Current location: Earth
Member since: Tue Sep 23, 2003, 11:05 PM
Number of posts: 24,215
Current location: Earth
Member since: Tue Sep 23, 2003, 11:05 PM
Number of posts: 24,215
- 2015 (10)
- 2014 (97)
- 2013 (106)
- 2012 (110)
- 2011 (6)
- December (6)
- Older Archives
there is no real democracy.
It's very simple. Buy the mainstream media, control your mainstream media, use the mainstream media to create culture and public opinion, and use it for your purposes.
Buy the government, control the government, and use it to control the populace for your purposes.
It's not rocket science.
The folks referred to by conservatives as "far left" are generally democrats who advocate for possible effective avenues of changing our system of government from oligarchy to some genuine form of democracy.
Many of these conservatives even consider leaders like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to be "far left", when, in fact, they are simply plain old democrats.
No offense meant, cbayer, but if you are, for some reason, not aware of this obvious reality, we cannot conduct a conversation as peers. The frustration expressed by Fumesucker in the OP is the same frustration expressed by most democrats in general, certainly the majority of democrats on DU. If such a large number of "Big D" Democrats are so unaware of global political realities that they refer to folks like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and DUers like Fumesucker, and the other democrats among us who see that the system is obviously rigged against us, there is no real hope for instituting democracy in the US, except through focused and effective direct action from outside the system.
The oligarchs will not allow democracy to manifest while they control the information and the political process; it's simply against their personal, and class, material interests.
Posted by Zorra | Fri Feb 27, 2015, 12:28 PM (1 replies)
The 1% buys and controls the global media in order to create, and control, cultures and public opinion. Give the voters in pseudo democracies a choice in order to continue the illusion of liberty and democracy.
The "choice": Either vote for the corporatist candidate who will support human rights, or vote for the corporatist candidate who will crush human rights. Meanwhile, economic injustice (particularly concerning the ramifications of the polarization of wealth), inequality (see previous parenthesized sentence fragment), and rule by oligarch continues to expand exponentially.
Marcos defines the maintaining principle of government of, by, and for, the wealthy ~
The global power of the financial centers is so great, that they can afford not to worry about the political tendency of those who hold power in a nation, if the economic program (in other words, the role that nation has in the global economic megaprogram) remains unaltered. The financial disciplines impose themselves upon the different colors of the world political spectrum in regards to the government of any nation. The great world power can tolerate a leftist government in any part of the world, as long as the government does not take measures that go against the needs of the world financial centers. But in no way will it tolerate that an alternative economic, political and social organization consolidate. For the megapolitics, the national politics are dwarfed and submit to the dictates of the financial centers. It will be this way until the dwarfs rebel...
Posted by Zorra | Fri Feb 27, 2015, 11:50 AM (0 replies)
freeing Ireland from imperialist British occupiers.
I reckon that the British imperialist occupiers have directly or indirectly murdered over a million Irish folk, including lots of babies and children. It was all a very deliberate genocide, complete with many of the horrors that usually accompany genocides committed by imperialist fascist pigs everywhere ~ destruction of the land and exploitation of natural resources, enslavement, torture, dispossession, etc.
One of my grandparents (who would not allow anything colored orange to be brought into the house) came from Ireland, and, according to specific statements in Irish histories about our tribe, I am descended from a long line of Irish Nationalist freedom fighters, back to antiquity. My Native Irish sept is related by blood or marriage to the Larkin, Kelly, Madden, Treacy, and Fahy tribes, to name just a few. Our families are all part of an alliance of septs that comprised a larger tribe, who once allied with Brian Boru to begin the end of the Viking occupation of Ireland at the the Battle of Clontarf. Our families, and other related families, shared the same tribal territory for 1500 years or more. And still do.
That said, paramilitary groups comprised of Protestant colonists from the British Isle, financed and supported by the British government, have dispossessed tortured, injured and killed thousands of Irish civilians, primarily Native Irish Catholics.
The IRA still exists primarily to help protect Catholic communities from ongoing oppression, persecution, and aggression by agents and supporters sanctioned by British Empire political/economic interests in occupied Ulster, who presently (and historically) use religion as a tool divide the inhabitants of Ulster, in order prevent Ireland from becoming a unified island nation.
