Oct 03 2007
Loaded Language and Loaded Guns: The Meaning of Opposites
Cyrano’s Journal Online and its semi-autonomous subsections (Thomas Paine’s Corner, The Greanville Journal, CJO Avenger, and VoxPop) would be delighted to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to subscribe, type “CJO subscription” in the subject line and send your email to
“Decades ago, in order to field test the economic theories that were formulated by the right wing think tanks at The Chicago School, Friedman and his disciples descended like locusts upon Latin America. The results were devastating: Democratically elected governments were systematically overthrown and brutal dictators friendly to US business interests were installed in their place—all of which were subsidized by US tax dollars with the complicity of the CIA.”
By Charles Sullivan
10/03/07
One can no longer understand US governmental policy on the basis of conventional language or traditional wisdom. Language itself and its long-established meanings were long ago twisted and distorted in order to deceive the people. Now war is peace and terror and occupation is liberation. In order to make sense of what is happening, it is important to understand everything within the context of a specific economic philosophy, and the distorted capitalist system that spawned it.
That ideology was crafted by a diminutive economist named Milton Friedman, at the University of Chicago some five decades ago. The holy trinity of Friedman’s version of capitalism—privatization of the public domain, corporate deregulation, and deep cuts in social spending—has resulted in enormous societal inequity and socio-economic classes. It has given us the haves and the have-nots, the haves and the have-mores.
Friedman and his disciples, collectively known as ‘The Chicago School’ do not believe in a minimum wage—much less a living wage, unions, worker rights, environmental protections, worker safety, or any other kind of restraint imposed upon corporations. In Friedman’s view, the market should rule and profitability should be the guiding principle, the end results always justifying the means.
The implementation of Friedman’s version of unfettered capitalism relies upon munificent corporate welfare, tax cuts to the wealthy, exploitation of workers, and the outright theft of other sovereign nations’ natural wealth through military force—including oil and minerals, water supplies and other societal infrastructure; cheap labor, and a procession of consumers of goods and services without limits—an impossibility in a closed ecological system.
Convincing the public to support policies that are, in fact, detrimental to them, requires enormous marketing skill, as well as a corporate owned and operated propaganda apparatus that is second to none. This is accomplished by cloaking harmful policies in patriotic language, and other forms of seduction.
In order to achieve this objective, which is really nothing less than unqualified global corporate dominance, the public domain must be privatized and run not for use, but for profit; and the unparalleled might of the US military brought to bear against any nation or people who stand in the way.
It is this thinking—the dominant economic paradigm that shapes all US policy—that has brought us an endless succession of wars and other human tragedies; exacerbated global warming, and unprecedented rapacious planetary destruction, including the mass extinction of much of the world’s flora and fauna — all for corporate profit.
Decades ago, in order to field test the economic theories that were formulated by the right wing think tanks at The Chicago School, Friedman and his disciples descended like locusts upon Latin America. The results were devastating: Democratically elected governments were systematically overthrown and brutal dictators friendly to US business interests were installed in their place—all of which were subsidized by US tax dollars with the complicity of the CIA.
As a result, US-trained death squads roamed the countryside torturing, murdering, and disappearing dissidents, union organizers, and indigenous land holders—a process that continues to this day. The corporate media, itself, an essential cog in Friedman’s capitalist machine, referred to these death squads as freedom fighters, and canonized the likes of Ronald Reagan as champions of liberty.
But the recipients of US policy in Latin America—those who survived them—know better. Now the same policies are being implemented in the Middle East, and with the same disastrous results. Elements of Friedman’s policies have been in play here in the US for decades, and the intent is to do to the US what was done in Latin America and Iraq.
Language is a tool that can be used to either conceal or reveal truth; it can be used to inform or to distort. Given the track record of private enterprise, it is not surprising that everything associated with Milton Friedman’s capitalism has been hopelessly perverted, and language is no exception.
