Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 22, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar
Target Iran

Target Iran

By Scott Ritter
$17.13

more items

 
Report

The War on Language

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 28, 2009
AP / Mohammed Ballas

A Palestinian boy aims a toy gun as he stands next to a mural of militants in the West Bank’s Jenin refugee camp. The Arabic graffiti reads: “Many people held weapons but few used them against their enemies.”

By Chris Hedges

There is a scene in “Othello” when the Moor is so consumed by jealousy and rage that he loses the eloquence and poetry that make him the most articulate man in Venice. He turns to the audience, shortly before he murders Desdemona, and sputters, “Goats and monkeys!” Othello fell prey to wild self-delusion and unchecked rage, and his words became captive to hollow clichés. The debasement of language, which Shakespeare understood was a prelude to violence, is the curse of modernity. We have stopped communicating, even with ourselves. And the consequences will be as extreme as in the Shakespearean tragedy.

Those who seek to dominate our behavior first seek to dominate our speech. They seek to obscure meaning. They make war on language. And the English- and Arabic-speaking worlds are each beset with a similar assault on language. The graffiti on the mud walls of Gaza that calls for holy war or the crude rants of Islamic militants are expressed in a simplified, impoverished form of Arabic. This is not the classical language of 1,500 years of science, poetry and philosophy. It is an argot of clichés, distorted Quranic verses and slogans. This Arabic is no more comprehensible to the literate in the Arab world than the carnival barking that pollutes our airwaves is comprehensible to our literate classes. The reduction of popular discourse to banalities, exacerbated by the elite’s retreat into obscure, specialized jargon, creates internal walls that thwart real communication. This breakdown in language makes reflection and debate impossible. It transforms foreign cultures, which we lack the capacity to investigate, into reversed images of ourselves. If we represent virtue, progress and justice, as our clichés constantly assure us, then the Arabs, or the Iranians, or anyone else we deem hostile, represent evil, backwardness and injustice. An impoverished language solidifies a binary world and renders us children with weapons. 

How do you respond to “Islam is the solution” or “Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior”? How do you converse with someone who justifies the war in Iraq—as Christopher Hitchens does—with the tautology that we have to “kill them over there so they do not kill us over here”? Those who speak in these thought-terminating clichés banish rational discussion. Their minds are shut. They sputter and rant like a demented Othello. The paucity of public discourse in our culture, even among those deemed to be public intellectuals, is matched by the paucity of public discourse in the Arab world.

This emptiness of language is a gift to demagogues and the corporations that saturate the landscape with manipulated images and the idiom of mass culture. Manufactured phrases inflame passions and distort reality. The collective chants, jargon and epithets permit people to surrender their moral autonomy to the heady excitement of the crowd. “The crowd doesn’t have to know,” Mussolini often said. “It must believe. ... If only we can give them faith that mountains can be moved, they will accept the illusion that mountains are moveable, and thus an illusion may become reality.” Always, he said, be “electric and explosive.” Belief can triumph over knowledge. Emotion can vanquish thought. Our demagogues distort the Bible and the Constitution, while their demagogues distort the Quran, or any other foundational document deemed to be sacred, fueling self-exaltation and hatred at the expense of understanding. The more illiterate a society becomes, the more power those who speak in this corrupted form of speech amass, the more music and images replace words and thought. We are cursed not by a cultural divide but by mutual cultural self-destruction. 

The educated elites in the Arab world are now as alienated as the educated elites in the United States. To speak with a vocabulary that the illiterate or semiliterate do not immediately grasp is to be ostracized, distrusted and often ridiculed. It is to impart knowledge, which fosters doubt. And doubt in calcified societies, which prefer to speak in the absolute metaphors of war and science, is a form of heresy. It was not accidental that the founding biblical myth saw the deliverer of knowledge as evil and the loss of innocence as a catastrophe. “This probably had less to do with religion than with the standard desire of those in authority to control those who are not,” John Ralston Saul wrote. “And control of the Western species of the human race seems to turn upon language.”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The infantile slogans that are used to make sense of the world express, whether in tea party rallies or in Gaza street demonstrations, a very real alienation, yearning and rage. These clichés, hollow to the literate, are electric with power to those for whom these words are the only currency in which they can express anguish and despair. And as the economy worsens, as war in the Middle East and elsewhere continues, as our corporate state strips us of power and reduces us to serfs, expect this rage, and the demented language used to give it voice, to grow.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 6:06 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 6:07 pm,

There you go again, attacking the messenger and crediting others for your own shortcomings.

You masquerade as an intellectual, but your actions are that of a foolish prating demagogue.

With regard to you, Shenonymous, Night-Gaunt, and OzarkMichael, I do not find it necessary to convince “you people”, as demagogues engaging in foolish prating prattle, of anything at all; all you are capable of is calling other people names, putting words in other peoples mouths and engaging in fulminating and equivocating caricature and Hitleresque subjective accusation and ridicule with disingenuous sophist rage, outrage, and indignation.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 5:57 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 28 at 9:20 pm and
OzarkMichael, December 28 at 9:08 pm,

Your posts are an example of you Right-Winger’s lack of creative imagination that is reliant upon the creative thought of others; that is understandable, since you are a conservative that is reliant upon literal, emotional static doctrine and dogma.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 5:49 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 28 at 5:23 pm,

Follow your own advice and I will do the same.

When I want your opinion I will pull the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST dog chain your master’s have on you as a leash————However, since I don’t value your opinion in the least, that’s not going to happen.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 28, 2009 at 5:20 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt said: You two are acting like predators, human ones that is.

Shenonymous commented: Night-Gaunt you might name the “You two” to whom you are referring.  I am
assuming ThomasG is one but it is not clear who you mean by the other of the pair.

I thought he meant Hitler was the other. Makes sense. But then it hit me that maybe Night-Gaunt is assigning the dual personality to Martha/Thomas G, so that both times he is referring to Martha/Thomas, counting her saggy butt twice. Thats is why I wrote this question: How many playground prating prattlers were in Peter Piper’s party?

But then i thought about it some more and I realized that in their little fascist party we can count Martha/Thomas twice, and Hitler once, that makes three.

so say it fast three times, once for each person in the trinity of Martha/Thomas/Hitler:

Peter Piper played at prating prattle.
If Peter Piper prattles at the playground,
How many playground prating prattlers were in Peter Piper’s party? 

(THREE!)

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 28, 2009 at 5:08 pm Link to this comment

Peter Piper played at prating prattle.
If Peter Piper prattles at the playground,
How many playground prating prattlers were in Peter Piper’s party?


Answer: One or maybe two.

(Depends if we count the duel personality of Martha/Thomas as one person or not)

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 28, 2009 at 2:07 pm Link to this comment

You cannot help yourself ThomasG.  Ignorance is a severe state of mind to
overcome.  You are hopeless since you say you are not young.  It is impossible to
teach an old dog full of hubris anything.  You bluster so that you do not have to
answer questions put to you.  Legitimate questions.  Everyone is watching how you
wiggle out of it by lambasting me and others.  Your attempted deception is
ridiculous because it is obvious. 

Night-Gaunt you might name the “You two” to whom you are referring.  I am
assuming ThomasG is one but it is not clear who you mean by the other of the
pair.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 28, 2009 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG repeating the same long thing four times makes you in the common parlance a “dick head” which in this case isn’t a good thing. Thank you for that.

ThomasG you are the student who sits in the corner all the time with a dunce cap on, to increase your intelligence, because you do not learn anything of any good. Which is fine. However I must warn you that using your enemy’s tactics (“Mein Kampf”) on us to fight against them is wrong. Like thinking that the Ring of Sauron could be used for good in the “Ring” trilogy. Hence J.R.R. Tolkien‘s point on that particular matter.

I would recommend people like Chomsky over Hitler any day to understand what is being done to us and how to circumvent it without becoming like them. You two have become like the fascists who believe in the barbarian way. Something Nietzsche found repugnant & dangerous. What he called the “blond beasts” (lions) who were barbarians on the inside and needed to let loose outside of their nobility and forced decorum of the elites—predators all. You two are acting like predators, human ones that is.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 1:55 pm,

You should really try to upgrade your prating prattle from the childhood playground prating prattle that it is, to a more Noble version of prating prattle.

To talk idly and at length is to prate and to talk foolishly or like a child is prattle. 

Prating prattle, therefore, is talk that is idle and foolish like a child.

According to YOU, you are a teacher; you, therefore, have a good savant education and are well versed in knowledge without understanding that defines a savant.  If you put your mind to your prating prattle, I feel like you can do better with regard to the entertainment value of your prating prattle.

From time to time I have been entertained by your prating prattle that never has any value other than savant regurgitation, like that of a parrot repeating words in the absence of understanding— by rote; I am reasonably certain that you will eventually say something entertaining in your prating prattle that will cause a smile to cross my face.

However, considering your prating prattle as wisdom is without merit; you are a good example of how, if a fool is treated as being wise, a fool will rage with indignation and ridicule when their prating prattle is not accepted as wisdom.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 28, 2009 at 11:59 am Link to this comment

You are writing nonsense, ThomasG.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 11:47 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 1:55 pm,

Parroting that you are not a parrot is what a parrot does, because a parrot parrots words without understanding as a savant.

Your post is self-serving prating prattle that attacks the messenger and does not address the message and is the limit of your capability as a PAID minion in service to YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate Fascist Overlords.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 11:41 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 9:17 am,

YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate Fascist overlords are, cumulatively, paying billions of dollars to inculcate the American Populace with self-serving Republican Corporate FASCIST Right-Wing EXTREMIST doctrine and dogma to lead the American Populace against their best interests in service to Republican Right-Wing EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST interests; why is it that YOU, Shenonymous, criticize my repetitive observation and condemnation of what YOUR EXTREMIST Republican Right-Wing Conservative Corporate FASCIST Overlords are doing, but YOU never criticize the activities of YOUR Republican Right-Wing EXTREMIST Conservative Corporate FASCIST overlords that are the cause that effects my condemnations???????  Could it be that YOU, as a sophist propagandist toady toiler for Republican Right-Wing Corporate Conservative EXTREMIST FASCIST interests that are contrary to the interests of the American Populace, are PAID to condemn my actions as an effect of their Corporate FASCIST Activities and know that YOU would be fired as a sophist propagandist toady toiler if you are critical of YOUR FASCIST Republican Right-Wing Conservative Corporate EXTREMIST overlords???????

I am one, and YOUR Corporate Republican EXTREMIST Right-Wing Conservative FASCIST overlords are many.  I am a messenger of what YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords are doing.  I am one voice in opposition and YOUR Republican Right-Wing EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords are legion, control newspapers all over the nation and the world, dominate broadcast media and use the media as an echo-chamber for their Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST interests of sophism and propaganda; ——  Why do you condemn my message in opposition to YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords, instead of the activities of YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords that ARE the cause of my message? ————  the reason why is that YOU are a toady toiler for YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords, and it is in YOUR greedy self-serving interests to serve YOUR masters, YOUR Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate FASCIST overlords that PAY YOU to fulminate and equivocate with sophism and propaganda against the best interests of the American Populace.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 28, 2009 at 9:55 am Link to this comment

Dream on ThomasG.  Shout your views without definition.  Who is the parrot? 
You are.  You parrot others’ ideas, others’ critiques because you have no skill to
think for your self.  I don’t want to read what others think.  I want to know what
you think!  Who cannot think for himself?  You cannot think for yourself.  You
are the parrot.  You shout and blare so that no one can actually argue for or
against you.  You deflect any argument others give you, and impugn any thing
they say.  You do not take others seriously.  It is often said only a thief can
catch a thief.  You try to set a trap which is disingenuous.  You are caught!  You
howl.  You need to show some a logical connection between what you claim or
seem to claim through the mouths of others and what is the reality.  You
should be ashamed to quote others so blatantly.  It is what freshmen in college
do.  They quote and quote and quote!  You need to define reality not simply re-
define it.  You have to define it first, which you have not done.  You need to
paraphrase all those quotes from all those links instead of copying them.  You
have done this many times.  You wiggle away from doing any real criticism by
hiding your inability to think for yourself in quotes from others.  Unlike OM
who is quoting Mein Kampf to show how you are a paradigm of the Hitlerian
kind of thinking.  His is methodical… and apparently inexorable! 

You have given no reason to believe you.  This is the tactic Hitler used.  It is
pontification and the height example of self-deception.  You don’t elaborate on
socialized capitalism.  You simply howl about it.  You claim I parrot you, but no,
I do more.  I hold a mirror up to your inanities.  To your empty arguments. 

I do not know what motivates Night-Gaunt, but my constructive advice is to
show how utterly vacant you are in your argument.  You have no eloquence to
persuade.  You rather use tortuous graphic methods and threaten damnation or
even worse, death with your commands to accept your version of socialized
capitalism. The Big Problem:  You have not given your version.  It is just a lot of
howling.  Your power of persuasion is nonexistent.

And I mean, do you have to copy and paste your comments four times?  Yikes.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 9:21 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 9:17 am,

You and all of the rest of your Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascist Cell are legends in your own minds in support of your Republican Right-Wing amorphous nonsense.

Here is a link and an excerpt from a Truthout Op-Ed that defines what “you people” are all about and gives the solution to Hitleresque toilers like you lumpen proletariat people working for money against your own best interests and the best interests of the American Populace:

http://www.truthout.org/topstories/122709vh4?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TRUTHOUT+(t+r+u+t+h+o+u+t+|+News+Politics)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

Inside the Military Media Industrial Complex: Impacts on Movement for Social Justice

Sunday 27 December 2009
by: Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff,
t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

This article has been previously published at Media Freedom Intl.

The American people face a serious moral dilemma. Murder and war crimes have been conducted in their name. Yet most Americans have no idea of the magnitude of deaths and tend to believe that they number in the thousands and are primarily Iraqis killing Iraqis.  Corporate mainstream media are in large part to blame. The question then becomes how can this mass ignorance and corporate media deception exist in the United States and what impact does this have on peace and social justice movements in the country?[iv]

Truth Emergency and Media Reform

In the United States today, the rift between reality and reporting has peaked. There is no longer a mere credibility gap, but rather a literalTruth Emergency in which the most important information affecting people is concealed from view. Many Americans, relying on the mainstream corporate media, have serious difficulty accessing the truth while still believing that the information they receive is the reality. A Truth Emergency reflects cumulative failures of the fourth estate to act as a truly free press. This truth emergency is seen in inadequate coverage of fraudulent elections, pseudo 9/11 investigations, illegal preemptive wars, torture camps, doctored intelligence, and domestic surveillance.  Reliable information on these issues is systematically missing in corporate media outlets, where the vast majority of the American people continue to turn for news and information.

While most progressive media activists do not believe in some omnipotent conspiracy, an overwhelming portion of NCMR participants do believe the leadership class in the US is dominated by a neo-conservative group of some several hundred people who share a goal of asserting US military power worldwide. This Global Dominance Group (GDM) continues under both Republican and Democratic rule.  In cooperation with major military contractors, the corporate media, and conservative foundations, the GDM has become a powerful long-term force in military unilateralism and US political processes.

It is up to the people to unite and oppose the common oppressors manifested in a militarist and unresponsive government along with their corporate media courtiers and PR propagandists.  Only then, when the public forms and controls its own information resources, will it be armed with the power that knowledge gives to move beyond the media induced mindsets that limit change to modest reform. Grassroots media providing voice to those who would challenge elite domination are our best hope to create a truly vibrant democratic society that promises as well as delivers liberty, peace, and economic justice to all.

http://www.truthout.org/topstories/122709vh4?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TRUTHOUT+(t+r+u+t+h+o+u+t+|+News+Politics)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 8:58 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 28 at 1:53 am,

Since you are a Right-Wing Conservative Republican Christian, OzarkMichael, here is an Op ed from AlterNet that explains how fascism works and the parallel between Nazi Fascism and Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism————We all know where Nazi Fascism led, and we all know that Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism will ultimately lead to the same place, if it is allowed free reign without responsible control by the American Populace:

http://www.alternet.org/story/144818/jesus_hated_war_—_why_do_christians_love_it_so_much?page=entire

Jesus Hated War—Why Do Christians Love It So Much?

