If power makes humans so unhappy and tormented, why so many of them seek nothing but it, at any costs?
You see it in their gaze, that they are their own main tormentors. Compare a picture of young Facebook CEO Zuckerberg, and one of late; compare the gaze.
Bernie never even proposed adding to the platform paper balloting, despite several studies showing that Hillary outperformed polling in the states with computer ballots, when all those systems have been proven to be corruptible and the companies providing them corrupt. He has further marginalized the evidence provided by that movement. That partially erases the main benefit of the campaign, to demonstrate what the rank and file of the party want, especially the younger voters, who are bearing the financial burden of Obamacare and overpriced secondary education and are more aware of the impact of US foreign policy due to less monopolized news consumption.
This charade was predicted by you and many others. I never said he wouldn't endorse Hillary or that he'd lead an autonomous movement in the event he wuz robbed. I think though that those who supported the campaign and became involved in the process have not acted in vain. I can't guarantee that the system won't be endlessly rigged, as Hillary and Obama have rigged the system in other countries, but it's better to struggle than to admit defeat and some struggles can prevail.
Because of the US spending millions of dollars on another country's election, Haiti can't hold a legitimate election because the vast majority of the people opposes the falsely chosen candidate and will take to the streets rather than accept a sham election. However, they have the benefit of a clear majority in agreement. Hillary won the black vote in the US. Nader and others have talked about a left-right alliance and I agree there are areas of agreement on major issues like trade, campaign finance, and war, but the Democratic primary was close enough for Hillary to steal.
Just as Hillary promised opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership during the primaries and caucuses and then claimed victory by defeating that same opposition in the platform committee, Bernie moved to the left on foreign policy during the primaries, and this endorsement indicates the lack of sincerity of those positions.
"The world is now faced with the prospect that insouciant Americans will elect a crazed and incompetent criminal or semi-criminal as their president, a person who has declared the President of Russia to be 'the new Hitler.' The stupid bitch’s statement is a declaration of nuclear war, and this dangerous, reckless, incompetent, careless person has been selected by the Democratic Party as the next POTUS !!!
"The ignorance and stupidity of the American people will destroy the world."
So that's the "progressive" Sanders' choice for Prez.
For calling out this evil bullshit way back, I got censored by two "progressive" websites that I had long published at. American progressives are some of the most clueless yet smug people on earth.
Still, I think the deep state will select Trump, because he's more useful to them. As I wrote last month:
"A Trump presidency will temporarily appease restless, lower class whites, while serving as a magnet for liberal anger. This will buy our ruling class time as they continue to wage war abroad while impoverishing Americans back home. Like Obama, Trump won’t fulfill any of his election promises, and this, too, will be blamed on bipartisan politics."
What ever happens, it won't be the American people who will decide anything.
Lew Rockwell on the new generation of "progressives":
"We are witnessing the least tolerant generation in recent memory. April Kelly-Woessner, a political scientist at Elizabethtown College who has researched the opinions of the millennials, has come up with some revealing findings. If we base how tolerant a person is on how he treats those he disagrees with — an obviously reasonable standard — the millennials fare very poorly.
"Yes, the millennials have great sympathy for the official victim groups whose causes are paraded before them in school and at the movies. That’s no accomplishment since millennials agree with these people. But how do they treat and think about those with whom they disagree? A casual glance at social media, or at leftist outbursts on college campuses, reveals the answer."
Blaming Hitler on the left is not an attempt at honesty. He liked liberals so much he killed them first, and the banks backed him for that purpose. Does Lew Rockwell know about Mussolini? Franco? Suharto? Pinochet? Duvalier? People who worked on Operation Condor are now set up in Honduras.. do they mention that on LewRockwell.com?
