US Oligarchs Should Be Stripped Of Their Power If They Commit Treason

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

  • If it is proven that some oligarchs have used their vast wealth to undermine our constitution (a form of war?) to the point of being treasonous?
  • If it is proven that the same oligarchs have used their power of money to buy political lemmings to follow directions from the oligarchs that undermine our Constitution (a form of war?).
  • If it is proven that the same oligarchs efforts resulted in gain advantage over the average citizens to a significant degree.
  • If it is proven that the same oligarchs want to transform our form of government to enhance their positions.

THEN: I recommend that their complete assets of the offending oligarchs should be seized by the government. Such assets should be controlled by the government. Consideration, should be made that such assets ownership of each corporation and company be passed on, in total, to the employees of the company so those employees are not injured by criminal acts of their former employer. Such assets values shall NOT be transferred to the oligarchs, in any form, if and when, those assets are sold for value.  The oligarchs must lose the very assets that gave them power.

REASON: An attack upon the US citizens assets, future, security, should result upon a significant penalty upon those people who participated to overthrow our form of government.

The United States Is In Decline

The United States is in a downward trajectory from being an hegemony, sole world power. Currently China may have matched the United States and if not now will soon do so. More important, China will surly surpass the United States in the year 2030. A number of factors have brought this about. To have this explained to you, I recommend three options for you to consider:

  1. Start by listening to this podcast: Alfred McCoy, the author of “Policing America’s Empire: The United States, the Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State”. He joins us to discuss his new book “In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power” and how much Donald Trump’s ignorance and incompetence is accelerating America’s decline and China’s rise, and whether a less powerful, more generous and collaborative America could co-exist in a world without a single hegemon.
  2. Another website, The Intercept, audio is recommended: https://soundcloud.com/the_intercept/intercepted-podcast-extra-alfred-mccoy
  3. Consider buying this book: In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power (Dispatch Books) by Alfred W. McCoy a distinguished historian at the University of Wisconsin.The book is due to come out September 12, 2017.   Wikipedia credentials for Dr. Alfred W. McCoy : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_W._McCoy

 

LA Times: The Problem with President Donald Trump.

Finally, the 4th estate exhibits it’s responsibility to the people of this nation and the world  to work for the greater good with this series of sharply critical but true articles about President Donald Trump.

A series of Times editorials:

This post was first placed on our news page, May 12, 2017.
Revised: April 7, 2018

Is Donald Trump Going To Get Us Into War?

I recommend that you be aware of techniques used by dictators.

Techniques of Dictatorships

When a dictator’s political approval rating plummets, one technique to get the nation to follow him/her is to create, find or use a real enemy and go to war with.  Typically, the country will rally around their leader if they buy into seeing an external threat.  The approval rating of Donald Trump is at a historical low.  His recent military actions, which seem so far as being of value, might also suggest a motivation for increasing his low approval rating.  Some fear that the United States might go to war very soon for reasons you might examine such as diversion.

Another motivation for going to war is to divert a nation’s attention away from some embarrassment.  Past United States presidents have used this technique.

Diversionary Foreign Policy is a recognized technique.

Further reading:

Left & Right Wing U. S. Politics – Simplified

For analysis to better understand the United States right and left wing political scene, I first propose that there are two types of individuals living in the United States and holding two different social and political outlooks.  These inherent views tends to move some individuals like magnets toward one and not another political party.   In some respects these individuals hold opposite views of the world and this directly effects their political attitudes.  For sake of analysis, let me attribute each different outlook as being in varying degree responsible for the person’s political view.

Let me start this proposal by stating that most children when they are growing up may seem to begin seeing themselves in singular terms.  The child thinks he or she is at the center of the universe and they are in many ways correct in this view when they are young children.  Over time the child may develop a belief that changes from  a self centered me to  more inclusive we, from singular to plural.  When a child is very young it naturally thinks it is the center of the universe because of all the attention they receive and it can really feel this way when family and friends spoil the child and shower praise upon the child.  Over time, this self contentedness is washed off or filed off to a varying degree by life experiences.  Other children may still cling to a more self centered outlook.  The more mature  child may begin to see themselves less as a thread but rather a component of the fabric.

