Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
In Robert E. Gamer's book "The Developing Nations" is a chapter called "Why Men Do Not Revolt." In it Gamer notes that although the oppressed often do revolt, the object of their hostility is misplaced. They vent their fury on a political puppet, someone who masks colonial power, a despised racial or ethnic group or an apostate within their own political class. The useless battles serve as an effective mask for what Gamer calls the "patron-client" networks that are responsible for the continuity of colonial oppression. The squabbles among the oppressed, the political campaigns between candidates who each are servants of colonial power, Gamer writes, absolve the actual centers of power from addressing the conditions that cause the frustrations of the people. Inequities, political disenfranchisement and injustices are never seriously addressed. "The government merely does the minimum necessary to prevent those few who are prone toward political action from organizing into politically effective groups," he writes.
Gamer and many others who study the nature of colonial rule offer the best insights into the functioning of our corporate state. We have been, like nations on the periphery of empire, colonized. We are controlled by tiny corporate entities that have no loyalty to the nation and indeed in the language of traditional patriotism are traitors. They strip us of our resources, keep us politically passive and enrich themselves at our expense. The mechanisms of control are familiar to those whom the Martinique-born French psychiatrist and writer Frantz Fanon called "the wretched of the earth," including African-Americans. The colonized are denied job security. Incomes are reduced to subsistence level. The poor are plunged into desperation. Mass movements, such as labor unions, are dismantled. The school system is degraded so only the elites have access to a superior education. Laws are written to legalize corporate plunder and abuse, as well as criminalize dissent. And the ensuing fear and instability—keenly felt this past weekend by the more than 200,000 Americans who lost their unemployment benefits—ensure political passivity by diverting all personal energy toward survival. It is an old, old game.
A change of power does not require the election of a Mitt Romney or a Barack Obama or a Democratic majority in Congress, or an attempt to reform the system or electing progressive candidates, but rather a destruction of corporate domination of the political process—Gamer's "patron-client" networks. It requires the establishment of new mechanisms of governance to distribute wealth and protect resources, to curtail corporate power, to cope with the destruction of the ecosystem and to foster the common good. But we must first recognize ourselves as colonial subjects. We must accept that we have no effective voice in the way we are governed. We must accept the hollowness of electoral politics, the futility of our political theater, and we must destroy the corporate structure itself.
The danger the corporate state faces does not come from the poor. The poor, those Karl Marx dismissed as the Lumpenproletariat, do not mount revolutions, although they join them and often become cannon fodder. The real danger to the elite comes from déclassé intellectuals, those educated middle-class men and women who are barred by a calcified system from advancement. Artists without studios or theaters, teachers without classrooms, lawyers without clients, doctors without patients and journalists without newspapers descend economically. They become, as they mingle with the underclass, a bridge between the worlds of the elite and the oppressed. And they are the dynamite that triggers revolt.
This is why the Occupy movement frightens the corporate elite. What fosters revolution is not misery, but the gap between what people expect from their lives and what is offered. This is especially acute among the educated and the talented. They feel, with much justification, that they have been denied what they deserve. They set out to rectify this injustice. And the longer the injustice festers, the more radical they become.
The response of a dying regime—and our corporate regime is dying—is to employ increasing levels of force, and to foolishly refuse to ameliorate the chronic joblessness, foreclosures, mounting student debt, lack of medical insurance and exclusion from the centers of power. Revolutions are fueled by an inept and distant ruling class that perpetuates political paralysis. This ensures its eventual death.
In every revolutionary movement I covered in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, the leadership emerged from déclassé intellectuals. The leaders were usually young or middle-aged, educated and always unable to meet their professional and personal aspirations. They were never part of the power elite, although often their parents had been. They were conversant in the language of power as well as the language of oppression. It is the presence of large numbers of déclassé intellectuals that makes the uprisings in Spain, Egypt, Greece and finally the United States threatening to the overlords at Goldman Sachs, ExxonMobil and JPMorgan Chase. They must face down opponents who understand, in a way the uneducated often do not, the lies disseminated on behalf of corporations by the public relations industry. These déclassé intellectuals, because they are conversant in economics and political theory, grasp that those who hold power, real power, are not the elected mandarins in Washington but the criminal class on Wall Street.
This is what made Malcolm X so threatening to the white power structure. He refused to countenance Martin Luther King's fiction that white power and white liberals would ever lift black people out of economic squalor. King belatedly came to share Malcolm's view. Malcolm X named the enemy. He exposed the lies. And until we see the corporate state, and the games it is playing with us, with the same kind of clarity, we will be nothing more than useful idiots.