Re: Trump: The media is trashing Gen. Michael Flynn for VP because he wants to work with Russia rather than ratchet up with them as Hillary will probably do, and actually fight ISIS rather than the Russian proxy war in Syria. I never thought averting war with Russia would start to be the main issue (as Paul Craig Roberts is saying emphatically). Hillary is countering by floating a general that openly talked about nuclear war with Russia and wants to sign a defense treaty with Israel. Trump's son in law wants Gingrich because he's buddies with Adelson. Donald looks to do his final 'eenie meenie miney mo' within 48 hours.
I'm sure Lew Rockwell knows more about Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, Pinochet and Duvalier than both you and me. Rockwell is 100% against any kind of dictatorship and 100% against state-sponsored war. You should read his articles.
Linh, I mentioned before Nader's left - right coalition - that can also apply to right and left libertarians and anarchists, but if someone smears the left and doesn't report what the corporations are doing now, then that's very convenient for the defense contractors on the ground in Iraq and elsewhere, paramilitaries, etc. The significance of the money flowing through the Clinton Foundation is that they are creating a corporate stateless world regime of defense corporations that are not responsive to democracy that remains from the constitutions. Tax money is divided up by corporations that buy the politicians and prop up any local crook that will kill the union leaders. The only people who report on that are the people who don't condone that sort of thing, and Ludwig von Mises devotees don't appear to fit that description. Ludwig himself know a lot more about Mussolini than he let on.
Hey Ian. I like the idea of working together. As far as voting for her or him, or that other guy, I don't think it makes too much of a difference at our level. This is just a picture of two actors. They've played their roles well for decades, both of 'em.
Also, I've never understood the "rigged voting machines" conundrum. The whole thing is rigged. In other words they don't need to fuck with the code even if you can't see it - you have no real choice to begin with. These are installed just for show and credibility, to keep some aspect "rendered holy" in otherwise spurious referendums.
I wonder though, if newer digital voting was employed with an understanding that people would fly off into the "they're rigged" hyperbole. To do that, people must feel something huge is at stake.
Is something huge at stake this time around or was it last time? We heard the cat calls of a Jurist today, a critical branch of Government (unelected by any measure) that has smoked some of our rights in the past decade, and given advantages to the "barons" - but none of that matters in her latest identity politics addled commentary. They're all fakes.
I'm thinkin' the game is far more subtle. Technology, where it is employed, can be and is "rigged". Most activity or response to content online, is in a sense research - for example. If good information is kept from you or me, it's easy to fool us based on what they already know. This isn't paranoia, this is marketing.
Folks are "voting" in some sense even when they consume pornography. "The machine" is rigged, especially in elections, not just in the way most people are capable of imagining.
Hillary actually said, "When I'm in the White House, you too will have a seat at the table." The crowd cheered. Hillary beamed. Bernie smiled.
Pandering to a stupid domestic audience, both of their speeches made empty promises about making life easier for the little guys and gals. Our world wrecking foreign policy was not mentioned at all.
JB Sr, You are correct in saying that voting machines are but one machine that is rigged, as the Herman/ Chomsky Manufacturing Consent thesis and yours argues.
Democrats have bribed voting machine companies in some elections to defraud the Republicans. In this case, the entire Democratic party establishment was enticed and intimidated to back one candidate so those overseeing the voting machine contracts would all be on one side of a primary.
The British voters have overruled the political establishment in a paper ballot, in a country that has never had electronic machines. The Netherlands has banned them because fraud cannot be eliminated.
On a previous point, Hitler outpolled the communists in 1930 but lost to them in 1928. Stalin sabotaged an alliance of the communists and social democrats against Hitler just as he did in Spain against Franco, isolating the Catalan anarchists from Marxists led by Stalin. German communists that couldn't get out were immediately exterminated, as the Communist Party has been banned by neo-Nazis in Ukraine since the Maidan protests. Those facts don't make it into the version of liberatarian history on LewRockwell.com.
There couldn't be a more utopian system than the one American libertarians have imagined. Its unfeasonableness is matched only by its advocates' smugness.
13 comments:
If power makes humans so unhappy and tormented, why so many of them seek nothing but it, at any costs?
You see it in their gaze, that they are their own main tormentors.
