The estimate of 25 to 30% of the ruling class being Jewish is by James Petras in his deliniation of the Zionist power configurationin the US.  People having at least hundreds of millions of dollars are less than 1% of the American population, and a third of that would be less than a million people.

Zionist progroms by Israeli’s are a feature of Palestinan life.  By students in Yeshiva’s, by fascist Kahane groups, by groups preventing Palestinians from harvesting their crops, by the military.  The purpose is the traditional one, to intimidate an ethnic population.

Folktruther, October 14 at 10:15 am #

Certainly a Zionist lout like you can ask good questions ... as can your colleagues in the Zionist lynch mob that you probably belong to.  And they probably do so at the poolhall ... you probably can think of things that my powerful brain overlooks.

*****************************

I didn’t know there were any Zionist lynch mobs.  Did you learn about them from the White-supremacist web sites you frequent?  Or the radical-Islamic ones?

That’s not dovening, that’s bending over a pool cue. I tried it but my big stereotypical Jewish hooked nose kept banging into the felt.

Don’t worry--there’s a whole UNIVERSE of things your brain overlooks.  Everything is true of the empty set.

*****************************

Thinking through truths that we have been miseducated, ... and your courage, curiosity and intelligence, (such as it is) is as useful as any other in penetrating our ideological indoctrination.
************************

I’m glad you are finally realizing how indoctrinated you are.  Left-wing indoctrination is almost as bad as Right-wing-.  Luckily, I’m still a left-leaning Progressive.

**************************

That is why it is important to allow freedom of communication, .......Thinking is a communal process when viewed historically...[
*************************************

Thinking is a COMMUNAL process?????  Fine, let me do your thinking for you. I’ll do all that heavy lifting you can’t manage!

What is communal is mob behavior--we see it at the Palin rallies.  Mob behavior leads to mass atrocities.  Thinking is an individual process.  We each must learn how to do it ourselves.

Too much Marxist indoctrination!  What can be communal is PROBLEM-SOLVING, which is definitely not the same as thinking.

*************************************
What makes you imagine that I think that serfs were treated fairly? [
**************************

Your idiotic assertion that serfdom was somehow “different” than slavery, that selling, torturing and killing was limited to slaves and by inference, not to applied to serfs as well.

****************************************
Your question, which I had never thought of before, or run acrss by anyone else.....(your provinciality), ....
***************************************

Well mazel-tov and Lah-dee-dah!  You just managed to figure this out! It is blatantly obvious that serfdom was simply a form of slavery. But, Mr. Next-Einstein, are just figuring it out.
*********************************

Could the Arab and Israeli people negotiate and come to an agreement about Palestine?  Why of course, a routine historical problem.  Easy.

...
***********************************

OK, Mr. Great Brain. Tell us how to solve the problem of Israel and Palestine.  Not what should have been done, but what can be done and needs to be done now.

While you are at it, tell us how YOUR plan will prevent genocide.

********************************

But they can’t do it.  He couldn’t do it… a major reason why they can’t is American Jewish machers, who make up twenty five or thirty percent of the American ruling class…
*****************************************

Getting your “statistics” from those white-supremacists and radical-Islamists again?  Can’t even do basic arithmetic can you?  There aren’t enough Jews in ALL the United States to be “25-30% of the ruling class”

**************************************

Not only does Israel hijack much of US policy, America hijacks much of Israel’s. ...

Judge Roy Bean “logic”.

And both the Dems and Gops are going to continue it, due to Zionist money ........  And it is Zionists like Addleson that is the political problem.

Time to get your meds adjusted....

I’m a fool to argue with a fool..

Certainly a Zionist lout like you can ask good questions and utter insightful truths, Inherit, as can your colleagues in the Zionist lynch mob that you probably belong to.  And they probably do so at the poolhall or where ever you all go to doven. Because of their, and your, perverted values, you probably can think of things that my powerful brain overlooks.

Thinking through truths that we have been miseducated, misinformed and misentertained from childhood is a very difficult business, and your courage, curiosity and intelligence, (such as it is) is as useful as any other in penetrating our ideological indoctrination.

That is why it is important to allow freedom of communication, something no polity has ever permitted throughout history.  Thinking is a communal process when viewed historically, and in this indeavor, fortunately for you, courage is more important than intelligence.
***
What makes you imagine that I think that serfs were treated fairly?  Your question, which I had never thought of before, or run acrss by anyone else, focuses attention on what power contraints on the power structure ALLOWED serfdom to flow out of plantation slavery.  The reason it is such a good question is that maybe earthpeople can use their defenses against our own power systems, if we knew what they were and could modernize them.
***
Could the Arab and Israeli people negotiate and come to an agreement about Palestine?  Why of course, a routine historical problem.  Easy. 

But it is not the people doing the negotiating, Inherit, but power systems.  And as Olmert, the mumser-in-chief of the Israeli leadership said, it is obvious what must be done. 

But they can’t do it.  He couldn’t do it knowing what the long term interests of the Jewish-Israeli people were. And a major reason why they can’t is American Jewish machers, who make up twenty five or thirty percent of the American ruling class, and the American power system, are against it.  Not only does Israel hijack much of US policy, America hijacks much of Israel’s.  It is the AMERICAN-Israeli power structure negotiating with the Palestinians.

