in the time remaining, to help us understand how the man-made system of capitalism will lead to the extinction of our human species, and so many others.
Click here to access article by Nafeez Ahmed posted on Motherboard. (Edited for greater clarity on Sunday, October 21st at 7:30 AM CT.)
Capitalism as we know it is over. So suggests a new report commissioned by a group of scientists appointed by the UN Secretary-General. The main reason? We’re transitioning rapidly to a radically different global economy, due to our increasingly unsustainable exploitation of the planet’s environmental resources.
Climate change and species extinctions are accelerating even as societies are experiencing rising inequality, unemployment, slow economic growth, rising debt levels, and impotent governments. Contrary to the way policymakers usually think about these problems, the new report says that these are not really separate crises at all.
Rather, these crises are part of the same fundamental transition to a new era characterized by inefficient fossil fuel production and the escalating costs of climate change. Conventional capitalist economic thinking can no longer explain, predict, or solve the workings of the global economy in this new age, the paper says.
This report by Ahmed accurately reflects the tone and substance of the report (which I read) issued by the UN appointed scientists from Finland. Ahmed also provides other sources to corroborate the findings of the Finish scientists--notice especially one source who is a famous capitalist.
I noticed that both Ahmed's and the scientists' report were careful to avoid any suggestion that a new social-economic system might be a totally different system from capitalism. Ahmed's statements provides some examples: "Capitalism as we know it is over" and "Whether or not the system that emerges still comprises a form of capitalism is ultimately a semantic question. It depends on how you define capitalism." (As if it were difficult to define capitalism.) Nowhere is the word "socialism" used--simply because it is verboten by capitalist authorities. And there seems to be no known alternative system as claimed by the Finnish scientist who remarked "It can be safely said that no widely applicable economic models have been developed specifically for the upcoming era." Need I argue that no "widely applicable economic models" have been permitted by our capitalist masters?
It will be up to the "wretched of the earth" to decide if capitalism will be destroyed and what system will be substituted for it. We simply cannot rely on the existing capitalist ruling classes, who are thoroughly addicted to the power and wealth that capitalism delivers to them. They are hopeless junkies who are unable to ever solve this dilemma. This will only be possible if the wretched of the Earth become aware that their very existence and survival will depend on this change.
Given the fact that the capitalist ruling classes have all the means at their command to insure this consciousness does not happen, I don't think it is realistic to imagine that such an awareness will ever arise, or if it does, it will be too late for any chance of human survival. There is a certain justice to this given that humans have caused the extinction of so many other species.
I have occasionally noticed this phenomenon which I suspect is an organized campaign to discredit activist bloggers and writers who are in political opposition to the policies and actions of the US-led Empire and to otherwise distort the information provided by Wikipedia. For example, see this post from Clarity of Signalregarding the Wikipedia entry on the White Helmets.
Also, you might be interested in an article entitled "Time to ditch Wikipedia?" regarding this obviously subversive Wikipedia editor or organization that posts edits of Wikipedia under the name of "Philip Cross".
Click here to access article by Elijah J Magnier, an independent Kuwaiti journalist (if my memory serves me correctly) with very good sources.
This will be a test of the expert author's take on the situation in Syria. I will follow up sometime in the future to evaluate his geopolitical forecast.
If he is correct, Saudi Arabia has decided to abandon support for their jihadists, most of whom came from their prisons; meanwhile Syria, Russia, Turkey, and Iran have decided to wait for the jihadists to deteriorate from the lack of support; and the US-backed Kurdish forces will finally realize that the US can't be relied upon to serve their interests and the US forces will finally leave Syria. Other members of the Arab league will recognize this new political reality and will re-establish ties with Syria. On the other hand, US strategists have extensive experience in creating chaos and will, in my opinion, likely try to stir up more chaos to thwart this scenario. Magnier's geopolitical take on the present situation in Syria seems so sensible, but it also seems too good to be true.
If you are seriously interested in what is going on in the US-backed Kurdish controlled areas of Syria, you might be interested in reading an interview conducted by Sarah Abed, an independent journalist, with Syrian activist and nationalist Nidal Rahawi. See part 1 here, and part 2 here.
Bernhard, a geopolitical investigative expert, on his blog Moon of Alabama has been following the incident of Khashoggi's assassination closely (see his latest report). Now we see today on Washington's Blog that an activist for 9/11 victims, who is also a victim, has thoroughly investigated this event to conclude that it raises so many questions, convinced that we cannot take US officials words at face value, and suggests some sort of desperate coverup of 9/11.
In a time when news lasts about as long as a minute, why has the story of Jamal Khashoggi dominated headlines for more than a week? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever questioned by the FBI at any time before or after the 9/11 attacks? If not, why not? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever employed by the CIA? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever deemed an asset of the CIA? When did Jamal’s employment for Saudi intelligence come to an end? Was Jamal Khashoggi a joint asset between the GIA [??] and the CIA? Did Jamal Khashoggi ever have any contact with the 9/11 hijackers or anyone in the support network of the 9/11 hijackers inside the United States? And, why did it take 15 Saudi assassins to kill Jamal Khashoggi? Doesn’t that seem a bit like overkill? And, is it just a coincidence that there were 15 Saudi hijackers on 9/11? Why would Jamal Khashoggi willingly go to the Saudi Consulate in Turkey—especially given his alleged sour relationship with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman? What would inspire him to go there? And what was the entreaty MBS allegedly made to Jamal more than one month ago about anyways? Was it made in earnest? What was Jamal Khashoggi really doing at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul? [GIA = Armed Islamic Group?]