Compare a picture of young Facebook CEO Zuckerberg, and one of late; compare the gaze.
Bernie never even proposed adding to the platform paper balloting, despite several studies showing that Hillary outperformed polling in the states with computer ballots, when all those systems have been proven to be corruptible and the companies providing them corrupt. He has further marginalized the evidence provided by that movement. That partially erases the main benefit of the campaign, to demonstrate what the rank and file of the party want, especially the younger voters, who are bearing the financial burden of Obamacare and overpriced secondary education and are more aware of the impact of US foreign policy due to less monopolized news consumption.
This charade was predicted by you and many others. I never said he wouldn't endorse Hillary or that he'd lead an autonomous movement in the event he wuz robbed. I think though that those who supported the campaign and became involved in the process have not acted in vain. I can't guarantee that the system won't be endlessly rigged, as Hillary and Obama have rigged the system in other countries, but it's better to struggle than to admit defeat and some struggles can prevail.
Because of the US spending millions of dollars on another country's election, Haiti can't hold a legitimate election because the vast majority of the people opposes the falsely chosen candidate and will take to the streets rather than accept a sham election. However, they have the benefit of a clear majority in agreement. Hillary won the black vote in the US. Nader and others have talked about a left-right alliance and I agree there are areas of agreement on major issues like trade, campaign finance, and war, but the Democratic primary was close enough for Hillary to steal.
Just as Hillary promised opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership during the primaries and caucuses and then claimed victory by defeating that same opposition in the platform committee, Bernie moved to the left on foreign policy during the primaries, and this endorsement indicates the lack of sincerity of those positions.
Yo Ian,
Paul Craig Roberts on Hillary Clinton:
"The world is now faced with the prospect that insouciant Americans will elect a crazed and incompetent criminal or semi-criminal as their president, a person who has declared the President of Russia to be 'the new Hitler.' The stupid bitch’s statement is a declaration of nuclear war, and this dangerous, reckless, incompetent, careless person has been selected by the Democratic Party as the next POTUS !!!
"The ignorance and stupidity of the American people will destroy the world."
So that's the "progressive" Sanders' choice for Prez.
For calling out this evil bullshit way back, I got censored by two "progressive" websites that I had long published at. American progressives are some of the most clueless yet smug people on earth.
Still, I think the deep state will select Trump, because he's more useful to them. As I wrote last month:
"A Trump presidency will temporarily appease restless, lower class whites, while serving as a magnet for liberal anger. This will buy our ruling class time as they continue to wage war abroad while impoverishing Americans back home. Like Obama, Trump won’t fulfill any of his election promises, and this, too, will be blamed on bipartisan politics."
What ever happens, it won't be the American people who will decide anything.
Linh
Lew Rockwell on the new generation of "progressives":
"We are witnessing the least tolerant generation in recent memory. April Kelly-Woessner, a political scientist at Elizabethtown College who has researched the opinions of the millennials, has come up with some revealing findings. If we base how tolerant a person is on how he treats those he disagrees with — an obviously reasonable standard — the millennials fare very poorly.
"Yes, the millennials have great sympathy for the official victim groups whose causes are paraded before them in school and at the movies. That’s no accomplishment since millennials agree with these people. But how do they treat and think about those with whom they disagree? A casual glance at social media, or at leftist outbursts on college campuses, reveals the answer."
Blaming Hitler on the left is not an attempt at honesty. He liked liberals so much he killed them first, and the banks backed him for that purpose. Does Lew Rockwell know about Mussolini? Franco? Suharto? Pinochet? Duvalier? People who worked on Operation Condor are now set up in Honduras.. do they mention that on LewRockwell.com?
Re: Trump: The media is trashing Gen. Michael Flynn for VP because he wants to work with Russia rather than ratchet up with them as Hillary will probably do, and actually fight ISIS rather than the Russian proxy war in Syria. I never thought averting war with Russia would start to be the main issue (as Paul Craig Roberts is saying emphatically). Hillary is countering by floating a general that openly talked about nuclear war with Russia and wants to sign a defense treaty with Israel. Trump's son in law wants Gingrich because he's buddies with Adelson. Donald looks to do his final 'eenie meenie miney mo' within 48 hours.
