There is no secret what I think of religion and I also believe that both sides in the Israel-Palestinian conflict are messed-up idiots. Since I know how to fix that conflict - it is very easy - but no one will ever listen I kind of just ignore all those morons. Fraudulent Banksters stealing our money and politicians imposing more fascist laws close to home seem more urgent
However, when some Muslim idiots complain over Muhammad drawings or scream over some football-supporters singing I need to call them on it. The same goes for Israeli fascists that condemn some leftie journalist writings in a Swedish Newspaper. The Journalist in question argued that some Jewish soldiers or whatnot is selling Palestinian organs on the black market. It wouldn’t surprise me if that is spot on; however, the idiot journalist has his own agenda so it’s probably not true. In either case it is his right, as well as anyone else’s, to write, say or express whatever he/she wants to. And what really bugs me is this stupid notion of the holocaust that always pops up every time you criticize Jews or Israel. Like Jews are not idiots? However horrifying the holocaust was, that occurrence is not a battering ram to use as a reacquiring excuse whenever Israelis fuck things up. So when Israel criticize a Swedish newspaper and demand that the Swedish State department should apologize on the behalf of freedom of speech; all the Jewish idiots are doing is giving the lefties all the ammunition they need to criticize even more and they also get more people on their side. Yes, the lefties are anti-Semite and hate Jews, what else is new? And yes, Swedish journalists in general don't like Israel, nothing new there either. Are Jews going to tell us the Sun is hot next? It is incredibly moronic to act in this way by Israel and if one ever needed a clear sign of Jewish stupidity, there you have it.
And where is that proof from either side? All the Israeli needs to do is do an independent investigation and the journalist in question can be ridiculed. But instead they seemingly go on the offensive and so far I haven’t seen any proof of what the journalists wrote are untrue. However, the ass-hole journalist should of course also be liable and actually show some facts instead of rely on very sketchy Palestinian propaganda. The whole story seems very unnecessary, which might be the point…
As usual everyone is blaming, shouting and arguing some crap about crap in a crappy world that is filled with crappy religions and crappy journalists. When will people wake up, smell the manure and really do something about this messed up world?
Thursday, August 20, 2009
What the news don’t tell you - US
In California the number of homeowners who are either behind on their payments or in foreclosure rose to more than 13%, a new record. The delinquency rate, which includes loans that are at least one payment past due but does not include homes in foreclosure, is the highest in records since measurements started in 1972.
The problem was worst in Florida, where almost 23% of mortgages were delinquent or in foreclosure at the end of the June. The next highest states were Nevada at 21.3%, Arizona at 16.3% and Michigan at 15.3%.
A normal number a normal year is around 4-6%
January 21, 1930
"Definite signs that business and industry have turned the corner from the temporary period of emergency that followed deflation of the speculative market were seen today by President Hoover. The President said the reports to the Cabinet showed the tide of employment had changed in the right direction." - News dispatch from Washington.
The number of Americans filing first-time claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly for the second straight week to 576,000 last week. Wall Street economists expected a drop to 550,000. No way!? Cornflake economists got it wrong? How can it be?
The total number of jobless benefit recipients was 9.18 million
In the meanwhile the American treasury’s debt-auctions is now approaching 40% of GDP annually which is the number they need to keep just in order to sustain the current levels of banking frauds and economic insanity.
March 8, 1930
"President Hoover predicted today that the worst effect of the crash upon unemployment will have been passed during the next sixty days." - Washington Dispatch.
The American stock market's index that has gone upwards lately have been marked overvalued by 20-30% by several independent analysts. And the latest jump upwards was, also according to the mainstream economic analysts, marked as bets into future markets i.e. someone(s) is gambling that the actual value is going up.
May 1, 1930
"While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed the worst and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There is one certainty of the future of a people of the resources, intelligence and character of the people of the United States - that is, prosperity." - President Hoover
Some media has picked up this story:
US Commercial Real Estate Collaspe
October 16, 1930
"Looking to the future I see in the further acceleration of science continuous jobs for our workers. Science will cure unemployment." - Charles M. Schwab.
