“I am quite ready to admit that the word Fascism has been used very loosely. Sometimes we call a man a Fascist simply because we dislike him, for one reason or another. And so I’ll try to be pretty literal in outlining some of the evidence which I see as the actual danger of Fascism in America. First of all, we need a definition. Fascism is a dictatorship from the extreme Right, or to put it a little more closely into our local idiom, a government which is run by a small group of large industrialists and financial lords…. Even in the case of Hitler, many shrewd observers feel that he is no more than a front man and that his power is derived from the large munitions and steel barons of Germany… Now one of the first steps which Fascism must take in any land in order to capture power is to disrupt and destroy the labor movement…. I think it is not unfair to say that any business in America or public leader, who goes out to break unions, is laying the foundations for Fascism.”—Heywood Broun [1888-1939, journalist]
“Lots of things can happen inside of people when they are unemployed or hungry. The become frightened, angry, desperate, confused. Many, in their misery, seek to find somebody to blame. They look for a scapegoat as a way out. Fascism is always ready to provide one. In its bid for power, it is ready to drive wedges that will disunite the people and weaken the nation. It supplies the scapegoat - Catholics, Jews, Negroes, labor unions, big business - any scapegoat upon which the insecure and unemployed can be brought to pin the blame for their misfortune.”—Army Talk Orientation Fact Sheet 64, War Department, 24 March 1945
“Why Fascists Are Anti-Union.
Deprived of their unions, the working people could be driven to work longer and harder for less money, so that those who subsidized and ran fascism could grow richer. By wiping out all internal competition - especially the small and medium-sized business firms - profits were increased still higher for the handful on top. In some cases the fascists then gobbled control of the top corporations. The living standards of the masses of the people declined, of course. As they earned less and less, they were able to buy less and less of the goods they produced….”—Army Talk Orientation Fact Sheet 64, War Department, 24 March 1945
“Fascism came to power in Germany, Italy and Japan at a time of social and economic unrest. A small group of men, supported in secret by powerful financial and military interests, convinced enough insecure people that fascism would give them the things they wanted…
At the very time that the fascists proclaimed that their party was the party of the “average citizen,” they were in the pay of certain big industrialists and financiers who wanted to run the people with an iron hand.
The fascists promised everything to everyone: They would make the poor rich and the rich richer. To the farmers, the fascists promised land through elimination of large estates. To the workers they promised elimination of unemployment - jobs for all at high wages. To the small business men they promised more customers and profits through the elimination of large business enterprises. To big business men and industrialists they secretly promised greater security and profits through the elimination of small business competitors and trade unions and the crushing of socialists and communists. To the whole nation they promised glory and wealth by conquest. They asserted it was their right, as a “superior people,” to rule the world.”—Army Talk Orientation Fact Sheet 64, War Department, 24 March 1945
“Fascism is a way to run a country - it’s the way Italy was run, and the way Germany and Japan are run. Fascism is the precise opposite of democracy. The people run democratic governments, but fascist governments run the people. Fascism is government by the few and for the few. The objective is seizure and control of economic, political, social, and cultural life of the state.”—Army Talk Orientation Fact Sheet 64, War Department, 24 March 1945
“Any fascist attempt to gain power in American would not use the exact Hitler pattern. It would work under the guise of “super-patriotism” and “super-Americanism.” Fascist leaders are neither stupid nor naive. They know that they must hand out a line that “sells.” Huey Long is said to have remarked that if fascism came to America, it would be on a program of “Americanism.”—Army Talk Orientation Fact Sheet 64, War Department, 24 March 1945
As I search deeper and deeper,read more and more first person accounts of life and events of those days, some reflective pieces written shortly after, and look in all sorts of different directions [journals, news analysis, stories, art, critical analysis, statistics and government documents], it looks more and more like we contributed to the actual start of WWI and certainly, through action and inaction combined, caused the troubles after that led, inevitably, to the rise of Hitler and Stalin. We were not alone, obviously, but we like to come off like we solved all the problems, when in fact it looks like many of our businesses and major economic players actually worked both sides and made money by resisting American involvement, stalling it even once it started, and by maneuvering circumstances after so as to maintain the businesses and their economic prowess, even though we put our own men at risk and into the jaws of death during that war.
Then we come to the “red scare” which we helped create and make real. The US had troops in Russia, in two places, and used our influence and money to try to kill off Lenin and his leadership team [perhaps with some justice as time played things out], but we contributed to his paranoia and the paranoia that followed with the mass-murderer Stalin.
Then we come to WWII, and the rise of Hitler. We do not speak of Jewish collaboration within many countries and cities to send lower income and “less useful” Jews to the Nazis, and to arrange transport of others out of the Axis powers and regions of control. There are numerous arguments and justifications on two sides of this reasoning and more, but here we see collusion, and it gets worse, because our own major financial moguls, the mutli-trillionaires and billionaires who own everything, actually supported fascism and threw tons of cash at Mussolini and then at Hitler. It’s one of the reasons so many op/ed pieces in the US were pro-fascism until Pearl Harbor. These men/families owned the newspapers, magazines, and radio, much like today, so the message went out. These same business interests, again, financing and supplying all sides, helped Hitler and Mussolini believe they had support for their policies [and Hitler’s rise to power, through various events following WWI and some serious media and financially related issues also built through these men/families who run America]. Again, we were not alone, but we were part of the problem, something we never talk about in schools, in society, or in any conversation, and to mention something like this, to even question the standard responses and stock textbook answers gets someone labeled as un-American or a traitor.
In WWII, we lost more men, more families deeply affected, and the second major genocide of the century [more to come later]. More soldiers died, more Americans all over the place killed and suffering, millions dead all over Europe and Asia, and our financial kingpins at the center of it all, not getting even slightly bloody, even though after and during both wars they were being investigated via Congress and the Senate [places they did not yet completely control, unlike today].
It poses a question: if major US financial interests contributed to the causes and poor truth-sharing related to WWI, stalled American involvement for their own profit, actually produced faulty equipment, bullets and more in order to stall our engagement and later to prolong the war, and then contributed to the growth and expansion of fascism [in order to reduce unions, eliminate the power of labor, and reinforce business interests and ownership, all in the name of improving government performance - marvelous propaganda] and garner greater control of more money and manufacturing interests, then stalled our entrance into WWII as they pocketed more money, yet again playing all sides off against each other and selling on all angles, then what price have they paid? How are they to be held accountable for the tens of thousands of American deaths, the deaths of so many soldiers and sailors, and potentially the deaths of everyone else in both wars? Why do we follow the party line, the one fed to us by the same textbook companies they own and the same politicians and news agencies they own? When will we seek and probe for ourselves, get out from behind our technological toys and distractions and stand up to these powers? Can we?
