Hard Core Democrat Reich Recognizes Inequality Came From Bill Clinton, Obama

Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a hard core “Democrat”. He is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His next book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, will be out in March. Obama deliberately turned away from Reich and his ideas about not too much inequality and being guided by greed. Instead, like Clinton before him, Obama gave power to Goldman Sachs potentates (Summers, etc.). The same who helped set-up Google and Facebook.

I generally agree with what he wrote, except where I made (hopefully) nasty comments 

Robert Reich hopefully disingenuously asks:

“Clinton and Obama chose not to wrest power back from the oligarchy. Why?

In the first two years of the Bill Clinton and Barack Obama administrations, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. Yet both Clinton and Obama advocated free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who consequently lost their jobs any means of getting new ones that paid at least as well. Clinton pushed for Nafta and for China joining the World Trade Organization, and Obama sought to restore the “confidence” of Wall Street instead of completely overhauling the banking system.”

Obama augmented inequality drastically by engineering a fat cats rescue, with taxpayer money. Even Trump was not that bad, that way (as more recent graphs show)…

PATRICE AYME: It’s better than that: Clinton demolished president Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Banking Act of 1933. Obama refused to re-established it. Thus Clinton and Obama were not revolutionaries, they were counter-revolutionaries. For Clinton and Obama, it is not just that plutocrat FDR was not plutocratic enough. For Clinton and Obama, FDR was a dangerous revolutionary, a Bernie Sanders erroneously elected.   

ROBERT REICH: “Both [Clinton and Obama] stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class. They failed to reform labor laws to allow workers to form unions with a simple up-or-down majority vote, or even to impose meaningful penalties on companies that violated labor protections. Clinton deregulated Wall Street before the crash; Obama allowed the Street to water down attempts to re-regulate it after the crash. Obama protected Wall Street from the consequences of its gambling addiction through a giant taxpayer-funded bailout, but allowed millions of underwater homeowners to drown.”

PATRICE AYME: Obama named ambassadors people who had given enough money to his campaign. All “Democrats” saw this. 

ROBERT REICH: “Both Clinton and Obama turned their backs on campaign finance reform. In 2008, Obama was the first presidential nominee since Richard Nixon to reject public financing in his primary and general election campaigns, and he never followed up on his re-election promise to pursue a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United vs FEC, the 2010 supreme court opinion opening wider the floodgates to big money in politics.

Although Clinton and Obama faced increasingly hostile Republican congresses, they could have rallied the working class and built a coalition to grab back power from the emerging oligarchy. Yet they chose not to. Why?”

PATRICE AYME: Good question. My answer is well known, and it’s the roughest, the one all are afraid to profer, in a case of collective hypnosis: personal corruption. If one compares different countries in the “West” one sees that in some countries (USA, Britain, Germany) some leaders became immensely wealthy after their “service”. Famously, Truman refused to make money from his ex-position of US president. And he explained that making money from it would demean the office of the presidency.  

Instead of expounding the obvious, namely squarely asserting that the plutocrats in control found willing empty suits to do as they were told, Reich opts for euphemisms:

ROBERT REICH: “There is no longer a left or right. There is no longer a moderate ‘center’

My answer is not just hypothetical, because I directly witnessed much of it: it was because Clinton, Obama and many congressional Democrats sought the votes of the “suburban swing voter” – so-called “soccer moms” in the 1990s and affluent politically independent professionals in the 2000s – who supposedly determine electoral outcomes, and turned their backs on the working class. They also drank from the same campaign funding trough as the Republicans – big corporations, Wall Street and the very wealthy.

A direct line connects the four-decade stagnation of wages with the bailout of Wall Street, the rise of the Tea Party (and, briefly, Occupy), and the successes of Sanders and Trump in 2016. As Eduardo Porter of the New York Times notes, since 2000 Republican presidential candidates have steadily gained strength in America’s poorer counties while Democrats have lost ground. In 2016, Trump won 58% of the vote in the counties with the poorest 10% of the population. His share was 31% in the richest.

By 2016, Americans understood full well that wealth and power had moved to the top. Big money had rigged our politics. This was the premise of Sanders’s 2016 campaign. It was also central to Trump’s appeal – “I’m so rich I can’t be bought off” – although once elected he delivered everything big money wanted.”

PATRICE AYME: Well, agreed with the rest, BUT the last point is disinformation. “Big money” wanted to keep having its tax avoiding, law avoiding, unemployment fostering and disempowerment promoting globalization. Globalization is how Roman plutocracy created the sort of “Republic” they liked, one they owned. (Nevermind it caused unending civil war, degeneracy and decrepitude.)  The Davos crowd wanted Davos to go on and on, until they own the world for sure. Then came Trump…

ROBERT REICH: “The most powerful force in American politics today continues to be anti-establishment fury at a rigged system. There is no longer a left or right. There’s no longer a moderate “center”. There’s either Trump’s authoritarian populism or democratic – small “d” – populism.”

Democrats cannot defeat authoritarian populism without an agenda of radical democratic reform, an anti-establishment movement. Trump has harnessed the frustrations of at least 40% of America. Although he’s been a Trojan horse for big corporations and the rich, giving them all they’ve wanted in tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks, the working class continues to believe he’s on their side.

Democrats must stand squarely on the side of democracy against oligarchy. They must form a unified coalition of people of all races, genders, sexualities and classes, and band together to unrig the system.

Trump is not the cause of our divided nation. He is the symptom of a rigged system that was already dividing us. It’s not enough to defeat him. We must reform the system that got us here in the first place…”

Reich points out Democrats controlled Congress for 16 out of 24 years, prior to this. He lauds the “Affordable care Act” (Obamacare), which has been a disaster for nearly all, including the poorest (I was direct witness of this, because I know some of the poorest). Those who made like bandits were the healthcare industry, and their financiers. 

A friend of mine posted a lament about the failed impeachment of Trump, calling it a “day of infamy”, “never to be forgotten”. I pointed out that Biden and Pelosi were war criminals, that was really what “infamy” was. I put links to my supporting essays. He has a vast following, being owner of a Venture Capital firm in the Silicon Valley. He took out his Original Post, with plenty of Trump hating comments. Progress. However, this major “Dem” donor didn’t address the bottom line: Biden and Pelosi should be tried. The dereliction of the “Democratic” Party is not just Obama, Clinton, and their helpers and minders. Nor is it just Pelosi and Biden. Obviously Pelosi’s December 5, 2019, confession that she was a war criminal was a cry for help: she is a big time Catholic, she wants to make contrition before meeting God and Lucifer.

What needs to be examined most is the failure of analytical capability in so many US citizens claiming to be “good” while they fostered (be it only by supporting Pelosi and Biden) the war in Iraq, or inequality (by supporting Clinton and Obama). Right, I was a force helping Obama at a crucial juncture. But I recognize I was had. Although I knew, even then, that Obama was a quick buck artist. But I had not cynically anticipated how far he would go doing the opposite of what was convened.

So we need authenticity. In his anti-establishment rage, certified since he fought Reagan, Trump brought some deep down authenticity. So, of course, does Sanders, long what Trump calls a “Communist”…

Curiously, and let me jokingly feed a baby conspiracy theory here, the fact that the Iowa caucus results were delayed… doesn’t look like an accident, on the face of it. A firm tied to Hillary Clinton, herself tied to Biden (as Kerry and Bloomberg, both billionaires, are, at least in spirit) set up an app which conveniently crashed. Hence the fact Biden was severely rejected in Iowa is masked by this delay: Biden doesn’t seem to have finished among the top third, and is slugging it out with Senator Klobuchar…

What is clear is that Sanders’ greatest adversary is not Trump. Oh no. Trump is actually running a strident anti-drug companies advertising, explaining to “Americans” that they pay much higher prices than any others around the world for the same exact drugs. The exact sentence used by Trump was used by a progressive such as yours truly, for years. So yes, Trump is a so-called “populist”, so is Sanders, and the establishment hates them, because they will reduce how much money flows to the greedy elite….

So, yes, it looks like an accident favoring the established Elite. But conveniently the fact Biden lost is drowned by a talk about an app… How many accidents do we need, before we suspect a conspiracy?

Patrice Ayme

We Think, Therefore We Smear: Tulsi Gabbard A Russian Asset Says Clinton

Hillary Clinton knows all about Russia: Clinton accused Tultsi Gabbard, a US war veteran, who served 16 years in the US military, and did two combat tours in the Middle East, and is currently enlisted in the US military to be a “Russian asset”. One has to hear the tone of Clinton when she makes her claim: real spooky, incisive, pulp fiction B movie style. I empathize with Tulsi, as I have been called over the years a US agent, a Russian agent, a “agent provocateur” (guilty!), a Nazi, a Communist, a Muslim hater, a Muslim Fundamentalist, a extreme right wing leftist fanatic French nationalist Le Pen lover, a Jewish lover, etc. All of it without quotes nor a semblance of reasoning…

Tulsi was elected to various positions (state assembly, Honolulu city council), and is a fourth term US Congressperson (she won some of these elections with 80%+ of the votes). In 2017, Gabbard introduced the “Off Fossil Fuels (OFF) Act”…

Hawai’i Congress Representative Tulsi Gabbard

Here is Clinton, an ex-Senator, ex-US Secretary of State  

“I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate… She’s the favorite of the Russians… They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far…”

Clinton went on accusing Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate in both the 2012 and 2016 elections, of being a “Russian asset”. Clinton said: “That’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not, because she’s also a Russian asset. Yes, she’s a Russian asset, I mean, totally. They know they can’t win without a third-party candidate.”

Gabbard responded on Twitter Friday afternoon to Clinton’s comments.

“Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain,” she tweeted.

“From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation,” she added. “We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know — it was always you, through your proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine, afraid of the threat I pose. It’s now clear that this primary is between you and me. Don’t cowardly hide behind your proxies. Join the race directly.”

Responding to Gabbard, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said, “Divisive language filled with vitriol and conspiracy theories? Can’t imagine a better proof point than this.“

Gabbard tried to fight off the charge that she is being pushed by Russian interests. But it’s hard to fight off outlandish accusations. Their very existence makes the public believe there is something there.

“Just two days ago, the New York Times put out an article saying that I’m a Russian asset and an Assad apologist and all these different smears… This morning, a CNN commentator said on national television that I’m an asset of Russia. Completely despicable,” Gabbard said, referring to a recent insinuation story, What is Tulsi up to? 

Here is the New York Times about Tulsi:

“Perhaps strangest of all is the unusual array of Americans who cannot seem to get enough of her. On podcasts and online videos, in interviews and Twitter feeds, alt-right internet stars, white nationalists, libertarian activists and some of the biggest boosters of Mr. Trump heap praise on Ms. Gabbard. They like the Hawaiian congresswoman’s isolationist foreign policy views. They like her support for drug decriminalization. They like what she sees as censorship by big technology platforms. Then there is 4chan, the notoriously toxic online message board, where some right-wing trolls and anti-Semites fawn over Ms. Gabbard, calling her “Mommy” and praising her willingness to criticize Israel. In April, the Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website, took credit for Ms. Gabbard’s qualification for the first two Democratic primary debates.”

