, accrue dividends from and have equal voting rights in shareholder's meetings, We the People would rule as the largest most powerful corporation to which all others would have to turn to. Only socially and environmentally responsible ones need apply.
Although I understand that this is critically important subject matter, and that the article is only one person's perspective, I'm reeling from all the doom and gloom here on C.D.
I will continue to let people know that this forum exists, in the hopes that a sufficient number of properly-informed individuals will make a difference. But personally, I think the stress and sleepless nights might be starting to get to me.
Thank you Chris Hedges for speaking such brazen truth.
Denial of the psychopathology and addiction is the heat under the pot cooking the frog. The fuel is advertising media. Advertising advertises advertising as Marshall McCluan saliently quipped. Denial only functions when there is denial of the denial. The water is the perpetually deferred promise of human completion through acquisition of what advertisers advertise. There is no completion, there is only a journey and choice of how to participate in it.
Overheat the fuel, speed up the boiling process and the frog jumps out. Like any metaphor, the frog transcends time and space and transforms according to mode of envisioning.
Functionaries (which most of us in the population are at one level or another because of the narrowing of meaning to practically nothing but economics) fear our 'inexperience' in any system other than what is familiar. Our delusion is in believing the monoculture conditioning of utter rejection of names of other systems (like socialism). Under any name exist all of the same elements of life that creatures depend on. This is evidenced by the fact that lives, however complicated by the shock of the system, are still based on being alive. In the process of adjusting, the unnecessary is shed and one chooses whether or not to focus on emerging as a loving, fearless and caring human being. One of the beauties is that one begins to recognize innumerable commonalities, weakness and strengths - how we fit together. One of the hardest things can be coming to terms with a deeply ingrained pattern of seeking advantage rather than cooperation. Sort of a difference between looking at and seeing through.
We will find our way out of this mess by embracing an uncompromising democratic socialism-one that will insist on massive government relief and work programs, the nationalization of electricity and gas companies, a universal, not-for-profit government health care program, the outlawing of hedge funds, a radical reduction of our bloated military budget and an end to imperial wars-or we will continue to be fleeced and impoverished by our bankrupt elite and shackled and chained by our surveillance state.
About half of the nation would rather be dead than live in a place described above. Joe The plumber, for one. During the Cold War, there was a famous bumper sticker: BETTER DEAD THAN RED. That still holds true for much of this country.
do people really need a better example of INTELLIGENCE and conscience together --when the most influential scientist of modern times - Albert Einstein HIMSELF not only was a socialist - but CLEARLY DEFINED what capitalism IS and what it DOES and its consequences?
as has always been clear, George Orwell was warning in his books of Fascism as the END result of Capitalism, which is always what I believed. it is its inevitable climax, really.
that is after all what DID happen to germany and italy . and what is now happening AGAIN in the USA and western imperial powers.
IMPERIALISM itself - as described by mao tse tung - was a "special result" of capitalism..in that -- having run out of "property" within its confines to feed on - it eventually MUST "expand" to steal other property, --such as lands and people's cheap labor to continue feeding. and that IS what happened to england - and others - whose imperial expansions REALLY were the RESULT of internal INSTABILITY caused by capitalism running out of "capital".
when will people learn?
hehe -- i'm glad to see Hedges used a favorite word i like to use about capitalism:
VAMPIRE. hehe
but on a more experiential note: a friend sadly related to me recently that her own brother working for an energy corporation -- that cut costs with employees, were not replacing the fired ones: 2 of them..but instead "elevated" her brother's position to make him work 3 jobs at the same salary.
that's capitalism for you.
it happens also , for example, in nursing homes...under capitalism...EVEN with the "partnership" of UNIONS who bow to the wishes of the corporations in order to have a "unionized work force" (at least that is the scheme in the USA) - a nurse aide (the women, primarily, who do the heavy lifting, wiping the asses of old heavy people, feed them, bathe them, put them to bed, bring them to the bathroom, and if they have any time left between running from old person to old person, duty to duty, are still expected to SMILE with their breaking backs, and elbows and wrists and shoulders and knees, to act like the family of the old people whose family members are too busy at work and come snapping their fingers when they visit)...has to do jobs that no one in his or her right mind would do given the way they are treated or paid - like slaves.
in those circumstances -- "workers" are made to feel as if , by being paid a PITTANCE - they should finish their "shift" quota of, say , 12 old people with very heavy dependence, and finish EVERY specific duty , from brushing teeth, to combing hair, to bathing, to feeding, PERFECTLY done, AND document them in VOLUMINOUS detail...all in the space of a working day . that is physical impossible.
but capitalism REQUIRES it. because the shareholders, boardmemebers have to cover their asses from government "checkers" or ELSE they don't get their "medicaire, medicaid" payments.