The IRA, and Sinn Fein, don't care what religion people belong to, they just want a united Ireland that governs itself, not a fragmented nation which in part is ostensibly ruled by a hereditary monarchy and which is a puppet government dedicated to serving the interests of the British Empire at the expense of the people of Ulster.
The only thing the IRA and other Irish independence groups want is for the British and their cronies to get the fuck out of Ireland and leave Ireland alone forever. It took 6 centuries of persistent resistance to finally kick the imperialist British occupiers out of most of Ireland, and eventually the Irish people will kick them out of Ulster, even if it takes another 6 centuries.
Irish Republican Brotherhood
Irish Republican Army
Republican Sinn Fein
THE NEED FOR JUSTICE
Republican Sinn Féin campaigns for a just settlement to the conflict in Ireland. It is our belief that a key ingredient missing from the Stormont Agreement is justice for all the Irish people. The “solution”, so-called, leaves the people in the 26 Counties stranded in a neo-colonial State, which by nature is heavily centralised (it is only now seeming to go contrary to its centralist nature at the behest of its European masters in order to receive maximum grant aid), with a political system contaminated beyond repair by an ethos of cronyism.
This agreement, if it runs its course, promises many more decades of working class alienation and institutionalised sectarianism. The sooner it falls, the better.
THE STRUGGLE ON ALL FRONTS
We stand for the complete separation of Church and State.
In these and in other matters, Republican Sinn Féin will not hesitate to take issues into the streets or wherever may be necessary to ensure the interests of the people they serve.
Regarding the story below, those known as unionists are people who support the British occupation of Ulster, and the term as used in the article has nothing to do with labor unions whatsoever.
Gay marriage in Northern Ireland: Catholics and unionists block motion
The Catholic church has backed unionist politicians' moves to block marriage equality in Northern Ireland.
A Sinn Féin motion to introduce legislation that would allow gay people to marry in the region is likely to be defeated at the Northern Ireland assembly on Tuesday.
Before the vote, the Catholic hierarchy wrote to every assembly member to urge them to reject the bill.
The Catholic bishops in Northern Ireland said: "We write to you today out of concern that the 'Marriage Equality' motion undermines a key foundation of that common good. We say this not only out of religious conviction, but also as a matter of human reason. Religious and non-religious people alike have long acknowledged and know from their experience that the family, based on the marriage of a woman and a man, is the best and ideal place for children. It is a fundamental building block of society which makes a unique and irreplaceable contribution to the common good. It is therefore deserving of special recognition and promotion by the State.
Below is the graveyard, and ruins of the chapel where some of my Irish ancestors and relatives are buried. At least 10 of the children of my direct ancestors were indirectly murdered in the 1800's by the imperialist British occupiers before their 30th birthday.
The British could bring good will to all concerned, and put an end to any and all violence connected to their occupation, by simply going back to the British Isle forever, and leaving Irish folk to govern themselves.
The violence in Ulster is unfortunate, but imperialist occupiers should expect it. Those who invade and occupy another people's ancestral lands through use of force and violence are terrorists, and the original inhabitants of the occupied land have every right to try to do whatever they feel necessary drive imperialist terrorists from their lands and homes if the terrorist occupiers refuse to leave peacefully.
For anyone who wishes to get some background of the horror and ultimate genocide of the Irish people by the British imperialist occupiers, the defeat of the British and their expulsion from the southern provinces, the background of the IRB, IRA, and Sinn Fein, etc, I recommend two classic novels by Leon Uris, Trinity, and Redemption. While these are fiction novels, they mirror historical events pretty well, and are very enlightening and entertaining.
Posted by Zorra | Wed Feb 25, 2015, 09:51 PM (2 replies)
institutionalized hatred for some harmless, innocent group of people.
