Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Right and Left Agree: Mandates are the Road to Neo-Feudalism
There is tremendous fear rising on both the right and the left that the announced intention of Congress - to force every American to pay tribute to private corporations, with no government alternative - sets a dangerous and frightening precedent with implications far outside the scope of health care.
If the health care bill written by the Senate is passed, middle class Americans will be mandated to pay almost as much to private insurance companies as they do to the federal government in taxes, with the IRS acting as a collection agency for penalties of 2% of your annual income for refusing to comply.
This is just one of many recent measures that have brought liberal progressives and conservative libertarians together to join forces in opposition:
- Democrat Alan Grayson worked successfully this year with Republican Ron Paul to pass legislation to audit the Federal Reserve, with 317 cosponsors as diverse as Dennis Kucinich and Michelle Bachmann.
- On December 3, the liberal Campaign for America's Future wrote a letter to the Senate opposing the reconfirmation of Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke until such an audit has been conducted. The letter was signed by James Galbraith, Robert Weisman, Chris Bowers and myself on the left, and Grover Norquist, Phillis Schlafly, and Larry Greenley on the right. Financial blogger Tyler Durden and young organizer Tiffiniy Cheng joined them.
- Also on December 3, conservative Jim Bunning joined liberal Bernie Sanders in placing a hold on the Bernanke nomination until the Fed had been audited.
- On December 15, CAF again sent a letter to the Senate Banking Committee, asking them to delay the vote on the Bernanke confirmation until Audit the Fed received a stand alone vote in the Senate. It was signed by Matt KIbbe of Freedomworks, John Tate of the Campaign for Liberty, and Grover Norquist on the right, and David Swanson of AfterDowiningStreet, Dean Baker and Robert Borosage on the left.
- On December 21, a letter was written opposing the mandate in the health care bill. It was signed by Bob Fertik of Democrats.com, Howie Klein of DownWithTyranny, Brad Friedman of Velvet Revolution, Tim Carpenter of Progressive Democrats of America on the left and Grover Norquist, Jim Martin of 60 Plus Association, Duane Parde of the National Taxpayers Union on the right.
- On December 23, Grover Norquist and I sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder calling for an investigation into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's conflicts of interest before the White House could lift the cap on the commitment to them from $400 billion to $800 billion with no Inspector General in place.
The individuals on both sides of the political spectrum who signed these letters agree on very little, but they do share both a tremendous concern for the corporatist control of government that politicians in both parties seem hell-bent on achieving.
In 2003, the Democrats railed in opposition when the Republicans passed Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage that didn't allow for negotiated drug prices. And in 2006 when Democrats took over Congress, one of the hallmarks of their first hundred days was passing legislation allowing Medicare to do so, supported by both Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama. Of course, it had no chance of passing with George Bush in the White House.
Candidate Barack Obama said the ability to negotiate for drug prices would save $30 billion a year in medical costs. Yet when President Obama got to the White House, one of the first things he did was negotiate a secret deal with PhRMA that prevented drug price negotiations in exchange for $150 million in political advertising to help vulnerable Democrats in the House and in support of the health care bill.
In the Senate, Tom Carper said that because PhRMA had paid for the deal with political advertising, they were obligated to abide by it.
Jeff Sessions railed against the corrupt PhRMA deal that didn't allow for prescription drug price negotiation. He didn't mention that he voted for the 2000 bill without it, and when he had the chance to vote for it in the Senate in 2006, he voted "no" himself. Both parties are equally blameworthy - the only difference is who is in power and taking PhRMA's money.
The PhRMA deal is one of many negotiated by the White House this last summer which formed the underpinnings of the health care bill. From then on, it just became a matter of which member was going to extract what deals for their votes, and who was going to take the blame for cutting popular elements from the legislation that the corporate "stakeholders" didn't want.
As FDL's Jon Walker wrote recently, if the ability to cut health care costs hadn't been auctioned off to private corporations in exchange for political patronage, there would have been no government subsidy necessary to make insurance coverage affordable.
We are ceding control of the government to private corporations, not figuratively but literally. When the Senate Finance Committee bill was released earlier this year, the "author" was a former VP of Wellpoint. Liberals, conservatives and independents alike are all justifiably alarmed at what this represents.
It is tragic that health care for the poor is being held hostage to the corporatist agenda, a fig leaf to buy public support and disguise this bill for what it is. As blogger Marcy Wheeler noted in a piece called Health Care and the Road to Neo-Feudalism:
I understand the temptation to offer 30 million people health care. What I don't understand is the nonchalance with which we're about to fundamentally shift the relationships of governance in doing so.
Just as those on the libertarian right were demonized by the Republican establishment for opposing the Iraq war during the Bush years, so progressives on the left are being pilloried for "damaging the cause" by joining with Republicans to oppose these extreme measures. It's ironic that the most virulent supporters of a President who ran on "bipartisanship" should reject it so vehemently when it becomes critical of the policies pursued by his White House.
