A Spooky Rebuke to the Enemies of Democracy

John Brennan has every right (and, I believe, a duty) to speak out on the dangers of Russian interference in our politics and elections. The same goes for the threat posed by trimp and his minions to liberal democracy, the rule of law, and basic human decency.

But when a kingpin of US “intelligence” and covert operations condemns Russia and our deplorable president* for counter democratic intereference and corruption, it behooves us to acknowledge how the US has (historically and currently) run roughshod over the rights of others countries to determine their own futures in a democratic manner.

Aside from brutal interventions across the globe, the US has perverted the democratic process in in Italy, Greece, Chile, Guatemala, Iran etc. etc. etc. mostly in the name of anti-communism or resistance to radical Islam.

Does Mr. Brennan sincerely advocate for national or democratic self determination everywhere - or is he even opposed to it in the US,  believing somehow that only a self interested, immoral, idiot elite (0.1%) has the right to impose its will on the global population through force and fraud?

Economic Democracy v State Capitalism

Just as markets could not exist and develop without vigorous government support, capitalism has always been a creature of the state, a sophisticated and somewhat pluralistic way of accumulating wealth, driving workers, and creating more wealth. But concentrated wealth used irresponsibly is a danger to democracy, our species, and the planet.

Ayn Randyish fantasies about heroic ubermenschen are only one toxic component of an outlandish mythology that has outlived its usefulness. To some extent, the rich (and therefore the poor) will always be with us, but by now we have overlearned the peril of allowing this dynamic to develop to extremes. We have also (through experiences like the Great Depression and The New Deal) begun to learn what we can do to prevent the abuses and pathologies of deslusional crisis capitalism.

Our established political fronts (and fall guys) for capitalist abuse are crumbling with one party unable to contain its racists, fascists, NAZIs - and dark Q enchantments. An alternative (involving a major restructuring of our economic, energy, transportation, education, and healthcare infrastructures) hardly looks extreme.

If people don’t like the term “socialism” just call it what it really is: ‘Jobs, Freedom, and Economic Democracy’!

https://www.streamlygredible.com/

The Socialist Motivator

Peter Suderman probably has no more understanding of macro economics, public debt, and the money system than I or the average “educated” adult. But in the way he discusses public spending, deficits, and debt, it is clear he is only regretting some of the consequences of Republican ignorance and hypocracy. The way he frames his argument makes it likely that he is worried more about threats to the privileges of irresponsibly owned private concentrated wealth than he cares about democracy or the dignity of struggling Americans.

But the drive for a Green New Deal, a massive overhaul of our energy and transportation infrastructures associated with a transformation of our healthcare and education systems is driven by human need as well as by national security and world peace.

The primary opening for socialism is not a result of Republican hypocracy. It’s a result of their policies which (with Democratic complicity) since the 70s have successfully commandeered wealth from ordinary Americans into the hands of a rapacious idiot (0.1%) elite which irresponsibly refuses to invest “their” treasure in productive industry.

What’s motivating socialism is human need in the face of a failing system.

The First Amendment, Liberals, and Left Wingers

We are all liable to being “played” - and also to be made foolish by our own compulsions and fatigue. 

If you take the original meaning of the term “liberal” which emphasized civic liberties and limited government, liberals don’t have to be “left wing”.   Liberals today *tend* to be “left wing” in reaction to the amount of concentrated power associated with private corporate wealth.  And such liberals do tend to resent the amount of “free speech” corporate money can buy - especially when such “speech” is filled with outright lies as well as the typical biases against workers, families, and consumers in favor of “freedom” for profiteers.

But the liberal civil liberties associated with the US Bill of Rights must be defended and built upon.  We need to be very careful about suppressing free speech even by well funded irresponsible provocateurs.  Their financial backers may be irresponsible and idiotic (selfish and short sighted), but the enemies of democracy have always been those who value personal wealth over the common good.  They can afford to hire the cleverest teams to trick us into destroying our own protections. 

Liberals don’t have to be left wing.  But “left wingers”  MUST be liberal - if they are seriously motivated by progressive, humanitarian, socialist/communitarian, democratic ideals. 

Does the First Amendment Favor Liberals or Conservatives?