Tulsi Gabbard promoted to Major (that’s above Captain).

I smear, therefore I think?

Today I wrote a comment to the NYT about an article it wrote about Brexit, where I explained, in particular, that UK plutocrats and tax evasion were behind Brexit. 15 hours later, the comment has not been published…

It is very important to NYT management that, at this point, NYT readers not know the truth about plutocracy and Brexit. Better accuse Gabbard to be a neo-Nazi (I can’t be far behind). Hurling outrageous insults removes the public from reality, diverting their attention from political significance, making them innocuous as far as oligarchic power is concerned.

To call thinkers names, agent of the enemy, or of foreign entities, to insult them, gravely and grossly, is the oldest trick in the book of oligarchic abuse. The sort of extreme accusations hurled at Gabbard are identical to the worst in McCarthyism. At least, we have to listen to Clinton’s song of infamy, from that bird of doom herself, to know the truth on the Clinton-Obama era…

Final point: that presidential candidates could be “agents”, “assets” comes naturally to Clinton. What about being simply an agent and asset of plutocracy?

Patrice Ayme

GENERALIZED PLUTOCRACY Rules, Or Why We Are Heading Towards Mass Extinction

WHAT IS PLUTOCRACY? Literally, EVIL RULE! The Notion of “Plutocracy” Is Thus Crucially More General Than Is Usually Suspected. The Present Political System Is Intrinsically Evil… Something Rather Foolhardy In The Thermonuclear Age!

This essay is not just about plutocracy in the way it is usually understood. Because therein is, once again, pointed out the fact that “representative democracy” is a contradiction in adjecto, and what we really have, when we talk of “representative democracy”, is plutocracy light, and calling it “democracy” is joining insult, irrealism, to injury.

Plutocracy light, at the local level, this so-called “representative democracy” sustains and supports what we have, de facto, potentially the greatest plutocracy, ever, in the history of the known universe. The maximal rule of hell, ever. As a result, the history of history may turn out rather short.

Verily, “Representative Democracy” is neither “democracy”, nor “representative”.

Plutocracy is instigated by the monopoly of power, made possible by the domination of an evil mentality (“Pluto”). A trivial example is Hitler, Stalin, Augustus, Ceausescus and hordes of other dictators, who, having monopolized outrageous power, could only keep alive with ever more mass murder and mass atrocities. 

Indeed, this is true even at the individual psychopathic level: the crazed neurology of the low lives serial murderers craves for ultimate power, that of destroying others, and even oneself. Fatally, the same exclusive craving for that same subjugation characterizes most of those who aspire to the highest positions of power [1]. 

Plutocracy is the monopoly of power. All the more dangerous, as power becomes ever more powerful, to the point it makes minds as it wishes, logically, cognitively, emotionally. Thus, in an age where monopolies grow, and when monopolies grow on minds, so does plutocracy. 

Plutocracy lives from the assent of the upper classes, which, as in the fascist Roman empire, are part of it, profits from it, and are occasional victims of it (see Putin’s Russia for the clearest examples). 

A US cartoon from 1911 (when the US still had a class struggle consciousness). The Pyramidal Organization of Plutocratic Society. This not human, because humans are not ants, bees, or termites. Humans are not meant to live at the bottom of the pyramid.

It is illustrative that, as the French Republic just took tax action against the tech monopolies, a bipartisan effort in US Senate screamed “injustice”. This bipartisan defense of monopolistic plutocracy shows how much sold to plutocracy and monopolies, US politicians are that they find French politicians unfair to US plutocracy, and want to legislate [2].

The full concept that the word “plutocracy” depicts, is not just what is usually assumed. That assumption, per se, is misinformation. According to a partial, and actually minor, interpretation of the concept “Pluto” as the god of wealth, plutocracy would just be the rule of wealth. 

For example when the Macedonian fascist Uber dictator Antipater, senior successor of Alexander took control of Athens, he decided that only wealthy individuals could vote… On the surface, that looks like just this: only the wealthy took part in government. But, actually, it meant that those not part of the oligarchy, such as non-collaborating philosophers, such as Demosthenes, were executed at will. So the government of a few wealthy ones was extremely bloody. And so it always will be, as human beings are not made to be treated as things.

*** 

Thus, in full, PLUTOCRACY IS THE RULE OF HELL: 

This is clearly the case etymologically and historically speaking: Pluto is the god of hell, not just wealth. Plutocracy, rule of hell, corrupts everything, not just finance and the economy, but also psychology, morality, an even rationality, cognition, and motivation. How one wants to move, what moves someone, is different under plutocracy.

Conventional wisdom constrains the concept of plutocracy to only be the rule of the wealthy. Then plutocracy is only viewed as “excessive wealth disorder”. Viewed this way, plutocracy has mostly economic impacts. Big money has been able to imprint the multitudes with big lies, capturing the judiciary, misinforming about global warming, immigration, fossil fuels, the ecological crisis, even nuclear energy (which is not a friend of fossil fuels). 

Plutocracy is much more than a type of economy, or politics, it’s a power obsessed sadomasochist mental derangement so friendly to oligarchy that only perfusion with the Darkest Side makes it sustainable. 

So naturally, plutocracy verses in the cruellest activities, such as torturing youth. As the second Roman emperor, Tiberius, adoptive son of Augustus, did on the island of Capri. Or as billionaire Epstein, a personal friend of Clinton or Trump, did on the island of Manhattan [3]. Media (such as the New York Times) don’t understand why Epstein left so many proofs of his illegal tortures of children… but absolute power is made to be flaunted absolutely. Only then does it subjugates.

Real wisdom, in full cognizance of the mental panorama at our disposal: Plutocracy is much more than the rule of wealth, it’s the rule of hell. 

***

A bit of revealing etymology: 

How the word plutocracy, in Greek “ploutokratia” arose is tells much. Initially Πλούτος (Ploutos) means wealth in Greek. Πλουτων or Πλουτωνας (Plouton, Ploutonas) was means “he who gets rich/wealthy” and was another name for Hades the God of Underworld.  “Hades”, the god of the underworld, acquired such a terrible reputation, that no decent Greek would dare to utter His original name anymore… However the wealthy were obviously felt to be hellish, so the word “Pluto” came to be used… to designate Hades. It all made sense in more ways than one: wealth was associated with precious stones and other underground riches. 

Associating hell, wealth, power, the underground and obscurity was not new: Angra Manyu, the Babylonian god of obscurity, the Dark Side, had been fighting Ahura Mazda, the god of Enlightenment, for millennia, right in the middle of Mesopotamia. (The equivalent Jewish concept is Satan, and it was passed to Christianism and Islamism through the Bible.)

A characteristic of Pluto is that he can make Himself invisible. So, naturally, its contemporary admirers denies the Dark Side, Pluton, is of any importance; nothing to see here, move on: the free market is an intrinsic good.

Jesus declared the wealthy had as high a probability to end in paradise as a camel through the eye of a pin. Summing up, all the mythologies of the Dark Side agree that wealth and hell are intimately tied together. 

Philosopher scientist Hypatia teaching a class. The philosopher was destroyed by the divinization of the spirit of Roman plutocracy grandly called “Catholic Orthodoxy” (Common Opinion Universalism), Christianism, then in full bloom. Christianism brought us extremely close to the total destruction of civilization in Western Eurasia.

How does the tie up between wealth and hell work? 

Money is part and parcel of power: it enables us to get other people or institutions to do what we want them to do. Thus huge money is huge power onto others. Reciprocally, huge power is the equivalent of extreme wealth. 

However, having huge power onto others is a violation of fundamental violation of the conditions enabling normal, evolutionarily anticipated human behavior: human beings didn’t evolve to do whatever other human beings wanted them to do. In other words, huge power on other human beings is intrinsically evil… by god given, that is evolutionary given standards.

However, there is a side of human nature which, given huge power of some individuals on humanity, makes matters much worse: human beings come equipped with a Dark Side… more or less present, according to individuals. 

In other words, although human beings come equipped by standards of good and evil, there is a meta system controlling simple goodness and badness, where all values become inverted. Good becomes bad, bad becomes good. This is how the divine species, Homo, prevents Homo to ruin it all for us, by massacring enough Homo, as needed. In other words, not only is demonicity strong in human beings, but, like Pluto, it is buried and knows how to make itself invisible. Moreover, it appears preferably as a bait and switch. 

***

The present political system selects for psychopaths, perfect operators for plutocracy:

All variable natural phenomena, are situated on a Bell Curve (exp – (x^2)). For the examples at hand, plutocracy and demonicity, this means that the evl streak is more or less represented in human beings. However the Will to Power itself acts as a filter: it will be stronger in the most evil ones. 

For example, many individuals become billionaires because they want power onto other individuals more than normal people do: the Dark Side, the Will to Power Onto People, is stronger in them (think of the characters at the head of the Galactic empire in Star wars; human history is full of them; actually in Star Wars the head of the Senate conspire to become emperor… just as Octavian really did when he became Augustus…). 

Enabling, and a fortiori encouraging, the occurrence of immense wealth, and immense power thus fosters the Dark Side, Pluto, Hell, in part by encouraging preferentially psychopaths to reach the greatest power. It is only natural: exerting maximum power onto others is intrinsically evil, psychopaths fit the job description best. 

The psychopathic leeches who lead us (to Armageddon and Mass Extinction) enjoy their power on us, including that of playing with the law, throwing basic decency to the winds. Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump, Michael Bloomberg, Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein… seriously why has nobody noticed this? because they didn’t want to notice we are under plutocracy, the power (kratia) of evil (Pluto)… The pundits who massage and brainwash our minds are paid for us NOT to notice, or even suspect this. Like they didn’t notice that Obama landed in a big private jumbo jet in another tax free private island next to Pedophile Island… Clinton was accompanied with up to ten secret service agents on some of the Lolita express flights….

The characters so encouraged are often going to be among the silliest of men, most full of themselves: Trump is an example… but, once again, history is full of them: most monarchs had that streak of self-obsessed babyhood (it’s not just Caligula and Nero, it’s also Constantine, etc.)

That sort of organization percolates down society. The Nazis called it the “Guide Principle”… but it’s not just the Third Reich which is organized that way. Lack of Direct Democracy is thus pervasive in the entire socioeconomic organization… which depends upon a hierarchy of little chiefs all the way down. One problem with that is that the collapse of the biosphere is everybody’s business. Another is that Artificial Intelligence and the concentration of Instruments of Mind Manipulation threatens to turn all into slaves, without them even suspecting it…  .

***

Remedies: Limit Absolutely Wealth, Power, Privileges…

Accordingly to the preceding fundamental observations, the Roman Republic limited both power and wealth strictly, and at a very low level. This is probably why it lasted 5 centuries in unadulterated form. 