This "right-left wraparound" is happening because politicians in both parties have become so unresponsive to popular sentiment: public support for stifling investigation of the bank bailouts just to protect the President are infinitesimally small, and fortunately Dennis Kucinich announced today that he would commence an investigation into the Fannie/Freddie bailout. But it's a testament to the extreme nature of what is happening to our government that such traditional political foes could find common cause in opposing it.
It's foolish to say that only those who agree with you on every issue are allowed to share your opinion when it comes to opposing something like the mandated bailout of Aetna - it isn't necessary to achieve health care reform. As Jon Walker notes, removing the mandate would reduce the CBO score and its inclusion in the health care bill with no government alternative is unacceptable for moral, political and policy reasons.
Candidate Obama himself opposed the mandate. Keith Olberman and Howard Dean concur.
As Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos said, "remove the mandate or kill this bill." We've opened a "war room" at Firedoglake with information about calling your member of Congress to demand that this provision to bail out the insurance industry be removed from the health care bill before they agree to cast their vote in favor of it.
And nobody needs to pass an ideological purity test before they can use it.
Join us to oppose the mandate. Enter the war room.
- Posted in
71 Comments so far
Show AllMandates in the so-called health-care reform bill that would require some 30 million US citizens to buy insurance from private US corporations are unconstitutional. That is, it would be unconstitutional if the constitution we had before Bush/Obama began their campaign to shred that once hallowed document was worth the paper it was printed on.
Until the left wing becomes as radicalized as the right wing, things will only get worse. Happy New Year suckers.
The "right wing" has not been radicalized. The political history of the word radical, as opposed to just being an extremist, is someone who goes to the root of the problem, as in mathematics, to question the structural or systemic nature of societal problems.
The "right wing" has been mobilized by the very same corporate forces that if they were true radicals, they should be organized against. A Radical would at least question, if not oppose, the capitalist system. No right-winger or conservative would ever do that.
Those who will comply with this "mandate", please raise your left hand now....
Hamsher's clear and principled arguments are what we had (foolishly) hoped for in a supposed well-educated skilled-speaker promoter-of-change President.
However, it seems that change will only come from us, just regular people, with our discussions and plans lead in part by courageous thoughtful truth-tellers like Hamsher.
Without changing his platform, Ron Paul is looking more like a Democrat now that the Senate Democrats have capitulated to anti-choice in their "health care" bill with tacit approval of Obama. I was tempted to vote for Paul's anti-war platform in 2008 until I found out he was anti-choice.
Many swing voters have voted for Democrats over Republicans in recent elections based on Democrats supporting a woman's right to choose. Now that the Democrats sold out on choice many of their swing voters will vote Republican or third party in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
raydelcamino--I did vote for Paul in Feb 2008 and the choice position did bother me. But I decided that if we didn't go after Wall St and cut the military/industrial complex down to size, abortion availablility was going to be the least of our problems. Ending the Drug War was a big bonus And I had no faith in either Hilary or Obama.
When did they end the drug war?
I'll believe that one when I see it.
No they didn't end the drug war. I just saw that as a bonus with a Paul presidency.
The left and right are reaping the rewards of their own stupidity. This trick has served the super rich for thousands of years---civilization I believe they call it.
Black against white, rich (moderately) against poor, property holders against the landless, and if those moderately rich guys think they are a part of some exclusive club that is committed to taking care of it's own they are fools.
I have seen the formation of a similar alliance of libertarians and progressives. They have united around blocking eminent domain when it is misused to benefit connected and powerful private interests and their political toadies at the expense of small local business, homeowners and tenants.
The owner of a small building or business may be to the right, believing in individual effort. Yet it angers them when someone tries to smash their American dream through strong-arm appropriation abetted by politicians on the take. Opposition to robbery of the public by corporatists can unite certain left and right groups around populist goals.
We should not ignore that type of anger or attribute it simply to right-wing ideology. If we do so, then the right will use it. We have to resist those who tell us that opposition to the health care plan will only help the Republicans. We on the left have to be the ones guiding the legitimate critique like that in this article by Jane Hamsher.
We cannot drop the demands for single payer and a public option. We must vigorously raise the necessity of price and quality controls on the insurance companies and others in the health industry. Otherwise the anger over this highway robbery will backfire against the whole idea of government assistance in healthcare. And the corporatists will not give a damn but will use it against health reform of any kind.
Joe
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (born 1856 - died 1941) - "We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."
Rah-rah! Hoo-raw! Amurka is raw! A coalition between socially conscious progressives and self-serving avaricious libertarians! Well and good if they kill an odious mandate.
But I hope all of the progressives cheering on this "coalition" understand that the libertarians may dislike corporate control over governance if it reaches into THEIR pocketbooks and wallets, but they have nothing whatsoever against over-concentration of wealth in private hands. They have always refused to acknowledge the link between the over-concentrated wealth & political power of America's corporations and the over-concentrated wealth & political power of the plutocratic class that owns them.
