Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Anti-politics: Hating Government, While Ignoring Private Power -- Noam Chomsky

Posted 3 months ago on April 17, 2014, 12:45 p.m. EST by struggleforfreedom80 (6584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

89 Comments

89 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by Ache4Change (3280) 3 months ago

An excellent short video about Democracy and how it is subverted and here is another such video - http://www.nationofchange.org/happy-tax-day-and-why-top-1-percent-pay-much-lower-tax-rate-you-1397657738 -- Never Give Up Explaining And Exposing! Occupy The Real 99% Agenda! Solidarity.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

there is plenty to blame the government about but the government is the one institution in which the people can change - the one institution you can affect by participation without institutional change

. . . the government has a defect it is potentially democratic corporations have no defect . . .

and that is precisely the argument I have attempted to make regarding the Snowden revelations - blame the government, ignore the private sector, and ultimately let the private sector provide your solutions.

That is, as it always has been, a disaster.

[-] 0 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

really good - explains a lot doesn't it?

[-] 6 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

He's describing these alex jones/ron paul-followers pretty well. We shouldn't make fun of them though --they've been duped. These people shouldn't be ridiculed, they should be educated.

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

agreed - too many are not educable

[-] 1 points by shooz (17656) 3 months ago

LOL

https://occupywallst.org/forum/how-many-of-these-do-you-support/

Here's an attempt to educate you.

What say you?

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

to you? nothing - word is you read my hightower post on the usps. wow he is good no?

[-] 1 points by shooz (17656) 3 months ago

Then say it for all to hear.

Quite the role reversal on Hightower on your part though.

If you like him so much, you must be aware of his opinion of (R)epelican'ts, here in the present day.

http://www.jimhightower.com/node/8289#.U1F71iikMvo

http://www.jimhightower.com/node/8301#.U1F7wCikMvo

http://www.jimhightower.com/node/8303#.U1F7uiikMvo

He's pro-union too. Bound to be a problem for you.

Must be why you don't quote him these days, nor have anything more to say about the USPS.

But you won't talk about that either, anymore than you will actually address the above list that was provided bu Sen. Sanders.

Let's hear how you're a fan of his.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

ya know, I can't think of a single instance of anyone other than you, me, DK or GF posting links to Sanders material - and of the four, you most often.

I'm tempted to insist - even if only to myself - that I must be wrong about that, that one of the others simply must have posted a link to a Sanders piece at least once . . .

but I can't recall any such instance.

Anyone else?

[-] 1 points by shooz (17656) 3 months ago

Is it any wonder that they've driven two of those four away?

That way, when they say things like how they "love Sanders", there's two less of us to point out that they don't agree with much of anything the man says.

I found it pretty amazing that flip posted something from Hightower, but that was a long time ago, and in the USPS threads that followed, he's not had much to say.

Like hchc on sanders, he mentioned how much he likes Hightower, but again, Hightower constantly skewers (R)epelican'ts, and flip does so, not at all.

Can you say disingenuous?

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

yes I can I can say d.i.s.i.n.g.e.n.u.o.u.s.

Disingenuous

[-] 1 points by shooz (17656) 3 months ago

I've been trying for over 2 years now.

Although, I think I got through to a few in the early days, there seems to be little hope among the remaining libe(R)tarians around here.

They are intent on attacking, just for the sake of the attack.

[-] 7 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

We're just going to have to keep on trying, shooz. I'm not here as often as you, who are these libertarians on this forum?

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

right on again - he will tell you I am one of them - obvious nonsense. seems to me the most disruptive people here are those who will not allow any criticism of Obama or the democrats. to them that is a sign you are libertarian - they are allowed to lie and insult while often very even handed comments are removed. anyone who knows anything about ows - at least while the occupations still in place - knows that ows was critical of both parties

[-] 5 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Ok. Just one thing. I believe I saw somewhere that you had posted something about Glenn Beck "being right for once" or something like that. If you don't want these suspicions towards you, then you should probably think twice about saying things like that.

But let's stop the rumors right now. Where do you stand politically?

