Charles Ferguson, the guy who directed "No End in Sight" - the best documentary about Iraq, recently released a new film about the financial crisis. He wrote this amazing article in Salon today talking about the Obama administration's failure to regulate the financiail interests that destroyed the economy.
Before I go to work I am going to be watching this.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Article of the Day
From n+1 - the best article I've read about racism in America in a long, long time.
David Cross? Still has it.
Yet MORE EVIDENCE that the only thing those poor Tea Party bastards are going to accomplish is give power back to the party that destroyed the economy and lost them their jobs. Not that the Democrats are going to save them, but talk about the worse of the two evils. It'll be a fun election to watch. And by fun I mean horrible.
Did two nifty things today. First, I bought the new Chris Hedges book; it looks amazing. Second, my beautiful girlfriend and I watched the David Cross stand-up from 2009. Half-way through Cross makes this excellent point. Isn't it duplicitous that the same people who hate America right now flip their lid when some one criticizes the same country? He explains it better in this clip. It starts around minute one.
Do you have three minutes to spare? Then watch the video.
Did two nifty things today. First, I bought the new Chris Hedges book; it looks amazing. Second, my beautiful girlfriend and I watched the David Cross stand-up from 2009. Half-way through Cross makes this excellent point. Isn't it duplicitous that the same people who hate America right now flip their lid when some one criticizes the same country? He explains it better in this clip. It starts around minute one.
Do you have three minutes to spare? Then watch the video.
Monday, October 25, 2010
No Class Warfare?
I'm starting to get jealous of the French. Sarkozy is done for, it seems.
Back in the Anglophone world things aren't looking too bright. David Cameron is about to cut half a million jobs. Obama seems to be sitting in the White House waiting for the Tea Party wave to crash. Chris Hedges, as always, puts things into perspective, writing that the liberal class made this mess themselves.
The collective experiment with free-market capitalism has failed. I agree with the researchers who wrote The Spirit Level that the root of all of this turmoil and societal breakdown is inequality. The rich are getting richer and the poor and the middle class are struggling.
What happened?
Back in the Anglophone world things aren't looking too bright. David Cameron is about to cut half a million jobs. Obama seems to be sitting in the White House waiting for the Tea Party wave to crash. Chris Hedges, as always, puts things into perspective, writing that the liberal class made this mess themselves.
The collective experiment with free-market capitalism has failed. I agree with the researchers who wrote The Spirit Level that the root of all of this turmoil and societal breakdown is inequality. The rich are getting richer and the poor and the middle class are struggling.
What happened?
Sunday, October 24, 2010
The Despotic Right
Truthdig is your friend. Most of these links come from them.
The Tea Party 'movement' is a farce. It's just yet another partisan group trying to achieve political power and when they do they will do their best to suppress objective journalism. They are merely actors in a drama that already ended: the story of how capitalism cannibalized itself towards destruction.
When the Crash really happens the despotic right, backed by the super-rich and the religious right, will take power. Without a competent Democratic Party that can give economic power back to the masses, there will be no alternative for the dispossessed other then to rally behind some demagogue who promises whatever they want to hear. This is the last dying breath of a nation.
One of my favorite senators, Russ Feingold, is losing horribly in the polls because he does not take soft money. The discussion that can't be talked about enough is the compatibility between the democratic process and capitalism unbound. All of the anger right now is directed towards the State even though the State has become impotent. The anger should be directed towards the people hoarding the wealth.
The Tea Party 'movement' is a farce. It's just yet another partisan group trying to achieve political power and when they do they will do their best to suppress objective journalism. They are merely actors in a drama that already ended: the story of how capitalism cannibalized itself towards destruction.
When the Crash really happens the despotic right, backed by the super-rich and the religious right, will take power. Without a competent Democratic Party that can give economic power back to the masses, there will be no alternative for the dispossessed other then to rally behind some demagogue who promises whatever they want to hear. This is the last dying breath of a nation.
