The underlying but absolutely salient aspect of almost all left-wing protests down through the ages is law-enforcement, in addition to maintaining racial supremacy, being the tool of those hellbent upon the continuation of suppressing those who are not classified as members of the economic upper class. In the US, this has taken the form of suppressing democracy in favor of capitalism. The two most salient aspects of the current wave of protests in the US are 1) property destruction by anarchists and 2) various local law-enforcement efforts and Trump-administration efforts to protect the legacy of systemic racism in the country. Trump is using the protection of the legacy of racism against primarily anarchists as a means to protect capitalism, and thereby elitism, against democracy.
US capitalists like to use the term democratic capitalism, but is there really any such thing? Where have all the People voted in totally free and fair elections to not own and democratically control the means of production and services? The “democratic” in “democratic capitalism” appears to be a smokescreen.
Could we have a truly democratic mixed-economy? It’s unclear, but probably not. Only those parts of society that would be democratically owned and controlled through-and-through would be truly democracy in the pure meaning of the concept. Therefore, the best mix could only be democratically owned and controlled on one side and undemocratic on the other.
There are hybrids, such as employee owned and controlled organizations that are fully democratic but which function in a capitalist market in supplying goods and services and typically in obtaining goods and services.
Where do we want the country to go? The status quo is definitely unacceptable. Poverty is unacceptable and right now, not within every person’s power to end other than by suicide or crime.
This shouldn’t even be an issue. We should have done away with poverty ages ago and could have, easily. Money can be immediately and freely (without borrowing) created by the government and distributed in a way to end poverty and without causing price inflation or deflation.
Anarchy is clearly not the right direction, whether it be left-wing or laissez-faire capitalist. The people coming together and freely and openly discussing and then deciding on courses of action, etc., is a state/government by definition. It wouldn’t be acceptable or tolerable to have a member of that community or society simply say he or she isn’t going to abide and is rather going to do whatever he or she likes. Anarchy would be a license to the return of the divine right of the king to be the one, only, and absolute monarch, whose word would be law with no exceptions.
Naturally, the less coercion, the better. The more peacefully convincing through reason, the better.
So, we have to decide. Our “Founding Fathers” did not have a monopoly on intelligence or on what constitutes the best form of government or economic order, which are really the same thing.
It’s up to us. We won’t get there via the extreme censorship we have in place now. We won’t get there with corporatist “liberal” or “conservative” gatekeepers controlling the parameters of the debate.
How many people will even be allowed to hear this or read this?
There are factions on both the self-styled left and self-styled right out to censor and without legitimate justification. Our society is not built upon fair rules of debate because such rules work against the advantages of the gatekeepers on both sides.
I read Popular Resistance Newsletter – Paramilitaries in our cities and found nothing in it denouncing wanton property destruction by anarchists. Otherwise, what’s said in it is correct.
Arguing in favor of Sweden’s approach to the pandemic is so callus. It’s as if opening prematurely didn’t happen. It’s as if there haven’t been many more who’ve fallen ill. It’s as if there aren’t any serious complications that remain with those who’ve been released from the hospitals. It’s as if there haven’t been more deaths. It’s as if Norway and Finland didn’t do a considerably better job than Sweden concerning all the people and not just the elderly and those with preexisting health-issues making them more susceptible to the virus and its aftereffects.
Arguing against wearing masks in public gatherings during the pandemic is also thoughtless. It’s as if all the places where there were protesters wearing the masks and not getting sick didn’t happen and where there were protests where the protesters weren’t wearing and did get sick didn’t happen. It’s anecdotal, yes; but there were dozens and dozens of such protests. Just because something is anecdotal doesn’t mean there’s no obvious cause and effect. Why the HELL do medical practitioners want N95 masks against the virus, because they don’t work? Honestly!
I think many people would rather fall on their swords going down defending their previous positions rather than simply admitting they were wrong.
“COVID-19 can result in prolonged illness even among persons with milder outpatient illness, including young adults,” the report’s authors wrote.
… “over 90 percent of outpatients with influenza recover within approximately two weeks” after a positive flu test.
Among the patients who experienced lasting [COVID-19] symptoms in the CDC report, 71 percent reported fatigue, 61 percent had lasting cough, and 61 percent reported ongoing headaches.
This was purely a policy choice. None of it had to happen. It wouldn’t have happened had I been in charge. How about you?
