Thoughts on the US 2020 election

 

Clearly Trump and his administration must be removed from office for their incompetence on covid19, nepotism, the appointments of an army of fanatics and libertines to executive  and judicial offices, abuses of power, corruption, the massive transfer of wealth from ordinary people to the obscenely rich under the Cares Act, the emboldening Neo-Nazis and white supremacists, the persecution of Muslims, the failure to address murder and brutality being committed by the police, belligerent threats of annihilation against other nations, the failure to address student debt, pulling out of the Iran nuclear treaty, weakening of regulation on destruction of the environment, withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate, to name a few reasons.

That being said, unlike the last umpteen administrations, both Republican and Democrat, Trump did not start any new wars and was in fact against more war hence his fall-out with John Bolton. We can fully expect a resumption of US imperialism under the Democrats which will of course be enthusiastically supported by Republicans, in congress at least. There will be no universal healthcare system despite the country being ravaged by covid19. There will be more deregulation of corporate activities from finance to pollution, leading to another and possibly terminal financial crisis and another 8 years of failure to address the burgeoning climate crisis which threatens to end civilisation as we know it. We can also expect the continual ratcheting up of authoritarianism as the US population rebels more and more against their appalling economic malaise at the hands of the corporate elite

Americans seem to like to think in terms of hope, but the reality is that hope is a luxury they can no longer afford. If they do not overthrow the corporate state and radically address the inequalities in healthcare, education, living conditions, working conditions, wealth, political influence, then they are doomed to a societal death spiral accelerated by evermore frequent appointments of fanatics and psychopaths to the Whitehouse, leaders who will make us long for Trump again, the way we longed for Bush again under Trump. These ruthless demagogues will have at their disposal not only the police and military forces of state but an ever-growing movement of angry racist hyper-masculine militias eager to express their discontent with LGTBQs, ethnic minorities, liberals and a laundry list of groups of people they hate, through barrels of their Glocks and AR-15s. Let's not forget of course the increasingly violent counter-movement from the left namely Antifa, who will do nothing to protect American society, but only to contribute to the misery, further enrage the already disenfranchised and grease the slide into anomie and civil collapse.

We in the UK are not merely distant observers, we already suffer many of the symptoms of the corporate-capitalist domination we see writ large in the US, and we too, much like Canada, will follow the US down the same drain hole. Furthermore, the collapse of the US could see nuclear weapons come under the control of some of the most frightening and deluded fanatics, both religious and non-religious, in the world.

There is little to celebrate from this election but the temporary removal of one of America's worst. The descent into destruction nonetheless proceeds unobstructed.

To mask or not to mask, that is the question

I was pretty insensed when I read Martha Gill's blog article, "Anonymous have been exposed as hypocrites. Watch them try to wriggle out of it", via The Telegraph website today. It was a dreadful attempt to pick any little hole possible with the movement by arguing that anons buying Fawksian masks to attend protests somehow contributes to misery in the 3rd world. I immediately responded in the comments section below her article:

"Slimey establishment spin from the Teleguff. What a surprise. Interestingly boycotting these factories would make these people considerably worse off. The right thing to do is to support their fight for better conditions. Furthermore it is establishment corporations in the West keeping these third world workers so oppressed. Establishment corporations that the Telegraph supports and receives advertising revenues from and whom pay Martha for her 'journalism'. But you wont read that in the Telegraph. Wriggle out of that Martha! Frankly you disgust me"

Martha could have done a little investigation into how Western corporations lobbying politicians put in place the kinds of international trade agreements that perpetuate and exploit the poverty and hardships of people living in the third world, for profit. She could have gone further to point out how these same corporations are driving down working conditions and dismantling the welfare state in the UK to create worker insecurity thus enabling corporations to stagnate workers wages against a back drop of inflation, effectively meaning wage cuts. All the while corporate executives and shareholders are getting fatter and richer. She could have talked about how Western corporations are using 3rd world workers as wage 'competition' against UK workers, putting many workers out of work or pushing them into zero hour contracts. But no, she didn't do this. She managed to spin anonymous, perhaps many unwittingly, keeping third world workers in work, into some kind of story about anonymous perpetuating their hardships. That takes at least one of two things; an unacceptable degree of ignorance for a journalist and a calculated cynical establishment hit on a people's movement.