"This is an era of hypocrisy," Malcolm X said. "When white folks pretend that they want Negroes to be free, and Negroes pretend to white folks that they really believe that white folks want 'em to be free, it's an era of hypocrisy, brother. You fool me and I fool you. You pretend that you're my brother and I pretend that I really believe you believe you're my brother."
Those within a demoralized ruling elite, like characters in a Chekhov play, increasingly understand that the system that enriches and empowers them is corrupt and decayed. They become cynical. They do not govern effectively. They retreat into hedonism. They no longer believe their own rhetoric. They devote their energies to stealing and exploiting as much, as fast, as possible. They pillage their own institutions, as we have seen with the newly disclosed loss of $2 billion within JPMorgan Chase, the meltdown of Chesapeake Energy Corp. or the collapse of Enron and Lehman Brothers. The elites become cannibals. They consume each other. This is what happens in the latter stages of all dying regimes. Louis XIV pillaged his own nobility by revoking patents of nobility and reselling them. It is what most corporations do to their shareholders. A dying ruling class, in short, no longer acts to preserve its own longevity. It becomes fashionable, even in the rarefied circles of the elite, to ridicule and laugh at the political puppets that are the public face of the corporate state.
"Ideas that have outlived their day may hobble about the world for years," Alexander Herzen wrote, "but it is hard for them ever to lead and dominate life. Such ideas never gain complete possession of a man, or they gain possession only of incomplete people."
This loss of faith means that when it comes time to use force, the elites employ it haphazardly and inefficiently, in large part because they are unsure of the loyalty of the foot soldiers on the streets charged with carrying out repression.
Revolutions take time. The American Revolution began with protests against the Stamp Act of 1765 but did not erupt until a decade later. The 1917 revolution in Russia started with a dress rehearsal in 1905. The most effective revolutions, including the Russian Revolution, have been largely nonviolent. There are always violent radicals who carry out bombings and assassinations, but they hinder, especially in the early stages, more than help revolutions. The anarchist Peter Kropotkin during the Russian Revolution condemned the radical terrorists, asserting that they only demoralized and frightened away the movement's followers and discredited authentic anarchism.
Radical violent groups cling like parasites to popular protests. The Black Panthers, the American Indian Movement, the Weather Underground, the Red Brigades and the Symbionese Liberation Army arose in the ferment of the 1960s. Violent radicals are used by the state to justify harsh repression. They scare the mainstream from the movement. They thwart the goal of all revolutions, which is to turn the majority against an isolated and discredited ruling class. These violent fringe groups are seductive to those who yearn for personal empowerment through hyper-
masculinity and violence, but they do little to advance the cause. The primary role of radical extremists, such as Maximilien Robespierre and Vladimir Lenin, is to hijack successful revolutions. They unleash a reign
...
>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>In Robert E. Gamer's book "The Developing Nations" is a chapter called >"Why Men Do Not Revolt." In it Gamer notes that although the oppressed >often do revolt, the object of their hostility is misplaced. They vent >their fury on a political puppet, someone who masks colonial power, a >despised racial or ethnic group or an apostate within their own political >class. The useless battles serve as an effective mask for what Gamer >calls the "patron-client" networks that are responsible for the >continuity of colonial oppression. The squabbles among the oppressed, the >political campaigns between candidates who each are servants of colonial >power, Gamer writes, absolve the actual centers of power from addressing >the conditions that cause the frustrations of the people. Inequities, >political disenfranchisement and injustices are never seriously >addressed. "The government merely does the minimum necessary to prevent >those few who are prone toward political action from organizing into >politically effective groups," he writes.
>Gamer and many others who study the nature of colonial rule offer the >best insights into the functioning of our corporate state. We have been, >like nations on the periphery of empire, colonized. We are controlled by >tiny corporate entities that have no loyalty to the nation and indeed in >the language of traditional patriotism are traitors. They strip us of our >resources, keep us politically passive and enrich themselves at our >expense. The mechanisms of control are familiar to those whom the >Martinique-born French psychiatrist and writer Frantz Fanon called "the >wretched of the earth," including African-Americans. The colonized are >denied job security. Incomes are reduced to subsistence level. The poor >are plunged into desperation. Mass movements, such as labor unions, are >dismantled. The school system is degraded so only the elites have access >to a superior education. Laws are written to legalize corporate plunder >and abuse, as well as criminalize dissent. And the ensuing fear and >instability—keenly felt this past weekend by the more than 200,000 >Americans who lost their unemployment benefits—ensure political passivity >by diverting all personal energy toward survival. It is an old, old game.