“A whole generation has been spent in whitewashing Wall Street, gilding the name of Morgan. So restored to public favor have both become that they suffered no ill effects whatever in 1946 when the Department of Justice instituted an investigation which produced the evidence that six most powerful banking groups of the nation, headed by Morgan, Stanley & Company, hold a monopoly on the nation’s commerce, manipulate gigantic corporations, railroads, utilities, and banks, and so completely dominate big industry that the term ‘free enterprise’ - which was also a semantic trick to take the curse off the ill-fated term ‘capitalism’ after the breakdown of 1929 - could be come the homeric laugh of the century.”—George Seldes , and it’s amazing that the Recession of 2007 [which still holds sway today] was caused by greed and Wall Street, these same people who do business on both sides of conflicts and whose interest is profit before anything, came through the terror unscathed and actually stronger and more centralized than ever, even recommending to the political powers that they knew better how to solve the problem they created. Wow! Talk about wolves running the henhouse, here it is. They caused the downfall, told the politicians how to fix it on their terms, and then walked away clean and raking on the cash and slurping up the failed banks and more, deeply solidifying their powerbase. No one questions them. They are literally the Wizards of Oz…
“Only the older generation will remember the ogres of their time: old John D. Rockefeller, the many who had trimmed widows and orphans out of millions and whose armed forces shot down his workers at Ludlow, Colorado; and John Pierpont Morgan, whose name was used as a synonym for Wall Street and the love of money which is the root of all evil.”—George Seldes 
“The greatest calamity that can befall people is not that they should be born blind, but rather that they should have eyes and yet fail to see.”—Helen Keller [and she would have a few terse words for us today]
I recognize the balancing act played by unions in their attempts to make working conditions safer, to allow for the appropriate and livable wages for workers, and to provide avenues towards transparency in corporate finance and retirement benefits for workers. Today in America, if you say you support these ideas, you are called a socialist or communist. Interesting…
If we take a supreme example, the one most often coined in the US, the Nazis and Adolf Hitler, well, Hitler was bought and paid for on his way to the Chancellorship, and industrialists and bankers [in Germany, Britain, and the US] funded his rise to power and supported his propaganda [where he said he was all for workers, but really squashed them and either removed, arrested, or “disappeared” union leaders and put his own select folks in charge] and drive towards anti-union activities. In essence, he said one thing and did another - I know you are shocked by this, but it rarely, if ever, gets mentioned here. So, socialism, well, in this form, not a worker-friendly environment, although there were plenty of jobs in the military. So, poor citizens of Germany had jobs, but menial ones or ones in the military - servitude, but apparently happy in their servitude because of the heightened nationalism and patriotism.
Communism… Well, our greatest fear and the enemy #1 was the Soviet Union and the Leninists. Okay, here we have another problem. As much as the Soviet propaganda said “Workers of the world unite,” and “We are the workers…” this was just propaganda. When the communist emigres, Lenin foremost among them, arrived in Russia, they abandoned those workers and citizens in need [when the cold and starvation hit places like Petrograd] and went to live warm and safe in Moscow. When riots and strikes occurred in the starving and freezing portions, well, the workers and families were arrested or shot. These shootings and “managing” of strikers and union-like activities continued well into the 70s with several incidents of workers being executed never reaching the press in the West. So, for a s much as the Soviet Union proclaimed it was pro-worker, it was a slave driver, and people learned, from many of these actions and reactions by the state, to keep quiet and just work and live.
Now we come to the so-called “free market” system in which we live. When over 90% of the major businesses, banks, and Wall Street interests are owned by about .05% of the citizens [a small and powerful group who own media corporations as well], and drive the political and social fabric, always hiding the truth of their control from us as best they can, working and playing both sides off against the uninformed public [in the past they supplied the Germans in WWII and WWI, and forced political issues against Bolshevism as the key to life, well, the key to their “free market” existence] to maintain and expand their control. The supposed “free market” exists, if only slightly, among the very small businesses perhaps raking in a few hundred thousand dollars in profits, the little guy [who thinks he or she is big], and is always at risk [if the big guys decide they want a piece]. So, it is a tightly limited and narrowly controlled “market” and there is nothing really “free” about it. It is a media and political selling point for these vested and hidden interests because they want us ignorant and stupid, lacking knowledge and vision, amused by our toys and unable to really delve and question. It is a form of propaganda like the ones listed above.
Where do the workers, the ones who keep the machines rolling and the system functional, get some rights, privileges and opportunities? There is so much anti-union rhetoric in the political and media spectra these days, it’s just tough to find safe harbor and a safe ground [we could all be working at places like Walmart with the same workers’ rights - virtually none, scraping by and suffering through existence unto death].
First, it is obvious that no two Tea Party websites are the same, and this carries forward to no two states Tea Party systems/leadership/beliefs are the same. It is a very regionalized almost “cell-like” activity and organization that localizes topics. However, there are some generic beliefs and statutes that do hold true. Oh, it’s worth noting that most of these feed on fear and individual needs [I have this sense that most Americans are essentially civilized, caring people, but in certain circumstances we allow fear and loathing to take control and become selfish asses - this allows fear and hate to rule and organizations like this to frolic and expand]. The larger centerpieces for this movement post the following:
This from Teaparty.org…
1. Illegal aliens are here illegally. 2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable. 3. A strong military is essential. 4. Special interests must be eliminated. 5. Gun ownership is sacred. 6. Government must be downsized. 7. The national budget must be balanced. 8. Deficit spending must end. 9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal. 10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must. 11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory. 12. Political offices must be available to average citizens. 13. Intrusive government must be stopped. 14. English as our core language is required. 15. Traditional family values are encouraged.
And… it claims that Democrats, Republicans and Libertarians all, at various points, agree with these precepts.
Let’s look at these.
1. Well, if we really go back, only Native-Americans are actually legal and our country was founded on immigration and on the basis of providing a haven from tyranny for those seeking this nebulous freedom American represents. Our forefathers, those founding fathers, said this in no uncertain terms. At various points in our history, various immigrants have been blamed for the troubles caused by industrialists, politicians and wars: Catholics, Irish, Eastern Europeans… So, today it is people who have a slightly different color from the standard white fair.
