not dancing the cmas polka

today is the start of a new chapter in my family's lives. yesterday, i had to help lay to rest her best friend of almost 20 years and there's nothing like digging a hole in frigid weather to help with perspective. i have essentially checked out since the election in november- and i am glad i did. it isn't because i don't care what's going on in the world- but there comes a time when you need a refuge from it. so, i haven't been caught up in the holiday hoopla.

i have yet to figure out why folks make such a big deal about 'the holiday season'- oh, can't get anything started 'cause 'it's the holiday season,' etc. people rushing to and fro checking off lists of folks they have to buy for; getting up at the butt crack of dawn to get the early bird deals at the corporate chain stores; risking getting trampled to death at said chain stores. i don't get it. most folks claim to love the holidays but in reality- they are stressed and dread them. why do we do it?

'everybody needs a little holiday' now and again- it's a special time and a time to be celebrated. but is what 'cmas' has become really a celebration? perhaps for the corporates who were behind the invention of the modern cmas season. 'black friday' started because that's the day traditionally they made the biggest profits and santa claus as we know him comes from coca cola. not to belabor the point- but we need to re-evaluate our holidays and realize that not everyone celebrates them in the same way. there isn't a 'war on cmas' but there's a war by the christians to stamp out any other way to celebrate during what is traditionally the winter solstice season.

there are many folks this time of year experiencing great loss- personally, financially, spiritually- and yet we are supposed to buy, buy, buy and continue on as if we haven't exeperienced anything other than joy that a single human being was born 3,000 years ago or so. many folks have been born before and after that one person who were far more important and i just think that we need to be mindful that america is not a norman rockwell painting and this is not the season of peace.

jim reeves- merry cmas polka

Marching Straight Towards Authoritarianism

Whenever a civilian government either outsources its responsibilities in matters domestic and/or foreign affairs, whether to corporations, security agencies and/or the military, then it is safe to say that it is the beginning of the end of democratic governance - ultimately leading to authoritarian corporatocracy, security state and/or military junta ... or all of the above, also known as fascism.

Expand the post +/-

In addition to the overwhelming assaults on the U.S. constitution, civil rights and human rights (i.e. military commissions, indiscriminate domestic spying, security sweep pre-emptive arrests, renditions, indefinite detentions, torture, etc.), including outsourcing of security and war efforts (Blackwater, anyone?), the U.S. government is now letting go of some of its people-empowered roles in diplomacy and foreign affairs. To whit:

(...) when did a four star general get handed the authority to act as if he were Secretary of State?

The WaPo reports that:

Gen. David H. Petraeus has launched a major reassessment of U.S. strategy for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and the surrounding region, while warning that the lack of development and the spiraling violence in Afghanistan will probably make it "the longest campaign of the long war."

The 100-day assessment will result in a new campaign plan for the Middle East and Central Asia, a region in which Petraeus will oversee the operations of more than 200,000 American troops as the new head of U.S. Central Command, beginning Oct. 31.

The review will formally begin next month, but experts and military officials involved said Petraeus is already focused on at least two major themes: government-led reconciliation of Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the leveraging of diplomatic and economic initiatives with nearby countries that are influential in the war.

All of this seems like a good idea to me. But, crucially, neither of those themes are military ones and the military shouldn't be leading the way on them. It's about separation of power and having the military subordinate to civilian policymakers rather than the other way around.

So where are the US ambassador, State Dept. and Condi Rice, who should be leading the way on them while the military man concentrates on military matters? For that matter, won't the leaders of other nations involved in the region wonder why America has appointed a de facto proconsul (again) and want their say?

"When you look at a lot of these problems, you see considerable regional connections," Petraeus said yesterday. The effort would embrace all of Afghanistan's neighbors and possibly extend to India, which has had a long-standing rivalry with Pakistan. "There may be opportunities with respect to India," he said.

An overview of the review team's mission obtained by The Post says that including other government agencies and other nations in the planning will "mitigate the risk of over-militarization of efforts and the development of short-term solutions to long-term problems."