One of my favorite senators, Russ Feingold, is losing horribly in the polls because he does not take soft money. The discussion that can't be talked about enough is the compatibility between the democratic process and capitalism unbound. All of the anger right now is directed towards the State even though the State has become impotent. The anger should be directed towards the people hoarding the wealth.
Article of the Week
Frank Rich summons up everything I could hope to say about the Obama administration.
Just read this.
Just read this.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Failures of Democrats
Here is a quote that has been floating around on the internet. I am not sure if Lincoln actually said this (I can't find a citation) even though I enjoy it quite a bit:
"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. [As a most undesirable consequence of the war...] Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed."
Anyone who has been concerned with income inequality in this country knows that, even if Lincoln never said this, that the quote is remarkably prescient. In the news this week there have been a lot of stories about illegal foreclosures. Evidently people that don't even have a mortgage are finding themselves in court battling banks who are trying to evict them. Both Democrats and Republicans have done nothing to stop this. In fact, the Obama administration's new National Security Adviser used to be a lobbyist for the same firms that caused the housing crisis. (Also: Larry Summers, economic adviser to the administration and one of the architects of the stimulus pacakage, helped draft and pass the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in1999, which removed the limitations on the part of Glass-Steagall that would have protected the public from something as corrupt and convoluted as the derivatives scandal; how is this not big news?)
If anyone reading this is going to only look at one political article this week, it should be this one. For some background: I spent the better part of 2008 obsessed with the Obama campaign. I bought into the energy of the campaign. I volunteered. I advocated. I voted. The main reason why I voted for him in the primary instead of Hillary Clinton was that I thought his administration would finally severe the Democratic Party from its corporate donors. That we, as a country, would focus on alternative energy, infrastructure, transparent government and disentangling ourselves from the Middle East occupations. That it was an evolution of where we were going as a country, that we would finally grow up and accept the real problems that are facing the planet rather than exist in this tiny bubble of constant cynicism and corruption.
It's a humbling lesson in naivety that I thought that he would change, really change, the way the government operates. In his campaign, Obama promised a moratorium on foreclosures. Where are they? During the campaign he promised a transparent government. He promised reform on lobbyist's influence on government. Remember? End the war (he expanded it), stop domestic spying (he hasn't), reform NAFTA and GATT (he hasn't).
Obama extended the Patriot Act earlier this year. With no reforms. It's the same bill that Bush passed.
He has deported more undocumented workers than Bush. He has not reinstated habeas corpus. Extraordinary rendition has not ended. Neither have secret prisons and, I'm assuming, state sponsored torture. He has isolated labor (he supported Blanche Lincoln, an anti-Labor Democrat, during the primary) and he has isolated the teacher's unions. "Race to the Top" will fail, despite whatever trendy documentary comes out about school competition and charter schools (that take public money but have no accountability).
Finally, and all things considered (Republican obstructionism, the lack of a strong liberal presence with the Democratic Party), Obama increased troop levels in Afghanistan. We have been there for almost a decade. There is no victory because no one knows why we are there. That is the kicker.
What happened to protecting worker's rights? What happened to the war on poverty? What happened to the Humphrey-Hawkins Act that strives for full employment? How is privatizing social security even up for discussion? France is having riots right now because they want to lower the retirement age by two years! And yet we are letting these corporate interests infect electoral politics where reinstating financial regulation is considered a major Democratic accomplishment. Seriously?!
How is this possible? Obama, you are a Democrat! How can an administration go so far off base? How is it that there is practically no one challenging this? Harry Reid is a disgrace. The majority of them keep voting for giving the military a blank check. All of the centre-right stuff that Obama keeps going for? They vote on these policies. They support them. There are two members of Congress I really respect. Poor Dennis Kucinich, who is marginalized in his own party and poor Russ Feingold, who is doing horrible in the polls. All the media can talk about is how the Tea Party thinks that Obama is a covert communist when, here in Reality, he is barely a progressive. Nixon was more liberal.
There is a great Bill Maher quote when he was on Wolf Blitzer's show last year:
"Barack Obama is not a socialist -- he’s not even a liberal....this country needs a left wing. It doesn’t have it, and part of the reason is the media.”
