Click on the headline to link to a an online copy of Workers Action, an early labor-oriented newspaper of the International Communist League's Spartacist League/U.S. I am not familiar with the Riazanov Library as a source, although the choice of the name of a famous Russian Bolshevik intellectual, archivist, and early head of the Marx-Engels Institute there, as well as being a friend and , at various points a political confederate of the great Bolshevik leader, Leon Trotsky, sits well with me.
*******
Thanks to the Riazanov Library for their efforts in digitizing Workers Action. The works provided by the Riazanov Library are © copyrighted by the Riazanov Library in 2010 for the document formatting and editing as they appear here in their PDF format, on the ETOL. The actual content itself remains in the public domain pursuant to US and International copyright conventions.
*****
Markin comment on this series:
Obviously, for a Marxist, the question of working class political power is central to the possibilities for the main thrust of his or her politics- the quest for that socialist revolution that initiates the socialist reconstruction of society. But working class politics, no less than any other kinds of political expressions has to take an organization form, a disciplined organizational form in the end, but organization nevertheless. In that sense every Marxist worth his or her salt, from individual labor militants to leagues, tendencies, and whatever other formations are out there these days on the left, struggles to built a revolutionary labor party, a Bolshevik-style party.
Glaringly, in the United States there is no such party, nor even a politically independent reformist labor party, as exists in Great Britain. And no, the Democratic Party, imperialist commander-in-chief Obama's Democratic Party is not a labor party. Although plenty of people believe it is an adequate substitute, including some avowed socialists. But they are just flat-out wrong. This series is thus predicated on providing information about, analysis of, and acting as a spur to a close look at the history of the labor party question in America by those who have actually attempted to create one, or at to propagandize for one.
As usual, I will start this series with the work of the International Communist League/Spartacist League/U.S. as I have been mining their archival materials of late. I am most familiar with the history of their work on this question, although on this question the Socialist Workers Party's efforts runs a close second, especially in their revolutionary period. Lastly, and most importantly, I am comfortable starting with the ICL/SL efforts on the labor party question since after having reviewed in this space in previous series their G.I. work and youth work (Campus Spartacist and the Revolutionary Marxist Caucus Newsletter inside SDS) I noted that throughout their history they have consistently called for the creation of such a party in the various social arenas in which they have worked. Other organizational and independent efforts, most notably by the Socialist Workers Party and the American Communist Party will follow.
*********
Markin comment on this issue:
A propagandistic left-wing, pro-labor newspaper from 1968, driven by current events, is going to contain a lot of material now of just historic interest like the first rumblings of the great, if aborted, French general strike of that year and the first serious overt rumblings against the Black Panthers who were eventually destroyed by conscious governmental policy. The one section that still bears reading for today’s audience is the ten point … And What We Stand For. With a an obvious need for some technical updating, like replace Vietnam War with Iraq and Afghan Wars, the thing reads as a very presentable program for a revolutionary labor party, or a caucus in a reformist labor party in a period of left-wing motion in 2011. This says to me that we had better be getting a move on about the business of creating that revolutionary labor party-enough is enough. Break with the Democrats! Build a workers party that fights for our communist future.
Monday, August 01, 2011
*White socks.....and white shorts- For James And John C., Clintondale Class Of 1964
Click on the headline to link to a site that sells "real" gym shorts for comparison with our old white shorts and socks. Is nothing sacred anymore?
Jimmy Taylor was desperate for a pair of gym-worthy white shorts, gym day worthy whites. Desperate enough to go into the dreaded battered white shorts discard cardboard box now slumped across from the shower stalls and rummage, rummage nose held, for a pair that would pass muster. Pass muster when Coach Dickson (everybody called him Coach, although he hadn’t coached a sport in Clintondale since Roosevelt was president, Teddy Roosevelt, Jimmy thought) passed down the line like some imitation colonel inspecting two things-white shorts and white socks. Clean, unwrinkled, better be pressed, white shorts of the appropriate size.
That last quality mattered, at least this is what Jimmy had heard from his own older brother, Kenny, Class of 1961, ever since one small sophomore, or maybe it was a freshman, whose brother was a behemoth on the Clintondale football team, the 1960 one that went on to win the Class D state championship if you remember that great team and that great season, “inherited” his brother’s perfectly good white shorts. Perfectly good according to this lad’s mother, and with the concurrence of many a Clintondale Irish working-class mother who knew things in that neighborhood were dear just then. They kept falling down, the behemoth's white sail shorts that is, exposing, well, exposing the fact that he did not have a jock strap on, and we will leave it at that, or could. Except Coach Dickson, cold-hearted Coach, merely cuttingly commented that he was glad there were no girls around because there would be nothing to see, wink, wink.
Needless to say every boy, particularly every senior boy, every Class of 1964 boy that is, in the place laughed or at least chuckled at Coach’s lame remark, fearful that "His Vengefulness" might hold up their graduations for failure to pass a state-mandated requirement. And according to local school lore, Clintondale High lore any way, back in those Roosevelt days (Teddy or Franklin, could have been either Jimmy again thought) he had actually done so. And the school committee backed him up, creating a legend that he lived, no, feasted off of for the next few decades. There was another story, or maybe stories, of too tight shorts exploding on the wrestling mat or while the guys were doing some gymnastic exercise. Those were just rumors though, Kenny never mentioned anything about that. In any case Coach Dickson’s Rule Three A ruled. (Rule Three being the part about clean and presentable white shorts.)
The failure to observe the afore-mentioned rule branded you as a felon not fit for civilized company, or it might as well have, for you had exactly one excused non-white short, non-white-sock gym period, per year, per student, as per Coach Dickson’s rule. (Rule Four, for all the rules see the bulletin board in front of Coach’s office. Bring a chair and reading glasses, if you need them, you will be there a while). And Jimmy had already used his up back in the fall when he had “forgotten” his after going down one of the back halls, far down in one of the back halls, with a certain girl, a certain nameless girl, and left his bag with his shorts and socks in it behind. (Really, it’s true, guys, and, oh well, he won’t mention names, although he told me it, but a certain girl, a certain very “hot” girl, could back Jimmy’s claim up. Jimmy claimed that you too would have forgotten your foolish gym bag if you had been around her, and her craze-inducing perfume or soap that made her smell like some flower, a gardenia maybe. I agree about the craze-inducing part too.)
Today he had forgotten, real forgotten, to bring his shorts, and in any case he was probably fated for the death penalty anyway since he had also forgotten to have Martha (dear, sweet mother Taylor, for those not familiar with Clintondale, or with the Taylor clan that has been part of Clintondale society since hector was a pup, and who do not know that woman) wash his dirty pairs of shorts and socks.
Of course Jimmy's scramble for white shorts much less for white socks, white matching socks, although the now doddering Coach Dickson was not always careful in inspecting socks so there was some wiggle room, was fated to be nothing but a humiliating experience, and was designed by His Vengefulness as such, since this wretched, battered cardboard box was filled with every thrown-away, nasty, off-white, sweat-grinded pair of shorts that Coach Dickson found lying around the locker rooms, or wherever he could find such things. (Although Jimmy, in a fit of gallows humor, chuckled to himself that he bet that Coach had not found those shorts down that dark hall where he had gone with Liz, oops, no names.)
But the white socks were worst, much worst, thrown hither and yon after doing yeoman’s service on some perspiring feet. All dirt-smudged caused by rubbing against the inners of some too tight sneakers while playing volleyball, basketball, or a really athletic endeavor like throwing the medicine ball and then left on some dank floor to walk home by themselves (no kidding either) when Coach’s charges changed into “civilian” socks-brown, black, or blue to go with their penny loafers. (The rest of the “uniform” being a plaid shirt and black chino pants, cuffed, preferred, uncuffed if your mother bought them.)
Today though he also started to notice some stuff that he could have cared less about yesterday. A lot of the guys on gym day wore their white socks with their uniform (plaid shirts and, cuffed or uncuffed, black chinos, remember) with their penny loafers. Egad. Squaresville, squaresville cubed. Also he started to remember that when the Class of 1964 athletic team pictures were being taken along with the jacket, tie, and slacks he noticed that most of the guys, especially the guys who were sitting down had white socks on. Double squaresville cubed. White socks, jesus. Jimmy was dumbfounded and said to himself what, pray tell (although he may have not used that exact term), was the meaning of this sartorial display. Moreover, did it extend beyond athletics? He knew, as a creature of habit at the time and one who desperately wanted to be “in”, that he too wore his "whites," sometimes unthinkingly.
But what kind of fashion statement were they trying to make at the time? “White socks” meant only one thing- dweeb, nerd, outcast and not cool. He distinctly remembered that term in reference to scientific and engineer-types. And they were not cool. As cool as he and his corner boys tried to be were they really all dweebs who did not get the message fast enough out in the 'sticks' of Clintondale?
And that last question got Jimmy to thinking, rebelliously thinking when he started to get up a head of steam about it. Why, if you forgot your white shorts or white socks, couldn’t you just wear your civilian clothes in gym and not have to go through the indignity of the dread battered box discard pile. And while Fritz was organizing this train of revolutionary thought (to Coach and his rules, if to nobody else) in his head he added why if you did have your white shorts but had forgotten your white socks couldn’t you just use your civilian brownblackblue socks. It’s only two-period-a-week gym, right? And on that note Fritz made a momentous decision. He was, come hell or high water, going to find a pair of decent white shorts and just wear them with his brown civilian socks as a protest against the injustice of Coach’s silly rule. He then found a suitable pair, donned them and walked out to face the music.
Jimmy Taylor was desperate for a pair of gym-worthy white shorts, gym day worthy whites. Desperate enough to go into the dreaded battered white shorts discard cardboard box now slumped across from the shower stalls and rummage, rummage nose held, for a pair that would pass muster. Pass muster when Coach Dickson (everybody called him Coach, although he hadn’t coached a sport in Clintondale since Roosevelt was president, Teddy Roosevelt, Jimmy thought) passed down the line like some imitation colonel inspecting two things-white shorts and white socks. Clean, unwrinkled, better be pressed, white shorts of the appropriate size.
That last quality mattered, at least this is what Jimmy had heard from his own older brother, Kenny, Class of 1961, ever since one small sophomore, or maybe it was a freshman, whose brother was a behemoth on the Clintondale football team, the 1960 one that went on to win the Class D state championship if you remember that great team and that great season, “inherited” his brother’s perfectly good white shorts. Perfectly good according to this lad’s mother, and with the concurrence of many a Clintondale Irish working-class mother who knew things in that neighborhood were dear just then. They kept falling down, the behemoth's white sail shorts that is, exposing, well, exposing the fact that he did not have a jock strap on, and we will leave it at that, or could. Except Coach Dickson, cold-hearted Coach, merely cuttingly commented that he was glad there were no girls around because there would be nothing to see, wink, wink.
Needless to say every boy, particularly every senior boy, every Class of 1964 boy that is, in the place laughed or at least chuckled at Coach’s lame remark, fearful that "His Vengefulness" might hold up their graduations for failure to pass a state-mandated requirement. And according to local school lore, Clintondale High lore any way, back in those Roosevelt days (Teddy or Franklin, could have been either Jimmy again thought) he had actually done so. And the school committee backed him up, creating a legend that he lived, no, feasted off of for the next few decades. There was another story, or maybe stories, of too tight shorts exploding on the wrestling mat or while the guys were doing some gymnastic exercise. Those were just rumors though, Kenny never mentioned anything about that. In any case Coach Dickson’s Rule Three A ruled. (Rule Three being the part about clean and presentable white shorts.)
The failure to observe the afore-mentioned rule branded you as a felon not fit for civilized company, or it might as well have, for you had exactly one excused non-white short, non-white-sock gym period, per year, per student, as per Coach Dickson’s rule. (Rule Four, for all the rules see the bulletin board in front of Coach’s office. Bring a chair and reading glasses, if you need them, you will be there a while). And Jimmy had already used his up back in the fall when he had “forgotten” his after going down one of the back halls, far down in one of the back halls, with a certain girl, a certain nameless girl, and left his bag with his shorts and socks in it behind. (Really, it’s true, guys, and, oh well, he won’t mention names, although he told me it, but a certain girl, a certain very “hot” girl, could back Jimmy’s claim up. Jimmy claimed that you too would have forgotten your foolish gym bag if you had been around her, and her craze-inducing perfume or soap that made her smell like some flower, a gardenia maybe. I agree about the craze-inducing part too.)
Today he had forgotten, real forgotten, to bring his shorts, and in any case he was probably fated for the death penalty anyway since he had also forgotten to have Martha (dear, sweet mother Taylor, for those not familiar with Clintondale, or with the Taylor clan that has been part of Clintondale society since hector was a pup, and who do not know that woman) wash his dirty pairs of shorts and socks.
Of course Jimmy's scramble for white shorts much less for white socks, white matching socks, although the now doddering Coach Dickson was not always careful in inspecting socks so there was some wiggle room, was fated to be nothing but a humiliating experience, and was designed by His Vengefulness as such, since this wretched, battered cardboard box was filled with every thrown-away, nasty, off-white, sweat-grinded pair of shorts that Coach Dickson found lying around the locker rooms, or wherever he could find such things. (Although Jimmy, in a fit of gallows humor, chuckled to himself that he bet that Coach had not found those shorts down that dark hall where he had gone with Liz, oops, no names.)
But the white socks were worst, much worst, thrown hither and yon after doing yeoman’s service on some perspiring feet. All dirt-smudged caused by rubbing against the inners of some too tight sneakers while playing volleyball, basketball, or a really athletic endeavor like throwing the medicine ball and then left on some dank floor to walk home by themselves (no kidding either) when Coach’s charges changed into “civilian” socks-brown, black, or blue to go with their penny loafers. (The rest of the “uniform” being a plaid shirt and black chino pants, cuffed, preferred, uncuffed if your mother bought them.)
Today though he also started to notice some stuff that he could have cared less about yesterday. A lot of the guys on gym day wore their white socks with their uniform (plaid shirts and, cuffed or uncuffed, black chinos, remember) with their penny loafers. Egad. Squaresville, squaresville cubed. Also he started to remember that when the Class of 1964 athletic team pictures were being taken along with the jacket, tie, and slacks he noticed that most of the guys, especially the guys who were sitting down had white socks on. Double squaresville cubed. White socks, jesus. Jimmy was dumbfounded and said to himself what, pray tell (although he may have not used that exact term), was the meaning of this sartorial display. Moreover, did it extend beyond athletics? He knew, as a creature of habit at the time and one who desperately wanted to be “in”, that he too wore his "whites," sometimes unthinkingly.
But what kind of fashion statement were they trying to make at the time? “White socks” meant only one thing- dweeb, nerd, outcast and not cool. He distinctly remembered that term in reference to scientific and engineer-types. And they were not cool. As cool as he and his corner boys tried to be were they really all dweebs who did not get the message fast enough out in the 'sticks' of Clintondale?
And that last question got Jimmy to thinking, rebelliously thinking when he started to get up a head of steam about it. Why, if you forgot your white shorts or white socks, couldn’t you just wear your civilian clothes in gym and not have to go through the indignity of the dread battered box discard pile. And while Fritz was organizing this train of revolutionary thought (to Coach and his rules, if to nobody else) in his head he added why if you did have your white shorts but had forgotten your white socks couldn’t you just use your civilian brownblackblue socks. It’s only two-period-a-week gym, right? And on that note Fritz made a momentous decision. He was, come hell or high water, going to find a pair of decent white shorts and just wear them with his brown civilian socks as a protest against the injustice of Coach’s silly rule. He then found a suitable pair, donned them and walked out to face the music.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Adieu, "Renegade Eye" Blog- The Political Struggle Continues In Another Form
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
The Last Post
The Renegade Eye blog, was born born March 26th, 2005. Today it is going into retirement, after 561 posts.
What an experience. If you read the blog, from the start, you can see my political evolution. Debate can change people. Can you believe I was pro-Iraq War at one time?
I want to thank all the contributing writers as Marxist from Lebanon, Marie Trigona, John Peterson, Ross Wolfe, Maryam Namazie, Aaron and Nadia A etc.
I think blogging is in decline, since the birth of the social network. A blog can still be important, but it has to build a following.
There has been more political combat on this blog, than most others. It was fun at one time. Now its argument for the sake of argument. I tried to deal with my political opponents arguments, without attacking their humanity, as much as possible. The rightist blog that leftists visit is Sonia Belle's Adults Only Blog.
The character of Renegade Eye, will comment on other blogs. I plan to start a new blog, with a different identity. Those who should know the new identity, will be informed.
RENEGADE EYE
*******
Markin comment:
Ren-Always was glad to post stuff from your site- Agree or disagree. You should remind followers that they can link to the In Defense of Marxism site to continue the "high-end" polemical struggle. Again, a good site, agree or disagree.
As for blogs,and their decline,I think I agree alhtough it is hard to believe that a vehicle that is about a decade old faces that situation. However such is the speed of the "information super-highway." Many wrecks on that road. I, personally, refuse to give up on the struggle to keep political language alive, the fight for multi-syllabic words and the need provide left-wing information to as Brecht said in his famous poem-"those who come after." Else we are reduced to "tweet." Damn. The fight continues though, in whatever form. Good luck, Brother. Markin.
31 July, 2011 15:25
The Last Post
The Renegade Eye blog, was born born March 26th, 2005. Today it is going into retirement, after 561 posts.
What an experience. If you read the blog, from the start, you can see my political evolution. Debate can change people. Can you believe I was pro-Iraq War at one time?
I want to thank all the contributing writers as Marxist from Lebanon, Marie Trigona, John Peterson, Ross Wolfe, Maryam Namazie, Aaron and Nadia A etc.
I think blogging is in decline, since the birth of the social network. A blog can still be important, but it has to build a following.
There has been more political combat on this blog, than most others. It was fun at one time. Now its argument for the sake of argument. I tried to deal with my political opponents arguments, without attacking their humanity, as much as possible. The rightist blog that leftists visit is Sonia Belle's Adults Only Blog.
The character of Renegade Eye, will comment on other blogs. I plan to start a new blog, with a different identity. Those who should know the new identity, will be informed.
RENEGADE EYE
*******
Markin comment:
Ren-Always was glad to post stuff from your site- Agree or disagree. You should remind followers that they can link to the In Defense of Marxism site to continue the "high-end" polemical struggle. Again, a good site, agree or disagree.
As for blogs,and their decline,I think I agree alhtough it is hard to believe that a vehicle that is about a decade old faces that situation. However such is the speed of the "information super-highway." Many wrecks on that road. I, personally, refuse to give up on the struggle to keep political language alive, the fight for multi-syllabic words and the need provide left-wing information to as Brecht said in his famous poem-"those who come after." Else we are reduced to "tweet." Damn. The fight continues though, in whatever form. Good luck, Brother. Markin.
