Our Election Day PSA to Voters Everywhere

 

Our Election Day "PSA" to Voters Everywhere:

The role of the media should be to provide accurate and balanced news so that we can make informed decisions. That means the news media needs to be non-partisan in their reporting. At election time the media (particularly newspapers) like to make their endorsements and urge you---the voter---support their agenda. Their agendas don't necessarily represent our best interest best interest. Do your own research and vote your conscience. Don't vote to be "anti" anything. We don't need any more negativity in the world. Instead, make your vote count "for" something you truly believe in. Thank you, AnotherOpinionblog.com

Who Wants To Play Monopoly?

 

I'm sure everyone has played the Parker Brothers board game "Monopoly" and tried to dominate all the properties and garner as much of the money as possible, but I'm not talking about board games. I'm talking about real life monopoly where a handful of individuals or corporations own the lion's share of the marketplace. Have you ever wondered who the real life monopoly players were? Well, if so, read on.

As many of you should know, only six corporations own 90%+ of all media. That includes movies, video games, publishers, magazines, newspapers, TV, cable, and practically all news outlets. That means just six corporations whose political and social agendas shape or influence our opinions on nearly every issue. To put it another way, those six corporations call the tune that we are forced to dance to.

While it's possible to find outside sources, most Americans either don't know where to look or they're too tired from work or just to frustrated to bother. Besides, most "go to" sources out there are biased one way or the other. There are too few non-partisan sources, such as this one, to go to. That means many American's turn to various distractions such at TV, videos or video games, movies, and so on; all of which are owned by those very same six corporations and reflect their political agendas.

So, if we weren't going to watch TV or play video games, what are we going to do? How about heading to the refrigerator for something to eat? Well, hate to break it to you, but you have the same problem. Four corporations control just over 50% of the market representing 79% of the groceries we buy. Not only that, just four companies---Walmart, Kroger, Costco, and Ahold Delhaize (the parent of companies like Food Lion, Giant Food, Stop & Shop, and Freshdirect) control 65% of the retail market.

As an aside, farmers receive only 15 cents of every dollar consumers spend on groceries. The rest goes for processing and marketing. Meanwhile, farmers received approximately $424.4 billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies from 1995 to 2020 (that includes $20 billion just under the Trump Administration). However, the majority of that money didn't go to the average small family farm. It went to the largest 15% of corporate owned farms which typically earn a million dollars or more a year.

In terms of meat processing, four companies---JBS, Tyson, Cargill, and  Marfrig---control  85% of the market while three companies, JBS, Tyson, and Hormel, control 66% of the pork market and four companies---JBS, Tyson, Purdue, and Sanderson Farms--- control 51% of the poultry industry. The same report points out that five corporations control 85% of processed pork market in Germany.

JBS alone received $78 million dollars in taxpayer based subsidies as part of a farm bailout during a trade war with China. JBS is 20% owned by the Brazilian Development Bank. In 2017, Brazilian authorities handed out the highest fines ever against JBS officials on corruption charges, including the bribery of 1,900 government officials. 

In terms of agrochemicals, such as fertilizer, four companies----ChemChina, Bayer, BASF, and Corveta own 65.8% of the market. The same companies, plus Limagrain, dominate 53.2 of the commercial seed market. In the world of "animal pharma", which makes veterinary supplies, medicines, and devices for farm and other animals, 58.3% of the market is controlled by only five companies, Zoetis, Elanco, Boehringer, Ingelheim, and Merck.

While Cargill, a global food company, is privately held, most of the other key players are owned by investment firms, banks, and pension funds; investing to the tune of $478 billion dollars in the meat and dairy market from 2015 to 2020. The major investors are Blackrock, Capital Group, Vanguard, and Norway's government pension fund! By the way, thanks to the blunder which is Citizens United, the food industry spent $175 million dollars lobbying government officials and making campaign contributions during the 2020 election cycle.

When it comes to the tech industry, which impacts nearly everything, just five companies virtually dominate the entire industry. Those companies are Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft.

Between them, they control or influence around 80% of the technology we use every day. In fact, their combined wealth makes up 15% of the entire S&P 500. I bet no one is laughing at those high school geeks now! Of course, the tech industry, like everything else, needs electricity to operate. So who dominates the energy market?

The three primary sources of energy for the United States is oil, natural gas, and coal, with oil and gas accounting for 60% of all energy produced and used.  Renewable energy such as wind, hydro, and solar makes up a tiny fraction of America's energy source, and if the leading companies controlling the energy market have any say in it (and they do), renewable sources will never be a major player.

The industrial sector makes use of 32% of all energy produced. This is followed by the transportation sector which uses 29%,  which is closely followed by the residential sector which uses around 20%. The commercial sector, which includes businesses, hospitals, schools, etc., consumes 18%.

When it comes to production of all this energy, the largest global company is ExxonMobil, followed by Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, Total, and British Petroleum. PetroChina and Sinopec make up the sixth and seventh spots. Others in the top 20 producers include a third Chinese company, CNOOC Limited (15th), Italy's Eni (10th), and Halliburton, a U.S. company, in 20th place. Together these 20 companies nearly dominate the entire energy industry.

You may be interested to learn that the oil and gas industry donated around $8,708,787.00 dollars in the 2020 election cycle. Of that Donald Trump received $3,773,155.00. Joe Biden, the only Democrat to receive money among the top five candidates, got a paltry $1,609,976.

The oil and gas industry gave $63.6 million dollars to the Republican Party while the Democrat Party got just $13.3 million dollars during the 1990 to 2020 election cycles. Thus far in the 2021/22 election, the GOP has received $8 million compared to the Democrat's $2.4 million. How's that for influence buying? 

With all that money, it's got to go somewhere! So, who are movers and shakers in the financial industry? The financial industry is highly diverse. It includes everything from banks, to fund managers, to holding companies, insurance companies (commercial and retail), to lenders and collection agencies. 

However, if we're looking at assets held or controlled, there are roughly 30 or so leading companies which dominate the U.S. financial market. The top ten (from tenth to first) are Blackrock, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, PayPal, MasterCard, Visa, JP Morgan Chase, Visa, and Berkshire Hathaway. Also in the top 30 are Travelers (29th), Capital One (23rd), and Goldman Sachs (13th).

Globally, it's a slightly different story. While Berkshire Hathaway is still number one, the next five companies are all Chinese (Ping An Insurance Group, ICBC Banking, China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, and China Life Insurance). Next is the German company (and the parent of my old company, Euler Hermes) Allianz, which is a financial conglomerate.  

In eighth place is another Chinese company, Bank of China, followed by JP Morgan Chase, and AXA Insurance. Other companies in the top 30 include 12 American companies, eight Chinese, four French, four English, four Japanese, two German, two Canadian, and a smattering of Indian, Italian, Swiss, Spanish, and Dutch. Notably absent are those from Hong Kong, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, or Singapore.

As we all know, nothing happens in Washington without palms getting greased in one fashion or another. As with any other industry, the financial sector made its presence felt in the 2020 election cycle. Wall Street executives, directly, trade associations, PACs, lobbying, and so forth, spent $2.9 billion on the 2020 election cycle. Of that, $1.9 billion went specifically to candidates running for a federal office. 

