Voices from Russia

Sunday, 10 September 2017

10 September 2017. Even the Birds Know That “Trickle Down” Is a CROCK

______________________________

Even the bird-brains know that “trickle down” is a disgusting crock of shit, purveyed by soulless scumbags like Rod Dreher and clueless yahoos like John Whiteford. Prosperity works UPWARD… that is, the people create the wealth… not the oligarch boodlers and their Upper Middle henchmen. The boodlers steal the wealth created by the people… and the people are getting wise to it! The Millenials don’t believe in the Free Market fairy tale dispensed by “conservatives” and “liberals” alike. The upsurge for Bernie should’ve warned ’em… but it didn’t. Chilly Hilly even blamed the Bern for her defeat (she’s the most-hated pol in all of “flyover America”… that’s why she lost).

Here in Schenectady NY, we’re on the border between “Colonial America” and “Mid-America”. I like to say, “Middle America begins across the Western Gateway Bridge”. We’re the last gasp of the area in New York City’s economic zone of influence. Therefore, I’ve seen Rustbelt America up close and personal. Places such as Amsterdam, Gloversville, and Johnstown are economic no-go zones. They’re not untypical of many places in the USA, ruined by the avarice and greed of the oligarchs and their Upper Middle goons. That’s why Chilly Hilly lost… the people of Mid-America hate her for ruining their lives and wrecking their communities. Bernie had nothing to do with it at all. The Repugs fail to realise that the votes of many in Mid-America for Trump were AGAINST Hilly and not for the Donald. If Bernie had run, he’d have won handily, by all accounts. There’s a world of hurt out there and both the Repugs and Establishment Dems don’t give a flying fuck. People know this. They’re losing hope… hopeless people make revolutions (“We have nothing to lose but our chains”). The neoliberal Dems and Repugs party on, oblivious to the pain that they inflict (just like the Russian ruling class in the early 1900s). There WILL be a reckoning.

We know what “trickles down”, Rod Dreher… you’re a пиздец (the nastiest Russian insult… it’s one of the Big Five pits-of-Russsian mat words) for cheerleading the oligarchs and their programme (to be fair, all “conservative” pundits share the blame… he’s not alone). However, a spectre IS haunting Mar-a-Lago…

BMD

Advertisements

Sunday, 2 July 2017

SHAME on Conservatives Who Ridicule Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders

________________________

Socialism attracts young people because they reject the immorality of corporatism. Conservatives should find solace in this… not ridicule it. For at least 20 years, the mainstream Western political and academic narrative was that socialism is a failure. Many cite production deadlock, strikes, riots, and a punitive taxation system to justify these claims. However, the system that ended up supplanting socialism both as a governing economic force and as a viable mainstream opposition platform in the West has also failed and failed more miserably than any prior socioeconomic system. Corporatism, a logical result of neoliberal economics, rejects the cottage-industry style capitalism of people like Ron Paul and the classical Austrian economists. Therefore, in a true sense, it’s unfair to call it “capitalism”.

Unlike with Austrian economics, corporatism places no value on individual liberty, nor does it decry endless rules, regulations, and bureaucracy either. Corporatism is to capitalism what the Manson Family is to a Norman Rockwell family painting… it’s a sick perversion. Likewise, corporatism doesn’t value the growth of a national economy, the steadying of national wealth, or the protection of national wealth from foreign hands. It’s unlike traditional market-protectionist economics or neo-mercantile thinking or what many now call sovereigntist economics. In this sense, it’s different from what I call conservative socioeconomics.

Corporatism is a series of interlocking oligarchic global corporations where production often occurs on different continents from where the profits are stored; furthermore, products themselves are often sold in multiple third locations. Corporatism has plenty of regulations and bureaucratic red tape, but all of it works in the favour of giant multinationals that often end up paying less tax than struggling middle-income individuals and families oppressed with socialist high taxation, whilst receiving none of the benefits of a real welfare state. There isn’t a moral, a national, or an individualist component in corporatism. In this sense, it rejects the morality of socialism, protectionism, and classical capitalism simultaneously.