31 July, 2011 15:25
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*****
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Stephen Lendman
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by Stephen Lendman
Among them is waging war on truth, Western managed news calling lawless imperial wars liberating ones. No wonder John Pilger says journalism is the first casualty of war, adding:
"Not only that: it has become a weapon of war, a virulent censorship (and deception) that goes unrecognised in the United States, Britain and other democracies; censorship by omission, whose power is such that, in war, it can mean the difference between life and death for people in faraway countries...."
In their book, "Guardians of Power," David Edwards and David Cromwell explained why today's media are in crisis and a free and open society at risk. It's because press prostitutes substitute fiction for fact. News is carefully filtered, dissent marginalized, and supporting wealth and power substitutes for full and accurate reporting.
It's a cancer, corrupting everything from corporate-run print and broadcast sources, as well as operations like BBC and what passes for America's hopelessly compromised public radio and TV. They put out daily managed and junk food news plus infotainment, treating consumers like mushrooms - well-watered and in the dark.
During wars, in fact, they cheerlead them, reporting agitprop and misinformation no respectable journalist would touch.
On the Progressive Radio News Hour, Middle East/Central Asia analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya, in Tripoli, said some journalists also perform fifth column duties, collecting intelligence and locating targets to supply NATO bombing coordinates, notably civilian targets called military ones.
In a July 28 email, he said tell listeners that "NATO is trying to negotiate with the government in Tripoli." More on that below. He added that they're also "planning a new stage of the war against the Libyan people through (predatory) NGOs and fake humanitarian missions." A likely UN Blue Helmet occupying force also, paramilitaries masquerading as peacekeepers Gaddafi controlled areas won't tolerate.
NATO, in fact, calls civilian targets legitimate ones, including one or more hospitals, a clinic, factories, warehouses, agricultural sites, schools, a university, one or more mosques, non-military related infrastructure, a food storage facility, and others.
Notably on July 23, a Brega water pipe factory was struck, killing six guards. It produces pipes for Libya's Great Man-Made River system (GMMR), an ocean-sized aquifer beneath its sands, making the desert bloom for productive agriculture, and supplying water to Libya's people.
The previous day, a water supply pipeline was destroyed. It will take months to restore. The factory produced vital pipes to do it, a clear war crime like daily others. Moreover, the entire GMMR is threatened by a shortage of spare parts and chemicals. As a result, it's struggling to keep reservoirs at a level able to provide a sustainable supply. Without it, a humanitarian disaster looms, very likely what NATO plans as in past wars.
On July 27, AFP said that:
"NATO warned that its warplanes will bomb civilian facilities if (Gaddafi's) forces use them to launch attacks." At the same time, a spokesman said great care is taken to minimize civilian casualties.
NATO lied. Daily, it's attacking non-military related sites to destroy Libya's ability to function in areas loyal to Gaddafi. Earlier, in fact, a spokesman claimed there was "no evidence" civilian targets were hit or noncombatants killed, except one time a major incident was too obvious to hide. Reluctantly it admitted a "mistake," covering up a willful planned attack, knowing civilians were affected.
Libya (satellite) TV calls itself "a voice for free Libya....struggling to liberate Libya from the grip of the Gaddafi regime...." In fact, it's a pro-NATO propaganda service, reporting misinformation on air and online.
On July 25, it headlined, "No evidence to support Gaddafi's allegations that civilian targets were hit," when, it fact, they're struck daily.
Nonetheless, it claimed only military sites are bombed, saying Tripoli-based journalists aren't taken to affected areas, "suggesting NATO's gunners are hitting military targets, at least in the capital."
In fact, corporate and independent journalists are regularly taken to many sites struck. Independent accounts confirm civilian casualties and non-military facilities bombed. Pro-NATO scoundrels report managed news, complicit in daily war crimes.
On July 28, Libya TV claimed "captured Gaddafi soldiers say army morale is low," when, in fact, most Libyans support Gaddafi. Millions are armed. Gaddafi gave them weapons. They could easily oust him if they wish. Instead, they rally supportively, what Western media and Libya TV won't report.
Moreover, captured soldiers say what they're told, likely threatened with death or torture if they refuse, especially in rebel paramilitary hands, under NATO orders to terrorize areas they control.
As a result, civilian casualties mount, up to 1,200 or more killed and thousands wounded in pro-Gaddafi areas, many seriously as war rages. In addition, unknown numbers of combatant casualties on both sides aren't known, nor is the civilian toll in rebel held areas.
Nonetheless, daily sorties and strikes continue. Since mid-July alone through July 27, they include:
July 14: 132 sorties and 48 strikes
July 15: 115 sorties and 46 strikes
July 16: 110 sorties and 45 strikes
July 17: 122 sorties and 46 strikes
July 18: 129 sorties and 44 strikes
July 19: 113 sorties and 40 strikes
July 20: 122 sorties and 53 strikes
July 21: 124 sorties and 45 strikes
July 22: 128 sorties and 46 strikes
July 23: 125 sorties and 56 strikes
July 24: 163 sorties and 43 strikes
July 25: 111 sorties and 54 strikes
July 26: 134 sorties and 46 strikes
July 27: 133 sorties and 54 strikes
Daily patterns are consistent. However, information on numbers and types of bombs, as well as other munitions aren't given. Instead, misinformation claims a humanitarian mission protects civilians - by terrorizing, killing, and injuring them, solely for imperial aims. It's why all US-led wars are fought, never for liberating reasons.
The entire campaign is based on lies. It's standard war time procedure, to enlist popular support for campaigns people otherwise would reject.
In fact, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO arrived. Moreover, in paramilitary controlled areas, Amnesty International confirmed only 110 pro and anti-Gaddafi supporter deaths combined, most likely more of the former than latter as rebel cutthroats rampaged through areas they occupy. Currently, the numbers of dead and injured civilians are many times that amount, largely from NATO attacks.
NATO, in fact, is code language for the Pentagon, paying the largest share of its operating and military budgets. Except for Germany and Britain, other members pay small shares, most, in fact, miniscule amounts.
Since NATO began bombing on March 19, daily attacks inflicted lawless collective punishment against millions in Gaddafi supported areas. Affected is their ability to obtain food, medicines, fuel and other basic supplies, exposing another lie about humanitarian intervention.
On July 25, OCHA's fact-finding team said Tripoli contained "pockets of vulnerability where people need urgent humanitarian assistance." Medical supplies are running low. The last major delivery was in January, and concerns are increasing about the "unsustainable food supply chain for the public distribution systems, especially as Ramadan approaches (on or around August 1 to about August 29) and the conflict persists."
Moreover, "Libyan oil experts warned that fuel stocks could run out in two weeks." Public transportation costs have tripled. Food prices have also soared. Tripoli residents experience electricity cuts, and clean water supplies are endangered.
Before conflict erupted, Libyans had the region's highest standard of living and highest life expectancy in Africa because Gaddafi's oil wealth provided healthcare, education, housing assistance and other social benefits. Imperial war, of course, changed things. Libyans now hang on to survive.
Seeking an End Game
On July 26, UPI headlined, "NATO seeks urgent exit strategy in Libya," knowing this phase of the war is lost. Nonetheless, future strategies and campaigns will follow.
For now, however, "NATO is seeking an urgent exit strategy (to end) fighting and decide the future of (Gaddifi), even if that means letting him stay in the country though out of power, it emerged Tuesday after British and French foreign ministers met in London."
In tribal Libya, Gaddafi's power, in fact, is far less than reported, social anthropologist Ranier Fsadni saying:
"Gaddafi's feeling for tribal Libya is certainly one factor that explains how he has managed to rule the country for so many years. (However), (t)here is no tribal office giving a single man a monopoly of institutional power at the apex....Several factors account for his longevity in power," including sharing Libya's oil wealth.
UPI said diplomacy is driven by a failed military campaign. As a result, "(i)ntense mediation efforts are underway at different levels at the United Nations and Europe, in African, European and Middle Eastern capitals and Russia."
Neither side is commenting, but some observers think operations may wind down in weeks, based on an unannounced face-saving solution, despite continued destabilization and future conflict planned. It's similar to Balkan and Iraq war strategies, a combination of tactics until Washington prevailed.
Libya faces the same end game, though years could pass before it arrives. As a result, Libyans can expect continued hardships. When imperial America shows up, that strategy persists until it prevails, no matter the pain and suffering inflicted.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*****
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Stephen Lendman
Daily NATO War Crimes in Libya - by Stephen Lendman
Among them is waging war on truth, Western managed news calling lawless imperial wars liberating ones. No wonder John Pilger says journalism is the first casualty of war, adding:
"Not only that: it has become a weapon of war, a virulent censorship (and deception) that goes unrecognised in the United States, Britain and other democracies; censorship by omission, whose power is such that, in war, it can mean the difference between life and death for people in faraway countries...."
In their book, "Guardians of Power," David Edwards and David Cromwell explained why today's media are in crisis and a free and open society at risk. It's because press prostitutes substitute fiction for fact. News is carefully filtered, dissent marginalized, and supporting wealth and power substitutes for full and accurate reporting.
It's a cancer, corrupting everything from corporate-run print and broadcast sources, as well as operations like BBC and what passes for America's hopelessly compromised public radio and TV. They put out daily managed and junk food news plus infotainment, treating consumers like mushrooms - well-watered and in the dark.
During wars, in fact, they cheerlead them, reporting agitprop and misinformation no respectable journalist would touch.
On the Progressive Radio News Hour, Middle East/Central Asia analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya, in Tripoli, said some journalists also perform fifth column duties, collecting intelligence and locating targets to supply NATO bombing coordinates, notably civilian targets called military ones.
In a July 28 email, he said tell listeners that "NATO is trying to negotiate with the government in Tripoli." More on that below. He added that they're also "planning a new stage of the war against the Libyan people through (predatory) NGOs and fake humanitarian missions." A likely UN Blue Helmet occupying force also, paramilitaries masquerading as peacekeepers Gaddafi controlled areas won't tolerate.
NATO, in fact, calls civilian targets legitimate ones, including one or more hospitals, a clinic, factories, warehouses, agricultural sites, schools, a university, one or more mosques, non-military related infrastructure, a food storage facility, and others.
Notably on July 23, a Brega water pipe factory was struck, killing six guards. It produces pipes for Libya's Great Man-Made River system (GMMR), an ocean-sized aquifer beneath its sands, making the desert bloom for productive agriculture, and supplying water to Libya's people.
The previous day, a water supply pipeline was destroyed. It will take months to restore. The factory produced vital pipes to do it, a clear war crime like daily others. Moreover, the entire GMMR is threatened by a shortage of spare parts and chemicals. As a result, it's struggling to keep reservoirs at a level able to provide a sustainable supply. Without it, a humanitarian disaster looms, very likely what NATO plans as in past wars.
On July 27, AFP said that:
"NATO warned that its warplanes will bomb civilian facilities if (Gaddafi's) forces use them to launch attacks." At the same time, a spokesman said great care is taken to minimize civilian casualties.
NATO lied. Daily, it's attacking non-military related sites to destroy Libya's ability to function in areas loyal to Gaddafi. Earlier, in fact, a spokesman claimed there was "no evidence" civilian targets were hit or noncombatants killed, except one time a major incident was too obvious to hide. Reluctantly it admitted a "mistake," covering up a willful planned attack, knowing civilians were affected.
Libya (satellite) TV calls itself "a voice for free Libya....struggling to liberate Libya from the grip of the Gaddafi regime...." In fact, it's a pro-NATO propaganda service, reporting misinformation on air and online.
On July 25, it headlined, "No evidence to support Gaddafi's allegations that civilian targets were hit," when, it fact, they're struck daily.
Nonetheless, it claimed only military sites are bombed, saying Tripoli-based journalists aren't taken to affected areas, "suggesting NATO's gunners are hitting military targets, at least in the capital."
In fact, corporate and independent journalists are regularly taken to many sites struck. Independent accounts confirm civilian casualties and non-military facilities bombed. Pro-NATO scoundrels report managed news, complicit in daily war crimes.
On July 28, Libya TV claimed "captured Gaddafi soldiers say army morale is low," when, in fact, most Libyans support Gaddafi. Millions are armed. Gaddafi gave them weapons. They could easily oust him if they wish. Instead, they rally supportively, what Western media and Libya TV won't report.
Moreover, captured soldiers say what they're told, likely threatened with death or torture if they refuse, especially in rebel paramilitary hands, under NATO orders to terrorize areas they control.
As a result, civilian casualties mount, up to 1,200 or more killed and thousands wounded in pro-Gaddafi areas, many seriously as war rages. In addition, unknown numbers of combatant casualties on both sides aren't known, nor is the civilian toll in rebel held areas.
Nonetheless, daily sorties and strikes continue. Since mid-July alone through July 27, they include:
July 14: 132 sorties and 48 strikes
July 15: 115 sorties and 46 strikes
July 16: 110 sorties and 45 strikes
July 17: 122 sorties and 46 strikes
July 18: 129 sorties and 44 strikes
July 19: 113 sorties and 40 strikes
July 20: 122 sorties and 53 strikes
July 21: 124 sorties and 45 strikes
July 22: 128 sorties and 46 strikes
July 23: 125 sorties and 56 strikes
July 24: 163 sorties and 43 strikes
July 25: 111 sorties and 54 strikes
July 26: 134 sorties and 46 strikes
July 27: 133 sorties and 54 strikes
Daily patterns are consistent. However, information on numbers and types of bombs, as well as other munitions aren't given. Instead, misinformation claims a humanitarian mission protects civilians - by terrorizing, killing, and injuring them, solely for imperial aims. It's why all US-led wars are fought, never for liberating reasons.
The entire campaign is based on lies. It's standard war time procedure, to enlist popular support for campaigns people otherwise would reject.
In fact, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO arrived. Moreover, in paramilitary controlled areas, Amnesty International confirmed only 110 pro and anti-Gaddafi supporter deaths combined, most likely more of the former than latter as rebel cutthroats rampaged through areas they occupy. Currently, the numbers of dead and injured civilians are many times that amount, largely from NATO attacks.
NATO, in fact, is code language for the Pentagon, paying the largest share of its operating and military budgets. Except for Germany and Britain, other members pay small shares, most, in fact, miniscule amounts.
Since NATO began bombing on March 19, daily attacks inflicted lawless collective punishment against millions in Gaddafi supported areas. Affected is their ability to obtain food, medicines, fuel and other basic supplies, exposing another lie about humanitarian intervention.
On July 25, OCHA's fact-finding team said Tripoli contained "pockets of vulnerability where people need urgent humanitarian assistance." Medical supplies are running low. The last major delivery was in January, and concerns are increasing about the "unsustainable food supply chain for the public distribution systems, especially as Ramadan approaches (on or around August 1 to about August 29) and the conflict persists."
Moreover, "Libyan oil experts warned that fuel stocks could run out in two weeks." Public transportation costs have tripled. Food prices have also soared. Tripoli residents experience electricity cuts, and clean water supplies are endangered.
Before conflict erupted, Libyans had the region's highest standard of living and highest life expectancy in Africa because Gaddafi's oil wealth provided healthcare, education, housing assistance and other social benefits. Imperial war, of course, changed things. Libyans now hang on to survive.
Seeking an End Game
On July 26, UPI headlined, "NATO seeks urgent exit strategy in Libya," knowing this phase of the war is lost. Nonetheless, future strategies and campaigns will follow.
For now, however, "NATO is seeking an urgent exit strategy (to end) fighting and decide the future of (Gaddifi), even if that means letting him stay in the country though out of power, it emerged Tuesday after British and French foreign ministers met in London."
In tribal Libya, Gaddafi's power, in fact, is far less than reported, social anthropologist Ranier Fsadni saying:
"Gaddafi's feeling for tribal Libya is certainly one factor that explains how he has managed to rule the country for so many years. (However), (t)here is no tribal office giving a single man a monopoly of institutional power at the apex....Several factors account for his longevity in power," including sharing Libya's oil wealth.
UPI said diplomacy is driven by a failed military campaign. As a result, "(i)ntense mediation efforts are underway at different levels at the United Nations and Europe, in African, European and Middle Eastern capitals and Russia."
Neither side is commenting, but some observers think operations may wind down in weeks, based on an unannounced face-saving solution, despite continued destabilization and future conflict planned. It's similar to Balkan and Iraq war strategies, a combination of tactics until Washington prevailed.
Libya faces the same end game, though years could pass before it arrives. As a result, Libyans can expect continued hardships. When imperial America shows up, that strategy persists until it prevails, no matter the pain and suffering inflicted.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Debt Ceiling Roulette - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
********
Debt Ceiling Roulette
by Stephen Lendman
Debt Ceiling Roulette - by Stephen Lendman
In this game, the house always wins. Bipartisan complicity stacked the deck against millions of working households, needing to know that political Washington is scamming them.
The end result is the banana republicanization of America. American writer O. Henry (William Sydney Porter: 1862 - 1910) coined the term (his fictional Republic of Anchuria) in his book, "Cabbages and Kings."
It refers to a country (often politically unstable and/or repressive) where a small percent of the population has a disproportionate share or wealth and power, where ordinary people are exploited, often persecuted, and where profits are privatized while working households bear the burden of debt.
It's also a kleptocracy run by criminals, complicit with corporate thieves who bribe them to get their way. It's corrupt, rotten to the core gangsterism, run for personal gain, both sides profiting at the public's expense.
It's in plain sight in Washington, the heart of darkness, where bipartisan crooks are destroying personal freedoms, democratic values, and general welfare to grab everything for themselves and their corporate partners.
Previous articles discussed it, accessed through the following links:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-debate-charade-masks.
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/fix-is-in-washingtons-planned-soci
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/america-heading-for-tyranny-and.ht
Read them and weep, or better still, react by refusing any longer to put up with bipartisan corruption, stealing us blind for the Big Monied interests that own them. Obama was made president to play ball, a Democrat engineering what no Republican would dare, at the same time duplicitously claiming populist credentials.
As president, he's been hardline and neocon, advocating Democrat Leadership Council ideology, around since the mid-1980s until operations ended early this year, perhaps because too many caught on to its scam.
Ralph Nader called it "corporatist (and) soulless," ideologically hardline. Obama fits the mold. He's anti-populist, anti-labor, anti-welfare, pro-business, while at the same time militaristic and pro-war for unchallengeable world dominance. Nader explained that:
"To the DLC mind, Democrats are catering to 'special interests' when they (pretend to) stand up for trade unions, regulatory consumer-investor protections, a preemptive peace policy overseas, pruning the bloated military budget now devouring (the federal budget), defending Social Security from Wall Street schemes, and pressing for universal health care coverage. So right-wing is the DLC....that even opposing Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy....is considered ultra-liberal and contrary to winning campaigns."