Nevertheless, some experts questioned whether Petraeus will have the authority to carry out such a sweeping strategy.

"General Petraeus is not in charge of our diplomacy. He can't decide whether we try to form an international contacts group on Pakistan," said Barnett Rubin, an Afghanistan expert at New York University.

Moreover, in dealing with Afghanistan at Central Command, Petraeus will face limitations that he did not encounter as the top commander in Iraq, such as the lack of a unified military command and serious resource shortages.

"We don't own it. It's been a NATO effort since 2006. He won't have the same sway with Karzai and the ambassadors and a bunch of other people that he had in Iraq," said a former senior military official with experience in Afghanistan.

Perhaps most worrying of all, Petraus' mini foreign policy is being described as "a policy bridge from one administration to the next" by one of his team members, Clare Lockhart, co-founder of the New York-based Institute for State Effectiveness along with former Afghan finance minister Ashraf Ghani.

"It's about separation of power and having the military subordinate to civilian policymakers rather than the other way around" - Cernig is spot on with this reminder.

However, I would amend this truism to include security agencies alongside the military.

For indeed, remember this, as but one example? (emphasis added)

Canada's spy agency has the green light to meet with Canadians detained abroad (as apart of a national security or terrorism case) before (Foreign Affairs) consular officials do when there are "urgent national security or terrorism-related considerations," says a newly disclosed federal agreement.

Which made me conclude the following (emphasis added):

In effect, Foreign Affairs will leave it up entirely to CSIS to make its own call - and defer to it.

Without any outside oversight whatsoever.

Plain and simple.

(...) This is how your Security State fully awakens, folks: when a country's secret security agency is given the power of life and death, of freedom and detention, over its citizens and whose judgement prevails over constitutional, civilian institutions supposedly mandated to deal in such matters.

After 9/11, we have witnessed a gradual encroachment of security measures which have been eroding our rights of freedom and privacy - all the while either applauding such measures, or remaining indifferent to them, because They. Make. Us. Feel. Safe.

Same thing with regards to human rights overall - whereby too many folks out there actually approve of the use of torture.

What we are now witnessing is the gradual deferment of responsibilities of our governments towards security agencies and the military - with the same mind set of needing to feel secure, which in turn has elevated security and military entities as preeminent Saviors in which We Trust implicitly.

Even for law and order enforcement (meaning: martial law by any other way).

All aided, abetted and amplified by the all-too-eager, gung ho, subservient, approving, supportive, enthusiastic, complicit, propagandist, media.

Indeed, a sickening worship of all things authoritarian and/or military was gleefully on display at the RNC last September (for instance, whether it was about McCain, his wife or Palin, it was inevitably emphasised that either they have served, have as son currently serving and/or had a parent/grandparent who served during WWI, WWII or some othe conflict - the message being that they are from a "strong" bloodline of military service).

The DNC likewise delved into this theme, albeit to a much lesser extent - nevertheless, that a past parent of Obama served and Biden's son being deployed to Iraq were emphasised as well.

That is creeping and already well entrenched militarism for you - case in point:

If I could be granted one small wish about our political discourse, it would be that reporters and pundits would accept -- as disappointing and unglorious as it is -- that, under our Constitution and basic government design, people who aren't in the military don't have a "Commander-in-Chief." The President isn't your "commander," and the "Commander-in-Chief" power, now synonymous in our political culture with "President," is actually extremely limited (Art. II, Sec. 2: "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States").

This endless festishization of "President as Our Commander-in-Chief" is one of those small but pernicious reflections of how militarized we've become, of how we are a society in a state of perpetual and endless war.

Punditman likewise expressed herein his concerns last year over the same phenomenon apparently slowly sinking into Canada's own consciousness:

Wearing camouflage used to signify one of two things: the person was either in the armed forces or was setting out on a different sort of mission that involved drinking tons of beer and killing furry creatures in a forest somewhere. But nowadays, the whole idea of hunting (humans or animals, that is), has been demoted by those who dress like G.I. Joe just because they are out hunting for a latte or an Ipod.