That's equivalent to blaming a scorpion for stinging your nephew to death while refusing to consider the link between the tail stinger and the venom sac in the same scorpion.
Libertarians don't give a flying #*@k about the common good, the plight of the homeless or those whose homes are foreclosed upon en masse. They simply don't want to be taxed for ANYTHING themselves. They are covering their own ass and that is all they care about.
They were silent and nowhere to be seen as the Bush/Cheney Junta methodically scuttled the Bill of Rights, habeas corpus, posse comitatus and our treaty obligations in lieu of an unaccountable regime of torture, secret rendition of citizens of allied nations, and secret military tribunals that still persists. The ONLY libertarian I remember over the last 9 years who consistently spoke out against these CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL LIBERTIES was an ex-CIA agent/Congressman from Georgia named Bob Barr.
No political coalition between authentic progressives and libertarians has ever lasted more than a handful of months because libertarians only care about money issues that personally affect them--any secondary consideration such as providing all Americans with universal single-payer health coverage is anathema to them. If these complete and utter imbeciles had their way America would end its public school system and become the only developed nation in the world without one. And regardless of whatever propaganda you've read neither "a thousand points of light" nor America's churches could replace the public school system (as wretched as it often is) with anything better.
amen!
Exactly. The individual mandate may be opposed by both philosophies, but for diametrically opposite reasons. We could work together to defeat it, but when it comes to alternatives, we have absolutely no common ground.
You get allies where and when you can ... The goal is to succeed ... If Libertarians can help then why not ...
Libertarians also are anti-war ... We can also count on them to help with down sizing the MIC ... This is crucial if we ever want our Democratic Republic back ...
Republicans and some Democrats are libertarians who also extort from the workers and give corporate welfare to corporations. At least libertarians don't extort and don't advocate pre-emptive wars.
No, the libertarians simply support the corporations extorting the worker directly and without limit.
Please study some history.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Are you sure you don't mean "Republicans and some Democrats are libertines who also extort from the workers and give corporate welfare to corporations?" I don't recall any libertarians publicly decrying Bush II's preemptive wars. If they didn't advocate them they sure as hell didn't resist them either. Only AFTER the early disgrace of Abu Ghraib did Ron Paul start intermittently griping a bit. Bob Barr (former Republican) has been the most consistent libertarian voice of any notoriety complaining about the lawlessness of Bush II's warmongering but I haven't heard a peep from him in over two years now while the wars and war crimes still keep rolling along...
American libertarians have a far more extensive history complaining about government programs that aid the poor than they do about corporate welfare or run amok military-industrial spending. They also have an extensive history of resisting sensible regulation of corporations and their various more dubious activities on the basis that such regulation interferes with the mythical "free market" and the equally mythical "capitalist competition" between rival industrial giants (who historically always trend toward illegally "fixed" and limited cabals or monopolies over time unless anti-trust laws are enforced--which they haven't been for decades).
Do they support downsizing the MIC, or do they simply support it being replaced with a privately-owned war machine?
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Think of them as a sort of militaristic bunch of fiscal conservatives. They want strong effective defense without budgetary bloat. I suspect some of the more traditional libertarians might even still object to a large permanent standing army and the gradual un-Constitutional transference of war powers from Congress to the Executive (beginning in the 1950s).
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
As I said, "Well and good if they kill an odious mandate."
Your assertion that "Libertarians also are anti-war..." is a greatly exaggerated generalization. Although they are more likely to pare down military spending than Dimocrats and Resmuglickins, they do believe in a Constitutional primacy of providing for the common defense and are fundamentally more militaristic than progressives. We might be able to count on them to help downsize the MIC and we might not. Can you name any major historical gain by libertarians in the last 100 years--either as a movement by themselves or as part of any coalition?
I agree with you and raydelcamino below. Not all libertarians are heartless bastards who care only about their taxes and, as ray points out, all political factions have their pigs. But here are some things in common: civil liberties including limiting police power, get rid of drug war, dismantle the military-industrial complex, break the power of Wall St, trade with Cuba, get rid of NAFTA and WTO. Some even want to get rid of corporations because corporate charters absolve owners from personal liability. Surely there are ways to build alliances.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Not all libertarians are heartless bastards who care only about their taxes. Most libertarians are ego-centric selfish bastards who care only about themselves and some of their family dependents. Libertarians have generally sided with alienated Republicans in the Tea Bagger movement to decry higher taxes on themselves and people even richer than they are, to rightfully condemn the bank give-aways and generally bash social programs that benefit the poor or the general population.
