For decades the radical Right has claimed that universities are havens for liberals who seek to brainwash American youth into hating the United States, but the fact is that there is a growing control of higher education by the Neo-Conservative movement that should trouble most Americans, especially those who value academic freedom, and sadly liberality shares in the blame. Neo-cons now occupy prominent positions on faculties and boards across the nation and they have been exercising their power. In addition, the Right has for some time now been developing a network of institutions designed to increase the visibility and clout of Neo-Cons on campuses. The actions and effects of this movement go largely undiscussed.
Liberality has a peculiar weakness....it is inclusive. At its worst, liberal inclusivity leads to a stringent, unthinking, reactionary political correctness like that which washed across campuses during the 1990s. Unfortunately, the Neo-Cons knew how to take advantage of this weakness and still do. It is not a coincidence that there has been a rise in the activity of what Russell Jacoby writing for The Nation coined "Crybaby Conservatives." Liberals, even those with tenure, now fear for their jobs because of threats of lawsuits by pseudo-conservative students backed by right-wing money who don't "like" what their professor has to say. It has had a chilling effect on academic discourse in many classrooms and has even affected left-wing student movements that fear retaliation from the university administration.
Liberal political correctness has also furthered the Neo-Conservatism that attacks true liberality. One must first ask a basic question. "How do so many Neo-Cons continue to have degrees conferred upon them?" The liberal penchant for tolerating different ideas and approaches combined with apprehension of retaliation from the Right has led to the practice of labeling Right-wing rhetoric antinomically valid. Therefore, Neo-Conservatives continue to win degrees, awards, positions and other honors when their work is based upon patently false premises. The rationale that is utilized by universities says that, even though academia, in general, disagrees with Neo-Conservative arguments and logic, they must confer degrees because Neo-Cons have a right to their opinions and, ludicrously, their arguments are logically valid within the context of the work, false premises or not. In other words, in order to appease the snivelling self-righteousness of Neo-Cons , universities now consider work in a factual vacuum. How else does an Antonin Scalia get a law degree? How does a John Yoo attain a position at Berkeley? How does a Paul Gigot receive a Pulitzer? Why is Republican supply-side economics still taught? In affect, academic institutions are extending honors to people whose dissertation in geology would be on the flatness of the Earth.
8/30/2006
8/12/2006
Wage Slaves and Feudalism
The purpose of government is to protect and benefit the citizenry. Liberals see this duty as extending to all necessary aspects of life including food, shelter, healthcare, education and the like. Conservatives, especially the "Con"-servatives currently in power, see government protection as concerning only the military and, when linked with our military-commerce-industrial complex, the uber-rich and the corporations they run. Most everyone is aware of this and we see it when the GOP marches out its utterly disproved rhetoric and tells us that tax breaks for the wealthy spur the economy and a minimum wage costs us jobs. They are preaching flat-earth economics, a.k.a.......Hoover-style bunk.
The business of the U.S. government is not corporate monopoly or plutocracy and, contrary to right-wing rhetoristorians, it never has been. (The East India Co. cured the framers of that nonsense.) This can be easily shown. A republic functions by the will of the people in a bottom-up fashion. Corporations are hierarchical systems founded upon an authoritarian model reminiscent of feudal baronies. They are inherently anti-democratic. So why does the Right insist on their American-ness and if someone runs our government on this model, have they not performed a de facto coup? Moreover, big corporations receive so much "welfare" in the form of subsidies and tax breaks that the Right has fostered the very Socialism it vilifies. Think of a big box store. Americans believe they are getting more for less. But in actuality, if we factor in subsidies and tax breaks (not to mention aid for their underpaid employees), Americans are paying exponentially more for such a great "deal." A $1 product could really cost $10.
It is realistic to picture big corporations as gluttonous barons and everyone else as serfs, "freemen", etc.; the Right's idea of America. Sounds a lot like what the Founders wanted to avoid, doesn't it? The corporations will claim that business operates on a Smithian capitalist "free" market system, as they regulary do. Bosh! They know very well that Smithian economics requires both robust competition and a high level of redistribution. They abandoned this anathema long ago in favor of the Robber Baron model, where they take what belongs to us all and sell it back to us, in one way or another, while the government, who they own, looks the other way.
The patriotic economic system of the U.S. is the liberal version and, while the Right decries it as Communist or Socialist, it is truer capitalism. Here's why. If you have a higher income it is because you exploit more resources, either directly or indirectly. This includes labor. Since resources originate in the common pool, one must pay for their use. In the U.S, one pays for resources used by......paying taxes. Corporations and much of the wealthy are using the vast bulk of our resources and, by so doing, are depriving the rest of us of them. Simply put, in good capitalist fashion, the more you take, the more you owe. Hence, the problem with our tax system is that those who take the most are not paying for it in proportion to use.
The corporate socialists will, of course, balk and claim that they create jobs. That would be nice if it were true and the few jobs that are created were worth anything. Maximization of profits demands lousy jobs. But even if it was true, they create jobs in order to exploit labor and, thereby, increase profit. Corporatists will also claim that the poor take advantage and, as the rich do, take without paying. It never occurs to them that to have haves there have to be have nots. They also neglect to consider that, in a post-industrial society, self-made men are a myth as the rich proverbially stand on the shoulders of the poor. But moreover, if our society paid the so-called unproductive to stay out of the workforce, the nation's productivity could only increase as only the ambitious would be involved. Sound crazy? You're brainwashed. The business world knows this is true as it knows that higher wages and more time off increase worker productivity. Unfortunately, the truly "ambitious" or, shall we say, greedy, seem to enjoy inflicting unhappiness.