Political leaders do the same thing. Like Francis, Putin is also currently using institutionalized hatred for LGBT and women as a vehicle for increasing his power, and the number of his followers, among the gullible ignorant. They are running out of groups they can successfully scapegoat for the cause of mass hate. Groups such as Jews (after all, after Hitler's insane failed adventure in exploiting mass sociopathy, using Jews as scapegoats will only get you so far these days; he used LGBT as well...there just weren't enough of us to mass murder in order to hold the crowd at the time), heretics, and black people, etc, whatever the flavor of the day. So now folks like Pope Francis are having to fall back on the two most hated innocent groups of human beings in the history of the world since the advent of the major patriarchal sky god religions to use as scapegoats in order to maintain their place, power, authority, and wealth:
Women, and LGBT. It is still A-OK with many to hate women and LGBT. The widespread hatred for women and LGBT that the patriarchal sky god religions have institutionalized in most existing societies is their ace in the hole.
The hate for LGBT and women that Francis is currently spreading at an alarming rate throughout the world is not just a random, fleeting phenomenon, it is right now being used enmasse (or is it in Mass?) around the world by various Right Wing religions and political leaders in order to once again rally the hateful faithful to the cause of legalized authoritarian oppression, destruction, misery, and death.
The phrase, "Never Again" is ever present; unless good people stop the current spread of RW hatred around the world, and I'm here to tell you, the fuckers will do it again, in some way of another, if they are not prevented from doing so. The "war to end all wars" never happens.
It doesn't matter that the women and LGBT are innocent, and harmless; using women and LGBT as scapegoats can always be relied on to maintain a substantial congregation of the hateful. It works the same in any country, or religion; all you have to do is tell the ignorant hateful that they are being threatened, and they will follow you to straight down the garden path to hell.
And when the destruction is finally over, there are always the same three words that the congregation of the hateful says to all the kind, incredulous people of the world, in order to justify the senseless carnage they helped inflict on the innocent...
"We didn't know."
Posted by Zorra | Wed Jan 28, 2015, 12:23 PM (0 replies)
of the way I was born. It continues to harm me every day of my life.
I'm female, and LGBT. Yesterday, the highest court, in the greatest
How ignorant, and dehumanizing, and insulting, is that? I can't help but see many religions as a vehicle for mean, ignorant people to justify and manifest their hatred for others, and their need to control others who differ from them in some way.
Religion based cultural mores have institutionalized the dehumanization of women and LGBT in almost every society on the planet.
I don't care what anyone believes, as long as it does not lead them to cause harm to others in any way. I don't deny the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent entity. I don't deny that there is an essentially correct, ethical and moral way for human beings to conduct their lives in a way that will result in their greatest happiness and satisfaction.
I do deny the rights of demented religions and religious leaders and their followers to use the law as a weapon to cause innocent people to suffer.
Rational people develop contempt for religions and the followers of those religions, when they see them using superstition based falsehoods to deceive themselves and others into causing harm and destruction to innocent people and the planet itself.
Posted by Zorra | Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:15 PM (0 replies)
all y'all promise to recognize that I, and every other woman, have full sovereignty over my/our own bodies, and that you will never do anything, directly or indirectly, to prevent me or another woman from preventing or terminating an unwanted pregnancy if that is our choice.
You must also promise to recognize that women are fully equal to men, and that they have same full equal rights in all areas of existence, including the equal right within your faith based organization(s) to be ordained as priests, imams, bishops, popes, Grand Wazoos, whatever, etc.
You must also promise to recognize that women and/or LGBT persons are not "evil" or "sinful" because they are natural born women and/or LGBT, and that you will do nothing directly or indirectly to prevent women and/or LGBT from having equal rights to non-LGBT, non-female/other persons in all areas of existence.
You must also promise never to encourage, promote, fund, or engage in individual or organized group "faith based" imperialistic acts of violence, such as crusades, inquisitions, witch burnings, or supporting the efforts of malicious, authoritarian governments to dehumanize and repress, oppress, or persecute, women, LGBT, or any other group because of their gender, race, color, sexual orientation, creed, etc.
If you can't do these things, then it becomes clear that you don't have the slightest notion of what love is, and your religion is nothing but egocentric, power and control driven authoritarian smoke and hypocrisy, and I reserve the right, to freely insult your malicious, destructive organization and beliefs whenever and wherever I see fit, and consider it my obligation to prevent you from harming innocent people.
Expect it. If the thing that you consider your "faith" leads you to deny innocent others their equal humanity, and causes direct or collateral harm to innocent people, then your faith is nothing but an irrational lunatic and pathetic self-justification for your own hatreds and needs for security and false superiority to others.