In all the years between 2003 and 2007 that I regularly participated in anti-preemptive war, anti-Torture State, anti-Bush marches & rallies I only ever met two (2) libertarians who dared hold their nose to march or rally in the weekly MULTIPLE progressive events in our city. Libertarians NEVER staged any events of their own because they are mostly armchair knuckle-dragging imaginationless throwbacks whose only talent is hot methane. Trying to hold an intelligent conversation with a "libertarian" under 35 is like desperately pretending to give a $#it about Amurkan Idol. I can only stand it for 3 seconds, max. I'd have to re-educate most libertarians I've met starting at the 3rd grade level to tug out the dense plug of fantasies they coddle and mythologies they inhabit. Childishly naive to myocardially infarctive, most of them sound like they are either about to or have recently had a minor stroke.
Of course it could be a regional thing. I live in the Deeply Indoctrinated South and most of our predominantly carpet-bagger, blue-haired libertarians are deeply pro-gun, pro-war (so long as its fiscally well-managed war), anti-trade with Cuba (because they are Cold War Boomers still furiously anti-communist), and couldn't give a rat's ass about NAFTA or the WTO (because to REGULATE capitalist corporate "free trade" is a restraint on the mythical "free market" and "capitalist competition" and, therefore, anathema to them). I have never in my life heard of a libertarian who wants to get rid of corporations on any grounds. If they espouse that then they are decidedly not libertarian. Which is one of my big problems with most Amurkan self-described "libertarians" whom I encounter--they are so ignorant of what libertarianism historically stands for that they don't know exactly what political brand they most closely affiliate with so they choose "libertarianism" as an all-purpose grab bag.
Progressives should build as many issue-specific alliances with these chuckle-heads as they need to achieve limited regional or local goals. But don't kid yourselves that these swivel-headed know-nothing self-serving economic onanists give a turd's crawl about anything but their own narrow financial interests. To imagine that American libertarians would be a dependable part of any national movement to restore the Constitution or reform and re-regulate capitalist corporatism or the run amok military/petrol industrial complex or looming "free trade" global oligarchy is the height of folly. The best possible use for libertarians would be to seize all of the corporate collectivized farmland in America and distribute it to descendants of small and medium sized farm owners and then divide any left over and distribute it to libertarians. They should be plowin' the fields, milkin' the cows, noodling for catfish, hunting wild pig and voting as seldom as possible unless its for a progressive candidate.
Damned straight.
No more left/right. Instead, time for the LIGHT party!
"We are ceding control of the government to private corporations..."
Come on, JH, you know better than that.
We have ceded control of the government - and the military - to private corporations. Period. Been a while, now, actually...
We really have to stop writing from the POV of 'almost,' as in: we've almost ceded control of our government to private corporations.
Frankly, they own the place. The challenge is how to take over The Place, kick out The Owners, not how to maybe possibly stop what's already happened...
Ah, the challenge... Can this left/right alliance go forward? It's likely the best chance of success but Grover Norquist is a big military supporter. Need more from the anti war right then focus on a strategy to, as you say, take over The Place and kick out The Owners. There's no point in trying to legislate anything useful until they're gone.
It does get tiresome hearing from so-called progressive journalists how 'close we came' to dictatorship under GWB, or how we 'almost' had a depression, etc.
Maybe such things are part of the DNC 'MOTD' (talking points - message of the day) just as the corporate media receives from the RNC.
I've been a pacifist my whole life, but I'm really starting to itch for some confrontation, and I haven't seen much of that from ANY media sources.
Thank you, Jane.
"Happy New Year suckers."
Cavedweller, that is the best critic anyone has put on this blog.
Yes, the idiots voted for the Democrats in 2008 even though they did nothing with the majorities given them in 2006.
I am not suggesting that the Republicans should have been put back into power, either.
Third party candidates should have been swept into office, but the suckers voted in another shill, B.H. Obama on his phony champaign of "change you can believe in."
I will bet that the suckers vote in more Democrats in 2010. They never learn.
Thank you Jane.
The more this summary of the current Health Care Ins Bill goes around the better.
Good posts from Metal and Frank.
This has all "been in the works" for 35 years.
Don't want to vote anymore?. Vote the bums out !
Care for your family, friends, and loved ones.
The "Lone Wolf" will not stand a chance in the next 15 + years.
THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM IS NOT A LINE WITH TWO ENDS FAR APART.
IT IS A BROKEN CIRCLE WITH THE ENDS CLOSE TOGETHER.
ITS PURPLE. AND IT COULD BE POWERFUL.
"This "right-left wraparound" is happening because politicians in both parties [ONE PARTY] have become so unresponsive to popular sentiment:"
CORP IS BORG
I think your analysis needs a little work.
The libertarian right are no friends of the left. The libertarian-right are perfectly happy with corporate power. Sure, government may appear to be supporting corporate power, but this is NOTHING like the power corporations will acquire if all government regulation and controls are abolished. It will be private power without limit, backed by modern-day hired-gun Pinkertons. PLEASE, PLEASE study you history of the robber-baron era and the workers struggle!