Grow a brain, people. This is all about the militarization of our culture.

(...) Along with camouflage, Canada is now beset by an overabundance of “Support Our Troops” ribbons, t-shirts, bracelets and mugs. You can’t go anywhere without seeing the telltale yellow ribbon on cars. Come to think of it, some are camouflaged. It is high time that the elephant in the room is asked the obvious question that polite Canadians would rather avoid: What does “Support Our Troops” really mean?

Those who decorate their vehicles thusly would have us believe that the decals are politically neutral symbols of support for soldiers overseas. This is nonsense and they know it. The intended audience are those of us who forego yellow ribbons. If you think about it, the phrase “Support Our Troops” is sort of bossy, like a drill sargent’s snarl. This is known in grammatical circles as the “imperative mood.” Therefore the directive to “Support Our Troops” comes off like an order, but with a somewhat fuzzy meaning: What exactly am I supposed to do? Buy a ribbon, I guess.

Yet the context is obvious. This is all about the Afghan War and nothing else. The yellow ribbon campaign has succeeded in convincing at least eighteen Canadian municipal and local governments to affix the decals to police cars, ambulances, fire trucks, buses and other municipal vehicles. Since this is all public property, this is a divisive move, not an inclusive one. Why this cause, but no others? Why not “Support Our Cancer Patients” or “Support Our Single Moms”? Are they less worthy?

(...) One may well ask: where should Canada’s foreign policy priorities be right now? Tied down in Afghanistan, begging NATO allies for more help in what looks more and more like an intractable military stalemate? Or, working through diplomatic channels to try to prevent a global conflagration between the US and Iran that could even go nuclear?

It’s time to ditch the camouflage and put on your thinking caps.

And that is without considering Harper's own drive to militarize Canada further. Peacekeeping? We Canadians apparently don't do that anymore:

(...) Rwanda was there, desperately needing help to prevent a genocide. Dallaire even knew what to do. But the rest of the world, Canada's government included, opted to do nothing. They let "traditional peacekeeping" fail in a grand and horrible way, with 800 000 dead, so they could pretend that "traditional peacekeeping" was itself dead.

And now the Canadian Press is helping them with this pretence. And at the end of article they're going to lament how little we trust journalists.

Referring to failed Bosnia-Serbia intervention, the article continues:

That frustrating experience shaped the attitude of a generation of soldiers, who were eager to shed the United Nations blue beret, which they saw as a symbol of weakness and indecision.

Really? The soldiers saw it as a sign of weakness? Who is writing this article? Where is the survey that demonstrates this? Is this the infantry or the military brass? Besides which, it doesn't matter what the soldiers think. It is the civilian population that selects the missions. If those enrolled don't like peacekeeping, they don't have to stay enrolled.

Yet the public clings to the romanticized notion of brave soldiers standing between belligerents.

Yeah. We stupid, ignorant Canadians have these stupid, romantic morals and values. God, we're so fricking naive, aren't we?

(...) The fact is that Canadians should be in charge of what their military is doing. At this time, we are not. The Liberals failed to steer the military in to the post Cold War peacekeeping force that we wanted. The Conservatives are taking that military force and using it aggressively.

Indeed - for only through military might may one country be taken seriously.

Once again - it all goes back to the fact that Americans and Canadians are sill gripped by the all-encompassing fear of terrorism - which is used whenever convenient to further push more authoritarian security measures, increased militarization/military interventionism, or simply to win elections.

History has clearly shown that fear-driven radical interpretations of the separation of powers within a republic, or any democracy, along with the slow erosion of the rule of constitutional law and the clamor for a single strong and powerful leader in times of crises, have lead to the downfall and de facto end of said republics/democracies - the fall of the Roman republic constituting an obvious, ancient example.

In other words:

Fear + Need for security + Erosion of the rule of Law + Religious fundamentalism + Militarism + Intolerance for opposing/dissenting opinions and beliefs + Calls for a strong and powerful leader = A democracy facing possible overthrow in favor of despotism.