A survey released Friday by AP-NORC found that while 78% of workers who were furloughed or laid off in the early days of the pandemic believed in April that they’d be able to return to work eventually, just 34% are optimistic about their prospects now. Just 18% have already returned to their jobs, and 47% say they no longer believe their old jobs will be available ever again.
The same poll found that 72% of Americans would still rather see the federal, state, and local governments impose restrictions aimed at preserving public health rather than prioritizing reopening economies while the coronavirus continues to spread across the country.
While Republican leaders have been reticent to offer robust aid to working families and have allowed large corporations to take much of the aid meant for struggling small companies, powerful Democrats in Congress have also stood in the way of some of the most ambitious aid proposals ….
Degrading the soil.
• Killing off the life giving microbes.
• Allowing the topsoil to erode.
• Causing flooding.
• Releasing greenhouse gases.
• Leaching chemicals into our streams, rivers, and oceans.
• And I’m not even getting into carcinogenic impact, and the other unintended [and unnoticed] consequences of their use.
Soy, and peas, and the other GMO commodities are synthesized in a laboratory to feed the people of the world a “new” kind of food, fake meat like Impossible Burgers.
The ingredients of monocropped soy and peas are produced by multinational corporations with reductionist science worldviews. Obscene amounts of money are made in this industry by Wall Street and Silicon Valley, not by the people living in rural America. In addition to the damages that I listed above, rural America was impoverished by this system of land management. It is one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century.
I’d spend $20T plus to improve things, and I would do it without having to raise taxes or the national debt. After that, I’d pay off the national debt and handle the fake business-cycle and its inflation/deflation as the child’s play it would be.
The deficit hawks don’t know what they’re talking about and never have. They’re a bunch of economics illiterates.
This goofy libertarian handwringing only works if interests rates are through the roof rather than sitting on the floor where they are or if we don’t stop governmental borrowing (which I’d do): As U.S. debt rises, Biden’s spending proposals near $10 trillion
Several studies have found that the risk of contracting severe Covid-19 that can result in hospitalization, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation or death increases with age as well as the presence of underlying health conditions.
… “the counties with the highest prevalences of any condition were concentrated in Southeastern states, particularly in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia, as well as some counties in Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and northern Michigan, among others”.
As professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, I have authored over 300 peer-reviewed publications and currently hold senior positions on the editorial boards of several leading journals. I am usually accustomed to advocating for positions within the mainstream of medicine, so have been flummoxed to find that, in the midst of a crisis, I am fighting for a treatment that the data fully support but which, for reasons having nothing to do with a correct understanding of the science, has been pushed to the sidelines. As a result, tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily. Fortunately, the situation can be reversed easily and quickly.
I am referring, of course, to the medication hydroxychloroquine. When this inexpensive oral medication is given very early in the course of illness, before the virus has had time to multiply beyond control, it has shown to be highly effective, especially when given in combination with the antibiotics azithromycin or doxycycline and the nutritional supplement zinc.
Since publication of my May 27 article, seven more studies have demonstrated similar benefit. In a lengthy follow-up letter, also published by AJE, I discuss these seven studies and renew my call for the immediate early use of hydroxychloroquine in high-risk patients. These seven studies include: an additional 400 high-risk patients treated by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, with zero deaths; four studies totaling almost 500 high-risk patients treated in nursing homes and clinics across the U.S., with no deaths; a controlled trial of more than 700 high-risk patients in Brazil, with significantly reduced risk of hospitalization and two deaths among 334 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine; and another study of 398 matched patients in France, also with significantly reduced hospitalization risk. Since my letter was published, even more doctors have reported to me their completely successful use.
Third, concerns have been raised by the FDA and others about risks of cardiac arrhythmia, especially when hydroxychloroquine is given in combination with azithromycin. The FDA based its comments on data in its FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. This reporting system captured up to a thousand cases of arrhythmias attributed to hydroxychloroquine use. In fact, the number is likely higher than that, since the reporting system, which requires physicians or patients to initiate contact with the FDA, appreciably undercounts drug side effects.
