The economy in the United States is in a collapse.  The Capitalist system does not work anymore; banks have become more powerful than our politicians.  The government now has a policy based around Fear and Greed.  The rich are getting richer and more powerful, while the great masses of America wallow in poverty.

Must we continue to exist in this passive state, only living to serve the rich and powerful?  Or do we, the great masses, stand up against the policies Fear, and Greed, and God?  We must break the bonds that separate us, we must pull down the centers of Greed and Fear and we must pull down the houses of God.  These borders are created to separate us into individuals where we can be controlled easier.

We must stand up, against the tyranny of the centers of Greed, and Fear, and God.  Quoting John Adams:  "People should not fear government, government should fear people."  Once we stand up to Fear, to Greed, to God, we will become united!

This being said, I advocate the collapse of the Capitalist system and the foundation of the United Socialist Federal Republic, in which the government will exist to serve the people.  Capitalism is Dead.  We must put it out of it's misery and move on toward Socialism.

Views: 336

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am not conceited.

I never said you were.

I care for my country deeply, and I want it to have a better government than it has now.

Many people feel that way, including myself.

I feel that this moment, this age live in right now, the deciding moment. We cannot let this moment pass us by. The time is now! Have to act!

Well, that is a good point. We can't make decisions in the past and we can only make decisions that effect the future. You got me there! ;-)

Our government serves its masters. And guess what? Unless you are in the top 1% of the economic terrorist class, that "master" isn't you, me, or most of us on these message boards.
Oh. Ok.
Have you considered that the reason for so much negative feedback might be that your proposed solution is actually a bad idea?

Have you considered that there is a reason no true socialist classless society has ever emerged? That, perhaps, the society that you are proposing is fundamentally incompatible with current human evolutionary development?

Have you considered that your vision of the perfect socialist state actually reduces humanity to the lowest common denominator instead of raising us up? That there would be absolutely no incentive for improvement or innovation in a world where everyone is equal; in a world where your needs are met and you won't get any more than that?

Have you considered that you are creating a false dichotomy in saying that the only answer to the corrupting influence of capitalism would be your extreme form of socialism?

Have you asked yourself why you think that a form of government - any form of government - is capable of resolving the practical and emotional conflicts you see as problems in your country.

Have you asked yourself why you need to reify concepts such as greed, corruption and fear to justify your argument? (For the record I am instantly suspicious of any proposal that resorts to putting capital letters on words that do not need it.)
"The only problem is that this world has not had a Socialist society that has succeeded, all attempts at socialism have failed and turned into a fascist communist state."

Please allow me to disabuse you of these misnomers.

First, communism and fascism are opposite social, economic and political constructs.

Second, socialism DOES work. But it is precisely because it works that the multinational capitalist class, through the liberal and generous use of its brutal enforcement arm, the National Security State, has violently crushed it everywhere that it was working or showed the potential of working. Whenever you hear statements along the lines of "protecting national interests", what you're really hearing is invasion, brutal repression, war by proxy, et al, to protect the interests of the wealthy at the helm of the Fortune 500 companies and multinational corporations.

Putting aside the fact that the Vatican backed the fanatical Catholic state of Croatia and was complicit in the horrors of Jasenovac and Croatia's Ustase were resurrected under Tudjman, putting aside the fact that Bosnia's Alija Izetbegovic was a fascist and a fundamentalist Islamic hardliner who was an active Nazi in the Waffen SA during WW II who openly called for his praetorian guard of elite Bosniaks to resurrect the SS Handzar and used his own people (the staged "Breadline Massacre" of May 27, 1992) as human shields and disposable pawns in the 1990's Balkan Wars by detonating a bomb and blaming the Serbs, putting aside the fact that Tito was a Catholic Croat and merely a puppet "dictator" who was somewhat of a tepid Communist, putting aside the fact that the US and NATO backed the known narco-terrorist klepto-megalomaniac Hashim "The Snake" Thaci, Albanian leader of the KLA who has been directly tied to KLA black market organ harvesting (murdering Serbs for their body parts) in the Serbian province of Kosovo, putting aside the fact that Slobodon Melosevic was a Serb nationalist who was no angel; putting all these things aside, here's what you left out about American and European capitalist involvement in the planned breakup of socialist Yugoslavia.