And this little reminder of the 10 steps towards fascism:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy;
2. Create a gulag;
3. Develop a thug caste;
4. Set up an internal surveillance system;
5. Harass citizens' groups;
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release;
7. Target key individuals;
8. Control the press;
9. Dissent equals treason;
and 10. Suspend the rule of law.

All the necessary tools are already on hand.

As the saying goes - one must remember and understand history in order not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

It remains to be established whether we, Americans and Canadians alike, will stand up for our constitutions, our democracy-based societies, or let fear and paranoia sweep them away in lieu of authoritarianism - as we keep allowing our elected representatives to defer their entrusted powers and responsibilities to security agencies and the military.

We better wake up before it is too little, too late ...


(Cross-posted from APOV)

worth 20 minutes of your time!

The Story of Stuff~~

peace my friend, peace
~~

a brave new america

i haven't been terribly hopeful for a peaceful world anytime soon. the winds of change are often harbingers of hope- but i am not feeling it. there was a time when i really thought that americans could fight against the tide of corruption washing over our nation but that was the election of 2006 and it seems, with the exception of rep. kucinich and rep. wexler and the small band that is with them, that the very people who ran on tickets of changing government- haven't. then, barack obama decided to run for president. taking the stage at the 2004 democratic convention, obama blew me- and countless others away. and i felt the stirrings of hope that john kerry ( a good man) could not stir. since that time, america's constitution has been stolen and shredded and with the bill of rights all but gone, people began looking for someone, anyone to hold the guilty accountable. but time and again, our leaders have refused to lead.

since i registered to vote, i have always been a registered democrat. for me, the democratic party represented fighting for the poor and vulnerable and fighting for the equality of all human beings- 'all men are created equal.' recently, i changed my voter registration to undeclared. i no longer believe that we have a two party system or a system of checks and balances in this country. we are no longer a country 'for the people, by the people' and we no longer have the will to be so. i can no longer participate in a system that will never be changed and is so horribly corrupt. i haven't spoken much about the presidential election since dennis k. dropped out because i felt that the only person 'man enough' for the job- was no longer running. and people started lining up behind clinton or obama. and they started ripping into each other. and it was and still is- blind stupidity.

i have been critical of hillary clinton because 1) she is the senator from new york- my home 2) she represents my gender 3) she is a highly motivated and intelligent person who helped raise a fine daughter in spite of her professional life and 4) she rose above the garbage thrown at her while bill was in office. all of that changed when her campaign started the racist crap and used misogyny as an excuse. it made me angry. because she played politics as usual and obama was running a different campaign- and she didn't get that. and she lost.

and now, i am not angry, just sad. sad that the death knell of the american democratic republic has turned into a funeral march. many folks looked to obama as someone who would lead america back towards democracy- but there is no democracy in politics. survival of the richest and fittest- and obama and the congress caved yet again to corporate interests. i mean, you can't bite the hand that feeds you, right?

hypocritic oath

nothing like the stench of corruption in the summer air. if nothing else drives the point home that new america is a nation run- not simply by capitalism but by the corporate ruling class- this should tamp it down good:

more than 7 million americans abused prescription drugs in 2005- so since this is 2008, i am going to assume that number went up. within the last 8 years of the debacle that has been bushco, the public trust in our government's ability and desire to do it's job- especially the fda- has been shaken to the point it's nonexistent. this is one reason:

"the FDA had “corrupted its mission to protect the public health” and that Mr Troy “is aggressively intervening against the public on behalf of drug companies and medical device manufacturers.”

probably the biggest problem americans have in a corporate run, for profit healthcare system run amok- doctors. doctors are the target of pharma marketing campaigns and are often given faulty information to go by when prescribing medications.

"The bulk of the industry marketing effort — more than 70 percent by Gagnon and Lexchin’s calculation — is directed at doctors.

Why?

Because it works.

The companies spend huge amounts paying firms that carefully track what doctors prescribe, and then they use the information to tailor messages to doctors, distribute samples and develop continuing medical education programs.