47% of that $1.9 billion went to Republican candidates while 53% went to Democrats, with $74 million going to Joe Biden. So much for the Democratic Party being one of the working class! If we were to include money coming from the real estate investors and insurance companies, along with the financial industry, the money spent jumps up to $250 million dollars to support Biden.

 Meanwhile, "The Donald", who made his living in real estate investment and development, received only $103 million from those same industries. Five U.S. senators received a combined $300 million, including Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

The same study showed that lobbying efforts by these same industries spent a whooping $932 million dollars for the same election cycle. Who spent the most? Apparently the top spenders were Blackstone, American Bankers Association, Charles Schwab, Susquehanna International, Bain Capital, and Renaissance Technologies. All I can say is that I hope they got what they paid for (well, maybe not).

Some groups and individuals would have you believe that America is "turning socialist" (or Communist. They use the two different ideologies interchangeably). Obviously if that was true, none of the above would be happening since socialism is the ownership of production by the workers and Communism is the ownership of everything by the state.

America is a Corportracy, a form of fascism, meaning a close partnership or even "hand-in-glove" relationship between corporations and government. As you'll note from the above, that's clearly what we have. Like any system, it has managers or overseers. Those managers are the uber wealthy Oligarchs who own or control these corporations. What they want they get, and it's usually at our expense.

Studies have shown that, on average, the wealthiest 10% of American's typically get what they want from government about 65% of the time. When average American's oppose a policy the super wealthy support (like the Wall Street bailout under President Obama), the rich usually win as they did in that instance.  The same argument can be made when it comes to tax cuts, low/no interest federal loans, bailouts, subsidizes, or foreign policy matters.

This isn't the work of would-be "socialists" or Communists. This is the work of an powerful and unbelievably rich Oligarchy where party means absolutely nothing except a means to divide us. They have an agenda and it's not the restoration of our former Republic or furthering the spread of democracy. This is about power and control. As George Carlin once said, "it's a big club and you and I ain't in it".  It's time we had our own club. It's time we stop playing Monopoly by their rules.

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on Facebook or whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation.

 

Companies: dominating the market from farm to display case

America's food monopolies and power imbalances

Just a Few Companies Control the Meat Industry. Can a NewApproach Level the Playing Field?

GAFAM: The Big Five Tech Companies Facts

Lobbying spending of oil and gas companies in the UnitedStates

Disturbing data: The rich and powerful get their policiesadopted even if opposed by most voters

The Top 30 largest US financial companies in 2021

List of the largest financial services companies by revenue

Wall Street execs, employees spent $2.9 billion to influenceWashington during the 2020 election, study shows

A Message to America

 

***Due to Blogger's new format change, there are random changes font size and colors***

America has been engaged in so-called "nation building" since World War II ended in 1945. It all started with the Marshall Plan, named after its originator, former General George Marshall. The intent was simple enough; to keep Europe, which had been devastated by 12 years of war, from a total collapse. Not only was Germany a heap of ruble, but so was most of the rest of Europe, from France in the west to the Soviet Union in the east and from Sicily in the south to Norway in the north. 

As a result of mistrust and rapidly rising tensions between the former wartime allies, Stalin refused to allow the U.S. to deliver badly needed supplies, including drinking water, food, and medical supplies, to countries under its control. Part of the reason was enforce its dominance over these countries and in the case of West Berlin, to force the Allies out; this abandoning West Berlin to the Soviets.

Of course, around the clock airdrops by the Americans ensured that West Berliners were able to stave off Soviet imposed starvation. Meanwhile, American supplies flooded the rest of Europe, including England which had been brought to its knees by the war. Not only were food, fresh water, and medical supplies delivered, but so was everything imaginable to rebuild Europe, from concrete and construction equipment to manufacturing machinery to ordinary consumer goods.

Not only did the U.S. save Europe from economic and social collapse, it also did the same for Asia, including its former enemy, Japan. As a result, not only did America emerge from WWII as the most powerful military power in the world, but also as the most powerful economic nation on the planet. It was at this time that the U.S. began flexing its newfound global muscle.

At the same time, the Soviet Union, our former ally, was engaged in an all out attempt to compete with the U.S. by stripping the countries it occupied of everything of worth, from technology to scrap metal to scientists and engineers. The "Cold War" was on. From there on out the two countries would be engaged a war of wills which would involve trade wars, embargos, proxy wars, and competing propaganda. Each would do its upmost to infiltrate and undermine the other at every opportunity.

During this period, both nations focused on influence expansion by attracting allies. Part of this involved the concept of "nation building". Nation building was an attempt to help developing countries (often newly independent former colonies) create new governments complete with infrastructures and militaries. It was essential in keeping or pulling a country from the other's political orbit.

Like the U.S., the Soviet Union, sponsored campaigns and candidates in addition to aid. Once a friendly government was installed (some were elected as in the case of Chile or Argentina or the result of a guerilla insurgency as in Cuba or Angola). The war in Vietnam was more complicated. It was, in fact, a civil war as much as a ideological war. The Communist North was supplied, trained, and occasionally aided by "volunteers" from the USSR and China. The same for North Korea in that war.

As for America, we relied less on elections and more on backing military coups and juntas. If there was an election that we opposed, we did our best to disrupt it by discrediting the opposition, and if that didn't work, we would often support an overthrow of the government which often included assassinating it president and other key figures. This was what the world saw as our "spreading American democracy" which was often hidden from the America Public.

Meanwhile, powerful American corporations would step in to seize....I mean negotiate...control of natural resources or economic markets. Anyone who objected (and couldn't be bribed) were typically intimidated with threat of U.S. military might. They would usually be denounced in the media while trade would suddenly be reduced to a trickle or aid was cut off as a case was manufactured to depose them (usually involving alleged civil rights violations) as a precursor to a U.S. sponsored coup.

At this point, most leaders simply took the bribe and looked the other way.  As an aside, the truth about civil rights violations was usually true. However, as long as they cooperated, it was officially ignored. Case in point---Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet or Jorge Videla. In time this corporate-government partnership became a merger of sorts into what we have today---a Corporatocracy comprised of interconnected plutocrats, or to put it much simpler, an Oligarchy.

As for our efforts at nation building, the U.S. Government spent billions if not trillions aiding countries into developing  capitalistic democracies.  Yet, despite all the money spent (that is, taxpayer money) how many countries do you think developed a government based on the U.S. model? Take a guess. We'll come back to it shortly.

Obviously for the Corporatocracy to succeed, it was necessary that both political parties be brought under its control. Controlling one party just so the other could undo everything or worse, rat them out wouldn't do. As a result, they slowly worked to oust anyone who wouldn't play ball. That included the majority of the moderates on both sides.

It also included anyone with pesky morals (some still exist, but they're a small minority and can do little). As former Speaker of the House, Sam Rayburn famously said, "To get along you have to go along".  Is it any wonder that the majority of Congress are multimillionaires? If they weren't went they first went in, they either soon became one by going along or they weren't reelected. How do you think that happens?