And both the Dems and Gops are going to continue it, due to Zionist money and media in both parties. There is a New YORKER article a few months back about Addleson, a gambling capitalist and no doubt a gangster as well.  He has 25 billion dollars to spread around Israel and the US to maintain a Likud foreign policy.  That’s proabably even more than you have, Inherit, so his views are given more weight then yours. Or of course mine.  And it is Zionists like Addleson that is the political problem.

Folktruther, October 13 at 6:22 pm #

I really don’t know, Inherit, what kept the nobles in line in oppressing their serfs, except tradtion. I suppose it was not economical to go too far.  Good question.
***************************************

Really?  A good question from a lout like me? How is that possible?

Here’s another question: Why do you assume the nobles STAYED in line and didn’t abuse their serfs? What evidence do you have that the serfs were treated fairly? The CHURCH????? The Church was one of the worst oppressors on their own, Church lands.

***************************************

The existential fears of the genocide of the Israeli population is used to prevent any reasonable conpromise with the Palestinians.  This includes deliberate misquotes of people like the Iranian president in the American mass media. These I assume you identify with.
****************************************

Why?  Why can’t the Israelis and Palestinians come to a reasonable negotiated compromise?  And isn’t “reasonable” defined as a compromise that both agree with, both aren’t thrilled with, and both know the other side isn’t thrilled with either?

But I’m just a Zionist lout so I can’t POSSIBLY understand why a negotiated peace is not only not possible, but BY DEFINITION unfair to the Palestinians.

To my idiotic mind that’s a contradiction, illogical and deadly.  But what do I know? I’m just a lout!  (according to you.  I guess Cyrena and Tony Wicher are louts too.  Maybe we can each have a sixpack...two Joes and one Jane Sixpack!)

I really don’t know, Inherit, what kept the nobles in line in oppressing their serfs, except tradtion. I suppose it was not economical to go too far.  Good question.

The existential fears of the genocide of the Israeli population is used to prevent any reasonable conpromise with the Palestinians.  This includes deliberate misquotes of people like the Iranian president in the American mass media. These I assume you identify with.

OH...BTW, on the slaves and serfs thing?

A colleague decided the other day that what we’re living through now is what he calls a “modern version of sharecropping.”

Sounds reasonable enough to me. It’s DEFINITELY not the same as being a slave, specifically because of what ITW has pointed out...the WHIP. And all of the other things that used to be visited upon ‘runaway PROPERTY’. (slaves were both punished and appropriately ‘marked’ as runaways by having their fingers, ears, whatever chopped off). So that’s a big difference between being a slave, and a serf.