I have seen people here becoming somewhat hostile when someone's taking on the Democrats, and because of this resorting to rather primitive and uncivilized way of debating. I don't think that's particularly helpful either.

The Democrats are also to a large extent under the control of the corporate puppeteers, they deserve to be criticized as well.

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

i thought it was obvious when i made the broken clock comment - even a broken clock is right twice a day - no? lots of people including ron paul and pat b say things that we can all agree with (and nobody is correct all the time). ows is a movement that is inclusive - that is my experience anyway. not here which is too bad but in ows occupations. we should all decide what is right and wrong based on what people say and do not who they are or the phd after their name. Nixon was a miserable lying bastard (like most of our presidents) but he was for national health care and a guaranteed minimum income. should we disagree with that because Nixon was for it? anyway if you don't know already i favor anarchism as a philosophy and a system to move towards. as howard zinn says - "if you realize your goals in your lifetime they were too modest!" in real life i am a capitalist - own my own business and am trying to make enough money to retire in my old age - that would be now. i have been marching and protesting on all sorts of issues since 1968! i voted for McGovern in 72 and then Clinton (never again) - nader a couple of times and Obama (never again) once because i wanted to stay married! now none of this should matter and i am a bit annoyed that i need to say it. i had many discussions in zuccotti park and nobody asked anything like this - they were interested in the facts of the situation under discussion and your analysis. your comment about "somewhat hostile" makes me think that you are much too kind! i posted this a while ago and it should explain what i think - SPIEGEL: So for you, Republicans and Democrats represent just slight variations of the same political platform?

Chomsky: Of course there are differences, but they are not fundamental. Nobody should have any illusions. The United States has essentially a one-party system and the ruling party is the business party.

SPIEGEL: You exaggerate. In almost all vital questions -- from the taxation of the rich to nuclear energy -- there are different positions. At least on the issues of war and peace, the parties differ considerably. The Republicans want to fight in Iraq until victory, even if that takes a 100 years, according to McCain. The Democrats demand a withdrawal plan.

Chomsky: Let us look at the “differences” more closely, and we recognize how limited and cynical they are. The hawks say, if we continue we can win. The doves say, it is costing us too much. But try to find an American politician who says frankly that this aggression is a crime: the issue is not whether we win or not, whether it is expensive or not. Remember the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? Did we have a debate whether the Russians can win the war or whether it is too expensive? This may have been the debate at the Kremlin, or in Pravda. But this is the kind of debate you would expect in a totalitarian society. If General Petraeus could achieve in Iraq what Putin achieved in Chechnya, he would be crowned king. The key question here is whether we apply the same standards to ourselves that we apply to others.

[-] 5 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Ok. That's fine, flip. My only point was, if you're being wrongfully accused of being a right-winger and would like the rumors to end, then maybe there are other things you should focus on than picking out the very few reasonable things that this ultra right-wing douchebag has said thruout his career. That's all.

Ok, so you're an anarchist. Good. Me too.

[-] 3 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

I would like to add one (obvious) point here - there are two groups that attack the democrat party. one, of course, is the republican right but the other is the real radical left. anarchists and real small d democrats. zinn, hedges, Chomsky, max neef, - should I go on? it is really very telling that one would assume the critic to be republican or libertarian. also it should go without saying that if the facts and the analysis are correct - who cares where it comes from?

[-] 7 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Sure. I agree. But again, picking out the few reasonable things a right-wing, anti-union, pro-capitalist conspiracy dirtbag has said, is probably not the best idea if you would like those rumors to end.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

The Left - if it intends to criticize the dems to any good effect, must come to grips with the damage and destruction being done to the nation by the right and the various ways in which these crazy anti-American scum keep us divided and ineffective.

The dems need to grow a spine.

That won't happen without the left.

And without the left, we cannot hope to divide and conquer the right wing scum from their corporate masters who are very adept at fomenting corruption and division.



. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Stupid Fuking Repelicans. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .



[-] 6 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Listen, I understand your hatred for the GOP, but like I said before, the name-calling and the fuck you's don't help your cause, it just makes you look like a brat.