Now back to my question. How many countries adopted the U.S. model of government? The answer is zero. Nix. Nada. Goose egg. Instead, they adopted the English parliamentary or proportional representation form of government. It allows every party to have seat based on the percentage of seats it won in the election. Thus, everyone still has a say even if their party didn't win a majority of seats.

Under the U.S. model, it's a "winner take all" form of government. That means if your party won, you theoretically have a voice (in truth you have no voice). If not, then you're out of luck. You have no representation. Doesn't sound real democratic does it?  Some people will argue that the English system is chaotic, cumbersome, and causes deadlocks. To that, I point to Washington and Congress as prima-facie evidence when it comes to legislative logjams.  

While the U.S. has mostly gotten out of the assassination business, it's still involved in removing governments and individuals that impede corporate interests. We are still involved with acquiring natural resources, forcing open markets, and so forth, though we might say "please" first. It reminds me of a quote from Chicago mobster Al Capone. He once said "You can get further with a kind word and gun than just a kind word". That kind word is now America's economic and military might.

Meanwhile, America has moved closer to becoming a fascist police or security state. Anyone past the age of 50 cannot look back and say this is the same country they remembered when they were 20 or even 30. Our education system has been repeatedly dumbed down. We have less to say about government policies or  tax increases. They had ridiculed and demonized any and all political or social alternatives.

Our infrastructure is fracturing and collapsing.  Most cities are struggling to survive. Many are imploding due to mismanagement. A few have become nothing short of cesspools where people routinely urinate or defecate on sidewalks, live in parks, and scatter used drug needles everywhere.  Up is down. Right is wrong. Alice would feel right at home.

Politicians, once elected, are virtually impossible to remove no matter how poor their job performance thanks to partisan gerrymandering. Unrestricted campaign financing (thanks to Citizens United and wrongly labeled as "free speech") has all but removed ordinary citizens from the process.  That's why we need to eliminate Citizens United and the concept of corporations as having the same (or greater) rights as people. It's why we need to impose term limits on politicians. Ranked choice voting wouldn't hurt either. 

Corporate power within government is near absolute. It controls virtually everything, from legislation to regulation. It dictates both foreign and domestic policies.  Meanwhile, we continue to lose our freedoms precious piece by piece. We are monitored constantly. Our opinions are shaped and manipulated by a cooperative media. We "vote", but only from a small cadre of pre-vetted candidates. Don't believe me?

Ask yourself why, out of  323.2 million Americans, is it that Biden and Trump are the best each party can produce? Can't San Francisco/Oakland/Sausalito do any better than Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein, or Kamala Harris?  Was Dick Chaney or George W Bush the best the GOP had? How did someone like Barack Obama, with little to no professional or political experience become president? I could go on and on regardless of political party. I bet you can too.

With Independents comprising the largest political bloc in this country, why are they and third parties blocked from getting on the ballot or participating in the debates by both parties. What are they afraid of?  Why do they have to jump over barriers the other two don't have? Not much of a free and open democracy is it?

Regardless of the outcome of this election in November, very little of substance will actually change. The elites will get back to business as usual. Some of Trump's accomplishments will be overturn (unless it can be perverted to serve their interests somehow). Individuals like Hillary Clinton and Obama will be restored to their former pedestals while their past transgressions will be securely buried forever.

However, there are things we can do if we work together. As voters, we need to ensure that our voices are heard. We need citizen based ballot initiatives or referendums. We must have the final say on any tax or rate increases no matter how large or small. It's our money, not theirs. Same holds true for salary increases of elected officials.  We need to end partisan gerrymandering by establishing independent ad hoc boards to draw the districts based on the latest census records. We also need to impose term limits.

We must remove all barriers to Indies and third parties. What's good for the Democrats and Republicans is good for everyone seeking an office. They must also open all debates to every candidate. They should be given the same coverage by the media. In short, elections must be fair and open. We must end Citizens United. Corporations are not people. They don't deserve the same rights. We also need to end corporate funding of elections, be it direct or bundled. They should also not be allowed to "help" write legislation.

Political offices which are not engaged in legislation should be non-partisan. This includes offices like Secretary of State, Treasurer, County Clerk, Auditor, County Attorney, Attorney General, Circuit Court Clerk, Secretary of Agriculture, and County Sheriff.  Judicial offices are supposed to be non-partisan, but often they're not. Therefore, they should be required to declare their registration.

If we can do this, we can take a huge step forward into repairing our broken system, and that could help returning this nation to what it was intended to be---a Constitutional Republic.

 

 

To 'Protect and Serve', But Whom? The Decline of Trust in America's Police

I am not sure what to make of the death of George Floyd. As you probably know, Floyd was the man killed by Minneapolis Police Officer, Derek Chauvin, who, after handcuffing Floyd, kneeled on his neck with his full weight which, despite pleas from Floyd that he couldn't breathe, caused him to eventually passed out and die. Chauvin and the other officers who neither said or did anything, were fired the next day. While trial will no doubt be forthcoming, the central question is whether the officers will be held to the same standards as everyone else.

We all remember Eric Garner who was choked to death by one of New York's "finest", Officers Daniel Pantaleo, with assistance from Officer Justin D'Amico, despite pleading eleven times to the officers that he couldn't breathe (they insisted that Garner was continuing to "resist". Witnesses testified that he was only trying to get air and with every attempt, the officer's grip only tightened. Ultimately, the officers were acquitted of all charges. Even the Department of Justice refused to press charges.

In 2014, a 21 year old college student named James King was misidentified in connection with a non-violent petty crime. However, that didn't stop three members of a joint federal/state police task force of beating him into unconsciousness. These undercover officers, who did not identify themselves as such, were looking for someone wanted for stealing empty aluminum cans and a box of liquor. They pinned King against a van and while yelling at him, began looting his pockets. King, who thought he was being robbed, broke and ran only to be tackled by the officers and subsequently beaten to a pulp. He was ultimately hospitalized.

Passersbyers heard King's screams for help and called 911 while others began recording the assault. Eventually uniformed officers showed up. After discovering their mistake, the undercover officers demanded that all recordings be deleted. Still, King, who wasn't wanted for anything, was still charged with felony crimes. The matter eventually went to court, where, not unexpectedly, none of the officers would testify against the three undercover officers. While the case was eventually dismissed, none of the officers were held accountable. In fact, attorneys for the state argued that the officers were "exempt" from having violated King's constitutional rights!

On June 6, 2019, in another case of mistaken identity, Los Angeles sheriff deputies shot 24 year old Ryan Twyman 34 times as he sat, unarmed, in his car with another individual. Just a few hours later, a 27 year black male was shot and killed by officers as he walked down the street. The officers maintained that the individual was "acting suspiciously". When officers approached he started to run. The officers gave chase and eventually shot and killed the unarmed man. In fact, on that day, there was a total of five shootings by officers, resulting in the deaths of all but one of the suspects. Of those four, none were directly involved in any crimes. None of the officers involved were charged. Unfortunately, this has become the norm and not the exception.