By Gary G. Kohls, Consortium News. Posted December 28, 2009.

There are no “blessed wars”. Yet virtually all evangelical, conservative and many mainstream church leaders were active supporters of the Bush wars.

Today, American Christianity is at risk of going the way of the pro-war “Christianity” of pre-Nazi and Nazi Germany, which may in the long run discredit the faith much the way Christianity lost credibility among many Germans because their churches and church leaders facilitated those destructive wars.

The vast majority of Germans before World War II were baptized members of a Christian church, but since WWII ended church membership has fallen sharply and the number of Germans attending weekly worship services is now estimated to be in the single digits.

The psychological and spiritual wounding of the soldiers and their families in the two world wars stripped the German churches of their moral standing.

Those PTSD-afflicted ex-church-going combat veterans who lost their faith in the wars, along with their traumatized families, found out much too late that they had not been warned by the very institutions that theoretically should have courageously and faithfully taken on the heavy responsibility to teach private and public morality.

Many Germans who survived the wars felt betrayed by their churches and therefore had no inclination to try to reclaim their lost faith. The churches sank toward irrelevancy.

The world would have been far better off if the Christian leaders of the world had been faithful to the ethical teachings of the gospels and quit making blasphemous appeals to God on behalf of war, whether with those “Gott Mit Uns” belt buckles or the “God Bless America” political sloganeering.”

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 8:57 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 28 at 1:53 am,

Since you are a Right-Wing Conservative Republican Christian, OzarkMichael, here is an Oped from AlterNet that explains how fascism works and the parallel between Nazi Fascism and Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism————We all know where Nazi Fascism led, and we all know that Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism will ultimately lead to the same place, if it is allowed free reign without responsible control by the American Populace:

http://www.alternet.org/story/144818/jesus_hated_war_—_why_do_christians_love_it_so_much?page=entire

Jesus Hated War—Why Do Christians Love It So Much?

By Gary G. Kohls, Consortium News. Posted December 28, 2009.

There are no “blessed wars”. Yet virtually all evangelical, conservative and many mainstream church leaders were active supporters of the Bush wars.

Today, American Christianity is at risk of going the way of the pro-war “Christianity” of pre-Nazi and Nazi Germany, which may in the long run discredit the faith much the way Christianity lost credibility among many Germans because their churches and church leaders facilitated those destructive wars.

The vast majority of Germans before World War II were baptized members of a Christian church, but since WWII ended church membership has fallen sharply and the number of Germans attending weekly worship services is now estimated to be in the single digits.

The psychological and spiritual wounding of the soldiers and their families in the two world wars stripped the German churches of their moral standing.

Those PTSD-afflicted ex-church-going combat veterans who lost their faith in the wars, along with their traumatized families, found out much too late that they had not been warned by the very institutions that theoretically should have courageously and faithfully taken on the heavy responsibility to teach private and public morality.

Many Germans who survived the wars felt betrayed by their churches and therefore had no inclination to try to reclaim their lost faith. The churches sank toward irrelevancy.

The world would have been far better off if the Christian leaders of the world had been faithful to the ethical teachings of the gospels and quit making blasphemous appeals to God on behalf of war, whether with those “Gott Mit Uns” belt buckles or the “God Bless America” political sloganeering.”

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 8:57 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 28 at 1:53 am,

Since you are a Right-Wing Conservative Republican Christian, OzarkMichael, here is an Oped from AlterNet that explains how fascism works and the parallel between Nazi Fascism and Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism————We all know where Nazi Fascism led, and we all know that Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism will ultimately lead to the same place, if it is allowed free reign without responsible control by the American Populace:

http://www.alternet.org/story/144818/jesus_hated_war_—_why_do_christians_love_it_so_much?page=entire

Jesus Hated War—Why Do Christians Love It So Much?

By Gary G. Kohls, Consortium News. Posted December 28, 2009.

There are no “blessed wars”. Yet virtually all evangelical, conservative and many mainstream church leaders were active supporters of the Bush wars.

Today, American Christianity is at risk of going the way of the pro-war “Christianity” of pre-Nazi and Nazi Germany, which may in the long run discredit the faith much the way Christianity lost credibility among many Germans because their churches and church leaders facilitated those destructive wars.

The vast majority of Germans before World War II were baptized members of a Christian church, but since WWII ended church membership has fallen sharply and the number of Germans attending weekly worship services is now estimated to be in the single digits.

The psychological and spiritual wounding of the soldiers and their families in the two world wars stripped the German churches of their moral standing.

Those PTSD-afflicted ex-church-going combat veterans who lost their faith in the wars, along with their traumatized families, found out much too late that they had not been warned by the very institutions that theoretically should have courageously and faithfully taken on the heavy responsibility to teach private and public morality.

Many Germans who survived the wars felt betrayed by their churches and therefore had no inclination to try to reclaim their lost faith. The churches sank toward irrelevancy.

The world would have been far better off if the Christian leaders of the world had been faithful to the ethical teachings of the gospels and quit making blasphemous appeals to God on behalf of war, whether with those “Gott Mit Uns” belt buckles or the “God Bless America” political sloganeering.”

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 28, 2009 at 8:57 am Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 28 at 1:53 am,

Since you are a Right-Wing Conservative Republican Christian, OzarkMichael, here is an Oped from AlterNet that explains how fascism works and the parallel between Nazi Fascism and Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism————We all know where Nazi Fascism led, and we all know that Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Fascism will ultimately lead to the same place, if it is allowed free reign without responsible control by the American Populace:

http://www.alternet.org/story/144818/jesus_hated_war_—_why_do_christians_love_it_so_much?page=entire

Jesus Hated War—Why Do Christians Love It So Much?

By Gary G. Kohls, Consortium News. Posted December 28, 2009.

There are no “blessed wars”. Yet virtually all evangelical, conservative and many mainstream church leaders were active supporters of the Bush wars.

Today, American Christianity is at risk of going the way of the pro-war “Christianity” of pre-Nazi and Nazi Germany, which may in the long run discredit the faith much the way Christianity lost credibility among many Germans because their churches and church leaders facilitated those destructive wars.

The vast majority of Germans before World War II were baptized members of a Christian church, but since WWII ended church membership has fallen sharply and the number of Germans attending weekly worship services is now estimated to be in the single digits.

The psychological and spiritual wounding of the soldiers and their families in the two world wars stripped the German churches of their moral standing.

Those PTSD-afflicted ex-church-going combat veterans who lost their faith in the wars, along with their traumatized families, found out much too late that they had not been warned by the very institutions that theoretically should have courageously and faithfully taken on the heavy responsibility to teach private and public morality.

Many Germans who survived the wars felt betrayed by their churches and therefore had no inclination to try to reclaim their lost faith. The churches sank toward irrelevancy.

The world would have been far better off if the Christian leaders of the world had been faithful to the ethical teachings of the gospels and quit making blasphemous appeals to God on behalf of war, whether with those “Gott Mit Uns” belt buckles or the “God Bless America” political sloganeering.”

http://www.alternet.org/story/144818/jesus_hated_war_—_why_do_christians_love_it_so_much?page=entire

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 28, 2009 at 5:17 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous wants a cracker, Shenonymous wants a cracker.  You see OM, we
Demon Strate how to be an effective debater to the mindless who only repeats
themselves incessantly that they are reduced to resort to name-calling and
denigrating.  It is spoof-theater for the audience.  Now that’s our ThomasG!  I
have been on his hitlist since day one.  Not only does he shoot me, but he
shoots through me to shoot you!  As if you are vulnerable!  I cajole him
because he is such a fool. 

ThomasG, fulminate or not, OzarkMichael is presenting a much better case
against you than you are against him.  His arguments are effective because they
are constructed well and are informative.  He understands the principles of
dramatic anticipation.  He has seen into your charade.  We look forward to his
next installments. 

We all notice that it is you shooting the messenger Shenonymous, not what
Shenonymous says!  You really are such a buffoon.

Not to worry, OM, there is no danger of TG changing for better or worse no
matter how hard N-G or I give advice.  A mind made of mud cannot be
changed, it can only dry up and turn into dust.  Your characterization is on
target and he knows it and is wiggling about with his castigating accusations. 
You recall what martha said about the wigglers?  She said to kill them.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 27, 2009 at 10:01 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 12:07 am,

Do you not have a mind of your own?——————Or what?

You criticize me and live in my shaddow without having the capability of originality.  You use my words to answer my posts without a demonstrated ability based in your own merit. 

You are a savant that parrots others, and you parrot me without understanding, secure in your prating prattle.

Your prating prattle is NOT an answer to my posts and you are upset because I do not consider you of any value other than as a foil to talk past.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 27, 2009 at 10:00 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 28 at 12:07 am,

Do you not have a mind of your own?——————Or what?

You criticize me and live in my shadow without having the capability of originality.  You use my words to answer my posts without a demonstrated ability based in your own merit. 

You are a savant that parrots others, and you parrot me without understanding, secure in your prating prattle.

Your prating prattle is NOT an answer to my posts and you are upset because I do not consider you of any value other than as a foil to talk past.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 27, 2009 at 9:53 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous said: Today it is mass media, but in particular it is a matter of knowing how to construct public opinion.

It puzzles me that both Night Gaunt and Shenonymous give good advice to Martha/Thomas.

There are two possible outcomes of giving good advice to a fascist like Martha/Thomas.

One outcome is that the fascist Martha/Thomas gets angry and begins demonizing you. You earn a place on the fascist’s hate list of people who will be silenced/eliminated later. Which is the reaction of Martha/Thomas so far. I am sure she has a list somewhere, and i bet you guys are on that list.

The other outcome is that the fascist Martha/Thomas takes your advice and learns how to communicate better. She learns how to express herself more effectively from your good advice, and can convince more people and even construct public opinion into believing that her fascism is a good idea.

What i want to know is which of those two outcomes are you guys aiming for?  The only thing that keeps Martha/Thomas from doing harm is the fact that she is not capable of deceiving people as well as Hitler did. Do you really want Martha/Thomas to be more savvy at communicating her awful message?

This situation reminds me of the psychologist who counseled the mob boss ‘Tony’ on the Sopranos. The psychologist would be met with one of two possible outcomes. She would either help him be a much more effective mobster, or she would find herself on his hate list…. and then she would certainly be dead.

Fortunately for her life, she was successful. Tony became the most effective mobster ever. He did many many bad things and never got caught.

Was that really a good goal for the pyschologist? To turn a dysfunctional, disorganized pyschopath into a highly capable pyschopath?

What is your hope for Martha/Thomas?  Her hatred is powerful but she is not good at spreading it to others. Her intimations of violence are very real but clumsy, and the violence remain impotent without the political victory she craves.

Her hope to change our freedom into slavery is frustrated by her lack of communication skills.

I for one do not speak with Martha/Thomas for her own benefit. There are no other people I deal with that way, but she represents something so awful that it must be done.

So i say, “Let her be incompetent, do not teach her anything, and whatever you do dont give her your real name unless you want to see it on her list.”

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 27, 2009 at 9:32 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 27 at 11:19 pm and OzarkMichael, December 27 at 8:48 pm,

There you go again, attacking the messenger, rather than the message.  The answer to your subjective amorphous nonsense is—————blah.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 27, 2009 at 8:07 pm Link to this comment

Do you fancy, ThomasG, that you actually speak to your 70% Majority Common
Population?  Do you imagine the 70% Majority Common Population have such
minds that they can understand your arcane repetitive message, let alone care
what you have to say?  It is quixotic.  You definitely have an inclination to force
understanding through doctrine and dogma.  Your doctrine, dogma, and
propaganda is in a time-warp tunnel that pontificates metaphorically through
people rather than speak directly about capitalism.  You sloganize rather than
convince.  Slogans are your seeds, but they are old and cannot germinate.  What
kind of regard do you think I had about your Razor-ridge runner anecdote?  Or
what importance is the fact that I teach and that you do not?  You put too much
importance on details of no consequence.  Please show how many have been
persuaded into rage and indignation by your strategy.  You think they are
capable of accepting your frame of intellectual knowledge and understanding,
but you are the prating fool that common people simply turn their head and
walk away from such soap box bombast.  It is not creative, it is claptrap in spite
of your sincerity.  If you have not noticed in all the time you have been posting
the same litany, there has been no measurable rage and indignation. 

You expect too much and have little understanding how people learn.  You
need better seeds and you also need to understand the soil in which you try to
sow your ideas.  You underestimate your garden.  Your small repetitive
vignettes of phrases are deadeningly dull.  Your

If you think a new paradigm of economics and socialized capitalism ought to
replace the system that you think has failed, then you need to give more.  You
are a prattling piker and don’t give enough.  It isn’t in me you are planting
seeds, as I have already expressed what I think about a synthesis of socialism
and capitalism.  If you want to reach the 70% Majority Common Population you
would do better to learn to what they listen to.  Your style goes over like a lead
balloon.  You are trying to change public opinion, and change it enough that
their emotional motivation will effect change. But you apparently don’t know
how to infect your ideas. 

For instance, in the 50s and 60s rock n’ roll was effectively used to develop
public opinion on a number of things.  The public learned that exploitation of
their fellow man was an art and a behavior to emulate.  They learned that
recreational drugs were good, and morals were empty.  The music industry had
enormous influence on the young but they are not your target.  Today it is
mass media, but in particular it is a matter of knowing how to construct public
opinion.  Values and morals are set by the media of television and now the
Internet, but not by provincial political blogs like TruthDig.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 27, 2009 at 7:19 pm Link to this comment

my words about Martha/Thomas: “Inexplicably, she just repeats herself and incidentally supplies more and more evidence that she is a fascist.”

The reason i point that out is you can almost set your watch by it. Case in point: in the course of ‘explaining’ herself in a December 27 at 5:30 pm post, Martha/Thomas just performed another Hitler step to fascism.

It is STEP #16 in Hitler’s Playbook. I didnt think Martha/Thomas could possibly hit ALL the Steps to fascism, but at this rate she will.

Anyone else see the Hitleresque trick that Martha/Thomas did? She borrowed something beautiful and wrapped herself in it, attaching it to herself, like a pig putting a fine gold ring in its ear.

Hitler pulled the same move. Such a wolf in sheeps clothing! It worked for him but it wont work for you, Martha/Thomas.

Lets go out of order and discuss STEP #16 next, since Martha/Thomas just exemplified it perfectly. Feel free to guess what it is.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 27, 2009 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

i stopped the study of Mein Kampf because I got a little sick of it. But I am back, thank you for your patience.

We were reviewing Hitlers steps to fascism. We have noticed so far that at every step Martha/Thomas imitates Hitler.

For example, in the face of financial and political turmoil, the first thing Hitler did was say that the economic crisis of his day was intentionally caused. That is Step to Fascism #11.

Martha/Thomas states that our economic problems were caused intentionally as once again she marches in lockstep with Hitler. It worked for Hitler. Maybe Martha/Thomas thinks the same trick will work for her too.

The second thing Hitler does is he places blame for the national economic crisis on a small minority. That is Step #12 to Fascism. Again we find Martha/Thomas does the exact same thing, blaming the conservatives for intentionally causing our problems. She even has a list of names which she waves in front of everyone. Over and over.