Anarcissie,

“..It would be a lot of trouble and the perpetrators could not be assured of success.  Unfortunately, they might nevertheless be stupid enough to try...”

~~~~

You hit it again. It IS a lot of trouble, and the success is by not means assured. In fact, indications are that it has already backfired.

Be that as it may, they ARE stupid enough to try, because for them, the result isn’t important. That became overwhelmingly evident in the response from Little King George to the global warming question when it was posed to him long ago. He’s denied it forever, but when caught on ‘why’ he wasn’t concerned, he said it didn’t matter, because we’d all be dead anyway.

I swear to God, that’s exactly what he said. AND, that’s how these people think. That’s why I knew (after years as a corporate slave in Texas) that I had to return to civilization and even academia, to try and understand/learn what had happened over the past 3 decades that I had somehow ‘missed.’ I didn’t THINK I’d ‘missed’ so much, since I’ve been in the midst of humanity, and traveling around a whole bunch. But, I knew I apparently didn’t understand how things had come to be, because this regime had totally thrown me off with the insanity.

So, now we know that the ‘insanity’ is part of it. The objective/tactic in the destablization of any society is to throw it into chaos, and eliminate all predictability. The rule of law then becomes the first thing to go, because the rule of law DOES establish a measure of order and predictability.

When the totalitarian regime of the Nazis was being established, this is exactly what they did. Oddly enough, (or maybe not) they never actually threw out or invalidated the Weimer Constitution, but instead just kept creating new horrors of ‘laws’. Not unlike what Dick Bush has done over the past 8 years.

Anyway, while we KNOW it to be insanity, (and this is even after it’s been PROVEN to be insane and or just totally WRONG – whatever it is) they still don’t acknowledge it. That is so foundational in the creation of an Authoritarian state. The insanity, the chaos, the unpredictability, and all the TERROR produces precisely what they need to establish a military dictatorship, and even have ‘the people’ believing that’s what best for the society at large.

I agree that Naomi Klein’s “Shock Doctrine” is an excellent work, and very readable. I could recommend several others, though not as easy to get through, and more focused on the aspects of Totalitarianism, including Hannah Arendt’s “Origins of Totalitarianism”. It took me a while to completely absorb the concepts there, because I suspect we’ve all had occasion to wonder how the people of such societies (like Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s Russia) actually allowed those atrocities to happen. Her work brings that into sharp and clear focus.

It also provides a scary wake-up call for the rest of us. Or...it SHOULD. Some remain in denial, but I just don’t see that as an option.

With slaves, Inherit, you can sell their families, torture or kill them easily, feed them miserably, etc. Serfs are tied to the land but live with their families and live off whatever the land produces not stolen by the rich.
*********************************************

And just what mechanism prevented feudal barons from selling serf families, torturing them or killing them?  Are you going to TRY to tell me that if a medieval lord decided to rape and kill a serf girl he would face ANY retribution from legal authorities????
Just how would that work.  After all, I’m too much of a lout to understand your subtle mind!

Yeah, serfs were tied to the land.  So were the barons. DUHHHHHHH!!!!!!

***********************************************

Capitalism functions under rental slavery where corporations only rent workers for their production time, those that can find jobs, and leaves them Free otherwise.  They not only can leave the land, they are encouraged to do when their houses are sold out form under them or they have the wrong opinions.

**************************************************

Rental slavery? Houses sold out from under them for the wrong opinions?  Are we talking the last 75 years or the late 19th and early 20th centuries, before the Wagner act and fair labor laws, still in the days of the company town and company store?  “Rental slavery” is one of those Marxist bullshit terms for employment—for actually WORKING for a living!

The difference between being a “wage slave” and real slave is the whip on your back.  If you think being a “wage slave” is the same thing, then when REAL slavery comes you will learn the difference--from that whip!

I also noticed that you NEVER answered the question about what to do about Israel. I KNOW you want a total right of return, and the end of Israel.  But you haven’t explained what will happen to the 5 million Jews who live there. That’s because you damn well KNOW what will happen and don’t want to admit it.  So you call me names and hurl insults..  That’s OK.  If I had ANY respect for you they might bother me.  But I don’t.  After all, I’m too much of a lout to see how much finer a human being you are, and not recognizing your quality of sticking your head in the sand and pretending another holocaust won’t happen.

Want to help society?  Go into the fertilizer business!

Thank you for your complement to my powerful brain, Inherit, you Zionist lout, and it is quite true that when I was young I WAS smart enough.  Unfortunately, like everyone elxe, I got dumber and dumber as I grew older and older.

With slaves, Inherit, you can sell their families, torture or kill them easily, feed them miserably, etc. Serfs are tied to the land but live with their families and live off whatever the land produces not stolen by the rich. 

Capitalism functions under rental slavery where corporations only rent workers for their production time, those that can find jobs, and leaves them Free otherwise.  They not only can leave the land, they are encouraged to do when their houses are sold out form under them or they have the wrong opinions.

Israel-wise, You are quite right, there is a danger of a masscre in a political-military war.  But the danger is more to Palestinians than Israelis.  The current trajectory historically is for ‘TRANSFER”, the destruction of the Palestinian nation.  This genocide cannot be acheived without widespread atrocities.

The obvious solution, as I’ve said before, was a two state solution. But I don’t think its possible historically anymore.  There isn’t enough Jewish and world power that supports it to ovecome the Aipac contingent of continued and increased repression.  Hell, Israel won’t even welcome Carter or Finklestein now, and is currently going to the right.

I concede that you honestly want an historical solution, but a loutish solution.  You and your friends don’t understand that most people don’t like louts spitting tobacco joice on the politial rug.

cyrena: ‘… Uruguay and Argentina are both good examples of how such a thing can happen ANYWHWERE, including here. Hell, it HAPPENED in Germany, in case anyone has forgotten that piece of history. ...’

Yes.  I’ve made a practice of reading about how the transition occurred in Germany, so I coud see It coming.  I was less well informed about Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Chile, but now I’m reading up on them as well.  Concidentally I’ve been reading The Shock Doctrine, ardently recommended in these pages, which deals in part with those very nations and events.  And the same probable perpetrators.

I was thinking, though, that homogeneity may conduce to the success of fascist coups.  In the large, incoherent United States, a coup or other unconstitutional takeover of any sort would immediately put millions of people, many of them armed, on the other side.  It would be a lot of trouble and the perpetrators could not be assured of success.  Unfortunately, they might nevertheless be stupid enough to try.

Inherit the Wind: ‘… I’m still trying to figure out what the difference is between slavery and serfdom other than the name.  None of you has answered that. ...’

Actually, I did just that, but you responded with an anecdote from Tsarist Russia: someone killed a serf, therefore there was no difference between serfs and slaves anywhere ever, period.  I figured we had both presented our opinions and there was nothing to be added.

Inherit the Wind writes:

“I THINK what Cyrena is getting at is that South America, especially Argentina, is a good paradigm of what can go violently wrong in a democratic society leading to fascism--that it’s an exaggerated version of ours.”

~~~~~

ITW...That was EXACTLY what I was trying to point out, before it became a forum on ethnography, having been highjacked by the person with the alphabet handle. The racial composition of these countries was only ONE thing used to point out that these societies were OPEN and DEMOCRATIC societies where there did not exist the standard conditions that can often be precursors to a facist state. Uruguay and Argentina are both good examples of how such a thing can happen ANYWHWERE, including here. Hell, it HAPPENED in Germany, in case anyone has forgotten that piece of history.

And, I’m not even so sure that Argentina or Uruguay are even exaggerations of what can happen here, or has already begun. We may not NOTICE it happening (obviously many don’t) because we are so much larger, and already broken down into 50 states that have their own set-ups, that we miss much. Like the fact that we now have US military troops setup to operate on US soil, to control US citizens.

Dick Bush has been shredding the Constitution for 8 years now, to the extent that we no longer recognize it. How long before this “State of Exception” becomes the rule, rather than the exception? Has it not already, in this post 9/11 eternal “War of Terror?”

I would say yes, and the collapse of the financial system puts it in the here and now, since that has been the final straw to break it all.