I know that's a terrible thing to say. But it's also true. In 2018, around 1000 individuals were killed by police (and about the same amount in 2017). Of that, 98 non-federal officers were accused of murder and arrested. Out of these 98 individuals, only 35 were convicted; typically of a lesser crime such as involuntary manslaughter or negligent murder. 22 were acquitted while ten were dismissed by the judge (one by a grand jury). 21 cases remain pending, and just three were ultimately found guilty.

As an aside, a study from 2016 conducted by the American Journal on Public Health reported that black males were nearly three times more likely to be killed by police officers in general compared to white males (in terms of raw numbers, there were more white male deaths than any other race. However, that's because white males made up a larger share of the total population). "Death by cop" is the seventh highest cause of death among black men under 30.

Native Americans were also three times more likely to be killed by law enforcement than whites males while Hispanics were twice as likely. Asians had the lowest percentage, but also the smallest population sample. Regardless, remember that taxpayers are the ones picking up the tab in each one of these cases, including settlements, which are often in the millions of dollars.

On March 13, 2020 in Louisville, Kentucky, undercover officers with Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) broke into an apartment using a "no knock" warrant with guns blazing. The officers claimed they were being shot at, and thus were responding with what they believed to be appropriate force. In the end, one individual, a male, was arrested and charged with attempted murder of a police officer and first degree assault, while another individual, a female, lay dead.

The officers were there to make a narcotics bust. They didn't identify themselves since this was an undercover operation. The problem, however, was that the officers had the wrong address. The man arrested by officers, Kenneth Walker, thought that their apartment was being broke into. The individual they shot and killed was a EMT employee who had been asleep in her bed. Her name was Breonna Taylor. She was just 26. She had been shot at least eight times. The officers had fired a total of approximately 25 rounds blindly into the house. Walker fired only a single round.

After realizing their mistake, the police clammed up, not releasing any information about the shooting to Ms. Taylor's family. It was a deliberate "tried and true" attempt to stall for as long as possible while trying to concoct a cover story to fed the victim's family and the media. Fortunately for the police, there were no body cameras or recordings since this was an undercover operation. As for the real suspect, he was found some ten miles away. At this juncture, the police have been slowly releasing information, albeit with contradictory statements. Certainly there will be an internal investigation, which is usually an effort to justify the action of officers and create a credible sounding scenario of events.

The matter will likely go to trial where, if it follows the usual pattern, every effort to shift the blame will be made. If past cases are any indication, the officers involved will get off with little more than a reprimand or they'll be "encouraged" to resign from the force with full benefits. Meanwhile, any settlements will be paid for by the residents of Jefferson County. It will likely include a non-disclosure agreement, which is a shame. Why? Well, if we are the ones paying for these screw-up's, then we deserve to know the full details wouldn't you agree?

The only upside of this tragedy is that the long embattled police chief, Steve Conrad, finally agreed to step down. However, rather than being fired as many throughout the community (including the FOP) had been demanding for years, he is retiring, which means he'll get full benefits courtesy of Louisville taxpayers. Conrad has a long track record of controversy. He mismanaged $6.2 million dollars in emergency funding (it was suppose to last six months. It lasted barely six weeks). There was the Explorer Scout sexual molestation debacle by police officers which he tried to sweep under the rug.

There has been numerous instances of police abuse or inattention which were covered up or excused, not to mention misuse of overtime, resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years among many other incidents. He long ago lost the respect of the community, his fellow officers as well as the FOP, which in 2016 gave a 98% "no confidence" vote in Conrad's leadership, followed by a "no confidence" vote by the Metro Council in 2017.

Conrad failed repeatedly in creating a transparent police department or rebuilding public trust after his predecessor, Robert White left the LMPD in shambles. In short, Steve Conrad has been an embarrassment to Louisville along with his boss, Mayor Greg Fischer, who has done nothing but cover for him at our expense. Was it worth it to Breonna Taylor, the Explorer Scouts, and all the others?

There's no question that crime is on the rise. "No knock" warrants have their place. Originally, they were intended for those rare and exceptional cases where the lives of officers would be put in extraordinary danger and there was no other way to safely execute a search. Nowadays, "no knock" warrants are almost routinely issued; an average of approximately 20,000 a year. Also, there are no provisions to record what happens during these type of raids, and there should be. If, for no other reason, than to safe guard the rights of every citizen in this country whether they are accused of a crime or not.

Secondly, we see too many cases where the police engage in a "shoot first lawyer up later" mentality. Part of this is the pressure police officers are under. It's a dangerous world out there and respect for the law or law enforcement is in short supply. The "bad guys" are often better armed and more willing to shoot cops than ever before. Gang members from south of the border face far worse conditions in their prisons than ours, which are seen as "resorts" and the death penalty is rare, so they have little to fear.

Another part of the problem is police militarization. They're dressed equipped like the military. They are frequently trained like the military. Their thinking is geared along military lines as are their operations. Is it any wonder they are acting like the military? Their motto, "protect and serve" is now "control and maintain". The public is viewed as criminals who haven't been caught...yet. When those you're suppose to serve are seen as part of the problem, it's not long before trust on both sides vanishes.

We also have to add a failure of leadership to lead; a failure to take responsibility. They should openly invite the public spotlight, not hide from it. Officers should be trained to use deadly force last, not first. That includes not just in the use of weapons, but also physically. Once they undertake any step to detain or arrest someone, they are by definition taking charge of that person which includes insuring their safety. It's also imperative that everyone understands that running from cops or assaulting one is a bad idea. It's not a game. Regardless of what you did or didn't do, you must follow the officer's instructions and don't mouth off. It's better to speak up in court than having someone speak at your funeral.

While there's a natural bond between law enforcement and the judicial system, a conspiracy, implied or not, to obscure or distort the facts cannot be allowed to exist. When police officers or judges mess up (and they do just like anyone else), they must be fully held responsible for their actions in the most transparent way possible. Because they are held to a higher standard, there cannot be the slightest hint of impropriety else the whole social system, which is ultimately based on faith and trust, collapses.

That is what we're seeing right now. The American People have lost faith in their institutions. They no longer trust the politicians, the media, the school system, corporations, or even in religious institutions. Nevertheless, we are first and foremost a nation of laws, which are applicable to everyone equally without regard to race, class, religion, or any other criteria. When we cease having faith in those laws and how they are applied, then there is nothing left to hold us together. When that happens, we lose not just our nation, but our identity as Americans as well. For more information, be sure to check out our links below.



Mayor: Officer who put knee on man's neck should be charged


Police officer convicted of fatal shootings are the exception, not the rule


Black men nearly 3 times as likely to die from police use of force, study says

After Police Brutally Beat And Hospitalized James King, The Government Closed Ranks And Is Using A Legal Shell Game To Avoid Accountability

Los Angeles officers shot at Ryan Twyman 34 times. He was one of four killed that day


Louisville police conducting a drug bust charged into Breonna Taylor's house and shot her eight times. Her family says they were at the wrong address


Getting killed by police is a leading cause of death for young black men in America

Where's The Outrage? America's Political Apathy

A few weeks ago former President Barack Obama gave a speech before Democracy Alliance. The speech was one of those typical "rah rah" events designed to rally the troops. Mr. Obama stated that one of the problems facing the Democratic Party was that the people no longer knew what the party stands for. He pointed out that much of what the public saw and heard came from the Far Left through Twitter feeds and other social media outlets; much of it promoting "crazy stuff".