>A change of power does not require the election of a Mitt Romney or a >Barack Obama or a Democratic majority in Congress, or an attempt to >reform the system or electing progressive candidates, but rather a >destruction of corporate domination of the political process—Gamer's >"patron-client" networks. It requires the establishment of new mechanisms >of governance to distribute wealth and protect resources, to curtail >corporate power, to cope with the destruction of the ecosystem and to >foster the common good. But we must first recognize ourselves as colonial >subjects. We must accept that we have no effective voice in the way we >are governed. We must accept the hollowness of electoral politics, the >futility of our political theater, and we must destroy the corporate >structure itself.
>The danger the corporate state faces does not come from the poor. The >poor, those Karl Marx dismissed as the Lumpenproletariat, do not mount >revolutions, although they join them and often become cannon fodder. The >real danger to the elite comes from déclassé intellectuals, those >educated middle-class men and women who are barred by a calcified system >from advancement. Artists without studios or theaters, teachers without >classrooms, lawyers without clients, doctors without patients and >journalists without newspapers descend economically. They become, as they >mingle with the underclass, a bridge between the worlds of the elite and >the oppressed. And they are the dynamite that triggers revolt.
>This is why the Occupy movement frightens the corporate elite. What >fosters revolution is not misery, but the gap between what people expect >from their lives and what is offered. This is especially acute among the >educated and the talented. They feel, with much justification, that they >have been denied what they deserve. They set out to rectify this >injustice. And the longer the injustice festers, the more radical they >become.
>The response of a dying regime—and our corporate regime is dying—is to >employ increasing levels of force, and to foolishly refuse to ameliorate >the chronic joblessness, foreclosures, mounting student debt, lack of >medical insurance and exclusion from the centers of power. Revolutions >are fueled by an inept and distant ruling class that perpetuates >political paralysis. This ensures its eventual death.
>In every revolutionary movement I covered in Latin America, Africa and >the Middle East, the leadership emerged from déclassé intellectuals. The >leaders were usually young or middle-aged, educated and always unable to >meet their professional and personal aspirations. They were never part of >the power elite, although often their parents had been. They were >conversant in the language of power as well as the language of >oppression. It is the presence of large numbers of déclassé intellectuals >that makes the uprisings in Spain, Egypt, Greece and finally the United >States threatening to the overlords at Goldman Sachs, ExxonMobil and >JPMorgan Chase. They must face down opponents who understand, in a way >the uneducated often do not, the lies disseminated on behalf of >corporations by the public relations industry. These déclassé >intellectuals, because they are conversant in economics and political >theory, grasp that those who hold power, real power, are not the elected >mandarins in Washington but the criminal class on Wall Street.
>This is what made Malcolm X so threatening to the white power structure. >He refused to countenance Martin Luther King's fiction that white power >and white liberals would ever lift black people out of economic squalor. >King belatedly came to share Malcolm's view. Malcolm X named the enemy. >He exposed the lies. And until we see the corporate state, and the games >it is playing with us, with the same kind of clarity, we will be nothing >more than useful idiots.
>"This is an era of hypocrisy," Malcolm X said. "When white folks pretend >that they want Negroes to be free, and Negroes pretend to white folks >that they really believe that white folks want 'em to be free, it's an >era of hypocrisy, brother. You fool me and I fool you. You pretend that >you're my brother and I pretend that I really believe you believe you're >my brother."
>Those within a demoralized ruling elite, like characters in a Chekhov >play, increasingly understand that the system that enriches and empowers >them is corrupt and decayed. They become cynical. They do not govern >effectively. They retreat into hedonism. They no longer believe their own >rhetoric. They devote their energies to stealing and exploiting as much, >as fast, as possible. They pillage their own institutions, as we have >seen with the newly disclosed loss of $2 billion within JPMorgan Chase, >the meltdown of Chesapeake Energy Corp. or the collapse of Enron and >Lehman Brothers. The elites become cannibals. They consume each other. >This is what happens in the latter stages of all dying regimes. Louis XIV >pillaged his own nobility by revoking patents of nobility and reselling >them. It is what most corporations do to their shareholders. A dying >ruling class, in short, no longer acts to preserve its own longevity. It >becomes fashionable, even in the rarefied circles of the elite, to >ridicule and laugh at the political puppets that are the public face of >the corporate state.
>"Ideas that have outlived their day may hobble about the world for >years," Alexander Herzen wrote, "but it is hard for them ever to lead and >dominate life. Such ideas never gain complete possession of a man, or >they gain possession only of incomplete people."
>This loss of faith means that when it comes time to use force, the elites >employ it haphazardly and inefficiently, in large part because they are >unsure of the loyalty of the foot soldiers on the streets charged with >carrying out repression.