However, globalization, from Roman military conquests enabled the wealthiest Romans to go overseas and escape Roman law, stricto sensu, as this extended only over Italy (not Spain, nor Africa, nor Gallia). Thus the limits on wealth and power were circumvented. Roman  plutocrats thus created, became so powerful, they were able to make it so that anti-wealth laws were not applied anymore. Then their power increased to the point they could employ private armies and kill progressives (such as the Gracchi). 

Plutocracy is an effect of the power chain reaction which enables a small elite to enslave the majority, thanks to the intrinsic leverage that civilization provides. Thus, it’s a danger in all and any civilization, at all and any time. 

Once again, plutocracy is, first of all, a psychological, one should say spiritual, phenomenon. Plutocracy corrupts minds, often by example. As most people see what the higher ups get away with, they themselves engage in something similar, to the much smaller case that is their adobe.

 

Hence, after Roman emperors came to be seen as living gods, and then representants on Earth of the one and only god, most people tried to emulate them in Christian fanaticism… and go further (see the death of Hypatia by torture, at the hands of a Christian mob).

Civilizations die from plutocracy. Any civilization is a balance between the necessities of the multitude (law, order, etc.), and the human ethology, which evolved for small human groups. Plutocrats can only enslave the multitude by persuading it, brain washing it, conditioning it, to not think and feel right. Thus, an effect of plutocracy is that the entire civilization it affects is impacted in all ways and methods which require reason, and a correct sentiment.  

A civilization with metastatic plutocracy is thus unable to handle any crisis: it becomes as stupid as possible. So plutocracy is characterized with dementia; all sorts of bad decisions are taken. It is even worse than that, because the will to stupidity is deliberate under plutocracy: the way plutocrats see it, bad decisions distract people, and are actually good, if they subjugate, hurt and weaken We The People.

In particular, a plutocracy will have a bad economy, as plutocratic Rome got, in the Third Century CE. A further example is the Late Roman empire, which became such a plutocracy that it was too stupid to solve around 200 different crises which were allowed to fester… and then the Roman empire was fatally weakened by a resource crisis and pressed by the Germans themselves pushed by the Huns… Another example is the Maya, struck by a very severe drought, who took the wrong decisions, making the ecological crisis worse, bringing total war.

The usual concept of plutocracy needs to be generalized, to see it for what it is: plutocracy is a rotting of minds. Only rot makes it possible, only ever more rot makes it sustainable.

Society could be organized differently, say as real Demos-Kratia, real People Power, with Referenda all over the place. Thus, one further question is why do people tolerate to be living like worker ants, insignificant termites? 

In other words, why nihilism, sadomasochistic society, etc? Because human beings are made for these behaviors. The Darkest Side is always how ecological overstretch was handled. Lebensraum for real. A result is that human beings are, potentially, to some extent, Machiavellian in the worst possible ways [4]. Moreover, a plutocratic mood, as presently pervades society, encourages the darkest of the Dark Side.

And this is why we have “Launch On Warning” (LOW)… and nobody of significance seems to care, let alone even seems to know about it…. 

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] … With the quasi-exception of those who really purely crave to implement some progressive political Revolution. Solon, the Gracchi, Marius, Caesar (!), Emperor Julian, Queen Bathilde, Charlemagne (!), William the Conqueror (!), Henry V, Henri III & IV, Louis XVI (!) are such possible counter-examples… The point is not that they didn’t destroy people (perhaps more than one million Celts in the case of Caesar… however he didn’t start it…), but that those means were imposed on them, and the ends they aimed for were laudable (and partly achieved; Caesar, as head of the Populares, had identified Rome’s most major problems: Germans and Parthans).

***

[2] US President Trump ordered an investigation into France’s tax on tech monopolies – a move that could result in retaliatory tariffs… with full approval of the so-called “Democrats”.

The tax will target around thirty (30) firms such as Google and Facebook with a 3% levy on revenue made inside France. The tax is expected to raise about €400m ($450m) in 2019. Any digital company with revenue of more than €750m – of which at least €25m is generated in France – would be subject to the tax.

“[Mr Trump] has directed that we investigate the effects of this digital services tax law and determine whether it is discriminatory or unreasonable and burdens or restricts United States commerce,“

The inquiry was welcomed by Republican Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Ron Wyden, the senior Democrat on the panel.

Senior Democrat? Senior People-Power person is all for tech monopolies which pay no taxes?

“The digital services tax that France and other European countries are pursuing is clearly protectionist and unfairly targets American companies in a way that will cost US jobs and harm American workers,” they said in a joint statement. Protectionist? US companies, including the GAFA are crawling all over France, where they have achieved monopolistic powers, tax exempt. So much for “Democrats” being against plutocracy. 

The digital tax is a risk for France, for the country at the origin of the Human Rights Charter, is now isolated. Talk of a Europe-wide tech tax, faltered thanks in part to opposition from countries such as Ireland, Luxembourg or even the Netherlands, which benefit from being able to attract tech firms to set up quasi tax-free bases through which to launder their world profits. This is reminiscent of the plutocratization of the Roman empire.

***

[3] Wealthy plutocrat Epstein connected to the greatest,was condemned for among other activities, soliciting sex from 12 year old girls: 

in full knowledge of what he was doing, Epstein was on first-name terms with two presidents, Bill Clinton (“Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist,” Clinton once said) and Donald Trump (“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” Mr Trump said almost two decades ago, in a wink to pedophilia). 

Since Epstein was charged in 2006 both commanders in chief distanced themselves from Mr Epstein. However, shortly before that, Bill Clinton had taken at least 26 trips on the “Lolita Express”, Epstein’s private jet. Top democrats (Cyrus Vance, etc.) intervened on behalf of Epstein to reduce his status of sex offender. It’s not just Tiberius who tortured people on his island of Capri… Much of the present highest level society is entangled with sex trafficking… in no small reason because individuals such as the obscure and mighty Maxwells are pulling the strings. (As PM Shamir of Israel said when Maxwell senior was buried, he couldn’t reveal all what he did; Maxwell owned media and made a killing from huge margins on scientific publishing… One more way in which the university system reveals itself to be plutocratic as public funds are used to finance astronomical private wealth…) 

The world in general, and the US in particular, should reconsider the enormous powers it institutionally gives to psychopaths… 

***

[4] As Balances of Good and Evil, Human beings are intrinsically Machiavellian. So Machiavellian, they play themselves, and only by some of their distant acts, sometimes, their true nature is revealed… to themselves 

Many love some of the advantages plutocracy provides, or could provide them. So they pose as if they were pure, fanatical opponents of the system, but actually are there to sabotage opposition, by exhibiting crazed fanaticism.

Politics is a war, not just of classes, but of ideas. Not all ideas of Trump are bad and against the times. French socialist PM Michel Rocard said: France can’t welcome all of the world’s miserable people. 

Enabling mass immigration to the West is not the panacea, the global solution for billions of people living in less fortunate circumstances. One can’t just say: it’s criminal to reject those who have no legal right to live here. 

Similarly, in a country which doesn’t provide free healthcare, why should unlawful immigrants, and the whole planet be told, in advance, that they would be treated better than US-born citizens? 

Such silly declamations will insure a Trump victory. Way worse: they are will foster ever more plutocracy. The way to insure progress is by focusing on a few points, such as Medicare For All, or a Public Option… A wealth tax, a transaction tax, breaking monopolies, etc. while leaving alone outrageous racist accusations and the like.

Posers who are keen to destroy any chance of serious progress, know they will be rewarded by the powers that be. That’s why they pose. Treachery and backstabbing, to be sustainable, has to be well rewarded…

***

Yes, published on July 14, 2019… 230 years after seizing the Bastille, symbol of executive privilege… 😉

 

 

 

Obama Wanted Trump To Win

Clinton lost Because Obama wanted it, deep down inside. Machiavel On The Potomac!

Some recent extracts from Obama (link below):“You can’t say it, but you know it’s true!… The end of the Republic has never looked better!… I am going to use it at Goldman Sachs next year!””

Did Obama want Trump to win consciously, or unconsciously? That brings the question of what is conscious, and what is not. The subconscious is neurological circuitry which exists already, but have not been visited officially by consciousness.

At That Point, Obama Told Everybody That He was Going To Be Dropped, Just As A Used Microphone (he dropped the mike next, see link below). However, Obama had A Secret Plan, A Second Foundation: Beat Clinton, And Thus Stay The Head Of the Opposition and the Core Of Hope. Hope That Will Work Better Next T

Obama just said (January 8) that “if you can find a plan that is demonstrably better than Obamacare, I will be the first to publicly support repealing Obamacare. Eight years ago, I asked if there was something better, and got no answer”.

Of course Obama knows very well that more than three dozen countries have better plans than Obamacare, and they are all variations of what would be of Medicare For All”. Namely you make basic health care a government program out of the clutches of plutocrats like Warren Buffet. (Warren Buffet being one saintly plutocrats of the “Democratic” Party.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdVVJibX5FA

Full version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxFkEj7KPC0

Anyway, the initial proposition is best as a question: Why would Obama have sincerely wanted for Clinton to win?

***

Would Obama have sincerely wanted for Clinton to win so that he could become insignificant, replaced, eclipsed?

Of course not.

Obama wanted Hillary to win, because he wanted to save his legacy, bleats the clueless sheep. Sheep is not smart: sheep thinks as one, as the group: know the mind of one sheep, know the mind of all. Actually the shepherd think for the sheep.

Obama’s legacy, as a legislative body, is shot, there is nothing to save It’s so shot through, it amounts so much to nothing, Obama knows it all too well… He may want to correct history and finally make his mark.

***

Why was Obama’s “legacy” so much ado about nothing?

Because Obama let himself be manipulated, feeling that was good “navigation” (a selfish concept central to his worldview). Not that he had a choice. He was not just financed by these people. He was programmed by them.

Ten years ago, Obama used to crow that he had been reading the Financial Times for so long, he actually had started before the Financial Times became required reading among “Democratic” leaders.

Obama has a good reason to be resentful about how his  “legacy” got mangled. Vengeance is a powerful motivation. Who did the mangling? Was that Trump? Trump has nothing to do with it. Far from it: it turns out that Trump was right, all along, on some very important points.

Obama failed, from all the way back, including from the admiration for Reagan, which perverted the Democratic establishment, the Clintons, and even Obama himself. Trump, on the other hand, opposed the globalocracy promoted by Reagan and Paul Krugman. As early as 1987, for all to see.

Obama’s legacy is a plane which gathered speed for take-off, yet, not enough speed to clear the trees. It has crashed. One can drive 3,000 miles across the US, and never leave a state thoroughly controlled by Republicans. Everything indicates that Trump, if he plays his cards well, will have a supermajority in 2018.

The Financial Times has some good articles, occasionally. However, it’s like saying that Pravda (the Soviet equivalent of the New York Times) had good article. Fundamentally, the Financial Times is a fundamentalist Thatcherian-Reaganian newspaper: “There Is No Alternative!” … to the fundamental principle is that greed is the best motivation of human beings, including for building a morality.    

