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 LappĆ©, excerpt from Time for Progressives to Grow Up

Friday, March 5, 2021

Posts that I especially recommend for Friday, March 5, 2021

  • šŸ’„GMO Soy, Popular Resistance, and Corporate Power, essentially a book review by Brian Tokar from Climate & Capitalism. This is a best post. (Note: It appears from reading this article that technically knowledgeable, ordinary people must learn about the genetic engineering methods to design seeds, foods, and even us humans in order to enhance corporate profits. Thus far, evidence suggests that corporations have obscured the introduction of these methods to hide their obsessive drive for ever greater profits despite their effects, potential and actual, on our health and well-being.)
I wish he had provided links to supporting documents for the arguments he made. He acknowledges that "his undergrads" have been taught false history lessons regarding WWII. Why, after a lifetime of indoctrination in false history, should the American people and "his undergrads" believe his undocumented history of WWII? Or, his later argument that (unspecified) people who lead the USA want full spectrum dominance of the world much like Nazi Germany and Japan. He seems to grant legitimacy to dominance in the early paragraphs, but then in the last paragraphs he seems to imply that such policies and motives threaten the extinction of humans. Which is it? I think this is a lame essay because of these faults and weaknesses. For these reasons, I question the motives that led him to write the article and the motives for CounterPunch to publish it online.
 
The above criticisms apply to nearly all of the articles published by CounterPunch. Perhaps Jimmy Dore's satirical arguments about the evasiveness of Democratic Party members of Congress describe the writers that CounterPunch chooses to publish. I haven't seen them posting articles that challenge the policies of Dr. Fauci and the actions of Bill Gates.  Perhaps they, too, as well as CounterPunch, only pretend to care about the issues of inequality and imperialist US policies that the rest of their writers of CounterPunch so incessantly address. Perhaps they, too, are in on the game of promoting themselves while pretending to care about important issues.