+- +-


Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 54
Latest: abrogard
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 16393
Total Topics: 269
Most Online Today: 2
Most Online Ever: 1155
(April 20, 2021, 12:50:06 pm)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Author Topic: Power Structures in Human Society: Pros and Cons Part 1  (Read 11977 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33215
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
To Abandon or not to Abandon all hope
« Reply #60 on: November 16, 2014, 04:47:53 pm »
The following article is related to the conscience free behavior by those pretending hypocritically to have one in this country. Too much has been forgotten CONVENIENTLY by those, like Pfaff, an excellent political analyst, that have written about the tyranny of this country against minorities in general and Blacks in particular in a vain search for a time when we were more civilized in this country. Of course they are right that WHITES were more civilized with WHITES before (post Civil war and reforms during the Teddy Roosevelt administration), so you might say things have deteriorated for non-rich whites.

My answer to that is, WTF? Evil doesn't give three hoots about color, creed, family, honor, tribe or whatever. Evil rewards those with the LEAST conscience and the most predatory instincts. Evil has INERTIA that accelerates. Any fool can see that. Oh, but the average white thought we were going to get a pass while the plutocracy was built step by evil step. LOL! THAT bit of magical thinking STUPIDITY was, and is, part and parcel of the evil rich modus operandi used on poor whitey in the South before the Civil War and throughout this country AFTER the Civil War (don't let the BROWNS AND BLACKS take yer jobs! Gotta keep em' DOWN or they will bang yer wives and daughters!). It never occurred to these DUMB AS A POST average whites that THEY would eventually feel the scourge of plutocratic tyranny as much as the minorities and blacks. Oh no, they were too busy FARMING that "free" land that ONLY European WHITE immigrants and WHITE Merikans after the Civil War could farm for "free", never mind what the injuns thought about THAT. As Nicole Foss infamously said about another obscenity called fracking, "THERE"s MONEY TO BE MADE".

So it goes. I have sat here and watched Doomers dance around the FACT that the ISSUE is EVIL for years now. They just DO NOT WANT TO ACCEPT that the problem is a moral one, not a resource, economy, jobs, police, political system, government, military, blah ,blah ,blah problem. Hell many here don't even believe EVIL exists! And that is JUST THE WAY the EVIL fucks running this tyranny for the people and gravy train for them want it.  :evil4:

Like the CHUMPS at TBP that have embraced racism and bean counting exercises about resources, the economy and so on, they REFUSE to look in that mirror and see how EVIL is making a world class sucker out of them.

William PFAFF makes a valiant attempt at giving us hope that the plutocracy can be "defeated" in the following article by pointing out our history (leaving a few things out... ;)).

Here's what William does not get. Machines do not require a large population. A large WORK FORCE was NECESSARY after the Civil War and while the US and the world was switching to mass production. Computers have now become cheap enough to BUILD THEMSELVES along with building just about everything else and even mining for and refining the raw materials! The "reforms" post Civil War and early 20th century were a trade off that is NO LONGER REQUIRED to keep the 1% happy. The INERTIA is to GET RID OF US so the 1% piggies can have more of the planet to pollute at their leisure. Anyone that thinks otherwise is willfully STUPID.

All that said. IF morality takes hold  among my fellow fallen, **** up Homo Saps, there IS hope that real reforms along the lines of William PFAFF's hopeful article can come to pass. I am not holding my breath but then I'm part minority so what do I know?  :icon_mrgreen:

Defeating Plutocracy
Date 2014/11/12 17:00:00
Paris, Nov. 12, 2014 – A week ago this column asserted that the present electoral system in the United States now places the U.S government on sale every two years -- the presidency and congress every four years, and the entire House of Representatives and a third of the Senate, as well as assorted state governors, judges, and other officials, every two years, as in the mid-term election that took place on November 4th.

The argument I made and make is that since national elections now are largely won or lost by the quantity of paid and unregulated television advertisements (or so politicians and professional observers are convinced, a possibly self-fulfilling expectation), those who have the largest amount of money at their disposal win the elections. There are few exceptions.

This is not as things should be, but overall it was the result of the November 4 vote. The success of big money was even greater than widely expected. Hence Americans now live in a plutocracy: the country that claims to lead the world is largely controlled by major American corporations and financial groups, and exceedingly rich individuals.

The question posed is can anything be done to reverse this situation, in which money has steadily accumulated national political power until reaching the seemingly decisive position it possesses today. The international economy’s present tendency, as the French economist Thomas Piketty has recently argued, is to augment the fortunes of the already rich, since the rate of return on investment tends to run ahead of the rate of growth in the overall economy.