As I have said for eight years, there was never much of a Obama government installed to instill hope. First Hank Paulson (Goldman Sachs and Bush Treasury Secretary) told Obama what to do, even before Obama got elected. Worst: Obama agreed to it. Of course, Obama’s economic adviser was Lawrence Summers (re-Goldman Sachs, Harvard). Obama was completely controlled by the Democratic machine, with the Goldman Sachs government, in place since before Bill Clinton’s election. Nancy Pelosi, head of the Democratic majority in Congress, also agreed to Paulson’s plan, after Paulson went down to one knee in front of her.

What happened? Obama was too young, too inexperienced, too naive strategically (street-smart is not world-smart). He was also a tool of the establishment, and he trusted those who trusted him. And it all turned out, into eight years wasted.

Now Obama, at last, is free of all these financial goons and their obsequious servants.

Whereas, if Clinton had won, they would have won. Instead, they were destroyed. Let me repeat slowly: the tormentors of Obama, those who lead Obama astray, those who made Obama’s legacy, mostly the color of a skin, this waste of hope, have been vanquished. Vanquished by Trump, yes, but vanquished. Why would Obama want it otherwise?

Now Obama is the core of hope, the future. Maybe he can make Michelle run, get another eight years that way. This time, with the correct mindset, not as a puppet.

We will see.

Patrice Ayme’

Vote For Truth & Other Recommendations

OFF WITH THE CLINTON ‘GLOBAL INITIATIVE’ WORLD OF PLUTOCRACY UNCHAINED

I support much of Clinton’s program. However… It is not just that she is not “inspiring“ as Obama just said. She belongs to a party whose elite has done the opposite of what they claimed they wanted to do, and lied about why and how that happened. Moreover herds of idiots out there, believe said elite of plutocrats, hook, line, sinker, and the entire boat. For 24 years. Yesterday I was walking in my neighborhood, along the shore of the world’s greatest ocean. On the other side of the giant 4 miles bridge, apartments have been sold for 60 million dollars. In the streets, in the nooks and crannies, homeless people moved, in the last few weeks. They will not vote. They live in absolute garbage, worse than in the worst of India. Indeed, unbelievably, they build their refuges from garbage. It smells, there are broken bottles everywhere. They are on the move, police is hunting them, bulldozing them here and there.

Even in the poorest parts of Africa, I have never seen such misery. And those are mainly young white men, with the occasional woman and the slightly Afro-American white man thrown in. They are real US citizens, not recent (often illegal) Hispanic immigrants (those stick together, and have work). That’s the other side of the Clinton-Obama global imperial plutocracy. Or, as the Clintons like to call it “The Clinton Global initiative”. To see who support that “Global Initiative” look at the long list of dictators who have given money to the Clinton family, or look at the picture below:

The CEO Of Goldman Sachs (on the right) Is Inseparable From Hillary Clinton & The Clinton Global Initiative: Global Plutocracy Is The Clinton Global Initiative. GS Was Not Prosecuted For Its Crimes In Greece

But don’t say that to wealthy Californians: they have immensely profited from the global corporate fascist crony capitalist state. A few miles from these hordes of homeless drifters pushed around by police, the world’s richest corporations have their headquarters, paying no taxes and doubling as spy agencies for the global security state. Those who earn their lives well in the SF Bay Area are professionally bound to sing the praises of that system, lest they be ostracized (same story in New York).

Well known philosopher Zizek observed that:”“Humanity is OK, but 99% of people are boring idiots.” No wonder they vote for that:

Baby Is Hungry! Wealthy Idiots Found A President For Hire. But Destitute Idiots Did Not Hire Her. Instead, They Just Admire

Thanks to Donald Trump, the idiots are getting less boring. Now they have coprolalia, and it’s Hillaryous. The insults are flowing, thick and innovative. I roll out FRED (Federal REserve Data), and posers who claim to be “Democrats” pile up derogatory terms to describe me.

Funny how Trump went from pillar of the establishment, to universally reviled as a “populist”. The same reproach was made to Caesar; Caesar was the leader of the “Populares”.  Trump is a man who dared to campaign, with his own money, against Ronald Reagan, as early as 1987. You have to understand that Trump critics such as Paul Krugman and Bill Clinton had actually worked for Ronald Reagan, years prior to 1987. Paul Krugman was officially in the White House, advising him how to fleece the little guys by setting a worldwide global plutocracy of outlaws. Now the outlaws are in power, and they have bought the Main Stream Media. Worldwide .

Bill Clinton helped Reagan set Iran-Contra (see  Arkansas governor Bill Clinton president George Bush CIA drugs for guns connection for crusty details).

Ironically Daniel Ortega, Reagan’s great enemy in Nicaragua,  was re-elected this weekend president of Nicaragua for the fourth time, with his own poetess multilingual wife as Vice President; Ortega just got 71% of the vote… and Washington based World Bank recognized that Ortega has done a good job reducing poverty! So Clinton and Reagan killed all these people for no good reason.

(Yes Ortega practices crony capitalism, as the Dems do in the US; but the difference is that the median income in Nicaragua has shot up, whereas in the USA, the median family income is down 5% from what it was under Bill Clinton.)

***

Voting Recommendations:

I vote for truth! Some will say it’s not on the ballot. Well, in California there are more than 12 propositions to vote on. Including: Outlawing the death penalty (I recommend yes), extending by twelve (12) years the supplementary taxes on wealthy income (I recommend yes), augmenting taxes on cigarettes (I recommend yes).

***

How Come Victims Support Their Oppressors?

This is the eternal question when looking at history. But the answer is always the same: oppressors manipulate the victims’ minds (except for outright brutal military invasions like those of the Mongols, or France in May 1940, invaded by the Nazi army)

The obvious flaws in USA (and most of the West) are inequality, global plutocracy, the richest paying the less tax, mass crony capitalism, mass media lies. Clinton-Obama, following the initiative of Reagan, himself following Reagan, set it up.

To what John Michael Gartland commented: “I don’t think that I will ever live long enough to understand the fanatical devotion and level of irrational denial of their minions.”

Dear JMD: You have several types of minions. Those who are in for money, power, the REAL minions (in the etymological sense of Henri II’s court) who have a vested interest in it, that is all the Hollywood, celebrities, Crony Capitalists, wealthiest paying little tax, plutocrats made by the Deep State, etc. Those have interest, pecuniary interest and power interest in the Clinton-Obama world.

Then there are the multitudes who vote Clinton, and are in DENIAL. Then there are the multitudes who really believe Trump set-up the world as it is, because they have not been paying attention. They really believe that it is all the fault of the “Republicans” (when Dems were in full supermajority power in 2009, say; this is why some on the Internet went insane at that notion which I long exposed… in 2009, or even in an essay last week…)

***

Why Are People So Idiotic? Media Propaganda.

Under the Soviets, the main newspaper was “Pravda” (“Truth”). It was full of lies. Now all the media in the West is under control.

It told the truth in 2009: I wrote in a comment to the New York Times that Obama lowered taxes a lot on richest incomes. The New York Times censored my comment. The. NYT recognized that was true only in 2016. Meanwhile, their readers were led to believe that Obama has brought taxes up on the rich (Obama did raise them a bit in 2012). Too many comments like that, and the NYT censored me totally (they don’t even bother to answer me anymore when I ask them why). I think that should be against the law, BTW (as the NYT has special prerogatives granted to it by the state, supposedly representing We The People).

Paul Krugman just accused Trump of anti-Judaism (by innuendo, Krugman did not produce any quotes). Paul Krugman is a an efficient propagandist of global plutocracy employed at White House under Reagan, while Trump raged against Reagan. At the White House, Reagan had put Krugman in charge of plutocratic globalization. So maybe we should call the “Clinton Initiative” the “Krugman Initiative”.

Says Krugman: “I had arranged for a leave from MIT and was on my way to Washington, to be the chief staffer for international economics at the Council of Economic Advisers.

It was, in a way, strange for me to be part of the Reagan Administration. I was then and still am an unabashed defender of the welfare state… I am also unable to pretend to respect “policy entrepreneurs”, the intellectually dishonest self-proclaimed experts who tell politicians what they want to hear. The Reagan Administration was, of course, full of people who hated the welfare state and had very little interest in the truth.”

Whatever. Power is power, some can’t resist the appeal of exerting power. Thus we end up, or rather, down, led into the abyss by the worst, those who are mostly motivated by power greed.

Paul Krugman became a professional, efficient propagandist of global plutocracy, singing the praises of trade. While Krugman was employed at White House under Reagan, Trump raged against Reagan about middle-income Americans being fleeced through international arrangements. Krugman got a Nobel for explaining scholastically that global trade was good. It’s good for global plutocrats (which pays the Nobel committee).

Trump kept raging against the system, sending millions to a succession of politicians who talked big about helping all (such as the Clintons).

Were Krugman and his ilk dishonest, or simply idiotic?  Paul Krugman, not a philosopher, behaved as if he did not suspect that global trade without global law would bring global plutocracy, world slavery, no more jobs in the West.

The median income in the USA is down 5% over what it was under Bill Clinton. Meanwhile the cost of quality health care and quality education has gone through the roof. So did real estate. Obama has been a disaster, but, because he is a “cool” guy, he is still wildly popular. Weirdly, whether Trump or Clinton, the president will be more up for the job. Obama is probably smarter than either, but he did not have either the temperament, nor the experience: he was too young when he became president. This being said, either Clinton, or Trump, will have a much more difficult situation… because the “cool” guy was so cool, he stayed below a rock for eight years, like a cool snake. 

With plutocracy owned Main Stream Media skewing the mood on all the financial-economic & social news & opinion, sanity can’t be regained. The Democrats found for themselves one of the world’s most corrupt family to lead the world again. Same old, same old, eight years after their financial conspiracies led to the world’s most spectacular financial crisis ever (the Great Depression went out of control when it was amplified as an economic-political crisis, starting July 1930). 

Oh, last but not least, Slavoj Zizek is viewed as a “Hegelian” Marxist philosopher. He said that he would vote for Trump. Zizek’s explanation:

“Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. When Stalin was asked in the late 1920s which deviation is worse, the Rightist one or the Leftist one, he snapped back: They are both worse! Is it not the same with the choice American voters are confronting in the 2016 presidential elections? Trump is obviously “worse.” He enacts a decay of public morality. He promises a Rightist turn. But he at least promises a change. Hillary is “worse” since she makes changing nothing look desirable.

With such a choice, one should not lose ones nerve and chose the “worst,” which means change—even if is a dangerous change—because it opens up the space for a different more authentic change.

The point is thus not to vote for Trump—not only should one not vote for such a scum, one should not even participate in such elections. The point is to approach coldly the question: Whose victory is better for the fate of the radical emancipatory project, Clinton’s or Trump’s? Trump wants to make America great again, to which Obama responded that America already is great. But is it? “

Zizek rightly dismisses the analogies with Hitler, pointing out that the hierarchies and geology of power in the USA are very complex. I agree with much of what Zizek says, especially the iconoclastic aspect, although I know the situation better than he does, and I know that on some important points Trump is way left of Clinton. What we have is two rightist plutocrats fighting, one global, the other national. [I will comment Zizek more in the future, if I find time.]