Yo Ian,
I'm sure Lew Rockwell knows more about Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, Pinochet and Duvalier than both you and me. Rockwell is 100% against any kind of dictatorship and 100% against state-sponsored war. You should read his articles.
Linh
Linh, I mentioned before Nader's left - right coalition - that can also apply to right and left libertarians and anarchists, but if someone smears the left and doesn't report what the corporations are doing now, then that's very convenient for the defense contractors on the ground in Iraq and elsewhere, paramilitaries, etc. The significance of the money flowing through the Clinton Foundation is that they are creating a corporate stateless world regime of defense corporations that are not responsive to democracy that remains from the constitutions. Tax money is divided up by corporations that buy the politicians and prop up any local crook that will kill the union leaders. The only people who report on that are the people who don't condone that sort of thing, and Ludwig von Mises devotees don't appear to fit that description. Ludwig himself know a lot more about Mussolini than he let on.
.. which is all the more reason why they should read you on those sites Linh..
Hey Ian. I like the idea of working together. As far as voting for her or him, or that other guy, I don't think it makes too much of a difference at our level. This is just a picture of two actors. They've played their roles well for decades, both of 'em.
Also, I've never understood the "rigged voting machines" conundrum. The whole thing is rigged. In other words they don't need to fuck with the code even if you can't see it - you have no real choice to begin with. These are installed just for show and credibility, to keep some aspect "rendered holy" in otherwise spurious referendums.
I wonder though, if newer digital voting was employed with an understanding that people would fly off into the "they're rigged" hyperbole. To do that, people must feel something huge is at stake.
Is something huge at stake this time around or was it last time? We heard the cat calls of a Jurist today, a critical branch of Government (unelected by any measure) that has smoked some of our rights in the past decade, and given advantages to the "barons" - but none of that matters in her latest identity politics addled commentary. They're all fakes.
I'm thinkin' the game is far more subtle. Technology, where it is employed, can be and is "rigged". Most activity or response to content online, is in a sense research - for example. If good information is kept from you or me, it's easy to fool us based on what they already know. This isn't paranoia, this is marketing.
Folks are "voting" in some sense even when they consume pornography. "The machine" is rigged, especially in elections, not just in the way most people are capable of imagining.
Hi, Linh. I just thought thought of a caption for the photo. "His master's voice."
Hi Linda,
Hillary actually said, "When I'm in the White House, you too will have a seat at the table." The crowd cheered. Hillary beamed. Bernie smiled.
Pandering to a stupid domestic audience, both of their speeches made empty promises about making life easier for the little guys and gals. Our world wrecking foreign policy was not mentioned at all.
Linh
JB Sr, You are correct in saying that voting machines are but one machine that is rigged, as the Herman/ Chomsky Manufacturing Consent thesis and yours argues.
Democrats have bribed voting machine companies in some elections to defraud the Republicans. In this case, the entire Democratic party establishment was enticed and intimidated to back one candidate so those overseeing the voting machine contracts would all be on one side of a primary.
The British voters have overruled the political establishment in a paper ballot, in a country that has never had electronic machines. The Netherlands has banned them because fraud cannot be eliminated.
On a previous point, Hitler outpolled the communists in 1930 but lost to them in 1928. Stalin sabotaged an alliance of the communists and social democrats against Hitler just as he did in Spain against Franco, isolating the Catalan anarchists from Marxists led by Stalin. German communists that couldn't get out were immediately exterminated, as the Communist Party has been banned by neo-Nazis in Ukraine since the Maidan protests. Those facts don't make it into the version of liberatarian history on LewRockwell.com.
There couldn't be a more utopian system than the one American libertarians have imagined. Its unfeasonableness is matched only by its advocates' smugness.
Post a Comment