We have traced 12 steps to fascism so far. Martha/Thomas has not deviated from Hitler’s playbook at all.  Martha/Thomas is in lock step with Hitler.

When asked to explain, she cannot defend herself at any point. Not one. Inexplicably, she just repeats herself and incidentally supplies more and more evidence that she is a fascist. More fascist than anyone we have ever met.

Did she hope that we wouldnt figure it out? Does she think that all she has to do is make baseless accusations and we would run away? How is that working out for Martha/Thomas?


Next post I hope to work on the next step to fascism that Martha/Thomas is using. Its not new, because Hitler(who else?) used it before.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 27, 2009 at 2:42 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 27 at 6:00 pm,

Concern yourself with your own writing style and I will concern myself with my writing style.

I am not talking to intellectuals; I am talking to the populace, the 70% Majority Common population of the United States, and it is necessary with the populace to say things repetitively in order to get past what has been programmed into their minds by corporate interests through television and the public school system.

Rather than to tell me not to be repetitive, take your message to the Corporate Media and the Public School System that has used inculcation as a political tool to dumb down and control the America Populace for corporate benefit for the term of my life; they are doing what they can as corporate entities in support of the classes and cultures of the American Aristocracy and the Professional Middle Class; I am doing what I can as an individual in support of the American Populace.

Reserve your criticism for the legions of corporations, corporate media, and the Public School System, rather than the lone individual standing against their mass inculcation of the American Populace, and if you have any success with that effort, perhaps my individual efforts will no longer be necessary.

However, until you have accomplished restraint of corporate inculcation for political, corporate and marketing benefit for the class and cultural elites of the American Aristocracy and the Professional Middle Class, I will continue as I am.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 27, 2009 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

Then ThomasG to accomplish your mission you need to rethink your writing style. You repeat too many words too often. -F You repeat whole sentences over and over that gets an -F too.

I agree with you that the kind of socialized Capitalism for the rich investor is disasterous. That needs to change if we are ever going to hold on to our degraded & tottering Republic. That would be among the first things that Obama should have been behind. But no, he is with the investor class and have no need to change it for the better. Bad for the rest of us if he allows a number of financial behemoths to come on permanent life support from our tax base as Wm. Greider sees happening if trends aren’t changed. 

ThomasG how many words did I repeat? Was it clear to you what I am saying and do you remember it? If so then perhaps you should rethink your writing style. The key is getting the reader interested at first then keeping them. Pounding the same litany over like machine gun bullets doesn’t educate, it sends them away.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 27, 2009 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 24 at 2:05 am,

When I talk about socialized capitalism, I am not talking to just you or about you, I am talking past you; if you understand I am talking to a greater audience that is alright, but it is ultimately unnecessary.

The metaphor of the Arkansas Ridgerunner was pointed at OzarkMichael through you, not at you, because of your seemingly inexplicable support of his academically unsupportable Hitleresque sophism and propaganda.

You say that you are a teacher and that is an honorable profession.  I, however, make no such claim and I have no inclination toward forcing understanding through doctrine and dogma of a teaching method.  Those who learn from what I say will do so because they will be forced by their own rage and indignation at what I have to say, to accept a creative frame of intellectual knowledge and understanding past their own, rather than the rote of time-warp doctrine dogma and propaganda of their own limited understanding in order to deal with what I have to say, without playing the part of a time-warped fool lost in the rote of bygone doctrine, dogma and propaganda, that everyone listening is aware of, except the fool prating the prattle of bygone time-warped rote, doctrine, dogma and propaganda.

I am not a young person and I know that those who want to understand, work insightfully with earnestness to understand, and do not expect others to hand that understanding to them, as would be expected by a prating fool.

I expect those who have eyes to see and ears to hear to grow creatively past foolish, prating, disingenuous, pedantic parsing and bygone prattle of time-warped rote, doctrine, dogma and propaganda, so that dialogue can move past disingenuous pedantic parsing of time-warped rote, doctrine, dogma and propaganda to actual participation in creative solutions that will effect benefit for the American Populace, the 70% Majority Common Population of the United States as a Class and Culture.

My mission is to spread and plant seed.  I am interested in those who with insight and understanding choose to be fertile ground, rather than those who do not.  Those who choose to be fertile ground will with creativity, knowledge, abstract, figurative and dynamic understanding and insight move past time-warp rote of FAILED doctrine, dogma and propaganda and participate in making a NEW paradigm of economics and socialized capitalism to replace the cyclically FAILED economic model of Privatized Capitalism, Zombie Capitalism, that cyclically FAILS and is brought back to life every 40 to 50 years by socialized responsibility of the American Populace for privatized benefit of Wall Street and the American Aristocracy.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 23, 2009 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment

I can appreciate a clever fable when it is presented.  I wonder, though, at the
suitability of your cart before the horse example, the wild boar and the
Arkansas ridge-runner.  A bit premature in the face of one untutored in the
fine points of economics.  Nevertheless, I doubt a ridge-runner would care
beyond a swig of moonshine whether he knew what a wild boar was before
shooting it for dinner.  Now maybe the Ridgerunner BBQ & Cafe in Wynne might
care if they wanted to serve porkribs.  As a cook for a long time, I often make
recipes with ingredients I had not known hitherto.  It is the intrigue of exotic
experiment.  But that is not really the point, the point is if I was hungry, I
probably would not worry about the finesse of a recipe. There would be no
problem of working ass backwards to understand a causal relationship between
the animal before me and what I would do to fill my stomach.  Distinctions
don’t seem too important the closer one comes to starving. 

But let me put it a different way then.  Stumbling along in understanding what
you mean by socialized capitalism, as I already told you I am not a student of
economics, and whether or not I go forward or backward is only a matter of
perspective.  When you say I must begin at the beginning you will have to say
exactly what you mean.  Your ambiguity sets up too broad a condition for
meaning.

Capitalism and socialism may each have its left and right characteristics and
trends, and each its visionary (quixotic) and practical (realistic or historic)
proponents and critical detractors.  Martin Sklar writes that “in real history,
capitalism and socialism, have not been mutually exclusive, not diametrically
opposed, or arranged in some overriding pattern of linear succession, but [they
were in fact] symbiotic, intersecting, and interrelated, as well as simultaneously
in conflict and mutual modification…”  Capitalism is a mode of production or
property-production system.  So is socialism and it has been present in the
historical circumstances of the United States. It too is a mode of property-
production relation.  Given this truth, it is completely speculative the degree of
socialization you have envisioned.

Robert Reich defined “socialized capitalism” to mean private investors reap the
gains and taxpayers take the losses. In July 2008 criticizing government
involvement with backing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, he said it was the worst
form of socialized capitalism, private gains combined with public losses.  The
government backing allowed F&F to take unreasonable risks, they only had
“upside” while the taxpayers had the downside.

Seems to me, a complete ingenue when it comes to high finance economics, 
that socialized capitalism had been at work, unbeknownst to the general
public, and it did not work. Why?  Because in that system, just like any system,
it is subject to corruption by those who control the purse strings.  So,
ThomasG, you do the explaining instead of fable-izing about Arkansas ridge
hunters and wild boars how to get the cart moving favorably whether the horse
is in front or in back and show how socialized capitalism would work for the
benefit of the country, not in theory but in practice.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 22, 2009 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment

Now I remove the psitticine repetition to see what the real content is of this latest response.

“ThomasG’s answer:  Your post is the blah of Hitleresque denial of H- behavior.  The H- scapegoat that is related to in your post is the Left and Liberals that were accused, condemned, denounced and demonized by Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, the R- Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II to the present time; thank you for your validation of this R- H- accusation, condemnation, denunciation and demonization of the Left and Liberals as being reprehensible H- behavior that needs to be judged.” [You left out Clinton and Obama on this.]

“You ask that a judgment be made with regard to R- H- behavior, R- M- Ec—C- H- b-, and Republican Party H- b- that is self evident from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present time that has been used to accuse, condemn, denounce and demonize the Left and Liberals; I agree that a judgment is necessary with regard to R-W C E H- behavior and that this judgment on the basis of history from the time of Goldwater to the present is that the R-W C E H-M-, the R-W C E H- M- Ec-C- and the Republican Party have engaged in H- b- on the scale of a political movement in the same way Adolph Hitler did to accuse, condemn, denounce and demonize the Left and Liberals in the same way Adolph Hitler did to the Jews.” (I could have done more to excise the junk in this. If I was an editor you wouldn’t be writing in this awfully bad way. You get a -D this time out of charity if you don’t do it again.)

When you are cornered you fill with bluster and endless parrot repeats that add nothing to the narrative. Repetition of this coarseness is boring. Tiring to the eyes and brain. It is also like junk food, fills you with garbage trying to fool your stomach into thinking you are full of real food. This is junk food for thought. Lazy and poorly written. Hack work in another words. Improve—-you have it in you both I have seen it occasionally. This formula is a failure discard it.

Creativity includes looking at things in ways not usually done. Try it.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 22, 2009 at 6:37 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 22 at 10:27 am, OzarkMichael, December 21 at 5:10 pm, and
OzarkMichael, December 21 at 3:31 pm,

OzarkMichael said:  “Then you can judge if Republicans(like me) are following Hitler,”

ThomasG’s answer:  Your post is the blah of Hitleresque denial of Hitleresque behavior.  The Hitleresque scapegoat that is related to in your post is the Left and Liberals that were accused, condemned, denounced and demonized by Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS, the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II to the present time; thank you for your validation of this Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement Hitleresque accusation, condemnation, denunciation and demonization of the Left and Liberals as being reprehensible Hitleresque behavior that needs to be judged.

You ask that a judgment be made with regard to Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement Hitleresque behavior, Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber Hitleresque behavior, and Republican Party Hitleresque behavior that is self evident from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present time that has been used to accuse, condemn, denounce and demonize the Left and Liberals; I agree that a judgment is necessary with regard to Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Hitleresque behavior and that this judgment on the basis of history from the time of Goldwater to the present is that the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement, the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party have engaged in Hitleresque behavior on the scale of a political movement in the same way Adolph Hitler did to accuse, condemn, denounce and demonize the Left and Liberals in the same way Adolph Hitler did to the Jews.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 22, 2009 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 21 at 4:00 am,

With regard to your post and OzarkMichael; for an Arkansas ridge-runner, who does not have access to markets and resources to purchase in the marketplace, it is first necessary for an Arkansas ridge-runner to know what a wild boar is, that a wild boar is a hog, and that pork comes from a hog, if the Arkansas ridge-runner wants to enjoy the benefit of pork for sustenance.

You want the Arkansas ridge-runner to start making recipes for pork before the hog is identified, secured and transformed into pork.

It is necessary to start from the beginning and proceed to the end of a causal relationship to effect benefit, rather than to start at the end and work backwards to the beginning of a causal relationship to effect benefit.

You apparently want to start at the end of socialized capitalism and work backwards to the beginning of its causal relationship as a means of effecting socialized capitalism: this will not work, because effect does not precede cause.

It is necessary with socialized capitalism to start from the beginning and proceed to the end of the causal relationship of socialized capitalism to effect socialized capitalism.

I think that you are smart enough to know that the Arkansas ridge-runner who does not have access to markets and resources to purchase in the marketplace must first identify a wild boar as a hog, that pork comes from a hog, and then secure the hog, before getting out the cook book and starting to concoct specific recipes involving parts of the hog as an ingredient.

A simpler metaphor is not to get your cart before your horse and getting your cart before your horse is what I perceive in your post. This is not a personal criticism, but a critical observation, based on your post.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 22, 2009 at 6:27 am Link to this comment

Hitler’s relationship to the monetary chaos, the disruption of normal life, the hysteria and dread of the Weimar Republic is very important. Contrary to Martha/Thomas, Hitler did not deliberately cause those things, but we must explore how he did relate himself to them.

It is all laid out in Mein Kampf, which Martha/Thomas knows so well.

I will summarize the next steps to fascism. If i write them all out with footnotes it will take me forever, so i will cover the next few steps quickly. We have a long way to go.

You, dear reader, can judge if I am telling the truth or if Martha/Thomas is telling the truth. Then you can judge if Republicans(like me) are following Hitler, or if Martha/Thomas is following Hitler. It is an evil thing to follow Hitler. Such people and their messages deserve to be exposed, ridiculed, and demonized.

Let us begin.

In the face of financial and political turmoil, the first thing Hitler did was say that the economic crisis of his day was intentionally caused That is Step to Fascism #11.

Dear reader, think for a moment.  Do you know any Republican who says our current financial crisis was intentional? Or have I ever said it? No. But we all know someone who says our current problems were intentionally and deliberately caused. That someone is Martha/Thomas. I will not ask her to defend herself. Frankly, it is indefensible to follow Hitler. Maybe that is why Martha/Thomas doesnt even try to defend her evil message. All she can do is make Reaganesque wisecracks.

The second thing Hitler does is he places blame for the national economic crisis on a small minority. In other words, he creates a scapegoat who intentionally caused the crisis. Sometimes he blamed banks, sometimes he blamed big business, sometimes he blamed a political party, and sometimes he blamed newspapers. But a particular class of people were the ones he held particularly responsible. They were (according to Hitler) rich people behind the scenes with bad intent. Yes, you know where this is going. We will have to say it openly. Martha/Thomas is forcing us to stare into the abyss of fascism.

Hitler blamed the Jews for intentionally ruining the German Common Culture, and trying to destroy the German Common Majority. That is Step #12 to Fascism: identify a scapegoat.

As I write this and name the Steps too quickly, the sheer evil of it all makes me nauseated. It feels wrong to recite the terrible Steps to Fascism as if i am reading a calender, as if it is ordinary and natural for Fascism Step #11 to be followed by Fascism Step #12 just like it is ordinary for Monday to be followed by Tuesday.

These Steps to Fascism mean so much more than I can say even if I wrote a book about each step. More importantly, every victim deserves a page. No. each victim deserves a book. How many millions suffered because Hitler figured out a way to take advantage of economic collapse and political gridlock by creating a minority scapegoat who he claimed caused the crisis intentionally?

Could this happen again? Is it ordinary and natural for it to happen again, like the days that follow each other during the course of a week? What does this say about human nature? What does this say about God?

I am sick from it, and sick of it, so I am going to stop for now.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 21, 2009 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment

Let us continue our study of the so called “three steps to fascism” that Martha/Thomas claims Hitler followed.

We have already realized that contrary to Martha/Thomas theory, Hitler did not deliberately cause massive unemployment, hysteria, monetary chaos and dread. He did not even accidently cause those things. He was a nobody when these things happened. 

At this juncture i want to make an important point.

While Hitler did not cause the economic breakdown and subsequent political gridlock of the Weimar Republic, he had a relationship to those events.

Does anyone know Hitler’s relationship to the monetary chaos, disruption of normal life, hysteria and dread of the Weimar Republic?

Hint #1: you will find the answer in Mein Kampf.

Hint #2: Martha/Thomas knows the answer

Hint #3: from Proverbs Chapter 11, verse 11, By the blessing of the upright a city is exalted: but it is overthrown by the mouth of the wicked

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 21, 2009 at 11:31 am Link to this comment

Normally I would comment upon the fine posts by Shenonymous and the reasonable posts by Night Gaunt.

I would of course disagree with some of it. I would even attack the parts i disagree with. And i play rough sometimes. But for all that, none of them ever squeel that I attacked them personally.

I recall trying to set traps for Shenonymous, and being rough with Night Gaunt. They never cried about it. Not once.

But Martha/Thomas is a different story. Maybe she simply cant stand any criticism of the things she says, but I suspect that all her squeeling is really just a smokescreen to deflect attention from the weakness of her message.