The Democrats will remain the servants of their corporate masters as long as the population doesn't rise up and demand change. But pushing democrats more to the left will naturally have to include criticizing the Dems when they deserve it--which is often.

I don't think there are many on the left that doesn't agree that the Republicans are really destructive. But that doesn't mean that the sins of the Democrats should be overlooked.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I don't really care what it makes me look like - this flipper fuker is a repelican stoog

and you cannot pull the dems anywhere. corporate mutherfukers have them very successfully pinned.

I don't give a fuk about the sins of the dems - we can deal with all of that in good time - after we end this insane pursuit of seditious conspiracy and treason

[-] 6 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

If you want to continue acting like a little brat, then go right ahead. It doesn't help your cause, though.

"this flipper fuker is a repelican stoog"

What makes you say that?

[-] 3 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

What makes him say, "this flipper fuker is a repelican stoog" is ...he has hopes that by maliciously denigrating anyone who is not a partisan Democrat....that people will reach the conclusion that only pro-neocon-Democrats are the true Occupiers & that everyone else is an imposter. It's a kinda child-like psychology that he uses...lol

[Removed]

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

It's not that difficult to figure. Just watch his behavior. He claims a non-partisan disdain for both parties, but is hardest on dems. He is perfectly content to suggest a hard right wing crazy ass repelican can be right - no one seriously from the left is going to touch fools like that with a ten foot pole -

especially not given the Fux culture of bullshit

I've called it the difference between Anarcho.communism and Anarcho.capitalism - both enjoy certain libertarian principles - shooz has an OWS article link on that very topic that puts it in slightly different terms - point is that if you examine the Fux culture it is easy to establish a tremendous amount of resources committed to the effort -

don't think we've been overlooked in our little back water of the internet.

we haven't.

Further, look at his latest sock puppet.

Granada - it's an island we Invaded during Reagan's admin - a socialist failure thanks to American Imperialism. When someone like him strolls the internet with sock puppets they often come up with names that reveal their agenda if you are familiar with the language, culture, history or particular individual.

Trashy Macaque likes Greek antiquity.

This clown prefers more contemporary . . . cues.

Kinda like BetsyRoss - She and hc tag teamed me on the issue of global warming among other things - I'm sure it was one person using two sock puppets. The name Betsy Ross would appeal to anyone associated with conservative American political activism.

The fukers tell ya what they are up to if you pay attention.

There is a very good reason why people like this are so rabid on the Kennedy's. That's Kennedy's plural. They can't help it. The CIA killed two of them. They can't afford to let up on them now.

It would be far too politically destabilizing if they did.

the treasonous fukers

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

there are two groups that attack the democrat party. one, of course, is the republican right but the other is the real radical left. anarchists and real small d democrats. zinn, hedges, Chomsky, max neef,

Yeah-ya, it's true. It is, it's true. There are, there are two.

Only one of them depends on Glenn Beck and whack jobs like Pat Puchanan



. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Stupid Fuking Repelicans. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .



.



. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Stupid Fuking Repelicans. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .



[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

yes thanks for the advice - it is good advice but i still don't like it. not that i don't like you giving me advice but it is very disheartening that the advice has to be given. now that is the only thing i have ever posted like that - everything else is for the real anarchist tradition and it has not stopped the silliness from some. i think the problem is with those who do this type of thing not what is posted - ok, sorry - it is a sore subject and i am ranting. seems to me that ows is the best thing to happen in the country since 1972. the park is gone and i miss it. i had hoped this forum would be something along the same line and it is not! thanks again - i won't be posting anything else from glen - i imagine he will not say anything that i agree with again anyway - and he is a really sick fuck but i blame those who pay him - millions! the respectable men - one of them is a big dem supporter - how about them apples

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I don't believe you for a minute. anarchist my ass. More likely corporate stooge and deep cover industrial spy.

fuk you

you don't like bots but are more than happy to embrace them the moment they first appear so long as they seem to supoort your point of view . . .

can't get much more phoney than that.