For people that actually belief in and want social justice the Democratic Party is not a good home. The sad part is that there is no where else to go, honestly. There is no Left or Right. There is only Up and Down. People that have power and wealth and the rest of us. We don't live in a Republic (with representatives who work for the public) and we sure as hell don't have a Democracy. We live in an oligarchy. We are approaching a new, modern feudalism.
Democrats today are more conservative than Eisenhower Republicans. If liberals are going to support any group it should be the DSA or the Green Party. Even though it may seem impractical, at least we get to keep our ethics. Lately, I feel slightly ill supporting Democrats that have gone so far right it is hard to tell where they end and the Republicans begin. There are more then enough groups out there that more accurately encompass what we believe yet we are faced with only two options. We have a centre-right party that expands wars, protects Wall Street and takes corporate money. And then we have the Republicans.
"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. [As a most undesirable consequence of the war...] Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed."
Anyone who has been concerned with income inequality in this country knows that, even if Lincoln never said this, that the quote is remarkably prescient. In the news this week there have been a lot of stories about illegal foreclosures. Evidently people that don't even have a mortgage are finding themselves in court battling banks who are trying to evict them. Both Democrats and Republicans have done nothing to stop this. In fact, the Obama administration's new National Security Adviser used to be a lobbyist for the same firms that caused the housing crisis. (Also: Larry Summers, economic adviser to the administration and one of the architects of the stimulus pacakage, helped draft and pass the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in1999, which removed the limitations on the part of Glass-Steagall that would have protected the public from something as corrupt and convoluted as the derivatives scandal; how is this not big news?)
If anyone reading this is going to only look at one political article this week, it should be this one. For some background: I spent the better part of 2008 obsessed with the Obama campaign. I bought into the energy of the campaign. I volunteered. I advocated. I voted. The main reason why I voted for him in the primary instead of Hillary Clinton was that I thought his administration would finally severe the Democratic Party from its corporate donors. That we, as a country, would focus on alternative energy, infrastructure, transparent government and disentangling ourselves from the Middle East occupations. That it was an evolution of where we were going as a country, that we would finally grow up and accept the real problems that are facing the planet rather than exist in this tiny bubble of constant cynicism and corruption.
It's a humbling lesson in naivety that I thought that he would change, really change, the way the government operates. In his campaign, Obama promised a moratorium on foreclosures. Where are they? During the campaign he promised a transparent government. He promised reform on lobbyist's influence on government. Remember? End the war (he expanded it), stop domestic spying (he hasn't), reform NAFTA and GATT (he hasn't).
Obama extended the Patriot Act earlier this year. With no reforms. It's the same bill that Bush passed.
He has deported more undocumented workers than Bush. He has not reinstated habeas corpus. Extraordinary rendition has not ended. Neither have secret prisons and, I'm assuming, state sponsored torture. He has isolated labor (he supported Blanche Lincoln, an anti-Labor Democrat, during the primary) and he has isolated the teacher's unions. "Race to the Top" will fail, despite whatever trendy documentary comes out about school competition and charter schools (that take public money but have no accountability).
Finally, and all things considered (Republican obstructionism, the lack of a strong liberal presence with the Democratic Party), Obama increased troop levels in Afghanistan. We have been there for almost a decade. There is no victory because no one knows why we are there. That is the kicker.
What happened to protecting worker's rights? What happened to the war on poverty? What happened to the Humphrey-Hawkins Act that strives for full employment? How is privatizing social security even up for discussion? France is having riots right now because they want to lower the retirement age by two years! And yet we are letting these corporate interests infect electoral politics where reinstating financial regulation is considered a major Democratic accomplishment. Seriously?!
How is this possible? Obama, you are a Democrat! How can an administration go so far off base? How is it that there is practically no one challenging this? Harry Reid is a disgrace. The majority of them keep voting for giving the military a blank check. All of the centre-right stuff that Obama keeps going for? They vote on these policies. They support them. There are two members of Congress I really respect. Poor Dennis Kucinich, who is marginalized in his own party and poor Russ Feingold, who is doing horrible in the polls. All the media can talk about is how the Tea Party thinks that Obama is a covert communist when, here in Reality, he is barely a progressive. Nixon was more liberal.