But what the FDA did not announce is that these adverse events were generated from tens of millions of patient uses of hydroxychloroquine for long periods of time, often for the chronic treatment of lupus or rheumatoid arthritis. Even if the true rates of arrhythmia are ten-fold higher than those reported, the harms would be minuscule compared to the mortality occurring right now in inadequately treated high-risk COVID-19 patients. This fact is proven by an Oxford University study of more than 320,000 older patients taking both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, who had arrhythmia excess death rates of less than 9/100,000 users, as I discuss in my May 27 paper cited above. A new paper in the American Journal of Medicine by established cardiologists around the world fully agrees with this.
Ecommerce, a structural shift in how Americans shop, has wiped out retailer after retailer, from big ones such as Sears Holdings and Toys ‘R’ Us, to smaller ones. It created a night-mare scenario for malls and landlords – including REITs – that own the malls, and for investors that hold the mortgages and the Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS) that these mortgages have been packaged into.
And now that the pandemic is compressing future years of brick-and-mortar meltdown into a few months, the whole schmear is coming apart.
Ecocapsule aims at “anywhere-living” with own energy & water
Can off-grid, anywhere-living appeal the masses? The Ecocapsule mobile dwelling gathers solar/wind energy, harvests/filters water. It shelters up to 2 comfortably and includes all essentials: kitchen, toilet, shower, folding bed, storage.
Sona Pohlova and Tomáš Žáček created the original design in 2014 for a client with a ranch who didn’t have the infrastructure for guest housing. They didn’t win the contract but were published worldwide and received requests from people to buy it. They spent 5 years turning their plans into a prototype.
Today they are selling their EcoCapsule – complete with shower and toilet, sleeping area for two, and kitchenette – to anyone looking to “stay in nature for a long time, for example, scientists, photographers, rangers or extreme tourists” or someone interested in installing one on a city rooftop. The pods are highly mobile: they can easily be pulled by a pickup truck or even airlifted by helicopter (for those rooftop needs).
The units capture sun energy (PV) as well as their own rainwater (and grey and blackwater). There’s even an app-controlled smart-home system and sensors that help you monitor your energy and water use.
The only way out is jubilee or having the federal government bail everyone out. I’m for bailing out and subsidizing on a permanent basis those people and organizations that will stimulate the true greening, not green washing, of America. Those organizations that run contrary to true greening should be phased out ASAP.
Nobody Knows How to Ever Get Out of This Mess
“Extend and Pretend” forevermore.
This is all they have?
… an isolated China might have continued to export violent revolution, sought to proliferate nuclear weapons and send waves of impoverished refugees across its borders.
Violent revolution wouldn’t have succeeded anywhere if the US had done the right thing and supported real democracy everywhere instead of market capitalism, fascism, and elitism. As for nuclear weapons, China has more nuclear-weapons capabilities than it would have had, and it’s using them. Also, why in the world would China have allowed it’s impoverished to escape when the whole point of China was to keep them from being able to?
If Nixon hadn’t “opened” China, we wouldn’t have the second largest economy in the world planning to undermine what little democracy there is anywhere in the world. We wouldn’t have the second largest economy in the world being a totalitarian dictatorship.
Please notice that the arguments now of those who claim Nixon made the right move conveniently leave out the fact that the great sales pitch used at the time was that if we open China, China would turn democratic. How did that work out? Are the people in Hong Kong becoming freer and more democratic in the face of Xi imposing his will upon them? Are the people of Taiwan looking forward to getting that Hong Kong treatment, or are they planning to fight to the death to maintain their system where the people of Taiwan choose their leaders in free and fair elections? If you have any spirituality at all, how would you like to live in China and be subjected to the mistreatment the spiritually minded there have received? Do you have any idea the degree of censorship there? How would you like to be a citizen of one of the countries where China has claimed your legal waters in the sea and threatened your nation with Chinese warships?
No, Nixon was dead wrong until he questioned his move by saying, “Maybe we created a Frankenstein.” I think that’s putting it mildly.
As for “Nixon’s Biggest Achievement,” try the EPA or try closing the gold window. He dragged his feet on ending the Vietnam War, but at least it ended.
Tom Cotton got schooled.
The free labor thesis that predicted slavery’s eventual demise was an antebellum theory. It post-dated the Revolution by 50+ years. And the Revolution produced an abolition moment in the North (‘contagion of liberty’). ~ Joshua Zeitz
The fact of the matter is, cotton could have been grown and picked by free wage-earners had the greedy not wanted their excess. Slavery was most certainly not a necessary evil.