Such smears will be little surprise to anons of course, having watched the media go to town on the likes of Bradley Manning and Julian Assange in recent years. Her article does however illustrate establishment ideology at work beautifully. They will try to find any little thing they can to bring down people's movements for justice. No matter how flawed their argument is, it doesn't matter. They're the establishment media. They decide what people should believe.

Martha very likely considers herself an independent minded journalist. What she almost certainly doesn't consider is that she has grown up in the downpour of establishment propaganda, as did her parents, 'educated' in the establishment run/controlled education/indoctrination system, selected by an editor because of her views, who himself/herself was selected for their views by the establishment owners/executives. This is how the hierarchy conspires to narrow the range of views presented to the public. This is totalitarianism in action. Martha will be completely unable to see it or herself for what is/she is. Nonetheless she is a tool of corporate/fascist totalitarianism.

One thing this whole issue does however do is make the waters of boycotting unethical businesses a little muddy. There are times when boycotting is the right thing to do, but this would not be one of them. Boycotting Israeli products for instance is a good idea as this puts economic pressure on Israel to end it's vile and murderous oppression of Palestinians. So what is the defining criteria for ethical boycotting? Well Israel is a prosperous state, and no small part due to its occupation of other people's territories, so a boycott is unlikely to put Israeli workers into the kind of abject poverty being inflicted upon Palestinians, whereas profits will be hurt. So we have to think about who we are helping and who we are hurting, and evaluate each case on its merits. I wish I could be more cut and dry, but this is the best I can come up with for now. I will be interested to hear your views on the matter, so please comment below.

So what of the mask? Is it a good idea to where the mask? Author and former war correspondent Chris Hedges argues that it isn't [1]. I agree mostly with Chris's point that hiding behind a mask of some kind is a gift to the establishment. The reason being that the sleeping masses will see this veil as the mark of criminality rather than legitimacy. If you are not a criminal then why are you hiding your identity? I know, I know, it's a horribly flawed rationale, but that is where they are at, and if we want to win them over we ought to avoid alienating them. That aside I do think that the Fawkesian mask carries with it tremendously important symbolism and of course a novel visual tool for drawing attention to the movement. I can't and don't want to tell others how to protest or dress but I can tell you what I will do and why I will do it and hope that others see what I perceive as the wisdom of it. I don't want to hide. I am happy for people to see my face when protesting. Why shouldn't I show my face? I'm proud to be standing for a cause. I will however continue to carry the mask and wear it for brief periods because of its symbolism and power to draw attention. But I will lift the mask from now on to talk to passers by who express an interest. This is just the same as taking off your sun glasses when talking to someone. Standing in front of someone with a mask covering your identity whilst talking to them suggests that you do not trust them, whether true or not, and that is not a smart way to go about bringing them on board. I want to meet them face to face. I want to smile at them and win them over with my humanity and my argument, and the mask can be a tremendous barrier to that. So if I had any advice to give on the matter I would say use the mask wisely and thoughtfully. Don't let it be your down fall.

References/Citations
[1] Chris Hedges and Occupy Debate "Black Bloc" tactics, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SoXWuQPrrI

Article short URL: http://tinyurl.com/phcmms6

National Service legislation for 18-25 year olds in progress

 A legislative bill to force national service on 18 to 25 year olds is currently making its way along the legislative conveyor belt in UK Parliament. The bill, titled 'National Service Bill 2013-14'[1], making it an offence to have reached the age of 26 without having performed national service, currently at the committee stage, will force young people to serve the armed forces or one of a number of other activities. Whether these alternate activities could be chosen from by young people in service is not defined suggesting that young people might be able to specify a preference but with government ultimately deciding the nature of their service for them. This leaves open the possibility of unofficial allocation of service by social class, school history or other capricious allocations.

The bill, sponsored by Conservative MP Philip Hollobone (Kettering), contains provisions for the following service content:

• forced re-education for young people who have not attained qualification in mathematics or English reading/writing
• a forced physical fitness regime, personal appearance and discipline
• life skills (cooking and so forth) and time keeping

This is not the complete list. The provisions also include what are likely to be regarded as socially beneficial elements.