[-] -3 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

even a broken clock is right twice a day - no? lots of people including ron paul and pat b say things that we can all agree with

fuk yoU

just FUK YOU

there is no excuse, there is no white wash

there is no forgiveness

for the sins committed by scum like these two conservative lying mutherfukers

and you can join them both in the fires of hell

[-] 7 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

What are you doing? Do you think that acting like a 9 year old brat is going to help your cause?

Come on, you're smarter than this.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

Don't mind him - Hitlary is his avowed choice for POTUS !!! So, IF he is 'smarter than a 9 year old brat', then it's not by much !! His deep hatred of the Republicans (not a bad thing per se), has little to do with any affiliation to 'Left / Liberal / Progressive' politics and much more to do with his rejection, disdain and denial of his own right wing upbringing .. and his suffering from Corporate MSM-programming of course !

In short his reactionary verbosity emanates more from psychology and 'personal issues' than any 'Class Politics or Analysis' and is at variance with OWS goals, imo. For corroboration of what I say here, see :

Re. the last link, he labours under a contrived and faux delusion that I am a - 'Pat Buchanan Libertarian' lol .. whereas I know for a Stone Cold Fact - that he thinks that that Neoliberal / Neocon haridan, Hitlary Clinton, is somehow a saviour for The 99% !!! This is also the true voice of 'The DNC Faction' here which is why he gets carte blanche with his language and bullying behaviour. However, he's due a taste of his own medicine & I've nominated myself as his ''huckleberry'' for this Easter, lol !! So .. watch this space !

oderint dum metuant ...

[-] 2 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

From having viewed several exchanges between the two of you, I think you will be an excellent "huckleberry" for his Easter. As for the audience......popping jelly beans while watching a Dem-neocon get some un-boiled Easter egg thrown at him....gosh it doesn't get any better than that.

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

I'm afraid that I couldn't consider wasting an egg on him and I may have to let you down - IF he's now skidaddled off to go remonstrate with his friends, lolol. However, I will recommend this to you instead : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Xh5eN2fXY & sorry for any disappointment but it is worth a view.

pax ...

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

now that was well thought out!

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

It did not need much 'thinking' tho' as I spent some time with him yesterday (see those links) and he pretty much 'self-exposed himself' to me !!! No wonder he kept going on about ''fig leaves'' lol !! Ahem ! Please also see my last link to him [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Xh5eN2fXY ] for some info.

fiat lux ...

[-] 0 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

good video - not sure i would like to spend some time with him - seems bipolar at best. i guess you are not heading to vt to have a face to face

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

I guess not but we should be mindful of upsetting him too much lest he lose all 'Zen' & just become all 'Dog' !!! He is anti-gun-control too !! Potentially ''bipolar'' + guns = bad combination ! Too much violence in your country already man & also fyi btw : http://www.wired.com/2014/04/tomas-van-houtryve-drones/ .

fiat pax ...

[-] 0 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

I should learn to be nicer. Maybe I will start tomorrow.

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

very nice - I like that. Three links to my own words which as they are stand all on their own. Who could possibly object.

As to your final paragraph - what that means is entirely unclear - but no matter. I've told you before where I will be later today and it still holds true. Beyond that, perhaps you might find something either educational or illuminating here.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

Spoken like a true narcissist !!! Hmmm, ''later today'' huh ?!! But I was there already and your friends in 'Burlington Square' .. who were there sniffing glue and drinking methylated spirits from dark bottles with no labels, said that tho' you tried to cultivate a loving heart, your head was more mixed up than evil and that I should not kick your ass in your home town & so I've teleported back across The Atlantic and will have to do it metaphorically on t'inter-web here instead !

Now, I keep opening and looking at your links - but dare you do the same to my links ? Have you a few minutes ? Sitting comfortably ?

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

Have you a few minutes

nope sorry gotta go cya

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (18318) 3 months ago

Oh, okay ! I'll try not to make noises like retreating poultry at you !! Don't be cross or violent with your friends tho' 'Dog', they were only trying to protect you !!! In the meantime, I'll strongly recommend that video [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Xh5eN2fXY ] to all 'Mericanians' & a Happy Easter Peeps.