But don't take my word for it; I'm just doing my best to consider this entire conundrum from the perspective of the dude you claim to follow ~
“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them."
Anyone who hates a brother or sister is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness. They do not know where they are going, because the darkness has blinded them.
"Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar."
"By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
Next up in our Tough Love™ series is Part One of "Saudi Arabia: "Institutionalized Hatred and Oppression of Women and LGBT Resulting From Authoritarian Religion Based Islamic Governments."
"Preventing people from deliberately harming innocent others because they believe their religion demands it is not religious persecution, it is simple common human decency, and hate is bad for children everywhere. So please, don't burn me, ok? It really hurts."
Posted by Zorra | Thu Jan 15, 2015, 01:02 PM (1 replies)
And the Rabbi says
“Woe to him who strives with him who formed him, a pot among earthen pots! Does the clay say to him who forms it, ‘What are you making?’ or ‘Your work has no handles’? Woe to him who says to a father, ‘What are you begetting?’ or to a woman, ‘With what are you in labor?’” Thus says the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and the one who formed him: “Ask me of things to come; will you command me concerning my children and the work of my hands? I made the earth and created man on it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host."
And the Imam says
"O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith."
"The Holy Prophet himself forbade people to ask questions ...so do not try to probe into such things."
And the Paul quoting evangelical preacher says
"The evidence of God is all that has been made".
"But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?"
And Jesus might say
"Well, bro, I'm, like, the Creator of the Universe. I gave y'all life and free will. And y'all fucked everything up. So I became a human being, and tried to tell y'all how to live well, and be happy. I tried to make it as simple as possible, but y'all still didn't get it. So don't be laying this guilt trip on me....
I'm just wondering...what part of "Love Your Neighbor" did y'all not understand? Y'all really need to start taking care of your own shit."
Buddha might say
"Give up what is wrong and evil, undertake what is good, and abandon thoughts that have to do with bringing suffering to any conscious being; cultivate thoughts of loving kindness, that are based on caring about others' suffering, and sympathetic joy in others' happiness."
And a Marxist might say,
"Religion is the opium of the masses."
And a tribal medicine person or chief might say,
"If there is but one religion, why do you people differ so much about it? Why not all agreed, as you can all read the Book?"
"Every person must learn for themselves the highest wisdom. It cannot be taught with words."
etc. ad infinitum
There's lots of interesting ideas to ponder out there.
As for me, I only believe and do what seems to me to be my best way, and never follow anyone, or any thing, except myself. That said, would you like a cookie? Fresh baked this morning.
Posted by Zorra | Sat Jan 10, 2015, 01:39 PM (0 replies)
In this respect, it will have a negative effect on the lives of the majority of Muslims living in the west, especially in Europe. A significant percentage of the European population already distrusts Muslims, and has contempt for Muslims and Islam.
This may also be used as another justification/excuse for western imperialism (war and exploitation) in primarily Islamic countries.
Posted by Zorra | Wed Jan 7, 2015, 12:57 PM (3 replies)
NAFTA at 20: One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Higher Income Inequality
Posted: 01/06/2014 3:19 pm EST
For NAFTA's unhappy 20th anniversary, Public Citizen has published a report that details the wreckage. Not only did promises made by NAFTA's proponents not materialize, but many results are exactly the opposite.
Such outcomes include a staggering $181 billion U.S. trade deficit with NAFTA partners Mexico and Canada and the related loss of 1 million net U.S. jobs under NAFTA, growing income inequality, displacement of more than one million Mexican campesino farmers and a doubling of desperate immigration from Mexico, and more than $360 million paid to corporations after "investor-state" tribunal attacks on, and rollbacks of, domestic public interest policies.
The study makes for a blood-boiling read. For instance, we track the specific promises made by U.S. corporations like GE, Chrysler and Caterpillar to create specific numbers of American jobs if NAFTA was approved, and reveal government data showing that instead, they fired U.S. workers and moved operations to Mexico.