When asked to defend her message, she clams up about it, and uses Reaganesque deflection techniques, like saying “There you go again.

I used to ask her questions about her message, but she could not answer a single one, not even simple yes or no questions such as, “Did you write that post?” Her response to even the simplist questions has always been to squeel like a little girl at the playground.

The message of Martha/Thomas is under attack from me. That is true. But I am not attacking her at all.

If I wanted to attack Martha/Thomas,  i would say “Martha/Thomas is a beef witted blunderhead.”

But i dont say things like that. I certainly dont say those things when they are self-evident and everyone already knows it.

For now i have allowed myself to be deflected from the serious task of attacking the message of Martha/Thomas. Very likely that is what she hoped to accomplish.

My next post will be back on topic.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 21, 2009 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

As a gift for solstice, here is something for you Night-Gaunt.  If winter is here can
spring be far behind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNnAvTTaJjM&feature=related

I hope you can enjoy it as a metaphor for your comments at 5:08pm for laize
faire.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 21, 2009 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

I find that we need to have a certain amount of competition in the economy to keep it vigorous and innovative. What we have is the reverse of what I see is the optimum way to keep a safety net for all and still have that part of Capitalism that is good. Just restrained enough so that like fire, it won’t go out of control. Like cancer which is lassiaze faire for cells—-it kills the host if let totally loose, or burns down the house.

Right now Capital has no rules, it has little regulation (no matter what is on the books) for they are the ones in charge of such regulatory bodies, they enjoy little taxation. They have privatized profit and socialized loss. That must end. If they want to go somewhere else where they can pay people next to nothing will be fine. Just it will cost them here if they wish to sell their slave labor made products. Truth in labeling would kill that. That and charges on them for being slavers. I think the death penalty and confiscation of all their assets would suffice.

Life is a balance of forces not a static, rigid form of unchanging similarity. We need balance where the weakest of us still have a place to go and food to eat but not enough to be more than the basics. If you want more you will pay taxes and get more. Though I am skeptical of people who make more that 1 million dollars a year. Are they paying all others who produce such wealth adequately? Back to a graduated tax. The more you have the more you pay. The rich have gotten by in the past with a 90% tax—especially when they own 70-90% of the wealth in this country.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 21, 2009 at 12:00 am Link to this comment

I would not presume to influence anyone.  Each must come to their own
revelation about the reality of life.  I can only suggest calmness of mind for
both OM and yourself.  The fallacy of fascism is that it lends itself to both
extremes of left and right.  Mind poise is required.  It appears to me that OM is
discussing issues not personalities and that you perennially dodge his
questions. 

I don’t see the parallel you are making between privatized capitalism and a
ponzi scheme.  Yes I understand the dynamics of a ponzi scheme. As simple as
I can make it:  Money is not really invested just moved around to make it look
like it is earning revenue by paying off early investors.  Eventually it runs out of
money since payoffs are expected and there was no investment that would earn
returns did not actually happen.  With no accountability to anyone, it runs
rampant until the money vaporizes and only a couple of people win and
everyone else loses.

I do not characterize capitalism as you do.  I proposed that socialized
capitalism already exists and there is no reason to propagandize further for it. 
It simply needs refinement is the way I put it.  There is no need for replacement
of something already in place.  A government enforced monopoly on bank-
note issuance called the Federal Reserve was created.  It can pull money out of
a hat called emergency currency to finance spending by the government.  The
gold standard was revoked a long time ago and the backing of money by
physical assets has virtually disappeared.  The fact that the US dollar has little
to no intrinsic value gets to be ignored by government and the general
population hasn’t a clue.  The whole money system is like a floating island. 
Money is necessitated because it facilitates purchasing goods, and unbalanced
credit expansion causes what is called business ‘cycles’ where a business, an
industry of an entire economy expands and contracts. 

Socialism fails economics because an extremely socialized capitalist
government is not able to efficiently handle the complexity of a gargantuan
country such as the US.  Standard of living drops under socialism as witnessed
by Russia and China, both of which are steeped in capitalism today.  Hoover
intervened with government programs after the Big Depression and Roosevelt
expanded on that up the wazoo.  And it helped the country, though some
would debate that.  Socialism is already descriptive of much of this country’s
financial foundation.  While I can see that a mixture of socialism and capitalism
would work for a market economy, I am not sure at all that the government
ought to own a country’s capital.  Social democracy already exists here.  The
economic system is extremely complicated and calling for more socialized
capitalism is a dogmatic chimera.  This government needs purification and
meticulous management. 

You offer this nomenclature of socialized capitalism but no items of action.  No
specified program.  It is a slick way of complaint, it is a whining and moaning. 
I see this psychology everywhere.  Pontifications from egomaniacs what needs
to be done.  Both from the left and the right.  But no one offers a coherent
plan.  It is all empty rhetoric.  When I see what your program is ThomasG, then
and only then will not only I be able to judge whether more socialized
capitalism is workable or not but so will everyone who is following this forum. 

It is my callow and unsophisticated belief that if this government favored
extreme socialism over productive competition, the economy would
disintegrate and so would this country.  However, unchecked capitalism is just
as dangerous as it falls prey to exploitation and those with the wealth are
predators of the people.  A temperate path is the most propitious and that
takes forceful but caring politics for the whole and not a small part.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 20, 2009 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG in each case it is the message not the messenger that Ozark Michael has shown to be wanting. You again avoid his points which are clearly made because you can’t handle it. You transcribe not think and it shows again and again. So engage that gray matter and put up. Back what you say and show that you are not following the Nazi blueprint as Ozark Michael has shown over ten times so far. It is the message he has shown that is following the early Nazi way of subversion. Why don’t you address it? Why do you support those that wish to destroy the USA as it exists now?

Ozark Michael 10
ThomasG/MarthaA -10

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 20, 2009 at 4:58 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 20 at 7:07 pm,

It appears from your post that you have come to an understanding that Capitalism is a parasite upon a working model of socialism that has existed since the advent of Capitalism.  With your new found understanding, it should not be too difficult for you to figure out why “socialized capitalism” is a necessary replacement for “privatized capitalism”.

With regard to Capitalism, do you understand why Capitalism is a Ponzi Scheme and why it is necessary to convert the Ponzi Scheme of Privatized Capitalism that serves the “greater greed” to a Ponzi Scheme of Capitalism that serves the greater good, by replacing Privatized Capitalism and Private Capital with socialized capitalism and socialized capital?

If you don’t fall off of the wagon, you have come a ways in your understanding and could perhaps be a positive influence on OzarkMichael, if you choose to do so.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 20, 2009 at 4:46 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 19 at 11:10 pm,

There you go again.  It seems that all you are capable of is attacking the messenger, rather than addressing yourself to the message, that the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS and the Republican Party have been using Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” as a political playbook from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and continue to do so at the present time.

You are also speaking for both sides of your own argument by posing your own questions and then making your own answers.  Putting words in other peoples mouths as a rhetorical tactic that can be used to support a negative conclusion is a favorite tactic of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS and the Republican Party, and defines the nature of what you have to say by your adherence to this deceptive rhetorical tactic.

My response to your amorphous subjective nonsense is————Blah.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 20, 2009 at 12:07 pm Link to this comment

As I read through your comments Dec. 17 at 3:18 a.m. where you claim
Quesnay’s theory describes the foundations of privatized capitalism, I have to
assume ThomasG you meant the question of why “Wall Street Fat Cats are Still
in Charge?” as a rhetorical device.  Writing, currency, and Quesnay’s formula
for the best economics on which a country could base its government are the
three inventions Adam Smith asserts are the contrivances that has given
stability to political societies. 

All that aside since the theory and its criticism will not help solve the problem
of the Ponzi/Capitalism Scheme even if what has happened is attributable to it. 
Socialism already exists in this country.  It needs refinement.  Privatized
capitalism is really only a term to talk about what is left once what exists as
socialized capitalism is set aside. 

All businesses today depend on the huge and intrusive infrastructure of
technology, information, and services that are provided by federal, state and
local governments. Taxpayers fund these things by government dictates
through the House of Representatives, the big spenders.  This is done
essentially collectively through representative government for the greater
good.  It is Socialism, economically, and this country could not function without
it.  Private industry, corporations, take advantage of government funded
services: i.e., the Internet, interstate highways, state and local roads,
communication satellites, some of which are launched by private business,
police protection, fire protection, Coast Guard, the military, court system,
copyright and patents granted and enforced, power grid, municipal and
international airports, foreign embassies, geographical maps, census data,
border patrol, USDA inspectors, the Federal Reserve, mail service (privatized by
still under the auspices of government), minted and printed money system,
sewage, and public records, just to name a few.  For individuals there is Social
Security and Medicare, educational grants, war veterans hospitals, small
business loan guarantee,...

Private corporations do not pay the true cost of using any of them. They pay
minimal fees relatively around the board, but most of the cost is carried by the
government, which is funded by taxpayers.  Thus, in the United States,
“capitalism” takes a ride on a socialized system.  There is a pretense it is not
this way. And it is not advertised what it is by those who could make this real
description generally publicly known. That is the mystery, why the progressives
don’t give a loud voice to this fact!  Instead they just keep whining and moaning
about the need for more and more socialization, but they don’t offer absolute
and certain, actual workable measures to take to refine then safeguard what is
already there.

Admitting to the fact that this country already operates in many ways
socialistically would permit a process to work on improving the system to
make it more equitable and just.  Also forcing the government to police the
corruption that seems to be an inherent trait of men ought to be the agenda.
But first clear delineation of what is corrupt behavior needs to be loudly and
bindingly expressed.

Incessant squalling critique to install socialist capitalism impedes any progress. 
Instead, tempestuous critiquing to improve what is already there is the Rx.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 19, 2009 at 7:10 pm Link to this comment

Martha/Thomas said of fascism:

Step One is a deliberately induced economic collapse of the National Economy

Let us talk about Step One. An intentional economic collapse. Martha/Thomas accuses Republicans of causing it. Furthermore:

The three-fold process I have indicated was used by Adolph Hitler to enable fascism in Nazi Germany

She is saying that Republicans are copying Hitler. Hitler invented this terrible process. He caused deliberate economic collapse of the National Economy.

And Martha/Thomas challenges: If you think you can refute the effects of all three steps of this process, do so on the merits of the self-evident evidence that has, is, and continues to drag the United States into an abyss of Right-Wing fascism that is equivalent to Nazi-Germany and Mussolini’s Italy.

Very well, i will do so. First question: did Hitler deliberately induce a collapse of the National Economy?

No. The Wiemar Republic was in charge of the National Economy when it collapsed. Hitler had nothing to do with it.

So let us attack the ‘message’ of Martha/Thomas: Her Step One- Hitler causing a “deliberate collapse of the National Economy” is sheer fantasy. She is making that up completely.

Let us continue.

Step Two is deliberately created political paralysis of Representative Democracy as a function of the Government with regard to making and enforcing law and order that is representative of the best interests of the masses of the population.

Step Three is deliberately induced and spread psychological hysteria in the masses of the population that cuts the ground from under habitual patterns of everyday life by way of massive unemployment and monetary chaos that is sufficient to fill even those who still have jobs with dread, foreboding and a sense of insecurity.

Was Hitler able to cause massive unemployment, hysteria, monetary chaos and dread? No. Those things happened because of the policies of the Weimar Republic. Perhaps Martha/Thomas will say, “It was Hitler who forced the Weimar Republic to adopt inflationary policy, which brought about economic and political collapse.”

That is sheer fantasy. Hitler had no such power at the time. There were forces that pushed the Weimar Republic into making stupid economic policy, but it was not Hitler.

No historian gives Hitler credit for the economic collapse of the Weimar Republic. No historian gives Hitler credit for causing monetary chaos, massive unemployment, dread and foreboding in the Weimar Republic. No historian says that Hitler was the cause of the political paralysis that afflicted the Weimar Republic. But the message of Martha/Thomas gives Hitler full credit for all these things!

I reject her message completely. I have barely started on it and it is already full of holes.

She will squeel that i am attacking her and not her message. But I attack only her message.

If I said that she was a saggy-butted skank, that would be an attack on the messenger Martha/Thomas.

Yet i dont say those things.

So I dont attack the messenger, but I attack her message.

It seems to be very important for her to blame the economic collapse and political weakening of the Weimar Republic on Hitler. There must be a reason why she has to tell those lies.

She wont tell you why, but I will do so next time.

Till next time….

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 19, 2009 at 3:45 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 19 at 3:41 pm,

More attacking the messenger, rather than the message————Blah.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 19, 2009 at 11:41 am Link to this comment

Today we look at some accusations by Martha/Thomas:

The three-fold process I have indicated was used by Adolph Hitler to enable fascism in Nazi Germany, by Benito Mussolini to enable fascism in Italy, by Hideki Tojo to enable fascism in Japan and is presently being used by a minority population of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS in the United States in an effort to enable fascism in the United States.

Just to make it clear, the accusation is the highest crime in politics. Martha/Thomas claims that the Republicans intentionally have followed and are following and will follow the same process as Hitler did.

And then let us also understand her next accusation, namely; that Republicans want to commit some sort of genocide. Please read the following:

I am hopeful that we who are now living at the start of the 21st Century in the United States will not allow an American minority population of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS to take power and control of the Government of the United States and lead the United States into destruction and genocide as did Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo.

It is interesting to note that while Martha/Thomas worries that the Right “accuses condemns and denounces” the Left, she is rather heavy handed when she “accuses condemns and denounces”...quite a bit more than any Republican or even Glen Beck! But since her charges of fascism are so serious, one might think she is justified to do so. Yes, to use the same process that Hitler did deserves to be accused, condemned and denounced in the strongest possible terms. Deserves to be attacked, mocked, and demonized because it is demonic and inhuman.

Isnt that right, Martha/Thomas?

Just answer yes or no.

Oh, but Martha/Thomas wont answer me. She knows this is all going to come crashing down on her own head.

But she will do nothing to stop it. She will not admit her mistake. She will not apologize. Silence is her only refuge. She is inert like a wrecked car on the highway. In Biblical times they would say she has made a shipwreck of her soul.

I think from now on I will not ask Martha/Thomas any questions. It is a waste of time to wait for her answers. Besides, I am not trying to teach her. I shook her dust off my feet some time ago.

The only reason I write all this is to learn from her mistakes, to teach you good people on the political Left and myself to beware her mistakes.

When we hear elements of what she says coming from our own mouths, we need to correct our own folly right away. Whether on the political Left or Right, we can learn from the terrible mistakes of Martha/Thomas. We can reflect on these things and we can be better people.

This is what we in church would call an object lesson. Yes, that is the level to which Martha/Thomas has sunk. She is no longer subject ie, I do not interact with her as a human being who is learning and growing with us. That is what life is all about. No, she is not subjectively related, but only an object, ie learning material for others.

She is a byword, a symbol, a proverb, a warning sign.

She is the wrecked car in a ditch beside the highway. You point to the twisted metal and teach your children that the wreck happened last night because some fool was drinking and driving. She died but the wreck remains as testimony to what we must NOT do.

The car isnt human or capable of subject relation, but only an object relation which we learn from. The only relation possible is to interact with it as a fixed point, like a compass needle that tells you how to not get lost, or a sign that says ‘do not enter’.

Martha/Thomas completely objectivized herself. She traded away her soul for complete objectivity. She got her wish.

Next we look at Martha/Thomas’ three part plan to fascism. And yes, there is a wreck up ahead. It happened some time ago. We will drive by it and try to learn, but its too late for Martha/Thomas to learn anything.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 18, 2009 at 12:03 pm Link to this comment

I give you another day to answer, Martha/Thomas.

Did you write that post or not?

Is it taken out of context or is it exactly what you want to say?