Both investigations dove tell nicely with the theory that the US Deep State ordered their secret ("intelligence") services which colluded with Saudi Arabia and probably Israel to pull off history's greatest false-flag event in order to justify to the ever trusting US public the US Empire's campaign since then to topple one nation after another in the greater Middle East (although upset, Gen. Clark has been unable to overcome the many years of his indoctrination in Empire propaganda).
Although this article is in reference to British politics and population, being that Britain in a major component of the US-led Empire makes it relevant to us also. And, indeed it is. Although we don't have any genuine significant leader-dissident like Corbyn, we do have a 99% that is divided between what Cook designates as "trusters" and "dissidents". As in Britain, the US ruling class (the "one percent") is desperately trying to prevent the spread of dissent among the 99%. Therefore, this insightful article is entirely relevant to we Americans.
We are arriving at a moment called a paradigm shift. That is when the cracks in a system become so obvious they can no longer be credibly denied. Those vested in the old system scream and shout, they buy themselves a little time with increasingly repressive measures, but the house is moments away from falling. The critical questions are who gets hurt when the structure tumbles, and who decides how it will be rebuilt.
The new paradigm is coming anyway. If we don’t choose it ourselves, the planet will for us. It could be an improvement, it could be a deterioration, it could be extinction, depending on how prepared we are for it and how violently those invested in the old system resist the loss of their power. If enough of us understand the need for discarding the broken system, the greater the hope that we can build something better from the ruins.
Lee Camp provides a very good rant on the latest censorship moves of social media that are owned by huge corporations are doing in collusion with the ruling class of the US-led Empire.
This expert geopolitical analyst admits that the political situation regarding the assassination of Saudi journalist Kashoggi is more complicated than first meets the eye.
While I earlier thought that the case would be settled rather sooner than later, I now expect the conflict to go on for weeks or months while collateral damage will accumulate around it.
This is because the Middle East power situation is very unstable, and such an incident could tip its re-orientation in any direction.
The real problem is that both sides, Erdogan and MbS, are extremely headstrong. For both men the issue is much bigger than the Khashoggi case. The conflict has historic, strategic and very personal dimensions. That makes it difficult to find a deal.
The U.N. climate report released this week had some stunning revelations, claiming that the 2020s could be one of humanity's last chances to avert devastating impacts.
But some say its authors were being too cautious.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report states in plain language that averting a climate crisis will require a wholesale reinvention of the global economy. By 2040, the report predicts, there could be global food shortages, the inundation of coastal cities and a refugee crisis unlike the world has ever seen. [my emphasis] A number of scientists contend that the report wasn't strong enough and that it downplayed the full extent of the real threat.
The reality is that ordinary people, who are brainwashed to believe only the "authorities", don't read these reports, and mostly believe what their capitalist masters tell them via corporate media (and all their other institutions). What I wrote in yesterday's commentary is another illustration of this childish mentality:
The sad fact is that so many of us naively believed what we were told
by adults in elementary schools and Sunday schools, and by our parents
who were also steeped in capitalist propaganda since they were born.
Later we were subject to this same indoctrination in movies and TV. Now
many people find it hard to believe otherwise, to believe their own eyes
and ears as our masters crank up their propaganda to new heights of
deception and engage in censorship of information
that counters their self-serving propaganda. A major problem for
activists and independent thinkers is that those who uncritically accept
this indoctrination are well rewarded by career opportunities in our
master's corporations, government, academia, etc.
Environmental sustainability and the capitalist system are incompatible, but this glaring fact does not worry ordinary people because of their childish belief in their masters who are thoroughly addicted to the power and wealth that their system delivers to them. Like most addicts they prefer to have their supply of drugs than rather than life, and they don't care if the rest of us go down with them and the human species become extinct.
This senior editor of The Greanville Post tells it like it is for those deluded individuals who still believe so many myths spread by our masters throughout their institutions.
“We’re in danger of losing our democracy!” is a warning cry I hear often. A variant is that “we lost our democracy gradually over the last few decades.” They’re both wrong. The truth is that we never had a democracy; we’re in danger of losing our illusion of democracy.
It's not hard to understand why, and he does in very simple terms. The sad fact is that so many of us naively believed what we were told by adults in elementary schools and Sunday schools, and by our parents who were also steeped in capitalist propaganda since they were born. Later we were subject to this same indoctrination in movies and TV. Now many people find it hard to believe otherwise, to believe their own eyes and ears as our masters crank up their propaganda to new heights of deception and engage in censorship of information that counters their self-serving propaganda. A major problem for activists and independent thinkers is that those who uncritically accept this indoctrination are well rewarded by career opportunities in our master's corporations, government, academia, etc.