\but UNDERNEATH that system - are the poor workers ,women, who break their breaks trying to not just take care of the old people but , just because they are human beings, can not help but feel compassion and LITERALLY BECOME the family members of the old people...trying to make them laugh and sing and play.
capitalism DESTROYS.
That is the stone cold truth.
Another thought-provoker lacking any sort of suggested solution paths, aside from the laughable "If Barack Obama does not end the flagrant theft of taxpayer funds by corporate slugs and the disgraceful abandonment of our working class..." which is negated by the sentence previous anyway: "In picking the lesser of two evils, it threw its lot in with a Democratic Party that backs our imperial wars, empowers the national security state and does the bidding of corporations."
BO voted Yes on the TARPyramid, in case there was any, er, hope that he was planning on not doing that bidding of corporations thing...
Here's an idea: spend only with the "good" guys, support mom+pop whenever possible, and spread the word to your friends-and-family circle as often as you can. Since big unity remains elusive at the moment, focus on small unity first.
Thanks, Mr. Hedges. You have given me more reason to leave this fascist country aka USA.
I mostly enjoyed the article, though I was disappointed that as Hedges came to the brink of stating that the left needs to drop the social issues if it ever wants to unite and have success, he seemed afraid to say it.
actually - you probably misunderstood or expected the WRONG thing from his article.
he did NOT have to state that socialists should "drop social issues"
BECAUSE socialism IS about social issues. that IS where it takes its essence from.
BAD economis IS a social issue of justice in distribution of wealth created by the TRUE capital of any economy beyond the land and earth -- and that is PEOPLE and their labor.
Yes, I understand that economic issues can be categorized as "social issues." However, in the common dialogue in the US, economic issues are not typically categorized that way and are treated separately, probably because they dwarf most other social issues in importance in determining one's quality of life.
My comment was based on the passage from the article:
"Labor and left-wing activists, especially university students and well-heeled liberals, have failed to unite. This division, which is often based on social rather than economic differences, has long stymied concerted action against ruling elites. It has fractured the American left and rendered it impotent."
I believe he is implying that these "social rather than economic differences" give rise to problematic differences of opinion on what are generally termed the "social issues," or the "cultural issues," or even the "social/cultural issues," such as reproductive rights, gay rights, affirmative action, gun rights, school prayer, etc... It is just a practical matter that the left could unite and have a much better chance to defeat the corporatists if it did drop what I termed "the social issues" for now, with the opportunity to revisit them after the corporate menace has been defeated.
I agree.
In California, Tom Bradley, Mayor of Los Angeles would almost certainly have become governor if he had stuck to economic issues instead of beating the anti-gun drum. The gun-owning working class voted for guns against their own economic interests.
A syndicated story interviewed people in fly-over-country who voted against their own economic interests during the second Bush election that admitted they voted for Bush because of the Dems pro-choice stance even though they knew it would hurt them financially. I recall one woman said she was working three jobs to earn what she had once earned with one, but she didn't care.
If the topic was kept to economics, few workers would be voting for the representatives of the multimillion and multibillion dollar less than half of one-percent of the population that live off workers like leeches.
Neither governors nor presidents ought to be pushing social issues which require a change in laws. Administration jobs are to administrate. Changes in laws are the responsibility of legislatures. Even then, neither state nor federal representatives need present strong views on non-economic topics: a legislator can quite rightfully claim that, while he/she has an opinion, he/she is willing to study the issue in depth, discuss it with constituents and debate it in legislative session.
While social issues may not always be so easily ducked, they don't have to be part of stump speeches.