Before Yugoslavia disintegrated into a hellhole of economic strife and civil wars, the people there had a very good standard of living. Sarajevo, the most cosmopolitan city of Eastern Europe with the richest of histories, was a cultural jewel known as Eastern Europe's "Jerusalem."

But some (like many in the East Bloc Warsaw Pact nations) saw American capitalist consumerism as this exotic gem and they wanted it, thinking that they would get to keep the security provided by their socialist system (their national health care, their generous unemployment benefits, education system, the guarantee of living wage jobs with paid vacations, generous pension benefits, etc. and get this whole new glittering jewel of materialism on top of all that. They didn't get it. Now they do — they got that red, white, and blue "free market" capitalist dick shoved right up their collective ass.

After 75 years of the orchestrated world capitalists' undermining of Communism in the former Soviet Union, the US seemed to have all these "enemies" all of a sudden. All these "enemies" who can't wait to attack us because they "hate our freedoms." That's the mass line used to cover up the class line.

Joseph Schumpeter made the same observation in his analysis of the fall of the Roman Empire. Fact: the American ruling class (viz a viz the National Security State) created those "enemies." Why aren't there "enemies" waiting to pounce on Denmark? Ever think about that?

As Ramsey Clark said, Yugoslavia was built upon an idea. The idea was that the southern Slavs would not remain weak and divided people falling out among themselves, or falling prey to some imperialist outsiders. They would join together and have a territory that was large enough and strong enough to become a viable nation with its own development. After WWII, multi-ethnic socialist Yugoslavia was a post-war industrial power, a viable nation and an economic success.

Between 1960 and 1980, Yugoslavia experienced one of the most vigorous growth rates, a decent standard of living, socialized medicine and education, guaranteed right to a job, one month's vacation with pay, affordable public transportation, housing, and utilities. Its literacy rate was over 90%. Life expectancy was 72 years in Yugoslavia between 1960 and 1980 — higher than in the US, where close to 50 million Americans lack access to health care. And the bulk of Yugoslavia's economy was in the public, not-for-profit sector. It was the type of country that global capitalists would normally not tolerate. Yet Yugoslavia was tolerated because it was seen as a buffer to the Soviet bloc, the Warsaw Pact nations.

At the same time, efforts were made to undermine Yugoslavia's socialist economy. Yugoslavia opened itself up to American capitalism as early as 1968, making the same mistake that the Polish Communist party leaders made: they borrowed from the West. But that came with IMF penetration into Yugoslavia's economy and enormous debt. And with this debt came IMF demands for "restructuring." Restructuring is a euphemism for the imposition of harsh austerity measures which, by intent and design, disproportionately crushes the working class. Austerity programs means you force the people to work harder and longer for less; and with the savings procured from these measures, you pay off the interest that's accumulating on that IMF debt.

There was a very conscious and deliberate plan to break up Yugoslavia, with full priori knowledge that it would cause bloody civil wars in the 1990's.

In November of 1990, President George Herbert Walker Bush ("King George I") pressured Congress to pass the Foreign Appropriations Act that called for the cutting off of all aid and credits to Yugoslavia. Trading without credits is fatal for any nation that doesn't have a hard currency, so this had a very devastating effect on Yugoslavia. This law also demanded that if any republic in Yugoslavia wanted further US aid, they would have to break away from Yugoslavia and declare their independence. (Foreign aid is when the poor in rich countries are forced to send money to the rich in poor countries.)

This law also required the US State Department's approval of election procedures and results in every one of the Balkan republics. It required that the republics do not hold national elections, but instead hold elections only in their own republics. Then the aid would go to those republics, if and only if they met the US definition of "democratic" — meaning small, ultra right-wing nationalists and fascist parties.

The ultimate goal was to "Balkanize" Yugoslavia and turn the fractured region into weak, helpless banana republics; privatized, de-industrialized, and demoralized. International bankers — the stakeholders in the IMF, World Bank, and Federal Reserve — by their henchmen in US and Western European governments, decided to destroy Yugoslavia in 1989 when it became evident that it was the one remaining Eastern Europe nation that would not relinquish what remained of its socialist system. It was the one country trying for economic independence outside of the global "free market" Third Worldization process.