Electing Trump is the best reward Obama’s plutocratic, corporate fascism rule deserves. That will fit even better than his Nobel prize. However, electing Clinton is the best reward her idiotic, fanatical supporters deserve. Plus, she is a woman (and we need a woman leader). Decisions, decisions…

Patrice Ayme’

Clinton: Weird, Weirder, Weaker

Abstract: Why did Clinton use a personal server, or even let her foreign maid access State secrets? Not just because she loves danger, but because she leads a Machiavellian plutocracy. By telling the enemies of the USA, secretly, US secrets, US democracy was weakened… And that is exactly what global plutocracy wants.

***

Global Corporate Fascist Plutocracy, The Clinton-Obama World:

Meanwhile, following the NAFTA paradigm, the bicephalic Obama-Clinton puppet forced onto the world three new global plutocratic corporate fascist treaties: the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership), TTIP (TPP with Europe) and TiSA (privatize all public services). Are global corporate fascist treatises “progressive”? Neither I, nor Chris Hedge, think so. Chris:”TPP Is the Most Brazen Corporate Power Grab in American History. It’s worse than any of us feared.” This is also what Ralph Nader said, his exact words.

Nader says (and I and Hedges concur): “It allows corporations to bypass our three branches of government to impose enforceable sanctions by secret tribunals. These tribunals can declare our labor, consumer and environmental protections [to be] unlawful, non-tariff barriers subject to fines for noncompliance. The TPP establishes a transnational, autocratic system of enforceable governance in defiance of our domestic laws.”

***

Hillary Spent Years As A “Goldwater Girl”, A Right Wing Extremist:

I used to be pro-Hillary. I used to be pro-Clinton, a bit more than eight years ago, after Obama defeated her. I had (with colossal naivety, it turned out) dedicated two years to Barack Obama. I knew Clinton was tough. Recently, I found out that she was seriously too tough by half, and, at the same time, small, like something hard in my shoe, preventing me to walk in comfort the road to truth.

I was even pro-Clinton as recently as when she was Secretary of State. Because she was a woman, smart, abused by Bill. I did not know the most telling details. Now I do. Indeed, the more I studied her case in the last year, the more disgusted I got. I have long known about her commodity trading in her twenties, poorly disguised corruption between the largest company in a state and its top politician. I read around in Democratic propaganda that Hillary was “idealistic” when young. I am “idealistic”, always have been, so I liked that.

However, the truth was that Clinton was a “Goldwater Girl”. Goldwater was an extremist Republican so extreme that Trump feels like Bernie Sanders relative to him. Senator Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act. This was who Clinton was for. Then Clinton claims she liked the anti-war movement, but the fact is, she was “intern” to the Congress Republican leader, Gerald Ford (later nominated US president), and worked for another Republican/plutocrat Nelson Rockefeller (the source on all this is her own memoir). It is clear that, very early on, she was ambitious, well connected, and would do whatever it took to get to power.

Hillary Clinton & Alledged Attempted Murderess Mind Meld. Heavier Together? A Weighty Issue

[Venezuelan Machado, on the right, admitted gaining more than 60 pounds after becoming “Miss Universe” when Trump owned the contest. That caused a problem, everybody agreed (including Machado, who admitted to bulimia). Machado stayed Miss Universe, but she has claimed that Trump, who supported her in public,  including lots of kisses on her cheeks, proffered four disagreeable words in private, in two instances. Hillary Clinton spoke about those words publicly as if these alleged words had been made public by Trump. After her Miss Universe year, Machado became a worldwide movie star, and a US citizen just in time to support Clinton.]

***

Plutocrats, Clinton Are Above The Law, We Are Under It:

Please understand the context: two four star generals have recently received felony convictions for exposing people who had no security clearances to classified materials. In the case of general Petraeus, he showed his biographer/lover classified material. Generally, the US justice system is of inhuman ferocity: thousands of immigrant who have done wrong are kicked out of the country by special judges, without debate, or appeal (whereas, in a country such as France, a legal immigrant cannot be kicked out, in practice: being stripped of nationality happened only 5 times in the last decade).

However, when dealing with plutocrats, the US system is incredibly soft. An example is manslaughter of a woman by a drunk Ted Kennedy:

“With all the facts in evidence, a charge of manslaughter would have been de rigueur for 99 percent of Americans. But this was a Kennedy. If 99 percent of Americans had gotten drunk, caused an accident, left the scene & another person to die, they’d go to prison. Fortunately for Ted Kennedy, he was Ted Kennedy. The judge at the inquest could have filed for manslaughter but did not. The DA could have brought the charge, but also did not. Now you know the story of Chappaquiddick. A sitting US Senator killed somebody & walked away scot-free. This miscarriage of justice wasn’t done behind a curtain either, it was done with the entire country watching. We’re either a nation of laws where we are all equal under the law, or we are not. Chappaquiddick demonstrated the truth of the matter. I had to spend 20 years watching Ted Kennedy being held up as some kind of great man.”

Ted Kennedy played a nefarious role under Obama: as he did not resign while sick, his absence provided Obama occasionally with the lack of supermajority pretext he used to do nothing during his first year, while claiming that it was the Republicans who made him do nothing at all.

I did generally agree with the policies claim to promulgate (but I doubt he ever really meant it: I don’t drink mind altering substances)

***

Clinton Filipino Maid Handled Classified Material:

“As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government emails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, D.C., e-mails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.

In fact, Marina Santos was called on so frequently to receive e-mails that she may hold the secrets to E-mailgate — if only the FBI and Congress would subpoena her and the equipment she used.

Clinton entrusted far more than the care of her D.C. residence, known as Whitehaven, to Santos. She expected the Filipino immigrant to handle state secrets, further opening the Democratic presidential nominee to criticism that she played fast and loose with national security.

Clinton would first receive highly sensitive emails from top aides at the State Department and then request that they, in turn, forward the messages and any attached documents to Santos to print out for her at the home.”

Suspect In Murder Plot Makes Natural Clinton Ally:

This week in Florida, Hillary Clinton was flaunting her relationship with Alicia Machado, a former Miss Universe from Venezuela, who made beauty her career (thanks in part to the ownership, then, by Donald Trump, of the Miss Universe contest). Machado was accused, but not convicted, of attempted murder: the victim got 2 bullet in his head, thus, could not remember too well what happened.

This is how The Economist described the case in an article at the time:

“The male lead in this complex plot is Miss Machado’s rugged boyfriend, Juan Rafael Rodriguez Reggeti. He had a sister, who, eight months pregnant, jumped off a fifth-floor balcony. He, allegedly, blaming her husband for the suicide, sought revenge by firing two shots at him just after the funeral. The husband was hit but survived. Mr Rodriguez fled in a car driven, say the police, by Miss Machado.”

The investigating judge, Maximiliano Fuenmayor, issued a warrant of arrest for Mr Rodriguez. Miss Machado, then a soap opera star, claimed that she was ill at home at the time. However, within hours, Judge Fuenmayor got a call from her. He says she threatened to ruin his career and have him killed. Machado admits she rang, but says it was just to thank him for his unbiased pursuit of justice. Mr Fuenmayor says she actually threatened him with her powerful friends, from—supposedly—President Rafael Caldera down.

Now here you have it all: Ms. Machado seems to have known how to manipulate politicians. She finds them, from South America, to North America.

Entering beauty contests was the Venezuelan Machado’s ticket to fame. She became a US citizen a few months ago, and Clinton has been milking her for all she is worth. (By the way, US law prevents people suspected of illegal activities, or other character blemishes, to become citizens. But then, of course, they have to reveal they were attempted murder suspects. Citizenship can be withdrawn retroactively, and this has happened to countless unfortunates).

Then, yesterday again, the FBI released 169 heavily redacted pages of Bill Clinton’s pardon of plutocrat Marc Rich (because of the Freedom of Information Act). Why would a report on a plutocrat be so heavily redacted? Are plutocrats somehow connected to the US government? Did the US government make deals with plutocrat Rich? Was plutocrat Rich in some sense an agent of the US government? One shudders at the possibility. And this facts which need to be removed from the public eye are 16 years old, or more.

Rich had been pardoned, it seems, because huge amounts of money went in the direction of Clinton related businesses (like the “Clinton Library”)

This Clinton business is getting weirder everyday. I am going to scramble an essay on all this organized crime… It affects the entire planet, as “globalization”, the way it’s done, is the main weapon of plutocratization.

Alicia Machado became Miss Universe, when Trump owned that contest. By her own admission, she was 118 pounds when she won, and quickly ballooned by 60 pounds. In their first, rigged debate, Clinton accused Trump to have called Machado “Ms Housekeeping”. Clinton did not reveal that Machado had no witness of that demeaning (?) label, as it was in a private conversation, one on one. The very fact that Clinton feels “Ms Housekeeping” is an insult is understandable, for someone like her, who lived in mansions with countless servants all her life, and goes around the world in private jets from five star hotel to five star hotel, all courtesy of adoring US taxpayers.  j

If someone calls me “Ms Housekeeping”, I will have to smile, because it’s the truth. Last night at 2 am, I was washing dishes. And I am proud of it. I don’t live as Machado and Clinton do, in the rarefied world of those with countless servants and $12,000 jackets.

Clinton does. Machado do.

***

Is Huma Abedin The Guarantor Of Saudi Support For All Things Clinton? 

That Clinton bonds with the likes of Machado and Huma Abedin tells volumes. Huma Abedin is half Pakistani. At the age of two, her family moved to Saudi Arabia, apparently to become Wahhabist propagandists, by profession. Huma Abedin is:

• Daughter of Saleha Mahmood Abedin, a pro-Sharia sociologist with ties to numerous Islamist organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood, all of them financed by immensely wealthy Saudi plutocrats, who also financed the Islamist State (and many other terrorist organizations).
• Longtime assistant to Hillary Clinton(since the 1990s).
• Wife of former congressman Anthony Weiner, self-described as “Carlos Danger”, a sextist, and apparent pedophile, who kept 650,000 emails of interest, thousands of them from Clinton. That may have been insurance, explaining why he is not in jail yet. As with Machado, crime seems to be a friend one can trust.
• Huma Abedin was a longtime former employee of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, which shares the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of establishing Islamic supremacy and Sharia Law worldwide. (Abedin was an editor there for more than 12 years).

Amusingly, Clinton pretends to be an advocate of women’s right. In a way, she is, automatically, as a woman. And that’s a good thing. That Clinton is a woman is the only reason to vote for her. But as her relationship with Abedin shows, she is even more interested by having flows of money into the Clinton Foundation coffers… From Saudi plutocrats. The same ones who have been funding the Islamist State, and Bin Laden before that, and the GIA (Groupe Islamiste Arme’ which killed 200,000 in Algeria) even earlier, etc.