2. This is a nice idea, but much of the support for these organizations comes either from the NAM or from organizations and people in high positions in and around the NAM. Since the major banking and industrial powers want us to be more like India [less government restrictions on environmental issues and workers’ rights], this would certainly boost the pro-domestic job rates, at less than livable wages and lifestyles [no health care, retirement benefits…]. We can have it, just not at minimum wage.
3. Well, this reinforces the military-industrial complex that many, from Washington, in his way, to Eisenhower warned us about, and now we have bases all around the world so the sun never sets on the American military bases and presence. We use over $700 billion in taxes on the military per year, more than the next 20 countries or so combined, most of whom are allies [even China spends so much less than us]. Please consider that taxes pay the military budget, and the military industries are used to carte blanche, and so this feeds the system and the unrestricted budget acquisitions they are used to [even as George W. Bush tried to trim the military, he spent radically in other areas]. I would reference Maj. General Smedley Butler’s comments and writings about the uses of the US military and its wealth and manpower for the profit of American businesses and George Seldes’ reports of government documents showing the treasonous acts of corporations like Standard Oli, Bausch and Lomb, JP Morgan, General Motors, Bethlehem Steel and several other companies [things rarely reported because they also, in combination with their related interests, control the television, newspaper and magazines in the country so it never gets reported in the so-called mainstream press. So taxes pay this, it is almost always increasing, and so…
4. This is nebulous… What special interests? Unions? Workers’ Groups? Bankers? Industrialists? It doesn’t say. In the past, the Tea Party and the candidates it supports [across numerous parties - you see this below] are anti-union, anti-labor… This is in keeping with a long-standing position of the NAM and the major banking and industrial interests in the US who have tried, since the so-called New Deal, to eliminate and destroy labor movements and unions.
5. Guns… Okay, so I just don’t even want to say anything here. When you make something sacred, it becomes authoritarian and unable to be criticized. Personally, I am not even sure the Bible is scared, given translation problems and the inability to probe, question and explore. Making this sacred is a travesty in my estimation, given that over 30000 American citizens die in gunfire every year in the US. This is 6x more than the number that dies on 9/11, so what do we do about it - buy more guns… This is a fear-mongering issue.
6. Downsizing government is not a bad idea, but the legislation supported [marriages, security, religious rights and controls of funds] actually builds larger government. One of the problems in these early stages of reductions is in things like the EPA - again, making us more like India or China, stated objectives of the NAM.
7. I guess this is a nice idea, but the US has actually had an unbalanced budget more than it has had a balanced one. It was balanced and more, in the black, under Clinton, but GWB’s two wars with no tax increases or leverage, for the first time in history, caused us to move into serious deficit spending, and then his start of the bailouts, which in many cases were the only solutions available to a problem caused by bankers and the Wall Street moguls and their hunts for profit at any cost. So, how do we balance it? Cut programs, lower taxes, build the military? That seems to be the mantra.
8. So, in an emergency, like the Recession, no deficit spending? None for wars? None for national disasters?
9. Well, for the common good, to keep the country afloat in a time of national economic disaster, we cannot do this? We’ve done it before, and many who join the US military do so for jobs and health care, so it is, in essence a form of bailout. We provide subsidies to farmers, ranchers, and rural folks as much as we do to urban people. So, no subsidies? Is this part of it?
10. Okay, sounds nice, but why? I mean, I would love to have a few more dollars to spend, but in the end, if I look at it honestly, I would willingly put the money forth to help others get healthcare, keep the police and fire departments and education for our youth, promote safe foods and transportation, build infrastructure that I use [highways…]. I understand what my taxes are used for, and I don’t always like where it goes, but if we follow Thoreau’s original tax revolt in his era, it was that he refused to pay taxes to support a war he believed unjustified and illegal. Would we stop paying taxes to force a pull out of US forces from all over the world? Not likely.
11. Nothing businesses and the NAM would like more… They’ve been pushing for that all the time, and sometimes they succeed. In the end, it feeds the myth that if we reduce their taxes, it will create more jobs. The stats just don’t bear this out. It does bear out increased profits for the corporations, but it rarely means more jobs for you and I and our neighbors.
12. Aren’t they already? I mean it takes money, lots of it, and if you’ll sell yourself to the NAM and business interests, they will give it to you, but are beholding to them.
13. So don’t tell people who they can marry, what sex acts they can do, what things they can buy, what things they can do with their own money and in their own houses? Well, we know this is actually on the increase with these folks, so this is a talking point only. It is fluff…
14. So, English only… Fear of foreign tongues and languages… Interesting. We would be one of the few nations on this Earth pushing this issue… Not sure this is something I would fight and die for.
15. Hmmm, since I don’t really know what these are… What do they mean? Encouraged or legislated? Many in this group have taken to legislation, which creates more government… Weird… It’s a nice idea, but it means anti-gay, anti=non-traditional marriage, anti-a lot of things. So, for a lot of this I this the Tea Party as the Anti-Party. Correct me if I am mistaken.
This from teapartypatriots.org
"Fiscal Responsibility: Fiscal Responsibility by government honors and respects the freedom of the individual to spend the money that is the fruit of their own labor. A constitutionally limited government, designed to protect the blessings of liberty, must be fiscally responsible or it must subject its citizenry to high levels of taxation that unjustly restrict the liberty our Constitution was designed to protect. Such runaway deficit spending as we now see in Washington D.C. compels us to take action as the increasing national debt is a grave threat to our national sovereignty and the personal and economic liberty of future generations.”
My comments: Well, this all sounds very good, but the designation of protecting our earning and fiscal liberties seems to stretch well into the upper crust of American society where those within that higher earning bracket, those in the millions and billions, now enjoy the greatest tax breaks in history while the rest of us slugging along below $400000 or so per annum are bearing the brunt. I am not saying we need to increase taxes on the upper class, that .05% or less, to the level of France, but they and the corporations who pour billions into programs to restrict labor and personal liberties might need to start paying a little more [and if they shift businesses and jobs overseas, perhaps a nice import tax on them in order to make up the difference when they want to sell their foreign-begotten wares in the US.
"Constitutionally Limited Government: We, the members of The Tea Party Patriots, are inspired by our founding documents and regard the Constitution of the United States to be the supreme law of the land. We believe that it is possible to know the original intent of the government our founders set forth, and stand in support of that intent. Like the founders, we support states’ rights for those powers not expressly stated in the Constitution. As the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, in all other matters we support the personal liberty of the individual, within the rule of law.”
