We’ve lived so long under the spell of hierarchy—from god-kings to feudal lords to party bosses—that only recently have we awakened to see not only that “regular” citizens have the capacity for self-governance, but that without their engagement our huge global crises cannot be addressed. The changes needed for human society simply to survive, let alone thrive, are so profound that the only way we will move toward them is if we ourselves, regular citizens, feel meaningful ownership of solutions through direct engagement. Our problems are too big, interrelated, and pervasive to yield to directives from on high.
—Frances Moore LappĂ©, excerpt from Time for Progressives to Grow Up

Thursday, December 26, 2019

Posts that I especially recommend today: Thursday, December 26, 2019

  • End-of-life anxiety and finding meaning in a collapsing climate by Leonie Joubert from Our Burning Planet (aka Daily Maverick--New Zealand) (Note: I didn't know what to do about this post because this website blocks access to those computers who block ads. Another website you can access the article is Living Resilience, but one can't access the links in the latter website. I have ad blocking software on my primary browser; so to access such articles from blocking sites, I have downloaded a second web browser which I use to access articles on such websites and don't load any ad blocking software to the browser. That way I don't have to remember to re-activate or mess with my ad blocking software on my primary browser. Incidentally, the ads on Our Burning Planet are not obnoxiously all over the article as in more commercial websites.)
  • Banking Nature, a 1:26:39 video posted on Thought Maybe. (I thank an activist, Caren, for this recommendation.) 

Wednesday, December 25, 2019

Sanctions, Security and the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline

Click here to access article by Binoy Kampmark from OffGuardian

This is huge. And I think it is the beginning of the end for the US/Anglo/Zionist Empire. European politicos are logically adamant about securing cheaper energy from Russia to fuel its profit-making industries, and they don't mind smacking the Empire (see this and this) to secure this energy. US sanctions against Europe will only increase the independence of Europe from the core Empire which includes Britain. I also think that Eric Zuesse is correct when he argues that "UK’s Tory Victory Likely to Bind U.S. & UK against Europe & Asia". 

However I can't go along with his elaborate argument that racism which is in the history of the Britain Empire accounts for this. Zuesse is a social-democrat and must find a way to justify this turn of events--see his remarks related to his statement "That’s not what capitalism was supposed to be". Racism was very prevalent around the turn of the century till late 1930s. But it has been diminishing in the post-war era as a useful divide and conquer weapon of the Empire's capitalist ruling classes (against workers) as color minorities have increased in population (customers) throughout the Empire. Anti-immigrant sentiment is now used in place of racism or as a substitute for racism.

So, what comes next? Either the Empire will execute an all-out attack against Russia, China, and Iran or the Earth's habitat will no longer support human life, or both. We ordinary people are "screwed" one way or another.

Sunday, December 22, 2019

How the US Created the Cold War

Click here to access article by Eric Zuesse from Washington's Blog.

Unfortunately, the false history of WWII has been written by the ruling classes of the current US/Anglo/Zionist Empire through their well-paid propaganda agents throughout institutions of the Empire. In contrast, Zuesse offers a valuable source of the real truth, but his insights are limited by his social-democratic political orientation. 

This article (not the article posted in Strategic Culture Foundation--an edited version that left out his statement about "capitalism"--cleared up a number of questions I had about Eric Zuesse, the author. I have written several (at least) articles complaining about his use of the feudal term "aristocracy" instead of "ruling class" in his numerous articles. I saw this as reflecting his indoctrination in capitalist views mostly influenced by many years of education in US schools that he obviously had experienced. I was not wrong. In this article he clearly defines himself as a "progressive" by which he means his commitment to social democracy, a subset of capitalist ideologies, as illustrated by what has existed in the Scandinavian countries particularly after WWII when they had elaborate social welfare programs constructed on top of capitalist economies. Also, he is an admirer of FDR who saw the necessity of more elaborate welfare programs to preserve capitalism through the Great Depression. I gathered this from several paragraphs in the article such as:
Even other parts of that post-FDR system, such as the IMF, have served as siphons from publics around the world into the bank-accounts of the U.S. aristocracy and of its allied aristocracies. That’s not what capitalism was supposed to be. [Really?]
 And another quote:
Those weren’t “socialist” countries; they were dictatorial socialist (i.e., communist) countries, as opposed to democratic socialist (i.e., progressive) countries such as in Scandinavia — the proper term for what the Soviet alliance was is “communist,” not “socialist” — and there was a very big difference between the Scandinavian countries, versus the communist countries (though the U.S. regime wants to slur one by the other so as to sucker fools against democratic socialism — progressivism).
In other words, his "progressivism" is social democratic. He evidently believes that capitalism could be compatible with a sustainable Earth and that it could remain peaceful and just in spite of abundant contrary evidence throughout the relatively short history of capitalism.

Of further interest to me was a link in this article that brought me to an article in a publication that is followed by a section of the ruling class. This was published in Foreign Policy and entitled "The Bomb Didn’t Beat Japan … Stalin Did" that added a great deal of clarity regarding the use of atomic bombs on Japan as well as the budding Empire's intentions toward the Soviet Union.

Zuesse's contributions to the geopolitical realities of our world are essential, but what isn't essential is his left-liberal views (capitalism can be reformed, his use of "aristocracy" instead of "ruling class", etc.) about these realities.