There is nothing un-libertarian about collective agitation for worker empowerment...provided it is peaceful and voluntary. This post by Charles 'Radgeek' Johnson (who promotes an integration of progressive and libertarian concerns) speaks highly of the Industrial Workers of the World:
http://radgeek.com/gt/2004/05/01/free_the/
Also, is there any particular scholarly source you would direct people to so they may understand the evils of "the robber-baron era," which I assume to mean mid- to late-nineteenth century U.S. economic history? I do not ask this condescendingly. I would genuinely like to read an in-depth progressive view of this period.
Pjd, thanks for the feedback. I’m certainly no expert and value anyone’s input.
It seems to me that the L and R have many common concerns---civil rts, corporate personhood, privatization of public funds (in the myriad ways that happens), corp food, media, the lock on the political process and elections/incumbency, war, the MIC, all manifestations of the short term business horizon, income disparity, NAFTA, GATT, WTO, degradation of the environmental commons, industry regulators regulating the industries, this medical ins fiasco, …add your own.
L and R are equally and similarly excluded from the game. We are the crop that is harvested, we are those who are divided and conquered. Our differences are more in method than in substance.
The one party monopoly has truly become a monster devouring our shared Constitutional values and whatever future we can hope for our children and g’chldrn.
I, for one, would like to see Paul and Kucinich on the same stage working this concept.
Again, let’s all toss it around and see where it goes.
I'm glad people are finally catching on to our de facto enslavement, but it's far too late to do anything about it. Our constitutional democracy is dead, and no amount of electoral activism (or for that matter protest) will stop Massa Obama and his band of Big Business despots from herding us into the slave pens of their Big Plantation.
McPalin, of course, would have done exactly the same thing Obama is doing: DemocRats or GOPorkers, the only difference is in the rhetoric. One party, one nation, one purpose: the expansion and protection of capitalism -- unlimited profit and absolute power for the Ruling Class, total subjugation and bottomless poverty for all the rest of us.
Indeed now we are finally awakening to the fact the only “change we can believe in” is our own radically changed perceptions: our realization that its mastery of technology has given the Ruling Class the savage omnipotence of its ultimate role-model, the vengeful god of Abraham, and that as a direct consequence, any possibility of “change” -- at least in the sense of Working Class progress toward more humanitarian conditions -- has become as permanently extinct as the dinosaurs.
We can however at least learn the correct terminology and thereby demonstrate to the future -- if indeed there is any future -- that we here below the salt are not all Moron Nation illiterates.
Ergo:
What is being imposed on us is NOT "neo-feudalism": "feudalism" was the military system of baronial armies that prevailed in post-Roman Europe, much as "neo-feudalism" is the military system of baronial armies now employed by the United Estates Ruling Class to tyrannize its colonies and -- eventually -- to tyrannize us here at home, particularly after the government armies -- dependant as they are on Working Class enlistments -- become unreliable. (The difference between a feudal army and a government army is the difference between Cosa Nostra and cops: hit men like baronial mercenaries owe their allegiance entirely to their bosses; cops and government soldiers -- at least in theory -- still serve principles over personalities.)
The purpose of feudalism was to support the prevalent economic system. Neo-feudalism increasingly serves that same purpose today.
The Medieval version of the economy feudalism defended was called "manorialism." From the collapse of the (proto-capitalist) Roman economy until the Renaissance, manorialism was the dominant European economic system. It was a slave economy in which the baron or lord of the manor owned not only the surrounding lands but all the humans who lived thereon. These people were called serfs and were required to work for their master in payment for being allowed to live on his land. Serfdom was hereditary; the serfs were de facto slaves, had no rights, and could be tortured, killed or sold at the master's whim.
In Europe the manorial system prevailed longest in Russia, where Tsar Aleksandar II liberated the serfs in 1861. In the United States, in the form of slavery, the manorial system officially lingered until the Emancapation Proclamation of 1863 and yet prevails in share-cropping and migrant labor.
Hence the correct name for what is being imposed on us is "neo-manorialism."
Technically, the United Estates began the imposition of neo-manorialism via the enslavement of Medicare recipients in Part D -- which (were there such a thing as honesty in labeling) would properly be titled “The Medicare Prescription Drug Lord Benefit.” A huge boon to the pharmaceutical barons, the program mandates the enrollment of all elderly and disabled people (you get steeply fined if you do not sign up) and thus keeps us in bondage to Big Business until we die.
Indeed Medicare Part D was now obviously the prototype for the enslavement of the entire U.S. Working Class via mandatory health insurance.
Though the DemocRats now try to blame the GOPigs for Part D's oppressiveness -- in its first year it tripled my own prescription drug costs -- this form of slavery would not have been enacted without the substantial DemocRat support. The two pivotal votes -- one that enabled the legislation, the other that made it law -- are referenced here (sorry but this site doesn't allow the posting of active Congressional links): first Senate vote -- 108th Congress, Vote 262 (S. 1 as amended, 26 June 2003); second Senate vote -- 108th Congress, Vote 459 (H.R. 1 Conference report, 25 November 2003).