Its ideology is indistinguishable from Republican extremism. It opposes rights for Blacks, Hispanics, Latino immigrants, Muslims, labor, the poor, consumer protections, populism, progressivism, environmental protection, peace and those for it, prosecuting corporate criminals, honest elections, and democratic governance.
It's for the privileged few at the expense of the many, the bipartisan cancer that's destroying America, Obama the point man in charge because who could imagine a Black president would dare. In fact, he was chosen for his commitment to wealth, power, global dominance, and grand theft at the expense of working Americans and ordinary people everywhere.
He's a fraud, a crime boss, a moral coward and serial liar, fronting for wealth, power and privilege. No wonder James Petras (weeks after his election) called him "the greatest con-man in recent history," comparing him to "Melville's Confidence Man."
"He catches your eye while he picks your pocket. He gives thanks as he packs you off to fight wars in the Middle East....He solemnly mouths vacuous pieties while he empties your Social Security funds to bail out the arch financiers who swindled your pension investments. He appoints and praises the architects of collapsed pyramid schemes to high office while promising" better times ahead he won't tolerate to assure powerful interests get it all, the public crumbs at best.
In July 2009, Kevin Baker's Harper's article headlined, "Barack Hoover Obama: The best and brightest blow it again," saying:
"Three months into his presidency," it's hard imagining the unthinkable that Obama will fail because he won't "seize the radical moment" to change a broken system responsibly.
Even then, some observers ludicrously compared him to Franklin Roosevelt. A better comparison is Herbert Hoover who faced a similar crisis, though doing so isn't fair.
In early 2009, plenty of evidence showed how destructive Obama would be, unlike Hoover who at least tried some ways to confront the great crisis, if inadequately. He established national voluntary initiatives to create jobs, provide charity, and create a private banking pool, but failed.
He also set up a dozen Home Loan Discount Banks to help people refinance mortgages to save their homes. In 1932, he established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), capitalized with $500 million with authorization to borrow another $1.5 billion.
In its first six months, it loaned banks over $800 million to no effect. Like today, they retained reserves and shunned lending. Moreover, public trust was absent because political leadership lacked courage to do more, hidebound by ways no longer working.
Roosevelt then streamlined RFC's bureaucracy, increasing its funding to recapitalize troubled banks and corporations. Despite understanding the problem, Hoover failed because he was part of a broken system he wouldn't change.
In contrast, Roosevelt confronted the crisis aggressively in first 100 days, enacting 15 landmark laws, including:
The Bank Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall), separating commercial from investment banks and insurance companies, among other provisions.
Streamlined the RFC with more capitalization and other measures to restore public trust, including by funding agencies like the Home Owners Loan Corporation, Farm Credit Administration, Rural Electrification Administration, Public Works Administration, and others, as well as emergency relief loans to states, something Hoover never did, let alone establish New Deal policies.
The Securities and Exchange Act of 1933, requiring offers and sales of securities be registered, pursuant to the Constitution's interstate commerce clause. Along with the 1934 SEC Act, it was to enforce federal securities laws, the securities industry, the nation's financial and options exchanges, and other electronic securities markets, unknown in the 1930s along with derivatives and other forms of speculation.
It was also charged with uncovering wrongdoing, assuring investors weren't swindled, and keeping the nation's financial markets free from fraud. Nonetheless, its fulfillment fell short of its promise. Unlike today, however, it tried.
The Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) to refinance homes and prevent foreclosures.
The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to create jobs building roads, bridges, dams, developing state parks, planting trees, and various forestry and recreational programs for the Forest Service, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, and Soil Conservation Service.
The Civilian Works Administration (CWA) to fund states to reduce unemployment.
The National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), establishing the National Recovery Administration to revive economic growth, encourage collective bargaining, set maximum work hours, minimum wages, at times prices, and forbid child labor in industry.
The Public Works Administration also established projects to provide jobs, increase purchasing power, improve public welfare, and help revive the economy.
So did the Works Progress Administration (WPA) that became the largest New Deal agency, employing millions in every state, especially in rural and western areas.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), providing navigation, flood control, electricity generation, and economic development, as well as promote agriculture in the depression-impacted Tennessee Valley area, covering most of Tennessee and parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia.
The Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) that fell short by restricting production by paying farmers to reduce and/or destroy crops and kill livestock at a time millions were impoverished and hungry. The idea was to decrease supply and raise prices, at the worst possible time.
The Farm Credit Act of 1933 to help farmers refinance mortgages over an extended time at below-market rates, and by so doing, helped them stay solvent and survive.
The May 1933 Emergency Farm Mortgage Act, established during the time of the Dust Bowl, provided refinancing help for farmers facing foreclosure.
Despite its flaws and failures, FDR's New Deal accomplished much, if not enough. It helped people, put millions back to work, reinvigorated the national spirit, built or renovated 700,000 miles of roads, 7,800 bridges, 45,000 schools, 2,500 hospitals, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 1,000 airfields, and various other infrastructure, including much of Chicago's lakefront. It also cut unemployment from 25% in May 1933 to 11% in 1937.
However, (because victory was declared too early), it spiked to 19% in 1938 before early war production revived economic growth and sent it lower, heading for full wartime employment.
Later came the Wagner Act that, for the first time, let labor bargain collectively on equal terms with management. Today it's entirely lost.
The 1935 Social Security Act was to this day the single most important federal program responsible for keeping seniors and others eligible out of poverty. Obama plans to destroy it, perhaps first by letting Wall Street privatize it, what Bush failed to do.
Unemployment insurance was instituted in partnership with the states. By 1935, nearly all the unemployed got social benefit payments.
The so-called "Soak the Rich" Revenue Acts of 1934 and 1935 made high income earners pay their fair share. In contrast, Obama favors the rich over working Americans and the poor.
The Revenue Act of 1936 established an "undistributed profits tax" on corporations. Today, profitable corporations pay minimal taxes. Many get large rebates. Yet Obama wants even lower taxes, perhaps eliminating them for business altogether, so only the little people pay them.
The Revenue Act of 1937 cracked down on tax evasion. Today, it's practically de rigueur along with sanctioned speculative excesses and grand theft.
A minimum wage, 40-hour week, and time-and-a-half for overtime was guaranteed under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Labor rights today are being eviscerated and lost, Obama as committed to do it as Bush.
Roosevelt also established other initiatives to reform a broken system, put people back to work, and revive the sick economy. Nonetheless, it didn't happen until WW II because much more was needed, including incentives for business to invest.
Under Obama, however, corporate crooks take the money and run, rewarding themselves with generous bonuses, stock options and benefits, investing some abroad, and stashing the rest in offshore tax havens.
Moreover, Obama wants all New Deal/Great Society programs ended, returning America to 19th century or earlier harshness. George Bernard Shaw might have had him in mind when he said:
"Democracy (especially American-style) is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent many for the appointment of the corrupt few."
Promising change, he broke every key pledge he made, conspiring with Wall Street, war profiteers, and other corporate crooks to loot the nation's wealth, wreck the economy, and consign growing millions to impoverishment without jobs, homes, savings, social services, or futures.
His legacy is already written, explaining how he betrayed the public trust, looted the nation's wealth, waged war on the world, presided over a bogus democracy under a homeland security police state apparatus, and initiated the destruction of America's social contract, governing to the right of George Bush.
In his latest article headlined, "Obama's Ambush on Entitlements," Michael Hudson explained, saying:
He's scamming old people to believe his budget deal will save them. "It is a con. Obama has come to bury Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not to save but kill them."
It was clear before he took office. His economic dream team appointees told all, including Trilateralist Paul Volker, Geitner at Treasury, Fed chairman Bernanke assured of reappointment in 2010, and Larry Summers responsible for financial market deregulation and massive fraud under Clinton, as well as others chosen for their fealty to wealth and power.
At the time, Hudson compared him to Boris Yeltsin - a giver who kept giving to "kleptocrats to whom the public domain and decades of wealth were given with no quid pro quo." In other words, a license to loot until they've got it all, hollowing out America in the process.
In his latest article headlined, "The Political Theater and the Debt Ceiling Crisis: Are We Being Had?" Paul Craig Roberts suggest a possible political theater/charade end game, saying:
If August 2 (the nominal deadline) brings no resolution, Obama may accept Boehner's plan he already favors but won't admit it publicly to hold his weakening base.
Why? To assure "the troops are not cut off from supplies, Social Security checks can continue to go out, and the dollar (is) saved. Having (rhetorically) opposed Republicans to the last minute," he can do what he does best - lie, saying "he had no other recourse."
In other word, who "wants the troops deserted on the field of battle and the elderly without groceries? Who other than the rich can stand the higher prices from dollar devaluation?"
It's the perfect scam "for getting rid of the New Deal and the Great Society, (using) money (wanted for) wars and bailouts and tax cuts for the rich."
Instead of using existing presidential directives and executive orders to declare a national emergency, suspend the debt ceiling limit, and keep issuing it to avoid default (perhaps Plan B), he can use his preferred option (Plan A), gutting America's social contract for the corporate bosses who own him.
Perhaps he'll do it by "cut(ting) Social Security, Medicare....education (and other social programs) loose from the federal budget, (so his) Wall Street (friends) can privatize them," ripping off recipients like they scam investors.
In fact, the entire scheme may have been cooked up in Wall Street board rooms years ago, awaiting the right time under the right president to spring it on millions unsuspecting beneficiaries and future ones, unaware of the subterfuge planned to defraud them.
Before he took office, Petras nailed Obama cold, calling him "the greatest con-man in recent history." Perhaps the greatest ever, given the stakes.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
********
Debt Ceiling Roulette
by Stephen Lendman
Debt Ceiling Roulette - by Stephen Lendman
In this game, the house always wins. Bipartisan complicity stacked the deck against millions of working households, needing to know that political Washington is scamming them.
The end result is the banana republicanization of America. American writer O. Henry (William Sydney Porter: 1862 - 1910) coined the term (his fictional Republic of Anchuria) in his book, "Cabbages and Kings."
It refers to a country (often politically unstable and/or repressive) where a small percent of the population has a disproportionate share or wealth and power, where ordinary people are exploited, often persecuted, and where profits are privatized while working households bear the burden of debt.
It's also a kleptocracy run by criminals, complicit with corporate thieves who bribe them to get their way. It's corrupt, rotten to the core gangsterism, run for personal gain, both sides profiting at the public's expense.
It's in plain sight in Washington, the heart of darkness, where bipartisan crooks are destroying personal freedoms, democratic values, and general welfare to grab everything for themselves and their corporate partners.
Previous articles discussed it, accessed through the following links:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-debate-charade-masks.
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/fix-is-in-washingtons-planned-soci
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/07/america-heading-for-tyranny-and.ht
Read them and weep, or better still, react by refusing any longer to put up with bipartisan corruption, stealing us blind for the Big Monied interests that own them. Obama was made president to play ball, a Democrat engineering what no Republican would dare, at the same time duplicitously claiming populist credentials.
As president, he's been hardline and neocon, advocating Democrat Leadership Council ideology, around since the mid-1980s until operations ended early this year, perhaps because too many caught on to its scam.
Ralph Nader called it "corporatist (and) soulless," ideologically hardline. Obama fits the mold. He's anti-populist, anti-labor, anti-welfare, pro-business, while at the same time militaristic and pro-war for unchallengeable world dominance. Nader explained that:
"To the DLC mind, Democrats are catering to 'special interests' when they (pretend to) stand up for trade unions, regulatory consumer-investor protections, a preemptive peace policy overseas, pruning the bloated military budget now devouring (the federal budget), defending Social Security from Wall Street schemes, and pressing for universal health care coverage. So right-wing is the DLC....that even opposing Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy....is considered ultra-liberal and contrary to winning campaigns."
Its ideology is indistinguishable from Republican extremism. It opposes rights for Blacks, Hispanics, Latino immigrants, Muslims, labor, the poor, consumer protections, populism, progressivism, environmental protection, peace and those for it, prosecuting corporate criminals, honest elections, and democratic governance.
It's for the privileged few at the expense of the many, the bipartisan cancer that's destroying America, Obama the point man in charge because who could imagine a Black president would dare. In fact, he was chosen for his commitment to wealth, power, global dominance, and grand theft at the expense of working Americans and ordinary people everywhere.
He's a fraud, a crime boss, a moral coward and serial liar, fronting for wealth, power and privilege. No wonder James Petras (weeks after his election) called him "the greatest con-man in recent history," comparing him to "Melville's Confidence Man."
"He catches your eye while he picks your pocket. He gives thanks as he packs you off to fight wars in the Middle East....He solemnly mouths vacuous pieties while he empties your Social Security funds to bail out the arch financiers who swindled your pension investments. He appoints and praises the architects of collapsed pyramid schemes to high office while promising" better times ahead he won't tolerate to assure powerful interests get it all, the public crumbs at best.
In July 2009, Kevin Baker's Harper's article headlined, "Barack Hoover Obama: The best and brightest blow it again," saying:
"Three months into his presidency," it's hard imagining the unthinkable that Obama will fail because he won't "seize the radical moment" to change a broken system responsibly.
Even then, some observers ludicrously compared him to Franklin Roosevelt. A better comparison is Herbert Hoover who faced a similar crisis, though doing so isn't fair.
In early 2009, plenty of evidence showed how destructive Obama would be, unlike Hoover who at least tried some ways to confront the great crisis, if inadequately. He established national voluntary initiatives to create jobs, provide charity, and create a private banking pool, but failed.
He also set up a dozen Home Loan Discount Banks to help people refinance mortgages to save their homes. In 1932, he established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), capitalized with $500 million with authorization to borrow another $1.5 billion.
In its first six months, it loaned banks over $800 million to no effect. Like today, they retained reserves and shunned lending. Moreover, public trust was absent because political leadership lacked courage to do more, hidebound by ways no longer working.
Roosevelt then streamlined RFC's bureaucracy, increasing its funding to recapitalize troubled banks and corporations. Despite understanding the problem, Hoover failed because he was part of a broken system he wouldn't change.
In contrast, Roosevelt confronted the crisis aggressively in first 100 days, enacting 15 landmark laws, including:
The Bank Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall), separating commercial from investment banks and insurance companies, among other provisions.
Streamlined the RFC with more capitalization and other measures to restore public trust, including by funding agencies like the Home Owners Loan Corporation, Farm Credit Administration, Rural Electrification Administration, Public Works Administration, and others, as well as emergency relief loans to states, something Hoover never did, let alone establish New Deal policies.
The Securities and Exchange Act of 1933, requiring offers and sales of securities be registered, pursuant to the Constitution's interstate commerce clause. Along with the 1934 SEC Act, it was to enforce federal securities laws, the securities industry, the nation's financial and options exchanges, and other electronic securities markets, unknown in the 1930s along with derivatives and other forms of speculation.
It was also charged with uncovering wrongdoing, assuring investors weren't swindled, and keeping the nation's financial markets free from fraud. Nonetheless, its fulfillment fell short of its promise. Unlike today, however, it tried.
The Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) to refinance homes and prevent foreclosures.
The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) to create jobs building roads, bridges, dams, developing state parks, planting trees, and various forestry and recreational programs for the Forest Service, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, and Soil Conservation Service.
The Civilian Works Administration (CWA) to fund states to reduce unemployment.
The National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), establishing the National Recovery Administration to revive economic growth, encourage collective bargaining, set maximum work hours, minimum wages, at times prices, and forbid child labor in industry.
The Public Works Administration also established projects to provide jobs, increase purchasing power, improve public welfare, and help revive the economy.
So did the Works Progress Administration (WPA) that became the largest New Deal agency, employing millions in every state, especially in rural and western areas.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), providing navigation, flood control, electricity generation, and economic development, as well as promote agriculture in the depression-impacted Tennessee Valley area, covering most of Tennessee and parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia.
The Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) that fell short by restricting production by paying farmers to reduce and/or destroy crops and kill livestock at a time millions were impoverished and hungry. The idea was to decrease supply and raise prices, at the worst possible time.
The Farm Credit Act of 1933 to help farmers refinance mortgages over an extended time at below-market rates, and by so doing, helped them stay solvent and survive.
The May 1933 Emergency Farm Mortgage Act, established during the time of the Dust Bowl, provided refinancing help for farmers facing foreclosure.
Despite its flaws and failures, FDR's New Deal accomplished much, if not enough. It helped people, put millions back to work, reinvigorated the national spirit, built or renovated 700,000 miles of roads, 7,800 bridges, 45,000 schools, 2,500 hospitals, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 1,000 airfields, and various other infrastructure, including much of Chicago's lakefront. It also cut unemployment from 25% in May 1933 to 11% in 1937.
However, (because victory was declared too early), it spiked to 19% in 1938 before early war production revived economic growth and sent it lower, heading for full wartime employment.
Later came the Wagner Act that, for the first time, let labor bargain collectively on equal terms with management. Today it's entirely lost.
The 1935 Social Security Act was to this day the single most important federal program responsible for keeping seniors and others eligible out of poverty. Obama plans to destroy it, perhaps first by letting Wall Street privatize it, what Bush failed to do.
Unemployment insurance was instituted in partnership with the states. By 1935, nearly all the unemployed got social benefit payments.
The so-called "Soak the Rich" Revenue Acts of 1934 and 1935 made high income earners pay their fair share. In contrast, Obama favors the rich over working Americans and the poor.
The Revenue Act of 1936 established an "undistributed profits tax" on corporations. Today, profitable corporations pay minimal taxes. Many get large rebates. Yet Obama wants even lower taxes, perhaps eliminating them for business altogether, so only the little people pay them.
The Revenue Act of 1937 cracked down on tax evasion. Today, it's practically de rigueur along with sanctioned speculative excesses and grand theft.
A minimum wage, 40-hour week, and time-and-a-half for overtime was guaranteed under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Labor rights today are being eviscerated and lost, Obama as committed to do it as Bush.
Roosevelt also established other initiatives to reform a broken system, put people back to work, and revive the sick economy. Nonetheless, it didn't happen until WW II because much more was needed, including incentives for business to invest.
Under Obama, however, corporate crooks take the money and run, rewarding themselves with generous bonuses, stock options and benefits, investing some abroad, and stashing the rest in offshore tax havens.
Moreover, Obama wants all New Deal/Great Society programs ended, returning America to 19th century or earlier harshness. George Bernard Shaw might have had him in mind when he said:
"Democracy (especially American-style) is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent many for the appointment of the corrupt few."
Promising change, he broke every key pledge he made, conspiring with Wall Street, war profiteers, and other corporate crooks to loot the nation's wealth, wreck the economy, and consign growing millions to impoverishment without jobs, homes, savings, social services, or futures.
