Email List
Most Popular This Week
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Hundreds of Chicago Students Walk Out of Standardized Test
- The Same Motive for Anti-US 'Terrorism' Is Cited Over and Over
- What Does It Mean To Be An “American” Corporation?
Popular content
Today's Top News
From Me Culture to We Culture: There IS An Alternative
Cynicism and Incoherence
I came of age in the 1980s which was, at the time, considered the epitome of pop culture, selfishness, competition, and corporate domination. The “greed is good” line from the movie “Wall Street” – meant as irony by the writer/director – became a motto for America. Indeed, the unbridled pursuit of material wealth was synonymous with “freedom.” Concurrently, in the context of the prevailing capitalistic system, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher decreed to the world: There is no alternative (TINA).
Around the time I graduated from college in the early 1990s, the so-called disaffected youth had aided the election of a modern new president, viewed as almost a messiah by his flock. Sound familiar? The difference back then was that the deleterious effects of rugged individualism, blind ambition, unbridled greed, and neoliberalism had not yet permeated all of the masses. The poor, many people of color, and most indigenous people remained as marginalized by society as ever, but a critical number of the middle and upper-middle class citizens still had access to their “piece of the pie” to which they felt entitled. A faction of twenty-somethings that didn’t believe in the system of greed found themselves underemployed during this era for two main reasons: 1. A large number of available jobs had gone from union, livable-wage, skilled or professional labor positions to low-paying service-sector positions, and 2. The higher-wage jobs available were detrimental and damaging to people and the environment; these young adults did not want to partake in such a corrupt, destructive system. Those particular Generation Xers were dismissed as “slackers,” and though that label was inaccurate, it was a more useful meme for the powers that be to declare that the dissenters were lazy rather than admit that they were purposefully noncompliant with the fraudulent, unjust, unethical status quo.
However, the personal rebellion of these discontented Generation Xers were few and far between – as evidenced by the many now middle-aged members who safely reside in the sanctity of their suburban comforts - so they did not cohere into anything more than discreet individual acts, for the most part. Moreover, the stresses faced by the youth then did not necessarily amount to the kind of dire financial circumstances, grim future prospects, and desperation faced by the youth of today.
photo: Eric Wagner
Domination and Desperation
Over the course of the past thirty years, popular culture, entertainment, narcissism, gluttony, and corporate imperialism have soared to heights unimaginable in the time of Centipede, the Cosby Show, and the Commodore 64. Until recently, the endless proliferation of these evils seemed as inevitable as the economic growth that resulted from them, and no one seemed to notice, no one seemed to care. While the WTO protests in Seattle in 1999 and other similar events lent glimmers of hope, these twinkles were usually quickly and summarily extinguished by our own complacency and by the media blanket that kept all winds of change in the margins.
Now, the first contradiction of capitalism has at last emerged, just as predicted. (So has the second, more ominous contraction which involves the ecosystem rather than the economic system, but that vital subject will have to be left to another conversation.) In an era marked by the election of yet another phony Presidential savior, the somnambulant masses have been forced to awaken. Not only have the conditions for the already marginalized grown excruciatingly horrific, but the members of socioeconomic classes who formerly expected to have a solid, productive outlook have been offered instead a harsh present and a bleak future. And even those who once assumed their lives secure have found their assumptions trashed along with their savings. It took these dismal conditions for people to finally proclaim that enough was enough, and for some of them to rise up and speak out on their own behalves.
Opportunity
The Canadian magazine Adbusters has been chronicling the inevitable downfall of Western Civilization and calling for massive resistance for over two decades now, which is why it is not surprising that they perceived the correct place to confront the masters of the modern world. But no one could have predicted that their request just months ago to Occupy Wall Street would have come at such an opportune moment.
What is happening in New York City’s Zuccotti Park and around the country is quite similar to what occurred during the capitol occupation in Madison, Wisconsin. People who could no longer stand to be controlled and exploited finally exerted their collective force. But more importantly, they demonstrated that the system in place to which we have been required to adhere is far from the only alternative.