While occasionally corporatist economics can result in a trickle-down effect for some ordinary people, if this ever happens, it’s generally short-lived. Corporatism’s Great Recession in 2007-08 was a testament to this phenomenon. The result has been that many middle-income middle-aged people turned to sovereigntist/protectionist conservative politicians who reject the multinationalism of corporatism and the collectivism of socialism equally. In addition, people in all age groups have begun to revisit classic capitalism as defined by the Austrian school of economics. Generally, the connection this school makes between individual liberty and economic liberality attracts these people.

Socialism has had a revival too, and one of the biggest constituent parts of this new socialist coalition has been the young, although it’s a very different kind of youth than those who previously voted for classical leftist parties. Throughout much of the 20th century, leftist voters came from the heart of suburban industry and, of course, the urban proletariat also. In the USA, this was the so-called “Rust Belt” states and in Europe, this was generally in the big industrial cities outside of the more urbane capitals (Marseilles, Calais, Birmingham, Glasgow, etc). It was only logical that working-class voters would vote for parties with an emphasis on the morality of treating working-class people with economic and social dignity and fairness.

However, today’s socialist core voters are very different. Although what remains of a western industrial base still often vote for politicians like Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, an increasing amount of young people from struggling middle-income families are turning to ideas that previously had appeal among the working-classes and those of other classes who for moral, intellectual, or spiritual reasons turned to socialism. These young people aren’t classical socialists, but they’re victims of corporatism. They’ve found that the first proper job in life hardly pays enough to make it worth considering and that the comfortable middle-income jobs of their parents’ generation have either gone overseas or become reserved exclusively for a highly connected upper-middle-class set, beyond simply having a decent income and ability to work hard for an honest first-world pay-cheque.

They’ve found that the neoliberal myth that having a university education guarantees good employment was simply a lie to force young people to take out insanely high loans to pay a university, which was, in fact, a business disguised as a place of learning. They’ve also come to the realisation that many of the comforts of middle-income life were because working-class people created wealth. Now, that wealth comes from foreign factories. All of these factors have led young people to turn to socialism for moral and personal reasons rather than more broad economic beliefs.

It is difficult for socialism to work in a non-industrial society. Socialism relies on working-class labour to create wealth in the same way that conservative economics relies on investment into national (rather than global) industry to initially create wealth. However, a healthy working-class is indispensable to proper moral conservative socioeconomics also. One must remember that conservative policies didn’t create the Irish famine of the 1840s and 1850s, but rather the adoption of liberal free trade by the British state, which ruled Ireland at the time.

With few Western countries having any national wealth and with millionaires conveniently and legally offshoring their money, it’s difficult to see how socialism can achieve anything in the 21st century West unless it takes the crucial step to use the resources of the state to build new factories and pass protectionist laws to keep the wealth they generate flowing on the home front. However, these longer-term economic issues are of little consequences to many young enthusiastic supporters of people like Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, who unlike Sanders, will almost certainly attain the highest political office in his country. These voters are drawn to the moral message of socialism and this should not be condemned callously, even by conservative protectionists like myself. Instead, we should praise it.

The only way society can ever retain its traditional values is by embracing anyone who rejects the immoral ideologies of globalism, liberalism, and corporatism. While I personally prefer a mixed system, what Deng Xiaoping called “market socialism”, I’m nevertheless sympathetic to those who turn to classical socialism, even though I fully reject the dogma of radical wealth distribution and the rejection of traditional conservative values that many socialists preach. However, in this case, socialism is a healthy first step towards rejecting neoliberalism and allowing a path back to conservatism to form. In many ways, it’s the opposite of the Marxist historical world view, where we have to go back from corporatism to socialism to then step back to conservatism, in each case along the way one must realise our return to past values while combining such thought with contemporary realities. In this sense, one can be both a reactionary and a pragmatic modernist simultaneously. This is the essence of any mixed socioeconomic system rejecting the dogmas of progressive thinking for the sake of modernity alone.