A further, somewhat remarkable, development may take place beyond the us view.  An even more mature individual may realize that they gain pleasure by looking after other people.  Remarkably, these individuals just might act selfishly but do not seem so because they are seen as helping others and they must be altruistic.  This may not be the whole truth.  They may help others so they feel good about themselves.  Also, a lot of times, helping other people are rewarded by thank you statements. Beside the exact motive, looking to help others is the more mature stand to take because it works for the greater good.  The simple reason for this is that these efforts often times come back to reward those who worked for others.  Some times the payback is not direct, sometimes hard to see, and takes time to realize.  This attitude often times pays back to society in making for a more stronger social fabric in that the people involved in this type of society feel more welcome and included.

A good example of this can be seen in economics.  The economy of the United States has a lot going for it. One terrific singular aspect is the free and open market system.  The more people who have money to spend, the more the merchants profit and can pay their workers who in turn can buy more product and the economy spins forward on its own energy.  This is a continuous cycle that is positive.

There is another tactic that seems to derive from a more self centered reward system.  It is based upon a me system where I get more and I do not care if you get less.  Even the poor buy into this if they think there is another group less fortunate that might take away what little they have.  Its like watching crabs in a barrel trying to get out.  Crabs will pull down any that get close to the top of the barrel.

This economic and political system is easy to identify.  It denies higher wages, denies higher taxes, denies social programs, denies environmental protection, denies infrastructure improvements, denies infrastructure repairs, denies social programs denies oversight.  It works to diminish or do away totally with unions.  Often times it disenfranchises voters.  It may even deny free education.  So little money is spent with this system that the economy may stall.  This model typically serves the rich or oligarch class.  This rich class does want money to be spent on police and military to better protect the oligarchs assets and suppress any social uprisings from the have nots.

A me economy that follows a non positive cycle where the masses of people have less to spend and less rewards may stall and diminish the nation.

 

Why It Is Not Wise To Say “Islamic Terrorism”.

It has come up in the conservative press and some dim witted Republican politicians that the Obama administration fails to use the term “Islamic terrorism”.  The right wing neocons love to pound their chests and think war is honorable so long as it is some others son who dies.  It seems the height of hypocrisy that anyone should promote going to war when it usually is some other person who will die.  War is the failure of negotiation and diplomacy, it is said.  The right wing conservatives it seems have a low IQ level so if you are in that category, let me tell you the logic for not specifying “Islamic terrorism”.  A darn good reason is that ISIS makes some claims that help it gain recruits and die hard followers.  Put simply for my Republican friends, they gain members if it is perceived that Islam is under attack.  For the president of the United States to use the term “Islamic terrorism” seems to paint all individuals who practice Islam as being a terrorist.  The ISIS people then can claim that the United States is against Islam and wishes it to be destroyed as a religion.  Now for my dumb Republican friends, would that wording play into the hands of ISIS?  You bet is would.  Let me express this in terms that the NRA gun luggers who seem to populate the Republican party might understand.  By the president of the United States saying “Islamic terrorism” puts another scum bag out there for the American military to fight if we go to war with ISIS.  If the Republican party insists in using the term “Islamic terrorism” we have more enemy to fight which would be incredibly stupid.  I hold little hope because Republicans cherry pick their arguments. They fail to take the time to walk around the problem to gain more facts and see more sides of any problem.  Please try to view this from the enemy’s perspective if you can.