The duration of service proposed is for one year for which young people on the program will be paid at the national minimum wage rate. Young people with severe physical or mental disabilities will be exempt from the program.

No official rationale for the bill is presented but it is not hard to see what it is trying to achieve. Governments have regularly created schemes for reducing unemployment figures without creating new employment. However it has been a long time since national service was in force suggesting that other motives may also be at work. The economic situation has certainly not improved for the majority of people in the country, with young people being worst affected, the government's unwillingness to tackle the big banks on activities that led to the 2008 crash, the shenanigans that have left the majority with increased work loads and pressure for the same pay, the economy is set to continue having problems and perhaps crash again. The bankers and corporate CEOs will not have missed the uprisings in Greece, Spain and elsewhere, and will be keen to see rebellion against their policies contained or stamped out. A national service program would indeed reduce the number of people with time on their hands who might be prepared to protest whilst simultaneously creating extra forces for controlling outrage and dissent by those worst hit.

If you have concerns about this bill then please express your concerns to your MP, whose contact details and email address can be found at the 'find your MP' page on the Parliament website. Additionally you may wish to share this article with friends and family in order to spread awareness since the establishment media are not so far covering this bill.

 

References

[1] National Service Bill 2013-14, http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/nationalservice.html

--------------------------------
Edit (13/09/2013):  I should have noted that this is a private members' bill, and as such has a lower likelihood of becoming law than a bill introduced by a minister.

The Tower of Babel

There is a tale told in the Bible about something called the Tower of Babel. The story goes that men tried to build a tower to reach the place of God, and God brought down the tower and scrambled the languages of men so that they could not collaborate in such a plan again, or so he thought...

A tower is a structure, constructed from substructures and layers. It is hierarchical in construction, and it is this that we should be looking for if we want to unveil 'T2'. Hierachy is everywhere in human society today. Contrary to common belief it is not necessarily a natural formation in human gatherings. Many ancient and even remote modern cultures are virtually structureless. In the Western World, we see towers reaching to the sky all around us but most of the time fail to see that they are merely substructures. What separates us is an idea that gained footing before the Romans; that depriving other sentient beings of life and liberty equals good profit.

The McDonalds lettuce washer reports to the floor manager. The floor mananger reports to the site franchise manager. The site franchise manager reports to the regional franchise manager. The regional franchise manager reports to the franchise general manager. The franchise general manager reports to the board of directors. The board of directors reports to the shareholders. The shareholding corporation market subsidiaries manager reports to the conglomerate management. The conglomerate management reports to the conglomerate board of directors. The conglomerate board of directors reports to the conglomerate shareholders. The conglomerate shareholders give 'donations' to the campaigns of politicians who will best represent them, and maybe arrange for the other politicians interested in their line of business other things to worry about, like where their children are right now, whether will they be embroiled in a sex scandal in the morning, or perhaps whether they will have an unfortunate 'accident' in their car on the way home.

Here we have 9 tiers of commercial hierachy, and a fairly typical one too. Each tier coercing the tier below, usually with the threat of losing their job for more mundane matters..., and ensuring their complicity and compliance in whatever agenda the tier above is operating.

So up there amongst the gods, we have military moguls who do so well out of death by metal and other forms of chemistry, banking moguls who own most of the planet, oil moguls who are doing so well from poisoning us all to death, the Biotech moguls who are doing so well out of experimenting on human beings and engineering the seeds of life to replace us. Shamelessly quoting from the film Contact (though perhaps not a good choice here) "are these the people you want talking to your god for you?".

God, or nature, it seems is poised to reply to these men, and in fact to all of us. Unfortunately the tower, now on the verge of collapse, is going to hurt and kill a lot of people as it crumbles down on top of its populations. The tower has suffered a few minor quakes in recent years, and all indepentent economists are telling us that they were merely preludes to the grand finale.

I'm just wondering though, are you still holding the tower? Are you still passing up more support? Do you really have to keep doing that? Humans did just fine living off the land before they started building towers. Are you living off the land or are you on the tower?