The global capitalist superclass wanted a Yugoslavia whose rich resources would be at the disposal of rich multinational corporations, whose population would work for sub-poverty wages and not have health care or access to an education, and whose economy offered no competition with existing capitalist producers — only new investors. They wanted to dismantle Yugoslavia's petroleum, mining, auto and engineering industries. And they wanted to eliminate Yugoslavia's public sector and social programs.

There was also an ideological component and motive behind Yugoslavia's destruction in which the Vatican was not merely tacitly complicit, but an active participant (which I briefly treat in my book Divine Right: The Truth is a Lie)

In Serbian Bosnia, the last remaining radio station was a Serbian station. It was a dissident station whose broadcasts were critical of NATO and Western policies. UN "peacekeepers" went in and shut down the station.

Before the NATO bombings of Belgrade, before the assault in Yugoslavia by Western financiers, Slobodon Milosevic's parliament had more opposition representatives than any other European nation's government. Milosevic was elected three times in elections that foreign observers affirmed as having met the West's definition of "democratic", and therefore compliant with US demands. Yet, Milosevic was labeled a "war criminal" and a "dictator." The Hague War Crimes Tribunal requested that the US produce documentation of the war crimes Milosevic committed so that they could indict him as a war criminal.

In 1992, the US imposed a trade embargo against Yugoslavia. The result: economic devastation and social disintegration from which the region has still not recovered to this day in 2010. There is mass unemployment up to 80%, malnourishment, hyperinflation, and the health care system has completely collapsed at great cost to the population.

With trade sanctions, the civilian population is not "collateral damage" — it's the primary target.

To justify these atrocities to the gullible American public, Western corporate-owned media launched a propaganda campaign which utterly demonized the Serbs to the American public for ten years (at least). Charles Boyd, former Deputy Commander of the US-European Command wrote in the September/October 1994 issue of Foreign Affairs (not exactly a "Commieland" journal):
"The popular image of this war in Bosnia is one of unrelenting Serbian expansion. In fact, what the Croatians call "the occupied territories " is land which the Serbs have held for more than three centuries. Most of the same is true in Serb land in Bosnia."

So it was admitted in 1994 that the smear campaign against the Serbs, and against Milosevic (although he was no angel!), was all part of an elaborate propaganda scheme to foment hatred and disgust in the hearts and minds of the American and Western European people and turn them against the Serbian people by manufacturing consent for imperialist-driven genocide. It's a lot easier to destroy a nation and its people when you can convince the rest of the world to despise them and view them as "less than."

Boyd also wrote (in that same article):
"The US has punished one side in this war unfairly. It has supported the legitimacy of a leadership in the Bosnian Muslim government that has become increasingly ethnocentric in its makeup, single party in its rule, and manipulative in its diplomacy. We say we want peace, but we have encouraged a deepening of the war."

The American ruling class initially got a guy who they decided would be their boy in breaking up Yugoslavia. He was a banker. He was described as charismatic and charming. His commitment to Communism was milquetoast at best. He was the ideal man for the job. His name was Slobodon Milosevic. But instead of being a tool, he became an obstacle.

Serbs comprise the ethnic majority. For all the scuttlebutt about Serb atrocities, remember that atrocities were committed on all three sides — the worst were committed by the fanatical Roman Catholic Croatian fascists, operating with the full blessing and support of the Vatican.

Mainstream media is the stenographer of power. Well-paid journalists working for the establishment wrote stories that suited the interests of that power — that velvet glove that clothes the iron fist of the National Security State. They're not the watchdogs of democracy and truth; they're the lapdogs of the elite. Well-kept mistresses among the billionaire Koch brothers' harem (like CNN, Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, and Tea Potty drama queen Glenn Beck).