His legacy is already written, explaining how he betrayed the public trust, looted the nation's wealth, waged war on the world, presided over a bogus democracy under a homeland security police state apparatus, and initiated the destruction of America's social contract, governing to the right of George Bush.
In his latest article headlined, "Obama's Ambush on Entitlements," Michael Hudson explained, saying:
He's scamming old people to believe his budget deal will save them. "It is a con. Obama has come to bury Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not to save but kill them."
It was clear before he took office. His economic dream team appointees told all, including Trilateralist Paul Volker, Geitner at Treasury, Fed chairman Bernanke assured of reappointment in 2010, and Larry Summers responsible for financial market deregulation and massive fraud under Clinton, as well as others chosen for their fealty to wealth and power.
At the time, Hudson compared him to Boris Yeltsin - a giver who kept giving to "kleptocrats to whom the public domain and decades of wealth were given with no quid pro quo." In other words, a license to loot until they've got it all, hollowing out America in the process.
In his latest article headlined, "The Political Theater and the Debt Ceiling Crisis: Are We Being Had?" Paul Craig Roberts suggest a possible political theater/charade end game, saying:
If August 2 (the nominal deadline) brings no resolution, Obama may accept Boehner's plan he already favors but won't admit it publicly to hold his weakening base.
Why? To assure "the troops are not cut off from supplies, Social Security checks can continue to go out, and the dollar (is) saved. Having (rhetorically) opposed Republicans to the last minute," he can do what he does best - lie, saying "he had no other recourse."
In other word, who "wants the troops deserted on the field of battle and the elderly without groceries? Who other than the rich can stand the higher prices from dollar devaluation?"
It's the perfect scam "for getting rid of the New Deal and the Great Society, (using) money (wanted for) wars and bailouts and tax cuts for the rich."
Instead of using existing presidential directives and executive orders to declare a national emergency, suspend the debt ceiling limit, and keep issuing it to avoid default (perhaps Plan B), he can use his preferred option (Plan A), gutting America's social contract for the corporate bosses who own him.
Perhaps he'll do it by "cut(ting) Social Security, Medicare....education (and other social programs) loose from the federal budget, (so his) Wall Street (friends) can privatize them," ripping off recipients like they scam investors.
In fact, the entire scheme may have been cooked up in Wall Street board rooms years ago, awaiting the right time under the right president to spring it on millions unsuspecting beneficiaries and future ones, unaware of the subterfuge planned to defraud them.
Before he took office, Petras nailed Obama cold, calling him "the greatest con-man in recent history." Perhaps the greatest ever, given the stakes.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Political Washington Fiddles While Rome Burns - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
****
Political Washington Fiddles While Rome Burns
by Stephen Lendman
Political Washington Fiddles While Rome Burns - by Stephen Lendman
With an approaching August 2 deadline, Paul Craig Roberts assessed the state of things accurately like he always does, saying in his new article headlined, "Disastrous Outcomes From An Orchestrated Crisis:"
"Americans need desperately to ask themselves why they put into political office such utterly irresponsible and incompetent people capable of creating such a totally unnecessary crisis loaded with such disastrous potential outcomes."
Michael Hudson's new article also covered important ground headlined, "The Debt Ceiling Set For Progressive Repealing," saying:
Obama's "blatantly empty threat (claims) there won't be money to pay Social Security checks next month (if Congress doesn't) 'tackle the tough challenges of entitlement and tax reform.' "
As always, Obama did what he does best. He lied. His threat "is not remotely true. But it has become the scare theme for over a week," and will be repeated until political Washington agrees on a deal destroying America's social contract, claiming it was done to save it.
In the end, of course, the debt ceiling will be raised as done routinely numerous previous times, including 10 times in the past decade and 74 times since 1962. Moreover, raised or not, no default will occur. Threatening otherwise is a lie. Failure to act, however, will lose America's AAA rating.
But that's virtually guaranteed anyway, given decades of reckless spending, largely on out-of-control militarism and handouts to Wall Street and other corporate favorites.
In contrast, America's entitlements are fiscally sound, needing only occasional tweaking to keep them steady-as-you-go for decades, maybe in perpetuity. But you'd never know it from bipartisan lying, regurgitated by managed new media deception.
America's Looming Debt Disaster
Worry also about financial expert/investor safety advocate Martin Weiss' assessment. Earlier he downgraded US debt to C-, the equivalent of S&P's BBB- or one notch above junk, heading for it eventually.
In doing so he said:
Regardless of the debt ceiling/budget debate charade outcome, "few will escape the far-reaching consequences of America's unfolding debt disaster."
Even if resolution is reached, "it could be just a dress rehearsal for the true tragedy of a nation unable to end its own financial decline any more effectively than a Greece, Ireland, or Portugal."
Why? "Among the 49 sovereign nations Weiss Ratings covers, the US has one of the heaviest debt burdens, the weakest international reserves, and the least stable economy."
More than any other nation, it depends on others for deficit financing, making up shortfalls by out-of-control money creation. The Fed, in fact, accumulated trillions on its balance sheet, making up for what foreign countries won't buy, plus trillions more in toxic debt, offloaded to them by Wall Street. Moreover, consumers are extremely debt dependent through mortgages, credit cards, and other ways they borrow.
Most dangerous, however, "America's largest banks have the greatest exposure to high risk derivatives - nearly 40% more today than during the debt crisis of 2008." They're a ticking time bomb able to explode anytime when least expected.
Today, in fact, "there are so many canaries in the coal mine, the din is deafening." Others include the nation's greatest ever housing depression with no end in sight, rising unemployment (much of it hidden and unreported), "skyrocketing" poverty (two or threefold the official rate), and many other deepening problems that won't quit. Moreover, the contagion is global.
Trends analyst Gerald Celente monitors it, offering Trend Alerts. On July 13, he headlined, "PIIGS, PRESSTITUTES AND THE GLOBAL MELTDOWN," saying:
Serious economic trouble keeps getting worse, highlighted by few jobs, and most around are low pay, low or no benefit ones, often temporary that workers can't count on for steady, reliable income.
As a result, "the more people out of work (or with too little income), the less they consume. And in (America) where consumer spending accounts for (around) 70% of GDP," less of it assures economic decline. Moreover, Europe is reeling under similar problems, and China faces a "ready-to-pop property bubble."
"And as goes the US, Europe and China, so goes the rest of the world....(N)o nation will escape the economic fallout and few will escape the political consequences."
No matter, major media scoundrels regurgitate lies, "cover(ing) for the politicians and financiers, the Presstitutes of the world - with their stable of 'well-respected' pundits - are accomplices in promoting" the Big Lie about recovery because they're well paid and secure to do it.
In fact, they're mindless of what ordinary people face - the greatest economic disaster in our lifetimes, worse than the Great Depression when a president actually focused on putting Americans back to work and reforming a corrupted system. Not perfectly but he tried.
Today, in contrast, despite a looming economic disaster, the combination of corrupt congressional leaders, a go-along majority in both Houses, and a cowardly, feckless president (the nation's worst by far) fiddles while Rome burns. Instead of governing responsibly, they're arranging an end game to rob people of their futures, while further wrecking a troubled economy heading south.
Representing Wall Street, not Main Street, they're arranging "to bury Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not save them," says Hudson, and he's right. It was planned long before Obama took office, but he jumped on it after his November 4, 2008 election. In fact, he set in motion what he didn't reveal, pretending he'd serve everyone equitably as America's first Black president. He lied, of course, and one led to another until every major pledge was broken.
That most of all highlights his tenure - a leader who promised one thing but did another, serving wealth, power and privilege, not millions counting on him for real "change to believe in." They're still waiting as the US ship of state sinks, its aristocracy safely offshore, plotting new ways to steal more.
A previous article explained that economist Arthur Okum began calculating America's Misery Index by adding the unemployment and inflation rates for a sense of public pain or lack of it in good times.
In May, it hit a record high, exceeding 25, surpassing the earlier June 1980 21.98 top, based on how both measures were calculated then, not today's methodology, distorted to hide painful truths.
However, it's currently approaching 30 based on 1980's formula, according to economist John Williams' calculations, putting unemployment at 22.7% and inflation at about 7%.
In fact, International Forecaster editor Bob Chapman estimates unemployment at about the same level with inflation at about 10%, heading for 14% by year end and still higher next year, explaining serious economic weakness getting worse.
A Final Comment
In August 1971, America's financial system unraveled when Nixon closed the gold window, ending the last link between gold, the dollar, and sound money. Thereafter, currencies floated, competing with each other in a casino-like environment, manipulated by Wall Street, powerful insiders, hedge funds, and governments.
Today, a new unraveling threatens because irresponsible politicians seek political advantage over what's best for the country and most people in it. As a result, the financial storm that struck in fall 2007 may turn out to be prelude to a catastrophic greater one coming.
International Forecaster editor Bob Chapman and others predict it, but it's anyone's guess precisely when. It may arrive by surprise when few people expect it. When it hits, however, it'll be with tsunami force, sweeping away everything in its path, except kleptocrats out of harm's way.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
****
Political Washington Fiddles While Rome Burns
by Stephen Lendman
Political Washington Fiddles While Rome Burns - by Stephen Lendman
With an approaching August 2 deadline, Paul Craig Roberts assessed the state of things accurately like he always does, saying in his new article headlined, "Disastrous Outcomes From An Orchestrated Crisis:"
"Americans need desperately to ask themselves why they put into political office such utterly irresponsible and incompetent people capable of creating such a totally unnecessary crisis loaded with such disastrous potential outcomes."
Michael Hudson's new article also covered important ground headlined, "The Debt Ceiling Set For Progressive Repealing," saying:
Obama's "blatantly empty threat (claims) there won't be money to pay Social Security checks next month (if Congress doesn't) 'tackle the tough challenges of entitlement and tax reform.' "
As always, Obama did what he does best. He lied. His threat "is not remotely true. But it has become the scare theme for over a week," and will be repeated until political Washington agrees on a deal destroying America's social contract, claiming it was done to save it.
In the end, of course, the debt ceiling will be raised as done routinely numerous previous times, including 10 times in the past decade and 74 times since 1962. Moreover, raised or not, no default will occur. Threatening otherwise is a lie. Failure to act, however, will lose America's AAA rating.
But that's virtually guaranteed anyway, given decades of reckless spending, largely on out-of-control militarism and handouts to Wall Street and other corporate favorites.
In contrast, America's entitlements are fiscally sound, needing only occasional tweaking to keep them steady-as-you-go for decades, maybe in perpetuity. But you'd never know it from bipartisan lying, regurgitated by managed new media deception.
America's Looming Debt Disaster
Worry also about financial expert/investor safety advocate Martin Weiss' assessment. Earlier he downgraded US debt to C-, the equivalent of S&P's BBB- or one notch above junk, heading for it eventually.
In doing so he said:
Regardless of the debt ceiling/budget debate charade outcome, "few will escape the far-reaching consequences of America's unfolding debt disaster."
Even if resolution is reached, "it could be just a dress rehearsal for the true tragedy of a nation unable to end its own financial decline any more effectively than a Greece, Ireland, or Portugal."
Why? "Among the 49 sovereign nations Weiss Ratings covers, the US has one of the heaviest debt burdens, the weakest international reserves, and the least stable economy."
More than any other nation, it depends on others for deficit financing, making up shortfalls by out-of-control money creation. The Fed, in fact, accumulated trillions on its balance sheet, making up for what foreign countries won't buy, plus trillions more in toxic debt, offloaded to them by Wall Street. Moreover, consumers are extremely debt dependent through mortgages, credit cards, and other ways they borrow.
Most dangerous, however, "America's largest banks have the greatest exposure to high risk derivatives - nearly 40% more today than during the debt crisis of 2008." They're a ticking time bomb able to explode anytime when least expected.
Today, in fact, "there are so many canaries in the coal mine, the din is deafening." Others include the nation's greatest ever housing depression with no end in sight, rising unemployment (much of it hidden and unreported), "skyrocketing" poverty (two or threefold the official rate), and many other deepening problems that won't quit. Moreover, the contagion is global.
Trends analyst Gerald Celente monitors it, offering Trend Alerts. On July 13, he headlined, "PIIGS, PRESSTITUTES AND THE GLOBAL MELTDOWN," saying:
Serious economic trouble keeps getting worse, highlighted by few jobs, and most around are low pay, low or no benefit ones, often temporary that workers can't count on for steady, reliable income.
As a result, "the more people out of work (or with too little income), the less they consume. And in (America) where consumer spending accounts for (around) 70% of GDP," less of it assures economic decline. Moreover, Europe is reeling under similar problems, and China faces a "ready-to-pop property bubble."
"And as goes the US, Europe and China, so goes the rest of the world....(N)o nation will escape the economic fallout and few will escape the political consequences."
No matter, major media scoundrels regurgitate lies, "cover(ing) for the politicians and financiers, the Presstitutes of the world - with their stable of 'well-respected' pundits - are accomplices in promoting" the Big Lie about recovery because they're well paid and secure to do it.
In fact, they're mindless of what ordinary people face - the greatest economic disaster in our lifetimes, worse than the Great Depression when a president actually focused on putting Americans back to work and reforming a corrupted system. Not perfectly but he tried.
Today, in contrast, despite a looming economic disaster, the combination of corrupt congressional leaders, a go-along majority in both Houses, and a cowardly, feckless president (the nation's worst by far) fiddles while Rome burns. Instead of governing responsibly, they're arranging an end game to rob people of their futures, while further wrecking a troubled economy heading south.
Representing Wall Street, not Main Street, they're arranging "to bury Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, not save them," says Hudson, and he's right. It was planned long before Obama took office, but he jumped on it after his November 4, 2008 election. In fact, he set in motion what he didn't reveal, pretending he'd serve everyone equitably as America's first Black president. He lied, of course, and one led to another until every major pledge was broken.
That most of all highlights his tenure - a leader who promised one thing but did another, serving wealth, power and privilege, not millions counting on him for real "change to believe in." They're still waiting as the US ship of state sinks, its aristocracy safely offshore, plotting new ways to steal more.
A previous article explained that economist Arthur Okum began calculating America's Misery Index by adding the unemployment and inflation rates for a sense of public pain or lack of it in good times.
In May, it hit a record high, exceeding 25, surpassing the earlier June 1980 21.98 top, based on how both measures were calculated then, not today's methodology, distorted to hide painful truths.
However, it's currently approaching 30 based on 1980's formula, according to economist John Williams' calculations, putting unemployment at 22.7% and inflation at about 7%.
In fact, International Forecaster editor Bob Chapman estimates unemployment at about the same level with inflation at about 10%, heading for 14% by year end and still higher next year, explaining serious economic weakness getting worse.
A Final Comment
In August 1971, America's financial system unraveled when Nixon closed the gold window, ending the last link between gold, the dollar, and sound money. Thereafter, currencies floated, competing with each other in a casino-like environment, manipulated by Wall Street, powerful insiders, hedge funds, and governments.
Today, a new unraveling threatens because irresponsible politicians seek political advantage over what's best for the country and most people in it. As a result, the financial storm that struck in fall 2007 may turn out to be prelude to a catastrophic greater one coming.
International Forecaster editor Bob Chapman and others predict it, but it's anyone's guess precisely when. It may arrive by surprise when few people expect it. When it hits, however, it'll be with tsunami force, sweeping away everything in its path, except kleptocrats out of harm's way.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
America's Media: Dancing Around the Budget Debate Charade - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*******
America's Media: Dancing Around the Budget Debate Charade
by Stephen Lendman
America's Media: Dancing Around the Budget Debate Charade - by Stephen Lendman
Previous articles explained an Obama-led bipartisan conspiracy to destroy America's social contract, returning the nation to 19th harshness harshness. But you'd never know it from major media reports, op-eds and editorials, ducking the issue even when critical.
The debate charade's gone on for weeks, both sides concealing their basic agreement on major cuts for political advantage.
Republican strategy is attacking big government, excluding its biggest part related to defense spending, imperial wars, and one-sided support for corporate interests and America's super-rich.
Waging no holds barred class war, they echo Ronald Reagan's 1976 Chicago's South Side presidential campaign speech theme when he attacked "welfare queens" without calling them Black. Today, all working Americans are "Black" in terms of struggling more than ever to make ends meet, and needing political Washington's help, not greater planned trickle-up poverty.
Obama and congressional Democrats agree with Republicans but won't admit it. According to Washington Post writer Zachary Goldfarb, Obama's also gambling on winning the political center saying:
His "political advisers have long believed that securing an agreement (even by slashing entitlements) would provide an enormous boost to his 2012 campaign, according to people familiar with White House thinking. In particular, they want to preserve and improve the president's standing among political independents, who abandoned Democrats in the 2010 midterm election and who say reining in the nation's debt is a high priority."
Perhaps Obama needs new advisers, given clear evidence that Americans overwhelmingly oppose cutting Social Security and Medicare with good reason. Their payroll taxes pay insurance premiums to receive them.
Taking the money and running may jeopardize any politician's reelection, especially for high office. That said, Obama's strategists may, in fact, count on winning by default, given no viable Republican candidate opposing him. At least, not so far.
There's no ambiguity where Murdoch's Wall Street Journal stands, including in a July 30 editorial headlined, "The Debt-Limit Hobbits: The GOP fantasy caucus is empowering Nancy Pelosi," saying:
"The shame is that the debt-limit absolutists have weakened (Boehner's) hand in negotiating a final bill with Senate Democrats. At the most practical level, (his) plan is better than (Reid's)."
In other words, under orders from Murdoch in charge of editorial policy, scorched earth slash and burn social contract cuts should leave none of them in place even if it takes multiple steps over many months to complete it. Failure will make Republicans "not (look) like adults to whom voters can entrust the government."
The editorial omitted saying what "voters" they mean. For sure, not working Americans.
Like the Journal, The New York Times also supports cuts, at the same time playing off good guy Obama v. irresponsible Republicans, instead of exposing political Washington's dark side.
On July 29, after Boehner's bill passed in the House, it's editorial headlined, "It's Up to the Senate," saying:
Only the Senate can avoid default by "piec(ing) together a compromise that can pass with bipartisan majorities in both chambers. (Doing so) would eliminate the imminent threat of financial chaos."
In fact, the debt ceiling will be raised. Default won't happen and Times writers know it. They also know both sides agree on destroying America's social contract, but won't denounce it responsibly. Doing so would expose its one-sided support for wealth, power and privilege, while pretending to care about working Americans it never did and doesn't now. Only its rhetoric differs from positions Murdoch's Journal endorses.
On July 26, columnist Thomas Friedman, a shameless free market fundamentalist, headlined "Can't We Do This Right?" endorsing slash and burn cuts as long as by strategic planning, saying:
"Only after" constructing one can we say, "OK, given our current fiscal predicament, where should we cut spending and where must we raise new tax revenues so that we can bring our government back to solvency and, at the same time, reinvigorate our formula for growth and success."