While the corporate media deride the “anarchy” of Occupy Wall Street, they are not completely off the mark. Few are willing to admit that, just as in the Madison capitol, what is occurring among members of the rebellion on Wall Street is anarchism at its finest: cooperation, human relations based on shared values, organic collectives of non-hierarchical groups, and democratically advanced ideas. At the height of the Madison occupation in February/March 2011, thousands of people virtually lived in the state capitol. They organized themselves into units to maintain peace, to clean, to educate, to administer first aid, to distribute food and supplies, etc. No one concerned themselves with the potential for crime – and in fact, no one was harmed, and no personal items were stolen as thousands of people amassed in an unguarded space. There existed nary a fear for person or property. The society of the occupation was one to be envied and emulated in “real” life. It appears that the experience at Occupy Wall Street is similar. I learned that they have even constructed grey water filtration systems and composting on-site. These occupations lay bare the simple truth that There Is An Alternative (TIAA). In fact, there are many options, as long as we have the creativity and the will to imagine and realize them. Of course, this discovery is precisely what the power elite fear the most, that their systems – THEY – are not necessary.
Toward a Collective Future
So, I sincerely thank you, occupiers. As I stand in awe of and in solidarity with all of you on Wall Street, in D.C., and all over the country and the world, I hope that instead of capitulating to the moneyed forces and voices who insist upon concrete demands – which will undoubtedly allow for the continuation and promulgation of their deceitful, destructive systems – the movement imagines a whole new paradigm for our collective future. It cannot be accomplished through traditional means; it will not be expressed through traditional pathways. In addition, I hope that the resisters continue to see beyond their own personal, immediate concerns and incorporate the needs of the forgotten, those who have always been suffering - the poor, the homeless, people of color, and the indigenous. The movement must never forget to include not only the currently disenfranchised who thought they could succeed under this system, but the always disenfranchised who never had a chance. In short, the movement will be worthwhile and long-lasting if it can embrace a future society in which “we” always comes before “me.” There is a better alternative. It is here now, unless we retreat back to our superficial comforts, unless we surrender to our own egos, unless we cease to envision a healthier tomorrow for us all.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...




41 Comments so far
Show AllHere's something from the BBC World News on this:
"'Occupy' is a response to economic permafrost"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15326636
Manysummits
======
In labeling the movement anarchism, Ms. Mattis inadvertantly reminds us to examine the isms that corporate and political propagandists for the past century have told us to fear.
Keep in mind that FDR's New Deal would never have happened if strong socialism, communism, anarchism and other ism movements didn't exist to influence members of Congress to vote for populist programs in order to keep more Americans from becoming part of the isms.
The US (and the world) need more isms that threaten global corporations and the politicians they own.
OK - I've read the article.
Good - I agree - WE before ME. Nice!
One thought:
"Now, the first contradiction of capitalism has at last emerged, just as predicted. (So has the second, more ominous contraction which involves the ecosystem rather than the economic system, but that vital subject will have to be left to another conversation.)"
-------------
I don't think we have the luxury of separate conversations anymore.
A healthy environment is the economy - it is LIFE - without it we die, and not all the philosophy in the world will alter this fundamental fact - 'Here on Earth'.
Kristine, I urge you to incorporate the environment always.
Perhaps this will help - from Freeman Dyson:
"Sanity, in its essence, is nothing more than learning to live in harmony with nature's laws."
-----------
Isn't that what the #OCCUPY movement is about - collective sanity - worldwide?
Manysummits
=========
Hi Michael-
I wholly agree that we do not have the luxury for separate conversations. In fact, I actually think our ecological state should be the PRIMARY conversation. You may like to check out my post at OpEd News which addresses this issue:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/More-Jobs-are-Not-the-Solu-by-Kristine-Mattis-110825-56.html
Warm regards,
Kristine
Hello Kristine!
I've read your OpEd article just now.
I don't think I've seen a better summary, and I am adding your article to my files.
In case you haven't seen this, an article on economics by Herman Daly:
"Economics in a Full World"
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=economics-in-a-full-world.
On the concept "Planetary Boundaries"
"Tipping towards the unknown"
Researchers propose critical planetary boundaries, transgressing them could be catastrophic. But there is hope.
http://www.stockholmresilience.org/planetary-boundaries
On the worst case scenario of an impending 'greenhouse extinction'. It is common today to think of 'back to the Eocene', a period ~ 56 million years ago which saw a minor extinction event due to an abrupt input of greenhouse gasses (The Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Event). This might not be the worst case. The PETM occurred when the world was already essentially ice free from pole to pole, CO2 was already high. A closer analogy might be the Permian extinction, though being some 251 million years ago, it is more difficult to compare. But strikingly, CO2 had been very low, like the present times of the Pleistocene, for a prolonged period, and so the transition to an extreme greenhouse was literally catastrophic, wiping out perhaps 96 percent of species.