Now we can hopefully see how ludicrous our economic system has become and how un-American it really is. Unrestricted monopolized-market capitalism has a nasty M.O. and it will eventually eat itself out of existence.
The business of the U.S. government is not corporate monopoly or plutocracy and, contrary to right-wing rhetoristorians, it never has been. (The East India Co. cured the framers of that nonsense.) This can be easily shown. A republic functions by the will of the people in a bottom-up fashion. Corporations are hierarchical systems founded upon an authoritarian model reminiscent of feudal baronies. They are inherently anti-democratic. So why does the Right insist on their American-ness and if someone runs our government on this model, have they not performed a de facto coup? Moreover, big corporations receive so much "welfare" in the form of subsidies and tax breaks that the Right has fostered the very Socialism it vilifies. Think of a big box store. Americans believe they are getting more for less. But in actuality, if we factor in subsidies and tax breaks (not to mention aid for their underpaid employees), Americans are paying exponentially more for such a great "deal." A $1 product could really cost $10.
It is realistic to picture big corporations as gluttonous barons and everyone else as serfs, "freemen", etc.; the Right's idea of America. Sounds a lot like what the Founders wanted to avoid, doesn't it? The corporations will claim that business operates on a Smithian capitalist "free" market system, as they regulary do. Bosh! They know very well that Smithian economics requires both robust competition and a high level of redistribution. They abandoned this anathema long ago in favor of the Robber Baron model, where they take what belongs to us all and sell it back to us, in one way or another, while the government, who they own, looks the other way.
The patriotic economic system of the U.S. is the liberal version and, while the Right decries it as Communist or Socialist, it is truer capitalism. Here's why. If you have a higher income it is because you exploit more resources, either directly or indirectly. This includes labor. Since resources originate in the common pool, one must pay for their use. In the U.S, one pays for resources used by......paying taxes. Corporations and much of the wealthy are using the vast bulk of our resources and, by so doing, are depriving the rest of us of them. Simply put, in good capitalist fashion, the more you take, the more you owe. Hence, the problem with our tax system is that those who take the most are not paying for it in proportion to use.
The corporate socialists will, of course, balk and claim that they create jobs. That would be nice if it were true and the few jobs that are created were worth anything. Maximization of profits demands lousy jobs. But even if it was true, they create jobs in order to exploit labor and, thereby, increase profit. Corporatists will also claim that the poor take advantage and, as the rich do, take without paying. It never occurs to them that to have haves there have to be have nots. They also neglect to consider that, in a post-industrial society, self-made men are a myth as the rich proverbially stand on the shoulders of the poor. But moreover, if our society paid the so-called unproductive to stay out of the workforce, the nation's productivity could only increase as only the ambitious would be involved. Sound crazy? You're brainwashed. The business world knows this is true as it knows that higher wages and more time off increase worker productivity. Unfortunately, the truly "ambitious" or, shall we say, greedy, seem to enjoy inflicting unhappiness.
Now we can hopefully see how ludicrous our economic system has become and how un-American it really is. Unrestricted monopolized-market capitalism has a nasty M.O. and it will eventually eat itself out of existence.
8/09/2006
Evidence of Election Tampering to be Destroyed
With all of the questions surrounding the outcome of the 2004 presidential elections, one would think the public would be eager to know what actually happened in Ohio. One might expect elections officials to care enough to see that the outcome of the election was correct. One might even expect to hear something about reams of accusations of alleged tampering and fraud. One might want to find coverage of the hearings held by John Conyers. One might want to see Ken Blackwell investigated for his Harris-style roll. One might even want to know about the impending destruction of the Ohio 2004 election ballots! What???!!!! That's right. Ohio officials, in accordance with Ohio state law, are planning on destroying the tainted 2004 ballots on September 3, 2006....... in less than a month!
According to SavetheBallots.org, Ohio officials have said that they "can't wait" to destroy the ballots and bury the controversy with them. So much for democracy. One would think that, with all of the questions concerning fraud, someone would have the ability to stop the destruction and rescue the ballots, otherwise known as the smoking gun. Those officials, Ohio Repugs, have not only no intention of investigating election fraud themselves, but are bound and determined to see that no one has the ability. Is there a more clear admission of guilt?
Ken Blackwell, the Harris of Ohio and now candidate for Governor, not only has no intention of letting investigations take place, but plans on using the same machines (made by a company he owned stock in) and, one can assume, the same tactics alleged to have been used in 2004 to secure his own election.
Another great miscarriage of justice is about to occur and is being ignored, as usual, by the mainstream media!
To help go to: www.savetheballots.org or write to them at info@savetheballots.org.
According to SavetheBallots.org, Ohio officials have said that they "can't wait" to destroy the ballots and bury the controversy with them. So much for democracy. One would think that, with all of the questions concerning fraud, someone would have the ability to stop the destruction and rescue the ballots, otherwise known as the smoking gun. Those officials, Ohio Repugs, have not only no intention of investigating election fraud themselves, but are bound and determined to see that no one has the ability. Is there a more clear admission of guilt?
Ken Blackwell, the Harris of Ohio and now candidate for Governor, not only has no intention of letting investigations take place, but plans on using the same machines (made by a company he owned stock in) and, one can assume, the same tactics alleged to have been used in 2004 to secure his own election.
Another great miscarriage of justice is about to occur and is being ignored, as usual, by the mainstream media!
To help go to: www.savetheballots.org or write to them at info@savetheballots.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
