Category Archives: Republicans

Economic Organization Says Trump Is the Number 1 Threat to the World Economy

Here.

The Economist Intelligence Unit, run by the very rightwing pro-corporate magazine The Economist, said in an analysis that Trump is the number 1 threat to the world economy due to his opposition to free trade and the possible killing of the nightmarish and catastrophic Transpacific Partnership free trade deal (TPP).

I suppose we could say then that anything that The Economist says is terrible for the world economy is probably actually great for most of us and no doubt anything that The Economist says is good for the world economy is bad for most of us.

9 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Economics, Journalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

Hitlery Clinton Embracing Her Best Friend

Screen-Shot-2016-03-15-at-9.09.23-AM

BFF’s. Republicrat on the left, Dempublican on the right. Vote Establishment!

6 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Humor, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

Chomsky on Trump’s Appeal

Found on the net:

Though we do not have detailed data, it appears that Trump is appealing primarily to less educated White sectors of the population, lower middle class and working class, people who are angry, frustrated, frightened, bitter about the fact – and it is a fact – that they have been in many ways cast by the wayside. The neoliberal programs of the past generation have been harmful to affected populations almost everywhere, sometimes severely so.

Rising global inequality, which has reached extraordinary proportions, is one (and only one) of the many indications. Oxfam produces annual reports of poverty and inequality. In 2014, they found that about 90 individuals held half of total world wealth. In 2015, the number was reduced to 62. Meanwhile perhaps 5 million children are dying of starvation every year – more than 500 an hour, a tragedy that could easily be remedied by available resources.

Among the developed (OECD) societies, inequality is particularly prominent in the Anglophone countries, with the US well in the lead. Despite its unique advantages, by most measures of poverty and social justice the US ranks with the poorest OECD countries alongside of Greece, Mexico, Turkey, facts heightened by lavish displays of concentrated wealth.

The disparities have increased since the latest crash, with some 90% of growth going to 1% of the population. As widely reported, the global rich now live in a different world from the general population.

In the US, the neoliberal programs have led to stagnation or decline for much of the population, undermining of functioning democracy, and reduction of benefits and social welfare.

People do not have to read academic studies to know that real wages for male workers are about what they were in the 1960s while wealth has concentrated in very few hands; that corporate strategies have shifted manufacturing abroad; that a considerable majority of the population is virtually disenfranchised in that their representatives disregard their attitudes; and much more. Years ago, academic studies showed that the socioeconomic profile of abstention in the US matches those sectors in similar countries who vote for laborite or social democratic parties, lacking in our political system, which in some ways still reflects the Civil War.

We also cannot overlook the deeply rooted historical background of White supremacy and racism that has never been overcome and the increasing atomization of the society that leaves people alone and isolated, feeling helpless against forces that are crushing them. Under these circumstances it is not hard for demagogues to stir up anger against those who are even more victimized – immigrants, minorities, “welfare cheats” (demonized by Reaganite racist slurs) – and to stimulate highly exaggerated fears of threats ranging from the federal government to Islamic terrorists.

We should also remember that what we are witnessing is not entirely new. A decade ago, the distinguished scholar of German history Fritz Stern, writing in the establishment journal Foreign Affairs, opened a review of “the descent in Germany from decency to Nazi barbarism” by writing that “Today, I worry about the immediate future of the United States, the country that gave haven to German-speaking refugees in the 1930s,” himself included.

With implications for here and now that no reader can fail to discern, Stern reviewed Hitler’s demonic appeal to his “divine mission” as “Germany’s savior” in a “pseudoreligious transfiguration of politics” adapted to “traditional Christian forms,” ruling a government dedicated to “the basic principles” of the nation, with “Christianity as the foundation of our national morality and the family as the basis of national life.” Hitler’s hostility toward the “liberal secular state,” shared by much of the Protestant clergy, drove forward “a historic process in which resentment against a disenchanted secular world found deliverance in the ecstatic escape of unreason.”

That was ten years ago. The words resonate more ominously today.