>Revolutions take time. The American Revolution began with protests >against the Stamp Act of 1765 but did not erupt until a decade later. The >1917 revolution in Russia started with a dress rehearsal in 1905. The >most effective revolutions, including the Russian Revolution, have been >largely nonviolent. There are always violent radicals who carry out >bombings and assassinations, but they hinder, especially in the early >stages, more than help revolutions. The anarchist Peter Kropotkin during >the Russian Revolution condemned the radical terrorists, asserting that >they only demoralized and frightened away the movement's followers and >discredited authentic anarchism.
>Radical violent groups cling like parasites to popular protests. The >Black Panthers, the American Indian Movement, the Weather Underground, >the Red Brigades and the Symbionese Liberation Army arose in the ferment >of the 1960s. Violent radicals are used by the state to justify harsh >repression. They scare the mainstream from the movement. They thwart the >goal of all revolutions, which is to turn the majority against an >isolated and discredited ruling class. These violent fringe groups are >seductive to those who yearn for personal empowerment
>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>the tax base.
> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>want to end up like Greece.
> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
rich are leaving California and NY.
We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
for their positions than the countries true welfare.
Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
money, it's that government spends to much"
>>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>>the tax base.
>> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>>want to end up like Greece.
>> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
>It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
>know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
>Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
So your saying we need a super majority of Eddies and Richards.
No thanks the Koch can kiss my ass.
>Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
>responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
>rich are leaving California and NY.
That is happening now.
>We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
>for their positions than the countries true welfare.
>Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
>money, it's that government spends to much"
Well in this you are half right IMO. The Bush Tax cuts were a
mistake. Deregulating the financial markets was a mistake.
The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy. The Liberal
Progressives want a socialist government. I can support neither.
Guess I better start packing my bags. ;-))
>>>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>>> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>>>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>>>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>>>the tax base.
>>> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>>>want to end up like Greece.
>>> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>>>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
>>It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
>>know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
>>Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
> So your saying we need a super majority of Eddies and Richards.
>No thanks the Koch can kiss my ass.
>>Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
>>responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
>>rich are leaving California and NY.
> That is happening now.
The trains still run on time, the video stores still rent The Scent of
a Woman and Croggers still sells bread for less than a days wages.
>>We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
>>for their positions than the countries true welfare.
>>Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
>>money, it's that government spends to much"
> Well in this you are half right IMO. The Bush Tax cuts were a
>mistake. Deregulating the financial markets was a mistake.
The Bush tax breaks post 9/11 rocked the frigging world!
The greatest expansion in American history took place after 9/11
because of tax cuts!
It's only when Dims took both House and Senate did we start declining.
Never forget that! Then When AlGore tried to steal the election the
markets saw it as an attempt at coup d'état. Richard Daley went to
Miami/Dade and planted the idea that votes weren't counted. The
ignorant (Obama's civilian army) community organized under Van
Jones/ACORN resulting in unrest.
You may have a short memory but I don't. The Bush tax cuts resulted in
the greatest economic expansion in world history!
> The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy.
No we don't! We want the market to decide it's own future. Companies
get big because over regulation prevents the little guy from
competing.
It costs a lot of money to get set up in business so overhead must be
covered. Tack on permits, impact studies, Certificate of Occupancy ,
EPA regulations governing cleaning chemicals and child labor, HTF and
any small business compete with the mean rich chains who serve
Monsanto crap?
The Liberal
>Progressives want a socialist government. I can support neither.
>Guess I better start packing my bags. ;-))
Reduce the Marxist grip on once free spirit, vote Tea Party
On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:21:33 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>On Mon, 14 May 2012 11:54:59 -0700, MattB
><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>> The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy. The Liberal
>>Progressives want a socialist government. I can support neither.
>>Guess I better start packing my bags. ;-))
>You get more stupid each day, Mattloon
>Name a fucking industry, business, law, policy, program that ANY
>government under Carter, Clinton or Obama has taken over and then
>allowed it to be run by fiat from the public, or by government with an
>goal of control of means of production and distribution
>You keep the cheap use of words flowing as if they had any meaning.
>THere is no "Socialism"
Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
>There is SOCIAL POLICY that government is required (by the people) to
>address in lieu of private accomodation. (health, infrastructure,
>clean water, etc)
On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:49:53 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:41:07 -0700, MattB
><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>>>THere is no "Socialism"
>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
>Wouldn't want anything of yours
>What "we" want is for you to pay yer taxes like a good American and
>stop bitching about it when you have to pay more than your share
>because of the political ideology you support.
See again you make things up. I have said I am willing for the Bush
Tax cuts to be allowed to expire. Let the tax rate go back to what
they were in the Clinton years. No Problem. Then again I think
people in Sec 8 should clean the area also. Welfare people should
help out by cleaning roads. They should be given the chance to take 1
area of study in a field to find work.