Shocking Observation, October 2015

At a local gym where I work out during the week I bring old copies of my Wall Street Journal front section and give them to a Republican friend.  He loves to read the opinion section to affirm his right wing beliefs.  I also bring in the center sections, Personal Journal and Mansion for a women trainer to read.  She is not interested in local or world news.  One of the club members brings the Wall Street Journal to the club and reads it while riding a stationary bicycle.  He does this every day.  After he is done with his workout and before he leaves, he leaves his WSJ paper on top of the cubicles, where people put their gym bags and possessions while working out.    Other club members pick up parts of the paper and read them while on treadmills and bicycles.  Just a few days ago I passed this fellow and asked him if he was still leaving his Wall Street Journal for members to read.  He said that he canceled his subscription.  I asked why and he said he was getting tired of all the negative news.  That’s interesting because just a few days prior I really got the same feeling after looking over that day’s paper.  Just a few days later, October 8, 2015, I talked to my next door neighbor and he too has dropped out from following the news.  He used to listen to Rush Limbaugh, a right wing nut talk show person while driving.  I call Rush the Vomit Comet because he allegedly spews out shill messages for the oligarchy.  My neighbor now listens to National Public Radio.  He then went on to say that his friends have also turned off the news saying that they all feel that its all negative.  He is still a Republican but is utterly discussed with his party.  He wants to see cooperation and not confrontation.

This country really needs an informed citizenry to continue to function as a Democracy.  Idealistically, each of us own this country.  In reality the rich and powerful are always trying to take the handles of power away from the citizens.  This might be one reason the oligarchy wish to diminish public education.  We need to stay engaged with what is going on in our country and around the world so we do not slide into becoming vassals.  Please do not become uneducated about current affairs.

Me vs We Views Impact Social, Political And Personal Outcomes.

This entry is part 1 of 2 in the series ME vs WE

Let me share a viewpoint with you that might help explain some social, political and maybe marriage behavior.  Let me begin by briefly explaining the concept of a continuum.  A significant portion of becoming educated is looking at situations and attempting to break the whole into parts so we can better look at the parts, examine the parts instead of the whole, and try to see if the parts stand out in any way from other parts.  Differentiation arises out of this process; in fact, it is the process of looking for differences and then defining them or explaining them as to how they are different.  Differentiation is recognizing something that we think is different and separate in some unique way.  If it is different, then that component may become important enough to use as an analysis tool.

Sometimes one factor which we think is unique also has a factor of degree.  The concept of a person having a temperature is an ideal example.  A high temperature might tell us to take some action like taking a medication or taking a person to the doctor or hospital.

Differentiation can also be expanded to present two different, and often times, opposite measures.  Light versus dark is an ideal example.  Then there are shades of gray in-between those two extremes.  Many people remember better if the writer can offer some graphical image that really parallels what is being presented.  I wish to present to you the concept of continuum and at each end are two opposing political views.  To best offer a graphical image in your mind, think of this continuum as a horizontal line, ruler or board.

Let me first define the continuum.  A measuring ruler, held horizontally, is perfect for showing this concept.  The horizontal length is a scale of sorts.  At either ends are opposite components, in this case, views.  This really works when you find societal components that appear to be in conflict, typically opposites.  Freedom and slavery would be a prime example.  The ruler, in this case, is not a temperature gauge but a societal gauge.  The continuum ruler allows us to place individuals and parties, in relative positions along that ruler as to their beliefs and actions.  What is wonderful about the continuum analogy is we can typically  “see” this ruler in our minds.  People who have visual memory can really grab on to this technique.  What is also important and implied by the use of the ruler analogy is that we can place people and society groups anywhere we want along this continuum.  It is very important that you define what the two extremes are.  Also implied is that this continuum significantly sweeps up, includes, a lot of the society we wish to talk about and may help us talk about and possibly explain political behavior of individuals and groups.  In the prior example of free and slave, or, free and incarcerated, there are also degrees of how much freedom a person has or how many impediments are put upon a person that do not allow full freedom.  In this case putting free on the left or right might not matter, just make sure you put them at opposite ends.  But, there are some instances when one should place a defined social situation on the left or right of the ruler or scale.

“The terms “left” and “right” appeared during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the ?president’s? right and supporters of the revolution to his left.”

In the Western world: “The Left seeks social justice through redistributive social and economic policies, while the Right defends private property and capitalism.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics

I wish to share with you a personal suspicion I have behind why individuals in the United States, and possibly other nations, have right or left political views.

It should not be enough to make a drawing in our minds with two opposite factors placed at either ends of a ruler.  We should endeavor to understand why the differences exist.  What is the why or reason behind two factors being opposed.