The data also show how post-NAFTA trade and investment trends have contributed to middle-class pay cuts, which in turn contributed to growing income inequality; how since NAFTA, U.S. trade deficit growth with Mexico and Canada has been 45 percent higher than with countries not party to a U.S. Free Trade Agreement, and how U.S. manufacturing exports to Canada and Mexico have grown at less than half the pre-NAFTA rate.
Economic Policy Institute
NAFTA’s Impact on U.S. Workers
Posted December 9, 2013 at 4:00 pm by Jeff Faux
By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.
NAFTA affected U.S. workers in four principal ways. First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. To be sure, there were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the loses, and are in lower paying occupations. The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor. In the midst of collective bargaining negotiations with unions, some companies would even start loading machinery into trucks that they said were bound for Mexico. The same threats were used to fight union organizing efforts. The message was: “If you vote in a union, we will move south of the border.” With NAFTA, corporations also could more easily blackmail local governments into giving them tax reductions and other subsidies.
In terms of U.S. politics, the passage of NAFTA signaled that the Democratic Party—the “progressive” side of the U.S. two-party system—had accepted the reactionary economic ideology of Ronald Reagan.
According to the Economic Policy Institute's study, 61% of the net job losses due to trade with Mexico under NAFTA, or 415,000 jobs, were relatively high paying manufacturing jobs. Certain states with heavy emphasis on manufacturing industries like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and California were significantly affected by these job losses. For example, in Ohio, Trade Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA-TAA identified 14,653 jobs directly lost due to NAFTA-related reasons like relocation of U.S. firms to Mexico. Similarly, in Pennsylvania, Keystone Research Center attributed 150,000 job losses in the state to the rising U.S. trade deficit. Since 1993, 38,325 of those job losses are directly related to trade with Mexico and Canada. Although many of these workers laid off due to NAFTA were reallocated to other sectors, the majority of workers were relocated to the service industry, where average wages are 4/5 to that of the manufacturing sector.
Opponents also argue that the ability for firms to increase capital mobility and flexibility has undermined the bargaining power of U.S. workers. In addition to enjoying lower tariffs for shipping goods from Mexico to the United States, multinational corporations also benefited from NAFTA's unprecedented section giving multinational corporations the right to sue governments for infringement of "investment rights". According to the Economic Policy Institute, these investor protections facilitated the movement of manufacturing plants to Mexico. Fifteen percent of employers in manufacturing, communication, and wholesale/distribution shut down or relocated plants due to union organizing drives since NAFTA's implementation. The weakening of rights for the American labor force is one example of the "race to the bottom" theory advocated by most opponents that will result from these trade policies. Ultimately, workers are faced with the dilemma of settling for fewer worker's rights because the firm will always have the ability to relocate to another country, notably Mexico, where they can attain cheaper labor and will face less resistance from workers. However, it is now common that these incentives are enough to cost American laborers their jobs regardless of the status of the labor unions.
Under Nafta, Mexico Suffered, and the United States Felt Its Pain
(Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas program at the Center for International Policy)
Nafta is limping toward its 20th anniversary with a beat-up image and a bad track record. Recent polls show that the majority of the U.S. people favors “leaving” or “renegotiating” the model trade agreement.
While much has been said about its impact on U.S. job loss and eroding labor conditions, some of the most severe impacts of Nafta have been felt south of the border.
Nafta has cut a path of destruction through Mexico. Since the agreement went into force in 1994, the country’s annual per capita growth flat-lined to an average of just 1.2 percent -- one of the lowest in the hemisphere. Its real wage has declined and unemployment is up.
As heavily subsidized U.S. corn and other staples poured into Mexico, producer prices dropped and small farmers found themselves unable to make a living. Some two million have been forced to leave their farms since Nafta. At the same time, consumer food prices rose, notably the cost of the omnipresent tortilla.
NAFTA: 20 years of regret for Mexico
It was 20 years ago that the North American Free Trade Agreement between the US, Canada, and Mexico was implemented. In Washington, the date coincided with an outbreak of the bacteria cryptosporidium in the city's water supply, with residents having to boil their water before drinking it. The joke in town was, "See what happens, NAFTA takes effect and you can't drink the water here."