I have said this over and over. Had some heated discussions with
Eddie and Richard about it.
>>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>>the tax base.
>> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>>want to end up like Greece.
>> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
> It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
> know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
> Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
Well, so much for poster "MattB"'s call for compromise. The right-wing scumbag side has spoken.
> Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
> responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
> rich are leaving California and NY.
The first order of business of the next federal government will be to revoke all visas of the rich who are renouncing their U.S. citizenship. The corporations will no longer get government contracts, since those are easily conditioned on U.S. citizenship.
Wanna make China and India rich? Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Hope your home in Shanghai or Mumbai is able to insulate itself from the filthy infrastructure the 99% of those countries live in. Oh, we hope that you are not one of the aristocrats that are caught in their villas when the popular peoples' revolutions take over.
> We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
> for their positions than the countries true welfare.
Greece's problem is different from that of France, you idiot.
France sees the UK under its right wing and its return to a recession under the Tories and say, "it's time for GROWTH, not AUSTERITY."
If the American voter is smart, it will put out of office all those crepe hangers and those who treasonously put party over nation and in the process try to hurt the nation. Time to put the Democrats back in charge so that they can let Obama implement his program fully, and not halfway.
> Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
> money, it's that government spends to much"
I hope Magnus knew how to spell English better.
Obama has offered the TRULY BALANCED approach: entitlement cuts and adjustments as well as tax increases on the criminally wealthy. Even when the Bush Tax Cuts for the 1% expire, it won't be enough. The days of the fabulously wealthy living it up are over, but only if America cleans out the right wing scum causing gridlock in the Congress.
Obama has stopped one of Bush's criminal and expensive wars, and will attempt to cut down to 10% of what is being spent in Afghanistan.
Obama has made Bush and Cheney look like amateurs in the national security area. No one----especially the Vietnam draft dodger Willard---has the nerve to carry Obama's shoes on this subject.
-- America's fascists, who are recognized by the name "Republican" and "Teabagger," are the evil that festers
when good, decent people look on in apathy, doing nothing.
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:16:11 -0700, MattB
> <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:49:53 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:41:07 -0700, MattB
>>> <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
--->
>>>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
>>> Wouldn't want anything of yours
>>> What "we" want is for you to pay yer taxes like a good American and
>>> stop bitching about it when you have to pay more than your share
>>> because of the political ideology you support.
>> See again you make things up. I have said I am willing for the Bush
>> Tax cuts to be allowed to expire. Let the tax rate go back to what
>> they were in the Clinton years. No Problem. Then again I think
>> people in Sec 8 should clean the area also. Welfare people should
>> help out by cleaning roads. They should be given the chance to take 1
>> area of study in a field to find work.
> Ah--so involuntary servitude is on your plate?
You don't seem surprised by that, and of course private
prisons are already skirting labor laws in a similar manner..
> CLeaning roads is a government function.
And sometimes community-oriented groups..
>> All Conservatives aren't the same.
> All conservatives who embrace the Republican (because they represent
> conservatives) are the same.
On Tue, 15 May 2012 07:24:43 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:16:11 -0700, MattB
><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:49:53 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:41:07 -0700, MattB
>>><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>THere is no "Socialism"
>>>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
>>>Wouldn't want anything of yours
>>>What "we" want is for you to pay yer taxes like a good American and
>>>stop bitching about it when you have to pay more than your share
>>>because of the political ideology you support.
>> See again you make things up. I have said I am willing for the Bush
>>Tax cuts to be allowed to expire. Let the tax rate go back to what
>>they were in the Clinton years. No Problem. Then again I think
>>people in Sec 8 should clean the area also. Welfare people should
>>help out by cleaning roads. They should be given the chance to take 1
>>area of study in a field to find work.
>Ah--so involuntary servitude is on your plate?
So that is what you think of people with Jobs. OK.
Like I thought you just want free handouts.
>CLeaning roads is a government function.
Yes I see why some areas are always trashy walk through Detroit or
Tampa
and you can tell what type of area you are in by the trash. Yes I know
government should have someone follow you and pick up after you.
. You know everywhere I live we clean our own neighborhoods not the
government.
>> All Conservatives aren't the same.
>All conservatives who embrace the Republican (because they represent
>conservatives) are the same.
Whatever
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.2 (Build 2424) - not licensed for commercial
use: www.pgp.com
>>>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>>> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>>>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>>>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>>>the tax base.
>>> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>>>want to end up like Greece.
>>> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>>>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
>> It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
>> know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
>> Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
>Well, so much for poster "MattB"'s call for compromise. The right-wing >scumbag side has spoken.