When people have got nothin’, they’ve got nothin’ to lose.

Folktruther, October 13 at 9:08 am #

But I like the way you have strong opinions about matters you obviously know nothing about, Inherit.  You draw responses from people like Anarcissie and get to learn that way.  So don’t be afraid of writing absurdities.  Courage is much more important than intelligence or knowledge in power relations- luckily for you-- so just keep on soildiering on in your loutlike way.  That is your way of learning.
********************************************

This from the person who didn’t know that Darfur was about Arab ethnic cleansing of non-Arab locals, via murder and rape.

I’m still trying to figure out what the difference is between slavery and serfdom other than the name.  None of you has answered that.

I guess it just must be so obvious to such brilliant minds as yours that you can’t explain it to a lout like me. After all, I’m practically Neanderthal, right?

While you’re at it, you can explain why you are in favor of a second Holocaust because the ONLY logical result of YOUR position on Israel is such a wholesale slaughter. What mechanism will prevent that slaughter (other than Israelis refusing to submit)?  So...why are you in favor of that slaughter again?  After all, I’m far too much of a zionist lout to see the advantage of another 5 million Jews murdered.

Jeez....it must be WONDERFUL to have such a powerful brain as yours, VolksVehrer!

I enjoyed your comment, Inherit.  It reaffirmed your eminent position in the loutish wing of liberal Zionism. 

It is quite true that the primitive accumulation of capitalism involved an enormous increase in income inequality.  But because the beginnings of capitalism did so doesn’t mean that the ending of capialism also doesn’t do so.

That Roman slavery turned into medeival feudalism is actually not my view, or a marxist view, but the standard view of mainstream history.  Astonishing how ignorant the Educated are of schoolbook history.
This is what happens when you restrict yourself to whatever serves Israeli nationalism.  You cannot see reality from a world historical perspective.

But I like the way you have strong opinions about matters you obviously know nothing about, Inherit.  You draw responses from people like Anarcissie and get to learn that way.  So don’t be afraid of writing absurdities.  Courage is much more important than intelligence or knowledge in power relations- luckily for you-- so just keep on soildiering on in your loutlike way.  That is your way of learning.

Inherit The Wind:
‘… IMHO, the difference between slavery and serfdom is solely semantics.  I think the evidence supports me.’

Then you will have to explain why Gaul became depopulated and subject to invasion under Roman rule, but developed political power and prosperity (slowly) after the immigration of the German tribes and the replacement of Roman slavery with feudalism.  My guess is that feudalism was a superior system because it did not contain a large body of people who had absolutely no interest in the survival of the social order in which they found themselves.

Xntrk: ‘… Yellowbird might have an unkind comment or two to make about these observations: No ‘serious racial diversity’???...’

Anarcissie: ‘The populations of Uruguay and Argentina are almost entirely of European descent—both over 90%, far more than the United States.  The population of Chile is mostly mestizo (of mixed descent), with a minority of European descent, but as far as I know does not exhibit racial stratification. ...’

Inherit The Wind: ‘Care to wager on that? ...’

Sure.  I’m just reciting what I read—the populations of Argentina and Uruguay are overwhelmingly European.  Chile is about 30% European and 70% mestizo, but without reading the detailed biographies of its ruling / leadership classes, I don’t know how to tell them apart.  We’re not talking here about Bolivia or Peru, which are demographically quite different.

My understanding is that the argument made was that these national communities are more ethnically homogenous than the United States; ethnic identity is a fault line along which a community under stress can fracture, as witness the Soviet Union.  Therefore, the kinds of stresses which were brought to bear on Argentina, Uruguay and Chile might have an even more deleterious effect on the social fabric of the U.S. than it did in those countries.  I agree with this argument, as well as the point in evidence we are discussing.

Anarcissie, October 12 at 6:25 pm #

The populations of Uruguay and Argentina are almost entirely of European descent—both over 90%, far more than the United States.  The population of Chile is mostly mestizo (of mixed descent), with a minority of European descent, but as far as I know does not exhibit racial stratification.

******************************************

Care to wager on that?

How many leaders of Native American descent are there in South America?  One. Evo Morales of Bolivia.  All the rest are European.

My understanding is that Chile is more like Argentina in that the aboriginal peoples were mainly driven out leaving a mainly Euro population, but that Chile’s neighbor, Peru, did not do so.

I THINK what Cyrena is getting at is that South America, especially Argentina, is a good paradigm of what can go violently wrong in a democratic society leading to fascism--that it’s an exaggerated version of ours.  To this day, Peronistas are common, and the memory of the silly military junta’s attack on Britain in the early 80’s isn’t that long ago.

Of course, the Nixon-CIA-generated “suicide” of Salvador Allende is more a reflection on the USA under Republicans than on Chile.  (the Pinochet junta never could explain how Allende committed suicide by shooting himself from 10’ away with several machine guns!)

By Xntrk, October 12 at 2:08 pm #
• “Is it your opinion, that somehow democracy was at fault when Allende was elected and therefore the selfish, stupid, people who elected him got what they asked for?”
Nope alphabet name,

That isn’t my ‘opinion’ at all. Is there anything in the extensive list of ‘recommendations’ (that you can’t possibly have had time to read) that would lead you to believe that is ‘my’ opinion, or are you just talking shit?