CO2 has been in decline throughout the Cenozoic, and the Pleistocene resembles in its polar ice caps the Permian.
And the rate of greenhouse input now apparently exceeds that of the PETM by an order of magnitude (Lee Kump). How it compares to the Permian and the flood basalt Siberian Traps is less clear. But if it is even possible that our injection rate exceeds the Permian's (I would think likely), then the PETM analogy is not the worst case scenario - it is something perhaps more ominous, even if it cannot be compared directly to the Permian. For a quick and dirty look at the idea of a greehouse extinction event, may I recommend an American specialist on the deep past and its extinction events, Peter Ward at the U of Washington:
"Impact from the Deep"
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=impact-from-the-deep
Best of luck in your studies Kristine - we are all in need of youthful exuberance like yours,
Manysummits
=====
Great thread - I'd add that along with the environment is the spiritual dignity of all peoples; That OCCUPY become profoundly familiar with Convention 169 of the ILO and the meaning of "free, prior and informed consultation" and consent. Non-indigenous peoples are fast discovering that those most denied by the system are but separated by degree. articulating points of solidarity - being very clear in one's own mind - think outside of the geo-political box and think planet/spiritual/environmental health.
in a time of competition to live engendered by the operational world-wide scarcity created by westernity (it is an insult to use the words culture or civilization together with the word western,.. that is social darwinism and exploitative capitalism, and more, and more,)... the winners win, consolidating and protecting their winnings by any and all means possible, while the losers are left to neo-feudalism, slavery and death.....as at the end of joseph conrad's novel, heart of darkness,: the horror! the horror!
Perhaps JFK has something to say with regard to WE before ME:
" I come here today to look across this world of threats to a world of peace. In that search we cannot expect any final triumph — for new problems will always arise. We cannot expect that all nations will adopt like systems — for conformity is the jailer of freedom, and the enemy of growth. Nor can we expect to reach our goal by contrivance, by fiat or even by the wishes of all.
But however close we sometimes seem to that dark and final abyss, let no man of peace and freedom despair. For he does not stand alone. If we all can persevere, if we can in every land and office look beyond our own shores and ambitions, then surely the age will dawn in which the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved."
- UN speech before the General Assembly: 25 -September - 1961
Manysummits
=======
No wonder why the global capitalists assassinated JFK.
I totally support OWS, BUT there is still too much "ME" and too little "WE". What about all of those who have been victims of U$A foreign policy. Economic justice at home is important, but NOT more important than the slaughter of innocent civilians all around the world by US military/CIA forces.
The corporations that own the US government dictate US domestic and foreign policy.
Ending corporate control of government will enable solutions to the domestic and global atrocities committed by the corporations and the politicians they own.
A generally well written and thought out article with one exception. The stereotype that people who live in suburbs or somehow "LESS" than people who live in cities. The principle value to living in the suburbs is NATURE. In the burbs there is more opportunity to connect with nature, in backyards or open spaces. Nature is critical to some people, someone like me, an American Indian. The concrete canyons of cities serve to disconnect me from nature. Nature is central to my culture. The four legged, winged, finned, plant people, and creeping crawling things are an important part of my existence. I have respected them and invited them to a place of peace and harmony. Here, from the largest wild animals such as the deer, to the smallest, they know me and they know they are welcome here. We live together in balance and harmony. My garden feeds them as well as myself. I provide natural living environments for them such as placing tree limbs and brush at the edges between woods and open spaces. I cultivate natural plants that are indigenous to the area. I provide shelters, food, and water for the most extreme times of the year. I use no pesticides or herbicides that kill instead of nourish. My child has a open and healthy space in which to grow. There are many benefits to living in suburbia and exurbia, so please be less stereotypical. City dwellers suffer from Nature Deficit Disorder and must be bussed to natural environments to teach them to appreciate and value nature. So if you truly value a "WE," culture and believe in cooperation then refrain from separatist speech and value people's choices as their right. Those who choose to live in cities are valued no less by me than those who live in the suburbs. If you want a culture of the "WE," then talk the speech of WE.