The two votes not only prove conclusively how GOPigs and DemocRats collaborate to serve the Ruling Class, they also illustrate our true powerlessness. To further underscore that powerlessness -- the fact our democratic processes are all charades and we are already effectively enslaved -- note how so-called "bankruptcy reform" officially re-established indentured servitude.
Taken together, all this legislation -- the Prescription Drug Lord Benefit, indentured servitude, our sale as slaves to the Sultans of Sickness who own the health-insurance industry -- clearly sets the global precedent of the Third Millennium as the epoch in which the now-permanent technological superiority of the Ruling Class enables it to destroy all Working Class freedom forever -- that is, until the human species itself becomes extinct.
Meanwhile the following link (which does work but requires you paste it into your browser) is also useful. It gives us an early glimpse of the utter contempt in which the elected politicians hold us:
http://people-press.org/report/92/washington-leaders-wary-of-public-opinion
Indeed it seems to me the only viable protest remaining to us is to refuse to vote in the obviously fraudulent elections. Such widespread nonparticipation will inflict a huge propaganda defeat on the Ruling Class, no doubt prompting our masters to make voting compulsory -- the final proof the American Experiment has become the biggest Big Lie in human history.
Do vote with your dollars by not purchasing from National Corporations and not borrowing from National Banks. The strong double punch of not voting and withholding your dollars is potent.
True, that, but your one-two punch is only potent delivered in numbers the U.S. populace seems unwilling - or unable - to unleash.
Loren, I love your post. It is quite well reasoned and written but your conclusion is absolutely defeatist and you end where you should take this to the next logical place it needs to go. "Indeed it seems to me the only viable protest remaining to us is to refuse to vote." The most amazing thing about humans is not our ability to reason and communicate, but to make leaps of faith and think outside of the box. I have no doubt the world is entering a darker time than any alive can remember, but our options are many.
We are only now beginning to see the glimmers of real resistance with strong wording regarding the actions of the treasonous actions of our leaders borne from pain and suffering brought about by the very same. Your post mentioned several ways they intend to make us slaves with the current medical reform issue and Medicare part D, however there are many more traps they have used over the years to ensnare us with. For example the notion that banks loan us our own money (the money comes into existence the moment it is put into your account, and therefore legally yours) at interest which becomes a game of financial Russian roulette which ignited our current economic bust. Those who lose are certainly slaves also. Homeowner insurance which is mandatory for many mortgages, mandatory unregulated or under regulated vehicle insurance when vehicles are absolutely necessary in most areas for jobs? Taxes that cumulatively are over 50% of a citizens income (when is the last time you calculated ALL the taxes you pay out and what percent they are to your income)? My personal favorite and predicament is Family lawlessness. I will only briefly state that as a divorced father we are branded a loser before we arrive in the courtroom. We are humiliated and more importantly our legitimacy as parents is eroded fully because we are males. The governmental machinery then assumes we cannot parent and by practical law we are forced into a state of wage slavery in the name of our own children whom we may rarely see. If and when the ridiculous and arbitrary usury on "back" support, court rules, fees, fines, malicious government propaganda ("be a father", "deadbeat dads") are done they leave many in prison or on the streets. This in turn burdens taxpaying citizens also. I am certain I have left out many other forms of financial usury in our society that leads to financial slavery but I hope you get the idea.
While any one of these political mechanisms leading to slavery can fully engulf an individual the sheer VOLUME and diversity of these slave making legal contrivances will break the back of the middle and lower class so we are all malleable enough to rule with an iron fist. The problem is not however the current form of slavery the Oligarchy is ramming down our throats in regards to the medical "reform" issues. The issue is not even the sheer numbers of contrivances the Oligarchy has invented and put into place to break the backs of the middle and lower class, but instead the problem is in the very fact that the Oligarchy wishes to enslave us. They are willing to lie to us through the MSM to lessen our awareness of what really is happening while many of us are losing our incomes and homes forcing us into homelessness (mortgage bubble burst) and starvation (many states are cutting back or eliminating food programs or access to them).
I have only registered to vote twice in my life. Both occasions where something very special was happening and I believed a Washington outsider or black sheep might have a chance to win. What I learned was those people cannot come to power unless they absolutely have the conviction that they must fight the great, or the Oligarchy. From personal experience, I can tell you that not voting does not work, and neither does voting for pre-packaged party rhetoric. What then will work? The ruling elite only back down when they are afraid or removed as the elite. They were afraid when Martin Luther King Jr. AND Malcolm X led black Americans out of segregation. They were removed when a young and foolish queen told the starving masses to "let them eat [moldy] cake."