The problem was worst in Florida, where almost 23% of mortgages were delinquent or in foreclosure at the end of the June. The next highest states were Nevada at 21.3%, Arizona at 16.3% and Michigan at 15.3%.
A normal number a normal year is around 4-6%
January 21, 1930
"Definite signs that business and industry have turned the corner from the temporary period of emergency that followed deflation of the speculative market were seen today by President Hoover. The President said the reports to the Cabinet showed the tide of employment had changed in the right direction." - News dispatch from Washington.
The number of Americans filing first-time claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly for the second straight week to 576,000 last week. Wall Street economists expected a drop to 550,000. No way!? Cornflake economists got it wrong? How can it be?
The total number of jobless benefit recipients was 9.18 million
In the meanwhile the American treasury’s debt-auctions is now approaching 40% of GDP annually which is the number they need to keep just in order to sustain the current levels of banking frauds and economic insanity.
March 8, 1930
"President Hoover predicted today that the worst effect of the crash upon unemployment will have been passed during the next sixty days." - Washington Dispatch.
The American stock market's index that has gone upwards lately have been marked overvalued by 20-30% by several independent analysts. And the latest jump upwards was, also according to the mainstream economic analysts, marked as bets into future markets i.e. someone(s) is gambling that the actual value is going up.
May 1, 1930
"While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed the worst and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There is one certainty of the future of a people of the resources, intelligence and character of the people of the United States - that is, prosperity." - President Hoover
Some media has picked up this story:
US Commercial Real Estate Collaspe
October 16, 1930
"Looking to the future I see in the further acceleration of science continuous jobs for our workers. Science will cure unemployment." - Charles M. Schwab.
A collaboration maybe? Socialists and Libertarians
Since I realized how things really work and how horrid things really are I have felt a sort of kinsmanship with socialists. I’m not taking about the “pretend-left” like labour or social-democrats; those are more of the fascist persuasion. The ones I’m referring to is those that actually believe in socialism.
Socialism is here referring to as a collective name for socialists/communists. Also this is a generalisation and is not always true for either side.
Let me take some examples.
The financial and banking elite are all about fraud and looting.
This is a concept I fully share with socialists. Almost all people that believe in NWO and detest the Bilderberg Group are either libertarians or socialists. The ones hardest criticizing fraudulent banks and finance institutes that, again and again, just take the hard working mans earnings and fill their own pockets, are libertarians. But the ones really loudly demonstrating and angry trash windows and really take to the street, of mainly the same reason, are the socialists. However, where socialists see capitalism and a neoliberal order creating the problems, libertarians see socialism and collectivism as being at fault. We draw different conclusion about the same phenomena, something that is a constant factor throughout.
In a way, neither side is the right here. With laws, constant government interventions, central banks, customs and so forth no one with any knowledge about capitalism can mention this world or any country on the planet as being capitalist. But also, since ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods is not completely in the hands of “the people”, and since we actually have a so so market economy; one cannot really refer to it as socialism either. To name the state of our world ‘fascist’ would be a simple word to use and it is not far from the truth, but that’s not really correct. Statism is probably the best word of choice in lack of a better one. Both fascism and statism sort of implies a closer relationship with socialism then with libertarianism, and I would argue that is correct, although I suspect a socialist might differ.
People are unnecessarily starving and injustice can be found everywhere
Also a statement that both socialists and libertarians can put their hank-cock under. Both sides sees all those horrifying things that goes on in the world where females and gays get stoned to death for expressing themselves, where people starve by the tens of millions, where war rages on despite us being “civilized”, where politicians say one thing and does another, and where there is a huge inequality in regards to money and power. Again, we see the same problem and react to them, but again we also draw different conclusions about the fault and solutions, mainly from the same notions as mentioned above. Here I also think there is an additional dissimilar way of looking at things. Where socialists mainly “think” with their hearts and react instinctively, libertarians rather use rational and a more intellectual approach. Basically a socialist screams while a libertarian shows graphs, a socialist becomes angry whereas a libertarian sighs while trying to explain how things work.