Understanding the role played by Friedman and his disciples in shaping US policy—a doctrine adopted and praised by Republicans and Democrats alike, is critical in order to bring the big picture of world events, including our own domestic policies, into clear focus.
The disciples of Friedman’s economic theorem have skillfully manipulated the language to deceive the subjects of those policies. Stripped of the garments of seductive language, the hidden kernel of truth is clearly seen: unregulated corporate power that masquerades as free market trade. The nations that have undergone Friedman’s economic shock therapy: Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Indonesia, and many others, were opened up to privatization and corporate plunder that soon left them impoverished and wasted.
The once sustainable and vibrant local economies, most of them characterized by broad public ownership, were thoroughly globalized, as capitalism was forced upon those who had rejected it at the ballot box or through armed revolution. Local manufactures were no longer protected from multi-nationals: prices soared, wages fell, workers lost their jobs, unemployment rose astronomically, and the infrastructure that once provided inexpensive or free public services—among them, potable water and inexpensive food—were privatized and rendered unaffordable to the multitudes.
Shared prosperity quickly gave way to abject poverty and misery; while predatory US corporations bled nation after nation of their natural wealth, and kept the profits to themselves.
Here in the US, the people of New Orleans and other Gulf Coast cities in the wake of Hurricane Katrina experienced the same economic shock and awe as Latin America. The poor were relocated and resorts for the rich quickly supplanted affordable public housing. The public school system was virtually dismantled and privatized. Contractors such as Halliburton and Blackwater reaped enormous profits on the misery and suffering of the Gulf Region’s working poor. Corporate profits mattered more than the lives of the people. New Orleans will never be the same.
All of this was accomplished by stripping language of its traditional connotations and perverting it into its opposite meaning. Thus lies became truth and predatory capitalism morphed into beneficent public service. The new definitions are designed to conceal the real intent of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity, and are employed as marketing tools to make blatant theft and exploitation appear palatable to the multitudes, and to the helpless victims of unfettered capitalism.
Had the hidden agenda of our elected officials been widely known to the public, the people would likely find these policies not only objectionable, but morally reprehensible and offensive. Now Orwellian doublespeak is the norm, resulting in the enforcement arm of capitalism—the police state and an emerging Gestapo society, perpetrated in the name of a democracy that does not even exist.
The dictum of freedom, as understood by rational and conscientious human beings everywhere, has traditionally been applied to people and refers to their treatment by one another and their respective governments. However, when free market capitalists speak of freedom and democracy, as we are witnessing in the catastrophic situation they have created in the Middle East, they are not referring to human freedoms at all—but to unfettered capitalism, absolute corporate rule, and human servitude to wealth garnered at public expense—essentially a global terrorist slave state. That is what is meant by so called free markets as it pertains to the human condition.
Thus democracy, rather than meaning self-government of the people, by the people, and for the people, is perverted into support for deregulated corporations that are accountable to no one, the ultimate arbiter of all forms of power—the market as a Holy Grail; the decisive triumph of private ownership over people and the public welfare by the global elite.
And that, in a nutshell, is what we are fighting for not only in the Middle East, but in 135 nations around the world. These are the American interests the military is protecting; these are the freedoms they are defending from democracy.
In the idiom of free market capitalism, all things—whether soil, mineral, plant or animal, including human beings (wage slaves), are diminished and commodified, and valued only in proportion as they can be privatized and exploited by the champions of Laissez-Faire capitalism.
Furthermore, let it be understood that the president and his cabinet, as well as every member of Congress (with one exception), are disciples of Friedman’s economic paradigm. Not only are they doing everything in their power to implement Friedman’s policies, they have been doing so for a very long time.
This perception certainly demystifies the remarkable homogeneity of US policy that has sent countless young men and women dressed in military uniforms to their deaths, and disappeared millions of leftist dissidents around the world. And it will continue unabated unless we the people put a stop to it.
Author’s note: Anyone wishing a more complete understanding of these policies should read Naomi Klein’s authoritative new book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. I cannot underscore enough the breadth and importance of Ms. Klein’s work in understanding capitalism, corporate globalization, and the grossly distorted governmental policies they have spawned. Every citizen, regardless of nationality, should read this book. It is that important.
Charles Sullivan is a contributing editor with Cyrano’s Journal Online, nature photographer, free-lance writer, and social activist residing in the Ridge and Valley Province of geopolitical West Virginia. He welcomes your comments at .
========================================================================
We at Cyrano’s and Thomas Paine’s Corner need your help! Our editors and writers work hard to provide you with the most original and diverse progressive content on the Internet. We are fiercely determined to provide enough people with a sound political education so that, in authentic democratic fashion, the will not only liberate their minds, but eventually cure the economic and moral disease afflicting our nation.
We derive no financial remuneration for our efforts to build a social order based on justice, democracy, compassion, and humanity. Isn’t that your desire as well? In fact, it costs us money to maintain our Internet presence.
If each of you donated a mere $5 a month—a trifling sum these days, the price of pack of smokes or a fancy beer—we would have enough money to cover our overhead, upgrade our server capacity, expand our audio offerings, and begin to provide you with compelling video content.
By helping us in this fashion you will be assisting the birth of a new type of American democracy, one which, genuinely rooted in the ideals we profess to honor, will finally measure up to its promise.
For you, for us, for everything that you think needs defending, make a donation that fits your budget today by clicking
Another excellent, highly didactic piece from Charlie Sullivan. But some things need tightening in his analysis. I don’t wish to sound critical for the sake of picayune fault-finding, but merely point out certain aspects that need careful exposition. Two statements strike me as in need of re-evaluation—not negation, but merely re-evaluation, as I agree entirely with what Sullivan is saying in this brave essay.
Charlie says in explaining the takeover by Friedmanian economics of some Third World nations:
“….Shared prosperity quickly gave way to abject poverty and misery; while predatory US corporations bled nation after nation of their natural wealth, and kept the profits to themselves…”
As a person who is both an economist, a radical, and a onetime resident of Latin America for more than 13 years, and a onetime frequent visitor to Asia and eastern Europe, not to mention Western Europe, etc., I have to say that, in most cases, “shared prosperity” never existed in these ravaged lands. There was neither “prosperity” nor any “sharedness” to speak of. What Friedman and his boys did, with the full backing of the CIA and its immense underhanded criminal apparatus, was to destroy and turn back the clock in those rare and often fragile attempts by native reformers to take these nations out of such terrible conditions. Such was the case of Arbenz and Mossadegh in Guatemala and Iran, respectively, in the early 1950s (with consequences that last to this day), and later the plot and coup against Salvador Allende in Chile (1973) and the similarly criminal “Guerra Sucia” [dirty war by the army and police against unarmed people] in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, etc., in the mid and late 1970s. Then, In late 1970s we had the “destabilization” of Nicaragua, the “Contra (illegal) War organized by that arch-criminal and fraud, Ronald Reagan and his neocons (who are certainly still alive and kicking in the Bush court) and the overt support for the army and death squads of El Salvador, who, among other heinous crimes, have on their tab the rape and murder of nuns (some Americans) and Archbishop Romero, a true man of peace.
A second point is that Charlie implies that Friedman is the intellectual author of such filthy economic policies. While that is true in its most immediate sense, he had plenty of colleagues and intellectual mentors, including Ludwig Von Mises, Von Hayek, and so on. Thus he was merely a very talented propagandizer of classical libertarian policies, (in an old intellectual climate in which anything said in favor of corporations automatically receives top billing and cascades of praise by the whores in the corporate media and publishing establishments) long advanced (since at least the late 19th century) by people who continue to put the welfare of the rich above that of the people (and nature).
Charles Sullivan’s article has crossed way over the line…into the realm of quality and meaningfulness too good to be popular. He has expertly communicated a dreadful and deadly reality that is way too real for mass consumption, clearly revealing the paradox of writers of such meaning—the better it’s written, and the more it means, the less popular it is. The very system he illuminates so well makes it less possible each day for the commodified masses to appreciate, or even vaguely understand. By winning so decisively, Friedman disciples have lost for everyone, even future generations. And excuse me, but The Rapture just doesn’t offer any consolation.
This, to me, is the most telling line of the piece. It accuses Friedman of wanting to privatize human beings. This is true. The socialist belief is that human beings are the property of the state, to be used as the state desires. Friedman believed that human beings belonged to themselves, that they should be free to pursue their own agenda.
There is, of course, no evidence presented that Friedman had any desire for America to invade or involve themselves with these countries. However, those who did intervene in these countries did impose policies which had, on the surface, some resemblance to some of the policies Friedman advocated, so he must be responsible for the interventions.
Friedman did have some involvement with South America, in reality. He went down and offered advice to the leader of Chile, which resulted in a freer market in Chile, and eventually lead to that leader voluntarily leaving power.
You do a disservice to honest debate when you try to equate Milton Friedman’s economics, which were correct and stressed freedom, to Ronald Reagan’s cold war politics, which were disastrous to the United States and everybody else involved. I suspect that Friedman would be more likely to support Ron Paul than Ronald Reagan any day.
The previous commentator who tries to lump the Austrian economists with the Chicago school errs terribly. As far as I know, apart from free trade, the Chicago school had no specific advice to offer on foreign policy. However, there is a strong tradition of non-interventionism in the Austrian school, as you can see at http://mises.org, where politics as well as economics are discussed.
This article is right on. People preaching the virtues of unfettered capitalism are in on the take and they help to widen the gap between the rich and the poor. To me, it looks like a snake that is eating its tail. Unfettered capitalism eats its young. Only a handful of people have more money than they know what to do with, and the rest of us find it harder and harder to make ends meet. I’m sorry, but that’s a crime against humanity. What can you say of a society when it says the opposite of what it means and turns 90% or more of its population into slaves?
So what will resolve this sort of situation? Well, those very few of us who have money and power over all others will destroy our civilization by making sure we’re all poor, ill, poisoned, uneducated and unable. What they don’t get is that they will not be spared our fate. They choke us, but they will also find it very hard to breathe. All that they do to others, they do to themselves. So, we will all lose everything, 2/3 of people will perish and those left over will have to pick up the pieces and start over.
If that sounds depressing, I’m sorry, but it’s what’s ahead. People like Milton Friedman are monsters who hide behind thick nerd glasses and try to pass themselves off as inoffensive. But they lurk in their power circles and secretly despise those who have less. They have no compassion and so they create a system that eats people alive. I hope Mr Friedman had a nice life, because he made the world a much worse place to live. Asswipes like him should be tarred and feathered for our entertainment. I hope he is burning in hell and reserving space for all others like him. May he eat shit for the rest of eternity.
Quoting one sentence:
“Furthermore, let it be understood that the president and his cabinet, as well as every member of Congress (with one exception), are disciples of Friedman’s economic paradigm.”
Who is the one “exception” in Congress?
Little Red Hen: {author: unknown}
Once upon a time, on a farm in Texas , there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat. She called all of her neighbors together and said, “If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?”
“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen And so she did; The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain. “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Out of my classification,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did. At last it came time to bake the bread.
“Who will help me bake the bread! ?” asked the little red hen.
“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.
“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, “No, I shall eat all five loaves.”
“Excess profits!” cried the cow.
“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.
“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted “Unfair!” picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.
Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, “You must not be so greedy.”
“But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.
“Exactly,” said the agent. “That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he or she wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle,”
And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am grateful, for now I truly understand,”
But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the “party” and got her bread free.
And all the socialists smiled. ‘Fairness’ had been established. Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared…..as long as there was free bread that “the rich” were paying for.
Richard, lay off the libertarian mindfuck & cancer for a bit, will you? Did any of these several-generation coupon-clipping heirs to huge fortunes plant any wheat, you moron? Did Bush get accepted to Yale and Harvard because of his smarts? Wake up fou fool, to the reality of society.
Further, as an economist I can tell you that many businesses make it on sheer luck: Microsoft is big because (a) the Macintosh/Apple excecs were greedy and never released their patent to cloning companies (as Gates did); (b) the sheer abject myopia of IBM whos aw the desktop personal computer as a toy unworthy of even developing software for, hence they gave the contfract to Microsoft. And, MS has won on marketing muscle, not because they field a better product. My, they even copied the Mac’s interface for their Windows OS. (Mac itself had copied that from Xerox, who saw no future in their invention either…tell me about executives; reminds me of the military and the moronic officers I encountered.)
OK, wasted enough time. Thank you.
Anyone wishing to see a lyrical, moving and well researched piece on the CIA involvement in South America over the past 40 years should see John Pilger’s new feature film ‘War on Democracy’. It is simultaneously on TV and general release in UK. The website will inform re other screenings and releases
MIRTHQUAKE and the rest of the gang here , the whole movie by John Pilger (War on Democracy) is already posted for viewing on Cyrano’s Journal contributing editor Phil Rockstroh’s personal (new) blog at: http://www.philrockstroh.com/
Darn worth watching!
onewaratatime:
The foul-mouthed Brit rises to the occasion!
That well-travelled ant/grasshopper type e-mail bit on my part could have been better thought out. If the little red hen represents the people and the other (shiftless) animals represent the power elite, the story may make more sense from a libertarian point of view. I weary of attacks on capitalism (the Sullivan article and others) by socialists wearing rose-colored glasses.
Reality: Is your view of reality the real one? Is reality in the eye of the beholder?
Your comments are not completely lost on me but that arrogant and elitist tone (moron, fool, etc.) is the same attitude I see in the power elite; it does not serve you well!
The Power Elite are not capitalists or socialists. They use capitalism and socialism to further their own ends. They see the world as their oyster to do with as they please. They consider themselves to be the gods of this world; who knows how they view the next.
Why are libertarians now considered to be right-wing fanatics, the oppressor, the enemy? Is it because a limited constitutional republic and individual self-determination threatens the socialist and collectivist agenda?
As a “libertarian”, I voted Democratic in the last election - mostly to counter the Republican/Neocon agenda. I voted for the best of two evils and got the same �evil� behind a different face.
There is another anti-Friedman article at rense.com (followed by: /general78/cap.htm) called “Capitalism and Freedom Unmasked” by Stephen Lendman. If I supply a definite link, my comment goes into “moderation” and never sees the light of day on this web site!
Richard,
Socialists don’t wear rose-colored glasses. They understand history far better than you and other libertarians ever will. We were denouncing this inevitable slide to fascistic imperialism that now alarms many on this thread long before you jumped on the wagon because of simple antiwar reflexes (which I certainly salute and appreciate—war is contemptible crime, especially UNNECESSARY “PREEMPTIVE” WARS).
We predicted this slide to de facto authoritarianism, the erosion of American constitutionality, on the basis of understanding the nature of the beast—capitalism—and how it goes through different stages according to specific social forces none of you care to study or understand, eventually arriving, at a point of final degeneracy, to a place where imperial wars (fueled by Zionist intrigue in this case) become endless on the historical horizon, and fascism begins to take stealthily over all institutions of American life.
Meanwhile, all you do is stubbornly defend capitalism as if it were a guarantor of democracy or liberty, which is a laugh indeed. Have you ever really looked at the historical record? Have you ever admitted in a moment of sanity or honesty that the history of the 20th century is riddled with examples of countries in which the most brutal rightwing despotism or military dictatorship lived side by side with thriving capitalists who openly embraced such regimes while not giving a hoot about personal freedoms—especially those of middle class and poor people?
How do you reconcile that simple fact if capitalism IS a guarantor of democracy and freedom? How do you reconcile your love of capitalism with the fact that US corporations pay $1.72 for a FULL DAY of work to workers in Haiti, many of them women, a nation where union activists and religious activists defending the poor have been disappeared with the tacit approval of the CIA who in many cases trained their killers? And the story of Haiti is repeated wherever capitalism reigns supreme without any form of public constraint represented by truly democratic institutions. Of course, our media are too busy demonizing Iran or the country to hate of the moment to tell you about these “nice regimes” we support wholeheartedly with American bloood and treasure.
Your statement that the “power elite” is neither capitalist nor socialist smacks of a misunderstanding about what a power elite is. Sure, elites exist and have existed under practically all regimes in this highly imperfect world. But there’s a huge difference: when a democratic socialist regime hoards power and betrays the people it goes against its grain, its nature, and its professed ideals. When a capitalist elite—like the Bush-Chewney gang—betrays its promised allegiance to democracy, it is just following its REAL SCRIPT, what is built into the grain of its capitalist DNA but seldom acknowledged openly, as that would deny such elites political legitimacy in the eyes of trusting publics.
Capitalism—and the corporation, its single most important manifestation in our time—is inherently a hierarchic highly non-egalitarian non-democratic system. Corporate executives, as a group, are normally on the right or even ultra-right of the political spectrum. That is their natural mindset—what would you expect of men who have spent lifetimes climbing the power ladder in a world in which competition against fellow humans is the be-all & end-all of human existence? To expect from them to have a non-Darwinian compassionate view of life would be to expect too much.
Your comments, in my view, betray remarkable naivete about what really transpires in those elite circles so many of you distrust, and quite a few of you justifiably abhor. I suggest you study history with an open mind, lay off those knee-jerk accusation of “collectivist” this or that, that you have been indoctrinated with for decades, and look at the record. I know that to shed lifelong prejudices is next to impossible—but you must try or else the fate of life on this planet is worth less than a plug nickel. Libertarianism has its origins in the 15th century, in the borderers’ traditions, especially, that many people in the “highland South” of the US descend from. But what might have made sense in those simple times is now obsolete. Times have changed and what could be accepted as “rational behavior” in the 15th or 18th century is madness today. Just consider for a moment the “libertarian” notion that a man is free to do as he pleases with his property—whatever that may be. What if he’s a tycoon who owns a big chunk of the North Pole? Would it be all right for him to blow up and pollute that immense territory setting in motion serious environmental consequences? Where does the “liberty” of individuals (amplified by their ownership of huge corporations) stop? Do you begin to see what I’m talking about here? That what could be acceptable in one century is totally unacceptable in another.
One more thing: I’ve been posting on this site since it began; it has never censored a post no matter what point of view it endorses: left, right, center, etc. The editors, who I think are on the left, believe in letting the better argument(s) win. Period.
And the article by Lendman is in another blog on this very same site, at https://bestcyrano.org/cyrano/?p=210
Publius:
Naive? Maybe so, but a guy has to start somewhere! The idea that capitalism is inherently evil - “the grain of its’ DNA”? - seems a bit naive to me. I would say that greed is the culprit and that greed comes from human nature. However, some will say that capitalism corrupts human nature and therefore causes greed.
You imply that socialism is inherently compassionate and that a competitive economic system has no merits. Competition and cooperation have both been shown to have admirable qualities. Proponents claim that democratic socialism works, but many Scandinavians are starting to question their “cradle to grave” society.
Does any economic system really have inherent qualities other than what human nature ascribes to them? If compassionate socialism “works” in a social democracy, why is a compassionate capitalism not possible? Is capitalism really to blame for Bush and company’s rape and pillage? Are the historical crimes perpetrated by a capitalist regime any greater than those under a socialist hierarchy? Socialist dictators live well while their “subjects” wallow. Are competitive sports drinks and the milk of human kindness not compatible? Does one not compliment the other?
In today’s world, the time may be past for a “simple” libertarian philosophy. But isn’t the concept of limited government a solution to corrupt bureaucracies, capitalist and socialist? Isn’t individual responsibility a quality desired in a socialist society?
You and “onewaratatime” are obviously well-read, thoughtful, studied, traveled, etc. Am I naive? I suppose so! But generally speaking, present company excluded, the world is full of educated idiots. I do appreciate your comments. Your “mentoring” skills are a bit more compassionate and less competitive than Mr. onewaratatime!
An interesting article, and generally equally interesting banter in the comments.
While having a small bias of Libertarian belief, there yet remain many Socialist beliefs within my core; and those beliefs which favor a compassionate approach towards the various life forms I may share this path with are my more pride focused facets.
I am quite certain that there is no true ideology; one that would take into account the need for, and nourish, competitive forces to keep productive, while also recognizing required need to render assistance and compassion within reason, to share that production.
Libertarianism espouses the rights of private property, as being foundation of all Liberty, and I agree with that principle, but the rub, as mentioned above, is that right abused.
All conceptual approaches to government, or more simply cooperative communal living, have one requirement to work, at their kernel; that all individuals remain inwardly self disciplined and principled.
There yet has to be seen in all of recorded history a Government or society, able to maintain that simple requirement.
Looking south from Canada ,Circa 1963 I can tell you now that friedman’s first test was the murder of JFK,the installation of the first first president of a long line of gansters soon there after started.
Johnson: The texas bulldozer didn’t waste much time in pumping up the war for profits scheme when at that time was targeting Vietnam.
the coup in America was in effect a first run of friedman’s ideas
At that time Americans had two reasons to protest one was racism the other was a war for profits. While many Americans went to war ,I am happy to say that many fought in the streets and stared the established authorities down,eventually it culminated in a win for the educated youth and the black people.
Still many Americans chose to go to war, I can not and will not backdown from the fact that those that choose to enlist in these wars for profits are cowards who rather fight for the profits of America than to fight on the side of right to make America right again.
each president after johnson was a part of the ganster click wether we want to believe that or not is not on trial ,what is on trial , wether America today under friedman’s rules is the American way.
That we stood the establishment down in the 60’s, ultimately was not a success . the majority of Americans then, as is the case now, and ever since , proved without a doubt that the vast majority of Americans are retarded in thinking, apathetic ,deaf, blind, and dumb.
They are numb, on eddie Bernays propaganda. As Henry kissenger once said ” the soldiers are dumb animals to be used as pawns in America’s foriegn policy”
and these dumb suckers line up everytime for more abuse.
the war for profits today like in Vietnam will be lost, it is not a matter of winning but more a matter of prolonging untill AMericans can take no more and fill the streets in protest. Well I can assure you Americans will not march on wahington ,with sustained affect. this time Americans have lost the will to even bother to notice the war .
As the president said this war will last 20 years ,and will consume many of those dumb pawns who are so stupid as to actually believe that they fight to keep America free from the tyrany of a third world nation already beaten by war,unarmed and declawed by the UN .
America has it’s military and national gaurd in a third world nation ,can not or will not defeat them. Yet the dumb pawns believe that they are fighting for freedom as America at home has lost freedom and is being invaded from the south.
We no longer merit the name Americans our forefathers spit on us from their graves
and as they install the NAu and the slimy hands of socialism decends upon us, we have no one but ourselves to blame . the decider now makes the law for us he will tall you when to jump all you can say is how high.
if you are no longer worthy of freedom. As the cold winds of inflation begins to blow,as the USD is reduced to toilet paper and as our gift from the forefathers is cast into the dust.Look up into the dark and empty skies, do you feel like, your knocking on heavens door.