Class and ethnicity are not mutually exclusive factors in terms of either one or the other in understanding the breakup of Yugoslavia. Ethnic enmity (like gender and religion) is commonly enlisted to serve class interests. Generally, when there's different racial or ethnic groups living in a society where there's some measure of hope, security, and prosperity, they tend to get along — they mingle and even inter-marry. But when the economic shit hits the fan, when you've got trade sanctions, high unemployment, lack of access to health care and education, things begin to unravel get desperate and that's when people begin closing ranks along racial/ethnic/religious and gender lines.

It is the rich capitalists (and many of their middle class economic hit-men) who have the "class envy" — they can't stand the idea of the poor/working class masses of the world having anything.

In the heart of Eastern Europe you had this relatively large country; 80% of its economy was still publicly owned; a standard of living that was high with an elaborate system of human services. Now it has been broken up into small right-wing fascist republics. Everything is deregulated. Everything is privatized. And everybody is now poor. They're poor in Bosnia. They're poor in Montenegro and Serbia. They're poor in Macedonia. And they're gettingpoor in Croatia. They're poor in Albania. Poor. Poverty. Privatize. Deregulate. Crime. Black market organ harvesting. Narco-terrorism. Religious fanaticism. Militaristic fascism. Get 'em down to being peasants so they'll be stepping on each others' throats to line up to work for 15 cents an hour (and they're getting close to that already) like the slave laborers in Indonesia, Saipan, and the Philippines. That's the goal of "free market" capitalism, which many middle class Americans call "freedom" — meaning the "right" of a certain privileged group to economically oppress the non-privileged Others and take away their freedoms.

Whatever anyone says about socialism and the erstwhile communist states, socialism has accomplished what capitalism cannot, will not, and has no intention to: adequate food for everyone, housing, utilities, education all the way to the university and grad school level, guaranteed income support in old age or in the event of disability, access to decent quality health care (including dental and vision), and the guaranteed right to a job — all of this in countries that were never as rich as ours.
Thank you so much for your input. You have enlightened me to the true corruption of the Capitalist Society.

I found this article that shows the Greed of U.S. companies:

I thank you again. Keep posting. You're my hero now :)
"I thank you again. Keep posting. You're my hero now :) "

Thank you for your kind words, but I must tell you that I am of a generation that stands on the shoulders of many who came before me, many who suffered severely in the class struggle — from being deprived of the ability to make a living, to FBI harassment (Michael Parenti), and even murder (think: Orlando Letelier, Che Guevara, and Ethel and Julius Rosenberg just to name a few).
While there is little question here that aspects of socialism are far preferrable to the current alternatives, Mr LaFont is not advocating any kind of part measure. He calls for the investment of a "classless" state where veryone's needs are met by a minimalist government, where every single citizen is perfectly motivated to sublimate their own interests for the good of society.

His thesis is self contradicting in many places. At one point there is no need for money then, in almost the same breath, he talks about taxation.

He requires a minimalist government that does not interfere in the lives of the citizens except to promote the regulation of perfect socialist order, whilst seemingly ignoring the massive beureaucratic structures that said government would entail.

He makes absolutely no mention of how social policy is to be directed and by whom. He makes no mention of who shall be directing and organising the foreign trade that would prop up his perfectly socialist economy and the basis for how those people are to be selected.

Yes - socialism does work but it cannot successfully thrive in extreme form. Socialist policies for health care, education, housing, et al, are necessary, I believe, for a healthy nation but they are pieces of the puzzle - not the whole jigsaw.
@ Jacqueline:

Furthermore I am wondering if you can point out how the socialist influence in my own country has been "violently crushed" by the "National Security State"?

New Zealand, if you are wondering.

We have plentiful provisions for welfare, health care, housing, education, retirement income - paid for by the people and regulated by our elected officials.

(Sorry if I missed it - ning makes it hard to keep track of these discussions - but who mentioned "American and European capitalist involvement in the planned breakup of socialist Yugoslavia." that you were responding to?)
It's coming. You just don't know it yet.

Evidence is required please, especially since we have functioned this way for the last 50 years plus.

We are a direct refutation of your hypothesis regarding the power of the capitalist elite and their ability or willingness to "violently crush" socialism.
I was responding to the other poster who said socialism doesn't work anywhere that it was ever tried.


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service