Ah…that’s what I thought.

I don’t much care what unkind things yellowbird might have to say, since it serves no useful purpose for yellowbird, or you, or me, or anyone else on these boards. The references that I included were not centered on Chile, but rather a few of the many South American countries that have fallen to military dictatorships. I had in mind (though I did not single it out) Uruguay, since I’ve done a considerable amount of study on them most recently, and it might be worth it for you to do the same.

In the case of Chile, Allende was overthrown by a typical US/CIA operation, which put the dreaded Pinochet in charge, and so for these purposes, wouldn’t be the best example, though it’s appropriate enough. (the US did the same in Peru with Fujimori, and Iran, when they overthrew the democratically elected Mossadeq and replaced him with the US/CIA puppet The Shah). However, for these particular purposes, that’s NOT what I’m referring to.

Too bad you didn’t read and re-post the ENTIRE thing, if in fact you were really after my ‘opinion’. So, I’ll do it for you…

• “Although not beset by overpopulation, serious racial diversity, or widespread illiteracy, in recent decades the people of Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile destroyed much of the good life and many of the freedoms they formerly enjoyed. Electing too few statesmen and too many politicians, they demanded more from their governments than they were willing to pay for. Rejecting sound economic policies, they engaged in unrealistic practices which led to exorbitant inflation. In contrast to traditional respect for individual freedoms, the military governments they brought in to solve their problems committed gross violations of human rights. The political and economic blunders and their unfortunate consequences should serve as a warning to the citizens of all democracies.”

Electing TOO MANY POLITICIANS and not enough STATESMEN/WOMEN was their problem, and they expected MORE FROM THEIR GOVERNMENTS THAN THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY FOR.

Did ya get that part mr/ms missing alphabet? Apparently not. Go back and read it again. And when you’re done being a smart ass, read the book by Lawrence Weschler, “A Miracle, A Universe: Settling Accounts with Torturers.”

Meantime, my OWN message/appeal has been consistent. I’ve consistently encouraged (even pleaded with) my fellow citizens to pay attention to, and take part in the selection of those you choose to send to the Congress to speak on YOUR behalf, and respect YOUR wishes. It’s too easy to sit around and bitch about who did or didn’t do this, that, or the other thing, when you took NO PART in deciding whom your representatives to Congress should be.

So, stop electing politicians, and start putting some statesmen/women in your houses. And stop expecting something for nothing. That’s not reality, and at the end of the day, reality is the only hope.

PAY ATTENTION!! Otherwise, by the time they finish bleeding us dry, you’ll be too broke to pay even that much.

THAT’S democracy moron. So NO! It’s not ‘democracy’ at fault, and I suggested no such thing. It’s when people GIVE UP their own participation, that they give up their democracy.

NOTHING is ‘free’ and if it was, it would have no value.

Xntrk: ‘… Yellowbird might have an unkind comment or two to make about these observations: No ‘serious racial diversity’???...’

The populations of Uruguay and Argentina are almost entirely of European descent—both over 90%, far more than the United States.  The population of Chile is mostly mestizo (of mixed descent), with a minority of European descent, but as far as I know does not exhibit racial stratification.

Trying to define feudalism as different from slavery is, well, futile.

Russia had a feudal system up until the 1860’s.  The lord or lady had rights that WERE the power of life or death.  One famous writer witnessed his grandmother, angry at a serf child, put a pillow on the boy’s face and sit on it, smothering him to death.  She did it with impunity. To value another’s life so little is a mark of slavery.  That was in the mid 1800’s (Was it Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky?)

Furthermore, Roman slavery was NOTHING like Ante-Bellum American slavery.  Taking care of your slaves was as much an obligation (if not more) than in Medieval Europe.  Even in America, it was ONLY as the Abolitionist movement grew that Southern slave owners, to protect their wealth, explicitly built more and more control and power into laws, to remove the chance that ANY slave had ANY rights or ANY chance to EVER have freedom.

IMHO, the difference between slavery and serfdom is solely semantics.  I think the evidence supports me.

As I try to bring myself to walk on the ethereal plain that allows one to have no beginning or ending and stroll down history’s many paths I have to wonder how many people miss the fact that Rome was destroyed by its own citizens.

Among other failures of the society Romans became most interested in their material wealth, how the bread and wine tasted that day, and being entertained by the slaughter of other human beings. This and other debaucheries kept there focus away from the fact that the legions that had fought to expand the empire slowly became a mercenary force.

While the point is well made that an economy based on slavery is doomed as the slave holders become out numbered by their slaves. This though does not take into account that the human population in other regions could do nothing but continually change. While Rome tried to change very little. Those changes I fear were not in the best interest of their republic. From a society run by a senate to a society controlled by maniacal dictators and religious zealots.

The question I would raise would history been better off if the empire had continued? That answer can be argued for all time and we will never know. As the citizens of Rome were more afraid of the government and change so afraid they ignored all surrounding conditions until they were paralyzed and could do nothing.

The question is the analogy. Do we see ourselves as paralyzed sheep discussing a history that has long seen its players in the grave, or do we see ourselves as people involved in a struggle that has lasted thousands of years.

I for one live in the here and now in this struggle not in ancient Rome or struggling through the dark ages with its ambiance nor do I want to.

So now we are here what are you willing to give up not for the empire not for a government not for a country but yourselves as free people?