Religion is the opiate of the people
This famous Karl Marx quotation is also something that both sides, generally speaking, agree upon. There are religious folk in both camps, but they are a minority and I would say that this quote is not only in regards to religion per say but rather a forbearing or warning about something that can put a veil over our lives and hide the truth of things. Religion is not necessary malevolent by nature, one can find good things or good thoughts in all religions, but religion might cover or hide science and can even be used as a means to control the populace, something that history shows us. Here I think the agreement might be bigger than above with one small exception; libertarians regard religion as a very collectivistic phenomenon while socialist rather sees religion as a means for the ruling elite to conform and control us.
The repeating recessions will never end with the current system of governing
In a way this topic has already been mentioned, but in our day and age this needs to be addressed a bit more direct. Socialist’s sees overproductions and the constant chase for profits as something that always will create repeated downturns in an economy. Libertarians sort of agree with this, but don’t see the chase for profits as something bad; on the contrary, we regard it as a virtue. However, just as socialists, libertarians acknowledge the profiteers as one of the main reasons for recessions. This is because the mixed system - or statism - that exists doesn’t let the free market roam free. Instead we get certain financial institutes, families or organisations that can take advantage of governments and our societies structure in a way that promotes “dictatorship” (=monopoly) within some sectors. As always libertarians regard governments, laws and the lack of freedom as the main cause of this money- and power-accumulation. If capitalism really got to exist, none of this would happen since there is always competition within the capitalist system. Socialists, however, wants to expand government and hand over everything to the people with a notion of that this would eliminate the worst elements and divide riches in a fair way.
Conclusion and a plead
I believe that socialists don’t know what capitalism really is and that they ignore the most important factor of all; the individual. If they really knew and started to acknowledge individual and intellectual freedom, they would very soon be entitling themselves as libertarians. Of course socialists will probably argue the opposite and maybe people, from either side, won’t agree with my conclusions.
I could go on for a long time but on almost every point I see more likenesses than differences, at least until one starts to talk about the solution. One might argue that similarities can be seen between all forms of ideology, but then you missed the real point. Socialist and libertarians are similar, not only do we see the same problems or that we, in many cases, draw the same conclusion, but we also have the very notion of revolution in our blood. Both want to stick it to the man and fight the power. Of course sometimes having differences in opinions about who the “man” is, but not always, and that is not an issue in regards to what I’m about to suggest.
We should cooperate. Neither side have the manpower or anything else needed to overthrow the current system and neither side can hope of persuade enough people to really make a difference.
So here is my suggestion; we rebel, together. A massive upraising where we throw out all politicians and those in power, then we simply divide the country/ies (maybe even divide continents) in some reasonable way. Socialists can live within their fluffy pink society and libertarians can really test and live in a capitalist country.
The main problem is that both sides will regard the other with great suspicion and both sides see the other as a warmongering side. So how about this; we keep peace and respect for each other until we have developed technology enough so we can conquer other planets and then the only question becomes in which direction our ships should go. A roll of the dice?
Socialism is here referring to as a collective name for socialists/communists. Also this is a generalisation and is not always true for either side.
Let me take some examples.
The financial and banking elite are all about fraud and looting.
This is a concept I fully share with socialists. Almost all people that believe in NWO and detest the Bilderberg Group are either libertarians or socialists. The ones hardest criticizing fraudulent banks and finance institutes that, again and again, just take the hard working mans earnings and fill their own pockets, are libertarians. But the ones really loudly demonstrating and angry trash windows and really take to the street, of mainly the same reason, are the socialists. However, where socialists see capitalism and a neoliberal order creating the problems, libertarians see socialism and collectivism as being at fault. We draw different conclusion about the same phenomena, something that is a constant factor throughout.
In a way, neither side is the right here. With laws, constant government interventions, central banks, customs and so forth no one with any knowledge about capitalism can mention this world or any country on the planet as being capitalist. But also, since ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods is not completely in the hands of “the people”, and since we actually have a so so market economy; one cannot really refer to it as socialism either. To name the state of our world ‘fascist’ would be a simple word to use and it is not far from the truth, but that’s not really correct. Statism is probably the best word of choice in lack of a better one. Both fascism and statism sort of implies a closer relationship with socialism then with libertarianism, and I would argue that is correct, although I suspect a socialist might differ.