It is also useful to compare the current malaise with the Great Depression in the 1930s, which I’m old enough to remember. Objectively, conditions were far worse than today. Subjectively, they were quite different as I could see even from my own extended family, many of them unemployed working class with limited education. Despite the grim conditions, there was a sense of hopefulness, a belief that we’ll get out of this together.

The labor movement had been virtually crushed by the 1920s, largely by force but reconstituted in the ‘30s with organization of the CIO and militant labor actions that helped induce a fairly sympathetic administration to institute significant social reforms. The unions also provided crucial forms of association and interaction, including educational and cultural opportunities. There were also lively political organizations – Communist, Socialist, others – participating actively in labor and civil rights actions and general intellectual life in which much of the working class participated.

Business publications warned of “the hazard facing industrialists” in “the rising political power of the masses,” but were powerless to stem the tide, though Reaction was building up by the late ‘30s and picked up forcefully when the war ended. This is not the place to review what has happened since, but one consequence is that the hopefulness of the ‘30s and the social struggles and achievements that inspired it have been largely supplanted by fear, despair, and isolation, opening the way to the Trump phenomenon, which should be cause for deep concern.

Perhaps the most favorable observation that can be made about his candidacy is that Cruz is even more dangerous, and the other likely Republican prospect, Rubio, is hardly less of a threat to the country and the world, at least if he means a word he says.

3 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Civil Rights, Economics, Government, History, Labor, Left, Modern, Neoliberalism, Politics, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Social Problems, Sociology, US, US Politics, USA, Whites

The Reason for Donald Trump’s Success

Trade.

All of the Democrat candidates but Sanders are free traders. All of the Republican candidates are free traders.

If you listen to Trump’s speeches, he talks over and over about trade. No one else, not even Sanders, is talking much or at all about trade. This, not racism and bigotry, is the source of Trump’s success with working class White voters. Neoliberalism has failed. Free trade has failed. And really the only person talking about this, and he is talking about it all the time in almost every single speech, is Donald Trump.

Hillary is a free trader. Bill was a free trader. Obama is a free trader. The majority of the Democratic Party leaders and elected officials are free traders.

Both Bushes were free traders. Reagan was a free trader. The entirety of  Republican Party leaders and elected officials are free traders.

The entirely of the US media from “right” to “left” is made up of free traders.

No one will talk about this. It’s the elephant in the room that no one will talk about because they all corrupted by and supporters of it. So instead of talking about trade, their Achilles heel, the elites of both parties talk about racism and bigotry. And they miss the point, probably deliberately. Deliberately because no one in the elites wants a conversation about free trade because they will probably lose that debate. So instead it gets the silent and deflection treatments.

Against free trade, Trump sounds a message, sincere or not:

One man is fighting back.

70 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Economics, Journalism, Neoliberalism, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

Ding, Dong, The Bitch Is Dead

Here.

What took her so long?

Of course the stupid US press today is full of gushing editorials about how great Nancy was. She was not great. She wasn’t even good. Nor was she even fair. She wasn’t even 50-50. Nancy sucked, plain and simple. She was lousy. Worse than that, she was downright malign.

Worse, her suckiness was emblematic of the suckiness of far too many Americans in the last 35 years.

Also, why must we praise everyone who dies here in the US? Did we praise Ted Bundy when he fried? Did we praise Stalin? Ok, so why praise Nancy? If those two are in Hell, she’s about ready to buy a house on the same flaming street where those two reside

Ronnie never really had any political values. When he was an actor in Hollywood and President of the Screen Actors Guild, he was known as a liberal Democrat. As governor of California, he was terrible with campus protesters, but he also legalized abortion. To tell the truth, his conversation to radical conservatism in the space of a mere decade was all down to his wife Nancy. Nancy came from a very wealthy and deeply conservative family of Old White Rich Elite stock. Old White Money.

She was a deeply reactionary ideologue at her very core. She was also a very political activist.

It’s not well known, but Nancy truly was the brains behind the Ronnie Raygun Frankenstein Monster. Ronnie wasn’t very smart, and he was easily manipulated into his political stance by his crafty and devious wife.

As long as majorities keep saying that Reagan was a great man and a hero, America is screwed. The percentage has been going down for some time now, but last I heard, it was still at 53%.