Inherit The Wind: ‘… So...what is the fundamental difference between Roman slavery and feudalism? (remember: feudalism binds the serf to the land and service to his lord--and the serf has no choice in the matter--it’s slavery). ...

At least in theory, the superior in every feudal relationship was obliged to look after the subordinates, up and down the line.  While there were different kinds and levels of slavery in Rome, those at the bottom were, like American and West Indian slaves, pure property with no rights.  As a result they usually died off rapidly; in the West Indies, slaves had to be imported regularly to keep up the supply, and in Gaul, large regions became devoid of population.  (It was this condition that caused the Roman authorities to allow Germans to immigrate, leading to the breakdown of their authority—the Germans were tribal or feudal and wouldn’t accept Roman slavery.) Feudal Gaul, instead of degenerating into a wasteland as Roman Gaul had, eventually became prosperous, so I take it there was some important difference between Roman and feudal administration.

By jackpine savage, October 12 at 6:52 am #

“What is historically significant is the choice that fading empires make, or what they choose to create out of their destruction. The Dutch managed to retain wealth and some degree of power, the same can be said for the British. They did this by reading the writing on the wall and purposefully drawing down their empires. Western Rome did not and paid for it with utter destruction.

What choice do you think we will make?”

~~~

And, there we have it Jackpine. The French too, though to a slightly different degree, and later along the time line, also decided to be a Republic rather than an Empire. 

As for what we’ll decide, I’m not so sure we haven’t already, and I don’t know if it’s already too late. We have NOT seen the handwriting on the wall at all. (or, most of us haven’t). If that were the case, we wouldn’t have fallen this far already.

I’ve been pointing this out for several years now, because in my own mind at least, it’s been easy enough to see. But most still don’t, even though - as Folktruther points out, most of the decline and decay, (and each major ‘hit’ to us) is pretty much out in the open, but the media doesn’t put it in everyone’s conscience. So it’s like ‘hiding in plain sight’. The destruction is everywhere, but on the surface at least, things ‘appear’ to be normal. Most of the buildings are still standing, etc, etc.

So, I’m not sure what it will take, for us to even accept that we aren’t an empire any longer anyway. Until we do, we can’t make that conscientious choice to decide NOT to be. I’d like to believe that there is still hope of that, and while we can look to Rome for what it failed to realize prior to its own collapse, we can also see that Rome is a rebuilt and vibrant democracy now.

Empires are built to always expand, this empire was built on fossil fuels, with no fossil fuel energy the empire will implode and there will only one class distinction rich and the rest of us. We are living in interesting times remember. This is what is known as a survival economy, if you survive then you will have done better than the millions who won’t. Oh and if you think any of the people who are running this show even care then you best wake up and do what they have been telling you since hurricane Katrina “you take care of you and we will steal everything that’s not nailed down”. I still don’t understand how any person can think that a whole life time can be paid for with credit, and that the inability to get credit is the real “crisis”. That the banks loaned people money that both parties’ knew could not be paid back is a testament to our society’s true beliefs and that there is no moral high ground here. I know for sure that the government won’t get 450,000 dollars back from me. To those of you with savings or money in the stock market to bad; I hear 2009-29 is not going to be much better. Remember -56 trillion is the real number at the US Treasury and they have known about it for quite awhile. So along with the US senate, the house of representatives, and the executive branch Welcome to The Peoples Republic of America, glad you could join us.(Maybe the North American Union?)

Folktruther, October 12 at 9:36 am #

An extremely inmportant factor of an empire’s decline, Jackpine, is the increase in class economic iequality, leading to an increase in power inequality. In the Roman empire the squeezing of the slaves on the plantations by the landowning class became so coercive that they were no longer economical, and led to the development of feudalism.
********************************

Where do you dig up this garbage?  Economic inequality grew at an ENORMOUS rate with the industrialization of the United States.  It was not during a decline but during reconstruction.  The disparity grew as the nation grew richer and the robber-barons emerged with unimaginable wealth. 

Instead, it was the courageous battles of the unions and Populist and Progressive movements of the late 19th century that forced legislation to slow down and even reverse the inequity.

Enough with the Marxist crap about how all capitalism leads to slavery and disaster! The Marxist governments of the world have ALL been failures! All!  Every one of them!  And MOST of them ended up as enslaved societies.

Your connection between Roman slavery and Medieval feudalism is bizarre, to be kind.  ALL slavery, whether it’s called that or called feudalism is a response to a dearth of labor. When labor is abundant, it’s cheap, wages are low and slavery is economically unfeasible.  When labor is scarce and the jobs to be done are particularly unpleasant, slavery becomes economically viable.

So...what is the fundamental difference between Roman slavery and feudalism? (remember: feudalism binds the serf to the land and service to his lord--and the serf has no choice in the matter--it’s slavery).  Now our view of Roman slavery is generally slaves in an urban environment, and feudalism is a rural form.  But that doesn’t change anything.

Sheesh! The only thing worse than a Marxist interpreting history and politics is a Marxist doing it who doesn’t even know what they are talking about!  Don’t you ever even LOOK at your ideas and see if they make some kind of cohesive sense?

jackpine savage: ‘… What is historically significant is the choice that fading empires make, or what they choose to create out of their destruction. The Dutch managed to retain wealth and some degree of power, the same can be said for the British. They did this by reading the writing on the wall and purposefully drawing down their empires. Western Rome did not and paid for it with utter destruction. ...’