People are unnecessarily starving and injustice can be found everywhere
Also a statement that both socialists and libertarians can put their hank-cock under. Both sides sees all those horrifying things that goes on in the world where females and gays get stoned to death for expressing themselves, where people starve by the tens of millions, where war rages on despite us being “civilized”, where politicians say one thing and does another, and where there is a huge inequality in regards to money and power. Again, we see the same problem and react to them, but again we also draw different conclusions about the fault and solutions, mainly from the same notions as mentioned above. Here I also think there is an additional dissimilar way of looking at things. Where socialists mainly “think” with their hearts and react instinctively, libertarians rather use rational and a more intellectual approach. Basically a socialist screams while a libertarian shows graphs, a socialist becomes angry whereas a libertarian sighs while trying to explain how things work.
Religion is the opiate of the people
This famous Karl Marx quotation is also something that both sides, generally speaking, agree upon. There are religious folk in both camps, but they are a minority and I would say that this quote is not only in regards to religion per say but rather a forbearing or warning about something that can put a veil over our lives and hide the truth of things. Religion is not necessary malevolent by nature, one can find good things or good thoughts in all religions, but religion might cover or hide science and can even be used as a means to control the populace, something that history shows us. Here I think the agreement might be bigger than above with one small exception; libertarians regard religion as a very collectivistic phenomenon while socialist rather sees religion as a means for the ruling elite to conform and control us.
The repeating recessions will never end with the current system of governing
In a way this topic has already been mentioned, but in our day and age this needs to be addressed a bit more direct. Socialist’s sees overproductions and the constant chase for profits as something that always will create repeated downturns in an economy. Libertarians sort of agree with this, but don’t see the chase for profits as something bad; on the contrary, we regard it as a virtue. However, just as socialists, libertarians acknowledge the profiteers as one of the main reasons for recessions. This is because the mixed system - or statism - that exists doesn’t let the free market roam free. Instead we get certain financial institutes, families or organisations that can take advantage of governments and our societies structure in a way that promotes “dictatorship” (=monopoly) within some sectors. As always libertarians regard governments, laws and the lack of freedom as the main cause of this money- and power-accumulation. If capitalism really got to exist, none of this would happen since there is always competition within the capitalist system. Socialists, however, wants to expand government and hand over everything to the people with a notion of that this would eliminate the worst elements and divide riches in a fair way.
Conclusion and a plead
I believe that socialists don’t know what capitalism really is and that they ignore the most important factor of all; the individual. If they really knew and started to acknowledge individual and intellectual freedom, they would very soon be entitling themselves as libertarians. Of course socialists will probably argue the opposite and maybe people, from either side, won’t agree with my conclusions.
I could go on for a long time but on almost every point I see more likenesses than differences, at least until one starts to talk about the solution. One might argue that similarities can be seen between all forms of ideology, but then you missed the real point. Socialist and libertarians are similar, not only do we see the same problems or that we, in many cases, draw the same conclusion, but we also have the very notion of revolution in our blood. Both want to stick it to the man and fight the power. Of course sometimes having differences in opinions about who the “man” is, but not always, and that is not an issue in regards to what I’m about to suggest.
We should cooperate. Neither side have the manpower or anything else needed to overthrow the current system and neither side can hope of persuade enough people to really make a difference.
So here is my suggestion; we rebel, together. A massive upraising where we throw out all politicians and those in power, then we simply divide the country/ies (maybe even divide continents) in some reasonable way. Socialists can live within their fluffy pink society and libertarians can really test and live in a capitalist country.
The main problem is that both sides will regard the other with great suspicion and both sides see the other as a warmongering side. So how about this; we keep peace and respect for each other until we have developed technology enough so we can conquer other planets and then the only question becomes in which direction our ships should go. A roll of the dice?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)