Here is the view.  I think whether you are a right continuum person or left depends upon, in part or whole, whether you are a “ME” and  “I”  type of person.  Let’s put the “ME” person at one end of the ruler and the “WE” person at the other end of the ruler.  The WE person is left and the ME person is on the right so that we follow the French and EU political seating arrangement.

Look closely at the Wikipedia use of words to describe the left; they are inclusive and recognize and embrace more people.  Look at the words to explain the right.  “Private” implies individual and family.  The word “capitalism” implies valuing profit over the needs of society.

There are two basic forms of political views and philosophy that may result in different political parties.  This is very close to be the situation in the United States but it also works for other nations, too.  The concept starts out being extremely simple to conceptualize.  The first is the view of “ME” a rather self centered view.  The second view is “WE” which tends to include people outside my family, tribe and state.  These two personal outlooks by individuals seem to translate and expand into a political philosophy similar to what is listed below.  I will use only the word ME and US to represent the two opposing views.

We will next examine each separate end of the continuum,ME and We, in our next posts (soon to be added).

Marsun Rane edited this post.

Open letter to Saudi King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz – by Ani Zonneveld

(Duplicated on the NEWS page)

Ani Zonneveld sent an open letter to the current Saudi King.  She “has correctly highlighted Saudi Wahabism as a major source of extremism and the foundations for terrorist groups like ISIS.”

Some items she mentions in her letter:

The Quran liberated women from subhuman status, gave us rights to choose whom to marry, to work, to be in leadership positions and to ultimately live in full dignity.

There is nothing Islamic about the way many countries in the Muslim world are run today.

The Muslim world remains corrupted by power and money, the very dynamic Muhammad spoke against.

To read the complete open letter, go to LUBP.

She is appealing to a medieval Saudi monarch who’s one and only pursuit is self preservation of the oligarch ruling class.    The Saudi monarchy abhors democracy.  It works quite well for the rulers of Saudi Arabia to use religion to control its people.  It would take a remarkable man to measure what she says as the truth.  Truth has little value in the minds the oppressors.

Firing Of Carmen Aristegui May Reveal Much More.

In studying sociology I found a singular concept that almost works like a tool to uncover hidden knowledge.  That concept is called “empirical indicator”.   This means “what we see” thus “shows us” something else.  The idea is that there can be one or more things that we can see but may actually stand for some hidden meaning.  In sociology the examples given are typically things you might see in a person’s office may indicate their rank in the organization.  If you see a potted plant, a rug, even a fire place in a person’s corporate office, each indicates a corporate ranking.  Simply put, the more elaborate the office furniture and trappings, the higher the person’s status.  The concept is based on common sense and we all had been using this concept well before sociologist put a name to it.  When we see a person not dressed well, we may think that person is poor.  The clothing a person wears may equate with how much money they have or not have.

This idea of empirical indicator can also be utilized in a lot of other ways.  Let me propose, for your consideration, that we take this concept and try to see if it fits a political situation.

A prominent Mexico journalist, Carmen Aristegui, was fired from her job at MVS Radio.  She revealed a number of political embarrassments committed by some top Mexican officials.  One such revelation, that the current president, Enrique Peria Nieto may have used his powerful office for personal gain in real estate deals.  Exposing this may have sent the ratings of the current Mexican president in a downward direction.

Now it is obvious conjecture that the president of Mexico exercised any influence in having Carmen Aristegui’s assistants dismissed.  Obviously, attacking her directly would be way too revealing.  Obfuscating the alleged pressure being applied to Carmen is better applied by sending her a strong message by having her close associates attacked, dismissed and hope she bows.  She obviously got the message.   She did not buckle and seems to have the tough stuff that we normally attribute to men.  Mexico needs more tough people in power like her, that have good ethics and moral values.   If she fades away, it will be a further loss for Mexico.

The empirical indicator I wish to suggest to you is that the alleged action taken against Carmen may stand for the fact of top Mexican corruption.   So, not a potted plant or a fire place in an office but instead an action may stand for something way more important – top Mexican political corruption.