My comments: Well, these are interesting documents and wonderful models of life and more. As for the supreme law of the land, they have never really been that, not since our inception. We had to debate what “men” were [they used to be white], and women were left out, so we could go back in time and leave them out again… Our Constitution, thankfully, a nice starting place as is the Declaration of Independence, but there are amendments to the Constitution, and there should be. There likely should be a few more, and in a few years, when we get over ourselves and our sense of self-importance and American exceptionalism [a phrase originally coined by Stalin that has found its way into a positive aspect of right-wing politics in America] and lose the mystic of ourselves, finally realizing we are together and a wonderful part of this great conversation and experiment in democracy, always growing with the times and developing our society.
"Free Markets: A free market is the economic consequence of personal liberty. The founders believed that personal and economic freedom were indivisible, as do we. Our current government’s interference distorts the free market and inhibits the pursuit of individual and economic liberty. Therefore, we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business.”
My comments: Well, this is pure nonsense. This is the dogma of the NAM and the industrialists, bankers, and Wall Street moguls who no longer see the light of day in America and who earn trillions [not seen in this land by the way]. This means survival of the fittest, let the market declare everything, and damn the torpedoes. If we are a Christian nation, as some of this previous material suggests, then we need to re-evaluate this concept. Christ was not a free market kind of guy, and nothing in the Bible leads to this idea of economic liberty and free market economies. As a matter of fact, nothing in the bible is “for” capitalism [as much as some people in the past have tried to warp the text to say things it doesn’t say], but then neither is it “for” the seeming opposite, communism. Pure capitalism is a blight on the world. Pure communism doesn’t work. Somewhere in between is the model, and even Adam Smith, the economist promoters of capitalism often turn to, warns us against free reign uncontrolled capitalism. This statement by the Tea Party is the most dangerous and inane statement on here.
This from TeaParty Express: Mission Statement
"Propelled by millions of Tea Party supporters across the country, Tea Party Express has become the most aggressive and influential national Tea Party group in the political arena. We are committed to identifying and supporting conservative candidates and causes that will champion tea party values and return our country to the Constitutional principles that have made America the ‘shining city on a hill.’"
My comments: If we were ever a “shining city on a hill” [which is a hideously flawed misquote from the original Puritan settles who came over on those first ships], it was because we provided a beacon to those who longed for religious and other freedoms, to worship as they saw fit without interference or persecution. Since this group is against pretty much all forms of immigration, this light has dimmed and been destroyed, and since it is all about Christianity and not about other faiths, well, that light dims a little more. The supposed nonpartisan component of their tax-exempt status says they do not support one party over another, but the note above about “supporting conservative candidates” is interesting. Well, I quibble…
Tea Party Express is proud to stand for six simple principles:
No more bailouts
Reduce the size and intrusiveness of government
Stop raising our taxes
Cease out-of-control spending
Bring back American prosperity
And… of course, they are all against the ACA, otherwise known as “Obamacare.”
Okay, this last one… There haven’t been any bailouts in a while, and they were to big businesses more than to Joe and Jane American. With the economy trashed by GW Bush and two wars with no added revenue [except borrowing from China], once the Recession hit in 2007, banks started closing and the fear of a real life Depression in our era was everywhere. So, GWB started bailouts [precision ones I might add, designed to reward those who supported George and his colleagues more than those who were fence-walkers or on “the other side” so as to weaken any financial support for the party in opposition, but that’s another story]. Most of these larger ones have been paid back, and the ones to Joe and Jane American, like farm subsidies, tobacco farming subsidies and more, have borne their benefits to the economy in general.
We’ve been over this reduce government stuff before [Food and Drug Administration, EPA, ATF, and other oversight aspects are the hardest hit… We know why - the NAM wants India/America - slave laborers who are happy in their serfdom or servitude, afraid of anything else]. They want certain parts gone but want to control more and more of what we do. Who will monitor? More police? Hmmmm…
Uhhh, our taxes have actually gone down in the last few years. Not sure what they’re looking at, but my tax returns say more money back and less off the check. Hmmm….
Repeal Obamacare. Okay. Why? Is this an economic decision? A decision in favor of insurance companies, drug companies and the large banking and financial interests of Wall Street who own and run those and the media outlets who promote these ideals? Is it perfect? Hell no - there are too many add-on and tags built in to cater to the special interests like insurance companies and drug companies, but they see an opportunity here to get back what they had and more… Thus the publicity campaign against our better interests.
These latter two are wonderful sound-bits. Spending on wars, military expenditures…. Those out-of-control spendings? Personally, I was always against the War in Iraq. None of it made sense, except to get the oil and Saddam [who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and was hated by Osama bin Laden]. Our military spending has often come under fire for the $130 clipboards, the $35 nut/bolt, and the $125 dress uniform gloves. If you want to make money in America, make something for the military and your profits will exceed 100%. Yay! Sad, sad, but true, and all the while our men and women who serve see little of that. Well, another story there [nothing has changed since Smedley Butler’s comments, and it was the same dating back to the Revolutionary War, so…].
Look, we are not a perfect society, far from it. Were we ever? No. Can we be a better nation than we have been? Sure. Will it be that way if we follow these policies and politics? No. It can’t. It’s too narrow a vision, too against the better interests of all citizens, and too simplistic and nebulous in application. If these folks get their way, everything will be privatized for free market - education, health care, police and fire departments, and eventually, for the more powerful factors, the military itself. Privatized doesn’t mean better or more efficient, in fact it usually means the opposite - all for profit and always for profit.
Somewhere out there our Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves as they watch and listen to how we are divided by fear and hate in this nation, how idiocy and private banking and financial interests control our nation [as many of them warned us against and feared might come to pass if we were not diligent]. We are not a just society, and we are not a caring and visionary people. We are a house divided and afraid, huddling in the shadows, seeking meaning in our own circles instead of as a larger group, a nation. Together we stand, divided we fall, and we are too darned divided right now, too amused by our technologies, toys and games to even notice [somewhere Nero and other none-too-nice emperors of by-gone days are laughing at us because the same games and toys they used have just been magnified and extended into all available media so we are mesmerized and lost, worse so than the people of the not-so-distant past]. The generic message of many of the Tea Party messages resonate with our individualism and selfishness as much as some of them wander aimlessly into our sense of another “ism,” nationalism or patriotism [both of which scare me because they have proven to open us up to some pretty serious problems - The Patriot Act would be a recent example of that, as we can see by recent and past NSA and Homeland Security nonsense]. Our walk-up alarm has run, and we keep pressing the snooze button or re-setting the alarm. We need to step up today, stamp out idiocy, bring ourselves together to solve problems and stop attaching ourselves to past dogma that doesn’t bear the light of day and hides in the shadows, all the while infesting our daily activities so we cannot see past our own selfishness and ignorance. Good luck with that.
53. Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.
Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a “disposable” culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the “exploited” but the outcast, the “leftovers”.
54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting. To sustain a lifestyle which excludes others, or to sustain enthusiasm for that selfish ideal, a globalization of indifference has developed. Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own. The culture of prosperity deadens us; we are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase; and in the meantime all those lives stunted for lack of opportunity seem a mere spectacle; they fail to move us.
No to the new idolatry of money
55. One cause of this situation is found in our relationship with money, since we calmly accept its dominion over ourselves and our societies. The current financial crisis can make us overlook the fact that it originated in a profound human crisis: the denial of the primacy of the human person! We have created new idols. The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose. The worldwide crisis affecting finance and the economy lays bare their imbalances and, above all, their lack of real concern for human beings; man is reduced to one of his needs alone: consumption.
56. While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ideologies which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. Consequently, they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control. A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. Debt and the accumulation of interest also make it difficult for countries to realize the potential of their own economies and keep citizens from enjoying their real purchasing power. To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which have taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits. In this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, which become the only rule.
No to a financial system which rules rather than serves
57. Behind this attitude lurks a rejection of ethics and a rejection of God. Ethics has come to be viewed with a certain scornful derision. It is seen as counterproductive, too human, because it makes money and power relative. It is felt to be a threat, since it condemns the manipulation and debasement of the person. In effect, ethics leads to a God who calls for a committed response which is outside of the categories of the marketplace. When these latter are absolutized, God can only be seen as uncontrollable, unmanageable, even dangerous, since he calls human beings to their full realization and to freedom from all forms of enslavement. Ethics – a non-ideological ethics – would make it possible to bring about balance and a more humane social order. With this in mind, I encourage financial experts and political leaders to ponder the words of one of the sages of antiquity: “Not to share one’s wealth with the poor is to steal from them and to take away their livelihood. It is not our own goods which we hold, but theirs”.
58. A financial reform open to such ethical considerations would require a vigorous change of approach on the part of political leaders. I urge them to face this challenge with determination and an eye to the future, while not ignoring, of course, the specifics of each case. Money must serve, not rule! The Pope loves everyone, rich and poor alike, but he is obliged in the name of Christ to remind all that the rich must help, respect and promote the poor. I exhort you to generous solidarity and a return of economics and finance to an ethical approach which favours human beings.
No to the inequality which spawns violence
59. Today in many places we hear a call for greater security. But until exclusion and inequality in society and between peoples is reversed, it will be impossible to eliminate violence. The poor and the poorer peoples are accused of violence, yet without equal opportunities the different forms of aggression and conflict will find a fertile terrain for growth and eventually explode. When a society – whether local, national or global – is willing to leave a part of itself on the fringes, no political programmes or resources spent on law enforcement or surveillance systems can indefinitely guarantee tranquility. This is not the case simply because inequality provokes a violent reaction from those excluded from the system, but because the socioeconomic system is unjust at its root. Just as goodness tends to spread, the toleration of evil, which is injustice, tends to expand its baneful influence and quietly to undermine any political and social system, no matter how solid it may appear. If every action has its consequences, an evil embedded in the structures of a society has a constant potential for disintegration and death. It is evil crystallized in unjust social structures, which cannot be the basis of hope for a better future. We are far from the so-called “end of history”, since the conditions for a sustainable and peaceful development have not yet been adequately articulated and realized.
60. Today’s economic mechanisms promote inordinate consumption, yet it is evident that unbridled consumerism combined with inequality proves doubly damaging to the social fabric. Inequality eventually engenders a violence which recourse to arms cannot and never will be able to resolve. This serves only to offer false hopes to those clamouring for heightened security, even though nowadays we know that weapons and violence, rather than providing solutions, create new and more serious conflicts. Some simply content themselves with blaming the poor and the poorer countries themselves for their troubles; indulging in unwarranted generalizations, they claim that the solution is an “education” that would tranquilize them, making them tame and harmless. All this becomes even more exasperating for the marginalized in the light of the widespread and deeply rooted corruption found in many countries – in their governments, businesses and institutions – whatever the political ideology of their leaders.
”—Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium of the Holy Father, Francis… This is the portion that will be seriously disputed by certain elements of American media [or not reported at all - omission is a form of lying].
“Cornfed - Could I use the restroom first?
Bob - Sure you can’t miss it. Make a right at the cow bone
grinding and marrow extraction room, a quick left at the
chicken squeezing ovum cracking pit & then a sharp circle
round the gobstopper & gizzard suction chamber.
Cornfed - I’ll hold it in.”—Just showing my love for Cornfed and Duckman.
I provide for you the text of an editorial expose written by conservative Republican editor William Allen White in 1943:
"One cannot move about Washington without bumping into the fact that we are running two wars - a foreign war and a domestic one.
The domestic was in in the various war boards. Every great commodity industry in this country is organized nationally and many of them, perhaps most of them, are parts of the great national organizations, cartels, agreements, which function on both sides of the battle front.
Here in Washington every industry is interested in saving its own self. It wants to come out of the war with a whole hide and with its organization unimpaired, legally or illegally.
On is surprised to find men representing great commodity trusts or agreements or syndicates planted in the various war boards. It is silly to say New Dealers run this show. It’s run largely by absentee owners of amalgamated industrial wealth, men who either directly or through their employers control small minority blocks, closely organized, that manipulate the physical plants of these trusts.
For the most part these managerial magnates are decent, patriotic Americans. They have great talents. If you touch them in nine relations of life out of ten, they are kindly, courteous, Christian gentlemen.
But in the tenth relation, where it touches their own organization, they are stark mad, ruthless, unchecked by God or man, paranoiacs, in fact, as evil in their design as Hitler.
They are determined to come out of this war victorious for their own stockholders - which is not surprising. It is understandable also for Hitler to desire to come out of this war at any cost victorious for the German people.
But this attitude of the men who control the great commodity industries, and who propose to run them according to their own judgment and their own morals, do not make a pretty picture for the welfare of the common man.