The only question that remains is, are we really only waiting for a “let them eat cake” moment to act, or are we going to be wise enough to change the system united as a people on the brink of democratic disaster? If the next serious contender for the Presidency wanted to reinstate the people to power they would run on only two promises and sidelining all others. Pulling our troops back home thus ending our imperial wars, and creating jobs. Everything else would follow. We need to find the person who can and will do this if we are to survive the Oligarchies schemes.
XGenman, Even if such a person was found, Nader is close to that description, how would he/she ever get elected? The corporate media controls the opinions of a great portion of the population and the uniparty controls the format. Nader was squashed before getting out of the starting blocks. Then assuming the miracle happens and a real person is elected president, nothing will change as the current liars and thieves, senators and reps, hold all the cards. A president is powerless without legislative backing. It would take a total cleaning of all three houses. I don't enjoy being so negative, but I don't see any hope through the system. Until the masses run out of cake and relieve their despair with violent revolt, nothing changes. Buck
Buck 4:41 am: BUILD THE FIRE - THE FIRE WILL MAKE THE CANDIDATES. Quantum 'people' physics. People think that Dr. King MADE the Civil Rights Movement. Wrong Wrong Wrong. Hundreds of thousands of Black people from Bed Sty to "Dogpatch" in SF MADE that movement in cahoots with the SCLC, NAACP and the ACLU. What a troika theY were BUT they were simply the 'horses' THE PEOPLE MADE to manifest their destiny - none of them alone ever made a Movement but together, they MADE history - and they MADE MLK.
If I understand correctly, they practically had to draft him, the man was fully involved at Ebenezer Baptist and had a life and a family. The Magic of critical mass. Remember Heisenberg, "You can know a partical's position OR you can know its velocity, but you cannot know both." In our struggle we can know where we want to go or how we're going to get there. BUT. If we don't know where we want to go, how can we make the steps to get there? Eyes on The Prize - WHO ARE YOU? WHAT DO YOU WANT?
Do everything you can to make people's dissatisfaction even more conscious. You have more Injustice to work with than at any time in our history.
"Did you know?"
That in 1967 we worked 37.5 hrs/wk, got paid the same for what had been 40 hours and lunch was paid and it wasn't a Union Job and people were talking about taking that to 35 hours for the same money and the same paid lunch in order to contribute to "Full Employment". I was there.
"Did you know?"
That in 1965 we had the greatest distribution of wealth ever seen in 6000 years of human history. The END of Poverty Forever in this country was In Sight. Lifetime stable employment was on the horizon. I was there. Here's the takeaway: WITT or YOYO
We go down as a people one-by-one or we make ourselves aware of how grossly dissatisfied we all are and talk to each other and FIND those areas of commonality. We're seeing this now about the Medical Mandates. Left AND Right are going ape-shit not because the Right loves Single Payer - but because they know Mandates are an eight-bladed sworded - can cut you from all 8 position. As Tesla might say, "Can you feel the resonances at work?"
Remember: Tesla put a small device on structural steel support beam in his first floor lab in a building he didn't own. He then sent resonating pulses through that steel beam. He shook the building. He shook that building sooo bad he blew out the upper story windows. He not only blew out the windows on his building, the same thing happened in a four block radius - his building became a tuning fork - every other similar building resonated - SANG - and blew their windows to the sky.
HERE'S THE PROBLEM: White America. Don't tell me, "My relatives won't listen to me." Who cares? They say the Hebrew god gave you friends to make up for your relatives.
If you connect to people's pain they will listen. If you connect to what they WANT, who they ARE, THEY WILL LISTEN. If you don't they won't. Can you "feel their pain"? The REAL pain underneath the surface structure. (just like Marriage, it's never about the dirty socks on the floor). And if you can, can you make them feel THEIR PAIN in a way that's safe for them to do?
It's not about taxes, it's that people are getting a lot more than you are for a lot less work, and you're exhausted all the time, and the schools are going to hell for everybody because constant war has taken all the oxygen from the room. Pace and Lead. But there's more. American people have to be willing to share. They have to be willing to make an equal starting place for EVERYBODY'S child and to do that they have to be willing to listen to the prophet's words, "Which is easier to say, 'There are no enemies' OR 'There is no spoon'?" Can you help people see that its WITT or YOYO and YOYO is Hell on Earth? WITT: We are In This Together; or YOYO: You are On Your Own.
Build the Fire. The Fire will make the Candidates.
Sioux Rose
LUCKY LEFTY, LOREN BLISS, GENX : All most-excellent posts. Thank you for sharing your insights in the forum. Happy (?) New Year.
luckylefty, I wish I had your "Field of Dreams" optimism. King was an exceptional human possessing an endless selfless spirit, boundless courage, an all inclusive approach to humanity, and relentless determination. He absorbed the 300 years of pain experienced by an oppressed people and turned it into love. That is the difference. The blacks saw the iron grip on a daily basis for years, decades, centuries. The pot had been boiling and was about to boil over. Desperation led to courage.