I can't say that I disagree with Obama on that point. Most of what we see and hear are, in fact, some pretty outlandish ideas. However, there were several other points made in his speech which caught my attention. First, much of what he said seemed to reflect his support for the military-industrial state and Wall Street.

Historically, the Democratic Party was seen as the "working class" or "blue collar" party. However, that changed decades ago as unions began losing their financial and political clout and the party became ever increasingly propped up by the super wealthy and corporations. This was especially true after the infamous "Citizens United" decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. which effectively ended any remaining illusions of our country's republican ideals.

Today, both the Democrat and Republican parties are owned by corporate interests, and with them, their politicians. Their lobbyists help write legislation and then actively promote its passage through Congress. As a result, we've devolved from a representative or democratic Republic into a defacto Oligarchy; a plutocracy. A neo-Fascist state if you will.

Mr. Obama went on to say that America "is still a country that is less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement". He added that Americans “like seeing things improved. But the average American doesn’t think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it.” While it's absolutely true that Americans have lost a willingness to impose changes on our broken system, I question his comment that we aren't wanting to see the system totally remade. He made it sound like we're apathetic; like we're content to wallow in a muck not of our making until someone else comes along to clean it up for us.

Right now, there are thousands of mass protests happening around the world, from Chile to Hong Kong. Citizens are openly challenging their government (some even have reputations for brutal reprisals and repression) over issues such as freedom of speech, movement, expression---including that of religion, the climate, and free enterprise. Yet here in the U.S., with Congress maintaining dismal approval ratings for decades, where are the protests? In other countries, similar ratings are often enough of a concern to threaten governmental stability.

As an example, during the week of November 1, 2019, Congress had a disapproval rating of 72% (with 3% having no opinion)! Can you imagine? Governments in other countries would have collapsed with those kind of numbers. Congress hasn't seen an approval rating in the thirties since the last week in August...2009! And this isn't a "Republicans only" issue. The American People have soured on both parties, keeping the approval rating in the dumpster regardless of who controls the Senate or House. In fact, the same October poll asked if we approved of the way Democrats or Republicans were doing their job. 60% said no to both.

I think Americans know beyond the shadow of doubt that the political (and to a large degree, the judicial system) are broken beyond repair. No amount of "reform" or changing the window dressing (ie: voting out the incumbents) are going to fix it. Yet, we sit on our couches watching TV or playing video games, lost in the noise, and do nothing. Sure, we may "bitch and moan" on social media (while subconsciously aware that the new surveillance state is probably reading everything we write) or complain to friends or coworkers. A few may be willing to sign online petitions, but not much more than that happens.

Yeah, the Left have staged a few protests, but very few have been large (perhaps the largest to date was during President Trump's inauguration by Antifa) or sustained. The last best example was the "Occupy Movement" in 2011. Most have been small ad hoc protests attempting to block intersections or highways (a really lame idea by the way) or appearing at Trump or conservative gatherings. As for the Right, they haven't staged any mass protests that I'm aware of. At best, it's been relatively small counter protests. However, all have been directed at the other side. None at the political system itself.

Over the decades, protests against the government have been fairly successful. Look back to the Civil Rights movement. It included calculated acts of defiance designed to attract public attention such as in 1955 with Rosa Parks sitting in a "whites only" section of a city bus in Montgomery Alabama, four black students sitting at a "whites only" lunch counter at Woolworths in Greensboro North Carolina in 1960, or the Freedom Riders in parts of the South in 1961. These were coordinated with mass marches on state capitols along with demands for Congress and the President to act.

The Vietnam War was replete with examples. Everything from sit-ins, protests outside government offices, mass marches, draft card burnings, occupying college administration offices and recruiting stations, and other acts of refusal aimed specifically at garnering the public's attention. It even branched out to include popular celebrities and TV shows (remember the Smothers Brothers?) to incorporating its message in the era's music and arts. Of course, there were, unfortunately, acts of violence brought on by groups such as the Black Panthers (which evolved out of the Black Power Movement), the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the Weathermen, and the SLA.

Some was the result of and in response to acts of violence by the KKK and Neo-Nazis who used violence as acts of intimidation (such as blowing up churches, schools, beatings, or outright assassinations). The government too got in on the act by illegally wiretapping, surveillance, break-ins, reading stolen mail, physical intimidation, blackmail, imprisonment, fines, tax audits. Of course, we can't forget the Chicago Police riots during the Democratic National Convention in 1969 or the Ohio National Guard shootings at Kent State in 1970 in which four students were murdered and nine were injured.

There was, of course, the Women's Liberation, Environment, Farm workers, and Gay Pride movements as well as the American Indian Movement (AIM) in the late 60's early 70's. Those weren't known for their violence, but more for the shock value of women publically removing and burning their bras or gays holding parades aimed intentionally at gaining public attention by their outrageous dress and behavior, or the widespread boycotting of certain businesses. Nevertheless, these movements had as their objective equal pay and fair employment laws. They incorporated not just demonstrations, but citizens lobbying (including petitions) and working together to elect supporters to office.

Ultimately, these groups were largely successful. We saw the passage of the Civil Rights Act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965. Under President Richard Nixon the war in Vietnam finally ended thanks to public pressure by 1973. President Nixon also signed into law various bills aimed at cleaning up the air, water, protecting wildlife and consumer safety.

There was the passage of equal wage, fairness in housing and employment laws along with better working conditions for migrant and seasonal workers. However, while there were some initial improvements on Native American reservations, much was left undone, especially when it came to housing, education, and medical care because the pressure wasn't maintained.

Nowadays, with the advent of the internet and social media, it's much easier to organize marches and protests aimed at a unresponsive government, but where is it? Why are the limited demonstrations aimed at either side when corporate/government corruption is the ultimate "villain" in the act? I think the answer is that politicians and corporations got a lot smarter.

First, they redirected their PR departments to focus on creating a more friendly public image by trying to get involved with local projects, emphasis jobs, gloss over outcomes, and changed advertising techniques (for a great example, take a look at the oil and gas companies and how to cover spills or court orders). Even the military did a makeover to make itself more appealing by emphasizing education, training, and "adventure".

Politicians learned to create a more "common man" image; even changing their language to sound more "down to earth", rolling up their sleeves, or hiding their elite professional and academic credentials; telling voters what they want to hear or disguising their votes. Corporations and government also got a lot cozier, especially after Citizens United which opened up the financial floodgate and all but eliminated ordinary citizens from the process.

It's more common now than 20 years ago for politicians or key staffers to turn lobbyists, earning millions to solicit their former colleagues, and you best bet that nepotism is alive and well with spouses, family members and close friends securing some very lucrative positions. Meanwhile, lobbyists "help" write legislation, provide bill summaries (and their recommendations), and freely engage in what can be called as legalized bribery.

With nearly unlimited financing of their campaigns, along with partisan gerrymandering, no term limits, it has become nearly impossible to dislodge an incumbent. They changed election laws to all but eliminate Independents and third party candidates from debates. With these same corporations owning 90+% of all media outlets, Indies and third parties are either ignored or treated like the clown car in a two ring circus. It has resulted in creating a professional political elite; a ruling class.