CAPITALISM REPRESENTED BY BANKS ARE INFUSED WITH MONEY GENERATED BY THEIR GOD....COMPOUND INTEREST....WHICH FUELS A ENDLESS CYCLE OF INFLATION AND DEFLATION...TO REDUCE CAPITALISTS TO THEIR RIGHTFUL STATUS ...PETTY FUNCTIONARIES...COMPOUND INTEREST MUST BE DESTROYED BY BOYCOTTING THE VAMPIRE....
Quite frankly, I believe the "me" generation ideology was spawned by Madison Avenue. In the same way, I perceive the stink of corporate manipulation in the so-called "we" generation events that are being staged and targeted toward young people these days. Young people know that they need other people for survival. It's some of the adults of this world that need to give their heads a shake. Let's not forget that only psychopaths and rich people can afford to have a "me" attitude. The rest of us know that we need each other every day to make life worth living on space ship earth.
with love and happy occupied world,
Elisabet
I was fortunate enough to be born a decade before Madison Avenue refined its brainwashing techniques (not having a TV until I was 6 years old helped immensely). I have therefore been able to remain outside the fishbowl, watching as Madison Ave. (primarily via children's TV) brainwashed children during the past half century. I therefore concur with Elisbet's observations that Madison Ave. has masterfully executed not only the self centered strategy, but also a divide and conquer strategy.
My license plate holder has been for the last 3 years: "FREEDOM THRIVES IN A WE SOCIETY". Tony
Quite a contrast to Ronny Raygun's FREEDOM THRIVES IN A ME SOCIETY, and GET RICH OR GET OFF.
in the meantime, the ENTIRE E.U. has been taken in a fascist coup....the pieces are moving on the board.....http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/14/a-coup-in-the-european-union/
any one who understands war or combat knows that when the other side is strong you retreat and wait for a clear opening to counterattack... this is how de gaulle, a general, defeated the rising of '68 in france....re: the enviroment, during the spanish civil war there was a crack detachment of franco fascists whose flag said on it, "long live death"...and who won that war?..
greed = looking for love in all the wrong places
Mattis: "embrace a future society in which “we” always comes before “me.” "
There's a name for such a society. Its called a democracy. It works because, politically, the we outnumber the me. So, if the Occupiers want to know why younger generations have been placed in the impossible position they find themselves in, it is simply because this is not a democracy, its a bought democracy. The U.S. is just the most egregious example, but many democracies have been bought, and if there is a global effort to change society, I hope it will focus itself on taking the democracy back from those who bought it. Everywhere, but most prominantly in the Americas, Europe, and East Asia.
Right now, the public is charged top dollar for the 'privilege' of conducting an informed democracy. This massive outlay of capital is used to purchase the airwaves upon which legitimate candidates can deliver their message. Who owns these airwaves? The public does! Thats right, we practically give away our airwaves and newsprint space to private entities who then charge us up the wazoo for the 'privilege' of informing ourselves of our democratic choices. I don't think even George Orwell could have dreamed up such a system of complete and utter abdication to the moneyed forces (the 1%).
Hammer the media until we get the space we need to conduct an informed democracy. Publicly finance all legitimate campaigns. Get private money completely away from our 'public servants'. Reclaim the democracy from those who bought it, or nothing gets fixed, and the Occupy movement will be seen as a fun party that unfortunately we had to wake up from.
Ubrew: Right on! Get the media away! No media, no politically-affiliated groups. The 99% starts from ZERO.
We can speculate about how soon environmental collapse will occur and whether or not we are at fault, but the best use of our energy is not in conversation but in action. This is what gives OWS its power, the fact that people are putting their bodies on the line to make change, not waiting for someone else to do for them.
We must focus our energy on those parts of the machine that require our participation in them to continue. That is why I support the movement to Move Your Money from the big blood-sucking banks (B of A, Citi, Chase, Wells Fargo, etc.) and into local banks and credit unions. Also, I propose now a #dontfile movement to go out and encourage 5 million or more Americans to not file income tax next year. Income tax is a form of illegal extortion, it is tribute to a private corporation, the Federal Reserve, that has stolen the U.S. government's constitutional mandate to be the only entity to coin money for the use of the people and the general good. The federal Reserve has co-opted that role, sucking interest from us through taxes for the right to use its toilet paper for money. We rent those reserve notes and pay interest through taxes, how do you think those guys got so rich? They get a percentage off of each economic transaction every time money changes hands. The only ones who are exempt from this little circle of pillage is the Upper crust of CEO's, especially in the financial sector for they are the main money movers. We really have to cut them off at the knees. Can you imagine a more peaceful protest than to just not mail that envelope or consult H.R Block, or push that send button? Think about it.....