It's Oboobuh who's going after the scumbag/OWS vote and I'm no Oboobuh
voter
>> Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
>> responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
>> rich are leaving California and NY.
>The first order of business of the next federal government will be to revoke >all visas of the rich who are renouncing their U.S. citizenship. The >corporations will no longer get government contracts, since those are easily >conditioned on U.S. citizenship.
More Marxist double down yoking the productive
>Wanna make China and India rich? Don't let the door hit your ass on the way >out.
It's Liberals who took the Pledge of Allegiance out of public schools
Hope your home in Shanghai or Mumbai is able to insulate itself from
>the filthy infrastructure the 99% of those countries live in.
Irland has 11% corporate tax and fair weather.
Oh, we hope
>that you are not one of the aristocrats that are caught in their villas when >the popular peoples' revolutions take over.
Nazis taking over your brain? From Marxism to Fascism in just a few
paragraphs.
>> We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
>> for their positions than the countries true welfare.
>Greece's problem is different from that of France, you idiot.
>France sees the UK under its right wing and its return to a recession under >the Tories and say, "it's time for GROWTH, not AUSTERITY."
Growth by stealing the wealth of the productive?
>If the American voter is smart, it will put out of office all those crepe >hangers and those who treasonously put party over nation and in the process >try to hurt the nation. Time to put the Democrats back in charge so that >they can let Obama implement his program fully, and not halfway.
Dims had the Senate, House of Representatives since 2007 and the
Presidency since 2008, the economy plummeted with their stewardship.
Obama came into office threatening the oil industry and fuel prices
necessarily skyrocketed. He threatened healthcare and insurance
companies raised prices as did hospitals.
There's NOTHING Oboobuh's done to benefit anyone other than his
friends.
>> Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
>> money, it's that government spends to much"
>I hope Magnus knew how to spell English better.
>Obama has offered the TRULY BALANCED approach: entitlement cuts and >adjustments as well as tax increases on the criminally wealthy. Even when >the Bush Tax Cuts for the 1% expire, it won't be enough. The days of the >fabulously wealthy living it up are over, but only if America cleans out the >right wing scum causing gridlock in the Congress.
NOT A SINGLE 'YES' VOTE WAS CAST ON OBAMA'S BUDGET!!! Dims never
proposed a budget.
You're a commie, aint'chuh?
>Obama has stopped one of Bush's criminal and expensive wars, and will attempt >to cut down to 10% of what is being spent in Afghanistan.
...only to have the Islamo-fascist Taliban train terorists again.
>Obama has made Bush and Cheney look like amateurs in the national security >area.
Oboobuh is a clown
No one----especially the Vietnam draft dodger Willard---has the nerve
>>>>>Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
>>>>>Monday, 14 May 2012 10:17 By Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
>>>> I have seen a few OWS demands that are fair and some that are
>>>>crazy. You do need to be careful. The people you need to pay for
>>>>all this are leaving the US. Over 1000 this year. You need to keep
>>>>the tax base.
>>>> I do agree we need to raise taxes and cut spending. We just don't
>>>>want to end up like Greece.
>>>> Personally I consider both the Tea Party and the Liberal Progressives
>>>>to be wrong. We need a middle ground.
>>> It'll never happen until we elect strict constructionists, people who
>>> know how to cut fat and waste. Romney needs a super majority of Tea
>>> Party Conservatives (not necessarily Republican) in both houses.
>>Well, so much for poster "MattB"'s call for compromise. The right-wing >>scumbag side has spoken.
>It's Oboobuh who's going after the scumbag/OWS vote and I'm no Oboobuh
>voter
I'm not either. Compromise to the liberal (freaks) Progressives
is total surrender.
>>> Without painful austerity and a projected message of fiscal
>>> responsibility, capital will continue to leave America just as the
>>> rich are leaving California and NY.
>>The first order of business of the next federal government will be to revoke >>all visas of the rich who are renouncing their U.S. citizenship. The >>corporations will no longer get government contracts, since those are easily >>conditioned on U.S. citizenship.
>More Marxist double down yoking the productive
>>Wanna make China and India rich? Don't let the door hit your ass on the way >>out.
>It's Liberals who took the Pledge of Allegiance out of public schools
> Hope your home in Shanghai or Mumbai is able to insulate itself from >>the filthy infrastructure the 99% of those countries live in.
>Irland has 11% corporate tax and fair weather.
> Oh, we hope >>that you are not one of the aristocrats that are caught in their villas when >>the popular peoples' revolutions take over.
>Nazis taking over your brain? From Marxism to Fascism in just a few
>paragraphs.
>>> We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
>>> for their positions than the countries true welfare.
>>Greece's problem is different from that of France, you idiot.
>>France sees the UK under its right wing and its return to a recession under >>the Tories and say, "it's time for GROWTH, not AUSTERITY."
>Growth by stealing the wealth of the productive?
>>If the American voter is smart, it will put out of office all those crepe >>hangers and those who treasonously put party over nation and in the process >>try to hurt the nation. Time to put the Democrats back in charge so that >>they can let Obama implement his program fully, and not halfway.
>Dims had the Senate, House of Representatives since 2007 and the
>Presidency since 2008, the economy plummeted with their stewardship.
>Obama came into office threatening the oil industry and fuel prices
>necessarily skyrocketed. He threatened healthcare and insurance
>companies raised prices as did hospitals.
>There's NOTHING Oboobuh's done to benefit anyone other than his
>friends.
>>> Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
>>> money, it's that government spends to much"
>>I hope Magnus knew how to spell English better.
>>Obama has offered the TRULY BALANCED approach: entitlement cuts and >>adjustments as well as tax increases on the criminally wealthy. Even when >>the Bush Tax Cuts for the 1% expire, it won't be enough. The days of the >>fabulously wealthy living it up are over, but only if America cleans out the >>right wing scum causing gridlock in the Congress.
>NOT A SINGLE 'YES' VOTE WAS CAST ON OBAMA'S BUDGET!!! Dims never
>proposed a budget.
>You're a commie, aint'chuh?
>>Obama has stopped one of Bush's criminal and expensive wars, and will attempt >>to cut down to 10% of what is being spent in Afghanistan.
>...only to have the Islamo-fascist Taliban train terorists again.
>>Obama has made Bush and Cheney look like amateurs in the national security >>area.
>Oboobuh is a clown
>No one----especially the Vietnam draft dodger Willard---has the nerve >>to carry Obama's shoes on this subject.
> On 5/15/2012 8:24 AM, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:16:11 -0700, MattB
> > <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:49:53 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:41:07 -0700, MattB
> >>> <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
> --->
> >>>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
> >>> Wouldn't want anything of yours
> >>> What "we" want is for you to pay yer taxes like a good American and
> >>> stop bitching about it when you have to pay more than your share
> >>> because of the political ideology you support.
> >> See again you make things up. I have said I am willing for the Bush
> >> Tax cuts to be allowed to expire. Let the tax rate go back to what
> >> they were in the Clinton years. No Problem. Then again I think
> >> people in Sec 8 should clean the area also. Welfare people should
> >> help out by cleaning roads. They should be given the chance to take 1
> >> area of study in a field to find work.
> > Ah--so involuntary servitude is on your plate?
> You don't seem surprised by that, and of course private
> prisons are already skirting labor laws in a similar manner..
> > CLeaning roads is a government function.
> And sometimes community-oriented groups..
But, stupid, that **IS** socialism. What? It ain't **SOCIALISM** if
there isn't a Congress or Parliament involved?
> >> All Conservatives aren't the same.
> > All conservatives who embrace the Republican (because they represent
> > conservatives) are the same.
> I'd sooner 'embrace' a cactus..
> --Less pricks there..
And the cactus objects to the big prick hugging it. You can tell, the
cactus doesn't hug back.
> On 5/15/2012 8:24 AM, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:16:11 -0700, MattB
> > <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 14 May 2012 21:49:53 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:41:07 -0700, MattB
> >>> <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
> --->
> >>>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
> >>> Wouldn't want anything of yours
> >>> What "we" want is for you to pay yer taxes like a good American and
> >>> stop bitching about it when you have to pay more than your share
> >>> because of the political ideology you support.
> >> See again you make things up. I have said I am willing for the Bush
> >> Tax cuts to be allowed to expire. Let the tax rate go back to what
> >> they were in the Clinton years. No Problem. Then again I think
> >> people in Sec 8 should clean the area also. Welfare people should
> >> help out by cleaning roads. They should be given the chance to take 1
> >> area of study in a field to find work.
> > Ah--so involuntary servitude is on your plate?
> You don't seem surprised by that, and of course private
> prisons are already skirting labor laws in a similar manner..
> > CLeaning roads is a government function.
> And sometimes community-oriented groups..
> >> All Conservatives aren't the same.
> > All conservatives who embrace the Republican (because they represent
> > conservatives) are the same.
> I'd sooner 'embrace' a cactus..
> --Less pricks there..
Yeah....but one stupid one does the embracing. The cactus would rather
not.
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:21:33 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> >On Mon, 14 May 2012 11:54:59 -0700, MattB
> ><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
> >> The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy. The Liberal
> >>Progressives want a socialist government. I can support neither.