Do you want to apologize for any of it or do you want me to expose your stupidity?

Your silence when asked to justify your denunciations and demonizations is puzzling. You seem to think that all you need to do is assert your accusations and that is enough to prove them true.  It is the worst type of subjectivity.

Your silence to my simple questions is inexcuseble. Anyone can scroll back and see that you wrote it. Why not admit it and maybe apologize for your terrible false frames?

Otherwise you deserve to be exposed and ridiculed for the shameful things you wrote. I am ready to do so, and if you dont answer you are really asking for it. Dont blame me for that or say that its out of context.

So answer me soon.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 17, 2009 at 12:37 pm Link to this comment

I am going to reprint a post by Martha/Thomas. I will not reinsert all the bold print, etc. so I ask the readers to use their own imagination for the shouting and armwaving that Martha/Thomas usually does. Then I will give Martha/Thomas a chance to comment so she cannot later accuse me of taking it out of context. And after that we will expose Martha/Thomas for what she really is.


Martha/Thomas on October 28 at 7:57 pm:


The Steps of a Three-Fold Process Necessary For a Fascist Takeover of Representative Democracy are as follows:

Step One is a deliberately induced economic collapse of the National Economy.

Step Two is deliberately created political paralysis of Representative Democracy as a function of the Government with regard to making and enforcing law and order that is representative of the best interests of the masses of the population.

Step Three is deliberately induced and spread psychological hysteria in the masses of the population that cuts the ground from under habitual patterns of everyday life by way of massive unemployment and monetary chaos that is sufficient to fill even those who still have jobs with dread, foreboding and a sense of insecurity.

At the present time the minority Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement has implemented Step One and Step Two for a fascist takeover of the Government of the United States, deliberately induced collapse of the U.S. Economy and deliberately created political paralysis of Representative Democracy as a function of the Government of the United States.

At the present time the minority Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement in the United States is in the process of implementing Step Three for a fascist takeover of the Government of the United States, deliberately induced and spread psychological hysteria in the masses of the population of the United States, that accuses, condemns and denounces the Political Left and liberals and cuts the ground from under habitual patterns of everyday life of the masses of the population of the United States by way of massive unemployment and monetary chaos that is sufficient to fill even those who still have jobs with dread, forboding and a sense of insecurity.


The three-fold process I have indicated was used by Adolph Hitler to enable fascism in Nazi Germany, by Benito Mussolini to enable fascism in Italy, by Hideki Tojo to enable fascism in Japan and is presently being used by a minority population of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS in the United States in an effort to enable fascism in the United States.

In Germany, Italy, and Japan the MAJORITY Population allowed a minority population of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS to take power and control of their governments and we all know that the destruction and genocide of World War II was the result; I am hopeful that we who are now living at the start of the 21st Century in the United States will not allow an American minority population of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS to take power and control of the Government of the United States and lead the United States into destruction and genocide as did Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo.

Martha/Thomas, you wrote a steaming pile of demonizations, accusations, and denunciations. Is there anything you want to say before i show how very wrong you are?

Do you want to apologize for your lies before its too late?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 17, 2009 at 11:19 am Link to this comment

1.
The issue of who is the “real” follower of Hitler’s 25 steps toward national
fascism is intriguing and OM provides comparisons by example and rational
argument while TG does not.  TG does not counterargue at all but only keeps
attacking the person OM rather than refute the charges.


“Socialized Capitalism disperses the benefit of capital equitably to the entire
populace of the pyramid from the top to the bottom of the pyramid.”
says
ThomasG.  But TG does not say how that would happen.  How is the benefit of
real capital equitably dispersed?  By what government instrument?  Who would
be in charge?  It is merely an abstraction until those questions are answered. 
Ignoring these questions severely depreciates your polemic.  Maybe there is a
correlation between Quesnay and Ponzi but I don’t see the relevance.  While
asking the question why is an attempt to discover the root of a problem, it can
be self-defeating not easily answerable question.  It may also be self-defining
and rendered moot.

Even though you said it four times, I don’t know what “commerce multiplies
sales and purchases, without multiplying things” means in this context since
Quesnay advocated an agricultural kingdom.  When it comes to money matters,
assets or capital is a matter of being moved around by mathematics… It is an
abstract world of paper and pencil and numbers.  Promises then become the
ruling force, promises of more wealth for promised investment, neither of
which may be realized as promised because investment may be based on
empty coffers as well.  They are just promises and we all know promises are
meant to be broken. 
Always keeping in mind the benefit of the whole society, regulation on trade is
not in or of itself always a good thing to impose on a commercially competitive
economy.  If such regulations fall into a morass where countless regulations
clog the ability to do business fluidly, then the opportunity arises for regulatory
vultures to leave their perch and feast on the carcasses of the mercantile
sector, eventually bringing down the banquet entirely. 

But vultures exist on both sides of the commercial field and those on the
deregulated side are perhaps even more voracious since no one is watching. 
Taxes, protective tariffs on the regulated side and the penchant for monopolies
and the privileges that permits a lack of quality on goods, primogeniture
mandates, laws of settlement that always sides with the corporation, and
choking guild control on the other sets up an extreme diametric conflict where
only the common man suffers the fall out of the pushme pullyou as national
well-being suffers extremely. 

Steven Medema, Professor of Economics at Uni. of Colorado, Denver, presents
in his observations in The Hesitant Hand: taming Self-Interest in the History of
Economic Ideas, 2009, neatly describes the ancient history of the problems of
economic policy in his discussion of Adam Smith and his views of economics. 
Smith is attributed with the modern model of economics.  The ancient Greeks
tended to see individuals as pursuing their self-interest, that engendered
results contrary to the national interest unless restrained by the “long arm of
the state.”  Throughout that history from the Greeks onward, the recurring
them with some variation from one author of economic description to another,
expressed the necessity of using government to control self-interest.  This
thought was up to the 19th . based on naturalistic or natural law of orientation. 
The individual and class separation within the socioeconomic system, the
legitimacy of actions due to primogeniture command, were considered to have
been granted by a higher authority beyond human control, i.e., divinely
dispensed.  This model was imperative for “proper” social ordering, and good
governance involved setting up a system of earthly laws that followed this
dictate.  It was assumed a natural order.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 17, 2009 at 11:18 am Link to this comment

2.
Plato and Aristotle supported policies to curb self-interest and its unbounded
exercise would cause included prohibiting lending money with interest,
elimination of profits, and a statutory fixing of prices.  Whoever thought these
two mental giants of philosophy considered economics?  They both
recommended government action to abate incentives to search for private gain
through foreign trade, trading currencies both internal to the country and
international.  They saw that the creation of an economic system that would
generate a sufficient level of material well-being required controlling the power
of the division of labor, and objected to internationalization of that division
because they believed corrupt influences would affect society.  Seems like they
had clarity of thought about economics.  We may be able to learn something
from their conceptions.

Traveling on my own path, I will continue my understanding of the argument
set out by TG and my disagreement with it a little later.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 17, 2009 at 8:20 am Link to this comment

Talking about pyramid I always looked at bureaucratic institutions; of which I worked as upside down pyramids.

Just an observation from this extreme right wing capitalist, seems our society is combined of many non producing capitals which accumulate huge amounts of money, compared to the slob on the street.  Insurance and law firms do a good job of substantiating their existence as well as bureaucrats and of course the military complex.

A social strata deemed as success may be part of the culprit, for I find success simonizes with opportunist?

Tiger Woods anyone! Golf as tiddly winks provides so much for society as a whole!  I plan on writing a book on Taliban I met while watching golf!

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 16, 2009 at 10:58 pm Link to this comment

“I have directed a response to Ozark Michael that is relevant to my post.  If you want to try to impress someone with your abilities, you might want to respond.  Otherwise, I suggest that you continue with your sideshow in my absence.”—Take your own advice as I substituted one name for another.

ThomasG/MarthaA how about listing 1-9 how what you do is different from “Mein Kampf” because Ozark Michael is crushing both of you and therefor you message is lost in the dust of jackboots as you roar your points? You both regurgitate but don’t create much. It is refreshing when you do, when you break from your mechanical writing. Half the message is how you present it then back it up. Veracity is important too. Once you lose it it is very hard to get back, it could take years and herculean efforts. It could fail easily and you are lost—-no one will listen to you no matter how well you write. I do not know you beyond your writings as you with me. One way to rectify that is to answer legitimate questions and Ozark Michael has done so. Ignore it at your peril as a serious thinker and writer here. The more you ignore the more suspicious and specious you are. It is in both your hands.

Writing well can have power—I was removed totally for my writings even though there were people threatening others lives who were kept on at AltNet. I must have pissed off someone or rubbed their fur the wrong way. I think it was my factitious bit on cannibalism to rectify the population crisis and spoke about Jonathan Swift & H.P. Lovecraft being alive and well on Tahiti being ardent cannibals. Silly really but some people just can’t stomach certain kinds of humor. Being “tombstoned” includes all such writings removed—-every last one I ever wrote. Truly evil that.

Interesting note that “silly” originally meant something sacred not foolish.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 16, 2009 at 9:46 pm Link to this comment

Martha/Thomas is really afraid to answer my questions. Notice how she resorts to shouting, repetition, and accusations against everyone with no proof whatsoever.

One more time I ask: On what level would your socialism be applied? neighborhood? municipal? Your Ponzi socialism couldnt handle more than that, could it? 

You wont answer because your Ponzi socialism wont work on a large scale. And you know that i have figured out the weakness of your message.

Since you are afraid to answer, next post I will go back to exposing your fascist methods.

How many similarities does Martha/Thomas have to Mein Kampf so far? its like 9 or 10 similarities. All nicely proven. And more to come…

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 16, 2009 at 8:18 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 16 at 5:33 pm,

The following post I made on another Truthdig thread should address your questions:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/wall_streets_fat_cats_are_still_in_charge_20091215/

Why is it that “Wall Street Fat Cats Are Still in Charge”?

According to Francois Quesnay’s book, “The Economical Table”, “commerce multiplies sales and purchases, without multiplying things” and the multiplication of sales and purchases without multiplying things is the basis of Privatized Capitalism, according to Francois Quesnay in his book, “The Economical Table”.

According to Adam Smith’s quote of the Marquis de Mirabeau in his book, “The Wealth of Nations”, “There have been, since the world began, three great inventions which have principally given stability to political societies, independent of many other inventions which have enriched and adorned them.  The first is the invention of writing, which alone gives human nature the power of transmitting, without alteration, its laws, its contracts, its annals and its discoveries.  The second is the invention of money, which binds together all the relations between civilized societies.  The third is the Economical Table, the result of the other two, which completes them both by perfecting their object; the great discovery of our age, but of which our posterity will reap the benefit.”

Capitalism is a Ponzi Scheme and the mechanics of how the Ponzi Scheme of Capitalism was designed in 1758 to work is defined by Francois Quesnay in his book, “The Economical Table”.

According to Francois Quesnay in his book “The Economical Table”, commerce “multiplies sales and purchases, without multiplying things”.

The Ponzi Schemes of Charles Ponzi and Bernie Madoff “multiplied sales and purchases, without multiplying things”, and the Privatized Capitalism of Francois Quesnay and Adam Smith that is the Model of Capitalism employed by the U.S. Economy “multiplies sales and purchases, without multiplying things”.

Privatized Capitalism is Capitalism for the greater greed of the chosen few at the top of the pyramid because capital is consolidated at the top of the pyramid for the benefit of the chosen few at the top of the pyramid.

Socialized Capitalism is Capitalism for the greater good of all of the populace that are a part of the pyramid, because Socialized Capitalism disperses the benefit of capital equitably to the entire populace of the pyramid from the top to the bottom of the pyramid.

Why is it that “Wall Street Fat Cats Are Still in Charge”——“Wall Street Fat Cats Are Still in Charge” because Privatized Capitalism is a Ponzi Scheme for the greater greed that cyclically fails and gets recapitalized by socialized resources at the expense of the American Populace, and has been bailed out again and again by the Bush II and Obama administrations at the expense of the American Populace and ten generations of their progeny at a cost of tens of trillions of dollars of socialized responsibility for the greed of Privatized Capitalism.  The reason they are in charge is because they keep getting bailed out again, and again, and again, and again .......... and on and on and on.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 16, 2009 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 16 at 4:09 pm, and OzarkMichael, December 16 at 3:59 pm,

No apology is necessary from me for the truth that the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber have been using Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” as a political playbook for the Republican Party from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, and the truth that YOU are defending the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party using Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” as a political playbook from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II by attacking me as the messenger that said outright without equivocation that the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party has been using Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and into the present as evidenced by YOUR posts and the posts of the rest of YOUR Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Hitleresque thugs on the Truthdig forum.

Say what you will, it will not cover up or change your behavior, the behavior of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the behavior of the Republican Party in this regard.

My message is evidenced by the Hitleresque behavior and activities of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party used to accuse, condemn, denounce and demonize the Left and Liberals from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II and that YOU and the rest of YOUR Group of Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST thugs are defending the reprehensible behavior of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the Republican Party from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and continue to do so at the present time.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 16, 2009 at 1:33 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG, I am interested in your answers to OzarkMichael and look forward to
reading them.  Dismissing his questions does not give you credibility.

My post at 2:02 a.m. gave more than a schematic.  The site gave an explanation
of the table.  Visit the site.  Possibly a 3-dimensional pyramid would better
illustrate your conception because it would allow volume to be an element, but
abstractly speaking a triangle can do much the same thing and volume at this
time is irrelevant.  It’s the principle you are after that is important anyway. 

I won’t be buying The Economical Table, other priorities and desires call for my
not-unending dollars.  If you would give the salient points you are after, I’d
understand better what it is you want to discuss.  If Quesnay did lay “the
foundation for the analysis of capitalist production,” as Marx said, how does
that relate to the contemporary economic scene?  How does his analyses of
circulation of product and revenue in an economy fit or compare with today’s
model?  As I said a couple of times, I’m not an economist.  It’s not clear what
game of seeing you want to play.  We may not want to play.

Seems like Quesnay’s General Maxims for the Economic Government of an
Agricultural Kingdom might give you a better basis for formulating a question
to the rest of us, the Blah BoilerRoom Contingent. 

It isn’t a question of teaching anyone how to communicate better, more self
reflection, a program in composition is the only remedy for that.  Fascism does
need to be checked wherever found, and that has been done here thanks to
OM.  I don’t think the force of fascism is getting anywhere on this forum. 
Resistance in this case is not futile.  Resistance is based on independent
thought. 

While on Quesnay as a topic a few words about his treatise on natural rights: I
would qualify Quesnay’s statement that the natural right of man is ‘the right
which man has is to do whatever is necessary to his enjoyment’.  The
paraphrase of his translator: ‘in its primitive and most comprehensive sense, it
is the right which man has to whatever is advantageous to him.’  Plato’s
Republic adequately dispenses with that view.

Exercising that right, I believe, is imperious indeed. Hobbes intuited this and
objected to such natural law that inevitably would lead to a world of chaos.

I contrast Quesnay’s natural right with the contractarian authority of social
contract and further ruled by constitutional democracy.  Participatory
democracy that emphasizes broad participation of the voting population is
most just, with direct democracy successful at only the most local level of
government, which is effective self-government if not fallen over into anarchy
or mob rule.  I don’t believe extreme socialism would work even at that level as
much as anarchy would not.

Bentham and Burke didn’t think there were such things as inalienable rights.  I
don’t agree with Quesnay that man has a natural right as he stated.  I don’t
think the right to whatever is advantageous, or the most pleasurable is a
natural right given the human organism, which is in fact born in a competitive
self-serving state for survival.  More akin to Locke’s three natural rights, my
view is that what would be a right for one man is the same right for all men.  It
must be universal, for if what pleasures one man interferes with the pleasure of
another man, then the right has no force, and if it has no force in one instance,
has no force in all instances.  The notion of natural right is only true in a
limited way after which civil society creates obligations, or dutiful laws, this is
more than similar to Hobbes’ idea of rights of man in his natural state.