The americans of today aren't desperate enough and haven't the courage. Their minds are distracted by entertainment and molded by a controled education system, not the least of which is the hand over heart pledge to start each day. Americans have lost all humility and aren't opposed to kings, they all want to be one.
The pain in the lower economic strata is easy to see and feel. They feel powerless, mute and invisible. Many turn to alcohol and drugs for relief, pay no attention to politics, and spend their time just surviving. Some live in government housing, some in campgrounds, and others wander with a backpack's worth of possessions.
The middle class are upper class wanna be's. They pay little attention to politics, prefering reality tv. They eat out regular, go to movies, buy over priced clothes, drink higher priced liquor and stronger bags of weed. They don't want their high bummed with talk of wars or the plight of the lowers.
The uppers don't care a bit; live the dream of vacation homes, jet skis, and flat screens. They blame the lessers figuring, "I made it. Why can't they." They don't want to give a penny to the lessers. They loved the bank bailouts because it protected their 401k's.
I want to feel a part of a community, but don't, and feel as if I'm going it alone as you say. That is why I spend time here in this false ether community. It is better than nothing, but still I don't really know anybody here, can't shake their hands, look into their eyes or have them over for dinner. Some could work for the cia for all I know.
Add to these economic divisions religion, race, region, etc. and a completely divided population is the product. Add in the mind controlling media, false emotions like patriotism and the divisions increase.
I just can't see the people coming together for anything or anyone until hunger reaches into masses and acts as the catalyst.
Buck
Because this deals with money and not political ideology or war, the average person is eventually going to feel the very long screws of this scam as they are driven ever deeper into their bodies. Swine like Obama and Rahm Emanuel and their Republican equivalents are absolutely convinced that the public is uniformly composed of the oblivious, the ignorant and the stupid. No one will say boo as the corporate state continues to mug them. But this is about money; this is about God. So watch out, Obama. The next uplifting speech you make may be delivered from the bottom of the toilet.
The exact same method is being employed in S 510, a "food safety" bill written by Monsanto which will mandate GMOs.
It will also mandate pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, irradiation of food and more.
I heard a report on a news show today describing a man who has chosen to fly the American Flag upside down as a sign of political distress. I believe that simple act is a powerful symbol. I suggest that we adopt that practice immediately and watch it grow.
"Let's roll."
-30-
Uh, I would think that our pay-or-die health care system is already feudalism, insurance companies or not.
For example, I am finally seeing a doctor for the first time in over a year tomorrow, thanks to my promotion giving me both a raise, and yes, health insurance. I haven't been able to afford to see a doctor before now. What a wonderful country we live in.
I see that Italy's government run healthcare for all taxes income at about 8%. Medicare taxes everyone at 20% and only covers those close to death. Something is dreadfully wrong here. Now we must pay tribute (taxes) to Big Insurance without any representation like we get when we vote for the government. We done been sold down the river.
Nah, public opinion via letter-writing is largely ignored. It doesn't matter if some sort of ad hoc left-right coalition supports an issue. Recall that single-payer healthcare was excluded by Obama, especially as public pressure swelled to push for single payer.
Basically, Congress doesn't give a rat's ass about letter writing, polls, public opinion. They care about corporate campaign contributions from the insurance companies and big pharma.
Sure, send a letter, but it's just $0.42 cents spent, to no effect.
Forget the seemingly hopeful campaigns of Jane Hamsher and her Dem-facing Firedoglake Web site. Just make an oath to stop supporting Dems and Repugs. Vote for a third party, and mean it this time.
By the way, it is just not true that compromise represents the real politic approach that gets things done on Capitol Hill. When the Repugs were in power, they never compromised. The need to compromise is a Dem feint as they sell out the public.
If you read Howard Zinn's book, "A Peoples History of the United States," he describes how the original unicameral Congress actually passed legislation in response to effective public lobbying. That is why Congress was changed to become a bicameral body, according to Zinn. Having a House and a Senate weakens the effectiveness of public lobbying.
-TIA
Thoughts_Into_Action -- you may shoot me in the face if I'm wrong BUT I 'think' almost every one of those players in DC have an '800' - NO it probably won't change the course of history - but you'll run up their F*&&ing phone bill - and every little bit helps because you never know what straw will be the last straw that breaks the camel's back; which will be the one last car on the the freeway that crystallizes like magic a 40 mile gridlock - and you know, I don't think we're all that far away from some very serious shit. Pick up the sword. Make the call....be the Righteous Devil you truly know yourself to be. That's it. Take the rest of the day off. Lenin didn't know the revolution had started until Kerensky was in the Duma and the House of Romanov was in a cellar somewhere. History's funny like that, and yes, we are for better or for worse making history, whatever 'history' we may have left. Pick up the sword. Make the call....
Peace.