If you said that almost all of those are White people, especially older White people, you would be right.

Another problem is the silly “Reagan generations” of younger people who came of age during his era when it was groovy to be a Reaganite. Large numbers of these younger folks still love Reagan because, well, because they came of age during his era. Apparently there was no one else around to like. You can see this shockingly even in some non-Whites like Obama. Obama says Reagan is his political hero! That’s because he grew up under him, see?

Also I must tell you that as a liberal Democrat during the Reagan days, anti-Reagan even here in California during that era was seen as very uncool. I had a couple of girlfriends during that time, and I told both of them that I hated him and asked what they thought of him. They both said that they did not like him, but acted like they were sort of ashamed to say so and afraid of the consequences, the same way so many liberals will quietly say that they opposed the war on Iraq, once again ashamed and afraid of the consequences.

We say we are the leader of the Free World, but when it comes to criticizing our reactionary nut leaders and their insane decisions, people act like they are living under Stalin. White America is a funny place.

There was always a lot of hatred towards Reagan, an extremely polarizing man. We think that working class White men are all reactionaries now, but I remember working as a security guard at a trucking yard for truck drivers in 1984. There were trucks with pro-John Hinckley graffiti on them praising Hinckley as a hero. It sounds terrible, but some of us actually cheered when that guy shot Reagan.

That’s how much we hated him. We hated him!

The problem is that any country where the majority thinks that maniac was a great man is a screwed country. When that number finally dips below 50%, we can start talking about whether there is hope for America. But as long as it’s a majority, forget it. This aspect is where a declining White percentage of the US will actually be a good thing. We will finally rid ourselves of this idiotic conservatism nightmare, inspired entirely by US Whites, that has gripped us for 35 years now.

Nancy Reagan will never be a hero to the Alternative Left. Is she is one of your heroes, you’re in the wrong movement. The Alt Right is that-a-way.

50 Comments

Filed under California, Conservatism, Democrats, Left, Liberalism, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Republicans, US Politics, USA, Whites, Women

The Alternative Left Must Oppose Donald Trump

The guy’s a reactionary. He’s just another radical rightwing capitalist.

There are Leftists and people who call themselves socialists all over now saying how much they support Trump. They’re all crazy. There is not one single progressive thing about any aspect of his campaign. He’s just another rightwing Republican, albeit probably worse than most.

Any Leftist, socialist, progressive or liberal person supporting this maniac is out of their heads. This rightwing nut is bad for workers, consumers, the poor, the low income and the middle class. He is also bad for our Black and Muslim brothers and sisters in America.

As far as I am concerned, the Alternative Left absolutely most oppose Trump. We cannot support him in any way, shape or form.

No!

72 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Left, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

Trump’s Health Plan

Radical free market health plan.

It’s the same garbage that all the Republicans are pushing.

Block-granting Medicaid.

Weakening the FDA’s control over the pharmaceutical industry is terrible. So is streamlining the process for approval of new drugs.

The whole thing is awful. It will not do one single thing to make health care better in the US. Trump is just another rich radical rightwing Republican.

Awful:

  • Weakening control of the pharmaceutical industry and the Food and Drug Administration over drug testing, production and approval. It’s already far too streamlined and corrupt as it is. That’s why we have all these dangerous new pills allowed onto the market every year that injure and kill so many people. Loosening things up even more would be great for the pharmaceutical industry and terrible for everyone else.
  • Turning Medicaid into a block grant to the states, decentralizing the social welfare program from federal control. In other words, he will ruin Medicaid. Block-granting social programs is just a nice way of sticking it to the poor.

As a wealthy corporatist billionaire, I assume Trump much have a lot of rich buddies in the health care, health insurance, hospital, and pharmaceutical industries. This health plan is like a Republican Party dream come true. It will be great for all of those industries and terrible for everyone else. Everything for Trump, his companies and his rich pals and buddies in corporate America and nothing for anybody else.

5 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Government, Health, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

A Marxist View of Our Present Economic Crisis

Found on the Net:

My belief is that Monopoly Capital describes a unique period of U.S. history between 1945 and 1970, when large U.S. corporations dominated the U.S. economy and exported large amounts of goods overseas.