This obviously assumes that it isn’t full communism but full corporatism that is the final “end” of economics. Here, Marx got it wrong; Oswald Spengler (a conservative) got it right. History has proved this; it isn’t a theory. After Russia attempted communism between 1917 and 1991, Russia then turned to corporatism for the remainder of the 1990s. Today, Russia is taking certain socialist elements of the past such as higher pensions and better funding for public services vis-à-vis the 1990s, while ultimately returning to a modern version of patriotic conservative socioeconomics.

If the West is to attempt to save itself, it must follow the same path. Whilst my view is that the October Revolution was a crime against humanity, I nevertheless wept in the 1990s at photos of old women, too thin for their age, carrying photos of Stalin as they protested the piratical liberal economics of Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais. Indeed, if Russia were ever to return to a fraction of its pre-1917 conservatism, both conservatives and those holding placards of Stalin while protesting the Yeltsin régime would have to oppose the liberal corporatists of the 1990s.

This is why conservatives who ridicule supporters of Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn ought to really step back from their position of arrogance. The young people voting for Sanders and Corbyn may often be odd in their appearance and the idea that they’d want to radically redistribute wealth might be horrifying. Their lack of God is also deeply sad for conservative believers. However, in finding Corbyn, these young people are rejecting the same immoral Godlessness inherent in neoliberalism that true conservatives reject. They’re looking for morality, they’re looking for ethics, they’re looking for community, and they’re looking for family. The authentic conservative solution is the best way to find each, but if they support socialism, which for all of its faults is still endlessly more moral than liberalism/corporatism, then we should wish them well whilst respectfully offering them a respectable conservative alternative.

1 July 2017

Adam Garrie

The Duran

http://theduran.com/shame-on-conservatives-who-ridicule-supporters-of-jeremy-corbyn-and-bernie-sanders/

Thursday, 6 April 2017

Still Not A Bro, Still Not A Russian Agent, Still Glad Hillary Lost

____________________________________

You can’t always tell how crazy someone is at first glance. When everything’s going their way and nothing psychologically abrasive is pressing up against the demons in their mind, even the most psychotic rageaholic can seem pretty normal to the casual observer. It’s not until the guy cuts them off in traffic, the lady at the checkout counter is a little too slow, or their spouse makes a tiny mistake that the mask comes off and you get a true taste of how batshit insane they are. This is what’s happening with Democrats in America today. My handful of conservative readers will disagree with what I’m about to say, but to a hard-left Australian looking at America from the outside, Democrats seemed relatively sane, at least compared to the Republicans. I mean, sure, they consented to the crushing exploitation of the Wal-Mart economy and tolerated Obama’s expansion of all of Bush’s most evil policies, but at least they were pretty mellow about it. They were chill during the Obama years and opposed the neocons during the Bush years, so the gibbering, drooling, screaming-Bible-verses-at-passing-cars psychosis that lurked just below the surface never had occasion to come to the foreground.

All that changed with Trump’s election. Although the Clinton campaign deliberately elevated the phenomenally unpopular reality TV star above his primary Republican opponents, his stated agendas conflicted with those of America’s unelected power structures in some very significant ways and they were never going to let him actually win the White House. Then, he actually won the White House. After more than a year of using their corporate media mouthpieces to pummel the psyche of liberal Democrats with horror stories of what would happen if Trump got in, Trump got in. The American public’s unprecedented ability to network and share information combined with WikiLeaks drops and a surging alternative media to cripple the campaign of the establishment candidate and caused the deep state to lose control of the narrative for the first time in its existence. It was like watching a glass plate shatter in slow motion. After more than a year of being told that the world would end if Trump got in, Trump got in. After more than a year of being told that Trump couldn’t win, Trump won. Democrats stood stupefied for a moment like a little kid who just got hit with a ball but hasn’t started crying yet… then, all the crazy came pouring right out into the open.