Britain and the Netherlands were states whose homelands were relatively small, and thus, once divested of their empires, they could become favored satellites of a larger power, and in the case of Britain, even allowed some quasi-imperial illusions.  The Western Roman Empire did not have this choice, and it does not appear to me that the United States will either.

I thought that (from the standpoint of the ruling class) Clinton was probably trying very cleverly to build a world system, a transnational empire of capital, in which the United States could find its place as one of many, a first among equal servitors of the supernal Board of Directors.  I think that option may have been wrecked by Bush, possibly for good.  Maybe it could not have worked anyway, but it did seem to be a sort of out, a graceful exit.

Folk and jackpine--Why dont most of us know that the ban on short selling was lifted on 10/08? I mean, I know WHY...ah well..just what would the Rogues Gallery think that that would accomplish. Call me naive’--no dont!

bipolar--I suppose you know the “Kipling” that Putin sent Bush before the “invasion of Afghanistan” (actually we’d been there so long, in and out, making a fricking mess)--but, little did Putin know--Dubya did not give a rat’s ass about the soldiers!!

“When youre lying and bleeding on Afghanistan’s plains, and teh women come out to pick at your remains, just turn to your gun and blow out your brains, and go to your god like a soldier”.

Sadly, if they “pick at remains”, it is because that is all that we left them, having fought out the “Cold War” on brown people’s soil.

jackpin --You compare the falling of the US empire, to the fall of empires like UK--and your point is well taken. I think that the UK fell, with an eye more towards its own people than we can expect from the US Capts. of Industry. Britain , at least, has a long history of its “people”, and, we seem unable to achieve that.

ONe can have affection for Britain , and, loathe that we are doomed to repeat their arrogance, at the same time.People in the EU are “screaming bloody murder” at their govts for , what they call, investing in an Anglo-Saxon greed scheme. But, I was watching “Atonement” last night (STF what??). It was a good, but corny ass love story,and, included the US’s continuing love affair with UK Empire-style “country estate” living. But, what I DID notice, was that, once invaded by Germany/Italy, the people did not have to be asked to work as a people. They seem to do it naturally.

Now, this was a movie. But, people I have talked to , that were in the UK during WWII, talk of everyone becoming a soldier, or a nurse, everyone accepting rationing, etc. We seem to be unable to do this, and , we seem to be unable to find leaders to inspire us to it.

Think that there is anything to this?-

Point/addition taken, Folktruther.

An extremely inmportant factor of an empire’s decline, Jackpine, is the increase in class economic iequality, leading to an increase in power inequality. In the Roman empire the squeezing of the slaves on the plantations by the landowning class became so coercive that they were no longer economical, and led to the development of feudalism.

The increase in class inequality increases the power of the ruling class to do anything it wants.  In the US, the Bushite SEC decrease the amount of reserves that banks needed, increasing the leverage of the five large banks to thirty to forty to one.

Then on Oct 8th, it lifted the ban on short selling with the predictable dive in the American market affecting the European market, with Goldman poised to exert its control over European banks; the issue is still in doubt.

But all this is more or less done openly, but simply excluded from the mainstream press.  The contempt for the general population by the power structure increases as its powerlessness becomes more evident.
Leading to that hubris and overreaching that ends empires.

All destruction is creative in so much as you can’t have one without the other. It is the dance of life: death begets life. It is an unavoidable fact, personified by Shiva, who’s dance is eternal.

But of course, the details are of supreme importance. The odds are that the paper for oil economy is finished, what we create to replace it remains to be seen...and i would imagine that since humans are fairly change averse we will continue to attempt propping it up. (That will lead to a more severe case of destruction over the long term.)

Our military empire is based squarely on the paper for oil scheme, and aside from a violent lashing out will fall roughly simultaneously with paper for oil.

We do have many of the hallmarks of a third-world nation; however, i think that the more accurate comparison would be to dying empires throughout history. The easiest comparison is with the British Empire, but others (including Rome...which is terribly poetic) work too.

Empires expand when young, driven by their agricultural/industrial/military might. That is, they actually do and make things that everyone wants...or at least find a way to control the distribution of those things. As they age and weaken, they tend to shift towards controlling the financing of trade rather than goods that comprise trade. Generally, their position gets more and more precarious and usually involves ballooning debt. The debt goes unnoticed at first because it still looks like the Empire is the richest thing around.

Eventually the debt becomes unmanageable and there is nothing of intrinsic value beneath the financing to hold the empire up.

What is historically significant is the choice that fading empires make, or what they choose to create out of their destruction. The Dutch managed to retain wealth and some degree of power, the same can be said for the British. They did this by reading the writing on the wall and purposefully drawing down their empires. Western Rome did not and paid for it with utter destruction.

What choice do you think we will make?

DarthMiffy, October 12 at 1:48 am #

And, yes, I really appreciate “Inherit the Wind“‘s name, too.
******************************************

Thanks, Darth.  It’s one of my all-time favorite movies, and the play it’s based on what I think is one of the greatest plays ever.  I think “Inherit The Wind” and “The Crucible” are the two greatest American plays to come out of the 1950’s.  Not only are both great political messages, but they convey it via some of the finest drama ever.  They reach beyond the naval-contemplation introspection of Tennessee Williams to larger issues, but ALWAYS as great entertainment!