The rich are not, as mainstream economists (and Republican Party candidates and supporters) have argued for years, “the creators of jobs.” Industry does not, as assumed for many years, support an enlarging workforce. What it does produce is enlarging return for investors.

In the economy of the past three decades, technology has tended to destroy jobs – that, after all, is one of its principal purposes, cost-reduction. The globalized economy has tended to export those fields of manufacture that still require human employees to poor countries, where wages are low and working conditions poor. As governments of countries thus favored by globalization tend to do what they can to maintain conditions that attract foreign investment, industry moves to where conditions are worse and wages lower : thus the competitive race to the bottom.

There are countertendencies, of course. There are enterprises convinced that a well-paid and skilled labor force is an asset. Public opinion tends to oppose the most sinister consequences of globalized manufacturing and services. But there is as yet no convincing evidence that forces exist in the United States today to reverse the conditions that now prevail. That is a condition in which the economy has awarded one single family – the owners of Walmart stores – 37% of U.S. national wealth, virtually the same amount of wealth possessed collectively by the poorest 40% of the nation’s population. (These figures, which are well known, were cited again by Senator Bernie Sanders [I-Vt.] in a recent interview with Bill Moyers).

In theory, this distribution of wealth affords such a family (let us say the Koch brothers, to take one of the most politically active families), the possibility of wielding as much electoral power -- measured in television political advertising -- in national elections than a major part of the total electorate.

I asked in my last column if there is “no way out” of this situation -- other than by revolutionary change in the way the economy and political system function, a change which is against the material interests of the dominant business, investor, and existing political classes, who may be expected to fight against any such challenge, or effect alteration in the existing government to prevent it, conceivably by force.

Change has, however, happened in the past, against severe resistance -- three times since the Civil War, for example.

   During the American “Gilded Age” that accompanied the great economic and industrial boom in the North that followed the defeat of the South in the Civil War, when the transcontinental railroad was built, accompanied by modern industrial development, and the Homestead Act had opened the western states to settlement by offering free federal land to those willing to farm it, Washington during the two Grant administrations experienced notorious corruption, as did the booming cities of the northeast, ruled by manipulative political machines.

The depression of 1873-79 inspired a popular reaction and the first American trade union movement, which rapidly acquired 700 thousand members (in a population of 50 million). Agricultural depression inspired Farmers’ Alliances demanding nationalized railroads, a graduated income tax and “Free Silver” (meaning unlimited coinage).

These popular movements found their leader in the great popular orator and preacher, William Jennings Bryan, who ran for the presidency in 1896 and 1900, losing both times but exciting the enthusiasm of the nation, and in 1900 electing by default the Republican McKinley-Roosevelt ticket.

William McKinley’s assassination within months made Theodore Roosevelt president and inaugurated a period of reforms – of the civil service, anti-trust legislation, regulation of interstate commerce, food and drug inspection and regulation, national resource conservation, and establishment of the nation’s national park system -- that shaped much of the United States’ economic and agricultural regulatory framework that survives to the present day.

The first Roosevelt was a romantic nationalist and believer in heroic leadership, contemptuous of class interest. He declared that “a patrician’s politics should be reform, and that reform [means] broad federal powers wielded by executive leadership.”

His nephew, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who confronted the Great Depression, shared and acted upon those beliefs, characterizing the rich who despised and fought him – the “one percent” of the 1930s -- as “malefactors of great wealth,” an expression that fit major figures in the election that has just passed, and identifies the vulnerability of democracy to the plutocracy that now exists.

© Copyright 2014 by Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.

This article comes from William PFAFF

 The URL for this article is:

Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart. Ps. 97:11


+-Recent Topics

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
August 03, 2021, 03:29:38 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
August 03, 2021, 02:25:43 pm

Money by AGelbert
August 03, 2021, 01:13:17 pm

🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️ by AGelbert
August 02, 2021, 02:28:41 pm

Mechanisms of Prejudice: Hidden and Not Hidden by AGelbert
August 02, 2021, 12:56:16 pm

🎋 Victories Against the 🦕 Hydrocarbon Hellspawn by AGelbert
July 30, 2021, 12:05:16 pm

Geothermal Power by AGelbert
July 29, 2021, 06:55:05 pm

What A Nuclear Power Plant REALLY IS by AGelbert
July 29, 2021, 04:06:58 pm

COVID-19 🏴☠️ Pandemic by AGelbert
July 28, 2021, 11:50:12 am

Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi by AGelbert
July 27, 2021, 10:53:46 pm