He then quoted Johns Hopkins University Professor Michael Mandelbaum ("a foreign policy expert," he said) stating:
"Such a plan requires cutting, taxing and spending. It requires cutting because we have made promises to ourselves on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that we cannot keep without reforming each of them."
Mandelbaum may know foreign policy. Neither he or Friedman understand economics or they'd know and admit Social Security and Medicare are fiscally sound, needing only minor adjustments to keep them that way, not major cuts.
Moreover, Medicaid provides essential healthcare to society's poor who'd get none or too little without it. Only a heartless corporatist would support policies denying them. Perhaps Friedman and Mendlbaum do without saying so.
In a July 24 column, Friedman also endorsed the "radical center," even though "it sounds gimmicky," he said. He explained the idea earlier in 2007, suggesting that if Obama won the Democrat nomination, he "might want to consider keeping Dick Cheney on as his vice president."
Why? Because he'd be much more effective with a Cheney "standing over his right shoulder, quietly pounding a baseball bat into his palm." For Friedman, in other words, mixing Obama's right wing politics with Cheney's is centrist. Maybe for zealots like himself, not for mainstream Americans, wanting better options they're denied.
On July 29, Times writer Jackie Calmes headlined, "That Aug. 2 Dealine? It May Be Impossible, Veteran Lawmakers Say."
Citing former Senator Tom Daschle as well as former Republican Reps. Tom Davis and Vin Weber's views in Calmes' words saying, "This time, be afraid. Be very afraid," instead of exposing the fraudulent debate, explaining the stakes responsibly, and endorsing what's best for all Americans. In addition, saying no deal is better than a bad one, causing irreparable harm to millions.
Instead Calmes also quoted a Chamber of Commerce headline, saying:
"Failure to Raise Debt Ceiling Could Turn the Economy Back Into a Recession." For Main Street, in fact, it's been in Depression since 2008, what neither the Chamber or Times writers will admit forthrightly. Instead, they shamelessly front for wealth and power, claiming it's for the good of the country.
In virtually all US managed news reports and opinions, supporting powerful interests at the expense of working Americans is standard policy, saying like a July 29 Washington Post editorial headlined, "Debt-ceilng sanity is now in the Senate's hands:
"(W)e continue to hope enough clear-thinking lawmakers will conclude that the time for compromise is now."
Unexplained was that any deal leaves working Americans in the cold, on their own and out of luck, especially after subsequent cuts eliminate what round one omits.
That's the ugly future no major media report will explain. That's why popular anger has to stop it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*******
America's Media: Dancing Around the Budget Debate Charade
by Stephen Lendman
America's Media: Dancing Around the Budget Debate Charade - by Stephen Lendman
Previous articles explained an Obama-led bipartisan conspiracy to destroy America's social contract, returning the nation to 19th harshness harshness. But you'd never know it from major media reports, op-eds and editorials, ducking the issue even when critical.
The debate charade's gone on for weeks, both sides concealing their basic agreement on major cuts for political advantage.
Republican strategy is attacking big government, excluding its biggest part related to defense spending, imperial wars, and one-sided support for corporate interests and America's super-rich.
Waging no holds barred class war, they echo Ronald Reagan's 1976 Chicago's South Side presidential campaign speech theme when he attacked "welfare queens" without calling them Black. Today, all working Americans are "Black" in terms of struggling more than ever to make ends meet, and needing political Washington's help, not greater planned trickle-up poverty.
Obama and congressional Democrats agree with Republicans but won't admit it. According to Washington Post writer Zachary Goldfarb, Obama's also gambling on winning the political center saying:
His "political advisers have long believed that securing an agreement (even by slashing entitlements) would provide an enormous boost to his 2012 campaign, according to people familiar with White House thinking. In particular, they want to preserve and improve the president's standing among political independents, who abandoned Democrats in the 2010 midterm election and who say reining in the nation's debt is a high priority."
Perhaps Obama needs new advisers, given clear evidence that Americans overwhelmingly oppose cutting Social Security and Medicare with good reason. Their payroll taxes pay insurance premiums to receive them.
Taking the money and running may jeopardize any politician's reelection, especially for high office. That said, Obama's strategists may, in fact, count on winning by default, given no viable Republican candidate opposing him. At least, not so far.
There's no ambiguity where Murdoch's Wall Street Journal stands, including in a July 30 editorial headlined, "The Debt-Limit Hobbits: The GOP fantasy caucus is empowering Nancy Pelosi," saying:
"The shame is that the debt-limit absolutists have weakened (Boehner's) hand in negotiating a final bill with Senate Democrats. At the most practical level, (his) plan is better than (Reid's)."
In other words, under orders from Murdoch in charge of editorial policy, scorched earth slash and burn social contract cuts should leave none of them in place even if it takes multiple steps over many months to complete it. Failure will make Republicans "not (look) like adults to whom voters can entrust the government."
The editorial omitted saying what "voters" they mean. For sure, not working Americans.
Like the Journal, The New York Times also supports cuts, at the same time playing off good guy Obama v. irresponsible Republicans, instead of exposing political Washington's dark side.
On July 29, after Boehner's bill passed in the House, it's editorial headlined, "It's Up to the Senate," saying:
Only the Senate can avoid default by "piec(ing) together a compromise that can pass with bipartisan majorities in both chambers. (Doing so) would eliminate the imminent threat of financial chaos."
In fact, the debt ceiling will be raised. Default won't happen and Times writers know it. They also know both sides agree on destroying America's social contract, but won't denounce it responsibly. Doing so would expose its one-sided support for wealth, power and privilege, while pretending to care about working Americans it never did and doesn't now. Only its rhetoric differs from positions Murdoch's Journal endorses.
On July 26, columnist Thomas Friedman, a shameless free market fundamentalist, headlined "Can't We Do This Right?" endorsing slash and burn cuts as long as by strategic planning, saying:
"Only after" constructing one can we say, "OK, given our current fiscal predicament, where should we cut spending and where must we raise new tax revenues so that we can bring our government back to solvency and, at the same time, reinvigorate our formula for growth and success."
He then quoted Johns Hopkins University Professor Michael Mandelbaum ("a foreign policy expert," he said) stating:
"Such a plan requires cutting, taxing and spending. It requires cutting because we have made promises to ourselves on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that we cannot keep without reforming each of them."
Mandelbaum may know foreign policy. Neither he or Friedman understand economics or they'd know and admit Social Security and Medicare are fiscally sound, needing only minor adjustments to keep them that way, not major cuts.
Moreover, Medicaid provides essential healthcare to society's poor who'd get none or too little without it. Only a heartless corporatist would support policies denying them. Perhaps Friedman and Mendlbaum do without saying so.
In a July 24 column, Friedman also endorsed the "radical center," even though "it sounds gimmicky," he said. He explained the idea earlier in 2007, suggesting that if Obama won the Democrat nomination, he "might want to consider keeping Dick Cheney on as his vice president."
Why? Because he'd be much more effective with a Cheney "standing over his right shoulder, quietly pounding a baseball bat into his palm." For Friedman, in other words, mixing Obama's right wing politics with Cheney's is centrist. Maybe for zealots like himself, not for mainstream Americans, wanting better options they're denied.
On July 29, Times writer Jackie Calmes headlined, "That Aug. 2 Dealine? It May Be Impossible, Veteran Lawmakers Say."
Citing former Senator Tom Daschle as well as former Republican Reps. Tom Davis and Vin Weber's views in Calmes' words saying, "This time, be afraid. Be very afraid," instead of exposing the fraudulent debate, explaining the stakes responsibly, and endorsing what's best for all Americans. In addition, saying no deal is better than a bad one, causing irreparable harm to millions.
Instead Calmes also quoted a Chamber of Commerce headline, saying:
"Failure to Raise Debt Ceiling Could Turn the Economy Back Into a Recession." For Main Street, in fact, it's been in Depression since 2008, what neither the Chamber or Times writers will admit forthrightly. Instead, they shamelessly front for wealth and power, claiming it's for the good of the country.
In virtually all US managed news reports and opinions, supporting powerful interests at the expense of working Americans is standard policy, saying like a July 29 Washington Post editorial headlined, "Debt-ceilng sanity is now in the Senate's hands:
"(W)e continue to hope enough clear-thinking lawmakers will conclude that the time for compromise is now."
Unexplained was that any deal leaves working Americans in the cold, on their own and out of luck, especially after subsequent cuts eliminate what round one omits.
That's the ugly future no major media report will explain. That's why popular anger has to stop it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Heading Toward Economic Ruin - by Stephen Lendman
Markin comment :
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*******
Heading Toward Economic Ruin
by Stephen Lendman
Heading Toward Economic Ruin - by Stephen Lendman
Bad policies assure bad results. Destructive ones assure calamities. Well before Obama took office, bipartisan initiatives plotted a course for disaster.
Bush accelerated it. Obama much more, so today America hangs on the precipice of what a previous article called the banana republicanization of America - a kleptocracy run by corrupt politicians and corporate crooks, scamming the public with austerity, debt peonage, and banker occupation, heading them toward mass impoverishment, misery and neo-serfdom.
Washington's current debt ceiling/budget debate centers around slashing entitlements and other social benefits to avoid a manufactured looming crisis. Off the table, however, are:
-- cutting military expenditures minimally in half, ideally much more, including closing overseas bases, reducing force levels, ending foreign occupations, and renouncing imperial wars;
-- taxing speculators and the rich;
-- making corporations pay their fair share;
-- strengthening America's social contract, not destroying it;
-- stopping the offshoring of high-paying manufacturing and professional jobs plus many others;
-- real regulatory reform with teeth;
-- abolishing monopoly and oligopoly power;
-- returning money creation power to Congress as the Constitution demands; and
-- investing the nation's capital in productive growth, not handouts to Wall Street and other corporate favorites, as well as permanent imperial wars, turning America into a corrupted, fascist, lawless sinkhole not fit to live in, except for the elite few pulling the strings.
At the same time, political theater, malfeasance and machinations come at the time the economy is heading south. The latest Commerce Department data showed it stalled so far in 2011. In fact, conditions are much worse based on economist John Williams' calculations.
His Shadowstats Government Statistics (SGS) analysis "reflects the inflation-adjusted, or real, year-to-year GDP change, adjusted for distortions in government inflation usage and methodological changes that have resulted in a built-in upside bias (aka cooking the books) to official reporting."
As a result, his annual growth calculation bottomed out in early 2009 at minus 6% GDP, elevated to over minus 1% in early 2011, and now has it at over minus 2% heading south. In other words, the true state of economic America is bad, getting worse.
In response to it, Obama-headed political Washington plans forced austerity at a time massive stimulus is needed - for productive economic growth and job creation to get America healthy again.
Once accomplished, tackling out-of-control debt should be done responsibly, not on the backs of working households, giving corporate crooks and super-rich parasites a pass, people who made their money the old-fashioned way. They stole it.
On July 29, trends analyst Gerald Celente told Russia Today viewers to believe nothing politicians say. "Deal or no deal," America's debt problem is real, getting worse. Washington's "economic policy is a total failure."
Bush's policies didn't work. "Obama's stimulus didn't work. The (Fed's) backdoor loans and QE I and II didn't work. The Republican program is not going to work. The country is going bankrupt."
"The (policies and) numbers don't lie. The politicians lie. (Moreover), they're devaluating the dollar," reflected in rising gold prices, real value, not fiat paper losing it because privatized money power debases it.
The problem is "we don't have a representative form of government. That's only for little kiddies to believe. We have a government that only represents the very powerful and very rich, and that's all this is about - letting them keep their perks."
And look at what passes for government in Washington. "It's like looking at the three stooges and waiting for an intelligent answer to come from Larry, Moe or Curly, or Boehner, Reid or Polosi....Politics is nothing more than show business for ugly people."
"They're incapable. They're inept, and the same people who caused the problem. We're now looking for them to solve it. That's a definition of insanity (or better still stupidity)."
"They'll pay the debt. I don't see a default coming, but the collapse is coming regardless. Let's look at the real numbers." They're bad and getting worse. The solution is "let the people vote on these issues," not corrupt politicians only "representing the rich and powerful."
Congress operates like Mafia "mob rule, the Bonannos and Gambinos. Just put a different name on it. The Republicans and Democrats....At least if we the people vote, we'll get the future we deserve, not the one being foisted on us."
In his straight-talk analysis, Celente pulls no punches. Neither does Progressive Radio News Hour regular, economist Jack Rasmus. His latest economic analysis explains a "double dip recession on the horizon."
In fact, Obama's "recovery" was due "to what economists call inventory adjustment and export-driven manufacturing. But both are now slowing sharply." With the global economy decelerating, export sales "hit a wall."
Moreover, consumption is also slowing, except for "the wealthiest 10 percent." At the same time, "(r)eal weekly earnings continue to fall, meaning less real consumption spending as prices for gasoline, food, health care, education and local taxes continue to soar."
In addition, inventory accumulation ran its course. Housing is in depression. Job prospects are bad and heading south. John Williams calculates real unemployment at 22.7%. Expect it to rise as conditions weaken.
In 2011 Q I, 400,000 discouraged workers left the labor force. From December 2010 - May 2011, only 14,000 full time jobs were created. Most private sector ones are low pay, low or no benefit part time or temp ones.
Now, recent National Association of Independent Business surveys show small firms (responsible for creating half of all jobs) plan cutting back. So are larger companies. At the same time, state and local governments are slashing payrolls at a rate of about 25,000 a month.
Later in 2011 and next year, Washington plans the same. Meanwhile, corporate America is sitting on over $2 trillion in cash and liquid assets, "refus(ing) to invest in the US to create jobs" because profit potential is poor.
Overall, public and private sector cost-cutting is de rigueur across the board, making a bad situation worse. As a result, "there is little if anything on the economic horizon to suggest....renewed economic growth and recovery." Conditions are bad, getting worse, and planned budget cuts will be disastrous for working Americans.
On the July 30 edition of the Progressive Radio News Hour, Rasmus discussed "Teapublicans" v. "Timidcrats" theater. He also said pay more attention to August 6 than August 2 when the new July employment numbers are released.
Comparing the US economy to a "punched-out fighter in the 8th round," job creation from July through September may prove a knock out blow. "That's called a double dip recession."
And with planned budget cuts hammering most Americans, it's called Depression. Working households have experienced it since 2008 because political Washington abandoned them when they needed help, and now plans to hit them harder.
No wonder Gallup's latest July 26 - 28 daily tracking poll showed Obama's approval rating hit a new low at 40%. Earlier in July, Congress scored an abysmal 18%.
Expect political Washington's approval to head further south once Americans learn how an Obama-led bipartisan conspiracy scammed them by stealing their welfare and futures. Hopefully they'll get mad enough to react. It's their only chance.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Agree or disagree, and mostly disagree on the solutions questions (nothing short of a workers government is going to make a dent, even a small dent in the systemic social problems we face today), I am always glad to put the prolific SteveLendmanBlog on this site. It gives me a feel for the pulse of the old-time (and vanishing) non-party (non-Democratic Party) progressives out there.
*******
Heading Toward Economic Ruin
by Stephen Lendman
Heading Toward Economic Ruin - by Stephen Lendman
Bad policies assure bad results. Destructive ones assure calamities. Well before Obama took office, bipartisan initiatives plotted a course for disaster.
Bush accelerated it. Obama much more, so today America hangs on the precipice of what a previous article called the banana republicanization of America - a kleptocracy run by corrupt politicians and corporate crooks, scamming the public with austerity, debt peonage, and banker occupation, heading them toward mass impoverishment, misery and neo-serfdom.
Washington's current debt ceiling/budget debate centers around slashing entitlements and other social benefits to avoid a manufactured looming crisis. Off the table, however, are:
-- cutting military expenditures minimally in half, ideally much more, including closing overseas bases, reducing force levels, ending foreign occupations, and renouncing imperial wars;
-- taxing speculators and the rich;
-- making corporations pay their fair share;
-- strengthening America's social contract, not destroying it;
-- stopping the offshoring of high-paying manufacturing and professional jobs plus many others;
-- real regulatory reform with teeth;
-- abolishing monopoly and oligopoly power;
-- returning money creation power to Congress as the Constitution demands; and
-- investing the nation's capital in productive growth, not handouts to Wall Street and other corporate favorites, as well as permanent imperial wars, turning America into a corrupted, fascist, lawless sinkhole not fit to live in, except for the elite few pulling the strings.
At the same time, political theater, malfeasance and machinations come at the time the economy is heading south. The latest Commerce Department data showed it stalled so far in 2011. In fact, conditions are much worse based on economist John Williams' calculations.
His Shadowstats Government Statistics (SGS) analysis "reflects the inflation-adjusted, or real, year-to-year GDP change, adjusted for distortions in government inflation usage and methodological changes that have resulted in a built-in upside bias (aka cooking the books) to official reporting."
As a result, his annual growth calculation bottomed out in early 2009 at minus 6% GDP, elevated to over minus 1% in early 2011, and now has it at over minus 2% heading south. In other words, the true state of economic America is bad, getting worse.
In response to it, Obama-headed political Washington plans forced austerity at a time massive stimulus is needed - for productive economic growth and job creation to get America healthy again.
Once accomplished, tackling out-of-control debt should be done responsibly, not on the backs of working households, giving corporate crooks and super-rich parasites a pass, people who made their money the old-fashioned way. They stole it.
On July 29, trends analyst Gerald Celente told Russia Today viewers to believe nothing politicians say. "Deal or no deal," America's debt problem is real, getting worse. Washington's "economic policy is a total failure."
Bush's policies didn't work. "Obama's stimulus didn't work. The (Fed's) backdoor loans and QE I and II didn't work. The Republican program is not going to work. The country is going bankrupt."
"The (policies and) numbers don't lie. The politicians lie. (Moreover), they're devaluating the dollar," reflected in rising gold prices, real value, not fiat paper losing it because privatized money power debases it.
The problem is "we don't have a representative form of government. That's only for little kiddies to believe. We have a government that only represents the very powerful and very rich, and that's all this is about - letting them keep their perks."
And look at what passes for government in Washington. "It's like looking at the three stooges and waiting for an intelligent answer to come from Larry, Moe or Curly, or Boehner, Reid or Polosi....Politics is nothing more than show business for ugly people."
"They're incapable. They're inept, and the same people who caused the problem. We're now looking for them to solve it. That's a definition of insanity (or better still stupidity)."
"They'll pay the debt. I don't see a default coming, but the collapse is coming regardless. Let's look at the real numbers." They're bad and getting worse. The solution is "let the people vote on these issues," not corrupt politicians only "representing the rich and powerful."