> >>Guess I better start packing my bags. ;-))
> >You get more stupid each day, Mattloon
> >Name a fucking industry, business, law, policy, program that ANY
> >government under Carter, Clinton or Obama has taken over and then
> >allowed it to be run by fiat from the public, or by government with an
> >goal of control of means of production and distribution
> >You keep the cheap use of words flowing as if they had any meaning.
> >THere is no "Socialism"
> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
When you move to a small government place such as Somalia and become
wealthy...your insanity will have some merit.
Please stop using all socialist goods and services (roads, education,
police, fire, Postal Service, etc.) and maintain your wealth all on
your own.
> >There is SOCIAL POLICY that government is required (by the people) to
> >address in lieu of private accomodation. (health, infrastructure,
> >clean water, etc)
<liberalh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 14, 7:41 pm, MattB <trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 16:21:33 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>> >On Mon, 14 May 2012 11:54:59 -0700, MattB
>> ><trdell1...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy. The Liberal
>> >>Progressives want a socialist government. I can support neither.
>> >>Guess I better start packing my bags. ;-))
>> >You get more stupid each day, Mattloon
>> >Name a fucking industry, business, law, policy, program that ANY
>> >government under Carter, Clinton or Obama has taken over and then
>> >allowed it to be run by fiat from the public, or by government with an
>> >goal of control of means of production and distribution
>> >You keep the cheap use of words flowing as if they had any meaning.
>> >THere is no "Socialism"
>> Then I owe you nothing. Good my property is safe. Again good.
>When you move to a small government place such as Somalia and become
>wealthy...your insanity will have some merit.
I pay my taxes and don't complain. I do not owe you liberals a
free ride, someone has to work.
>Please stop using all socialist goods and services (roads, education,
>police, fire, Postal Service, etc.) and maintain your wealth all on
>your own.
Bite me. All Americans that pay taxes pay for those services. So
again liberal freaks bite me. You are all so strange and live in a
world of make believe.
So now the Liberal Progressives claim Conservatives don't pay any
taxes. I think we need a Flat tax with no deductions for everyone.
Fair and then all liberals would pay taxes.
>> >There is SOCIAL POLICY that government is required (by the people) to
>> >address in lieu of private accomodation. (health, infrastructure,
>> >clean water, etc)
"C...@PrayForMe.com" <C...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:
>>>We are becoming Greece and now France because politicians care more
>>>for their positions than the countries true welfare.
>>>Like Magnus said, "The problem isn't that government hasn't enough
>>>money, it's that government spends to much"
>> Well in this you are half right IMO. The Bush Tax cuts were a
>>mistake. Deregulating the financial markets was a mistake.
>The Bush tax breaks post 9/11 rocked the frigging world!
Not hardly.
>The greatest expansion in American history took place after 9/11
No. Growth after 9/11 was quite anemic, even before the 2008
recession.
an average 2.8% growth over the 5 peak years. Over Bush's full 8
years, it was only 1.6%.
>because of tax cuts!
Not hardly. Actually, much of the increase was due to increased
government spending. Federal outlays in FY2001 were $1.86 trillion, in
2006, 2.66 trillion, in 2008, 2.98 trillion. So roughly half of the
growth in the economy from 2001-2006 was from increase in federal
spending, and it increases to over 70% over 2001-2008.
>You may have a short memory but I don't. The Bush tax cuts resulted in
>the greatest economic expansion in world history!
3.8% average growth over the full 8 years of Clinton's term.
1980-12-31 5.88 trillion
1988-12-31 7.73 trillion
3.5% average growth over the full 8 years of Saint Ronnie's term.
1963-12-31 3.26 trillion
1968-12-31 4.17 trillion
5.0% average growth over the 5 years of LBJ's term
Even much-maligned Jimmy Carter managed an average 3.2% over his full
4 years, which is better than Junior managed in your cherry-picking 5
best years.
>> The Tea Party wants a corporate State and a aristocracy.
>No we don't!
You don't speak for the Tea Party.
>We want the market to decide it's own future. Companies
>get big because over regulation prevents the little guy from
>competing.
I suggest that you review the era before Teddy Roosevelt started
government regulation of monopolies. Regulation is what keeps big
corporations from stomping little ones into the mud.
>It costs a lot of money to get set up in business so overhead must be
>covered. Tack on permits, impact studies, Certificate of Occupancy ,
>EPA regulations governing cleaning chemicals and child labor, HTF and
>any small business compete with the mean rich chains who serve
>Monsanto crap?
Why don't you ask the ones who succeed? There are large numbers of
successful small businesses. And some of the biggest were rather
small only a few years ago.
lojbab
---
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
loj...@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org