Gagnon and Lexchin report that Pharma spends more than $20 billion a year on “detailers” — the pharma reps that knock on doctor doors, ply the staff with free coffee and lunches, distribute samples ($16 billion worth), and prod docs to prescribe their drugs.

This is complemented by a host of tactics that in other circumstances might be called bribes."
the result?

"Half of all Americans take prescription medications. Eighty one percent take some type of pill. 100,000 die every year from a prescription med that they either didn't need or that was not properly prescribed."

most ailments folks have- most not all- are curable with a change in lifestyle- eating and exercise habits. many mental health problems- not all- can be solved with therapy sans medication. reprogramming how one thinks and learning coping skills is a start. if we took time to live life as it is- instead of attempting to live a fantasy- we may not need to medicate or self medicate. and big corporate wouldn't be raking billions in profits of our hard earned money every year.

Economic Stimulus

Did you get your economic stimulus yet?

Oh, Ahh ~ I can’t wait – ohhhh – to be stimulated. I looked on the IRS web site and my check won’t – oooOOOOoooo – be able to cause me sti-mu-lation until the end of the month, as I refuse to use direct deposit when I file my taxes.

But let’s talk more about the feds grand plan of stimulating us – oh baby yea, right there – and whom it will not stimulate. It's simple, it will not stimulate anyone who doesn’t file a tax return.

So, these people will be required, if they want to be as stimulate as we are – oh YEA baby – to file a pretend return in order to get their very own check or direct deposit. Anyone else have that fishy smell coming from their computer screen when they read this???

If this sounds like conspiracy theory, well then maybe it is, but I’m a wondering why we all are getting a pittance of the taxes returned to us in the form of a stimulus – yes, baby More – and hundreds of people in search of their very own stimuli – oh oh OHHHH – are now filing tax returns. Could there be another reason behind this economic payoff??

Cuz, seriously how much will our recessive economy be affected by this stimulus – More More More, oooOOOOoooo baby. Does anyone else have any ideas on this, something that actually makes sense?

And I am just curious, how many people are saving their stimuli – come on baby, I want it NOW – or being the good consumers our 'corporation run government' want us to be?

I just can’t help but feel this stimulus – um, ya know, you’re just not my type – is just a band-aid. It’s like the little boy who stuck his finger in the wall of the dyke. Eventually someone will take their finger out of this wall and the economic flood will start. And I’m wondering just how prepared we all are to take on this surge?

peace my friend, peace

TO GW BUSH (CEO - USofA INC)

Belacqua Jones, meth riddled visionary,
via Case at Open Letters to George W. Bush (from his ardent admirer, Belacqua Jones),
is well worth a daily read if there ever was one in blogotopia.

Before reading his letters I will offer three cautions:

1. Do not drink anything while you read them, unless you can afford to buy a new monitor every other day or so or you keep a spray guard over your screen and keyboard.

2. Bring your "irony meter" and set it to "high" (pun intended).

3. Do not read them while taking medications of any variety as you will never no what is causing those nasty side effects (and doing so would likely negate any possibility of bringing suit against big pharma).

~

Belacqua Jones... Buy the book

Our Quadrennial Search for a New CEO

Dear George,

It never fails to amaze me how often the left gets it wrong. I’ve been reading a piece that goes on and on about what wimps Congressional Democrats are, which they certainly are but not for the reasons the author describes. Their cowering has less to do with a missing backbone and more to do with the revolution you have set into place.

America’s traditional separation of powers has always been a pain in the ass. Under the pressure of constant bickering and posturing the wheels of government have clumped along to the stirring beat of inefficiency.

Thanks to you, the public no longer suffers the vacuum of inaction that for too long characterized the Beltway. You have strengthened our traditional separation of powers by making the legislative and judicial branches employees of the Corporatist State. This allows the three branches to achieve a unity of purpose never before dreamed of.

Congressional Democrats fold and fold and fold because they understand that loyal employees don’t buck the boss. Pork fat floods the hallowed halls of Congress, and our congressmen realize that if they don’t dance to the corporate tune they will find all this fat rendered out of them.