Congress operates like Mafia "mob rule, the Bonannos and Gambinos. Just put a different name on it. The Republicans and Democrats....At least if we the people vote, we'll get the future we deserve, not the one being foisted on us."
In his straight-talk analysis, Celente pulls no punches. Neither does Progressive Radio News Hour regular, economist Jack Rasmus. His latest economic analysis explains a "double dip recession on the horizon."
In fact, Obama's "recovery" was due "to what economists call inventory adjustment and export-driven manufacturing. But both are now slowing sharply." With the global economy decelerating, export sales "hit a wall."
Moreover, consumption is also slowing, except for "the wealthiest 10 percent." At the same time, "(r)eal weekly earnings continue to fall, meaning less real consumption spending as prices for gasoline, food, health care, education and local taxes continue to soar."
In addition, inventory accumulation ran its course. Housing is in depression. Job prospects are bad and heading south. John Williams calculates real unemployment at 22.7%. Expect it to rise as conditions weaken.
In 2011 Q I, 400,000 discouraged workers left the labor force. From December 2010 - May 2011, only 14,000 full time jobs were created. Most private sector ones are low pay, low or no benefit part time or temp ones.
Now, recent National Association of Independent Business surveys show small firms (responsible for creating half of all jobs) plan cutting back. So are larger companies. At the same time, state and local governments are slashing payrolls at a rate of about 25,000 a month.
Later in 2011 and next year, Washington plans the same. Meanwhile, corporate America is sitting on over $2 trillion in cash and liquid assets, "refus(ing) to invest in the US to create jobs" because profit potential is poor.
Overall, public and private sector cost-cutting is de rigueur across the board, making a bad situation worse. As a result, "there is little if anything on the economic horizon to suggest....renewed economic growth and recovery." Conditions are bad, getting worse, and planned budget cuts will be disastrous for working Americans.
On the July 30 edition of the Progressive Radio News Hour, Rasmus discussed "Teapublicans" v. "Timidcrats" theater. He also said pay more attention to August 6 than August 2 when the new July employment numbers are released.
Comparing the US economy to a "punched-out fighter in the 8th round," job creation from July through September may prove a knock out blow. "That's called a double dip recession."
And with planned budget cuts hammering most Americans, it's called Depression. Working households have experienced it since 2008 because political Washington abandoned them when they needed help, and now plans to hit them harder.
No wonder Gallup's latest July 26 - 28 daily tracking poll showed Obama's approval rating hit a new low at 40%. Earlier in July, Congress scored an abysmal 18%.
Expect political Washington's approval to head further south once Americans learn how an Obama-led bipartisan conspiracy scammed them by stealing their welfare and futures. Hopefully they'll get mad enough to react. It's their only chance.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen (at) sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
See also:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
This work is in the public domain
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Rick’s Flying Saucer Rock Moment- The Rock ‘n’ Rock Era; Weird, Wild & Wacky
Click on the headline to link to a YouTube film clip of the Royal Teens performing their classic, Short, Shorts.
CD Review
The Rock ‘n’Roll Era: Weird, Wild & Wacky, various artists, Time-Life Music, 1991
He was glad, glad as hell that angel thing, that guardian angel thing, was over and done with. You know that Sunday school thing they beat you over head with about how your guardian angel was there to keep you on the straight and narrow, or else. Yes, Rick Roberts certainly was glad that was over although now that he thought about it it just kind of passed out of sight as he got older and other things filled his mind. Things like his June ("June Bug" was his pet name for her but he had better not hear you call her that, especially one Freddie Jackson, or else). Yes, Rick was now large, strong enough, and smart enough strong, not to have to worry about some needlepoint guardian angel looking out for him. Although truth to tell he was worried, a little anyway, about this Cold War Russian bear thing coming over here to take his brain away, or maybe put the big heat on him, the A-bomb heat and creating alien things from outer space to haunt his dreams. But only a little.
What was exercising Rick these days was his June (you know her pet name but don’t say it, please) and causing him no end of sleepless nights was that thing about Freddie Jackson, June’s old flame. At least according to his sister, Celia, a reliable source of North Adamsville High gossip, and not afraid to spread it when it pleased her, was that Freddie was taking his peeks at June, and she was peeking back. So, lately, in order to pass those sleepless nights Rick had begun to sit up in his bedroom at night with his transistor radio on, the one that he had forced his parents to buy him, batteries included, for last Christmas, rather than the practical ties they had intended to foist on him. And what Rick listened as the hour turned to midnight was The Crazy Lazy Midnight Madness Show on WMEX, the local be-bop, no stop, all rock radio station the that got the sleepless, the half-awake, the lame and the lazy through the 1950s Cold War night, and into the dawn.
Now this Crazy Lazy Show fare was strictly for night owls, stuff that would not appeal to daytime rockers, you know, those listening to guys like Elvis, Carl, Bo, Little Richard, and Jerry Lee, or just stuff that appealed to Lazy’s off-center, off-beat funny bone. One night, one really restless night, as Rick was revving up the transistor around midnight
he heard Buchanan and Goodman’s silly The Flying Saucer, parts one and two back to back no less, so you see Crazy was serious about presenting goofy stuff. That was followed by Sheb Wooley’s devouring the Purple People Eater, and then, for a change of pace The Royal Teens be-bop Short, Shorts and that got his to thinking about how good June looked in them, and then back to zaniness when Bobby Picketts flattened Monster Mash and, as he got a little drowsy, The Detergents waved over Leader of the Laundromat.
That last one got to him, got to him good, because, believe it or not the song had sentimental value to him. See he met June at the North Adamsville All-Wash Laundromat one day. His mother’s washing machine had broken down and she needed to bring the Roberts laundry to the All-Wash and Rick drove her over. During that time June had passed by, he had said hi, they had talked and then more seriously talked, and that was that. Freddie Jackson was after that dust, a memory, nothing to June.
All this thinking really got Rick tired this night and as the last chords of Laundromat echoed in his head he fell into a deep sleep. Around four o’clock in the morning though he was awoken with a start, with the high pitched whining sound coming from some where outside his window. Next thing he knew a huge disc-like object was hovering over most of Adamsville, and stayed there for maybe a minute before departing just as quickly as it appeared. Rick took this for a sign, a sign that he and June would hang together. And a sign that Freddie Jackson probably should have taken a trip on that flying saucer while he could, or else.
CD Review
The Rock ‘n’Roll Era: Weird, Wild & Wacky, various artists, Time-Life Music, 1991
He was glad, glad as hell that angel thing, that guardian angel thing, was over and done with. You know that Sunday school thing they beat you over head with about how your guardian angel was there to keep you on the straight and narrow, or else. Yes, Rick Roberts certainly was glad that was over although now that he thought about it it just kind of passed out of sight as he got older and other things filled his mind. Things like his June ("June Bug" was his pet name for her but he had better not hear you call her that, especially one Freddie Jackson, or else). Yes, Rick was now large, strong enough, and smart enough strong, not to have to worry about some needlepoint guardian angel looking out for him. Although truth to tell he was worried, a little anyway, about this Cold War Russian bear thing coming over here to take his brain away, or maybe put the big heat on him, the A-bomb heat and creating alien things from outer space to haunt his dreams. But only a little.
What was exercising Rick these days was his June (you know her pet name but don’t say it, please) and causing him no end of sleepless nights was that thing about Freddie Jackson, June’s old flame. At least according to his sister, Celia, a reliable source of North Adamsville High gossip, and not afraid to spread it when it pleased her, was that Freddie was taking his peeks at June, and she was peeking back. So, lately, in order to pass those sleepless nights Rick had begun to sit up in his bedroom at night with his transistor radio on, the one that he had forced his parents to buy him, batteries included, for last Christmas, rather than the practical ties they had intended to foist on him. And what Rick listened as the hour turned to midnight was The Crazy Lazy Midnight Madness Show on WMEX, the local be-bop, no stop, all rock radio station the that got the sleepless, the half-awake, the lame and the lazy through the 1950s Cold War night, and into the dawn.
Now this Crazy Lazy Show fare was strictly for night owls, stuff that would not appeal to daytime rockers, you know, those listening to guys like Elvis, Carl, Bo, Little Richard, and Jerry Lee, or just stuff that appealed to Lazy’s off-center, off-beat funny bone. One night, one really restless night, as Rick was revving up the transistor around midnight
he heard Buchanan and Goodman’s silly The Flying Saucer, parts one and two back to back no less, so you see Crazy was serious about presenting goofy stuff. That was followed by Sheb Wooley’s devouring the Purple People Eater, and then, for a change of pace The Royal Teens be-bop Short, Shorts and that got his to thinking about how good June looked in them, and then back to zaniness when Bobby Picketts flattened Monster Mash and, as he got a little drowsy, The Detergents waved over Leader of the Laundromat.
That last one got to him, got to him good, because, believe it or not the song had sentimental value to him. See he met June at the North Adamsville All-Wash Laundromat one day. His mother’s washing machine had broken down and she needed to bring the Roberts laundry to the All-Wash and Rick drove her over. During that time June had passed by, he had said hi, they had talked and then more seriously talked, and that was that. Freddie Jackson was after that dust, a memory, nothing to June.
All this thinking really got Rick tired this night and as the last chords of Laundromat echoed in his head he fell into a deep sleep. Around four o’clock in the morning though he was awoken with a start, with the high pitched whining sound coming from some where outside his window. Next thing he knew a huge disc-like object was hovering over most of Adamsville, and stayed there for maybe a minute before departing just as quickly as it appeared. Rick took this for a sign, a sign that he and June would hang together. And a sign that Freddie Jackson probably should have taken a trip on that flying saucer while he could, or else.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Out In The 2000s Crime Noir Night-“Sin City”-A Film Review
Click on the headline to link to a Wikipedia entry for Sin City.
DVD Review
Sin City, starring Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, based on Frank Miller's graphic novels, co-directed by Frank Miller, 2005
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Of course when I think of noir it is 1940s-50s noir, black and white in film and in the good guys-bad guys constellation with a little murder and mayhem mixed in to keep one’s eyes open just in case there is no femme fatale to muddy the waters. Neo-noir, such as the film under review, Sin City, is another matter, perhaps. Here’s the why of the perhaps.
Central to the old time crime noir was the notion that crime did not pay and as stated above the bad guy(s) learned that lesson the hard way after a little mussing up or a date with a bullet. Kids’ stuff really when compared to the over-the-top action of this three vignettes series on modern day good guys versus bad guys. Three separate male characters, all tough guys and guys you would want to have at your back if real trouble headed your way, are trying, trying within the parameters of common sense or believability, to clean up slices of Sin City. Sin City as the rather obvious name implies, is in the grips of corruption from the top down, including in virtually every civic institution. Our avengers are trying to cut a wedge into that bad karma by individually, one, tracking down a bizarre, politically connected heir whose thing was slice and dice of very young girls, two, avenge the death of a high class call girl who was kind to one tough guy, and, three, keep the pimps and cops at bay in the red light district where the working girls have set up their own Hookers’ Commune.
All of this doing good is, of necessity in today’s movie world, linked up with, frankly, over the top use of violence of all sorts from cannibalism to barbaric death sentences, well beyond what tame old time noir warranted. Apparently the succeeding crime waves since the 1940s have upped the ante and something like total war is required to exterminate the villains. That and some very up-to-date use of cinematography to give a gritty black and white feel to the adventures. And also a not small dose of magical realism, suspension of disbelief, and sparseness of language to go along with the plot and visual action.
But here is the funny thing, funny for an old-time crime noir aficionado, I really liked this film. Why? Well go back to the old time crime noir premise. Good guys (and then it was mostly guys- here some very wicked “dames” join in and I know I would not want to cross them, no way) pushed their weight around or tilted at windmills for cheap dough or maybe a little kiss. They got mussed, up, trussed up, busted up in the cause of some individual justice drive that drove the “better angels of their natures.” Guess what, sixty years later, a thousand years advanced cinematically, a million years advanced socially (maybe) and these guys are still chasing windmills. Nice, right.
DVD Review
Sin City, starring Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, based on Frank Miller's graphic novels, co-directed by Frank Miller, 2005
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Of course when I think of noir it is 1940s-50s noir, black and white in film and in the good guys-bad guys constellation with a little murder and mayhem mixed in to keep one’s eyes open just in case there is no femme fatale to muddy the waters. Neo-noir, such as the film under review, Sin City, is another matter, perhaps. Here’s the why of the perhaps.
Central to the old time crime noir was the notion that crime did not pay and as stated above the bad guy(s) learned that lesson the hard way after a little mussing up or a date with a bullet. Kids’ stuff really when compared to the over-the-top action of this three vignettes series on modern day good guys versus bad guys. Three separate male characters, all tough guys and guys you would want to have at your back if real trouble headed your way, are trying, trying within the parameters of common sense or believability, to clean up slices of Sin City. Sin City as the rather obvious name implies, is in the grips of corruption from the top down, including in virtually every civic institution. Our avengers are trying to cut a wedge into that bad karma by individually, one, tracking down a bizarre, politically connected heir whose thing was slice and dice of very young girls, two, avenge the death of a high class call girl who was kind to one tough guy, and, three, keep the pimps and cops at bay in the red light district where the working girls have set up their own Hookers’ Commune.
All of this doing good is, of necessity in today’s movie world, linked up with, frankly, over the top use of violence of all sorts from cannibalism to barbaric death sentences, well beyond what tame old time noir warranted. Apparently the succeeding crime waves since the 1940s have upped the ante and something like total war is required to exterminate the villains. That and some very up-to-date use of cinematography to give a gritty black and white feel to the adventures. And also a not small dose of magical realism, suspension of disbelief, and sparseness of language to go along with the plot and visual action.
But here is the funny thing, funny for an old-time crime noir aficionado, I really liked this film. Why? Well go back to the old time crime noir premise. Good guys (and then it was mostly guys- here some very wicked “dames” join in and I know I would not want to cross them, no way) pushed their weight around or tilted at windmills for cheap dough or maybe a little kiss. They got mussed, up, trussed up, busted up in the cause of some individual justice drive that drove the “better angels of their natures.” Guess what, sixty years later, a thousand years advanced cinematically, a million years advanced socially (maybe) and these guys are still chasing windmills. Nice, right.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Out In The 1940s Crime Noir Night-“The Naked City”-A Film Review
Click on the headline to link to a Wikipedia entry for The Naked City.
DVD Review
The Naked City, starring Barry Fitzgerald, Howard Duff, Universal International, 1946
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Some, such as the film under review from 1946, The Naked City, offer neither although the stark New York City cinematography and the voice-over narration place it firmly in the genre. This film is that old noir stand-by from the period, the police procedural with its never-ending cautionary tale about how “crime does not pay.”
A little plot summary is in order. Yes, New York City, well the New York City of the 1940s and 1950s had eight million stories, although maybe really just two, rich and poor, or maybe better getting richer or sliding down poorer, but that is the subject for another day. Of course telling eight million stories, other than as a few seconds relief slice-of-life scenes, would make me very sleepy, very sleepy indeed. So the plot line reduces the sleepiness to a minimum by telling one story, or rather one murder story that wraps quite a few people in its tentacles, including one major city homicide squad. A squad led by perennial Irish actor Barry Fitzgerald as the foot-sore but worldly-wise detective in charge. The grift (profit motive) that drives the story line is stealing jewelry from those self-same getting richer New York City swells, including an inside society swell finger man. But things turn awry when one drop-dead beautiful model (maybe I should not have used just that phrase, but I will let it stand) winds up being murdered by her some of her thieving confederates.
The twists and turns, such as they are, revolve around a mystery man lover, suitor, whatever it was never really clear, except he was daffy over that drop-dead beautiful model, and finding him as the logical guy to have done, or ordered the murder. In New Jack City and elsewhere that is hard to do, one and one half hours hard to do. But in the end Barry and his homicide squad cohorts get their man, a strangely agile bad man for noir who are usually just straight thugs. And the city moves on to the next…murder, mayhem or whatever. Not exactly my cup of tea in noir but if I recall this film was the model for a television series of the same name so somebody must have though well of it beyond the slice-of-New York life scenes interspersed in the story and the great black and white cinematography of the Big Apple just after the end of World War II.
DVD Review
The Naked City, starring Barry Fitzgerald, Howard Duff, Universal International, 1946
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Some, such as the film under review from 1946, The Naked City, offer neither although the stark New York City cinematography and the voice-over narration place it firmly in the genre. This film is that old noir stand-by from the period, the police procedural with its never-ending cautionary tale about how “crime does not pay.”
A little plot summary is in order. Yes, New York City, well the New York City of the 1940s and 1950s had eight million stories, although maybe really just two, rich and poor, or maybe better getting richer or sliding down poorer, but that is the subject for another day. Of course telling eight million stories, other than as a few seconds relief slice-of-life scenes, would make me very sleepy, very sleepy indeed. So the plot line reduces the sleepiness to a minimum by telling one story, or rather one murder story that wraps quite a few people in its tentacles, including one major city homicide squad. A squad led by perennial Irish actor Barry Fitzgerald as the foot-sore but worldly-wise detective in charge. The grift (profit motive) that drives the story line is stealing jewelry from those self-same getting richer New York City swells, including an inside society swell finger man. But things turn awry when one drop-dead beautiful model (maybe I should not have used just that phrase, but I will let it stand) winds up being murdered by her some of her thieving confederates.
The twists and turns, such as they are, revolve around a mystery man lover, suitor, whatever it was never really clear, except he was daffy over that drop-dead beautiful model, and finding him as the logical guy to have done, or ordered the murder. In New Jack City and elsewhere that is hard to do, one and one half hours hard to do. But in the end Barry and his homicide squad cohorts get their man, a strangely agile bad man for noir who are usually just straight thugs. And the city moves on to the next…murder, mayhem or whatever. Not exactly my cup of tea in noir but if I recall this film was the model for a television series of the same name so somebody must have though well of it beyond the slice-of-New York life scenes interspersed in the story and the great black and white cinematography of the Big Apple just after the end of World War II.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
The Real Scoop Behind “Brother, Can You Spare A Dime?”
Click on the headline to link to a YouTube film clip of Tom Waits performing the classic Great Depression song, Brother, Can You Spare A Dime?.
“Hey, brother (or sister), can you spare a dime?,” followed by “Got an extra cigarette, pal (or gal)?” Ya, Billy Bailey, used-to-be brash corner boy William James Bailey, certainly had the panhandler lingo down, down pat, after only a few days on the bum. Worst though on the bum in his own home town, his ever-loving’ roots, Boston. On the bum this time, this time a real fall and not just some short money, pick up some spare change, free campsite, Volkswagen bus pick-up sharing stews, brews and dope hitchhike road looking for the great blue-pink American West night with some honey, some Angelica honey, bum like a few years back.