I realize the topic of natural rights has moved away from the topic of
economics, so be it, that happens sometimes.  I think it contains ruling
principles by which an equitable theory of economics can be built.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 16, 2009 at 12:09 pm Link to this comment

Instead of pressing the attack, maybe we can come to a compromise.

Martha/Thomas, would you be satisfied if socialism was adopted only at a local level? Like just on your street or just in your town? Is the municipal level enough to satisfy your demands?

And if not, at what level would your socialism need to be enacted? Be specific because I am not a socialist and i dont know what your demands really require. Dont exaggerate.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 16, 2009 at 11:59 am Link to this comment

Martha/Thomas, please dont be offended.

This was started by you. Who brought up Mein Kampf? you did.

Who claimed that people today are following what you call Hitler’s Playbook? You did.

Who started accusing people on this thread of fascism? You did.

Did you ever take it back? No.

Did you ever apologize for the false accusations? No.

So those of us that you accuse of fascism defend ourselves. And what a surprise that we find that you bear more similarities to fascism than anyone here. On every point we see that your message is like Hitler’s, and you couldnt deny it. Not a single point refuted. Every charge sticks to you. and the worst is yet to come.

Now you cry that as a “messenger” you are being attacked.

No. I dont know you personally, it is your message that i attack. It is true that your weak response draws derision, but other than that i focus on your message.

Old agenda: You remarked that Night Gaunt, Leefeller, and Shenonymous and myself are all the same person, which was wrong. Then you changed it to ‘they are followers’ of mine, which is also wrong. The funny thing about all your baseless accusations is that Night Gaunt is a socialist, maybe even some communism mixed in his political views. It was funny to see you calling him a right winger, because Night Gaunt and i were really arguing and your crazy accusations have made us friends.

Your message failed terribly. It deserves to be attacked and ridiculed. Unlike Shenonymous, i dont want to teach you how to communicate better. That would just make you a more effective fascist. Which is the last thing we need in this world.

You started this fight and you continue it. So I will continue my attack. I have much more to say about your message and its similarities to Hitler. In fact, I saved the best stuff for later. Your beloved Weimar Republic still needs to be discussed. You said some stupid things which will prove that you are a fascist.

You dont like it? Well, no one forces you to continue your Hitleresque message. No one forces you to not apologize for the horrible accusations you made.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 15, 2009 at 11:09 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 15 at 11:02 am,

According to Quesnay’s definition of commerce as that “which multiplies sales and purchases, without multiplying things” as a result of the circulation indicated in his Economical Table, it appears to me that a graphic representation of commerce would take the form of a pyramid and that an economy dependent upon commerce as defined by Quesnay would take the form of a pyramid in graphic representation.

You will need more than just a copy of Quesnay’s graphic representation of “The Economical Table” to reach a conclusion, you will need to consult the book that is of the same name, “The Economical Table” by Francois Quesnay.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 15, 2009 at 7:02 am Link to this comment

ThomasG,  I am not an economics scholar and know only peripherally what has
come through in other of my studies and research in the last couple of years
due to becoming more interested in why there are severe problems in the
world.  This is not an excuse but an admittance to my naivete.  I am on a path
of catching up.

Quesnay was the leader of the first school of economic thought, and the
Physiocrats, thought economic power came from society’s agriculture sector. 
Francois coined the concept laissez-faire, laissez-passer (the liberty of labor,
the liberty of commerce).”  In Quesnay’s time the Physiocrats wanted the French
king to deregulate and reduce taxes on agriculture so France could copy their
richer competitor, England. 

His program defined three classes: those who occupied the sector of the
population as landowners; farmers; and those who consumed what they
produced so that there is no surplus for any other period.  These latter he
called “sterile” classes (in the plural).  Believing that only the agricultural part of
society could produce a surplus that could then be used to seed for the next
year—this strategy would help growth of the society and hence promotes
society in beneficial ways.  Industry and manufacturing were not forward
reaching, hence they provide no surplus. While he was said to be incorrect
about manufacturing not providing for the future, he was thought right about
attributing poverty in France to the system of political economy that sought to
enrich the country by restraining imports and encouraging exports,
mercantilism.

Mercantilism in the 16th c. was the consolidation of the regional power centers
of the feudal era by large, competitive nation-states.  The most important
economic rationale for Mercantilism is economic nationalism for the purpose of
building a wealthy and powerful state.  Adam Smith coined the term
“mercantile system” to describe the system of political economy that sought to
enrich the country by restraining imports and encouraging exports.

Used as a mode, most of the mercantilist policies were the outgrowth of the
relationship between the governments of the nation-states and their
mercantile classes.  In exchange for paying levies and taxes to support the
armies of the nation-states, the mercantile classes induced governments to
enact policies that would protect their business interests against foreign
competition.  Doesn’t this sound familiar, even though this took place in 18th
century France?

Quesnay advocated reforming these laws by consolidating and reducing taxes,
getting rid of tolls and other regulations that prevented trade within France,
and generally freeing the economy from the government’s stifling controls.
These reforms were much more sensible than his theorizing about the sterility
of industry. As Mark Blaug writes, “It was only the effort to provide these
reforms with a watertight theoretical argument that produced some of the
forced reasoning and slightly absurd conclusions that invited ridicule even from
contemporaries.”

Quesnay’s work led to classical economics— Adam Smith latched on to the
Physiocratic idea of free trade and the preeminence of the agricultural sector.
That Q had such a seminal influence on economics is all the more surprising in
light of the fact that he served under Louis XV in Versailles not as an
economist, but as a medical doctor.

What do I think about all this?  I have to study the Table (see
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/quesnay/1759/tableau
.htm ) to understand its meaning.  It is not something I can just take in at a
glance.  The Tableau was found at a marxists.org site so I’m on the skeptic
side.  I will read it over the next few days to see if I can even come to some
conclusion to be able to make a cogent opinionated answer to your question
and how it might relate to current problems perceived.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 14 at 12:21 am, and Night-Gaunt, December 14 at 5:42 pm,

You express a lack of understanding and continue to attack the messenger, rather than the message.

I have directed a response to Shenonymous that is relevant to my post.  If you want to try to impress someone with your abilities, you might want to respond.  Otherwise, I suggest that you continue with your sideshow in my absence.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, December 14 at 5:13 pm,

“There you go again”, attacking the messenger.

If you have something to say, I am listening.  Otherwise, you should say nothing at all, and no one will know how really vacuous you really are;——oops, too late.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 14, 2009 at 6:08 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 14 at 6:23 am,

I would think than the distribution for workers and consumers should be equal to that proposed by Francois Quesna in “The Economical Table” for production and manufacturing, what do you think?

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 14, 2009 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

I would disagree with you Ozark Michael on classifying socialism in toto to be a “Ponzi scheme.” Not if everyone is in on it and they know from whence the money comes and to where it all goes. However I would say that the present system rewarding huge money makers who fail by simply giving them more money and not changing the system is the Ponzi scheme of sorts only we see the money go in and don’t get it back in any real way. Not if the corporations who do not create anything but wealth for themselves through speculation to be bailed out again soon for the same reasons. Not the way to do it. They should have either been bailed out but with strict severe restrictions and limitations on them or better yet dissolved their casinos and let them rot in prison stripped of all their ill gotten gain and marked for life. Rather like how only sex crime addicts are in our perverse culture. Certainly the money should have gone to those robbed by them and let the companies survive or fail on their own like the Capitalists say the want it.

As for MarthaA/ThomasG aren’t learning anything and it becomes tiresome to translate some of the few possible gems out of their floatsom they generate in abundance. Their bad attitudes make them sure fire losers for getting their points across. Sad but true.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, December 14, 2009 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment

In response to our silence, Martha/Thomas said: What happened with regard to all of the propaganda, disingenuous indignant sophist outrage, rage and personal ridicule that normally occurs when I make a post?

It seems that Martha/Thomas just cant keep away from the Hitler Playbook. Step #10 of Hitler’s plan is to ask for and recieve constant attention, even if its negative comments. No normal person wants that, but Martha/Thomas, like her mentor Adolf Hitler, insists on constant attention. It doesnt matter if we laugh, rage, ridicule, or are disgusted at them. They demand attention at all times, just like Hitler did. Even after i pointed this similarity a few weeks ago, they still insist on it now.

Here is a hint for socialists: Anyone who loves socialism shouldnt rant about Ponzi schemes. All socialism is a Ponzi scheme.

Welfare is a Ponzi scheme.

The concept of the Ponzi scheme is perfectly illustrated in something called Social Security, isnt it?

Just answer yes or no… or dont answer at all since it would take some original thought and some honesty to make a worthwhile answer. Something martha/Thomas never does.

Which reminds me… I think it does matter that Martha/Thomas is just cutting and pasting stuff from different websites. Regurgitated material isnt original, its just bilge. Fascist bilge being pumped into our faces. I wonder where it all comes from. It really is a waste of time to act like we are dealing with a thoughtful human being. We are dealing with a fascist bilge pump.

If we think we will learn something from all this we are mistaken.

But very well, Martha/Thomas will have her wish. We continue our study of Mein Kampf, both Hitler’s and Martha’s. Maybe the redeeming feature of this is that we can all learn what NOT to do from what Martha/Thomas/Hitler does.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2009 at 2:23 am Link to this comment

It doesn’t matter if TG posted this elsewhere.  Discussion of this topic was
entered into some time ago here. 

As I said I would, I tried to work my way through your extremely trying
comments of questions, in your inimitable fashion, ThomasG.  I even tried to
sketch out page 1 using a large triangle format, separating the text with arrows
up and down to show the direction of the action so I could follow your Ponzi
Scheme logic and just gave up on page 2 and continued the attempt to analyze
as best I could.  It was not easy to weed out verbal redundancy and wend my
way through your labyrinthine manner to get to the essence of what you are
saying.  You repeat too much and the logic got lost in fervid verbiage.  I think
the quiddity of what you are saying is that the laborers in this society, while
they receive wages do not receive equitable wages for the labor expended in
comparison to those who do benefit and who numerically are very few . They
are the distributors of the products and accumulate wealth by way of the
consumers who participate between wage-earners and suppliers.  As too
abstract a term to whatever group it is applied, the metaphor of class interferes
with portraying the reality.  I have eliminated it in an attempt to see the matter
more distinctly. This is not a new idea, critics of economics have characterized
the disparity as well.

But your unique thesis question is this structure is comparable to the
Madoff/Ponzi-like Scheme of economic organization and if it is, why is it
Madoff was prosecuted but not those who receive a disproportion of the money
(capital) from the production component from a similar economic
organization?

Given the energy exerted by those who work, the laborers, who manufacture
the products consumed, compared to those who receive most of the wealth, it
does seem there ought to be a better distribution of the wealth.  A more fair
and just formula needs to be developed.  You actually have not identified the
problem clear enough.  You have only described the structure of the problem. 
The question of criminality clouds the issue since there is no way to indict the
amorphous entity you describe as the PPS of PC.  You kept it in the descriptive
and hypothetical realm.  Not much can be accomplished that way except an
expenditure of a lot of rhetoric occurs.  KInd of wishful thinking at the
macroeconomic level.  It needs a prescriptive strategy (scheme if you like that
word better).

Also your hypothesis has a tone of morality to it when you say that greed is the
motivator and the capital benefit of this current product, distribution, and
consumption structure is enjoyed by a few when it ought to be spread
equitably among the all.  Be that as it may, you have not presented any cogent
program to correct what you perceive is an ethically wrong set up, that is, you
need to propose a restructure.  To continue this discussion, you need to say
precisely or at least close to precisely what the ratio of corporate to laborer
and an economic distribution that would avoid falling into the inequitable
Ponzi Scheme.

I sense that we, others and myself, are being used to clarify and simplify what
your bewildering style of writing generates.  I think I detect provocative ideas
worth discussion.  It is now up to you to give your idea of a better configuration
to this edifice of economics.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 13, 2009 at 8:21 pm Link to this comment

A tangential connexion at best ThomasG so give us some examples that make this screed different from the one on another forum shall you? You did simple copy paste it without addition because it was the very next forum I went to. So please do a little more work on that okay? Can you take any form of criticism? I do and when I see the error I change it, can you? Or are you of the infallible variety of human that runs amok on this benighted planet. I will be the first to say I am flawed and imperfect, whatever that really means. [Perfection is a sophism created by imperfect minds. But then we can imagine so much that isn’t real but then try to make it so. It doesn’t always work.]

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2009 at 10:06 am Link to this comment

Good Sunday Morning ThomasG,
Sheesh, you criticize me when I make comments and you criticize me when I
don’t.  Would you be missing me now, ThomasG?  wink wink I am preoccupied
with another fascinating forum and winding up another.  While I am not a
RWCE, I have still always been interested both directly and peripherally when
you complained bitterly against others whatever is their political orientation.  I
have also been preoccupied with some personal business that takes priority
over any electronic interaction.  It is a matter of life and death. 

Truth, with a capital T, is an abstract ideal concept so I’m not concerned that
you think you might have posted The Truth.  Your truth about Capitalism.
Privatized, Ponzi Schematicized, etc., would be relative truths, the local variety,
and I shall have to peruse further it to determine for myself if I think you have
indeed tripped on something significant.  I cannot do that at the moment.  You
have assessed me wrong, as you did a couple of others, so you ought not to
feel indignant at any delay in response.  The attempt at bulldozing thought
doesn’t work, and hardly making me timid, nor my comrades in verbal arms I
think.  I shall be courteous , not use any of my recent ThomasG identifiers, and
expect you to do the same.  I will give due consideration to what you said as I
travel about my ordinary life business and get back to this forum sooner rather
than later.  You should also know by now, after our long relationship, I am not
easily intimidated, nor rushed.

I can only surmise since you rarely respond to questions put to you by the
Boiler Room Contingent, that you are seeking more information to help you
with your thesis, which I realize it is now close to the end of the semester or
quarter and you will have to submit your paper.  (Professors are notorious to
give extensions, which is my practice).  So well, such are the vicissitudes of life. 
Been there, done that.  I don’t mind being “used” in that way.  (Other ways
indeed I do however). 

So until later as I must be off to parts here and there… au revoir and please
relax.
I remain courteous,
Shenonymous

The others will speak for themselves, or not.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 13, 2009 at 9:04 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, et al,

What happened with regard to all of the propaganda, disingenuous indignant sophist outrage, rage and personal ridicule that normally occurs when I make a post?

I posted the truth about Capitalism - “Privatized Capitalism is a Ponzi Pyramid Scheme” on Truthdig and for the first time your “dumb show” of outrage and rage did not happen? ——Could it be the Nationwide Protest Movement such as “Americans For Financial Reform”, “National Peoples Action”, and the trained organizers from the “Midwestern Academy” have made you Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS more timid? ——or what?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 12, 2009 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 12 at 3:24 pm,

More prattle.

Language is what has been used to misframe and miscast Capitalism subjectively, rather than objectively, so that Capitalism is defined and used to provide benefit for the few at the expense of the many, rather than for the greater good of all of the populace that are a part of the construct of the Pyramid of Capitalism; in this context, my post is relevant to the War on Language and in no way off topic.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 12, 2009 at 11:24 am Link to this comment

Off topic. You put this on another site. Can’t you say anything else? Loser.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 11, 2009 at 4:13 pm Link to this comment

Privatized Capitalism is a Ponzi Pyramid Scheme

(Page 1 of 2)

Why is Privatized Capitalism a Ponzi Pyramid Scheme?