The bottom line is that they don’t fear you, they fear becoming low fat legislators. (Read the rest...)

NO THANKS...

(Photomontage © 2007 mrp/thepoetryman)

Replacing the Empire Culture: A Podcast Interview With Author David Korten

The topic below was originally posted in my blog the Intrepid Liberal Journal as well as Worldwide Sawdust and Independent Bloggers Alliance.

“There is a culture war in America, but it is not between liberals and conservatives, who in fact share a great many core values – including a commitment to children, family, community, personal responsibility and democracy. It is between the lower and higher orders of our human nature. It is between an imperial politics of individual greed and power and a democratic politics based on principle and the common good. It is between Power Seekers at the extreme political fringes who remain imprisoned in an Imperial Consciousness and the realists of the political mainstream who truly want to solve the problems that beset us all.”

David Korten wrote those provocative words in his book, The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community published last year by Berrett-Kohler.



Korten worked for more than thirty-five years in preeminent business, academic, and international development institutions. He eventually turned away from the establishment and instead worked with public interest citizen action groups. He is the co-founder and board chair of the Positive Futures Network and Yes! A Journal of Positive Futures, an associate of the International Forum on Globalization and a member of the Club of Rome. He serves on the boards of the Business Alliance for Local Living Economics and the Bainbridge Graduate Institute.

In his early career, Korten set up business schools in low-income countries starting with Ethiopia, hoping to help establish a new class of professional business entrepreneurs would be the key to ending global poverty. He also completed his military service stateside during the Vietnam War as a captain in the U.S. Air Force, with duty at the Special Air Warfare School, Air Force headquarters command, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Following his service in the military, Korten was a faculty member of the Harvard University Graduate School of Business where he taught in Harvard’s middle management, M.B.A. and doctoral programs. Korten also served as Harvard’s adviser to the Central American Management Institute in Nicaragua and later joined the staff of the Harvard Institute for International Development, where he headed a Ford Foundation funded project to strengthen the organization and management of national family planning programs.

When Korten left academia in 1970 he moved to Southeast Asia where he lived for almost fifteen years, serving as a Ford Foundation project specialist and later as Asia regional advisor on development management in the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). His work there earned Korten international recognition for helping to engineer the development of intervention strategies for transforming public bureaucracies into responsive support systems dedicated to strengthening community control and management of land, water and forestry resources.

Korten ultimately broke with the international aid system when he became convinced they were actually increasing poverty and environmental destruction and impervious to change. During the last five years of Korten’s work in Asia he coordinated with leaders of Asian nongovernmental organizations on identifying the root causes of development failure in the region and building the capacity of civil society organizations to better facilitate positive global level change.

Korten’s life experience abroad convinced him that the United States was actively promoting both at home and abroad – the very policies responsible for, inequality, environmental devastation and social disintegration. At that point a friend advised Korten he would best serve the cause of ending global poverty by returning to the United States and educating his fellow Americans about the destructive role of corporate imperialism. Hence, Korten returned to the United States in 1992 to share with his fellow Americans the lessons he had learned abroad.

Ironically, Korten’s original motivation for international travel as a college senior in 1959 was to persuade the world’s poor to reject revolution in favor of America’s political and economic system. Instead, as he writes, Korten found himself learning far more from the people he hoped to teach:

“The subsequent experience of working for some thirty years as a member of the international development establishment profoundly changed my worldview. I had gone abroad to teach. Far more consequential than what I taught was what I learned – about myself, my country, and the human tragedy of unrealized possibility. Ultimately, I realized I must return to the land of my birth to share with my people the lessons of my encounter with the world.”

In 1995 Korten published an international bestseller, When Corporations Rule the World and followed that up with The Post Corporate World: Life After Capitalism several years later. Korten agreed to a podcast interview with me about his current book, life experience and worldview. Please refer to the media player below. The interview is approximately fifty-six minutes.



This interview can also be accessed at no cost via the Itunes store by searching for Intrepid Liberal Journal.