It was Comey’s fault. No, it was Bernie’s fault. No, it was third parties. Wait, no, it was Russia. Yeah, that’s it! Russia. Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. Everyone who says we’re acting crazy now is a Russian agent. Isn’t the CIA awesome? Gosh, I love the CIA. In addition, Dick Cheney and John McCain, they’re great too. Know who I hate though? Russia. Did you know Russian bots convinced Sanders supporters to hate Hillary Clinton? Any Sanders supporters you saw criticising Hillary were actually Russian bots disguised as Bernie Bros. Basically, Hillary was perfect, and the DNC scandal never happened. If you think you hated Hillary, you imagined it. Have I mentioned I hate Russia? They committed an act of war against us, you know. War, war, war, war, war, war, war. I like war now. Not Russia though. Have I mentioned I hate Russia? Sheer yammering lunacy. It’s like the lifetime’s worth of consent-manufacturing establishment media propaganda they’d been spoon-fed since birth suddenly started making them sick, like when you eat a few too many marshmallows or jello shots and it starts coming out the way it came in. All the psychological abuse America’s rank-and-file political left suffered at the hands of the oligarchy is now spewing out in a jumbled hot mess of gibberish and McCarthyism, and they don’t know how to make it stop.

Well, you can make it stop, Democrats. What you’re doing looks intensely psychologically uncomfortable, and you can’t possibly be enjoying yourselves. So stop. It’s easy… all you have to do is realise that you’ve been lied to your entire life by everyone you respect and admire. Okay, so maybe that’s not necessarily easy, but it’s simple and straightforward. Everyone on TV lied to you. Every mainstream media outlet lied to you. Everyone you know who consumes these forms of media and believes them lied to you by regurgitating the lies they fed them. The fact that you even for a second considered Hillary Rodham Clinton to be an acceptable candidate proves this. Did you know that Hillary Clinton campaigned on a promise to install a no-fly zone in Syria, which top military officials attested would cause a war with both Syria and Russia? No? Did Rachel Maddow and the Washington Post not make you aware of that indisputably true, critically important, world-threatening fact? Guess what? That’s because they’re liars. They lie to you. Constantly.

As bad as Trump is, nothing he’s done is anywhere remotely close to as horrible as a war with a nuclear superpower and its allies. All the horror stories that they told you about this man pale in comparison to the horror stories they were deliberately omitting from their coverage of the candidate they were attempting to inflict upon this planet. Trump could tank the economy, stop all immigration, build a wall around the entire continental USA, and star in a viral video being urinated on by V V Putin himself, and as long as he spared America from a world war with a nuclear superpower, he’d still have been a better president than Hillary Clinton would have been. The further into conflict two nuclear superpowers get, the greater the likelihood of a nuclear warhead being deployed either by accident, on purpose, or some mixture of the two due to unforeseeable circumstances in the unpredictable chaos of war, and once one nuke gets deployed, they all do. If you can shake off the mental bondage to the false reality you’ve been coaxed into by the corporate media of a corporatist government, all that psychological discomfort you’ve been experiencing will fall away. You know you’re not enjoying this. You know all this war talk is getting scary. You know Dick Cheney isn’t really your friend. I’m not a Russian agent telling you this. I’m not a sexist Bernie Bro. I’m nothing special, just someone who stopped believing the lies. You can do this too. I stand nothing to gain from lying to you, but the plutocrats who own your government and your media certainly do. Stop trusting these monsters. Stop believing the lies.

4 April 2017

Caitlyn Johnstone

Medium.com

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/still-not-a-bro-still-not-a-russian-agent-still-glad-hillary-lost-24f57aae29df

Saturday, 18 March 2017

The Splitting Up of the Democratic Party: Why It’s Probably Coming Sooner Than You Think

____________________________________

Before the election, some pundits predicted that a Trump defeat would cause the Republican Party to split into at least two discrete new parties… one representing the old GOP’s business establishment, the other for the populist firebrands of the Tea Party. As the fight over gutting Obamacare reveals, those factions are in an uncomfortable marriage. However, a full-fledged rupture doesn’t appear imminent. A bigger story, one the corporate political writers don’t focus on, is on the left. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Democratic Party split in two.