Privatized Capitalism is a “Ponzi Pyramid Scheme” because those at the TOP of the pyramid get exclusive private benefit, the Revenue Stream of Capital, generated by production and distribution of commodities at the top of the pyramid through the use of labor and consumption of those at the BOTTOM of the pyramid that generate that same capital.

SUPPLY flows from the top of the pyramid, down.

DEMAND flows from the bottom of the pyramid, up.

Supply from the top of the pyramid is limited in number of commodities with regard to demand in number of population from the bottom of the pyramid.

WEALTH is generated for those at the top of the pyramid by means of commerce, supply and demand, which multiplies sales and purchases, WITHOUT multiplying things from the top of the pyramid down to the base of the pyramid; this is called CIRCULATION.

The allocation of Capital and Capital Assets for production and distribution of commodities and expanding demand for those commodities by a downward trajectory of circulation from the top of the pyramid to the bottom of the pyramid diminishes the supply and increases the price of the remaining commodities as the number of individual transactions increase on a downward trajectory from the top to the bottom of the pyramid.

From the top of the pyramid downward, Capital and Capital Assets, the class and cultural means of production and distribution, are class and culturally socialized into private ownership by those at the TOP of the pyramid and used to produce a limited supply of commodities for distribution to the many between the top and the base of the pyramid; as the commodities produced and distributed by those at the top of the pyramid are distributed downward from the top of the pyramid to the base of the pyramid, the supply decreases and the demand increases, as the expanding competition to purchase a limited supply of resources increases on a downward trajectory to the base of the pyramid.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 11, 2009 at 4:08 pm Link to this comment

Privatized Capitalism is a Ponzi Pyramid Scheme

(Page 2 of 2)

Circulation of a limited supply of commodities to an expanding base of demand at the base of the pyramid increases both transactions and cost for the limited supply of commodities in a downward trajectory from the top of the pyramid to the base of the pyramid; this increasing circulation of progressively diminishing commodities at increasing prices as demand becomes greater and greater on a downward trajectory to the base of the pyramid creates relative wealth at the top of the pyramid from production and distribution at the top of the pyramid and increasing demand for consumption from the top of the pyramid downward to the base of the pyramid.

The Scheme of Privatized Capitalism is dependent upon socialized class and cultural ownership of the means of production and distribution, Capital and Capital Assets, by those at the top of the pyramid and those beneath the top of the pyramid to the base of pyramid providing cheap labor and markets for consumption of what is produced at the top of the pyramid from wages as laborers.

Distribution, consumption and labor for production comes from those beneath the bottom of the top and the base of the pyramid; and is individualized so that an individualized workforce provides both labor and consumption that creates capital, capital flows upward from the base to the top of the pyramid and those beneath the bottom of the top and the base of the pyramid do not receive capital equity.

Why is it that the Ponzi Pyramid Scheme of Privatized Capitalism is not a crime when it is used in a Capitalist Economy, but the SAME PROCESS is a crime when it is used for private gain by people like Charles Ponzi and Bernie Madoff?

If the Ponzi Scheme of Capitalism is good legal business practice by good businessmen and industrialists in the best country in the world, the USA, why is it that Ponzi and Madoff are criminalized for the SAME behavior?

Those at the top of the pyramid get the exclusive benefit of a Revenue Stream of Capital generated from the top of the pyramid, and those beneath the bottom of the top of the pyramid and the base of the pyramid do not get the benefit of the Revenue Stream that is capital; capital is generated from the bottom of the pyramid upward, as a function of demand and consumption for a limited supply of goods that flows downward from the top of the pyramid.

For Capitalism not to be an obscene Ponzi Pyramid Scheme, those at the bottom, top and all points in between the bottom and the top of the pyramid must share in the benefit of the Revenue Stream that is Capital.

Capitalism where all of the people in the pyramid of the economy share in the Revenue Stream that is Capital is what I call “Socialized Capitalism”.

“Socialized Capitalism” where all who are a part of the pyramid of production, distribution and consumption share in the Revenue Stream that is Capital generated by the circulation of supply to the demand for that supply, within the pyramid, would still be a Pyramid Scheme, but it would be a Pyramid Scheme for the Greater Good of all who are a part of the pyramid, rather than the greater greed for the benefit of the few at the top of the pyramid, like Ponzi, Madoff and Privatized Capitalism.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 30, 2009 at 12:16 am Link to this comment

Pseudo, you are slithering in your opinion.  You could either be mistaken or a liar. 
Is it too simple for you to understand that you haven’t said anything noteworthy? 
So yeah, they are using more words, any word would be one more than you have
said.  Maybe it is all too deep for you?  (uh FYI you might look up the word too). 
What ALL comes from US?  Who are US?  what proof do you have that corporations
only “appear” to pay taxes, etc.  What exactly do you mean that WE actually pay all
the taxes?  Seems like you think that corporations add in the taxes they pay to the
price of their products. You have not given any sufficient reason for anybody to
believe you.  I certainly don’t.  There is no reason for anybody to believe you?

Report this

By Pseudo, November 29, 2009 at 11:09 pm Link to this comment

If what you say, Pseudo, is true, I’d be much obliged if you would say where that
94 billion dollars came from? 


It ALL comes from US!  Where else is there for it to come from?


And you wouldn’t mind explaining this article at
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/tax-law-income-tax/11794815-1.html
giving references for your answer.


They say the same thing I have said, using more words to say it.

As I said:  “This may be for many a little to simple to understand.”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 29, 2009 at 10:32 pm Link to this comment

If what you say, Pseudo, is true, I’d be much obliged if you would say where that
94 billion dollars came from?  And you wouldn’t mind explaining this article at
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/tax-law-income-tax/11794815-1.html
giving references for your answer.

Report this

By Pseudo, November 29, 2009 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment

Corporations only appear to pay taxes, they are as any other business “Tax Collectors,” collecting money from us, do the paper work and make it appear as if they really did pay taxes, but WE actually pay all taxes. 

Any “taxes” paid by Corporations is just added on to what you and I have to pay for any services or products.

This may be for many a little to simple to understand.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 29, 2009 at 6:44 pm Link to this comment

As I understand it, and please anyone, correct me if I am wrong, “Socialized
Capitalism” takes tax money, which comes from the whole strata of the
population, the imaginary 70%, 2%, and 1%, and subsidizes capitalist ventures,
theoretically using the dollars in the way it is used for any other socially
funded program.  Sounds plausible but is that the real picture?  Granted the 1%
find shelters for their billions, the 2% find as many loopholes and shelters as
they can for their upwards of $250,000, and the 70% if they pay taxes, pay in
their respective brackets of income and finding as many deductions as they
can.  That is 100%.  While I’ve read many corporations don’t pay any taxes,
many do, and since they do pay taxes, albeit as less as they can find the way to,
where do corporations fit into that 100%?  It amounts to billions.  Like $94
billion in 2007.  More work on what is meant by socialized capitalism does
seem to be in order as there are too many unclear facets.  I don’t like to work
in a fuzzy environment.

So martha/thomas, are you copying your socialism from that piece of tripe
Mein Kampf?
  Please give OM, and the rest of us, a plain answer yes or no.  I
am slogging through MK, all 403 pages, and I have to say I am unable to
sustain much interest.  I’m thinking Chapters 5 and 6????  My delicate stomach
however….  would appreciate some help there.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, November 29, 2009 at 2:28 pm Link to this comment

The Case of Adolf Hitler: Liar, Fascist, and Mass Murderer. Part V

Lets get right to business. Lets not start with Hitler’s Mein Kampf, because its too hard to understand what that evil rat was up to.

With Martha/Thomas around, we can always count on her to explain Hitler, not merely by teaching us, but because she always emulates Hitler. So far she is 7 out of 7 points. In other words, we can learn from Martha/Thomas first and then go back to Mein Kampf, almost certain to find that Hitler did the same thing.

For example, Martha/Thomas has her imaginary American Common Culture and Majority, which she refers to again and again and again as if its a real thing. We know its not real, but by hammering away at it she creates a false frame as a step to power.

So then we focus back to Hitler. And we find… oh my what a coincidence!... that Hitler also had his magical phrase, folkish by which he referred to his imaginary German common culture and majority. Oh yes, Hitler refers to it again and again and again in his speeches, and in his Mein Kampf he spends two whole chapters on the German folkishness. His false frame helps him gain power. The similarity to Martha/Thomas in her own personal “My Struggle” is fascinating.

So now we come to Hitler’s governmental policy. Thats a complex and shadowy thing. But we can count on Martha/Thomas to lead us right to it.

Martha/Thomas said: Socialism is NOT an economic model

Gee, i didnt know that. Its amazing how much Martha/Thomas knows about her socialism.

She clarifies that her socialism does not destroy the capitalistic production, but her powerful state uses the capital generated by capitalist production. In other words, her socialism is friendly with capitalism and lets it go where it pleases, except that most of the generated capital is then utilized by the state for the sake of the American common culture and common majority. The idea is to co-opt the capitalist system, keeping it alive but in thrall to the state, making it serve the state instead of itself. 

The capitalist has to cut a deal with her powerful socialist state that imposes itself upon the capitalist’s profits, but allows the capitalist to do business. This is her Socialized Demand Economy, based upon socialized capital.

Do you think Martha/Thomas just made that stuff up? No, she gets these ideas from someone else. You can tell because her governmental policy is very well organized. Very well planned out. As if it has already implemented before.

And so we come to another moment of truth, where we try to use Martha/Thomas governmental policy to learn about Hitler’s governmental policy. What are the chances that Martha/Thomas will match up perfectly to Hitler? Judging by past results, the chances are very good.

Before we go on lets give Martha/Thomas a chance to answer for herself. What are the chances she will give an honest answer? Judging by past results, the chances are very poor.

Martha/Thomas! This should be easy for you. Answer this question with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

Are you copying your socialism from Mein Kampf?

Lets have none of your amorphous subjective accusations and insults. Do not surround yourself with a subjective cloud of ‘blah’.

Answer the question with a direct ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 29, 2009 at 2:10 pm Link to this comment

Do you mean “ingenious”* or “disingenuous”** with what you have written ThomasG? I usually don’t bring up spelling errors but it was a pivotal word in your sentence so I do this strictly for clarity.

Are we speaking of socialized capital in relation to the war on the world efforts? If so then it is part of this thread. But could you please define it for us? What particular type do you mean? If it only benefits business then it is common place here as socialized profit. But you need to define it for us without sloganeering. [That is for propagandists not for the truth. The truth should not have to be sold unlike ideology and falsehoods.]

* Means to be full of genius or indwelling of the geni or creative impulse. Applied to inventors and other problem solvers and also artists of every type.

** To be false in the way one speaks or acts.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 28, 2009 at 10:40 pm Link to this comment

This forum is much more interesting than the others so I will post my replies to
you, ThomasG, here.  I have a lower tolerance for quasi-intellectuals.

I see on the other forum you are attempting to bait me to do your work again. 
Your technique is still much too clumsy, but getting better.  Are you saving my
comments for your bibliography?  I am not worried nor have I ever been about
sitting on my fence.  I’ve never fallen off nor ever been pushed off.  I sit on the
fence because from that vantage point I have not seen truth on either side, and
I don’t see it from your side either.  You and they are pushing and shoving and
most of the time yell and scream an imaginary political theory.  It is like a
volleyball game and I am the net not the referee.  Time is the referee.

Bringing the topic on the other forum to here, there are ways to affect the
populace.  Seems to me the intellects on Truthdig might be able to come up
with at least six ways to motivate the populace to action on their own behalf. 
Surely you have even one?  Using honey instead of vinegar will attract a lot of
flies so a wise woman once told me.  It depends on what you want the
populace to do.  A clearly defined project needs to be propagated.  Importantly
for that project there is a need to also know the personal history of the voting
members of the populace and what are their priorities for their life to be happy
or at least comfortable.

I will say this much, we have to assume that populism is limited to the voting
public and not the entire population.  The reason for that limitation is that only
the voting public are the “action faction” so to speak.  The non-voting public by
their own default (perhaps from their own folly or helpless circumstances) are
victims of the vote regardless what person wins elections or what referendums
are passed.  Even political parties have no meaning for the non-voting public. 
So the idealism that the entire common population is served is a delusion.

Having to assume there is such a synthesis as anti-populace populism, and if
as you say both the Democrats and Republicans are “heavily engaged” in it,
then the first question inherent in your post to me is how could the common
people, before they could act, be brought to the awareness that they are being
manipulated by anti-populace populism (which seems to signify an adverse
and antagonistic assault against the common people), but by some yet inchoate
entities?  It seems to me the populace is not easily awakened.  Do you think
they ought to be coerced?  Instead of being inscrutable regarding the felons
(said Left and Right, Democrats and Republicans), and if not precisely said then
close to it how do they commit such crimes against the people needs to be
explained in plain language so that as identified it can be squashed.  Success
depends on a lucid and complete program. Also what crimes exactly are being
committed, so we can tell the public what they are?  So far, all I ever see are
blurred allusions regardless of the bolded letters.

Occasionally I climb down from my elevated perch on the fence to participate
in what I think is a worthwhile project usually to the left, but occasionally in the
opposite direction.  Justice and integrity are the two virtues I value.

If I have a question about socialized capitalism, I will ask it.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 28, 2009 at 3:06 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, November 21 at 2:47 pm,

If you have legitimate questions about Socialized Capitalism, I am interested in legitimate questions and will do what I can to answer your legitimate questions.

However, I have a low tolerance for Time-Warp doctrine, sophism and propaganda; I expect that you be aware of this fact and that you pose ingenuous questions, if you want, expect or desire ingenuous answers.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 28, 2009 at 2:59 pm Link to this comment

What it is based upon are facts documented while you just wildly attack with no merit at all. We can see it even if you say it isn’t. The Emperor has no clothes and you have no merit. Go get some now to support yourself and no amount of repeating and bold face will help you one whit. He gets you with granite of substance and you fight back with the soft weak tickles of pussywillow of epithets. Like smoke against a fan you are always blown away. Buck up man and get some facts on this not just say so. He has you beat every time at this and everyone else can see that but you. Do it for real. You are a joke at this point. Just the facts not histrionics.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 28, 2009 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment

OzarkMichael, November 21 at 5:58 pm,

You have a penchant for self-lauded, undeserved, and unwarranted merit.  You are, without a doubt, a legend in your own mind that deserves unwarranted merit.

Your unworthy merit is based upon ridicule, indignation, rage, and contention; and reflects nothing more than your frustrated aspiration and desire for Hitleresque Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST power and control by way of self-serving, self-lauded, and unworthy activity, actions, and behavior that is without meaning to anyone outside of the Hitleresque zeitgeist of your own Right-Wing Chorus of Sophists and Propagandists in the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and Boiler Room Operations.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, November 21, 2009 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment

It is an amazing thing to watch Shenonymous, who is more interested in learning than anything else, as she tries to find something worthwhile to learn from Martha/Thomas. This could go on a long time, because Shenonymous doesnt give up.

It is also interesting to watch Night Gaunt, who has a strong affinity for socialism and perhaps communism, as he tries to make a more human connection with Martha/Thomas.

But one can explain Martha/Thomas’s socialized capital, and understand Martha/Thomas.

All it takes is continued application of the method I already used thus far. That means its time to crack open the books again.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 21, 2009 at 10:47 am Link to this comment

Since we are talking about the future, even if that future starts tomorrow, today
is already spent, speculation about alternatives in economic models should
include descriptions of the candidates not merely title-ization. To be serious
about capitalism, historically it has had very different kinds and degrees of
government involvement, or as some would like to say, intervention.  There has
also been major roles for labor and rules about money.  Add to that socialism,
communism, fascistic corporatism, and a smorgasborg of anarchism and we
find gallimaufry of economic models.