There is a great Bill Maher quote when he was on Wolf Blitzer's show last year:
"Barack Obama is not a socialist -- he’s not even a liberal....this country needs a left wing. It doesn’t have it, and part of the reason is the media.”
For people that actually belief in and want social justice the Democratic Party is not a good home. The sad part is that there is no where else to go, honestly. There is no Left or Right. There is only Up and Down. People that have power and wealth and the rest of us. We don't live in a Republic (with representatives who work for the public) and we sure as hell don't have a Democracy. We live in an oligarchy. We are approaching a new, modern feudalism.
Democrats today are more conservative than Eisenhower Republicans. If liberals are going to support any group it should be the DSA or the Green Party. Even though it may seem impractical, at least we get to keep our ethics. Lately, I feel slightly ill supporting Democrats that have gone so far right it is hard to tell where they end and the Republicans begin. There are more then enough groups out there that more accurately encompass what we believe yet we are faced with only two options. We have a centre-right party that expands wars, protects Wall Street and takes corporate money. And then we have the Republicans.
Please Watch This, Please
This is a talk that Chris Hedges, who is fast becoming my hero, gave yesterday about his new book, "The Death of the Liberal Class."
Please, please watch it when you can:
Here.
Please, please watch it when you can:
Here.
Another great Tea Party article
I just finished reading this. It's a great compliment to the article I posted yesterday.
This article explores debt that Beck has to the ultra-right wing John Birch society. Towards the end it talks about the conflicts between extremists from the right and the civilized wing a la William Buckey. If only the Democrats had that problem. Where is our Tea Party? I can't be the only one sick of seeing Bill Clinton's pro-corpoate/military policies dominate the politcal scene.
This article explores debt that Beck has to the ultra-right wing John Birch society. Towards the end it talks about the conflicts between extremists from the right and the civilized wing a la William Buckey. If only the Democrats had that problem. Where is our Tea Party? I can't be the only one sick of seeing Bill Clinton's pro-corpoate/military policies dominate the politcal scene.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Great Article
This is from Newsweeek of all places - a superb article about the Tea Party and the Constitution.
David Cameron is cutting defence spending
If the UK Prime Minister is doing this, why can't we?
If Americans are serious about austerity measures, why not cut back on the 700 military bases throughout the globe?
If Americans are serious about austerity measures, why not cut back on the 700 military bases throughout the globe?
Monday, October 18, 2010
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Quick Link
This is a great profile on one of the Koch brothers. These two billionaire brothers are bank-rolling most of the conservative think tanks in the country, including, most importantly, the "grassroots" Tea Party.
Tea Party Socialism
I just wanted to add this article from Truthdig.
"Small" government activists don't actually believe in small government. They love and cherish these farm subsidy programs - the New Deal program created alongside Social Security and Glass-Steagall - which, when you call a spade a spade, is welfare. The American government spends something like $20 billion a year for farms not to grow crops.
Tea party activists want to keep gay couples from full citizenship, keep victimless crimes illegal and make sure a woman can't get a safe abortion. What I don't understand is this: abortion, the issue that divides this country more than anything I can think of, is a philosophically libertarian issue. Making it illegal automatically makes it a government vs. individual issue; otherwise who would be enforcing its illegality? Logically, and I hate it when people type in all caps, but,:
IF YOU WANT LIMITED GOVERNMENT, THEN YOU SUPPORT ABORTION RIGHTS.
I know I mentioned before my own inherent hypocrisy in the last post, but this seems to be kind of strange, yeah? I have not heard one Tea Party-er talk about this. They don't want government involved in health care, yet they demand government involvement in a medical procedure.
(Also, they are fine with spending 684 billion on the military budget, yet are worried about the solvency of Medicare. They hate the bailout of Wall Street, but are taking millions of dollars in contributions from the billionaire Koch brothers to finance their candidates.)
