Beckys

I would suggest that the Beckys of the world certainly are oriented to women’s issues. I don’t see that as being negative since people have to start somewhere. The however is simply is that there is a plethora of issues that affect all genders. The Neoliberal mindset separates by issues rather than unite people. As long as women advocate birth control, abortion and breaking the glass ceiling they are “warriors.” Let anti-war, civil rights and economic issues of the poor into advocacy and then all of sudden people become #demexit or anti-uniters…This has been the theme of the HRC wing of the Democrats since well before the primaries and is the one big reason I could never vote for HRC. I cannot tell you how many pro-HRC called me Republican lite for advocating Bernie over HRC. Until the Democratic Party is purged of neoliberals, by exposing their pedophilia or sexual harassment or whatever, the Democrats will continue to be a one trick pony as a haven for upscale petty bourgeois willing to sell the futures of those less fortunate for “a handful of dimes” as Jim Morrison of the Doors sang years ago…

FDR

Franklin Roosevelt is considered one of America’s greatest presidents for good reason. On the surface he saved America from the worse economic failure in history and guided America’s policies during WWII. What is overlooked was his ability as the ultimate politician of his time and of America’s existence. Sure he made mistakes as anyone who is bold enough to go against the grain but ultimately he was proven right on so many policies that even his critics could only attack him personally.
Two books by the same author- “The Mantle of Command: FDR at War, 1941-1942” and “Commander in Chief: FDR at War, 1943” by Nigel Hamilton shows the depth of which the president controlled his own military, congress and the American people as well as the allies, Great Britain and Soviet Russia.
In “The Mantle of Command” Nigel Hamilton starts by documenting his first meeting with Winston Churchill and how masterful his performance with the “Bulldog.” Churchill was hell bent on getting the United States into WWII at a time when America was not ready militarily nor politically. His mandate, from the American people, was to keep the United States out of the conflict as long as possible and still supply Britain and Russia with the war supplies they needed to fight the Axis.
“Moreover, far from abandoning their hold on the Middle East— as American military observers were still advising the British to do, but the President was not— the British were holding General Erwin Rommel at bay in North Africa. British forces, in fact, had successfully driven into Iraq and Syria to deter Vichy French assistance to Hitler. As a result, neither Turkey nor Portugal, nor Spain, had moved a finger to help Hitler. Even Marshal Pétain’s egregious puppet government in Vichy had refused to alter the terms of its 1940 surrender to Hitler and permit French military cooperation with the Nazis. Hitler, the President was convinced, was not going to have things his own way.”
The United States military in fact was advising the president to cede to Germany, Italy and Japan much more of the tremendous gains the Axis had made in the earlier years of war, which would have been much more costly to eventually win back. How Roosevelt handled the sure defeatist attitude of all those who surrounded him should be a lesson to us all and all the politicians who have come and gone up to modern times.

LifeandFate

“Life and Fate” is a Mini-Russian TV series based on the novel of the same name. Although I don’t care much for subtitles this one is much easier to read as it is blacked with white lettering.
The characterizations are pretty slick Hollywood-type in what westerners would call typical Russian stereotypes and icons. Still it is an enjoyable production that could have never been done in the Soviet era. “‘Life and Fate’ is an epic tale of World War II and a reckoning with dark forces emerging, including Stalinism. With Hitler and the Nazi army looming on the Front, the series takes us deep into the hearts and minds of citizens and soldiers struggling to cope with the ravages of war” as one reviewer succinctly wrote.
Still if you want to understand more about Russia and even understand the mindset of a nation that many think is still an adversary today, this drama may shed some light on a complicated dog and pony show of modern times.

advice

If I was going to give any advice to the younger generation, I would try to save as much as you can if nothing more than a dollar a day. That doesn’t mean necessarily investing in something- I’d only do any investment if it was “safe” or the alternative would be- prepare yourself to lose it all. The fallacy of “amateurs” in investing is they get too nervous like in a Wall Street stock when it goes down- they sell off too quickly. Mutual funds with a track record of more than 20 years to me is a good safe investment. There’s plenty of funds that are either environment friendly or progressive. But you have to do some research. I would ask myself what would the future bring? I’d say solar, power companies, perhaps a few startups if they are involved in some sort of futuristic endeavor. Organic Farming would appear to me to be a pretty safe thing. Of course if you had the equity, land in the right location on the fringes of cities will pay off in 20 years or so. Even though things look bleak for many folks these days, investing and finding the right career will do more to lift one out of the lower classes. Don’t get me wrong, it’s tougher today to find a good paying job. Anything having to do with technology and the ability to learn new skills will enhance prospects. No matter how much automation the future will bring there will be a need for folks who can service the technology. Did i leave anything out of course- if you can add anything positive to this please do- save your criticism for when you get old and you know a lot more about the world…

Much has been made of the division between the middle to the extreme left. Most folks would agree that any progressive candidate would need the majority of the middle of the road folks who no doubt voted Republican, especially in the sparsely populated states.
Now this begs the question as if candidates who garnered the votes necessary to win could lose the support of those who voted for them. Much of this is a distraction from issues since much if not most of the propaganda coming forth even from MSM is one of “personality.” The new mode of political discourse would appear to be the belligerent rantings from thoroughly unqualified candidates designed to stir the feelings of inadequacy so long part of the American electorate.
The only thing that trickles down is the consequences from voting and electing candidates who continually favor policies that enrich the elites.