During this 25 year period – created by the convergence of two items – the devastation of European capitalism and the New Deal promotion of unions – companies could give decent wages to workers, raise prices to pay for those wages, and export profitably to other nations. That was the era of Monopoly Capital and the era of large amounts of surplus capital. The manufacturing sector generated 40 to 50% of corporate profits during this time. Note that this time period is the period of rising wages/income that stopped in 1973.

However, in the 1970s this system broke down. More and more U.S. companies were competing against cheaper, higher quality imports from Japan, Germany, and a few other countries. The trade balance went into deficit around 1973 and since then we have a huge trade imbalance. Profits for manufacturing companies went down, jobs were lost, and companies attacked their unions because they no longer had monopoly pricing power. Reagan breaking the airline controllers union and Volker sending interest rates over 15% were markers of the period.

During the Reagan-Bush era there was an industrial depression and a corresponding boom in financial, real estate, and trade (the FIRE sector). By the 1990s, the FIRE sector was generating 40% of corporate profits and manufacturing profits were plunging below 20% of profits. Thus, the onslaught of foreign competition in manufactured goods ignited a tidal wave of job cuts and pay cuts and destruction of unions and the loss of pensions etc.

Now the capitalists all around the world (including the Chinese capitalists) have squeezed so much out of workers, there isn’t enough demand in the world to buy all of their products. So, for example, now U.S. corps have a trillion dollars sitting in bank accounts overseas because they have nowhere to invest it profitably in the U.S. or anywhere. So I believe the age of inequality is the results of fierce worldwide competition which forced wages down which now leads to to what Marx called a “Realization” crisis – capitalists have trouble using their greatly increased share of the surplus because there isn’t enough demand to invest it into new profitable ventures.

Finally, a more technical Marxist issue. It is unclear if, in a competitive world market, things like marketing and research into new products are surplus or whether they are necessary to realize profits. Changing tail fin designs on cars was unnecessary in the 1950s, but doing research on hybrid engines in the 2000s was necessary for American companies to compete with Japanese companies. Thus, the whole measurement of the surplus changes depending on how necessary the components are.

There are charts and articles in the past five years that show how the share of income going to labor is falling and the share that goes to capital is growing. But the cause of that seems to me be falling real wages rather than an abstract surplus being grabbed. I suggest you look into this literature plus the work of Robert Brenner who wrote The Economics of Global Turbulence which is a Marxist account of the new world of capitalist competition and squeezing labor and labor unions.

As usual, the Marxist analysis of capitalism is as immaculate now as it was when Marx himself was writing. Of course, there is not a single conservative, rich person or capitalist on Earth who will agree with this assessment because these people have a unique view of what constitutes a true or false question.

To capitalists, the rich and conservatives, a question is true or false depending only on certain variables.

To these people an answer to a question is false if:

  • It makes my ideology look bad
  • It makes capitalism look bad
  • It interferes with my profits or promotes a view that may lower my profits.
  • It conflicts with my ideology.

An answer to a question is true if:

  • It makes my ideology look good
  • It makes capitalism look good
  • It makes me more money or promotes a view that increases my profits.
  • It is congruent with my ideology.

A shorter version is that for the rich, conservatives and capitalists, anything that increases my wealth or profits is a true statement and anything that lowers my wealth or profits is a false statement.

As Upton Sinclair noted, it’s hard for a man to truthfully answer a question when his money and profits are involved in the answer. He will always support any answer that is good for his money and profits, and he will always oppose any answer that is bad for his money and profits.

So in a capitalist society, philosophy itself goes out the window. Not only is God dead, but philosophy itself is dead. Philosophy can be thought of as a search for the truth. Once a society decides that “the truth is whatever makes me money, and falsehood is whatever makes me less money” then the whole concept of truth and falsehood is out the window.

Not only is philosophy dead, but science is too. Inevitably, science is ruined in a capitalist society. The capitalists soon take over most of the sciences and the universities, and both the universities and the sciences become utterly corrupted by money. When the views in so-called scientific publications are dependent on whether or not that view makes people money or loses people money, then empiricism itself is history.