We've devolved into is duopoly bought and paid by a super wealthy Oligarchy with its own values and separate laws. Society has become basically a two tier economic system with the top one percent controlling 40% of the nation's wealth while the bottom 80% control just 7%. The gap between the top 10% and everyone else is 1000% of their entire wealth.

A free nation cannot survive with a political system which caters to a tiny fraction of its population, or in which the vast majority of its population is all but eliminated from the process. We're encouraged to no longer think of ourselves as citizens of a country but as global consumers. Our worth is determined by our credit rating. Our differences are magnified out of proportion to what we have in common. Americans have been manipulated. We no longer know who to believe or trust. Our hopes have been distorted into "either/or" conflicts with others.

Worse yet, we've seen this corporate/government partnership (what Benito Mussolini defined as a "Fascist" relationship) attempt to restrict or deprive us of our rights. We've seen attempts at restricting our freedom of speech and expression, our ownership of guns, to freely travel, taxation without consent, being detained without charge, what we consume, our right to privacy, and even our right to protest. Did you that there are currently 20 states with pending legislation aimed at restricting our ability to protest? Four states---North and South Dakota, Tennessee, and Oklahoma---already have laws on the books to restricting protests. Where is our outrage?

Former President Obama is, I believe, wrong when he says that Americans don't want to "tear down the system and remake it". We do. We want to return to our representative Republic which offered each of us an equal opportunity to reach for our dreams. That doesn't mean we'll succeed. Outcomes were never guaranteed, only a level playing field. We want to return to a time where a limited government represents the people...not the super wealthy and not corporations.

If the Democratic Party can provide that, then so be it. If the Republicans can, great. If it takes a Independent or third party, then so much the better. Until then, we need to remember that protests and demonstrations work. They have worked in the past and they are working now all over the world. We must, as a nation, come together to remind those in office and those who control them that we---you and I---have the power. It's time to take back our country.


Gallup Poll: Congress and the Public

United States presidential approval ratings

Wealth inequality in the United States

Obama Tells His Party's Elites to Relax

Do You Trust the Government?

With the Presidential election cycle, among others, starting to heat up, now would be a good to time to ask yourself, "do you trust the government?". As we all know, we're no longer a democratic Republic as originally intended by our Founding Fathers. Instead, we've become a defacto Oligarchy whereby government and the super-wealthy (along with their global corporations) work in tandem to the point where are interests are overlooked (or better, ignored) approximately 99% of time according to some surveys (at best, our interests are addressed only about 10% of the time). So, what do you think, how much faith do you have in government?

According to a recent Gallup Poll, the overwhelming majority of Americans have little or no faith in government regardless of which of the two corporate owned party holds sway. As of late January 2019, only 10% of those polled indicated that they had faith in government. 31% said they had a "fair amount" while 57% had little or no confidence whatsoever.
Let me tell you, in practically every other country on this planet those numbers would be a near guaranteed that a massive revolt or revolution was about to happen. These type of results would have most government leaders shopping around for a nice place to spend in exile somewhere.

In terms of domestic policy, 63% of the population believes government can't be trusted to get it right. Think about for a minute. 63% of Americans, regardless of party, ideology, gender, age, religion or whatever have no faith in Washington's ability to deal with the issues which directly affects us each and every day. Yet, for some mysterious reason we keep falling for their same old repackaged ideas and "solutions".

In looking specifically at the different branches of government, we find that as of the end of 2018 (the most recent result) there's not much difference. 59% of the American People have little or no confidence in Congress. Of course, the approval rating for Congress has been dismal for decades; sometimes barely making it out of single digits! As for the Judicial Branch, which includes not just the federal courts, but the "unSupreme" Court as well, it's much better. 68% actually trust either a lot or a fair amount the Judicial Courts.

To get a balance perspective, I checked with Pew Research to see what they showed. The poll I looked at was the most comprehensive on trust in government from 1958 through 2015. According to them, just 19% of citizens have any trust in government. Yikes! By comparison, they number was 80% in 1963 under President John Kennedy's Administration. My how things have changed.

Pew also broke the trust factor down by party. It found that just 26% of the Democrats and Republicans trust the federal government. Given that it's largely a problem of partisan making, it's a little surprising that the figure was so low. As an aside Independents distrust the government about 70% of the time (conservative leaning is about 71% while liberal leaning is roughly 67%).

If we look at other factors like age or race, we find that younger voters (mainly Millennials and Gen Z, both of which having shown support for socialism) trust the federal more than older voters---27% among 30 and under; 19% for those 31 to 49; and 15% for those 50 and over. So while the younger generation trusts government more, the numbers are far from stellar.

Among whites in general, a mind-boggling 84% either have little to no trust in Washington. Blacks distrust the federal government by a margin of 77% to 23%. For Hispanics (many of whom having come from totalitarian regimes) 69% have little or no faith in government. These are staggering numbers; the kind of which that indicate a fundamentally flawed societal foundation of the kind you would expect to see of a nation in a "death spiral". Historically speaking, few countries have been able to survive numbers like these and emerge unchanged to their core.

As an interesting aside, those with a post-graduate degree have any trust in the government about 23% of the time. That means among the academic professionals (professors, doctors, lawyers, etc) 76% have little or no faith in Washington. Those with a Bachelor or Masters degree have an even lower opinion. 80% of them keep their hand on their wallet when Washington comes knocking. Finally, individuals with a High School diploma, GED, or less trust government just 19% said they had any faith in the federal government.

Finally, I wanted to look at the approval rating of each of the institutions I mentioned starting with President Trump. As of the first two weeks of July 2019, Trump's approval rating stood at 44%. Obama's average for his first term was 49%, so despite all the "fake news" being manufactured by the corporate owned media, Trump isn't doing too bad (the average for all Presidents is 53%).

As for Congress, through the first two weeks of July 2019, their disapproval rating stood at 76%. Lastly, the Supreme Court. Rasmussen, which had the latest polling results of the high court, found that 60% of those surveyed approval of their decisions. Meanwhile, 40% said that the ideological balance was about right with 24% saying it's too liberal and 36% saying it was too conservative.

The poll also broke down the responses by political affiliation and race as well. It found that 77% of Republicans approved of the Supreme Court's decisions along with 57% of Democrats and 50% of Independents. 64% of whites agreed as well as 52% of Hispanics and 51% of blacks. Interestingly, the poll also revealed that Justice Ruth Ginsberg was the most popular member of the court while Justice Brett Kavanaugh had a higher name recognition, albeit only slightly.

Einstein once famously remarked that the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Are the American People insane or are we just that easily duped by propaganda. Maybe we're just lazy. The US Office of Strategic Services made the following observation about Adolf Hitler their psychological profile of the Nazi leader, "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it". You could apply that same description to describe how both of the political parties as well as the corporate media acts vis-à-vis it relationship with the American People. I guess someone was paying attention after all.

So what do you think? With numbers like these (which, by the way, have been long trending), why do we keep voting in the same crooks and charlatans time and again? We know they are lying just as we know they have no intention of representing us. We know or should know that it was our actions (or inactions as the case may be) has led to the loss of our Republic.