lead

I was listening to NPR and they had an economist who wrote a book on 50 things that affect the economy. Interestingly he cited the guy who invented leaded gasoline which made it burn evenly. The inventor also was involved in fluorocarbon in spray cans and had lead poisoning and eventually developed polio, and then he invented a pulley system to lift him out of bed and strangled himself…another economist said that the reason why the crime rate has gone down was banning leaded gasoline, which lead was thought to lower IQ and inhibit thinking…as a side note…many cite lead being in the pipes in ancient Rome led (double pun lol) to the downfall…also mercury was used in animal skin hats to smooth the fur, which was also thought to contribute to the craziness of American frontiersmen…

war

WWII was unique compared to previous wars in the sense that civilians became much more part of the retaliatory destruction than previous wars. That’s not to say that civilians were not caught in between invading armies and defending armies before but rather it became the policy of the armies to actually go after civilian populations. The precedent seems to have started with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in the early thirties. The Japanese were hell bent on expanding their territory because of their homeland perceived as being much too crowded.
That escalated even more so and with more furor when the Nazis invaded Poland and the Soviet Union. The Nazis sent SS troops behind the army to genocide the civilian populations to clear the way for the expansion of German peoples to take over the conquered land. To ramp it up even more the Nazis decided to bomb London and other cities primarily in civilian and non-military targets.
Churchill in retaliation decided to bomb German cities during the night and when America entered the war they bombed during the day. This policy was extended in the Asian theater by the Americans primarily in the Japanese homeland. Besides the obvious intent to intimidate the Soviet Union, the dropping of two nuclear bombs on Japan, which ended WWII, were also in a revenge treatment for atrocities committed against prisoners of war.
Atrocities against both civilians and even disarmed military on both sides increasingly was policy for the remainder of the war resulting in civilian casualties overwhelmingly outnumbering military injured and dead.
By the time of Korea and Vietnam, millions of civilians were killed, injured and wounded and the destruction of homes and property was just “collateral damage.”
Modern wars in the Middle East have added civilian casualties as the price for insuring the world was safe for the oil industry.
Today it is “normal” for civilian casualties and our policy makers no longer bat an eye for millions who have become cannon fodder for policies that should be reprehensible to any sane person…

govt

One thought occurs to me is that one big complaint about socialism is “government interference” in private companies. However, it’s okay if the corporate state props up by subsidizing oil companies through depletion allowances or banks when they fail. Or how about favoring electrical power companies with tax credits as opposed to renewable energy sources or the fact that hemp could be used to replace almost all forms of plastic.
The truth is that the “opposition” has no interest in really opposing all these dangerous and expensive policies. So the next time you hear anything about the “resistance” think about why are none of these items in the mainstream media or why doesn’t political parties hammer on these very short sighted policies? The truth is more likely that politics is truly a dog and pony show, designed to concentrate on people and events not ideas…

conservatism

And if you want to get into “truthful” definitions- consider that most folks identify with conservatism. Around 1900 or so, the definitions were reversed to accommodate the Robber Barons. Ask yourself what is conservative about intervening militarily or otherwise in a foreign country or having troops stationed in 200 countries? Or how about exploiting land to the point where it’s uninhabitable? Or how about fiat money backed by nothing or unregulated Wall Street picking the pockets of small investors? What is conservative in genociding Native Americans or exploiting immigrants? Or using resources that are not renewable? None of this is “conservative” yet this is the way academics and politicians define conservatism. They put the positive spin on it by saying it’s the national interest (elites’ interest) not common folk’s. To understand reality one has to learn to think out of the box- this takes a basic grounding into the word play used by corporatists and their minions. And that is sorely lacking in most folks…

I’m not going to argue with the definition- however academia co-opts movements’ labels to suit the corporate shift to the right. I don’t know how old you are, but in 1968 a liberal was considered as much as what we say is a progressive today. You seem to be in a mindset to let corporatism define the movement to accommodate neoliberalism. And that is a fallacy…

narrative

Bernie is coming under some heavy criticism as if he rigged the primaries all by himself.
So what would have the narrative have been if Bernie hadn’t run? We would have had “token” Democrats such as Biden, Warren or O’Malley running who would have lost to the superior politician, HRC, and would have their endorsements flying like toilet paper on Halloween night.
The primary debates would have been like an Emmy or Academy Awards show and the sycophants would have been purring how wonderful and thoughtful HRC would be for embracing difficult positions on fracking, Wall Street and perpetual war for the good of the country. Healthcare would have focused on how great Obamacare was instead of Medicare for All and college loans discussions would have been whether loans should be six or maybe five percent interest and how our young people would be so lucky to attend our great institutions and taken one for the good of America. Everybody would have been touting Clinton’s record on feminism and civil rights- all the while ignoring the reality.
The Democratic Party convention would have been a big Kumbaya party with Bill Clinton kissing cheeks, whispering to the women “meet me later, we’re having a feminism test in the broom closet.”
Yea, good old Sheep herder Bernie would have made no difference at all and we’d all be saluting HRC as our commander-in-chief…Wasserman Schultz would be leading us to the next glorious election in 2018…and we’d all be dancing down the Yellow Brick Road seeing what the Wizard had in store for our people…