Those days he practically made a religion, ya a religion out of living “free,” living out of the knapsack, living under bridge, no sweat, if need be. But those “golden days” dried up a few years back and now here in 1976 he was facing a real skid row choice. How it happened he will get to along the way but first let’s set the parameters of what 1976 panhandling, to put an eloquent name on it for “bumming”, shiftless bumming , looked like and how to survive in the new age of everybody me-ing themselves, even with people who were not on the bum. Christ, lord the times were hard, hard times in old Babylon, no question.
See, a guy, a guy who called himself “Shorty” McGee for obviously physical reasons but who knows what his real name was, maybe he didn’t remember either after all the rum-dum sterno heat years and the endless backsides of skid row haunts, that he had hitched up with for a minute, an overnight minute at the Salvation Harbor Lights Center over in the South End kind of hipped him to the obvious tricks of the new down-at the-heels road. Like putting the two requests together when you were panhandling. See, Shorty said it was all a matter of psychology, of working the crowd, the downtown crowd, the bustling Park Street Station crowd, and the Copley Square sunning themselves crowd just right to get you out of their sights and back to whatever sweet thing they were doing. So you endlessly put the two requests together, time after time after time, and always. And what happened was that when they turned you down for the dough, or maybe took you literally and pieced you off with just a dime, Christ a dime that wouldn’t even buy a cup of joe, could feel good about themselves, if they smoked, smoked cigarettes anyway, by passing you a butt. Billy thought, nice, this Shorty really does have it worked out just about right. Of course dimes and drags were not going to get him out from under, not this time.
Well, rather than leaving the reader out in the dark, Billy Bailey this fair 1976 spring was not just on the bum, but on the lam as well, keeping his head very far down just in case there were some guys who were looking for him, or worst, the cops, in case some irate victim of one of his scams took a notion to “fry his ass.” Of course he was counting on them, those victims, being mainly friends and acquaintances, of not putting “the heat” on him since he had already promised through the grapevine that he would make restitution. But we are getting a little ahead of the story, let’s step back.
The early 1970s were not kind to “free spirits” the previous name for what on this day were “free-loaders” and Billy, well, got behind in his expenses, and his bills, his ever expanding bills. But see the transition from free “s” to free “l” caught him off-guard, moreover he was just then in the throes of a fit of “the world owes me a living,” a serious fit. Why? Well see, he as a pauper son of the desperate working poor, “felt” that since he missed out on the golden age benefits of his youth that he was to make up the difference by putting the “touch” on the richer (not really rich but richer, no question) friends that he had acquired through his doing this and that, mainly high-end drug connections.
The long and short it was that he would “borrow” money off Friend A under some scam pretext of putting it to good use (yes, his good use, including several long airplane fight trips to California and other points west-no more hitchhike roads for this moving up the food chain lad) and then borrow dough off Friend B to cover some of his debt to Friend A. Something like an unconscious classic Ponzi scheme, as it turned out. And then when he got to Friend X or somewhere around there things got way too complicated and he started “kiting” checks, and on and on as far deep into his white collar crime mind a he could think. That could only go on a for a short while and he calculated that "short while" almost to the day when he would have to go “underground” and that day had sprung up a couple of weeks ago.
So it took no accountant or smart-ass attorney to know that dimes and drags were not going to get him back on his feet. Nor many of the schemes that Shorty had outlined over at Harbor Lights as ways to grab quick cash were. These were chicken feed for his needs, even his immediate needs, although some of the scams would fill the bill for a rum-dum or life-long skid row bum. But here is the secret, the deep secret that Billy Bailey held in his heart, after a few nights on bus station benches, cold spring night park benches, a night bout under the Andersen Bridge over by old haunt Harvard Square, and a few nights that he would rather not discuss just in case, he finally figured out, figured out kicking and screaming, that the world did not owe him a living and that if he wanted to survive past thirty he had better get the stardust and grit out of his eyes. But just this minute, just this undercover spring 1976 minute, he needed to work the Commons. “Hey, brother, hey sister, can you spare a dime?” “Pal, have you got an extra cigarette?”
Postscript: Not all wisdom ends happily, and not all good intentions grow to fruition. Yes, Billy paid off his debts to his friends, mostly. However, Billy Bailey was killed while “muling” in a drug war shoot-out in Juarez, Mexico in late 1979.
“Hey, brother (or sister), can you spare a dime?,” followed by “Got an extra cigarette, pal (or gal)?” Ya, Billy Bailey, used-to-be brash corner boy William James Bailey, certainly had the panhandler lingo down, down pat, after only a few days on the bum. Worst though on the bum in his own home town, his ever-loving’ roots, Boston. On the bum this time, this time a real fall and not just some short money, pick up some spare change, free campsite, Volkswagen bus pick-up sharing stews, brews and dope hitchhike road looking for the great blue-pink American West night with some honey, some Angelica honey, bum like a few years back.
Those days he practically made a religion, ya a religion out of living “free,” living out of the knapsack, living under bridge, no sweat, if need be. But those “golden days” dried up a few years back and now here in 1976 he was facing a real skid row choice. How it happened he will get to along the way but first let’s set the parameters of what 1976 panhandling, to put an eloquent name on it for “bumming”, shiftless bumming , looked like and how to survive in the new age of everybody me-ing themselves, even with people who were not on the bum. Christ, lord the times were hard, hard times in old Babylon, no question.
See, a guy, a guy who called himself “Shorty” McGee for obviously physical reasons but who knows what his real name was, maybe he didn’t remember either after all the rum-dum sterno heat years and the endless backsides of skid row haunts, that he had hitched up with for a minute, an overnight minute at the Salvation Harbor Lights Center over in the South End kind of hipped him to the obvious tricks of the new down-at the-heels road. Like putting the two requests together when you were panhandling. See, Shorty said it was all a matter of psychology, of working the crowd, the downtown crowd, the bustling Park Street Station crowd, and the Copley Square sunning themselves crowd just right to get you out of their sights and back to whatever sweet thing they were doing. So you endlessly put the two requests together, time after time after time, and always. And what happened was that when they turned you down for the dough, or maybe took you literally and pieced you off with just a dime, Christ a dime that wouldn’t even buy a cup of joe, could feel good about themselves, if they smoked, smoked cigarettes anyway, by passing you a butt. Billy thought, nice, this Shorty really does have it worked out just about right. Of course dimes and drags were not going to get him out from under, not this time.
Well, rather than leaving the reader out in the dark, Billy Bailey this fair 1976 spring was not just on the bum, but on the lam as well, keeping his head very far down just in case there were some guys who were looking for him, or worst, the cops, in case some irate victim of one of his scams took a notion to “fry his ass.” Of course he was counting on them, those victims, being mainly friends and acquaintances, of not putting “the heat” on him since he had already promised through the grapevine that he would make restitution. But we are getting a little ahead of the story, let’s step back.
The early 1970s were not kind to “free spirits” the previous name for what on this day were “free-loaders” and Billy, well, got behind in his expenses, and his bills, his ever expanding bills. But see the transition from free “s” to free “l” caught him off-guard, moreover he was just then in the throes of a fit of “the world owes me a living,” a serious fit. Why? Well see, he as a pauper son of the desperate working poor, “felt” that since he missed out on the golden age benefits of his youth that he was to make up the difference by putting the “touch” on the richer (not really rich but richer, no question) friends that he had acquired through his doing this and that, mainly high-end drug connections.
The long and short it was that he would “borrow” money off Friend A under some scam pretext of putting it to good use (yes, his good use, including several long airplane fight trips to California and other points west-no more hitchhike roads for this moving up the food chain lad) and then borrow dough off Friend B to cover some of his debt to Friend A. Something like an unconscious classic Ponzi scheme, as it turned out. And then when he got to Friend X or somewhere around there things got way too complicated and he started “kiting” checks, and on and on as far deep into his white collar crime mind a he could think. That could only go on a for a short while and he calculated that "short while" almost to the day when he would have to go “underground” and that day had sprung up a couple of weeks ago.
So it took no accountant or smart-ass attorney to know that dimes and drags were not going to get him back on his feet. Nor many of the schemes that Shorty had outlined over at Harbor Lights as ways to grab quick cash were. These were chicken feed for his needs, even his immediate needs, although some of the scams would fill the bill for a rum-dum or life-long skid row bum. But here is the secret, the deep secret that Billy Bailey held in his heart, after a few nights on bus station benches, cold spring night park benches, a night bout under the Andersen Bridge over by old haunt Harvard Square, and a few nights that he would rather not discuss just in case, he finally figured out, figured out kicking and screaming, that the world did not owe him a living and that if he wanted to survive past thirty he had better get the stardust and grit out of his eyes. But just this minute, just this undercover spring 1976 minute, he needed to work the Commons. “Hey, brother, hey sister, can you spare a dime?” “Pal, have you got an extra cigarette?”
Postscript: Not all wisdom ends happily, and not all good intentions grow to fruition. Yes, Billy paid off his debts to his friends, mostly. However, Billy Bailey was killed while “muling” in a drug war shoot-out in Juarez, Mexico in late 1979.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Defend The Cuban Revolution!! -Defend The Cuban Five -End The Blockade Ahora!
DEFEND THE CUBAN REVOLUTION!!!
COMMENTARY
END THE U.S. BLOCKADE!-U.S. OUT OF GUANTANAMO!
This year marks the 58th anniversary of the Cuban July 26th movement, the 52nd anniversary of the victory of the Cuban Revolution and the 44th anniversary of the execution of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara by the Bolivian Army after the defeat of his guerrilla forces and his capture in godforsaken rural Bolivia. I have reviewed the life of Che elsewhere in this space (see blog, dated July 5, 2006). Thus, it is fitting to remember an event of which he was a central actor. Additionally, the Cuban Revolution stood for my generation, the Generation of '68, and, hopefully, will for later generations as a symbol of revolutionary intransigence against United States imperialism.
Let us be clear about two things. First, this writer has defended the Cuban revolution since its inception; initially under a liberal- democratic premise of the right of nations, especially applicable to small nations pressed up against military forces of the imperialist powers, to self-determination; later under the above-mentioned premise and also that it should be defended on socialist grounds, not my idea of socialism- the Bolshevik, 1917 kind- but as an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist revolution nevertheless. That prospective continues to be this writer’s position today. Secondly, my conception of revolutionary strategy and thus of world politics has for a long time been far removed from Fidel Castro’s (and Che’s) strategy, which emphasized military victory by guerrilla forces in the countryside, rather than my position of mass action by the urban proletariat leading the rural masses. That said, despite those strategic political differences this militant can honor the Cuban revolution as a symbol of a fight that all anti-imperialist militants should defend.
Let me expand on these points, the first point by way of reminiscences. I am old enough to have actually seen Castro’s Rebel Army on television as it triumphantly entered Havana in 1959. Although I was only a teenager at the time and hardly politically sophisticated I, like others of my generation, saw in that ragtag, scruffy group the stuff of romantic revolutionary dreams. I was glad Batista had to flee and that ‘the people’ would rule in Cuba.
Later, in 1960 as the nationalizations occurred in response to American imperialist pressure, I defended them. In fact, as a general proposition I was, hazily and without any particular thought, in favor of nationalizations everywhere. In 1961, despite my then deeply felt affinity for the Kennedys, I was pleased that the counterrevolutionaries were routed at the Bag of Pigs. Increased Soviet aid and involvement in the economic and political infrastructure of beleaguered Cuba? No problem. The Cuban Missile Crisis, however, left me and virtually everyone in the world, shaking in our boots. Frankly, I saw this crisis (after the fact) as a typical for the time Cold War confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union with Cuba as the playground. Not as some independent Cuban ploy. In short, my experiences at that time can be summed up by the slogan- Fair Play for Cuba. So far, a conclusion that a good liberal could espouse as a manifestation of a nation’s, particularly a small nation’s, right to self-determination. It is only later, during the radicalization of the Vietnam War period that I moved beyond that position.
Now to the second point and the hard politics. If any revolution is defined by one person the Cuban revolution can stand as that example. From its inception it was Fidel’s show, for better or worse. The military command, the strategy, the political programs, and the various national and international alliances all filtered through him. On reflection, that points out the basis problem and my major difference with the Fidelistas. And it starts with question of revolutionary strategy. Taking power based on a strategy of guerrilla warfare is fundamentally difference from an urban insurrection led by a workers party (or parties) allied with, as in Cuba, landless peasants and agricultural workers responsible to workers and X (fill in the blank for whatever allies apply in the local situation) councils. And it showed those distortions then and continues to show them as the basis for decision making –top down. It is necessary to move on from there.
Believe me, this writer as well as countless others, all went through our phase of enthusing over the guerrilla road to socialism. But, as the fate of Che and others makes clear, the Cuban victory was the result of exceptional circumstances. Many revolutionaries stumbled over that hard fact and the best, including Che, paid for it with imprisonment or their lives. In short, the Bolshevik, 1917 model still stands up as a damn good model for the way to take power and to try to move on to the road to socialism. Still, although I have made plenty of political mistakes in my life I have never regretted my defense of the Cuban Revolution. And neither should militants today. As Che said- the duty of every revolutionary is to make the revolution- and to defend them too. Enough said. U.S. HANDS OFF CUBA! END THE BLOCKADE! U.S. OUT OF GUANTANAMO!
COMMENTARY
END THE U.S. BLOCKADE!-U.S. OUT OF GUANTANAMO!
This year marks the 58th anniversary of the Cuban July 26th movement, the 52nd anniversary of the victory of the Cuban Revolution and the 44th anniversary of the execution of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara by the Bolivian Army after the defeat of his guerrilla forces and his capture in godforsaken rural Bolivia. I have reviewed the life of Che elsewhere in this space (see blog, dated July 5, 2006). Thus, it is fitting to remember an event of which he was a central actor. Additionally, the Cuban Revolution stood for my generation, the Generation of '68, and, hopefully, will for later generations as a symbol of revolutionary intransigence against United States imperialism.
Let us be clear about two things. First, this writer has defended the Cuban revolution since its inception; initially under a liberal- democratic premise of the right of nations, especially applicable to small nations pressed up against military forces of the imperialist powers, to self-determination; later under the above-mentioned premise and also that it should be defended on socialist grounds, not my idea of socialism- the Bolshevik, 1917 kind- but as an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist revolution nevertheless. That prospective continues to be this writer’s position today. Secondly, my conception of revolutionary strategy and thus of world politics has for a long time been far removed from Fidel Castro’s (and Che’s) strategy, which emphasized military victory by guerrilla forces in the countryside, rather than my position of mass action by the urban proletariat leading the rural masses. That said, despite those strategic political differences this militant can honor the Cuban revolution as a symbol of a fight that all anti-imperialist militants should defend.
Let me expand on these points, the first point by way of reminiscences. I am old enough to have actually seen Castro’s Rebel Army on television as it triumphantly entered Havana in 1959. Although I was only a teenager at the time and hardly politically sophisticated I, like others of my generation, saw in that ragtag, scruffy group the stuff of romantic revolutionary dreams. I was glad Batista had to flee and that ‘the people’ would rule in Cuba.
Later, in 1960 as the nationalizations occurred in response to American imperialist pressure, I defended them. In fact, as a general proposition I was, hazily and without any particular thought, in favor of nationalizations everywhere. In 1961, despite my then deeply felt affinity for the Kennedys, I was pleased that the counterrevolutionaries were routed at the Bag of Pigs. Increased Soviet aid and involvement in the economic and political infrastructure of beleaguered Cuba? No problem. The Cuban Missile Crisis, however, left me and virtually everyone in the world, shaking in our boots. Frankly, I saw this crisis (after the fact) as a typical for the time Cold War confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union with Cuba as the playground. Not as some independent Cuban ploy. In short, my experiences at that time can be summed up by the slogan- Fair Play for Cuba. So far, a conclusion that a good liberal could espouse as a manifestation of a nation’s, particularly a small nation’s, right to self-determination. It is only later, during the radicalization of the Vietnam War period that I moved beyond that position.
Now to the second point and the hard politics. If any revolution is defined by one person the Cuban revolution can stand as that example. From its inception it was Fidel’s show, for better or worse. The military command, the strategy, the political programs, and the various national and international alliances all filtered through him. On reflection, that points out the basis problem and my major difference with the Fidelistas. And it starts with question of revolutionary strategy. Taking power based on a strategy of guerrilla warfare is fundamentally difference from an urban insurrection led by a workers party (or parties) allied with, as in Cuba, landless peasants and agricultural workers responsible to workers and X (fill in the blank for whatever allies apply in the local situation) councils. And it showed those distortions then and continues to show them as the basis for decision making –top down. It is necessary to move on from there.
Believe me, this writer as well as countless others, all went through our phase of enthusing over the guerrilla road to socialism. But, as the fate of Che and others makes clear, the Cuban victory was the result of exceptional circumstances. Many revolutionaries stumbled over that hard fact and the best, including Che, paid for it with imprisonment or their lives. In short, the Bolshevik, 1917 model still stands up as a damn good model for the way to take power and to try to move on to the road to socialism. Still, although I have made plenty of political mistakes in my life I have never regretted my defense of the Cuban Revolution. And neither should militants today. As Che said- the duty of every revolutionary is to make the revolution- and to defend them too. Enough said. U.S. HANDS OFF CUBA! END THE BLOCKADE! U.S. OUT OF GUANTANAMO!
The Latest From "The National Committee to Free the Cuban Five" Website -Free The Five Ahora! -The Defense Of The Cuban Revolution Begins With The Defense Of The Cuban Five
Click on the title to link to the website mentioned in the headline for the latest news and opinion from that site.
Markin comment:
On a day, July 26th, important in the history of the Cuban revolutionary movement it is also important, as always, to remember that the defense of the Cuban revolution here in the United States, the "heart of the beast", starts with the defense of the Cuban Five.
Markin comment:
On a day, July 26th, important in the history of the Cuban revolutionary movement it is also important, as always, to remember that the defense of the Cuban revolution here in the United States, the "heart of the beast", starts with the defense of the Cuban Five.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Out In The 1940s Crime Noir Night, Kind Of-“Undercurrent”-A Film Review
Click on the headline to link ot a Wikipedia entry for the film Undercurrent.
DVD Review
Undercurrent, starring Katherine Hepburn, Robert Taylor, Robert Mitchum, directed by Vincent Minnelli, 1947
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Some, such as the film under review from 1946, Undercurrent, frankly baffles me. A pyscho-drama, no question, a famous director, no question, but also a very non-femme fatale in Kate Hepburn, and a very non-tough guy (street or detective) role for classic 1940s tough guy and a good guy to have at your back, Robert Mitchum.