In my imagined scenario, the liberal Democratic base currently represented by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren would file for divorce from the party’s centre-right corporatist leadership caste. What’s next? Led by Sanders/Warren or not (probably not), prepare to see a major new “third” party close to or equal in size to a rump Democratic one. I even have a name for this new 99 Percenter-focused entity… the New Progressive Party, or simply the Progressive Party. Since this is ahistorical America, no one remembers the Bull Moosers. Today’s Democratic Party is evenly divided between the Bernie Sanders progressives who focus on class issues and the Hillary Clinton urban liberals who care more about identity politics (gender, race, sexual orientation, and so on). In the short run, a Democratic-Progressive schism would benefit the GOP. In a three-way national contest I guesstimate that Republicans could count on the roughly 45 percent of the electorate who still approve of Trump after two months of hard-right rule. That leaves the new Progressives and the old Democrats with roughly 27.5 percent each… hardly a positive outlook for the left in the first few post-schism elections. Yet, as the cereal box warning goes, some settling may… in this case will… occur… and sooner than you’d think.

First, some “Republicans” in the Trump coalition… those Obama and Sanders voters who switched to Trump… will migrate left, attracted to a Progressive left-nationalist economic message that puts working-class Americans first, minus the racism and nativism of the anti-NAFTA Trump right. Doesn’t feel like it this second, but bigotry is finding fewer adherents. Second, demographic trends favour any left-of-the-Democrats party. Slightly more than half of Americans aged 18-to-29 oppose capitalism in its current form. Some Millennials would move right over time, John Adams style… but most won’t, mainly because the capitalist economy isn’t likely to reward them with better-paying jobs as they age. A strong Progressive Party… and 27.5 percent of the vote is strong, guaranteeing access all the way down the ballot to minor races and a spot on the national presidential debate stage… would be the natural home for America’s long-disenfranchised political left. Third, the Progressives would attract sustained media attention. Excitement generates enthusiasm. Finally, it isn’t a stretch to imagine that some mainstream Republicans disgusted by a Trump/Tea Party-dominated Republican Party might scoot over to the old Democrats… whose current politics are Republican Party circa 1980, so it isn’t like it’d be an uncomfortable fit… adding to their numbers.

Granted, this is all very back of the envelope. However, my instincts tell me we’d probably wind up with three surprisingly evenly matched parties before too long. To be clear, a Democratic split isn’t inevitable. It may not even be more likely than not, not in the next few years anyway. Nevertheless, what about 10 or 20 years out? The further you extend the timeline, I’d bet a tidy sum that the left would finally hear what the Democratic Party leadership has told them for half a century… we don’t need you, we don’t owe you, we won’t do anything for you… and walk.

Why am I so convinced that today’s Dems will go the way of the Whigs? Still controlled by centre-right Clintonistas, the Democratic National Committee continues to snub progressives and leftists despite the fact that Bernie could’ve beaten Trump. Throughout the campaign, polls showed Bernie would outperform Hillary in the fall. Still, the DNC cheated on her behalf. Moreover, they sleazily lined up the superdelegates for her. She never considered him for Veep. She didn’t even promise to appoint him to the cabinet… big mistake. She didn’t adopt any of his signature platform planks. After the debacle, Democratic leaders blamed everyone but themselves… WikiLeaksRussia, the FBI, the media, even Bernie voters. They didn’t think they did anything wrong. In the race for DNC chair and thus for the soul of the party, they picked the establishment choice over the progressive. If you’re a Bernie Sanders Democrat, you have to be a complete idiot to believe that the Democratic Party learnt the lesson of 2016… lean left or go home. Even after it became clear that Trump was putting together the most right-wing administration in American history, Democrats still voted in favour of Republican appointees.

I can’t predict how the great split-up of the former Democratic Party will play out. However, given the escalating rage of the party’s progressive base in the Age of Trump and the absolute refusal of the DNC leadership to grant them concessions, it’s hard to imagine this restive crowd staying calm and keeping Democratic. The tsunami is coming. Lefties have a choice… get washed away or grab a surfboard.

15 March 2017

Ted Rall

Counterpunch

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/15/the-splitting-up-of-the-democratic-party-why-its-probably-coming-sooner-than-you-think/

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.