These international combinations of industrial capital are fierce troglodyte animals like an old silurian reptile about our decent more of less Christian civilization - like great dragons in this modern day when dragons are supposed to be dead.”
As an added comment from yours truly, it would be inane to assume these powers have not found greater depth in our political and media/propaganda/information systems and re-found old methods and started new ones to better their positions in all fields [banking, insurance, chemicals, health care, military, transportation, power, manufacturing of all types…] and these the world over. It is no wonder, the National Association of Manufacturers main line of argument and presentation is a threefold position that would render us closer to India or an unrestricted China than a Christian nation [the one we always tout we are or could be if only we followed the directions of these same media outlets and manufacturers of belief]: reduce environmental standards and restrictions on all levels of manufacturing [from resource garnering all the way to processing, manufacturing and transportation], annihilate labor unions to reduce wages to near or at Third World levels [the argument being that unions cause prices to go up - which is partially true, but they make work places safer, provide support and negotiations for wages people can actually live on, and work for retirement benefits so we don’t all just die out at 65 or 70, whatever age they decide is the one at which we are no longer needed], and play the tacit hero behind the scenes to ensure business and manufacturing are seen always in a positive light [the necessity of suppressing the negative and using billions upon billions to ensure elected officials support their vision and designs - mesmerizing the voting public with advertising and news (that is really advertising) that promotes its candidates and system].
There’s a reason all the idiocy that is going on in this country is actually going on… It is a form of divide and conquer, but as we fiddle around, our position burns. When we are so busy blaming each other, blaming the sheep for being white not the wolf for hunting, we cannot see the depth and breadth of the system engulfing us and altering our local, national and world views. Befuddled in education, shortened in thought, unable to critically analyze an argument, unable to read effectively, and mindlessly following, the masses are led to the slaughter [sheeple as someone so adeptly called us - I am one].
When you reach that point beyond simple faith in God, when you realize the universe, the nature and depth of attachment and association with all things great and small [down to the subatomic], and the scientific and philosophical revelations of connections, how can you fear death and dying? It is…
Let us ponder this and probe, however we might manage it, to find some understanding…
Consider the relativity of time [and space] - the perception of it, the nature of it. The question: Does time pass the same for a virus or bacteria as it does for a human on this planet, a solar system or a galaxy?
First thoughts that popped up were the that speeds are different, perceptions are obviously different, and distances between objects and things at all levels is different…
Once we start this discussion, the nature of our time, how we perceive it and say we “know” it must also come into some question. It may seem silly or obvious, depending upon your view or education, but it remains a classic question.
“At the present time many believers, to avoid the anxieties that contact with reality might renew in them, allow a veil of conventional answers to cover the mysteries of life.”—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin [and we see this madness expanding exponentially in our era with people throwing blinders on and focusing on a commonplace or convention that provides cookie-cutout and ready-made easy answers that require no thought, no probing, and no critical analysis, thereby becoming totalitarian and authoritarian, the very things God would not wish for His people. He granted us a mind, the capacity for depth and breadth of thought, for inquiry, probing and searching, for finding avenues of discovery, yet a large segment (an ever-expanding segment) in the US today denies this very truth and casts the head into the quicksand of ‘pure faith’ that asks no questions, that seeks not to know… Faithfulness means seeking deeper and deeper, both within and without, to come to a more compound and complex understanding of our lives in this incredible sphere - the mere thought of shutting it down to a simplistic acceptance of some morality, man-made always, or narrowed view, again man-made and freshly cherry-picked from a minute portion of some biblical text, should repel us.] (via christology101)
The path of being alone and the path of loneliness are not the same, and they travel along different routes leading to different ends. Even though these paths rarely cross, sometimes they do, for a moment, or at other times for what seems like an eternity.
Why is it that Hannah Arendt, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Jacques Ellul, and George Seldes, all of whom authored 10+ books each, are not recognized by spell check and thus have the red line underneath their names, but Alexander Solzhenitsyn checks fine? Is it because he wrote mainly fiction and stuff about those commie bastards? Ha, well, that’s not even true if you read his works… Hmmmm. It’s weird how some names, particularly for more radical figures, ones outside the normal streams of massmind thought, do not check.
Why, my fellow citizens, is there any man here or any woman - let me say is there any child here - who does not know that the seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry? The real reason that the war that we have just finished took place was that Germany was afraid her commercial rivals were going to get the better of her, and the reason why some nations went into the war against Germany was that they thought Germany would get the commercial advantage of them. The seed of the jealousy, the seed of the deep-seated hatred, was hot successful commercial and industrial rivalry….
This was [World War I] was a commercial and industrial war. It was not a political war.
President Woodrow Wilson, from a speech delivered in St. Louis, September 5, 1919 as reprinted and reported in the Congressional Record, Sept. 8, 1919, p. 5006; St. Louis Globe Democrat, Sept. 6, 1919.
If we accept Wilson’s statement as truth as he knew it as President and the man who lead us into WWI, then he knew what we all know on the tip of our conversations and brains… ALL wars are commercial and industrial wars. Well, certainly since our Civil War and the Industrial Revolution.
“Exposition: the workings of the actual past + the virtual past may be illustrated by a even well known to collective history, such as the sinking of the Titanic. The disaster as it actually occurred descends into obscurity as its eyewitnesses die off, documents perish + the wreck of the ship dissolves in its Atlantic grave. Yet a virtual sinking of the Titanic, created from the re-worked memories, papers, hearsay, fiction - in short, belief - grows ever ‘truer.’ The actual past is brittle, ever-dimming + ever more problematic to access + reconstruct: in contrast, the virtual past is malleable, ever-brightening + ever more difficult to circumvent/expose as fraudulent. The present presses the virtual past into its own service, to lend credence to its mythologies + legitimacy to the imposition of will. Power seeks + is the right to ‘landscape’ the virtual past. (He who pays the historian calls the shots).”—Isaac Sachs [from Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell] - a concept that George Orwell [and others] knew well, spoke of at great length, but never quite worded in this fashion. (via yoona939) - THis begs the question posed in my class: how can we know the past we think we know is even close to true? How is it possible to really “know” this past? Is it even knowable? Personally and professionally, I believe it unknowable, at least in full. At best we can hope, if we dive deeply into documents from every angle [those from the time in which events took place, and perhaps shortly after], we can glean a semblance of that truth, a smidgen of that actual past. Not easily done, and too few will expend the labor to dig deeply into this vast mine of past events and circumstances to seek the golden truths, instead preferring the Twitter or Instagram version of 140 characters of less, or better yet, a photo… Maybe a meme…
“Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century, and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press.”—Alexandr Solzhenitsyn - ha, and this is why we do what we do in my class, well, one reason.