A little plot look will help explain my bafflement. Robert Taylor, a ruthless, driven high-tech capitalist who made big dough during World War II is also a little mad, well, a lot mad. However he is able to cover that little problem up while courting, well not beautiful, but let’s call her handsome, Kate Hepburn. Seems he needs a trophy wife and Kate fills the bill. And that is where the problems begin because Brother Taylor has a brother whom he is insanely jealous of for the usual Freudian, or pseudo-Freudian, reasons that drive the plot lines of these pycho-dramas. Kate, however, loves the big lug Taylor until he starts going over the edge about his brother (and some other things like a little murder of an employee that goes a long way to allowing him to be that ruthless high-tech capitalist). Of course, as in all such dramas old Robert will get his comeuppance, have no fear.
But where is the noir in this noir? No femme fatale, no tough guy throwing his weight around or tilting at windmills to right the world’s wrongs, no problem that requires quick thinking to right those wrongs. Well when you go on a tear on a subject as I am on crime noir not everything will come up Out Of The Past or The Big Sleep. Not this one anyway.
DVD Review
Undercurrent, starring Katherine Hepburn, Robert Taylor, Robert Mitchum, directed by Vincent Minnelli, 1947
No question I am a film noir, especially a crime film noir, aficionado. Recently I have been on a tear reviewing various crime noir efforts and drawing comparisons between the ones that “speak” to me and those that, perhaps, should have been better left on the cutting room floor. The classics are easy and need no additional comment from me as their plot lines stand on their own merits. Others, because they have a fetching, or wicked, for that matter, femme fatale to muddy the waters also get a pass. Some, such as the film under review from 1946, Undercurrent, frankly baffles me. A pyscho-drama, no question, a famous director, no question, but also a very non-femme fatale in Kate Hepburn, and a very non-tough guy (street or detective) role for classic 1940s tough guy and a good guy to have at your back, Robert Mitchum.
A little plot look will help explain my bafflement. Robert Taylor, a ruthless, driven high-tech capitalist who made big dough during World War II is also a little mad, well, a lot mad. However he is able to cover that little problem up while courting, well not beautiful, but let’s call her handsome, Kate Hepburn. Seems he needs a trophy wife and Kate fills the bill. And that is where the problems begin because Brother Taylor has a brother whom he is insanely jealous of for the usual Freudian, or pseudo-Freudian, reasons that drive the plot lines of these pycho-dramas. Kate, however, loves the big lug Taylor until he starts going over the edge about his brother (and some other things like a little murder of an employee that goes a long way to allowing him to be that ruthless high-tech capitalist). Of course, as in all such dramas old Robert will get his comeuppance, have no fear.
But where is the noir in this noir? No femme fatale, no tough guy throwing his weight around or tilting at windmills to right the world’s wrongs, no problem that requires quick thinking to right those wrongs. Well when you go on a tear on a subject as I am on crime noir not everything will come up Out Of The Past or The Big Sleep. Not this one anyway.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
From The "In Defense Of Marxist" Website Via The "Renegade Eye" Blog-Norwegian massacre: “This is an attack on the Labour Movement” - Labour must respond!-Written by Alan Woods
Norwegian massacre: “This is an attack on the Labour Movement” - Labour must respond!-Written by Alan Woods
Saturday, 23 July 2011
World public opinion has been shocked by the news of the bloody massacre in Norway. At least 91 people have been killed, including 84 members of the Labour Youth Organisation (AUF) in a summer camp.
The AUF summer camp only a few days ago. The massacre began with a bomb blast in Oslo that killed seven people. But the real bloodbath took place a little later on the island of Utøya, where hundreds of young people had gathered for a summer school of the Labour Youth (AUF). The island was given to them by the trade unions of Oslo and is a place of great symbolic importance for the whole labour movement.
“He travelled on the ferry boat from the mainland over to that little inland island posing as a police officer, saying he was there to do research in connection with the bomb blasts,” NRK journalist Ole Torp told the BBC. Another eyewitness explains that he arrived claiming he was a police officer and was there to talk about the bombing in Oslo and when he had gathered enough people he started shooting.
In a horrific moment, young people in bathing costumes were mown down. In scenes of indescribable panic, they jumped into the sea to save themselves and were shot at as they tried to swim away from the scene of carnage. Others cowered behind rocks or hid in caves, terrified, as the gunman proceeded to shoot one defenceless person after another.
The gunman wandered around the island posing as a police officer, calling people forward and then shot them as they emerged from their hiding places. 15-year old Elise saw a police officer and thought she was safe, but then he started shooting. “He first shot people on the island. Afterward he started shooting people in the water,” she said.
Several victims pretended as if they were dead to survive. But after shooting the victims with one gun, the gunman shot them again in the head with a shotgun. The Norwegian press this morning showed pictures of beaches covered with bodies. These were the actions of a cold and calculating killer.
Who is Anders Behring Breivik?
The finger of blame was immediately pointed at al-Qaeda. Who else could it be? The possibility of such attacks by Islamic extremists was always a there, given that Norway has sent troops to Afghanistan, and this is backed by the Norwegian Labour Party and not opposed by its youth organisation. President Obama lost no time in conveying his most sincere sympathy, and making good use of the opportunity to drum up support for continuing the “war on terror”.
Such has been the effect of the propaganda campaign since 9/11 on the public psyche that terrorism is immediately associated with men with a dark complexion dressed like Arabs or Afghans. However, the information subsequently released immediately exploded this theory. It was revealed that the Labour Party Youth (AUF) camp was attacked by someone described as a man with blond hair and of Nordic appearance, dressed in a police uniform. The murderer is neither a Muslim nor a member of al-Qaeda but a member of the Norwegian middle class.
Anders Behring Breivik is a Norwegian petty bourgeois. He went to business school in Norway and runs a small business. He was evidently not short of money, as he bought a farm, on which his small business was run, which had previously been used by elements in the criminal underwold as a marijuana plantation. The plantation was also connected to a famous bank robbery (NOKAS robbery). Probably in preparation for yesterday’s events Breivik bought six tonnes of artificial fertiliser, which is commonly used for home-made bombs, on May 4th, using his farming business as cover.
He is also a right-wing extremist. He was an active member of the racist Fremskrittspartiet, which is currently running at 20% or so in the polls, and their youth organisation, supposedly for 10 years, until 2007. He's an opponent of multi-culturalism and viciously anti-Muslim. He has apparently suggested recreating the US Tea Party in Europe and expressed support for the English Defence League. He wrote things like:
“All hate ideologies ought to be treated the same:
“Islamism has killed 300 million
“Communism has killed 100 million
“Nazism has killed 6-20 million”
He calls former prime minister Gro Harlem Brundlant a "fatherland killer”, for having put forward the idea that anyone who lives in Norway is a Norwegian. He also constantly refers to how “Marxists” supposedly have infiltrated everywhere, including culture, schools and the media.
There can be no doubt that this was a political act. The targets were not haphazard, as is usually the case in attacks by mad people. They were carefully selected for political reasons. It seems likely that the main target was The Labour Norwegian Prime Minister Jan Stoltenberg. Hundreds of young people were awaiting a speech the prime minister was to give there today.
The international media is unanimous in regarding these atrocities as the act of a “mad gunman”. In this way they try to draw attention away from the political content of these events. A madman is not responsible for his actions, which are of a purely random and accidental character. But there was nothing either random or accidental about this.
Norwegian terror “experts” are perplexed at the fact that it was a Norwegian right-wing terrorist that committed the crime and not a Muslim. Some have commented that the Norwegian intelligence services have not given enough attention to the threat of right-wing extremism in the last few years. Did they not know of Breivik’s extreme right wing views?
There are many aspects of this case that are unclear. Did Breivik act alone or was there more than one gunman? The impression was initially given that he acted alone. But there are witnesses saying there was also at least one person without uniform on the island participating in the slaughter. Time will tell. Interestingly, Labour leader Stoltenberg stressed that the police were investigating the possibility of international links.
Labour must act!
The leader of AUF, Eskil Pedersen, held a press conference this morning calling the attack an attack on democracy and said that AUF would continue to stand by its values of anti-racism and for democracy and equality.
Soltenberg, the Prime Minister, obviously shaken by this atrocity, told the television cameras: “This is an attack against the Norwegian labour movement, against the Norwegian Labour Party and its youth organisation.” That is absolutely correct. However, this message was immediately diluted by the BBC News, which said it was an attack “against Norway’s political system and Norway’s values.”
Right wing politicians like Sarkozi and Angela Merkel pander to anti-Muslim sentiments to curry favour with the right wing, as do the press, with people like Rupert Murdoch. They encourage extremist and anti-immigrant elements. In the case of Norway, the Conservative Party is preparing to form a coalition government with Fremskrittspartiet, if the present left-wing coalition is defeated at the next election. It is therefore wrong to suggest any kind of agreement with the right wing bourgeois parties to “defend democracy” against the far right.
The Labour leader, having correctly emphasized that this was an attack against the Labour Movement, then went on to say that the matter should be left in the hands of the police. This is a mistake. The state cannot be relied upon to provide effective defence against the fascists. The state intelligence services have ignored the activities of fascist groups, and a section of the state always has fascist sympathies. Blind belief in the efficacy of the state to protest us can lull us into a false sense of security with fatal results. Let us remember that this assassin was able to commit mass murder because he was dressed as a policeman.
The attack has unleashed an atmosphere of fear that needs to be fought. The Socialist Youth (SU) were forced to cancel their summer camp which was due to take place next week, on the very same island. They have released a statement of solidarity with the AUF, in which their leader, Olav Magnus Linge, put it very well: “for all dead comrades, not a minute's silence, but a life of struggle”.
The attack poses the question of how to defend the Labour Movement and its youth organisations from fascists. The Labour Youth, the Youth Wing of the trade unions, and the Youth of the Socialist Left party should immediately link up to form self-defence committees, linked to the trade unions and the shop stewards committees. Every public activity should be patrolled and defended, and every act of aggression responded to energetically.
The organised working class must learn to depend only on itself. Only the Labour Movement can combat the menace of fascist and right wing groups. But to do so effectively, it must respond to every fascist provocation by mobilizing the full might of the organised working class. The Norwegian Labour Movement is very powerful. It must use its power to teach the fascists a lesson. The Norwegian trade unions should call a 24-hour general strike to protest this attack.
The labour organisations of the world must show solidity by mass action. Commemoration events are now being organised in Sweden. But what is needed is not just an outpouring of mourning but international solidarity action. The unions in other countries should organise protest meetings and demonstrations – starting with Sweden. Let the world see that the international Labour Movement will not be cowed by any fascist aggression, and that we will come out onto the streets to meet any threat to our rights! Let our slogan be: an injury to one is an injury to all.
It is time to wake up! For many years Norway seemed to be an island of peace and tranquility in a turbulent world. Now this comforting illusion has been brutally shattered. The military are now on the streets of the Norwegian capital guarding public buildings, while many families mourn their dead children. The world crisis of capitalism spares no country and no individual. It is, to use the phrase of Lenin, horror without end.
London, 23rd July, 2011
Saturday, 23 July 2011
World public opinion has been shocked by the news of the bloody massacre in Norway. At least 91 people have been killed, including 84 members of the Labour Youth Organisation (AUF) in a summer camp.
The AUF summer camp only a few days ago. The massacre began with a bomb blast in Oslo that killed seven people. But the real bloodbath took place a little later on the island of Utøya, where hundreds of young people had gathered for a summer school of the Labour Youth (AUF). The island was given to them by the trade unions of Oslo and is a place of great symbolic importance for the whole labour movement.
“He travelled on the ferry boat from the mainland over to that little inland island posing as a police officer, saying he was there to do research in connection with the bomb blasts,” NRK journalist Ole Torp told the BBC. Another eyewitness explains that he arrived claiming he was a police officer and was there to talk about the bombing in Oslo and when he had gathered enough people he started shooting.
In a horrific moment, young people in bathing costumes were mown down. In scenes of indescribable panic, they jumped into the sea to save themselves and were shot at as they tried to swim away from the scene of carnage. Others cowered behind rocks or hid in caves, terrified, as the gunman proceeded to shoot one defenceless person after another.
The gunman wandered around the island posing as a police officer, calling people forward and then shot them as they emerged from their hiding places. 15-year old Elise saw a police officer and thought she was safe, but then he started shooting. “He first shot people on the island. Afterward he started shooting people in the water,” she said.
Several victims pretended as if they were dead to survive. But after shooting the victims with one gun, the gunman shot them again in the head with a shotgun. The Norwegian press this morning showed pictures of beaches covered with bodies. These were the actions of a cold and calculating killer.
Who is Anders Behring Breivik?
The finger of blame was immediately pointed at al-Qaeda. Who else could it be? The possibility of such attacks by Islamic extremists was always a there, given that Norway has sent troops to Afghanistan, and this is backed by the Norwegian Labour Party and not opposed by its youth organisation. President Obama lost no time in conveying his most sincere sympathy, and making good use of the opportunity to drum up support for continuing the “war on terror”.
Such has been the effect of the propaganda campaign since 9/11 on the public psyche that terrorism is immediately associated with men with a dark complexion dressed like Arabs or Afghans. However, the information subsequently released immediately exploded this theory. It was revealed that the Labour Party Youth (AUF) camp was attacked by someone described as a man with blond hair and of Nordic appearance, dressed in a police uniform. The murderer is neither a Muslim nor a member of al-Qaeda but a member of the Norwegian middle class.
Anders Behring Breivik is a Norwegian petty bourgeois. He went to business school in Norway and runs a small business. He was evidently not short of money, as he bought a farm, on which his small business was run, which had previously been used by elements in the criminal underwold as a marijuana plantation. The plantation was also connected to a famous bank robbery (NOKAS robbery). Probably in preparation for yesterday’s events Breivik bought six tonnes of artificial fertiliser, which is commonly used for home-made bombs, on May 4th, using his farming business as cover.
He is also a right-wing extremist. He was an active member of the racist Fremskrittspartiet, which is currently running at 20% or so in the polls, and their youth organisation, supposedly for 10 years, until 2007. He's an opponent of multi-culturalism and viciously anti-Muslim. He has apparently suggested recreating the US Tea Party in Europe and expressed support for the English Defence League. He wrote things like:
“All hate ideologies ought to be treated the same:
“Islamism has killed 300 million
“Communism has killed 100 million
“Nazism has killed 6-20 million”
He calls former prime minister Gro Harlem Brundlant a "fatherland killer”, for having put forward the idea that anyone who lives in Norway is a Norwegian. He also constantly refers to how “Marxists” supposedly have infiltrated everywhere, including culture, schools and the media.
There can be no doubt that this was a political act. The targets were not haphazard, as is usually the case in attacks by mad people. They were carefully selected for political reasons. It seems likely that the main target was The Labour Norwegian Prime Minister Jan Stoltenberg. Hundreds of young people were awaiting a speech the prime minister was to give there today.
The international media is unanimous in regarding these atrocities as the act of a “mad gunman”. In this way they try to draw attention away from the political content of these events. A madman is not responsible for his actions, which are of a purely random and accidental character. But there was nothing either random or accidental about this.
Norwegian terror “experts” are perplexed at the fact that it was a Norwegian right-wing terrorist that committed the crime and not a Muslim. Some have commented that the Norwegian intelligence services have not given enough attention to the threat of right-wing extremism in the last few years. Did they not know of Breivik’s extreme right wing views?
There are many aspects of this case that are unclear. Did Breivik act alone or was there more than one gunman? The impression was initially given that he acted alone. But there are witnesses saying there was also at least one person without uniform on the island participating in the slaughter. Time will tell. Interestingly, Labour leader Stoltenberg stressed that the police were investigating the possibility of international links.
Labour must act!
The leader of AUF, Eskil Pedersen, held a press conference this morning calling the attack an attack on democracy and said that AUF would continue to stand by its values of anti-racism and for democracy and equality.
Soltenberg, the Prime Minister, obviously shaken by this atrocity, told the television cameras: “This is an attack against the Norwegian labour movement, against the Norwegian Labour Party and its youth organisation.” That is absolutely correct. However, this message was immediately diluted by the BBC News, which said it was an attack “against Norway’s political system and Norway’s values.”
Right wing politicians like Sarkozi and Angela Merkel pander to anti-Muslim sentiments to curry favour with the right wing, as do the press, with people like Rupert Murdoch. They encourage extremist and anti-immigrant elements. In the case of Norway, the Conservative Party is preparing to form a coalition government with Fremskrittspartiet, if the present left-wing coalition is defeated at the next election. It is therefore wrong to suggest any kind of agreement with the right wing bourgeois parties to “defend democracy” against the far right.
The Labour leader, having correctly emphasized that this was an attack against the Labour Movement, then went on to say that the matter should be left in the hands of the police. This is a mistake. The state cannot be relied upon to provide effective defence against the fascists. The state intelligence services have ignored the activities of fascist groups, and a section of the state always has fascist sympathies. Blind belief in the efficacy of the state to protest us can lull us into a false sense of security with fatal results. Let us remember that this assassin was able to commit mass murder because he was dressed as a policeman.
The attack has unleashed an atmosphere of fear that needs to be fought. The Socialist Youth (SU) were forced to cancel their summer camp which was due to take place next week, on the very same island. They have released a statement of solidarity with the AUF, in which their leader, Olav Magnus Linge, put it very well: “for all dead comrades, not a minute's silence, but a life of struggle”.
The attack poses the question of how to defend the Labour Movement and its youth organisations from fascists. The Labour Youth, the Youth Wing of the trade unions, and the Youth of the Socialist Left party should immediately link up to form self-defence committees, linked to the trade unions and the shop stewards committees. Every public activity should be patrolled and defended, and every act of aggression responded to energetically.
The organised working class must learn to depend only on itself. Only the Labour Movement can combat the menace of fascist and right wing groups. But to do so effectively, it must respond to every fascist provocation by mobilizing the full might of the organised working class. The Norwegian Labour Movement is very powerful. It must use its power to teach the fascists a lesson. The Norwegian trade unions should call a 24-hour general strike to protest this attack.
The labour organisations of the world must show solidity by mass action. Commemoration events are now being organised in Sweden. But what is needed is not just an outpouring of mourning but international solidarity action. The unions in other countries should organise protest meetings and demonstrations – starting with Sweden. Let the world see that the international Labour Movement will not be cowed by any fascist aggression, and that we will come out onto the streets to meet any threat to our rights! Let our slogan be: an injury to one is an injury to all.
It is time to wake up! For many years Norway seemed to be an island of peace and tranquility in a turbulent world. Now this comforting illusion has been brutally shattered. The military are now on the streets of the Norwegian capital guarding public buildings, while many families mourn their dead children. The world crisis of capitalism spares no country and no individual. It is, to use the phrase of Lenin, horror without end.
London, 23rd July, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)