The American People should understand by now that we need term limits; that we must end political gerrymandering; that at least at the state level, we need voter ballot initiatives and referendums and that we, the taxpayers, should have the final say on rate, tax, and salaries increases. It's our money and Lord knows that politicians can't be trusted with money. We also must remove Citizens United and get unlimited corporate money out of politics as well as end the revolving door between government, Wall Street, and E Street where is the lair for lobbyists. By the way, 80% of voters oppose Citizens United.

Until we do these things, we will continue to become bystanders to a government which was supposed to represent you and I regardless of our political leanings. In the absence of action by us, the voters and citizens of this country, money will fill the void. Lastly, if you have any doubts, I encourage you to check out the links below. We have to act.



Politicians Don't Actually Care What Voters Want

Trust in Government

Trust in government: 1958 - 2015


Presidential Approval Ratings--Donald Trump

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?

0% Approve of Supreme Court Performance; Plurality Believes Ideological Balance About Right

Citizens United Poll: 80 Percent of Americans Oppose Supreme Court Decision

Political Corruption: Taking Out The Trash

Over the past several weeks we've taken a look at political corruption, from the cozy relationship with the big donors ( and no, George Soros and the Koch Brothers aren't even close to being at the top of that list) to military contractors, local lobbyists, and the always entertaining, "dirty tricks" which happen at the local level. Political corruption isn't unusual or even new. It's been a part of society since the very beginning (the same with religious corruption, which started out as being one and the same as the political, and in many countries today it's essentially the flip side of the same coin).

The real problem is when a society goes from the occasional individual form of graft to institutionalized corruption; where it actually becomes part of the political system itself, which is where we are today. In the past, once a society reaches that level of corruption, society begins to break down, some form of totalitarianism arises and eventually the people rebel. I think that's what we're starting to see today, except that the rebellion is being carefully controlled or manipulated; channeled if you will.

America is governed by an Oligarchy. That's an accepted fact by all but the most naive. An Oligarchy is when a relatively small elite control the government for their own benefit. In this case, it's a plutocracy, which is rule by the wealthy. As I've previously written, they control---literally own---the financial institutions, defense industry (war is a very profitable business), oil and gas, as well as the energy industry, the auto industry, the media (90+% of all forms of media), and many more. This is the stuff that urban myths about the Trilateral Commission, Bildenbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations are based, and to a degree, are true in that they all belong to small interlocking clique of committees and boards that you and I will never belong to.

What is their goal or objective you ask? Well, actually it's quite simple. It's all about having control. They already have more money they any of us could possibly imagine. However, money begets power, and power equates with control. Their aim is to control or influence every aspect of society. For them, control is order and stability. It takes order and stability for business to operate and, hopefully, generate profits. This also means controlling the demand for jobs, wages, and benefits, which also means controlling or destroying labor unions and worker associations. That's why it's important for them to be able to ship high wage/benefit jobs overseas where they pay virtually nothing (and because of the abject poverty and overpopulation, people are glad to take it) and then ship it back over here where marketing creates the demand for it (not to mention intentionally built-in obsolescence).

It means controlling demand...and supply...of not just products but of the availability of jobs. This is the reason many of these large companies push for open borders and/or are willing to employ illegal immigrants. The more demand there is for the limited number of opening, the lower the employer can force the wages as well as any benefits. This is a flaw with labor unions too. They work to recruit illegal workers, especially in the low skill sectors since they are unlikely to rock the boats and ask a lot of questions about how things are run, but more importantly their dues fill near empty union bank accounts.

Another serious factor is controlling ordinary people. The information they routinely gather is used to ascertain our shopping habits---where we go, what we purchase, how often, what we watch, and so forth. It's also used to determine our financial and physical health; our "worth" to the economy if you will. It is used to gather information on our political leanings, which is helpful for them to determine what are key issues or "buttons" are, as well as seeing just how far we can pushed.

If, for instance, I know what are the hot buttons are for various issues, I know I can push you on other topics without much push back. If I know the hot topics for a specific population segment, I know how to manipulate and motivate them to act (like the best way to get you to send money, or maybe call or email some legislator). I also know how to spin issues to make one side look better (or worse, demanding on my intent). That's what the media is for. It's to decided what is and isn't newsworthy, how to present it (spin), and manipulate the outcome.

Now if you happen to be one of those individuals who think it's all the Democrat's fault or the Republicans, then I hate to break it to you, but it's not one side or the other, it's actually both. These Oligarchs literally own both parties and the politicians who are actually more selected than elected. Think about it. If the Democrats were right and the GOP were all a bunch of greedy and selfless bastards, and the Democrats did all they said they would do, there wouldn't be a single Republican elected to office anywhere in this country. On the other hand, if the Republicans were right and the Democrats were a group of manipulative SOBs determined to tax the middle class into oblivion, and they actually did all they promised, you couldn't find a Democrat in office anywhere you looked.

However, we know---we instinctively know---both sides are lying to us. Whenever a single party has controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency nothing changes does it? We still have the same ole BS. Even when a single party had controlled the governor's office and state legislature it's still the same game. The reason is because neither party is actually serious about doing anything. While you and I talk about the system being broken, for them the system works just fine because the ones who line their pockets and campaign war chests are doing just fine. A politician's biggest concern is getting reelected because, frankly, they love the power (which is addictive and gives them a sense of self importance) and they love the perks and lifestyle that power brings them. But getting and keeping that power mean getting access to big money, and the only ones capable of providing that kind of money are the big corporations or their errand boys (and girls) who work for them, the lobbyists.

In fact, these lobbyists are paid really big money on behalf of their masters to make sure those they helped to put in office do as they're told. In some cases, they even help to write legislation and provide summaries for bills or issues along with their "recommendations". All this has effectively made it near impossible for the average American to even consider running for office; it's far outside the financial reach of most of us. That's why Congress is called the "Millionaire's Club", because it actually is. It doesn't matter what your party affiliation is. It matters who your financial benefactors are. The political infighting is both a matter of which special interest group wins out on a particular issue, and in keeping us divided; to make us believe it's the other side's fault (like "taking guns away" or "destroying" some freedom).

The truth of the matter is that the Oligarchy wants--- actually needs--- for us to be divided. It has to keep us at each other's throats in as many ways as possible. "Why" you ask? Again, the answer is pretty simple. As long as we're fighting and arguing with each other, no one is watching the "candy store". That is, we're not focused on the corruption which is taking place almost openly (and in some cases, in broad daylight). Secondly, with us fighting each other, it's so much easier to manipulate one side and then other. That allows them to expand their control. This type of mentality happens not just at the local or community level, but at the state as well as the national and even international levels.

How often have you heard where some country, often one few have even heard of, is suddenly in the news amid claims of "terrorism" or some other "international crime"? Fairly often I would bet. Invariably the US is "asked" by various parties to intervene to help restore democracy or some other noble sounding cause. The odds are pretty good that the sole reason has to do with either access to resources or a market. And as often as not, it's because attempts to gain access to these resources or markets by regular means have failed. Attempts at bribing have failed. Threats have failed, and finally once that has happened, public opinion is stirred up and the next thing we know, we're bombing the daylights out of some nothing of a county or group.