***

Nothing Like Living Dangerously, Especially When You Have All The Power:

Her conversion from Goldwater Girl to “Democrat” showed Clinton that what matters was to get powerful allies while posing so well that one could do in reality the very opposite of what one claims to be doing. She has embraced successfully this Machiavellian strategy for so long, she loves to do it dangerously. Hey, anybody needs a thrill. Especially those who have got it all, already. This is no doubt why she engaged in extremely dangerous behaviors such as being personally associated with Muslim Fundamentalists, attempted assassins and sending secret messages to Putin through her leaky server, as if she did not really mean it. For all to see. No doubt she chuckles as she observes that her pathetic followers don’t get any of it. This why she wore a $12, 495 Armani jacket during a speech on inequality. It’s all about who has power, and who does not, guys. And flaunting it.

Patrice Ayme’

Does Clinton Corruption Matter?

Clinton Foundations (yes, there are two!) helped Clinton as a presidential candidate (be it just with taxpayer paid travel in the best accommodations). The Foundations were entangled with the State Department. It is 99% probable that at least five countries had full access to State Department mail, thanks to Clinton’s private server. Clinton knew the debate questions in excruciating details (proven for one debate), that’s how she beat Sanders. Ethics up, guys!

A typical answer came from a Clinton fanatic, Mike Griffith: “So what. We just need to stop Trump. Right, Patrice? I’m alright with a little corruption. I’m sure Hillary is no angel, nor her husband, nor George Bush (probably the worse of the bunch / not to mention Cheney).”  

That was part of various exchanges, where I got most of the insults in the book, hurled my way (it just wakes me up, better than my tenth cup of coffee). I replied that: You need to stop plutocracy. Good luck doing it with a genius of qui pro quo such as Hillary, who transformed $1,000 into six figures, supposedly all by her little self, when she was in her twenties, playing cattle futures. Actually she was not playing the futures, the lawyer for Tyson Foods, Arkansas’ main employer, was “playing” them for her. Specialists have evaluated her trading success as one chance in 31 trillions. It was obviously a back payment for service rendered… or expected. Did I mention the obvious? Her husband and presumed accomplice, was governor of Arkansas. Yes, corruption grows with the years, especially when one got away with it.

I am not particularly for Trump (I used to be against Trump, decades ago, but now we have much worse under our eyes, and experienced much more wicked minds). However I am aware of extremely damaging laws which attack fundamental liberties of simple people (such as Obama’s great invention to terrorize little guys who dare to travel a bit, FATCA; I will speak of FATCA in detail some other day, it is exemplary of the viciousness of so-called “Democrats”).

I am more for democracy and truth than for anything else. It is funny to see a bunch of Clinton fanatics insulting other people, or even democracy, in the rabid hope that all what Clinton propagandists, who happen to be the standard plutocratic propagandists, brandish as truth, is all true: if Trump did not exist, the USA would be OK.

Those anti-Trump haters did not notice that Trump never ran for office before. Nor did they notice that Bill Clinton ran for Congress in 1974,  That was 42 years ago. This is a Clinton world we are living in, not Trump’s. 

Carter Declared Secret War To Afghanistan On July 3, 1979. Clinton Would Pursue It, And Attack Iraq, Too. Why Do We Need Such Warlords, Deciding Of Life And Death, To Overlord US?

Now for the bigger question:

***

Does Some Corruption In The Leaders Of The Republic Matter?

The answer is that it all depends of what the alleged corruption is, who, and what for. Corruption of the spirit of the Roman Republic was alleged against the Gracchi, because they did not follow traditional procedures when passing their anti-plutocratic laws. A detailed examination of the circumstances show that complaint was unfounded, considering what was at stake: the Gracchi tried desperately to stop the plutocratization of the Roman Republic. They had good reason to believe the plutocrats were playing dirty, because they were. Ultimately, the Gracchi laws passed, the Gracchi were assassinated, and the anti-plutocracy laws were not enforced.

Similarly, corruption was alleged against Caesar. It was both true, and irrelevant: Caesar was going to leave at the head of the greatest army Rome ever had, to subdue Persia, just as Alexander had done before, swing through the Caucasus, and subdue Germany from behind. Had Caesar succeeded, the Roman Republic could have survived, and taken the world over. However, the plutocrats who assassinated Caesar feared a triumph of the Republic more than anything else. So they killed a departing Caesar.

What we have now in the USA is an extremely dangerous form of corruption:

***

Corporate Fascism Serves Its Servants Well:

How did Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, get to power? With the help from major US corporations and their leading plutocrats. This is what the official history books do not want you to suspect.

Under Obama, extending a movement well launched by the Clintons’ repeal of the Banking Act of 1933, corporate fascism has been allowed to run rampant.

The present US system is the most corrupt in the history of the world, if measured by size alone (just like we are the richest people who ever lived, as measured by GDP and my own AWE).

Obama has advantaged what one should call the Obama corporations. All the Obama corporations pay little, or no taxes: Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, GE, etc. Obama corporations have the full might and so-called “justice” of the United States of America behind them. What, who pays for that? The little guys, worldwide.

“Friends” such as Mike Griffith, above, have scoffed:”Why to give up power?” The reason to not gather too much power on the few is equality (at least of opportunity), without which there is no democracy. And if there is less democracy, there is less mental power, thus less power, even less economic and social power, period. As Obama corporations are advantaged, little guys, including the engineers and scientists who make the system innovative, suffer, shrivel, and disappear. Obama may think, in his naivety, that Elon Musk is a great scientist, and needs billions of state aid, but Musk is actually nothing important for innovation. The guys who design electronic chips are much more important. And such people are decimated by the system Obama and the pro-plutocratic Supreme Court have set-up. They are reduced to bankruptcy.The corruption in the present regime extends all the way down the justice system. Federal judges can take decisions in favor of giant corporations, and even refuse to make them pay what a jury has decided they should pay. Then underhanded pressure make the lawyers of the little guys go away, and the Judge accepts a job in one of said corporations I saw the situation from distance zero; obviously I am going to give no names, you are not just talking about ruin here, but much more definitive solutions. Speaking of that, at distance zero too, I was told of direct death threats in the realm of a joint private-public employment. This entanglement of deadly corruption started with racist president Wilson, through the likes of Prescott Bush, Brown, Brother Harriman, Dulles Brothers, and all the plutos higher in the chain of command. We are now in generation five or so. Obamacare was written by Sen. Baucus a fifth generation Pluto, etc… The Clinton are low level puppets of that monstrosity. However top notch lawyers know they set up systems to kill thousands (legally, through mock drug charges).

***

When The Big Guy Is Free To Terrorize the Little Guy, You Get Persia, Not Athenian Greece:

When the Macedonian (that is Macedonian plutocracy) led army defeated Achaemenid  Persia, the Macedonians and their Greek contingents were stunned by the advanced Persian civilization. The freeway system was stunning (in the gigantic empire, news took just a week). The buildings of Babylon, with its suspended gardens, or of Persepolis, with its gigantic palaces, were stunning. The Persians were highly sophisticated. Laws were intricate, administration superb.

So why was Persia not more advanced than Greece, but a retard, instead?

Liberty, Equity, Equality. Greece was not perfect that way, far from it. But it was much better. So innovation was Greek, just as it had been Sumerian, Egyptian and Cretan earlier. And for the same reason.

In Persia, oligarchies were enabled to gather overwhelming power. They were headed by “Satraps”. Thus the little guys got crushed.

All together, the little minds of the little guys gather more mind than the few minds of a few Satraps.

The Clintons and Obama (let alone the crazed like a fox G.W. Bush) want us to live little lives, when they live big, harnessing the state. But you would have had to experience a keen interest in history since the day before yesterday to know this. But you did not. Because like Obama, you had only passion for the Chicago Cubs and the like (Obama tweets about this sort of brain-dead material all the time). Having passion for nothing is not worth it, and it creates dead minds, fit for slaves.

So yes, Clinton corruption matters.

And this time, it is not just about the USA, or the West, or even civilization. It’s about the planet.

Yes, I know, they accuse Trump. Trump was not in power, guys.

The Clintons were.

Patrice Ayme’

Obama, Clinton: Stealthily Regressive

So much lying! So much naivety! Oh Blah blah! Obama! Obamacare! Obama cares not: yes, GDP of the wealthiest, the .1% has been growing. But, in truth, Clinton and Obama were the most stingy presidents of the last 66 years. Far from being progressives, they were the top two regressives and regressors. Here is the graph:

Clinton And Obama Were The Less Progressive Presidents In 66 Years

I do not expect the insulting fanatics who worship Clinton and Obama to understand the preceding graph. Let me explain a bit more for the others.  The graph above looks at United States government purchases of goods and services. It looks at the purchases at all levels: local, state, and federal. Such purchases are, actually buying real stuff, and work, in contradistinction with transfer payments like Social Security and Medicare.

[Why was there a decrease around 1950? Because of super giant spending due to the Second World War, just prior; after that enormous spending, a retrenchment was in order. However, notice that President Ike brought up spending to 25%! Thus, if one makes, say a five-year rolling average, Clinton and Obama are the lowest in Net Government Investment since… President Hoover; that was 83 years ago; and even Hoover did the Hoover dam, and much more. One can advantageously consult “Wealthcare Endless Summers“.]

Obama has been far from presiding over a huge expansion of government the way he himself and the right-wing, Neoconservative fanatics who now support Hillary Clinton, claim. As a matter of fact, Obama presided over unprecedented austerity, in part driven by spending cuts at the state and local level. Thus it is an astounding triumph of misinformation and disinformation that lackluster economic performance since 2009 has been interpreted as a failure of government spending. Let’s zoom in on Obama’s first term:

Obama Cliamed He Was A Big Spender. Instead, He Spent Big Only On His Friends, The Plutocrats, Soon To Provide Him With Beaucoup Bucks

Here it is, massaged differently:

Clinton And Obama, By The Measure Of Annualized Growth Of Real Government Spending, Were The Two Most Conservative US Presidents

[Source: Economist View.] So now the hysterical ones on the pseudo-left tell us that Hillary Clinton is not at all like Clinton, Bill, her husband and Obama, her supporter. It is indeed likely: Clinton says she will spend more in education and infrastructure. How much she can deliver with a hostile Congress, is something else. However, Trump has clamored for more government spending since ever. Trump lambasted the decrepit infrastructure of the USA while Obama (and Clinton), in chief command, did nothing about it.

I have said that government spending should be massively  augmented, for years. (But intelligently augmented, a big but, not a big butt!) Even Krugman, the Clinton sycophant, has joined my long held opinion. Here he is, in August 2016:

“Time to Borrow, by Paul Krugman, NY Times: …There are, of course, many ways our economic policy could be improved. But the most important thing we need is sharply increased public investment in everything from energy to transportation to wastewater treatment.