I am getting off track. The real question is: How can they mention reckless government spending without mentioning the military budget or farm subsidies?
"Small" government activists don't actually believe in small government. They love and cherish these farm subsidy programs - the New Deal program created alongside Social Security and Glass-Steagall - which, when you call a spade a spade, is welfare. The American government spends something like $20 billion a year for farms not to grow crops.
Tea party activists want to keep gay couples from full citizenship, keep victimless crimes illegal and make sure a woman can't get a safe abortion. What I don't understand is this: abortion, the issue that divides this country more than anything I can think of, is a philosophically libertarian issue. Making it illegal automatically makes it a government vs. individual issue; otherwise who would be enforcing its illegality? Logically, and I hate it when people type in all caps, but,:
IF YOU WANT LIMITED GOVERNMENT, THEN YOU SUPPORT ABORTION RIGHTS.
I know I mentioned before my own inherent hypocrisy in the last post, but this seems to be kind of strange, yeah? I have not heard one Tea Party-er talk about this. They don't want government involved in health care, yet they demand government involvement in a medical procedure.
(Also, they are fine with spending 684 billion on the military budget, yet are worried about the solvency of Medicare. They hate the bailout of Wall Street, but are taking millions of dollars in contributions from the billionaire Koch brothers to finance their candidates.)
I am getting off track. The real question is: How can they mention reckless government spending without mentioning the military budget or farm subsidies?
Modern Inequality
This is a blog. I am going to post some interesting things that I find. Mostly political things.
I am probably a socialist, I think. I don't agree with Republicans or attend any Tea Parties, but I don't think I like the Democrats (corporate money, state secrecy, military expansionism). The closest party that I can identify with are the Greens. Really though? I'm probably what this wikipedia article talks about.
I think that workers should own the companies that they work for. It's one of those ideas that makes the most sense but that no one really talks about.
I think corporations are fundamentally horrible. (I regonize the hypocrisy of this being on a Google owned site; it's nearly impossible to not be a hypocrite and have the views that I have. I am at the core, like most affluent people that think the way I do, filled with hypocrisy.)
I think that human health and happiness should be the focus, the endgame, for civilization. Instead we are continuing with this failed capitalist experiment, propping up zombie financial institutions with public money. Corporate welfare should be illegal.
I think that most of socieities problems come from inequality. This is less of an opinion and more of a view of the facts.
I think we are entering into new terrain as a civilization and as a global society. We have done a terrible job trying to articulate exactly what we are trying to do as a species.
Really, it's about purpose. What are we here for? Consumption? Reproduction? Sustainability?
But why am I starting to write in this?
It is mostly to stop bothering my beautiful and understanding girlfriend with my apparently endless running commentary on all things political, economic and sociological. I love you LC.
I am probably a socialist, I think. I don't agree with Republicans or attend any Tea Parties, but I don't think I like the Democrats (corporate money, state secrecy, military expansionism). The closest party that I can identify with are the Greens. Really though? I'm probably what this wikipedia article talks about.
I think that workers should own the companies that they work for. It's one of those ideas that makes the most sense but that no one really talks about.
I think corporations are fundamentally horrible. (I regonize the hypocrisy of this being on a Google owned site; it's nearly impossible to not be a hypocrite and have the views that I have. I am at the core, like most affluent people that think the way I do, filled with hypocrisy.)
I think that human health and happiness should be the focus, the endgame, for civilization. Instead we are continuing with this failed capitalist experiment, propping up zombie financial institutions with public money. Corporate welfare should be illegal.
I think that most of socieities problems come from inequality. This is less of an opinion and more of a view of the facts.
I think we are entering into new terrain as a civilization and as a global society. We have done a terrible job trying to articulate exactly what we are trying to do as a species.
Really, it's about purpose. What are we here for? Consumption? Reproduction? Sustainability?
But why am I starting to write in this?
It is mostly to stop bothering my beautiful and understanding girlfriend with my apparently endless running commentary on all things political, economic and sociological. I love you LC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)