Well, I suppose that's true - if the Dem/Rep party doesn't succeed in destroying social services by refusing to fund them, we could perform the same function by refusing to fund them ourselves ....
Is the answer that we don't pay our taxes or that more folks do .....
For the past 30 years the wealthiest 1% and the politicians they own have determined where tax money is sourced and where it is spent.
The 99% need to once again decide where tax money is sources and where it is spent.
Yup, but that is not going to happen by refusing to pay them - that will only happen when we pick politicians who are not "owned" ...
Denying government tax money is just another way of saying "don't tax us" but it sounds better when cloaked as "protest" ....
Most of the taxes come from we wage slaves that have tax deducted at source.
Problem: taxes are deducted at the source for wage slaves. How to fix it: became an independent contractor where you decide how much you have to pay.
Continue to express your views. If that idea catches the imaginations of the majority of participants then that will become an actionable outcome. I agree that would be a useful tool but it is a bit early and a bit extreme for most people I would think. Be patient and allow things to unfold. Your time will come.
Everyone should read Agenda for A New Economy: from Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth by David Korten
I participated in the opening moments of my local 'occupation', and am happy to read articles such as this one.
I still notice in such accounts, though, some trepidation about the 'anarchist' dimension of these events. If anything, this is a time to notice that the approach of self-organization and spontaneous response is a promising and more effective strategy than usual protest protocol in Western cultures. We are finally learning from the great antagonists of other places how to do this, and that is going to be the guiding light for ongoing manifestations such as we see now. Let's use this opportunity to show everyone what anarchism can really do: those tough and uncompromising souls are the majority that are camped out and facing the elements, carrying the burden of the occupation. Let's all learn how to organize ourselves in better and more imaginative ways!
Let's all also stop falling for corporate propaganda that teaches us to fear anarchism, communism, socialism and other isms.
You and other anarchists WILL NOT hijack the OCW movement. All individual participants will develop the visions. Extreme left and extreme right included, but not dominant. We need no isms. The Bell Curve will approximate the outcomes. If you wish your particular ism to become dominant then start your own movement, don't try to hijack ours. This movement is much bigger than your particular ism.
You just demonstrated the effect of the prevailing cavils about this thing. In fact, anarchism, in and of itself, cannot be equated to other -isms... it's an unfortunate shortcoming of our language that there is no better word to describe this attitude at the moment... we actually wish for a better, more poignant word, but as it stands this is the best we can do in light of history and context. I suggest you educate yourself and learn about this word and those who (all too rarely) would identify themselves with it.
Outside of this, I can tell you that I agree entirely with your feelings about hijacking the movement.
Nicely done. I'm always impressed by the gentleness, respect, politeness, and lack of agression I find in anarchists. I read a book years ago called Battle of the Trees about an anarchist movement to save a forest in England; until the topic of condoms came up I couldn't determine the gender of the writer. (Yes, I know women could talk about condoms too, but, not in this particular context.) I'm not sure I've ever seen such a clear example of moving beyond patriarchy.
On top of that, anarchists have had some success in curbing corporate excess ---- have managed to screw up Monsanto a time or too ---- and that means a lot to me.
I never met an anarchist I didn't like, but I've met a lot of really mean-spirited Capitalists.
I am not a slacker--I am purposefully noncompliant with the fraudulent, unjust, unethical status quo.
Great Tshirt (and speaks for me as well)
Some very noble wishes particularly in that final paragraph, Kristine . . . . it would be lovely if the paradigm could shift toward true communalism.
But I don't think we can ignore the existence of the psychopaths: the rulers and principal architects of the "greed before need" movement that has become dominant.
Unless a way is found by the caring majority to override these narcissistic few------------the pattern merely reassembles itself into a newer version of the old.
Exactly. The 1% will cling firmly to their ME religion. Taking their power away will not be a gentle process.
The WHOLE POINT of OWS is that 300 million Americans NO LONGER HAVE A SAY in the direction of America.
We have to return our country to the 99% through VOTER REPRESENTATION.