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I really don't give a fuk what noises you make, you stupid libertarian shill. I tend to be rather impervious to bullshit like that.

And as far as friends go, don't worry. I wont' be mad at them. In fact, there is not one single person in my life today that I cannot cut loose in a heartbeat - all they need do is insist there are aliens.

Not one.

there are no aliens.

And everyone is most definitely entitled to their own opinion.

I just have no patience for utter stupidity.

cya

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

boy you catch on quick - the new guy here is very sharp it seems to me. you will see much more of this if you can stick it out and i hope you do. be careful of the removals though and sometimes a well thought out rebuttal is grounds for removal

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by JGriff99mph (507) 3 months ago

Classy as usual.

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

sounds like an upvote to me.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

don't believe in heaven or hell - dust to dust man so swear all you lie

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

knows that ows was critical of both parties

scumbag repelicans depend on the perception that both parties are to blame

It's another bullshit meme and I hope you choke on it.

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

seems to me the most disruptive people here

of course, of course, and there are apparently you, me and nazi hunter on at the moment. And you had three points already by the time I saw this comment. Several of us have complained vociferously about the lack of transparency around here - and for quite some time, and we have complained about the usage of bots - a list of active users signed in would or could help alleviate some of that.

You depend on it. I'm sure. To judge from the upvotes you tend to receive.

And as a matter of principle I do not mind rational criticism of the President. On the contrary - it can be useful in attempting to identify sources of conservative influence and corruption surrounding the oval office. What I object to is that the majority of . . . of . . . criticism . . . is not intended to be constructive in the least.

On the contrary.

IT is designed specifically for the purpose of ridicule and persuasion based on nothing more substantial than mere preference.

FUK YOU you libertarian liar and repelican shill.

Go back to your book of MOrmon

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

we agree on bots and the like (although i am not so sure what they are) and also agree on transparency - nice we agree! now is this for the purpose of ridicule or education - SPIEGEL: So for you, Republicans and Democrats represent just slight variations of the same political platform?

Chomsky: Of course there are differences, but they are not fundamental. Nobody should have any illusions. The United States has essentially a one-party system and the ruling party is the business party.

SPIEGEL: You exaggerate. In almost all vital questions -- from the taxation of the rich to nuclear energy -- there are different positions. At least on the issues of war and peace, the parties differ considerably. The Republicans want to fight in Iraq until victory, even if that takes a 100 years, according to McCain. The Democrats demand a withdrawal plan.

Chomsky: Let us look at the “differences” more closely, and we recognize how limited and cynical they are. The hawks say, if we continue we can win. The doves say, it is costing us too much. But try to find an American politician who says frankly that this aggression is a crime: the issue is not whether we win or not, whether it is expensive or not. Remember the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? Did we have a debate whether the Russians can win the war or whether it is too expensive? This may have been the debate at the Kremlin, or in Pravda. But this is the kind of debate you would expect in a totalitarian society. If General Petraeus could achieve in Iraq what Putin achieved in Chechnya, he would be crowned king. The key question here is whether we apply the same standards to ourselves that we apply to others.

[-] 0 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

huh

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

too difficult for your small mind to follow huh. lemme see if I can help.

flipper quoted chomsky to support his completely erroneous and utterly deceptive thesis that Both Parties are the Same a subject which I have given extensive coverage to.

Chomsky in flipper's quote uses broad strokes to express his utter frustration with U.S. foreign policy - he never examines how that foreign policy is arrived at, much less what influences serve to produce it.

I don't believe Chomsky ever says or even suggests that since the differences between parties are little more than a cynical charade there is no point in voting.