How should we pay for this investment? We shouldn’t — not now, or any time soon. Right now there is an overwhelming case for more government borrowing. …

First, we have obvious, pressing needs for public investment in many areas. … Meanwhile, the federal government can borrow at incredibly low interest rates: 10-year, inflation-protected bonds yielded just 0.09 percent on Friday. …

Spending more now would mean a bigger economy later, which would mean more tax revenue…, probably be larger than any rise in future interest payments. And this analysis doesn’t even take into account the potential role of public investment in job creation…”

In any case, no president did worse than Obama, except for skirt-chaser-thanks-to-government-clout Clinton. Would the Clinton of the future be different from the Clinton of the past? Hillary hysterics foam at the mouth, and assure us, that such will be the case. However, as many called me a racist, xenophobe, fascist, hater of Muslim People, Trump lover and even less flattering term, in public, on the Internet in recent days, I now strongly doubt that they are capable of informed judgment.

Yes, be it Hillary or President Trump, real government spending will grow. Both from what they said, and who they are (Trump is a builder used to take loans and invest rather profitably). But also because, after eight years were Obama “signature achievements” consisted in bombing weddings in Yemen, in “signature strikes”, and deploying the health plutocrat friendly (think Buffet) Obamacare, real government spending could not be any lower.

Or then, it was a farce: consider the US government spending on Elon Musk (a South Africa born entrepreneur). If Trump is elected, SpaceX is gone in a year. And so it will be all over: watch Amazon go down in flames. Yes, I do finance heavily my local bookstore, and yes I purchase only two books once at Amazon. Nobody os perfect.

But those who say that Clinton and Obama were progressives, are either liars or ignorant, or cruel, or all the preceding. It is one thing to no be perfect. It is another to wallop in error: to persevere in error is diabolical, the Romans said (“perseverare diabolicum”).

Again, look at this:

I invest Nothing For You People, because You Are Unworthy. Call Me Progressive, Like The Anaconda Who Progressively Squeezes

[Notice the dearth of spending under Clinton. Pelosi-Bush invested, until last 3 months of 2008, when Pelosi-Obama signed on Bush’s Sec. of Treasury Paulson’s plan. Pelosi-Obama invested in plutocrats thereafter (mostly, although there was a small genuine ‘stimulus’ which worked wonders).]

I expect feeble minds and cultural retards to not understand such a graph. They will probably revert to insults. And I do not expect them to understand what this means for analyzing the reasons for the frantic support of the Obamas for Clinton. You see, ultimately, investing is a zero sum game, in the instant: the US government did not invest, because all its discretionary money went to plutocrats. And this is why the Main Stream Media, held by plutocrats, is so anti-Trump. Trump, who is one of them, plutocrats, know very well where the investment streams are going. If Trump wants a bigger name, and he does, he will have to divert them, towards We The People. And all and any president, but for Clinton, did this, investing in the USA, better than Obama did. Since president Hoover.

In retrospect, those who wanted progress, at least by the measure of investing in the country, should never have voted for Clinton or Obama. How can one hope that the creature closest to them would be any different?

Patrice Ayme’

Between Friends: Donald, Hillary, & Angry Plutocrats

Trump Hatred Originates With The Average Plutocrat, Not The Clintons:

The Clintons and Trumps have long been friends, their children are great friends, especially Chelsea and Ivanka, and it shows. So why all the hatred? Well, it’s manufactured, It is part of a distraction show, kabuki theater. And a genuine worry, among most plutocrats, that Trump is a traitor who plays apprentice sorcerer. The figure of the rogue plutocrat turning treacherously against plutocracy, his alma mater, his nourishing mother, is a familiar one in history. 

Roughly all Main Stream Media, worldwide, are owned, held, or otherwise controlled by plutocrats (yes, including the public NPR and PBS in the USA). Those plutocrats hate Trump, because Trump has dared to say, and has been saying as loudly as possible, since at least 1987 (when he attacked Reagan in writing) that globalization, as practiced, does not work for We The People. That has been proven aplenty, and now angry voters are discovering that Trump was right all along.

Amusingly, Sanders’ final success in 2016 was forged by Donald’s iconoclastic work, from way back when he fought Reagan with the exact same idea he rolls out today again (whereas the ever more popular Obama lauds Reagan; that, and not racism, is the source of the antipathy between Trump and Obama: Obama was born half white and educated by 100% whites). When crafty Bill Clinton called Obamacare the “craziest thing in the world“, he was craftily following Donald Trump too (and thus neutralizing the Donald: no need to vote for Trump to put Obamacare out of its misery, Bill will do it for you…)

***

The Ill Informed Sing The Praises Of The Clintons, but the Clintons are followers of Goldman Sachs, establishers of  the financial plutocracy. One, of course, has to be educated enough, and curious enough, to understand the following graph. As rabidly pro-Clinton minorities are in general not graced with as much discernment, they are rather obdurate: they suffer you know. Thus it is that the victim elect their torturers, a generalization of the Stockholm Syndrome (the feelings of trust or affection felt in certain cases of kidnapping or hostage-taking by a victim towards captors). It is a case of capture-bonding. 

The Clinton System Destroyed FDR’s Banking Act of 1933 and Re-established The Vicious Financial System Of 1929, On Steroids

 Since the Clinton economy affected income, median GDP per capita has lost 40% relative to the GDP of the USA. How come? The 40% went to the top, and mostly the .1%. 

***

We Are Friends, And Long Have Been:

Trump and Clinton roasted  each other in a funny way at the annual roast and Catholic fundraiser. Trump said he was delighted that Hillary was nominating him ambassador to Iraq or Afghanistan, and he got to choose which one. Hillary said Donald said she did not have stamina, but she had spent 4.5 hours with him, debating, and that was longer than any of his campaign managers ever did (an allusion to the fact Donald’s managers keep on resigning, or being resigned).

The host, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, said the candidates had “nice things” to say offstage.

“I was very moved by the obvious attempt on behalf of both Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump to kind of be courteous, to get along, to say nice things privately to one another,” Dolan said on NBC’s “Today.” “I was very moved by that. That was pleasant.”

Dolan, who sat between Trump and Clinton at the dinner, acknowledged the two were, like President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012, “kind of awkward together.”

“But the purpose of the evening is to break some of that ice, and thanks be to God, it works. The Al Smith Dinner by its nature literally tries to — I’m sitting there between the two — and literally,I’m supposed to be kind of a bridge to bring these two people together. And I try my best, and there were some very touching moments.”

The three of them prayed together. “And after the little prayer, Mr. Trump turned to Secretary Clinton and said, ‘You know, you are one tough and talented woman…This has been a good experience in this whole campaign, as tough as it’s been” She replied “And Donald, whatever happens, we need to work together afterwards.”  

Trump: Sometimes Vulgar Below The Belt. Clinton: All Too Often An Awfully Vulgar Laughter Which Looks Like Something A Donkey Would Do. Made For Each Other

So much love! Not like the “arrogant” Dylan who, members of the Nobel committee loudly whine, has refused to acknowledge their glorious, yet most generous existence. Well, what do they think? It is embarrassing, that Nobel is embarrassing and Dylan knows it. (At least he did not get it just because he received power and brown skin!) If I were me, i would accept the Nobel, if i were Dylan, I would refuse it. The Nobel should be used to reward what, and, or, whom, deserves to be discovered, not one of the planet super stars. (Salman Rushdie was supposed to be a runner-up for the literature Nobel, Rushdie is a martyr of the struggle against fanatical, lethal theology, yet how come I get bored to death reading a few pages of his books? At least Dylan, I appreciate, and not just the music.)

So who hates Trump, if not the Clintons? Well, in the last presidential debate, Hillary accused Donald to be a “puppet” and he angrily retorted:”No, you are the puppet“. She meant he was a caricature, he meant she was something whose strings were pulled by multi billionaires (Soros, Buffet, the Gates, etc…) They both knew that they were right, and in which different ways. (Clinton may have enough of a temper to break a few strings, though…)

***

Hatred Against Trump Is Self Interested Among the Mighty:

Typical is the hatred of the (light weight, yet courageous) billionaire-intellectual-charming corruptocrat,  Bernard-Henri Lévy who nebulously accuses Trump of “possible infidelity to America itself. The party of Eisenhower and Reagan has been commandeered by a corrupt demagogue…”

To put Eisenhower and Reagan in the same category is embarrassingly ignorant: Eisenhower launched FDR New Deal style massive programs (for example the construction of a continental size FREE freeway system, all the way to Hawaii! Or several massive defense programs reminiscent of FDR again). To pay for them, Eisenhower brought up the tax on the wealthiest up to 93%. Free, highest quality public university system went up in the USA, for example the University of California. In shocking contrast, Reagan, an enemy of cognition, established a tuition at the PUBLIC University of California, starting the great movement of making it so that only the wealthiest are fully human (Thatcher would pursue it much later) 

By comparison, in 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.

The result was pandemonium (see the second graph in https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2016/08/02/trump-a-traitor/: that’s when the rich started to get ever richer, and the poor, poorer). Reagan was the anti-Eisenhower (but Reagan’s followers were even worse! All those who laud Reagan in any way are just ignorant, Neoconservatives, or worse, clueless clowns. And most probably, all the preceding. Logically enough, as Trump blasted Reagan during his presidency, Trump hatred and Reagan loving are two sides of the same coin (many of Trump partisans, or their parents actually believed in Reagan, before realizing later that they had been had… hence their indignation).

***

Plutocracy strikes aging societies. Just like metastatic cancer strikes older individuals, and for similar reasons: the corruption of entrenched nefarious mutations. When a society is struck by plutocracy, it needs a revolution. That is why France, the core of the European civilization, went through so many revolutions: precisely to rejuvenate itself, from revolution to revolution (and France implemented a revolution machine in England, which worked for many centuries; even Brexit is a form of revolution, however flawed and misguided…)

Trump, by lashing back against plutocratic globalization, is refreshing. He is also sincere: his mood against some aspect of globalization can be found in a campaign he made against Reagan. Trump’s campaign against the “Politically Correct”dates from the early 1970s. It is not clear what Hillary will do against corrupting globalization, as she did a 180 degrees on the Trans Pacific Partnership (she said the details changed, she didn’t). The Democratic platform adopted several of Sanders’ propositions.

In any case, the differences between Hillary and the Donald are less great than feared by the young and naive. The difference of either of them with Obama, will be more marked: the impulsive Donald and the Hilarious One have lots of experience with the system, and do not really need said system, to become somebody: they are already superstars, and they think highly of themselves. But progressives have to understand they have to exert continual pressure if they want progress, be it Donald, or Hillary. Just making a blind Hillary cult after 8 years of blind Obama worship will mean ever more plutocratization, same as what we have been going through.

And keep in mind that the grotesque racist campaign against Trump is an example of how much manipulation is going out there. After a visit with John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, the Ecuadorean president, Correa, cut Wikileaks’ Assange his Internet access. Assange had been revealing various Clinton manipulations all over. The strident accusations of the US administration against Russia in the US electoral process, mean, precisely, that it takes one to known one. 

Hillary is a monster: a good sign. Devils know best how to fight evil. Maybe she will gobble Bill and his financial puppet masters too.

Patrice Ayme’

Trump A Traitor?