Former Nazi Air Marshall Hermann Goering once said "Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” The only real difference today is that the decision is made between corporate and government officials, who work hand-in-hand (in the majority of cases, the revolving door between the corporate world and the government one, be it as an elected official or an appointed one, is a blur) rather a cabal of politicians. In fact, it might as well be stated that the goals of most politicians, senior staff members, bureaucratic department heads, or appointed offices is to become one of these very generously paid lobbyists.

Another feature of a divided people besides being easier to manipulate, is that they almost always look to the government to "fix" the problem, which it is always happy to do since that affords them the opportunity to seize more control over your life. Recently that control has been in terms of surveillance and the increased militarization of the police. Together, they can quite easily devolve into a police state...all for our own protection naturally. There's another interesting feature used in these situations which we're seeing a lot of lately. The use of name calling, or more specifically, of demonizing an individual, group, or term.

Since kindergarten we've all known the value of name calling, rumors, and innuendos. Politics is no different. I've known a certain politician who purposefully would call his female nemesis a vulgar but rhyming term similar to her name. Of course, calling opponents by various derogatory but humorous names has been common since the ancient Greek forums. The late Huey P. Long of Louisiana made it art form! So did President Teddy Roosevelt and his cousin, FDR. It's a staple of politics. What's different today, at least in US politics, has been the misuse of terms like "Nazism", "Socialism", "Communism" as well as "racism" and others. The intent seems to be to confuse people by trying to convince them that the term means something that it doesn't. For instance, claiming that the Democratic Party is "Socialism" or "Communist" while the GOP is "Nazis" (this can just as easily be applied to a specific individual from either party as well).

The fact is that neither the Democrats or Republicans are as the other side claim. Both represent corporate special interest groups; each has its own agenda. While socialism and Communism imply doing away with capitalism and Nazism implies business interests becoming subservient to the state, which are all opposite to what the Oligarchy wants. In addition, the overuse and misuse of the terms distorts and dilutes their meanings to the point no one understands their significance. As Humpty Dumpty said to Alice, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose for it to mean---neither more or less". Has politics now become the "Looking Glass"? This misapplication of terms also distort the fact that ideologies such as democratic socialism had worked quite well in Europe until recently when the system was overloaded with "migrants" who, lacking skills, education and a similar work ethic, refuse to participate in the economic system which is required for its success.

However, when it did work properly, the citizenry benefited very handsomely. Yes, they paid much higher taxes (which they voted to approve), but they were willing to do so in exchange for more public benefits. But it also meant the corporations were also more heavily regulated and there was more mandatory transparency. It also meant that unions and employee associations had a much more active voice in government and work affairs. That's something the Oligarchy obviously doesn't want. So, terms like "democratic socialism" become linked to "Communism" or even "Nazism", which already have negative connotations, as if they were one in the same.

So, what kind of government does the Oligarchy and plutocracy want? Their ideal form of government is Fascism, which as its founder, Benito Mussolini once said, would be better called as "Corporatism" since it's a partnership between government and the major businesses (in his view, government would be the senior partner while today it's the opposite). The plutocracy, as the name implies, would like to see to that the rich (and by that I mean really rich) elites are in charge. Thus, the special interest groups behind the Democratic Party and its politicians are pushing for Left oriented form of Fascism while those behind the Republican Party are trying to implant a Right leaning form of Fascism. Either way, it's Fascism.

For it to succeed, we must be ignorant of or willing to ignore the many forms of corruption and manipulation which are taking place at all levels of government (the so-called "Nanny State" which wants to control what you eat, wear, the education of you and your children, your workplace, use of private land, living "off the grid", and so forth while learning everything there is about you). It's also necessary that we not be united. That's one reason we see such groups like Antifa and BLM with their paid organizers and agitators (surprisingly, the Right has been unexpectedly quite when it comes to social violence). However, to be sure when it has come to police shootings, there has been several instances where the police reacted improperly and weren't either punished or adequately punished. But too has been the tendency of the certain groups to think they don't have to follow a cop's instructions or to act physically or verbally aggressively (either intentionally or not). You just don't make a intense situation worse by doing that. It's really stupid and a recipe for tragedy.

There are things we can do, at least for now, to help offset this assault on our individual freedoms and to restore our Constitutional Republics, which for now appears lost. One, don't share personal information (especially financial or political) with groups you don't know. This is especially true of surveys by phone or online (such as the seemly innocent looking quizzes online which offer to tell you what's your "totem animal" or "power color" or whatever). If you must, then lie about the responses. Seriously. Don't give any real data about your viewing, shopping, dining habits no matter how innocent they seem. It all goes to build a profile of you and others with similar responses.

Another thing you can do is to assume that the media, just like politicians or other political groups, have an agenda they're pushing. Try to get as many diverse news sources as possible. Read Left leaning articles as well as Right leaning on the same topic if possible in order to seek out the truth, which is usually somewhere in the middle (no one said this was going to be easy). Read different blogs and pass them on to your friends and ask that they do the same (like this one for instance!). Go outside the US for news stories. You'll be surprised at the different takes they have on events in the US as well as the stories they find important that we never hear about.

We also need to support candidates based on their stances on issues, not political registration (and especially not based on newspaper or other endorsements which, again, are pushing their agendas not yours). Pay specific attention to third party and Independent candidates (remember, Indies are the largest voting bloc in America by far). Partisan politics are about pushing someone else's agenda who has a lot more money than you do or ever will. Get involved in issues which are non-partisan such as real campaign finance reform which makes it possible for anyone to afford to run for office; ending gerrymandering for political parties. This creates artificial and biased boundaries designed to keep the incumbent or their party in power. Push for a non-partisan group like a university to do it using simple population data not based on political registration.

Get involved with efforts to create a balanced playing field for Independents and third parties to file and run for office, as well as participate in debates. There are still backward states which require non-partisan candidates to have hundreds or even thousands more signatures to get on a ballot than a Republican or Democrat. Also, both corporate owned parties actively seek to keep third party and Independent candidates out of debates; they make it appear that you have "choices" while limiting those choices to two! As an aside, the news media also try to ignore third party and Indie candidates; treating like a sideshow if they acknowledge them at all. Voters also need to be the ones with the final say on tax or rates increases, as well as increases in public sector salaries or perks. Allowing citizen initiated ballot referendums must be given.

Volunteer or financially support Indies or a third party candidate if you can, even if it's just telling others. Demand term limits be imposed in order to at least limit the amount of corruption going on. Personally, I support a twelve year cap. Focus on individual issues, and be sure to keep an open mind (doing a little research of your own won't hurt either). Heck, don't vote for incumbents for a change of pace and fresh ideas! Lastly, find ways to bring diverse groups together to target specific problems. If we can do this, we can fight back against the obvious attempt to hijack our country, its values, and its traditions. We need to restore our Constitutional Republic, and by coming together we can do that. But if we wait any longer that opportunity, like our nation, will be gone forever. Let's kick to the curb those who seek to overthrow our nation like yesterday's garbage.