I don't believe he ever says anything like it. On the contrary - what he does say it this:

and as I said to flipster, the gippsters little lipster

fuk you

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

did i ever imply that Chomsky says no point in voting. i did say emma goldman said "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." now Chomsky said this " I agree. One has to pick the lesser of two evils, and there are substantial differences. If I were in a swing state, I'd vote against any Republican (hence necessarily for Obama)." to flesh out his argument though i should also give you this part of the interview - "Noam Chomsky- It's true that their are similarities, but it's not quite the case. Obama is quite different from the Republican candidates, and the constituencies of the two political organizations differ, which helps lead to different policies. Over a long stretch, for example, working people have made out better under Democratic than Republican administrations--which is kind of ironic, because the white working class is now mostly Republican, not on economic but on "social" and "cultural" issues.

kcrob2001- Obama isn't what his voters wanted him to be. It seems to me that his voters expected him to save the country and all would be well, but that is obviously not happening. In your career, have you ever come to a solid conclusion that the structure of the U.S. government is unsavable? What I mean is, there isn't a force of any kind that would combat the inner erosion we are seen now.

Noam Chomsky- It's not a matter of Yes or No but of More or Less. There have been plenty of times when popular pressures led to improvements, sometimes major ones.

kcrob2001- I've said that a democracy can't last, and I believe you have written about how shaky a democracy can be. Do you think another system of government would produce better results, and would it be possible to make such a shift using popular pressures?

Noam Chomsky- What we're seeing is that a partial democracy is being shredded by concentrated domestic power. Authentic democracy would have a much better chance to thrive and flourish, I think. I don't know of any preferable alternative.

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

did i ever

well jeez. shall we examine the structure and hence implication in an environment where duopoly seems to be the reigning theory despite studies to the contrary.

what did you just say. . .

.

SPIEGEL: So for you, Republicans and Democrats represent just slight variations of the same political platform?

.

thus ends your first paragraph. Now what does that paragraph do, if not reinforce the dominant meme: same same

and what does this dominant meme do, if not herd the masses . . .

fuk you

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

i guess you can't read - too bad - is it dyslexia or just plain old stupidity

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

o no, I certainly can read, and I can gauge how line and paragraph breaks may accentuate a specific point - especially among comments that are

too long didn't read

stupid lying libertarian shill and Koch Socker

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

well golllll eeeee

there's one now

[-] -3 points by shooz (17656) 3 months ago

There's only a small hand full of us left, who aren't, these days.

For starters, any number of posters who constantly, and I do mean constantly, make claims for a duopoly, who NEVER, and I do mean NEVER say much about the forces behind that illusion.

You will find them bitching at me and voting me down for posting on the Koch's, Pope, ALEC, or number of other drivers of the oligarchy.

You find them claiming a love for Bernie Sanders, yet you will find them hating almost everything the guy has to say.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

you cannot educate these people. Their minds are made up and they will not hear you if you try.

What we can do, is to identify the ways in which they have been psychologically abused. This kind of abuse can - and has - taken many forms and all of us have been victimized by at least some of them - I think Chomsky would be among the first to point out that he has himself attempted to illuminate some of these forms of psychological abuse.

False advertising is a form of just this kind of thing.

Some of these people have been subjected to some of the most bizarre kinds of mind games one can imagine. What one cannot imagine is the pain and suffering that attends this kind of abuse - one either lives through it, or one does not.

Almost all of this behavior either is, or was at one time, criminal.

And so what I am saying is that although you may not be able to teach these people, we may be able to restore some measure of trust and some measure of sanity simply by restoring Justice.

I do not claim it will be easy.

I do not believe we can realistically expect to save this nation by any other means.

Refusal even to try is and must be seen as something no real, honest American can even contemplate.

[-] 5 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Many people, right-libertarians included, will never change their minds, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to enlighten people (who are in many ways victims of propagandists and fearmongers). We should try to reach out and enlighten people who support capitalism and other intolerable systems.

Eventually there has to be a systemic change, and that means that there's a lot of educating and enlightening ahead of us (in addition to other things as well, of course )

Whether they're democrats, republicans, libertarians etc, we should try to convince as many of them as possible that what they're supporting is intolerable and unsustainable.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

Do you know horses? I know horses - or I should say I have known horses, since I buried the last two horses I knew just a year ago now . . . horses . . .

  • they say you can take a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.