This is what French billionaire (and newly found messianic Jew) pseudo-philosopher Bernard Henri Levy (BHL), wants you to think. BHL wants you to think Trump is a traitor and that BHL is just the opposite. Yet, BHL has been part of the powers that be, at the highest level, for his entire life, even more so than Donald Trump. After BHL made an editorial calling Trump a traitor, I was, naturally, titillated. A comment of mine was immediately blocked (censored). The following is a vast expansion of said comment. Basically BHL tries to drown Trump by inundating him with innuendos… Whereas, in truth, Trump’s major crime is that his dangerous rhetoric threatens the politico-financial milieu created by actors such as BHL. To enrich himself, BHL destroyed the African primary forest. Thus BHL has had much further consequences on world ethics, and lying as the new ethics, than Trump ever had. His hold on the media is frightening.

A foundational lie of modern plutocracy is that Obama and the Clintons are dedicated friends of the poor and downtrodden. Nothing of the sort. The government’s own statistics show it (look at the graph below).

If you don’t know what the Gini Coefficient is, that’s not alright.  It may mean you may have a life, but you cannot take an intelligent part in debating what ails the world. Thus, for the sake of general goodness and true progress, let me explain: when a dictator pushes the Gini up, he (and sometimes she) augments the plutocracy, the power of the few, the oligarchs, over the multitude. Here is the sad reality of Obama and Clinton from raw numbers of the Federal REserve Data (FRED): 

The Oligarchs Became Richest Ever Under Beloved Leader Obama I. Notice The Colossal Rise of the Gini Under The BelovedClintons & Their “Democratic” Congress. Contrary to repute, Gini stagnated under the evil G W Bush. So why are not Clinton and Bush viewed as even more evil? The ways of the simple are mysterious.

The Gini coefficient is a number between 0 and 1.  It is a number to evaluate how much the richest get (it could be income, wealth, education, health, etc.). A country with an income Gini coefficient of 0 means all income is distributed equally.  And a country with an income Gini coefficient of 1 means one person gets all the money.  This measure was created to show just how skewed goodies distribution was.

Sadly, yet eloquently, despite, or rather precisely because of Obama’s ideologue-strength desire to claim to want to redistribute income, he’s craftily managed to make the rich get richer while the poor got poorer. And this, at record levels. Thus, if you hated Bush that way, you should excoriate Obama.

By 2011, the USA had become one of the top (most unequal) countries in the world in wealth. Just surpassed by four dictatorships. This can be explained by the rise of financial manipulators and conspirators such as Bloomberg, a plutocrat many times the wealth of Trump, who supports Clinton (as his ilk always do).

Obama & Democratic Congress Cut Taxes On Richest Taxpayers At The Beginning Of Obama’s Reign. [They also transferred trillions to the richest under ‘Quantitative Easing’, but that’s not in the graph above!]

And this is exactly how many Trump supporters are feeling like: the victims of a giant conspiracy, complete with lying media, pseudo-liberal economists, and pseudo-philosophers railing against We The People. 

‘Something Is Going On, And You Don’t Know What It Is, Mr. Jones’ (Bob Dylan)

The last few times I saw Bernard Henri Levy (BHL) on TV, 2016, he talked to no end about “Jewishness”, and the “genius of Judaism”. He had even just written a book about it. The French audience stayed ominously scornful. When he rose to leave the stage of the famous debate show ONPC, nobody, not even one person in the audience of hundreds, applauded (although BHL was the major guest of the evening). Nobody was amused.

Why? When the ugly face of religious war is surfacing in France again, fanatics of this, that, or the other cult, are intuitively disliked: they don’t seem like offering anything but strife. Many, among We The People, rightly perceive racism, which consists in treating people differently because of their origins.

Indeed, BHL does not like Trump to “emphasize Jewishness“. “Emphasizing Jewishness” is a crime if Trump does it, says BHL, yet a blessing when BHL goes ballistic about it. BHL should read carefully “Night” of Elie Wiesel, where the latter (one of many Jews to do so, including philosopher Hannah Arendt) considers that exaggerated “Jewishness” was a factor in the satanic brew which brought the Shoah. Indeed. There are rarely single causes, most often, web of causes.

The critiques of BHL against Trump, much of them hearsay or wild deliberate misinterpretations, may, or may not be justified. They would be justified if the facts were really as depicted, not just well-founded as industrial strength hearsay. Even then, Trump is a blabber box, who sometimes warns his audience that he may not know what he is talking about, and that his opinion may change in the future. This is an unusual approach for a politician, it strikes many as sincere… And it is. Yes, it’s frightening, but it’s intrinsic to the present system of government we have: a few people, elected or not, fairly or not, have too much power.

The final complaint of BHL against Trump is infidelity. “Infidelity to America.” Whines he:

“The implications of Trump’s election would be truly terrifying. The problem would not only be his vulgarity, sexism, racism, and defiant ignorance. It would be his possible infidelity to America itself. The party of Eisenhower and Reagan has been commandeered by a corrupt demagogue who betrays not only his country’s ideals, but also its fundamental national interest.

American vertigo. Global disaster.”

That’s rich. Eisenhower passed a 93% tax on the wealthiest. BHL himself is the exact opposite: he is one of the wealthiest, stealing wealth from the poorest (Africans, poor French taxpayers). BHL co-opted the entire French state under both Mitterrand and his successor Chirac to extract his father’s company from bankruptcy, and make himself a billionaire. BHL got the help of billionaire Pinault, to intercede with president Chirac, and pass the appropriate law in the French National Assembly. BHL’s life is a testimony to the sort of entanglement of political power and the hyper wealthy, which disgusts so much so many of Trump (and Sanders!) supporters. Ironically, BHL has been in very close, loud and clear relationships with many of the world’s leading politicians, in a way he hints Trump also does with Putin.  

So why does a plutocrat such as BHL dislikes Trump so much? Because Trump said many times that the plutocrats who do not presently pay taxes, for example hedge fund managers, will, should he become president. BHL is scared that this mood, this mood of taxing the wealthy, will propagate (even in France, the wealthiest legally escape tax in many ways made to strike the poor hard). 

Policies Engineered by US Leaders Since Reagan’s Reign Are Obviously Wrong. Time For A Vast Change We Can See. European Parrots May Follow.

In his editorial BHL claims Trump’s call to renegotiate some debt would reduce the US to Argentinian status. Yet, some debt could be renegotiated: after all, president Roosevelt devalued the dollar and cut US national debt by 33%, the day he got to power.

That a pillar, and prime recipient of the present established order, such as BHL, does not like Trump is hardly surprising.  Trump has stated, loud and clear that he would severely modify the established order, making lots of bad actors, and free riders, pay. Trump want bad actors and free riders, from Amazon Inc. to hedge fund managers, to sanctimonious members of NATO who don’t pay for their own defense, to pay for the advantages they enjoy.

That so many of the “vulgum” BHL despises so much, so explicitly, are ready to vote against the established order, is refreshing. I would have preferred Sanders. Individuals such as BHL, who found the money in the coffers of states, they needed to cut the entire forests of some African countries, to buy themselves palaces all over the world, and dominate the media relentlessly, should get their comeuppance.

Trump demolished Jeb Bush by calling him a “liar” about the invasion of Iraq. Bush could not find a way to reply to that. Not just once, or twice, did Trump call Bush a liar, but hundreds of times. And Trump insisted with outright blustering anger that the entire government of Jeb’s brother G W Bush had lied too. And it worked: average right-wing Republicans, by voting for Trump, agreed that the Bush family was a family of liars. It is telling of the sorry state of US  politics that no American politicians had ever made such a furious denunciation of the Iraq invasion prior to that. (Yes, Clinton, as a crucial Senator, voted for the Iraq invasion, to help her friend G. W. Bush; Trump will accuse her to be either a liar or an idiot, or both, on this subject.)

Of this, this alone, real progressives should be grateful. And what of the wall Trump wants to build? Some will whine. Well, the wall already exists. Just look at that Gini above. That’s just the one on income. The one on wealth is way worse. And the one on after tax income jumped after Obama became president, because democrats decided to help the economy by taxing the wealthiest less, and pumping into them trillions through the Federal Reserve (“Quantitative Easing”)

In Africa, huge crocodiles look like friendly trunks, placidly laying there in the water. Lying there or laying there? That is the question many animals are not able to solve. Trump may not be the friend of the common person. However BHL has spent his entire life trying to demonstrate, to himself, that he was a good person. When obviously, he knows perfectly well that he is exactly the sort of crook the world is sick with, doing the sort of things which should be rewarded in the future not with billions, as he was, but with long prison sentences.

I am not for Trump. I am not advocating to be trumped by Trump. The choice between the insufferable Trump and the corrupt Clinton illustrates perfectly well the abysmal nature of representative politics. But I am certainly against liars, and lying in general. Much of what was presented as “progress” in the West since the Fall of the Berlin Wall was actually addictive lying. Yes, GDP went up, in the UK, or the US. But mostly GDP of the rich: watch Irish GDP going up 26% a year, thank to tax evasion.

The lie? That this sort of industrial strength legal tax evasion has nothing to do with most people’s lives getting ever harder. Lying is addictive because, with humans, perception, even perception of happiness, is (nearly) everything. When We The People lives the lie that exploitation is redemption, they live happy.

Increasingly it feels as if lying were most of the industry of the West: contemplate the fact that Obama and Clinton, who brought up the US Gini (on both income and wealth) up to heights never seen before, are really viewed by the losers they stole as their best friends. At some point though, those who do not view We The People as vulgar, may win. A different regime of truth will apply.

So is Trump a traitor? Let’s hope so. He would betray his class, as he already betrayed the Neoconservatives (who were all about invading Iraq).  When one looks at history on the largest scale, one can see that revolutions are often led by plutocrats who betrayed their own class (the Gracchi, and Caesar were from the very top of Roman society; they were assassinated; had they lived, the Roman Republic may well have survived, and progress forged ahead without the Dark Ages; a queen of the Franks outlawed slavery in the Seventh Century; several otherwise vicious Russian leaders propped Russia forward; and so on).

Maybe Trump is a piece of trash. Yet, when he got people to vote for him by decrying the “wrong system” he admitted he was a product of, and he was “wrong” and “part of the establishment”, Trump says important things, and set-up a different mood. A better mood that the one of embracing lies, just because they feel good.

The future is here: it looks just like the past. Lying is its cement, generously provided by the ruling class. Decrying lying is nothing new: the Cathars insisted that most of Christianism was a gigantic lie. Maybe the part of the universe humans lived in was controlled by Evil. That would explain the “Catholic Orthodox” church’s nature. The Cathars were, obviously, and in retrospect right. They were most believed in the most democratic and republican part of Europe, the giant county of Toulouse and surrounding areas. The establishment was not amused, and kill both the Cathars and their books, to the last (millions died, one million in France alone).

At some point, history did not repeat and real progress was made. First by analyzing the past. The time has come to analyze with more subtlety than ever.

Patrice Ayme’