Now the Marxists have no money whatsoever riding on the answers to the questions that they are answering, so there is no motivation for them to lie. That’s why the best analyses of whatever is going on in any capitalist situation anywhere on Earth will always come from the Marxists.

I have looked over the statement above and I cannot see one false statement anywhere in it. Of course, you will never find such an analysis anywhere in any US media outlet because this analysis if adopted stands to lose the capitalists, the rich and the conservatives (these people control 100% of US media) a lot of money.

The real problem is that in a capitalist society almost everyone is lying a good part of the time. From the time you awaken til the time you bed down, the individual in capitalist society is assaulted by the endless lies of conservatives, capitalists and the rich (who are really the same people).

The individual goes to the media for answers to questions about this or that, and all he finds are nothing but lies. 95% of media consumers are not intelligent or sophisticated enough to parse the lies from the facts. I can do it myself, but I have a genius IQ, am nearly unemployed, and I have been studying political economy for decades. Most people do not have my gifts or attributes necessary to figure out what is going on. Even with my gifts and attributes, it is often very difficult for me to figure out what is going on because the US media is usually in Lockstep Lie Mode on so many issues. The only way I can figure things out is by going to alternative media on the Net, and even then, it is not so easy to piece it all together.

What are the consequences of living in a society where you are lied to about as much as a North Korean? This is not known, but I would assume that the consumers of these lies often start lying a lot themselves, as they parrot the media, and soon find it nearly impossible to tell fact from fiction. Because most folks seem oblivious to the idea that they can even tell fact from fiction, and do not even seem to be care that they are being lied to, the astute individual in a capitalist country quickly takes the masses as suckers who cannot even figure out if they are being conned.

If people actually do start mimicking the dishonestly of the elites, politics and the media, then you end up in a Society of Liars or at least a society of folks who think lying is no big deal. Now the fact-conscious person, in addition to having to tease apart the media-politics propaganda, also has to deal with probable mass lying in his personal world as he goes about business in a capitalist society.

I can’t see how sort of mass promotion of degeneracy and depravity in terms of moral philosophy can possibly have a good effect on the body politic.

And perhaps even more importantly, who wants to live in a Society of Liars anyway? Is it fun? I don’t find it to be a blast. It strikes me as profoundly discouraging and depressing.

12 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Economics, Higher Education, History, Journalism, Labor, Left, Marxism, Philosophy, Political Science, Politics, Religion, Republicans, Science, Social Problems, Sociology, US, US Politics

Who Would You Vote For?

12729303_10153883330643077_2185213155926612994_n

Who do you vote for?

I say vote for Pinestraw. He’s the most intelligent and capable candidate of the three.

6 Comments

Filed under Humor, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

Death to the WTO

Here.

You wonder why I pretty much hate the whole world? Because the whole world has been taken over by “free trade” corporate capitalists like the vermin in this article. Ever meet anyone opposed to “free trade?” Neither do I. Ever seen a politician opposed to “free trade” agreements or organizations? Neither do I, and that’s because there pretty much aren’t any.

Republicans: The party of “free trade”

Democrats: The party of “free trade”

Most “Democratic Party liberals” I talk to: The party of “free trade.”

Most other political parties on Earth: The parties of “free trade”

Most “socialist” or “Communist” (sic) parties on Earth: The parties of “free trade.”

As you can see, in this wonderful world of Democratic capitalism, voters get their choices of all sorts of different candidates. Isn’t popular rule great? Except no it isn’t great because voters get to choose between thousands of different candidates, all of whom want the same thing! Isn’t free choice grand?

I suppose we could have a revolution.

What should we do with all the “free trade” politicians?

  • a. Hang them from lamp-posts.
  • b. Behead them and put their heads on spikes
  • c. Put bullets in their heads, Stalin-style.
  • d. All of the above.
  • e. Those are your only choices.

Hey these free trade pricks don’t give us any choices about the matter, how bout we don’t give them any choices either?

6 Comments

Filed under Asia, Capitalism, Capitalists, Democrats, Economics, Environmentalism, India, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Scum, South Asia, US Politics, USA