“Our world is rent asunder by those same old cave-age emotions of greed, envy, lack of control, mutual hostility which have picked up in passing respectable pseudonyms like class struggle, racial conflict, struggle of the masses, trade-union disputes. The primeval refusal to accept a compromise has been turned into a theoretical principle and is considered the virtue of orthodoxy. It demands millions of sacrifices in ceaseless civil wars, it drums into our souls that there is no such thing as unchanging, universal concepts of goodness and justice, that they are all fluctuating and inconstant. Therefore the rule — always do what’s most profitable to your party.”—
Alexandr Solzhenitsyn - rather prescient of him… for much of the world, including and not limited to the microcosm that is the US of A. (via yoona939)
“Not everything assumes a name. Some things lead beyond words. Art inflames even a frozen, darkened soul to a high spiritual experience. Through art we are sometimes visited — dimly, briefly — by revelations such as cannot be produced by rational thinking. Like that little looking-glass from the fairy-tales: look into it and you will see — not yourself — but for one second, the Inaccessible, whither no man can ride, no man fly. And only the soul gives a groan..”—
Alexandr Solzhenitsyn - such a poetic voice locked in a prose mode of discourse, flayed at from all directions, rarely understood [not in a true “depth” of understanding, kindred spirits and knowledge bases]. (via yoona939)
We could learn a lot from this man, and others like him, should we choose to drop our self-righteousness and senseless indignation regarding the communal intelligence and things and items that make us uncomfortable because the scratch and dent our narrow worldview.
Is one act of resistance of sacrifice, an act of true depth of character, of understanding the nature of our connectedness and a willingness to pay any price to both honor the sacrifices of those before us and to set the future on a path, step-by-step, moment-by-moment, through the millennia, outside the selfish and focused on the altruistic and communal nature of humankind, worth the price? Does it have an impact?
In truth, we can never know. Our acts may outlive us and contribute to a better more personal and communal future or they may not, but we must take the risk, stand against the mass-mindedness and pseudo-individuals and soi-disant experts, and be what we hope and pray we all can be: loving, caring, and incredibly vital people who care more for others than they do for themselves, who value all life and all the wondrous gifts we’ve been granted in this short stream of life in which we swim.
“Belief, like fear or love, is a force to be understood as we understand the theory of relativity, and principles of uncertainty. Phenomena that determine the course of our lives. Yesterday, my life was headed in one direction. Today, it is headed in another. Yesterday, I believe I would never have done what I did today. These forces that often remake time and space, they can shape and alter who we imagine ourselves to be, begin long before we are born, and continue after we perish. Our lives and our choices, like quantum trajectories, are understood moment to moment, at each point of intersection, each encounter, suggest a new potential direction.”— Cloud Atlas (via yoona939) - Thoroughly enjoyable concept and potential truth.
So Bank X charges [its word is “assesses a service fee”] you maybe like mine does, $14 per month. I know my bank has over 50 million accounts/clients. Okay, let’s say not all are in my situation, but it’s more than half… figure around 30 million. Now multiply 30,000,000 by 14 and tell me these folks are suffering. Oh, this doesn’t include overdraft “fees” late payment “fees” NSF check “fees” [coming and going], so maybe there you can add another 100,000,000 per annum. Add to this the interest garnered in loans, investments, and just cash on hand [besides the fees they collect from the third-party bill payment services who actually manage the on-line bill payments that should be instant, but take 2-3 days - these small companies rely on continuous flow of large sums through their accounts and short term investments based upon that flow in order to stay in business - a middle-man that no one really knows about], and these cover operating costs, salaries and more before leading to the huge profits. We can say all manner of nice things, but we are “fee-ed” to death by these machines of finance all in the name of profit and not in our best interest. The mattress looks better and better as an investment partner.
Okay, in a basic economic sense, if person or company X goes bankrupt, the money went somewhere, right? I mean, X paid into things, and then it gets sold off [money going to Bank A or B, creditors who line up]. Let’s be a little more personal - stock prices decline, and you bought them through a retirement account, paid in, say, oh, about $50,000. Now the stocks are “worth” say $30,000. Where did the $20,000 go? You paid it in. It went somewhere. I know some economic theories will run circular logic around this, but in the end, someone, some company somewhere, ends up with the money. It’s not the government, and it’s not Joe or Jane Blow, John/Jane Q. Public… So, who? In the recent Depression, with all the “toxic” assets sold and money made, money was made by banking interests coming and going… Smaller interests purchased by larger, loans purchased and some called, properties picked up, companies lost and markets or assets transferred into larger ones. What it was, from a more simple standpoint, was the elimination of smaller competitors in the Wall St. and banking game by larger ones, a natural and predictable cycle to varying degrees of impact, in our society as we have it now. The big sharks ate up all the small fish, and thrashed in the waters of the Depression eating like crazy all the blood and torn flesh from companies, accounts, cities, and the government itself. Now these same interests have extended their tentacles even deeper into all aspects of society [media, manufacturing, politics, transportation, utilities, technology…] so they either own the puzzle, own a significant piece of it, or own loans to them so they have created a symbiotic and inseparable alliance. Yup, so-called “free enterprise.” Oh, did you see benefits? Ha, ha…
Simply a question: How are we to trust that what textbooks tell us, the slants, inclusions, exclusions, selections and more, given the publishing companies are few and they are subsidiaries of larger Wall Street and banking interests who own all elements of newspapers, magazines and now major internet providers and engines, and have owned the news and the slanting of it since the turn of the 20th Century?
As an aside, one wonders why we so readily accept policies, wars, processes, lack of laws or actual laws, and party politics so fundamentally counter to our basic human needs and interests as a people, and then you look and see who owns these propaganda machines in the guise of news: Time, Fortune, Forbes, NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times… The list is endless, and then their TV and internet affiliates who are owned by the same people and the textbook and book publishing companies who are either owned by Wall Street and banking interests or rely heavily upon them [notice how much MORE heavily since this recent Depression] is extensive and permeates almost all elements of education [top to bottom and the public soi-disant and psuedo-knowledge base].