.

Whether or not capitalism is intolerable remains to be seen, for the planet never has had a set of conditions whereby all of the people of the earth had access to adequate food, water, housing and healthcare.

Capitalists today insist upon a lie, that markets must or even can be free. They cannot. They never have been.

Nor have markets ever been level. And so we cannot possibly know if capitalism is, in and of itself, intolerable, or if it is simply the parameters within which it operates that are intolerable.

Certainly what we have now is both - intolerable and unsustainable, just as you said.

[-] 4 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Capitalism is intolerable whether it's regulated or non-regulated. It should eventually be dismantled.

https://occupywallst.org/forum/abolish-capitalism/

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I completely agree that it must be radically overhauled. But to suggest that some form of GA like structure can form the basis of something new is I think naive. The GAs didn't function well, nor did they function honestly. Leadership did exist even if it were not acknowledged.

What you seem to propose with your link does not, I think, provide enough latitude for . . . the inventor for example Someone who requires the labor of others to assist in bringing an innovative vision to life. This kind of labor should be properly compensated, but when that compensation comes at the expense of the vision itself, then innovation becomes stifled.

And to be clear, large corporations with huge R&D budgets are not at all what I am referring to. I'm simply referring to something like the back yard inventor who envisions a project that is a bit more than a single individual can undertake.

There may also be other legitimate exceptions to a universal program of employee ownership.

Having said that I would be remiss were I to completely ignore that conservative insistence on just this kind of argument to eventually bend the perceptions right back to a place where acceptance of the status quo becomes acceptable.

that is not my intent - for it is neither acceptable nor is it sustainable.

[-] 9 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

It's not naive at all. Today people gather and make common decisions in all kinds of ways. There are numerous of neighborhoods, communities, cooperatives and so on, in which people gather and democratically decide on how things are run. Take Mondragon, for example. It's not a perfect utopia, but it's a pretty large scale network of cooperatives working together on schooling, banking, industry, agriculture and so on, and where everything is controlled democratically by the workers. Again, not 100% perfect, but it shows that private ownership of the means of production (capitalism) is unnecessary. And there are plenty of other examples as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJDhKMrncw&list=PLJ5zzDSL0WHpN7SCm2je69kToUPn4EN5W

I'm not an expert on all Occupy-GAs, but I believe there was a little too much focus on consensus. Building consensus can be very time consuming; this method is also vulnerable to sabotage etc. Occupy organizers should learn from past mistakes, and try to construct better ways of doing things. It's nothing to be ashamed of, you can't expect everythign to go smoothly all the time.

[-] 2 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

You are right, "It's not naive"..... You're a real asset to our struggle, as is this young man in the south Bronx who is assisting people in setting up co-ops. I've seen this bright young man, Omar Freilla give a super presentaion in NY at the Unitarian church on the upper East Side.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/omar-freilla-green-jobs_n_917264.html

[-] 4 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Yeah, I'm aware of the Green Worker Cooperatives in Bronx. It's really great to see cooperatives popping up all over the place. This is the future. A co-operative economic system is what we should strive for.

Our highest priority should be to do what we can in order to strengthen workers' rights and trying to implement as much democracy into the workplace as possible--including in existing institutions.

[-] 1 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

Thanks, anyone who has listened to a presentattion by Mr Freilla and doesn't come away inspired is ....well un-inspirable. He is proof-positive that this movement is in good hands with people who know it doesn't have to be like this.

Here (below link) is a series of cool stories about people who are taking the bull by the horns ...starting with a group in Ohio I have known about for quite a while. Notice the difference in people who haven't lost hope ....and those on here who think that we have to settle for the same old with new faces.

http://youtu.be/5dm114sD4I8

I'm not sure what Easter means to you...perhaps religious, or being with, or remembering family gatherings, etc. Whatever have a good one.

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

have I told you that you're the man! or was that someone else - I am pretty old (that's one of the reasons that can't fool me with the same old shit - I have heard that sad old story too many times) anyway I cannot always remember what I say to whom. I think it is called pascals wager - if you assume there is no hope - you guarantee that there is no hope! you keep doing what you do - I am impressed and I am not easily impressed.