Our neglected infrastructure aside, it is easy to see that NAFTA was a bad deal for most Americans. The promised trade surpluses with Mexico turned out to be deficits, some hundreds of thousands of jobs were lost, and there was downward pressure on US wages – which was, after all, the purpose of the agreement. This was not like the European Union's (pre-Eurozone) economic integration, which allocated hundreds of billions of dollars of development aid to the poorer countries of Europe so as to pull their living standards up toward the average. The idea was to push US wages downward, toward Mexico's, and to create new rights for corporations within the trade area: these lucky multinational enterprises could now sue governments directly before a corporate-friendly international tribunal, unaccountable to any national judicial system, for regulations (eg environmental) that infringed upon their profit-making potential.
But what about Mexico? Didn't Mexico at least benefit from the agreement? Well if we look at the past 20 years, it's not a pretty picture. The most basic measure of economic progress, especially for a developing country like Mexico, is the growth of income (or GDP) per person. Out of 20 Latin American countries (South and Central America plus Mexico), Mexico ranks 18, with growth of less than 1% annually since 1994. It is, of course, possible to argue that Mexico would have done even worse without NAFTA, but then the question would be, why?
It's tough to imagine Mexico doing worse without NAFTA. Perhaps this is part of the reason why Washington's proposed "Free Trade Area of the Americas" was roundly rejected by the region in 2005 and the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership is running into trouble. Interestingly, when economists who have promoted NAFTA from the beginning are called upon to defend the agreement, the best that they can offer is that it increased trade. But trade is not, to most humans, an end in itself. And neither are the blatantly mis-named "free trade agreements".
Posted by Zorra | Tue Jan 6, 2015, 02:47 PM (21 replies)
are corporate property. Most people recognize when someone does the right thing, even if it is largely symbolic.
So over the past six years, even with large Democratic majorities, it has been impossible to pass any necessary progressive legislation that goes against the wishes of the financial centers.
During the first two years of the Obama administration, Democratic legislators could be accused of not fighting hard enough for constructive, effective progressive legislation if it was clear they were not supporting it and promoting it in earnest, at least making a sincere effort.
The ineffectiveness of the Obama administration and large Democratic majorities in getting critical progressive legislation passed led to the awful situation we are in now, with fascists having large majorities in both the House and Senate.
Through their ineffectiveness during the first two years of the Obama administration, Democrats either deliberately or foolishly lost all the political capital they had gained in the 2008 elections. water under the bridge, yes, but it happened and many people lost faith in the Democratic party and we will continue to pay for Democrat's squandering our capital for generations if, not forever.
Now, unfortunately the Democratic Party is basically done. Stick a fork in it. It created a hopeless situation for America during those first two years of the Obama administration, and the best that real Democrats can hope for now is a few necessary changes in the social aspects of life in America, clever Executive Orders, and a busy and effective veto pen in the Oval Office.
For anything else, mass non-violent revolution is the only way to regain any semblance of democracy in America.
I support Bernie Sanders for President. But I know that the 1% will never allow him to be nominated for POTUS, let alone become President, even if elected. I know they already have their candidate groomed and ready to go for the election. They don't really care who wins, as long as they don't try to go against their global financial affairs
They wouldn't even allow Al Gore become POTUS, even after he was elected, so obviously, they're not going to let a real Democrat (I know, he's an independent) like Bernie near the White House.
It's all bullshit; the only reason I'm even here supporting the Democratic party is because Democrats are generally much better than republicans. So, as part of my microscopic capacity to try to bring about constructive change, I am making a sincere effort to do promote Democrats doing the right thing, even if it has become largely a symbolic gesture.
So what am I going to do? Obviously, I need to do everything in my power politically to ensure that Jeb Bush does not become President. So I'll eventually have to support Democratic Corporate Candidate "X" in order to do what I can to prevent another deadly fascist from becoming the Commander in Chief of the US.
I really don't like not ever having any real options in my choices for who I permit to govern me. I have no doubt whatsoever that the only way can institute democracy and bring about change for the 99% is mass non-violent revolution.
And there ain't much hope of that happening either, so long as people continue to sit, hypnotized and homogenized to the point of insipid, in front of their much beloved television.
Posted by Zorra | Sun Jan 4, 2015, 02:30 PM (0 replies)