I suggest that OWS make this demand. All other demands flow logically from this demand. I'm sure that 99% of those 300 million Americans will support it enthusiastically. The 1% will scream bloody murder but so what? It's time the 1% running this corrupt status quo was returned to 1% of voting power instead the 70% or greater power they now enjoy.
Here's my suggestion:
Power for the 99% cannot come about when the population to representative ratio is one to 700,000. Since the Constitution was shit canned in 1913 with a cork on the max number of reps in the House, corporate control of ANYONE in the House was guaranteed.
Only by returning to the Constitution's original one rep per 30,000 (that gives us a House of Representatives of about 11,000 - too many for the corporations to buy or threaten) AND a Representative to Senator ratio of 3 to one as in 1789 will we be provided with ANY insurance that the 1% won't coopt any new political party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_population_per_representative.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives#Number_of_Representatives
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment#Constitutional_text
Naomi Klein said this cannot be settled at the ballot box.
If any citizen was allowed to get on the ballot and our representative to population ratio was one to 30,000 making an electronic House and Senate with TOTAL voter access to their reps and ALL monetary lobbying BANNED while verbal lobbying is required by law to be posted on the web site of each rep and senator, she might change her mind.
Also there should be no more election campaigns, PERIOD. A US Government web site would list all the candidates in all the states from dog catcher to president and the platforms (no more party affiliation bullshit stories) of said candidates and links to their web sites.
For those who still believe that elections for Representatives matter and Corporations have not totally destroyed our republic, I have this to say: If, in 1789, we had the same level of "representation" that we have today, the first Congress wouldn not have had 65 Representatives. THE FIRST CONGRESS WOULD HAVE HAD THREE REPRESENTATIVES!
Wake up! The corporate elite STOLE our democracy. With modern technology, we CAN go back to 30,000 per rep. That would be Constitutional. That would be too many reps for corporations to buy or threaten. That would keep the oligarchy from regrouping to attack social safety nets again.
L. Cohen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG4ndbhOkpI&feature=related
Beautiful article, and informed comment.
However, as an inveterably obsessive editor, I would take issue with the following snippet from the article, on historical grounds:
"...the movement imagines a whole new paradigm for our collective future. It cannot be accomplished through traditional means; it will not be expressed through traditional pathways. In addition, I..."
My objection, again for historical reasons, is to the use of the word, "traditional," twice. My first substitute term was "conventional," but it seems insufficient. I'm open to any alternatives. It would seem that Troglodytes and the SMASHERS OF MACHINES THAT REPLACED HUMAN LABOR in the absence of the TAXATION OF SUCH MACHINES (actually tax write-offs!) to COMPENSATE THE HUMANS for loss of wages, had it about right.
EAT THE STATE! (The expression has been around for decades...)
As to the mention on this thread of Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness," my memory was that it did not end with "The horror. The horror," but instead with "Mr. _________. He dead." But then I could be thinking of the Marlon Brando version. "Apocalypse Now." (1979.)
I leave it to others to decide, while we probably all could benefit from re-reading the book. The movie was also really good. Brando did not take the role lightly! He stands as great as the giants of the movies from the years of WWII. Casa Blanca. Greenstreet. African Queen.
Dialog seems to have given way in the MSM to mindless (planned) action. To create a FICTIONAL Iranian threat, to divert attention once again from the fact that our society is in DEEP doo-doo.
Eisenhower won his Presidency by promising to end the Korean War, and he did.
Who now will end the Koran War?
-30-
Having no concrete demands is not a multifaceted imagining of “a whole new paradigm for our collective future” — it is a dead end to defeat.
And the way to avoid buying into “the continuation and promulgation of their deceitful, destructive systems” is to refuse to compromise on your programme — however ‘irrational,’‘fanatical’ and even ‘un-American’ they paint you.
Yes, there is an alternative — but it will not be won by hippie-like platitudes. “Me’ will only become ‘we’ when *everybody* (especially the “always disenfranchised’) has a say over the circumstances of their existence, economic and social as well as ‘political.’
And this, in turn, requires a programme aimed at taking economic and social control from those who currently have it and giving it to those who don’t — or, to put it plainly, taking the power to decide who works and under what conditions *out of* the hands of individuals and groups of ‘shareholders and ‘directors’ and placing it *into* the hands of the workers.