Given that the world is changing rapidly and even exponentially with the advent
of the electronic communications media, it seems radical evolution of world
economics should be expected.  Seems like socioeconomics of the world will
be quite different than was had even as recent as the beginning of this century. 
I surmise there will be much experimentation and various economic forms as
governments struggle to conciliate various interests within their own borders
then to negotiate with those outside their borders.

Also seems like, in looking at the history of world economics, there has been a
corollary of high spikes for boom times, and down deep doldrums when it
crashes and for the whole world system to collapse as is happening now.  There
is no easing into it but it drops like a lead balloon.

Now we come to the electronic information age, and one that will permanently
affect human existence in every which way beyond economics.  We all know
that information spells power, and power generates wealth, and the way that
wealth is structured is economics, economic power, and determines The
Economic Model.  It fosters game.  And the game is to beat your opponent
before they are aware they are even in a game.  We have a few TDers here who
subscribe to that spirit.  Finally, we are also stressfully aware that the Day of
the Android is on its way and we are helpless to stop it as they almost seem
like they are creating themselves.  There advent will mean ever fewer jobs than
we are already experiencing from outsourcing jobs to low paid workers in third
world countries.

So we have to think of both new economic and social models given the
shrinkage of the world.  Letting go of feasibility for the moment, what kinds
are even thinkable?

ThomasG is offering a kind of salvation economics that he calls Socialized
Demand Economy, SDE for short (my acronym).  In his usual patronizing style,
he has not actually defined it very well except for nominally naming it.  He is
required to provide a small essay (I usually give three pages but in his case a
pithy paragraph would do.) It is his claim that models of the past have failed
miserably (my low-quotient qualifying adjective), further claiming that a
command economy that in the US used a privatized demand economy are
more than failures, they are abject failures.  But he does not give us even an
infinitesimal idea of exactly what HE means.  Again it is patronizing, hubris is
in operation.  And to the promote discussion I will suspend using my favorite
nickname for TG.  I believe we are making some progress here and there won’t
be any need for it.  I hope.

So besides the old-time-religion of socialism, there are indubitably other
models, I can think of two, but also I think we ought to let others do some of
the work and let ThomasG and I take a bit of a rest maybe jumping back in to
reflect on what is suggested???  Otherwise, ThomasG, it will be you and I who
can take all the credit for solving this socioeconomic disaster of a world.  I
don’t mind doing a lot of the work but crowns bother me being an anti-royalist
through and through.  You do see that I am working WITH you not really
AGAINST you.  See, I’ve even adopted a smidgen of your style by capitalizing for
effect.

Let’s see how it goes…(that is a little variation on Kurt Vonnegut).

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, November 21, 2009 at 10:07 am Link to this comment

As human nature seems, reason has little purpose in the grand scheme of things. Fanatics reign for emotions are the catalyst, enlightenment is left to fend for itself and has little chance over emotions. One only need hear the bear shit in the woods! (like saying that one)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 21, 2009 at 7:16 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, November 17 at 7:50 pm,

Shenonymous said: ”... that does not mean socialism will become the economic base for the country as a permanent operating government program.”

ThomasG’s answer: The answer is American Socialism and Socialized Capitalism.  Socialized Capitalism as an economic model used with American Socialism as a social model.

Your post implying that Socialism is an economic model does not make it so; Socialism is NOT an economic model.

Economic Models that have been used in the past and have failed are those that promoted a Command Economy and a Privatized Demand Economy.  The United Soviet Socialist Republics used a Command Economy and the United States uses a Privatized Demand Economy;——Both systems are abject failures. 

I advocate a Socialized Demand Economy, based upon socialized capital.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 21, 2009 at 6:34 am Link to this comment

KDelphi, November 19 at 2:43 am,

Anger Management Therapy would be of help to you to resolve your problems that you keep trying to blame others for.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 19, 2009 at 9:48 am Link to this comment

I agreed.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 19, 2009 at 6:58 am Link to this comment

For KDelphi — Reading your posts for a long time now, I know you have
consistently appealed for better social programs in the United States.  I also
think you have been right in those requests and when and if I can support
them I have and do. 

Yours is the more circumspect way to effect compassionate change in a large
and diverse society.  Often your appeal is abundant with passion, but there is
always underlying it a justified reason for the underprivileged to be regarded
as worthy human beings. 

I wish we, you, I, all those sympathetic to the human condition of its fragility
both from the hostility of nature to sustain life and the unnatural hostility of
mankind to each other, to make human survival less acute.  How we go about
that in an intelligent way determines the real value of having the kind of
comprehending mind we humans uniquely have.  No one has all of the answers
to the most profound questions.  But with true empathy and cooperation, we
will find them.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 18, 2009 at 10:43 pm Link to this comment

MarthA/ThomasG—you are honestly one really wierded out person what does “blah” mean? What are you talking about? I make it a practice not to say that to anyone, but I just broke it. You are just really too much..I tried to answer your remarks on the Cartoon, but my browser/pc is too slow. Yes, I made it up..but at least I have a brain to have a tumor in. Its none of your damn business if I “relax and spend time with my family”..where do you get off telling anyone what to do? You obviously dont know you ass from an outhouse. Even with radiation, I can tell when someone is just a bitch.

If you decide to finally answer someone’s questions, you must do so without referring to any major illnesses that they might have, other than your mental one. You have to engage your brain before hitting the keys, ok? Why do you post just to disagree with everything to everyone? Have you ever asked yourself what all this Party crap means? Never mind I know the answer.

Shenonymous is completely correct, by the way. You have no idea what Socialism is, Warren was advocating no such thing, and, do you ever see anything not through the lens of Marthas/Thomas..Ive never heard of conjoined twins of the opposite sex. Must make you very angry—or hot…which is it?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 17, 2009 at 3:50 pm Link to this comment

Since you deemed it important to post the Elizabeth Warren interview on
Moyer’s Journal, ThomasG, on this forum as well, I will repost some of what I
also said on the other forum Hi Ho American Capitalism with some edits and
modification leaving out discussion of credit cards.

I watched the Elizabeth Warren PBS interview actually when it aired on Sunday.
Warren argued that we are already in a state of socialism with the bailout and
that taxpayers not only rescued the financial institutions but are guaranteeing
their solvency. Her evidence is that involvement of the taxpayer defines a
socialism, and it does per certus of a sort.   What kind of socialism are you
thinking is definitive?  Anarchism (Libertarian Socialism), Leninism, Marxism,
Maoism, Social democracy, Stalinism, Trotskyism, or National Socialism?  Please
answer since it seems to be an imperative of yours that I get the definition
right! 

While her illustration seems to have some truth to it and it seems to be a kind
of socialism, that does not mean socialism will become the economic base for
the country as a permanent operating government program. Warren said that
this financial conundrum is fixable with Congressional legislation and
encourages that to happen. She does not advocate socialism, and especially no
particular form of socialism, as an economic structure for this country. 

This is much different from what you and MarthaA yammer about. And your
version is not comparable to Warren’s definition of capitalism and socialism.  In
that video her definition is completely simplistic and only superficially
descriptive.

What I offered was the prototypical or general definitional interpretation since
applied programs would take extensive analysis. You were stupid to blister me
about it. As I’ve said you are malicious minded. 

Warren’s antidote is one that should be expected of our government, it is
reasonable and rational.  A full-out radical socialism program as you are
suggesting is infeasible and would be rejected by the Common Majority. I have
already agreed with MarthaA that a federal program combination of capitalism
and socialism seems to be the only remedy. Your bucket-covered mind does
not want to acknowledge that, but would prefer to sling slanders at me and a
few others. I realize you get an emotional thrill at it.

MarthaA does not give any relative value for how much socialism to how much
capitalism and does not give any important personage who represents your
economic/governmental scheme of extreme socialism.  Do those two things
and I will start taking your posts seriously.

Yours truly,
Shenony Mouse!

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 16, 2009 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment

Micky Mouse Club Members, Goofy, OzarkMichael and Daffy Duck, Shenonymous:

Here is a PBS link to an interview with Chairman of the Congressional Oversight Panel, Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard University Professor, which should help you with your understanding of Socialism and Capitalism, and the difference between socialism and Capitalism:

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/546/

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 16, 2009 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

Truthdig’s Mickey Mouse Club Member, Goofy, OzarkMichael:

Here is a link explaining socialism and Capitalism that you should peruse:

http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/20091105_steve_fraser_on_the_crisis_of_capitalism/

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 16, 2009 at 1:35 pm Link to this comment

Truthdig’s Mickey Mouse Club’s Night-Gaunt, Nov.16 at 3:01pm and Goofy, OzarkMichael, the Leader, Nov.15 at 11:50pm,

Boiler room blah accusing others of YOUR own Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST family tactics of attacking the messenger to deny the message.  This is the tactics used by the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber Sophists and Propagandists as follows from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present:

FOX NEWS & FOX TV Network,
Dick Armey,
John Ashcroft,
Michele Bachmann,
Glen Beck,
Roy Blunt,
John Boehner,
Pat Buchanan,
Dick Cheney,
Tom Coburn,
Ann Coulter,
Tom Delay,
James Dobson,
Bill Frist,
Newt Gingrich,
Phil Gramm,
Sean Hannity,
Dennis Hastert,
James Inhofe,
Bill Kristol,
Rush Limbaugh,
Trent Lott,
Rupert Murdoch,
Don Nichols,
Grover Norquist,
Bill O’Reilly,
Sarah Palin,
Ralph Reed,
Pat Robertson,
Ed Rollins,
Karl Rove,
Arlen Specter,
Bart Stupak,
Donald Rumsfeld,
Phyllis Shlafly, and
George Will to name but a few.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, November 16, 2009 at 11:01 am Link to this comment

It is a boiler room where if they are asked questions on the “forbidden topic” they just repeat like the rout robots they are. Pathetic and pitying to say the most. Remember ThomasG you show you are a “blah” by repeating the same jetsum over and over. Not a sign of intelligence—-it is a sign of mania.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, November 15, 2009 at 7:50 pm Link to this comment

Martha/Thomas accuses us: All of “you people”... try to kill the messenger to deny and destroy the message

No one one wants to hurt you. Stop your subjective pretending. Dont project yourself as a martyr for your Mein Kampf.

Then Martha/Thomas said this of herself: I am the messenger and Hitleresque dialogue

True. But no one is forcing you to keep being a messenger for Hitleresque dialogue. I want to know one thing. Who are you being a messenger for?

Are you in some sort of room? Is it a fascist boiler room?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 15, 2009 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment

Donald Duck, Minnie Mouse, Daffy Duck, Goofy, Night-Gaunt, Nov.15 at 7:32pm, Leader and Agenda Bearer, OzarkMichael, Nov.15 at 7:56pm,and again your Leader and Agenda Bearer, OzarkMichael, Nov.15 at 7:28pm,

Ozark Michael, here is the thread you requested:

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20091002_hi_ho_american_capitalism/

There is NO REASON for me or anyone else to answer your questions, since you represent both sides of your own dialogue, much like a morphydite services itself.

I am the messenger and Hitleresque dialogue of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement and their Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber is my message.  If an answer is desired, address the message, rather than accuse, condemn, denounce, and demonize the messenger.  The following list of Hitleresque Sophists and Propagandists are the message:

FOX NEWS & FOX Television Network,
Dick Armey,
John Ashcroft,
Michele Bachmann,
Glen Beck,
Roy Blunt,
John Boehner,
Pat Buchanan,
Dick Cheney,
Tom Coburn,
Ann Coulter,
Tom Delay,
James Dobson,
Bill Frist,
Newt Gingrich,
Phil Gramm,
Sean Hannity,
Dennis Hastert,
James Inhofe,
Bill Kristol,
Rush Limbaugh,
Trent Lott,
Rupert Murdoch,
Don Nichols,
Grover Norquist,
Bill O’Reilly,
Sarah Palin,
Ralph Reed,
Pat Robertson,
Ed Rollins,
Karl Rove,
Arlen Specter,
Bart Stupak,
Donald Rumsfeld,
Phyllis Shlafly, and
George Will to name but a few.

Direct yourself to addressing the Hitleresque sophism and propaganda of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber since the time of Goldwater, through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and into the present that has accused, condemned, denounced and demonized the Left and Liberals with Hitleresque sophism and propaganda.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, November 15, 2009 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment

Donald Duck, Minnie Mouse, Daffy Duck, Goofy, Night-Gaunt, Nov.15 at 7:32pm, Leader and Agenda Bearer, OzarkMichael, Nov.15 at 7:56pm, and again Leader and Agenda Bearer, OzarkMichael, Nov.15 at 7:28pm,

Ozark Michael, here is the thread you requested:

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20091002_hi_ho_american_capitalism/

There is NO REASON for me or anyone else to answer your questions, since you represent both sides of your own dialogue, much like a morphydite services itself.

I am the messenger and Hitleresque dialogue of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Movement and their Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber is my message.  If an answer is desired, address the message, rather than accuse, condemn, denounce, and demonize the messenger.  The following list of Hitleresque Sophists and Propagandists are the message:

FOX NEWS & FOX Television Network,
Dick Armey,
John Ashcroft,
Michele Bachmann,
Glen Beck,
Roy Blunt,
John Boehner,
Pat Buchanan,
Dick Cheney,
Tom Coburn,
Ann Coulter,
Tom Delay,
James Dobson,
Bill Frist,
Newt Gingrich,
Phil Gramm,
Sean Hannity,
Dennis Hastert,
James Inhofe,
Bill Kristol,
Rush Limbaugh,
Trent Lott,
Rupert Murdoch,
Don Nichols,
Grover Norquist,
Bill O’Reilly,
Sarah Palin,
Ralph Reed,
Pat Robertson,
Ed Rollins,
Karl Rove,
Arlen Specter,
Bart Stupak,
Donald Rumsfeld,
Phyllis Shlafly, and
George Will to name but a few.

Direct yourself to addressing the Hitleresque sophism and propaganda of the Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber since the time of Goldwater, through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and into the present that has accused, condemned, denounced and demonized the Left and Liberals with Hitleresque sophism and propaganda.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, November 15, 2009 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

Night Gaunt comments to Martha/Thomas: How can we listen to your message when you threaten us if we don’t take it all in as you dictate to us?

It worked for Hitler, so Martha/Thomas expects it to work for her.

Night Gaunt continues: Not the way to win friends and influence people. What one would expect in some kind of totalitarian dictatorship of the coarsest kind.

But winning friends wasnt the point for Hitler either. One of Martha/Thomas favorite quotes of Hitler’s Mein Kampf:

It makes no difference whatever, whether they laugh at us or revile us, whether they represent us as clowns or criminals; the main thing is that they mention us, that they concern themselves with us again and again

Which is precisely what Martha/Thomas forces us to do every day. She doesnt care if we laugh at her or revile her, as long as we keep talking about her and her very own Mein Kampf.

What is so clever is that NightGaunt has jumped ahead to Hitlers Playbook STEP #9. But that is getting way ahead. We are still at STEP #5, NightGaunt. Please be patient.

Night Gaunt, you mustnt get too far ahead, the rest of us wont be able to keep up. Especially if Martha/Thomas keeps giving links to entire threads for us to read instead of simply saying “Yes” or “No”. Why did you do that, Martha?

At this rate we wont get though all the STEPS in Hitlers Playbook until 2011. Martha/Thomas will keep us concerned with her constantly.

But ok, yes, Night Gaunt is right, that is Mein Kampf STEP #9.

Report this

Page 2 of 7 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >  Last »

 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook