AuthorTopic: The Surlynewz Channel  (Read 568510 times)

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Manhattan Power Outage Shuts Down Subways, Stores, and Landmarks
« Reply #3855 on: July 13, 2019, 06:05:03 PM »
Manhattan Power Outage Shuts Down Subways, Stores, and Landmarks
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/07/manhattan-power-outage.html
 
A blackout hit Manhattan on Saturday night, leaving large swaths of the city in darkness. Power outages were reported in much of midtown Manhattan and in parts of the Upper West Side around 7 p.m. Con Edison said around 42,000 customers have lost power.

"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Barry heads inland with high risk of flash flooding
« Reply #3856 on: July 13, 2019, 06:08:15 PM »
Barry heads inland with high risk of flash flooding in Louisiana
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/07/13/barry-predicted-strike-louisiana-hurricane-saturday-with-excessive-rainfall-threat/

The system weakened from a hurricane to a tropical storm, but it now threatens eastern Louisiana and western Mississippi with a long duration deluge that could dump nearly 20 inches of rain.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: The Surlynewz Channel
« Reply #3857 on: July 14, 2019, 04:02:52 AM »
A cogent essay on Reddit about how the elites guided us to an environmental collapse for their own benefit and consolidation of power. No surprises, but well expressed.

https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/c656hh/attempts_to_erase_the_science_at_un_climate_talks/es6d38k/

In response to:
Attempts to 'erase the science' at UN climate talks - Oil producing countries are trying to "erase the science" on keeping the world's temperatures below 1.5C, say some delegates at UN talks in Bonn.
https://out.reddit.com/t3_c656hh?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Fscience-environment-48786295&token=AQAAYhcrXdqTYGI00VWiTpvQmabCJx9Gz17l2zwCjFTNjHT7S7YJ&app_name=reddit.com


Want the honest, brutal truth?

We were too dependent on petroleum to change direction in any meaningful way. Take a second to look around you and ask yourself how much of that which surrounds you is dependent on oil in some fashion. Even more basic just ask yourself about the device you're using to talk about this on reddit: The plastics, the supply chains that took the raw-ingredients all the way up to you buying it online or in a shop. Look at how massively inefficient our societies are in their lay out for anything other than an entity which relies on petroleum to power the infrastructure; the cars we drive, the planes we fly in, and the ships that bring goods across entire oceans. It's all dependent on Petroleum.

And the powers that be knew this.

When climate change first surfaced there must have been a decent amount of debate about what to do, but every decision ran into two very important road blocks: To ween the world off of Petroleum with Capitalism at the helm was almost impossible. The economic impact would, and still will, collapse the world economy.

Globalisation has pretty much made this an impossibility because production webs are now global. The second issue was the rise of developing nations like China and India. Any attempts for the West to move to a zero emission scheme would have been wiped out if either nation didn't agree to halt their industrialisation. That was never going to happen: International politics, paranoia and regional tensions meant that China and India are effectively competing indirectly for the time being and almost certainly directly in the near future.

So knowing this, the elites choose the following strategy:
Run interference, denying climate change for as long as possible. Petrochemical industries would bankroll this, and the baton would be picked up a cross section of the general population. They relied on the fact that the general public was too complacent to start making changes.

Once the general public started waking up and noticing for themselves that things weren't exactly kosha, start making token gestures towards environmentalism. Just enough to keep people placated and assuming that the Governments were actually working towards solving the issue.

Use the idea of the free market meeting the problem head on once their is enough profit involved. By the time there is, it'll be far too late to head off the 4 degrees celsius change which is the tipping point towards full blown environmental Armageddon.

The most important part: Make as much profit as possible in as short as time, and use that profit to start socially engineering the world towards being the society it will be forced to be once the Environmental changes start really affecting civilisation. We are already being conditioned to accept the next step in societies devolution in a number of myriad small ways. Not only this, but it allows them to be well ahead of the game when things start to break down. If they have any smarts they'll have reinvested at last a portion of their wealth in things that will retain their value post collapse.

I cannot begin to overstate this enough: They are already playing the survivalist game by concentrating the wealth. It's a game we're not even aware is going on, because we're so damned complacent in our modern lifestyles. By the time the jig is up, they will already have the influence to field their own private armies in order to keep them and their families safe from a very pissed off population.

The 2 degrees rise is almost certainly going to happen at this point, and because the world economic system is reliant on petroleum, there's no changing the direction it is headed in. I also wouldn't be surprised if there isn't a rapid environmental degradation that no one saw coming because of hidden feed back loops within the Earth's biosphere: Things like the frozen methane reserves in the Arctic suddenly becoming active would prove devastating. Likewise, the last time the Oceans acidified, there was a 95% extinction rate in Oceanic species, and a 70% rate within land dwelling species.

And we are going to have to factor in 8-10 billion people who all want desperately to survive this. The kind of climate migrations we'll be facing will almost certainly mean nations will go to war over dwindling supplies: Especially sources of fresh, clean water. My one hope is that no one is stupid enough or desperate enough to start lobbing nukes at that point, because if they do it's pretty much game over for humanity. If they don't we'll be able to cling on once the population declines due to war, starvation and disease
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38304
    • View Profile
https://www.reddit.com/r/globalcollapse/comments/cdnlco/this_week_in_doom_july_14_2019/

Also the article was Cross Posted on Global Economic Intersection.  :icon_sunny:

http://econintersect.com/pages/opinion/opinion.php?post=201907160122

RE
« Last Edit: July 18, 2019, 02:40:48 AM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
https://www.reddit.com/r/globalcollapse/comments/cdnlco/this_week_in_doom_july_14_2019/

Who knew?

Also the article was Cross Posted on Global Economic Intersection.  :icon_sunny:

http://econintersect.com/pages/opinion/opinion.php?post=201907160122

RE

This is knew, at least...

thanks.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
    • View Profile
https://www.reddit.com/r/globalcollapse/comments/cdnlco/this_week_in_doom_july_14_2019/

Also the article was Cross Posted on Global Economic Intersection.  :icon_sunny:

http://econintersect.com/pages/opinion/opinion.php?post=201907160122

RE



<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/wVOa3xhl0bg&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/wVOa3xhl0bg&fs=1</a>
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
PENTAGON MAY HAVE RELEASED WEAPONIZED TICKS THAT HELPED SPREAD OF LYME DISEASE: INVESTIGATION ORDERED
https://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-weaponized-ticks-lyme-disease-investigation-1449737

BY ARISTOS GEORGIOU ON 7/17/19 AT 11:39 AM EDT

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives quietly passed a bill requiring the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (DoD) to conduct a review into whether the Pentagon experimented with ticks and other blood-sucking insects for use as biological weapons between 1950 and 1975.

If the Inspector General finds that such experiments occurred, then, according to the bill, they must provide the House and Senate Armed Services committees with a report on the scope of the research and "whether any ticks or insects used in such experiments were released outside of any laboratory by accident or experiment design," potentially leading to the spread of diseases such as Lyme.

The amendment was put forward by Rep. Chris Smith, a Republican from New Jersey, who was "inspired" by several books and articles claiming that the U.S. government had conducted research at facilities such as Fort Detrick, Maryland, and Plum Island, New York, for this purpose....

more
« Last Edit: July 19, 2019, 04:41:35 AM by Surly1 »
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Manmade ruin adds 7,000 species to endangered 'Red List'
« Reply #3862 on: July 19, 2019, 04:23:13 AM »
Manmade ruin adds 7,000 species to endangered 'Red List'
https://www.france24.com/en/20190718-manmade-ruin-adds-7000-species-endangered-red-list



Mankind's destruction of nature is driving species to the brink of extinction at an "unprecedented" rate, the leading wildlife conservation body warned Thursday as it added more than 7,000 animals, fish and plants to its endangered "Red List".

From the canopies of tropical forests to the ocean floor, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) said iconic species of primates, rays, fish and trees were now classified as critically endangered.

The group has now assessed more than 105,000 species worldwide, around 28,000 of which risk extinction...

https://www.france24.com/en/20190718-manmade-ruin-adds-7000-species-endangered-red-list
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
(Americans Are in Denial That) Fascists Took Over America
« Reply #3863 on: July 19, 2019, 04:50:25 AM »

There are Three Phases of Fascist Collapse. America’s Way Past One. It’s Entering Phase Three.

umair haque

Here’s a tiny question: what stage of collapse is America in? Do you think — like many Americans — that “things aren’t that bad”? Or are you ashamed, furious, and disgusted? How should one feel, anyways — what’s the objective reality of collapse?

First, extremists like fascists capture institutions — they gain power over them. That’s phase one of any proper collapse. Then, they subvert them — they pack them with cronies, flunkies, admirers, and sycophants. That’s phase two. But in phase three, the institutions of a democracy are perverted. They are turned from instruments of freedom, justice, and equality, to weapons of subjugation, repression, fear, and violence.

(Think of how the Nazis used the law itself to oppress and then exterminate Jews. Phase three. But that was after phase two — stacking the branches of government with good Nazis. And phase one — seizing power. That is how social collapses tend to go.)

So where is America on my little scale, or sequence, of collapse? Should we be relieved things aren’t worse — or horrified at how bad they really are? American collapse is further along than you probably think, my friends. It is well past phase one. Even phase two. In fact, phase three — the last one — is beginning. The basic institutions of democracy, having been captured, and then subverted, are now being reshaped and restructured, as weapons of mass subjugation, repression, and violence.

Consider three events that happened just in the last week.

This morning, the Prez told several members of Congress to “go back” to their countries. Now, of course, they’re as American as…the Prez. This tirade was described in the press as “racist.” But the truth is that it is much more than just racist. Racist would be the President demeaning minorities in general. But to attack members of the opposition in this way isn’t just racist. So what is it?

Well, let’s specify the nature of the attack. It says this: Impostors walk among us. The opposition members aren’t “real” Americans. Someone that isn’t real is an impostor, pretending to be a thing they are not. It’s a slur that every minority’s heard countless times. But that very slur is very different when it comes from the head of a state — against members of an opposition. In that case, it isn’t merely obnoxious, foolish, or vulgar.

It is institutional dehumanization. “You aren’t really one of us! You are alive, foreign, other. You are something lesser, beneath us. The true and real volk of the homeland. You are subhuman.” None of that is said explicitly, of course. It doesn’t need to be. “Go back home!”, to another citizen, in a democracy of equals, is a violation of personhood, its negation, absence, removal. It says that some of us are superior, because we are real, and others of us are inferior, because we are not.

But that is the very logic of supremacy. Why is it that some of us are real people, and others of us only impostors? The only answer is that it is in the blood. The real ones among us are authentic by virtue of our bloodlines, our genetic inheritance. Impostors walk among us — the ones pretending to be real, just like us, but they are not. Their blood says so.

So. What do we call people — especially in an official capacity — who institutionally dehumanize others as impostors? They are called fascists, my friends. But these fascists apparently run the country now. They are using the office of the Presidency itself to institutionally dehumanize the opposition. That’s not just the textbook definition of fascist-authoritarianism: it’s phase three, the perversion of democracy, using the institutions of governance as instruments of violence, as weapons.

Let me come to my second event. This one barely seems to have made the news. Did you know that “agents” were checking IDs on the…NYC subway? Does that chill you a little? It should. But if it doesn’t, let me put it another way, so that it does. Papers were being checked on public transport.

Get the context now? What does it say when papers are being checked on public transport? Well, the “agents” must be looking for a specific kind of person. Because in the absence of war or some kind of genuine emergency, the only point to checking papers can be to identify members of an unwanted group. Not, for example, to manhunt individuals.

What kinds of societies check papers on public transport? Certainly not constitutional democracies. Because doing so violates basic constitutional principles. Freedom of assembly, expression, movement, privacy. Checking papers in any public space isn’t just a “violation of civil liberties”, as America’s anodyne public discourse might put it: it’s a violation of the most basic principles of democracy.

That is because if I imagine my papers are going to be checked, I will alter everything about my life, probably. I will avoid those places. I will avoid associating with certain people. I will watch what I say. I will limit what I think. Society will soon come to be defined by an atmosphere of fear, of grim and stone-eyed complicity, of looking the other way.

The “chilling effects” — another American phrase — of paper-checking are vast. Why, though? Because people are not just numbers and categories and files, my friends. In a democracy, people, first, are human beings, with inalienable rights. They are equals in regards to those rights. But when a society begins to check papers, in broad daylight — and it barely even makes the news — it tells us something crucial, vital, and bleak. That society is dehumanizing itself. It is reducing people to objects, numbers, things to control and subjugate and prey upon.

Checking papers, of course, demands the creation of new government agencies who can do the “job.” Later, they will say things like: “we were just following orders!” Of course, of course. But that doesn’t change the point. When a society begins checking papers in broad daylight, it tells us something very, very important, and very, very bleak. It takes Gestapos to check papers, my friends. And that is precisely what America is building now.

That brings me to my third event. The VP recently did something very much like a victory tour of America’s concentration camps. A press junket. He showed them off and flaunted them. “Tough!”, he said, as if to show off just how manly and strong the regime is. Of course, that’s a celebration of violence and cruelty — but that’s so normal in America it’s almost besides the point.

What does it say when a VP is giving tours of concentration camps? Let me remind you that once, not so long ago, concentration camp tours were given to eager journalists. They were shown canteens and cafeterias and gymnasiums and schools. “Why, see”, cried the Nazis. “Look how well we are treating the Jews! Like honored guests!” The world was foolish enough to fall for it. But even that is not the point.

When heads of state are giving tours of concentration camps, it’s even more stark evidence of the answer to my question. The institutions of governance haven’t just been captured. Now they are being perverted, commandeered, rebuilt.

Let me make all that crystal clear. What institutions am I talking about? The Presidency is now an office that institutionally dehumanizes the opposition, speaking the language of supremacy openly in public. The Vice-Presidency, meanwhile, is an office that…gives tours of concentration camps. Needless to say, both of these are offices that build networks of such camps. Meanwhile, new “enforcement agencies” have arisen to fill the camps — the Gestapos of American collapse. They check papers in broad daylight — and nobody much notices.

What kind of a society does all these things? I think the answer to that is very clear. One that is turning fascist-authoritarian at light-speed.

Americans are in a kind of deep, stark, denial. They have been for very long, about very many things. The wars they made on the world, they damage they did, and so on. But the denial they are in now is the most dangerous of all. The way that they treated the world — with contempt, with hate, with scorn — has come home. The fascists are treating Americans just the way they treated the world. But Americans deny — enough of them — that there is a fascist collapse happening in America at all.

Even if they worry, even if they’re concerned — they are unable to use the lexicon of history to describe what is happening to America now. Wait — what is it that we say about people who can’t learn from history?

America’s not just in danger of having a fascist collapse. It’s having one. It’s bang in the middle of one. It’s not in the early phases — but in fact, beginning the later ones. The ones where concentration camps rise, and hatred spews from the head of a state, and papers are checked on public transport. How much more obvious could it get? How many more data points do you need? If this isn’t enough…what could be?

Denial, in the face of fascist collapse this obvious? It’s the bad guys’ best friend. It’s up to you to judge for yourself where you stand on that scale. But don’t kid yourself anymore. When the President is openly dehumanizing the opposition, when the VP’s giving happy tours of the concentration camps, when the NYC subway is a place where papers are checked…my friends, your country is ruled by fascists. The only question is when they will come for you, too.

Umair
July 2019

"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Catholic priests and nuns arrested protesting Trump Immigration policies
« Reply #3864 on: July 19, 2019, 05:36:19 PM »
Shocking moment Catholic priests and nuns are led away by police in zip-tie handcuffs after being arrested during a peaceful protest against Trump's immigration policies on Capitol Hill
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7262271/70-Catholic-activists-arrested-protesting-Trumps-immigration-policies-Washington-D-C.html?fbclid=IwAR0FUdCMW__Ty_GTxcT4e5ytzXc-b3B7PKdFzvB609AuKTiyfRNe-xUvuLw
  • Catholic activists staged a demonstration at the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. on Thursday
    The group were protesting the Trump administration's policy of detaining migrant children at the Southern Border
  • Priests and nuns were among 70 people arrested for 'crowding, obstructing, incommoding', and several were filmed being led away in handcuffs
    • It's the second religious demonstration against Trump's immigration policies this week, with 10 Jewish activists arrested outside ICE headquarters on Wednesday
    • Officials are struggling to cope with overcrowding of detention facilities on the Southern Border with more than 500,000 people apprehended trying to illegally enter the U.S. since January


    Shocking video has captured the moment priests and nuns were put into zip-tie handcuffs after being arrested for protesting the Trump administration's detention of migrant children on the U.S. southern border. 

    The clergy members were among 70 Catholic activists who descended upon the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. on Thursday for the protests. 

    Activists from more than a dozen Catholic organizations chanted the names of children who have died in detention facilities during Trump's term in office as they railed against 'the immoral and inhumane practice of detaining immigrant children.'

    Several of the protesters lay on the floor of the building's rotunda in order to make a human cross before it was dismantled by officers.

    70 of the assembled were subsequently arrested for 'unlawfully demonstrating in the rotunda of the Russell Senate Office Building', Roll Call reports. A 90-year-old nun was among those arrested.

    Video posted to Twitter by one eyewitness shows officers escorting priests and nuns from the premises.

    Several recited the Lord's Prayer as they were led away. 

    'All were charged with D.C. Code 22-1307, Crowding, Obstructing, or Incommoding,' a police officer told Roll Call in an emailed statement. 
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
What Americans Do Now Will Define Us Forever
« Reply #3865 on: July 19, 2019, 07:09:21 PM »
What Americans Do Now Will Define Us Forever
If multiracial democracy cannot be defended in America, it will not be defended elsewhere.


Adam Serwer
Staff writer at The Atlantic



The conservative intelligentsia flocked to the Ritz-Carlton in Washington, D.C., this week for the National Conservatism Conference, an opportunity for people who may never have punched a time clock to declare their eternal enmity toward elites and to attempt to offer contemporary conservative nationalism the intellectual framework that has so far proved elusive.

The Atlantic's Daily Idea, on your smart speaker

Listen to a two-minute story every weekday, via your Amazon Echo or Google Home device.

promo image
Listen Now

Yoram Hazony, the Israeli scholar who organized the conference, explicitly rejected white nationalism, barring several well-known adherents from attending, my colleague Emma Green reported. But despite Hazony’s efforts, the insistence that “nationalism” is, at its core, about defending borders, eschewing military interventions, and promoting a shared American identity did not prevent attendees from explicitly declaring that American laws should favor white immigrants.

Some other attendees, such as National Review’s Rich Lowry, took pains to distance themselves from the president’s brand of nationalism. “We have to push back against Donald Trump when he does things to increase that breach between the right and African Americans,” Lowry said. But in the fall of 2017, when Trump attempted to silence black athletes protesting police brutality, Lowry praised his “gut-level political savvy,” writing, “This kind of thing is why he’s president.”

The conference stood solidly within the conservative intellectual tradition, as a retroactive attempt by the right-wing intelligentsia to provide cover for what the great mass of Republican voters actually want. Barry Goldwater did not break the Solid South in 1964 because the once Democratic voters of the Jim Crow states had suddenly become principled small-government libertarians; voters who backed Donald Trump in 2016 did not do so because they believed a nonracial civic nationalism had been eroded by liberal cosmopolitanism.

The consensus that American civic nationalism recognizes all citizens regardless of race, creed, color, or religion was already fragile before Trump took office. That principle has been lauded, with varying degrees of sincerity, by presidents from both parties, and in particular by the first black president, who reveled in reminding audiences that “in no other country in the world is my story even possible.” The nationalism that conservatives say they wish to build in fact already existed, but it was championed by a president whose persona was so deformed by right-wing caricature that they could not perceive it. Instead, they embraced the nationalism that emerged as a backlash to his very existence and all it represented.

Trump’s nationalist innovation is not taking pride in his country, supporting a principled non-interventionism, or even advocating strict enforcement of immigration laws. The only thing new Trump brings to the American nationalism of recent decades is a restoration of its old ethnic-chauvinist tradition. Conservative intellectuals cannot rescue nationalism from Trump, any more than they could rescue Goldwater from Jim Crow, because Trump’s explicit appeals to racial and religious traditionalism, and his authoritarian approach to enforcing those hierarchies, are the things that have bound conservative voters so closely to him. The failure of the conservative intelligentsia to recognize this is why it was caught so off-guard by Trump’s rise to begin with.

At a rally last night in North Carolina, Trump was reminding the country of this truth. Last week, the president told four Democratic congresswomen—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar—to “go back” to their countries, even though all of them are American citizens. This is literally textbook racism. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission offers “Go back to where you came from” as its example of potentially unlawful harassment on the basis of national origin.

Trump’s demand is less a factual assertion than a moral one, an affirmation of the president’s belief that American citizenship is conditional for people of color, who should be grateful we are even allowed to be here. Some elected Republicans offered gentle rebukes; others defended the president’s remarks. But at his rally in North Carolina, Trump showed them all that the base is with him. The crowd erupted into chants of “Send her back” when the president mentioned Omar, the Minnesota representative who came to the United States as a refugee from Somalia.

Republicans, in the week since Trump’s initial tweet attacking the four representatives, have tried to argue that the president was criticizing their left-wing views and “hatred for America,” or that the attacks on Omar were justified because of her past remarks about Israel. This is belied by the nature of the attack itself—not only did Trump say “countries” in his tweet telling the representatives to “go back,” but much of the bill of particulars against Omarthat his supporters use to justify calling for her banishment also applies to the president, long a hyperbolic critic of the American political establishment.

Adam Serwer: Trump tells America what kind of nationalist he is

Some of Omar’s remarks in the past (for which she has apologized) have echoed anti-Semitic language about Jewish conspiracies and dual loyalty, but the president has described Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “your prime minister” to American Jewish audiences, and is a proponent of the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories around immigration that terrorists have used to justify killing American Jews. No apology from the president on these matters is forthcoming, and the right will not demand one. The ancient anti-Semitic charge of dual loyalty does not somehow become more justifiable when applied to Muslims. As James Kirchick wrote for The Atlantic, “Trump’s invocation of Israel to attack four ethnic-minority women is breathtakingly cynical, effectively working to pit Jews and people of color against each other.”

Trump has falsely accused Omar of supporting al-Qaeda, of betraying her country. But when a foreign power attacked American elections, it was the president who first sought to profit from that attack, and then to obstruct the investigation into it, and finally to offer a vocal defense of the perpetrators.

The argument that Omar’s criticisms of her adopted country for failing to live up to its stated ideals justify revoking her citizenship substantiates the very criticism she lodged. Trump has said, “If you hate our country, or if you are not happy here, you can leave!” but his entire 2016 campaign was premised on the idea that many Americans not only are deeply unhappy, but also have every right to demand that things be better. That Trump’s supporters believe Omar’s sins justify her banishment, and Trump’s similar transgressions justify his presence in the White House, helps illustrate exactly what is going on here. Under Trumpism, no defense of the volk is a betrayal, even if it undermines the republic, and no attack on the volk’s hegemony can be legitimate, even if it is a defense of democracy.

Faced with the president’s baldly expressed bigotry toward four women of color in Congress, Republicans turned to reporters to argue that his attacks are part of a clever political strategy, elevating four left-wing women of color into the faces of his opposition. I suspect these Republicans, and some political reporters, believe that this somehow exonerates Trump from the charge of bigotry, as though prejudice ceases to be prejudice if it becomes instrumental. In fact, the admission that fomenting racism and division is central to Trump’s strategy is a stunning rebuke to those political reporters and pundits who, for four years, have insisted that the rise of Trump is about anything else. Trump and his most ardent liberal critics are in full agreement about the nature of his appeal, even as they differ on its morality. Only the Trumpists, and those who wish to earn their respect, fail to see it.

Adam Serwer: The cruelty is the point

It also speaks to the futility of trying to somehow rescue a Trumpian nationalism from Trump. Racism is at the core of Trumpism. The movement cannot be rescued from its bigotry, and those at the National Conservatism Conference who believe it can are in denial. Conservatives can make their case for limited government, or for religious traditionalism, but as long as it is tied to Trump or Trumpism, it will be tainted. Trump is not a champion of the civic nationalism Hazony and others claim they want to see. He is a mortal threat to it.

I often open my articles on Trumpism with explorations of American history. I’ve spent much of the past four years trying to illuminate the historical and ideological antecedents to Donald Trump, to show how America got to this point.

So I want to be very clear about what the country saw last night, as an American president incited a chant of “Send her back!” aimed at a Somali-born member of Congress: America has not been here before.

White nationalism was a formal or informal governing doctrine of the United States until 1965, or for most of its existence as a country. Racist demagogues, from Andrew Johnson to Woodrow Wilson, have occupied the White House. Trump has predecessors, such as Calvin Coolidge, who imposed racist immigration restrictions designed to preserve a white demographic majority. Prior presidents, such as Richard Nixon, have exploited racial division for political gain. But we have never seen an American president make a U.S. representative, a refugee, an American citizen, a woman of color, and a religious minority an object of hate for the political masses, in a deliberate attempt to turn the country against his fellow Americans who share any of those traits. Trump is assailing the moral foundations of the multiracial democracy Americans have struggled to bring into existence since 1965, and unless Trumpism is defeated, that fragile project will fail.

Nevertheless, most of Trump’s predecessors had something he does not yet have: the support of a majority of the electorate. Ilhan Omar’s prominence as a Republican target comes not, as conservatives might argue, simply because her policy views are left-wing. Neither is it because, as some liberals have supposed, she is an unmatched political talent. She has emerged as an Emmanuel Goldstein for the Trumpist right because as a black woman, a Muslim, an immigrant, and a progressive member of Congress, she represents in vivid terms a threat to the nation Trumpists fear they are losing.

To attack Omar is to attack a symbol of the demographic change that is eroding white cultural and political hegemony, the defense of which is Trumpism’s only sincere political purpose. Many of the president’s most outrageous comments have been delivered extemporaneously, when he departs from his prepared remarks. Last night, though, his attacks on Omar were carefully scripted, written out by his staff and then read off a teleprompter. To defend the remarks as politically shrewd is to confess that the president is deliberately campaigning on the claim that only white people can truly, irrevocably be American.

Still, a plurality of Americans in 2016 and 2018 voted against defining American citizenship in racial terms, something that has perhaps never happened before in the history of the United States. There was no anti-racist majority at the dawn of Reconstruction, during the heyday of immigration restriction, or in the twilight of the civil-rights movement. The voters of this coalition may yet defeat Trumpism, if they can find leaders who are willing and able to confront it.

That is not a given. In the face of a corrupt authoritarian president who believes that he and his allies are above the law, the American people are represented by two parties equally incapable of discharging their constitutional responsibilities. The Republican Party is incapable of fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities because it has become a cult of personality whose members cannot deviate from their sycophantic devotion to the president, lest they be ejected from office by Trump’s fanatically loyal base. The Democratic Party cannot fulfill its constitutional responsibilities because its leadership lives in abject terror of being ejected from office by alienating the voters to whom Trump’s nationalism appeals. In effect, the majority of the American electorate, which voted against Trump in 2016 and then gave the Democrats a House majority in 2018, has no representation.

The electoral coalition that gave Democrats the House represents perhaps the strongest resistance to the rising tide of right-wing ethnonationalism in the West, yet observe what the party has done with that mandate. The great victory of the House Democrats has been to halt the Republican legislative effort to deprive millions of health-care coverage, a feat they accomplished simply by being elected. But over the past seven months, Democrats have proved unable to complete a single significant investigation, hold many memorable hearings, or pass a single piece of meaningful legislation that curtails Trump’s abuses of authority. Instead, they held their breath waiting for Robert Mueller to save them, and when he did not, they, like their Republican predecessors, took to issuing sternly worded statements, tepid pleas for civility, and concerned tweets as their primary methods of imposing accountability.

As the president’s declarations of immunity from oversight have grown more broad and lawless, the Democrats have slow-walked investigations, retreated from court battles, and unilaterally surrendered the sword of impeachment. They have only just begun to call witnesses from the Mueller inquiry, they have only just begun to challenge the president’s lawlessness in court, they have only just begun to hold Trump officials in contempt for their defiance of Congress’s constitutional prerogatives. This foot-dragging will leave them with little time to actually look into presidential abuses before campaign season begins, effectively forfeiting a massive political advantage, to say nothing of abdicating their constitutional duties. The leadership of the Democratic Party has shown more appetite for confronting and rebuking legislators representing the vulnerable communities Trump has targeted most often than it has for making the president mildly uncomfortable.

Although two prior presidents, Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon, faced articles of impeachment over obstruction of justice, Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered the gibberish analysis that the president was “self-impeaching,” so no actual impeachment was necessary. When confronted with yet another woman accusing the president of sexual assault, Pelosi said, “I haven’t paid much attention to it.” When the politically connected financier Jeffrey Epstein was indicted again on charges of sex-trafficking minors, and Pelosi was asked what she would do about now-ousted Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who negotiated a previous sweetheart deal with Epstein, she said, “It’s up to the president. It’s his Cabinet,” a position indistinguishable from that of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is a member of the president’s party.

“If you start endangering children, I become a lioness,” Pelosi declared, before caving on a funding bill for border security that will do nothing to relieve the systematic abuse of migrants at the border, and whose restrictions the Department of Homeland Security is already ignoring. Chuck Schumer, the Democratic minority leader in the Senate, took the occasion of federal prosecutors in New York mysteriously closing their investigation into the president’s hush-money payments to former girlfriends to ask the FBI to look into a popular app that ages pictures of people’s faces. The president’s racist attacks on Omar and her colleagues were precipitated by Democrats leaking a poll of “white, non-college voters” supposedly showing that they might cost the party the House and the presidency. Having publicly told the school bully where and how to take their lunch money, the Democrats were surprised when he showed up.

One could protest that the Democrats’ timidity is a cold, calculated strategy. Republicans hold the Senate, the argument goes, so an impeachment inquiry would only lead to the president’s acquittal. The whiter, more conservative voters who form much of Trump’s base are geographically distributed in a way that maximizes their political power. Democrats may need to win over some of these voters, who would be alienated by impeachment, to take the White House. If the Democrats cannot hold the House, they cannot hold back Trump.

But Democrats now hold the House, and they are not holding Trump back. The president has abetted a foreign attack on American democracy, he has obstructed justice, he has vowed to turn federal law enforcement on his political enemies. There are squalid camps at the border where families are being separated, and children are being sexually assaulted, their existence justified as a necessary response to a foreign “invasion.” Trump has sought to rig American democracy in favor of white voters and refused to recognize the oversight authority of Congress, and now assails the cornerstone principle of multiracial democracy that none of us is more American than any other. What, exactly, would be enough to rouse Democrats to action?

In the face of such a challenge to the American idea, tactics become intertwined with morality. If the Democrats convince themselves that anything they do to attack the president risks alienating white voters who believe the country belongs only to them, then they will be partially responsible for the path the country is taking, and the standard it is upholding. The Democrats’ weakness has not appeased the president. Instead, it has only invited bolder challenges to democracy and the rule of law. This will not change. If congressional Democrats cannot or will not defend the principle that America belongs to all of its citizens, regardless of race, creed, color, or religion, their oaths to defend the Constitution are meaningless.

Omar must be defended, but not because of her views on Israel, gay rights, or progressive taxation. You needn’t agree with her on any of those things; in fact, you needn’t like her at all. But she must be defended, because the nature of the president’s attack on her is a threat to all Americans—black or white, Jew or Gentile—whose citizenship, whose belonging, might similarly be questioned. This is not about Omar anymore, or the other women of color who have been told by this president to “go back” to their supposed countries of origin. It is about defending the idea that America should be a country for all its people. If multiracial democracy cannot be defended in America, it will not be defended elsewhere. What Americans do now, in the face of this, will define us forever.

"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Hundreds of Astronomers Denounce Arrest of Native Hawaiians
« Reply #3866 on: July 21, 2019, 06:26:55 AM »
Hundreds of Astronomers Denounce Arrest of Native Hawaiians Protesting Thirty Meter Telescope
https://earther.gizmodo.com/hundreds-of-astronomers-denounce-arrest-of-native-hawai-1836497851


Mauna Kea, the contested site for the Thirty Meter Telescope.

All week, opponents to the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) have been putting their bodies on the line to prevent construction from starting on top of Hawaii’s Mauna Kea. Now these opponents, who are largely Native Hawaiian, are finding allies among an unlikely group: astronomers, including those whose research would benefit from the giant new telescope.

The TMT is a $1.4 billion project that’d allow astronomers to gaze billions of years into the past. The project has faced stiff opposition from Native Hawaiians due to its planned construction site atop the sacred mountain of Mauna Kea, a decision that raises issues of Native Hawaiian sovereignty and who gets to decide what happens on historically indigenous lands. Construction was slated to start this week, but opponents aren’t planning to let that happen. The first arrests of protestors blocking work crews on the mountain occurred Wednesday.

That was the big moment for Sal Wanying Fu, especially when she found out law enforcement officers were arresting Native Hawaiian elders. The 22-year-old is a budding astrophysicist, but that doesn’t mean she’s down for the telescope to be built by any means necessary. And more than 200 other astronomers feel similarly, signing an open letter Fu published Wednesday with Mia de los Reyes, another graduate student of astronomy. Both students are at institutions that comprise the TMT International Observatory, the coalition behind the telescope—Fu at the University of California at Berkeley and de los Reyes at Caltech.

Fu and de los Reyes urged the astronomy community to speak out against the criminalization of TMT opponents protesting on Mauna Kea. The letter doesn’t denounce the project outright, but it does question the methods the coalition and Hawaiian government are using to make it happen.

“We certainly hoped that regardless of astronomers’ opinions on the construction of TMT, we could agree that involving the military and the police in these deliberations was bad,” both students said in an emailed statement to Earther. “And we think the outpouring of support speaks, at least, to the fact that people recognize the importance of that message.”

And their message is clear: “We ask that the community pause and consider what it means that, armed or not, the military and the police have become involved in the project’s deliberations with the protectors of Maunakea,” the letter reads.

Quote
“We have an ethical duty to put the rights of people ahead of our science. Otherwise, our science is unethical.”

Most importantly, the letter highlights the complicated and troubling history the scientific community has had with people of color, especially indigenous peoples who’ve lost countless lands (and lives) to white colonizers’ obsession with conquest and trying to “civilize” Native peoples historically (and incorrectly) viewed as less-than.

“These histories progressed in lock-step with the development of western ‘sciences’ of personhood: of who and/or what is human, and therefore who must be subhuman, and thus must be subject to control via mechanisms of policing, incarceration, and military violence,” the letter goes on.

Indigenous and Native Hawaiian sovereignty is ultimately at the heart of this whole issue. It’s not that opponents don’t believe in the science or don’t want the telescope built at all—it’s that this is their sacred, ancestral land. The way they see it, it’s not up for grabs for scientists to use however they see fit. And yet that’s what many in the field have done, argues Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, an astrophysicist at the University of New Hampshire who signed the letter, in an email to Earther.

“What’s facilitated [scientific] access [to Mauna Kea] is American colonialism on kānaka ‘ōiwi (Native Hawaiian) land in what we call the state of Hawaii,” she wrote. “It is the American state apparatus that continues to play a role in enforcing astronomer access to the Mauna, for example, with the police forces this week arresting the kūpuna, the elders, who took great physical risk to protect their family.”

Many scientists agree that it shouldn’t be that way, as this letter’s list of signatories made clear. For Hilding Neilson, an assistant professor of astronomy at the University of Toronto who also signed the letter, much of it comes down to ethics and human rights.

“I think we have a duty to stand up for people and their rights, and in Canada and the U.S., I think that means listening and learning from Indigenous peoples,” Neilson told Earther in an email. “We have an ethical duty to put the rights of people ahead of our science. Otherwise, our science is unethical.”

As a man from the Mi’kmaq First Nation in eastern Canada, Neilson felt horrified when he saw elders facing arrest Wednesday. If that were happening on his turf, these individuals could’ve been his friends and family. That’s, in part, why he signed the letter.


Protestors have risked arrest in their efforts to stop construction of the controversial telescope.

“My work includes integrating Indigenous knowledge into astronomy,” he said. “How could I do that on one hand and stay quiet on the other?”

Some signatories don’t believe the project should go on as planned. Lucianne Walkowicz, an astronomer at the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, can’t support the TMT until the project operates in partnership with the Native Hawaiian community. The TMT International Observatory argues that it has, of course, by creating workforce pipeline programs for Native Hawaiians and an education fund for Native Hawaiian youth interested in pursuing astronomy. At this point, though, it’s tough to imagine a future where opponents are happy seeing the telescope atop Mauna Kea.

And Walkowicz doesn’t imagine that happening without her colleagues coming to terms with “their role in not only historical but continued colonial violence against marginalized people,” which feels like a long shot.

“What I currently see from colleagues who support TMT construction is a failure to take the central objections of the Kānaka Maoli protectors seriously,” Walkowicz said. “I see many colleagues regurgitating poll numbers about majority support for TMT construction without reckoning with the fact that diminishing the objections of indigenous communities in the name of ‘progress’ is literally the definition of marginalizing people.”

The histories of these people and the social issues surrounding the research are just as important as the science itself, said Sara Kahanamoku, a Native Hawaiian biologist at Berkeley who’s been inspired by the actions of her people on Mauna Kea, as well as by the support from the astronomy community.

“Just as we have a responsibility to learn the state-of-the-art in of our respective fields of science, we also have a responsibility to learn the history of our discipline,” she wrote to Earther in an email. “Begin by asking: who has historically benefitted from my field’s practice of science? How is the legacy of inequality manifested in the structure of modern academic institutions?”

This isn’t a moment for scientists to stay silent, said Aurora Kagawa-Viviani, a Native Hawaiian Ph.D. candidate at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa’s Department of Geography and Environment who’s been following the stand-off closely. That would make scientists complicit in oppressing indigenous worldviews, she told Earther via email.

Here’s the kicker, though. This state-of-the-art machine doesn’t have to exist on Mauna Kea. Spain’s Canary Islands offer a prime location for the telescope, too. While not as perfect as Mauna Kea, the site is pretty damn good. However, the researchers aren’t necessarily suggesting this is what needs to be done. What they want to make clear is that arresting elders to construct a telescope where it’s not wanted by some is not the right way to make it happen.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Pentagon Wants 16-Year-Old Kids To Fight The Empire's Wars
« Reply #3867 on: July 26, 2019, 03:59:33 AM »
Pentagon Wants 16-Year-Old Kids To Fight The Empire's Wars
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-25/pentagon-wants-16-year-old-kids-fight-empires-wars


Authored By Kurt Nimmo via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity



The Pentagon is desperate. Far too many millennials are criminals, so luring them in to become the latest crop of bullet stoppers for the state is a nonstarter.

Solution? Recruit 16-year-olds. Most have yet graduated to petty and violent crime, although a lot of them are in video game training for a future of violence and self-destructive stupidity.

It’s not being widely reported in the media. Recruiters are ready to go after tenth-graders. They are itching to snag kids before they engage in a life of crime, or before they have fully-mature brains (well, some of them) and decide to kill and be killed isn’t much of a career choice.

First, though, the state will have to give these little darlings the “right” to vote for a crop of handpicked carnival barkers, euphemistically called representatives of the people.

I don’t know about you, but when I was sixteen all I thought about was cruising in my father’s car with a freshly minted state permission to drive card in my wallet as I searched desperately for girls willing to make-out in the backseat.

It took a year or two before I was politically aware, mostly as a result of Richard Nixon’s plan to “draft” me (polite speak for slavery) into the meat grinder he inherited from LBJ, aka the Vietnam War, where I would either be minced, traumatized for life, or lucky enough to stay behind lines and scrub latrines while other kids fought and senselessly died.


Around this time college, high school students, and millions of other concerned Americans marched against the war, a truly remarkable one-time event now impossible in America because the military is “volunteer” and our wars are “humanitarian.”

Most of these so-called volunteers “joined” the military because they have so few other career options (if you consider killing other people a career choice). Brought up in largely single-parent homes and taught all manner of nonsense in public schools that now resemble locked down prisons, these “volunteers” are completely ignorant of the reason the state needs them to fight and die.

It’s all about the psychopathic dominance of a tiny elite. The elite doesn’t send its Harvard-bound kids into its neoliberal meat grinder (because so many of these silver spoon darlings have bone spurs and such).

But this system is breaking down, mostly because the state upholds standards that worked in the 1940s and 50s, but are completely irrelevant now. They insist it is not permissible to fill the empty ranks with criminals. Hired killers must be held to the highest moral standard.

So, like the United Kingdom, the US is looking to 16-year old kids to fight in the name of the corporate state and, of course, our freedom to live hand-to-mouth in a political and cultural cesspool.

Democrats like the idea of 16-year-old voters. Most are far more impressionable and less cantankerous than your average middle-age deplorable. They also approve the idea of feeding kids into the military, but you don’t hear a lot about that because Democrats and progressives don’t think much about war. It’s a big blind spot for them. There are more important issues, for instance trans-gender bathrooms.

I don’t think this is going to turn out like they think it will. Far too many 16-year olds will flunk out of basic training. Most don’t have what it takes, never mind all those formative years killing bad guys on computer screens.

If The Donald gets us into a big shooting war over in the Middle East or in the South China Sea, the mandatory servitude of conscription will be required. It won’t be a turkey shoot like Iraq or Libya. It will be an existential threat, so all males —criminally inclined or not — between 16 and 45 will be inducted, same as they were after FDR tricked the Japanese into invading Pearl Harbor, or Johnson said the North Vietnamese attacked our warships in the Gulf of Tonkin.

But the kids are oblivious. They were taught to be so. And the propaganda machine will tell them they’re sacrificing their lives (or limbs and mental health) for the noble cause of star-spangled democracy, which most of them know close to zero about.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 15968
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Europe heatwave: Paris latest to break record with 42.6C
« Reply #3868 on: July 26, 2019, 04:07:35 AM »
Europe heatwave: Paris latest to break record with 42.6C
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49108847



Paris saw a record high temperature of 42.6C (108.7F) on Thursday, amid a heatwave that broke records across Western Europe.
A red alert - the highest level - was issued in northern France.

Meanwhile Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands also reached new record highs, of 41.8C, 41.5C, 40.8C and 40.7C respectively.
The UK recorded a record temperature for July of 38.1C, with trains told to run more slowly to stop rails buckling.

"Climate change has increased the likelihood and severity of heatwave episodes across Europe," the UK's national weather service said.
What temperatures was Europe expecting?

French authorities launched a red alert in the Paris region and 19 other districts and said temperatures were expected to reach 42C-43C in parts of the country.

Belgium's Royal Meteorological Institute issued "code red" warnings across most of the country - urging people to take extra precautions during "extremely high temperatures".

What has been the impact?
In France, officials warned people to avoid travelling to work from home if possible. Some nurseries have been closed.

The chief architect responsible for restoring Notre-Dame warned that the extreme heat could lead to the cathedral's roof collapsing if the joints and masonry holding up the roof dried out.

French reports suggested five deaths may have resulted from the high temperatures.

Comparisons were drawn to a heatwave in August 2003 which contributed to almost 15,000 deaths in the country.

In parts of north Germany, rivers and lakes have dried up - with warnings that fish and mussels could be "severely threatened".
In the Netherlands, hundreds of pigs died earlier this week after a ventilator at a farm failed.
On Wednesday, a Eurostar train from Belgium to London broke down, trapping passengers.

Hasn't the summer already been hot?
Yes, an intense heatwave swept through areas of Europe last month, making it the hottest June on record.

France set an all-time high-temperature record of 46C, according to the WMO, and new June highs were set in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria, Andorra, Luxembourg, Poland and Germany.

Is climate change to blame?

While extreme weather events like heatwaves occur naturally, "research shows that with climate change they are likely to become more common, perhaps occurring as regularly as every other year", the UK's Met Office says.

Dr Peter Stott from the Met Office told BBC 5Live the latest heatwave is the result of both "weather and climate acting in concert.

"What we have at the moment is this very warm stream of air, coming up from northern Africa, bringing with it unusually warm weather," he said. "But without climate change we wouldn't have hit the peaks that we're hitting right now."

The Met Office conducted a study last year that found that the UK was now 30 times more likely to experience heatwaves compared to the year 1750, because of "the higher concentration of carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) in the atmosphere".

Records going back to the late 19th Century show that the average temperature of the Earth's surface has increased by about one degree since industrialisation.

A climatology institute in Potsdam, Germany, said Europe's five hottest summers since 1500 were all recorded in the 21st Century.
Scientists have expressed concern that rapid warming linked to use of fossil fuels has serious implications for the stability of the planet's climate.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 8839
    • View Profile
Re: Pentagon Wants 16-Year-Old Kids To Fight The Empire's Wars
« Reply #3869 on: July 26, 2019, 04:17:51 AM »
Pentagon Wants 16-Year-Old Kids To Fight The Empire's Wars
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-25/pentagon-wants-16-year-old-kids-fight-empires-wars


Authored By Kurt Nimmo via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity



The Pentagon is desperate. Far too many millennials are criminals, so luring them in to become the latest crop of bullet stoppers for the state is a nonstarter.

Solution? Recruit 16-year-olds. Most have yet graduated to petty and violent crime, although a lot of them are in video game training for a future of violence and self-destructive stupidity.

It’s not being widely reported in the media. Recruiters are ready to go after tenth-graders. They are itching to snag kids before they engage in a life of crime, or before they have fully-mature brains (well, some of them) and decide to kill and be killed isn’t much of a career choice.

First, though, the state will have to give these little darlings the “right” to vote for a crop of handpicked carnival barkers, euphemistically called representatives of the people.

I don’t know about you, but when I was sixteen all I thought about was cruising in my father’s car with a freshly minted state permission to drive card in my wallet as I searched desperately for girls willing to make-out in the backseat.

It took a year or two before I was politically aware, mostly as a result of Richard Nixon’s plan to “draft” me (polite speak for slavery) into the meat grinder he inherited from LBJ, aka the Vietnam War, where I would either be minced, traumatized for life, or lucky enough to stay behind lines and scrub latrines while other kids fought and senselessly died.


Around this time college, high school students, and millions of other concerned Americans marched against the war, a truly remarkable one-time event now impossible in America because the military is “volunteer” and our wars are “humanitarian.”

Most of these so-called volunteers “joined” the military because they have so few other career options (if you consider killing other people a career choice). Brought up in largely single-parent homes and taught all manner of nonsense in public schools that now resemble locked down prisons, these “volunteers” are completely ignorant of the reason the state needs them to fight and die.

It’s all about the psychopathic dominance of a tiny elite. The elite doesn’t send its Harvard-bound kids into its neoliberal meat grinder (because so many of these silver spoon darlings have bone spurs and such).

But this system is breaking down, mostly because the state upholds standards that worked in the 1940s and 50s, but are completely irrelevant now. They insist it is not permissible to fill the empty ranks with criminals. Hired killers must be held to the highest moral standard.

So, like the United Kingdom, the US is looking to 16-year old kids to fight in the name of the corporate state and, of course, our freedom to live hand-to-mouth in a political and cultural cesspool.

Democrats like the idea of 16-year-old voters. Most are far more impressionable and less cantankerous than your average middle-age deplorable. They also approve the idea of feeding kids into the military, but you don’t hear a lot about that because Democrats and progressives don’t think much about war. It’s a big blind spot for them. There are more important issues, for instance trans-gender bathrooms.

I don’t think this is going to turn out like they think it will. Far too many 16-year olds will flunk out of basic training. Most don’t have what it takes, never mind all those formative years killing bad guys on computer screens.

If The Donald gets us into a big shooting war over in the Middle East or in the South China Sea, the mandatory servitude of conscription will be required. It won’t be a turkey shoot like Iraq or Libya. It will be an existential threat, so all males —criminally inclined or not — between 16 and 45 will be inducted, same as they were after FDR tricked the Japanese into invading Pearl Harbor, or Johnson said the North Vietnamese attacked our warships in the Gulf of Tonkin.

But the kids are oblivious. They were taught to be so. And the propaganda machine will tell them they’re sacrificing their lives (or limbs and mental health) for the noble cause of star-spangled democracy, which most of them know close to zero about.

(shaking head)
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
73 Replies
25337 Views
Last post March 02, 2019, 12:54:20 PM
by azozeo
0 Replies
534 Views
Last post July 01, 2018, 08:07:18 PM
by Palloy2
0 Replies
96 Views
Last post August 05, 2019, 03:51:00 AM
by RE