[-] 1 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

Thanks...You remember correctly, but be reminded that I am just one old spoke in a wheel that has many...which includes the many good posters on here who refuse to accept another version of the corrupt status quo.

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

a nice strong spoke

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

kjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

;orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

bwaaaaaaaa hahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfaadjfh

orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

.

and that's a nice long stroke

.

;kjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

;orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

bwaaaaaaaa hahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfaadjfh

orikjqlw;kejfasdfjklsdfa

.

[-] -2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

And I thought you didn't like bots . . . didn't you say you didn't like bots? Someone help me here, did flipper say he didn't like bots?

  • granada Joined April 18, 2014

  • granada An orgy of self-congratulation . . .



. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Stupid Fuking Repelicans. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .



[-] 0 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

good article - there are people like this all over the country (and the world) doing work that never makes the news. the capitalist press knows how to keep this kind of thing to a minimum. good work man

[-] 1 points by granada (38) 3 months ago

The above reply was meant for you.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I honestly feel the implementation of the block option was a form of sabotage. It provided for a one person filibuster and that was completely unfair.

[-] 6 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 3 months ago

Exactly. Agreed!

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

you are right - many grassroots tea party types have the same complaints as ows. the beginning of the end of the Vietnam war was the teach ins. the civil rights movement was largely about showing average americans what was happening. lastly a fairly large percentage of americans think "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" - is in the constitution - they just need a little better education

[-] 3 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

honestly I haven't watched it yet, but I could have sworn the title summed your strategy up quite nicely . . .

  • hate the government and ignore the private power
[-] -2 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

wrong again

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

really? so did you delete this comment yet?

that's right I saved it - I found it priceless. Seems like a clear confession of your libertarian commitments to me. I would call it evidence but it's not - it's a confession.

Totally different.

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

you did notice it was a question - usually questions are not evidence or confessions and by the way - I hope I don't annoy you here but thanks for not slamming me with obscenities

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

questions can also be rhetorical, and dripping with sarcasm

keep it up mutherfuker

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

did you see a drip and who deleted my comment - do you know?

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

no one deleted your comment. Embarrassing, isn't it? And I haven't done anything to lead you into this position, you simply did not read what I wrote and chose not to follow the link back to see.

The comment links back to where I took it from, you can see for yourself if it is still there or not.

and how did I say what I said?

  • did you delete this comment yet?

did you and yet

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

you are correct - you caught me - I do not read what you write at all carefully - can you guess why?

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13105) from South Burlington, VT 3 months ago

I don't really care why - you're a bright mutherfuker, able to generate upvotes when in reality you haven't said shit . . . woops it dropped one point - and it wasn't me. I haven't voted on it yet. I was going to use it as an excuse to beg for an examination of how many bots you got and their voting practices - didn't DK get shit for that? But then I thought, geez, kinda weak.

And I'm even getting tired of hearing myself accuse you of being someone else - like grapes - honestly I'm not sure how much difference it really makes any more anyway.

White collar criminals siphon billions from the economy using a variety of criminal techniques, the feebs chase after anonymous . . .

  • and you blame the Kennedy's

Why would I really give two shits whether you embarrass yourself or not?

[-] 1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

thanks for that - i tried to read it carefully and seems you had something to say. nice going. i don't vote - here or in federal elections. i read emma goldman a long time ago and agree with her on voting. ok, so i lied again - i have voted here maybe twice - both i think for cicero. i am old and can't remember what i did exactly. i also voted for McGovern in 72 - nader a couple of times - slick willy once - never again for that bastard and Obama in the last election. my wife was worried he would lose and she beat on me until i agreed to vote - i will vote for lizzy if she runs or Bernie - we will see what the dems put up but i will not vote for a mainstream dem again - fool me once ...........

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by flip (5436) 3 months ago

no I did not delete it - I wonder who did and why. any idea?? so what the hell is it then - seems a contradiction in terms - enlighten me oh great wise one

[Removed]