To me, “Inherit The Wind” is the greatest celebration of thinking over feeling, of knowledge over superstition, of education over ignorance.

In case people don’t know, “Inherit the Wind” is a classic black and white 106- movie starring Spencer Tracy and <sans dancing feet beauty> Gene Kelly. Subject: the “Monkey Trial” or Scopes Trial. A to-the-point movie about the various points of view around Darwin vs. Creationism. Still on ongoing debate in the USA. How long will it take America to evolve to sensibility? Do we HAVE that much time left? I think this is real background driving question.

And, yes, I really appreciate “Inherit the Wind“‘s name, too.

From the Eugene’s piece:

• “I know that our mammoth economy bears little resemblance to Argentina’s, or Brazil’s, or any of the other economies I covered in South America. I know that we’re dealing with a mortgage meltdown and a credit crisis, not runaway inflation. But one thing is the same: The feeling of free-fall into some sort of abyss.”

Actually, Eugene isn’t at all off the mark in comparing our current environment to that of Argentina, or Brazil, or others of South America like Chile and Uruguay. In fact, while they may have been smaller, they are a microcosm of what has begun here, and can continue our own slide into a State of Authoritarianism, and the hyper-inflation that HAS in fact already begun as well. Only superficially different causes produce the same results.

This link is to a short review on Uruguay.

http://books.google.com/books?id=08OV704armMC&pg=P A1647&lpg=PA1647&dq=Uruguays+civil+unrest&sourc e=web&ots=SLugPGnnHa&sig=rTjFeE3LePZXC_F2f46kvkAa5_ M&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct =result

This one is even more extensive

“Warnings from the Far South: Democracy Versus Dictatorship in Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile”
By William Columbus Davis

“This work examines three advanced Latin American republics with long records of democracy, political stability, and economic prosperity which degenerated into instability and military dictatorship--and issues a warning for other democratic peoples. Although not beset by overpopulation, serious racial diversity, or widespread illiteracy, in recent decades the people of Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile destroyed much of the good life and many of the freedoms they formerly enjoyed. Electing too few statesmen and too many politicians, they demanded more from their governments than they were willing to pay for. Rejecting sound economic policies, they engaged in unrealistic practices which led to exorbitant inflation. In contrast to traditional respect for individual freedoms, the military governments they brought in to solve their problems committed gross violations of human rights. The political and economic blunders and their unfortunate consequences should serve as a warning to the citizens of all democracies.”

http://books.google.com/books?id=nc8XAAAAYAAJ&q=Ur uguay+Tuparnaros&dq=Uruguay+Tuparnaros&pgis=1

Here’s another one…my favorite actually…
A Miracle, A Universe: Settling Accounts with Torturers
by Lawrence Weschler

I’ve read this last book several times, (part of an ongoing project)and I discover something new in it each time. From the primary prospective for which I was originally consulting it, (A Study of Authoritarian States and How They Develop) I discovered that it has historically been those states that have enjoyed the most democracy, or the most open societies, who have been the most devastated. Maybe they don’t see it coming, because they don’t know what it ‘looks like’. That’s one of the many explanations.

Whatever the case, it happened, and it was devasting to all of these countries. The similarities (to our own condition) are enough to scare the living shit out of anyone who gives this any serious thought. So far, few have.

That’s what our downfall could be. It wouldn’t be the first time, and nothing is too big to fail/fall.

An interesting point, Anarcissie.  The difference however with Schumpeters ‘creative distruction’ is that the modern form is directed against welfare capitalism rather than against feudal constraints.  It is a political insane reaction and return to unregulated capitalism by destroying the regulation-welfare aspect of govenment and emphasizing its military and police violence.

Klein gives credit for its initation to Milton Friedman.  My old school the U of Chicago, may it burn to the ground, is currently building a 200million dollar memorial to him, presumably without the Pinochet wing.  They continue to ask me for money, ho, ho, ho.

The ideological trinity of Freedman’s neoliberalism--privitization, deregulation,and militarization- has been married ideologically to Zionism, creating an ideology not only against the interests of the American population, but against the interests of the American power system.

From a power standpoint, therfore, present day disaster captitalism is very differnt from the initial creative destruction.  Klein stands high for pointing it out.

Many years ago I read an essay by J. K. Galbraith to the effect that the United States had already become a Third-World country, since its main exports were agricultural products and it was increasingly importing its finished goods.  Many other similarities were noted, such as the importance of the military and reverence for it, wide and growing gap between the rich and the poor, weak and shrinking middle class, lack of public transport, absence of a comprehensive medical care system, draconian and irrational punishments including the death penalty.  The question to the candidates (which of course neither of them would answer) should be not “are we becoming” but “have we fully become.” I would say it would take just one more stolen election to give us full banana republic status.

As for disaster capitalism, I believe capitalism is supposed to be like that, to provoke and feed on disasters.  More fully, capitalism has a creative phase and a destructive phase.  The destructive phase is necessary to break up old arrangements, relations, even physical stuff.  Whatever is outmoded, weak, dubious, unlucky, is Darwinianly destroyed, and the new arises out of the survivors.  Marx wrote about it in the Manifesto 160 years ago.  Of course, this process can be very hard on the people involved, so people have tried to work out a kind of capitalism that has only the creative phase.  This probab