Let’s look at Time-Warner [primarily owned by the Morgans… who also own utilities, manufacturing, and military-industrial interests to name but a few]… Here are its publishing companies [the ones it owns]:
Books Time Life Books Book-of-the-Month Club (managed by Bertelsmann) Little, Brown & Co. Bulfinch Press Back Bay Books Warner Books Oxmoor House
Magazines Time Magazine Life Magazine Fortune Magazine Sports Illustrated Money People Entertainment Weekly In Style Southern Living Cooking Light The Parent Group (Parenting, Baby Talk, Baby on the Way) This Old House The Health Publishing Group Real Simple Golf Magazine Popular Science Ski Yachting Magazine American Express Publishing Corporation (partial ownership; includes Travel & Leisure, Food & Wine, Departures, SkyGuide) DC Comics MAD Magazine
In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression — everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way — everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want — which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants — everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear — which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor— anywhere in the world.
”—Franklin D. Roosevelt - and why did we sway so far from this? Why do we move in the opposite direction?
Given the subtext to recent research, combined with older research done by advertising companies, sometimes done in the name of psychological data-seeking, the message is clear: The IQ of the average American is low, about 95, lower than it was 25 years ago, and since the majority of this data includes legal immigrants, do not think they are the reason for the lowered IQ numbers [they actually raise it with the H1B visa folks who have intellectual needs for the US, and they tend, in large numbers, to do better than so-called natural born US citizens at IQ tests]. So, the onus is on the people who live here… How do we deal with this phenomenon that is really not a surprise to those in the trenches every day?,
“…they [the 1000 or so who control America, the invisible government Seldes noted in his research into the congressional reports, and the one several political leaders and presidents also noted at several times but was rarely, if ever, even mentioned in the press (it was owned as well, duhhh)] are united for one purpose: the greatest profit for the smallest number, instead of the greatest good for the greatest number, which is American democracy.”—George Seldes [1948 - interesting to note that spell check doesn’t recognize Seldes’s name… Not important I guess, like Ellul and others who figured some things out… Look, I am no super conspiracy theorist, but the warping of the common good for the corporate good, the replacement of our original ideals of community, togetherness, and anti-corporate rule (the original tea party was as much anti-corporate as it was anti-tax, and the related events of that time were more so), the realization that the resources of the nation are ours, not privately owned… Well, they did not start that way, but now almost everything is privately owned and we PAY and PAY and PAY for things like water, electricity… some of the simplest items that should cost us so much less. Seldes is not the first person I have come across with a keen mind and a series of proofs for this problem and our dilemma and paradigm shifts (ones we seemingly cannot even see as a shift but now accept as the WAY).]
Well, there are more when we consider the banking interests, but the big three were Alcoa [those aluminum and power entity that has spread its tentacles into almost all corners of the world in our day], duPont [now diversified, a nice euphemism for divided up into seemingly smaller chunks but still centrally owned and operated by an elite few], and General Electric. All of them had working agreements with the Nazi regime and its allies. Something to think about when we promote corporate freedom and liberty without restraint… Oh, and it might serve to note that the Nazis were EXTREMELY anti-union [assassinating union leaders, taking over unions, and you might remember they used forced labor and indoctrinated everyone else into elements of military service for expansion and gaining of resources and power. Oh yeah, that…
“A DEMOCRACY is dedicated to the greatest good for the greatest number. If the resources of a nation belonged to its people, economic security, a base for democracy, would be assured.”—George Seldes [he poses, at the very least, an idea we should explore and discuss in order to decide if we believe any of this or to probe and discover what exactly it is that We The People, believe in…]
“To the Congress of the United States:
Unhappy events abroad have retaught us two simple truths about the liberty of a democratic people.
The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism, or by any other controlling private power…
Among us today a concentration of private power without equal in history is growing.”—Franklin D. Roosevelt [He saw in his day what Thomas Jefferson saw in its infancy in his day and also warned us about… Recently, in the past 8-10 years, media outlets owned by some of these powers, combined with their various mouthpieces (politicians and lobbyists) and paid pundits, have thwarted and perverted the definition of fascism as it was known in Roosevelt’s time, the time between the wars and the time of WWII - it was corporate fascism where the powerful few control the means of everything from power, food, manufacturing, press/media, and more. We have made it simple for the mass-minds and equated fascism with socialism, socialism with communism, and thus wiped the idea of the Italian corporate fascism under Mussolini and even the more estranged but equally corporate form expanding under Hitler (any study of how he came to power, the influence of men of power and the likes of Alfred Hugneberg will tell the tale with ease - German nationalism via corporate control, not government control of corporations….) from the public/communal American mind. We do not even question the relationship, and socialism is to be greatly feared - another result of the campaigns by large corporate and banking interests in the US during the 1920s through the 1950s (many of those same “free American companies, providing jobs, liberty… blah, blah” were also making ridiculous amounts of cash selling raw materials like aluminum and more advanced technologies and aide to the Nazis and Japanese before WWII and during it, making fortunes on what would be the graves of American youth, Allied youth, and Axis youth and civilians all over Europe and the world). They sold their bill of goods equating any government program to help the people as socialism, leading to the dark path, and the corporate way, the free business way, as the way of liberty, justice and the grand American plan, the path into the light… Because they either owned the newspapers and media outlets or were major advertisers in the ones they didn’t own, they ruled the editorial pages and the story selection process, and sadly, very sadly, still do, and perhaps more so. We have a very valid question to ask: Do we value corporate wealth and values over the welfare and values of our citizens? Apparently we do and have been falling more and more prey to this fiction. Perhaps it is time to heed Presidents Roosevelt, Lincoln, and Jefferson, three more interesting presidents who warned us of these invasions to our communal welfare and futures as a people, and saw through the deviousness and selfishness of the business and banking industries and interests in this nation.]
Enjoying 1000 Americans… It feeds upon other works, meshes and gels with Lippmann, Bernays and many others, and defies the depth of the mass-minds. Equally, I am enjoying Jacques Ellul’s Reason for Being [it reminds me, yet again, how many profess to believe in Christianity, call themselves Christians, but do not probe with depth, probe things counter to their beliefs, outside their comfort zone or protective bubble in order to balance faith with truth and understanding, increase the depth of this belief and faith (so many walk on thin ice; it cracks and they sink the moment they take a step in any direction, and then actions so un-Christian speak so much louder than professions of belief and soi-disant quotes from the Bible), and who will not read the LANGUAGE of the Bible, a study of its words, distant meanings, translations… and act like God spoke English to Moses, and Jesus was referencing America or speaking in an American dialect]. Ellul is a breath of fresh air as Seldes is a smack in the teeth. Nice combo.