Monday, October 10, 2016

Declaration of Independence Dominates Debates AGAIN!!

Sure it's a subliminal message, but this was the third time the debate committee showed it, from a somewhat lower angle. They also had it behind the Vice Presidential debaters. (Who were so obnoxious I turned them off after 8 minutes.)  Maybe their set designer is a sneakily effective libertarian?? Or radical decentralist? Or anarchist?

Anyway, how many subliminal messages can one get before they become the DOMINANT one.  Trump's message: "i'm a tool who can grab all the #10 pussies I want." Hillary's message: "Yes, my husband is a bastard, but I'm stuck in the 1950s. How else could I make it to be president?"

Sunday, October 09, 2016

2016 Presidental election: from sex assaults to nuclear war

Anyone who reads my 2016 election posts can see they are overwhelmingly about patriarchal sex, with patriarchal nuclear war a close second. Allegations that one candidate is a woman-demeaning sexual predator who would start nuclear war over a tweet, contrast with allegations that the other candidate enabled her sexual predator husband and is pushing for nuclear war against Russia. This 2016 presidential election is emblematic of the political degradation and self-destructive path of large patriarchal nation states.

This week the focus has been on sexual assaults: who's the biggest sexual assaulter of women - Bill Clinton (and his allegedly enabling wife Hillary) or Donald Trump (and his possibly enabling wife Melania)? The big difference between the two couples is that Bill (and Hillary) deny the sexual assaults and Trump boasts about them!

Much as I believe the allegations versus Clinton of flashing/groping/rape, I have to admit he's innocent until proven guilty. Hillary's enabling is not quite as clear, though I would not be surprised if it was true to some extent. Some good articles about Bill's alleged assaults on women and Hillary's denial and defense.1, 2, 3, 4. These have been around for more than twenty years.

Released just this weekend was a 2005 tape of Trump on microphone confessing/admitting/boasting about sexual assaults: "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful [women]. I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. I just kiss, I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything — grab them by the pussy. You can do anything."

As the New York Times wrote: "Why did a decade-old three-minute video provoke a sudden revolt by party officials against their nominee, an uprising that could very well destroy their chances of taking the White House? Because the glee with which he bragged about sexually assaulting women, by forcibly kissing them and grabbing their genitals, turned a boorish man into an outright predator."

Yup. Trump already was known for his aggressive sexuality, frequently expressed poor regard for women, and several allegations of sexual assault, including rape of a girl who was 13 years old at the time. See Esquire and Huffington Post stories among others. So it is easy to assume Trump was being honest - for a change!

Trump's initial apology did not deny predatory acts. He just said he regretted them... and Bill Clinton was worse! Relevant quote: "I’ve said and done things I regret, and the words released today on this more than decade old video are one of them...I’ve said some foolish things, but there’s a big difference between the words and actions of other people. Bill Clinton has actually abused women..." (Evidently Trump thinks kissing and grabbing genitals is NOT abuse??)

And then, of course, a tape was just released of Trump agreeing with the disgusting sexist radio yapper Howard Stern that Trump's daughter Ivanka is gorgeous. He even gives Stern permission to call his daughter a "piece of ass".1, 2  Just reinforcing the perception of Trump's sexual perversity.

But then, during tonight's second presidential debate/townhall, after the moderator pushed and pushed him, Trump finally explicitly denied doing any kissing or genital grabbing or anything else. Oh, yeah, tens of millions of Americans believe him. (NOT!) (My meme take on it below.)

It is sad to see women who Bill Clinton probably DID assault speaking out against him in a Trump-stunt press conference right before tonight's second debate. They obviously are in denial about Trump's sexual depredations or they would not have shown up. And they probably don't know that Trump made light of allegations against Bill Clinton for years, a fact in the news for months. At least none of these women are Trump's preferred young, buxom "10s", so he won't try to kiss them or grab their genitals.

The sexual aggressions of patriarchs and their enablers (male and female) are just a symbol of the larger aggression that politicians and the media suppress: that U.S. imperialism and large nation state rivalries are leading us to nuclear war. Let's see the IMPORTANT headlines and stories just this week of nuclear threat stories we are NOT seeing prominently or at all on CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN or Fox. Or even most major American newspapers.

10/4/16: State Dept: US Considering ‘Military, Other Options’ Against Russia in Syria

10/4/16: U.S. vs. Russia: What a war would look like between the world's most fearsome militaries

10/4/16: Russia builds huge underground shelters in Moscow as it prepares for NUCLEAR WAR with West

10/4/16: Is Nuclear War becoming Thinkable?

10/5/16: What We Talk About When We Don’t Want To Talk About Nuclear War

10/4/16: 40 million Russians involved in annual 4-day defense drills

10/7/16: Russia Building Up Forces in Syria Since Ceasefire’s Collapse

10/7/16: The US Air Force Just Dropped Two Fake Nukes

Monday, September 26, 2016

Trump vs. Clinton: Post-Nuclear War Comments

Since nuclear war and which candidate is most likely to start it is always my biggest election year issue, I made this video comparing how Trump vs. Clinton would comment in a statement after a nuclear exchange that struck the U.S. My Youtube Introduction reads: Many fear that Trump - or Clinton - will start a nuclear war. It's an argument supporters on both sides give for supporting their candidate. Given their histories, I think it is easy to imagine that these are the kinds of statements each might make should nuclear war happen under their "reign".

A few hours after posting it I discovered this article "Poll: Nearly half of voters think Trump will detonate a nuke" which notes that 22% of Trump supporters think he'll user nuclear weapons, something that inevitably would escalate to world nuclear war!

Gary Johnson, the less than perfect libertarian candidate who still is 10 times better than Hillary/Trump, at least would bring up issues that the debate moderators will doubtless ignore. Seven of those, according to Reason magazine, are: the massive and escalating national debt; centralized government taking over state and local issues; squashing international trade (goodbye dollar store, hello $3.50 dish sponge); US military intervention, including with shock and awe, anywhere anytime neocon-neoliberal ideologues feel like it; spying on all of us to make it easy to prosecute and convict individuals of SOMETHING should the state find it to be necessary; free speech - let's keep it!; war on "drugs", i.e., black people, nonconformists or anyone the state wants to target. Check it out!

UPDATE:  During the 9/26/16 Presidential Debate with Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump quickly melted down and descended into confused ranting, as expected. To me the most significant aspect of the debate was the debate stage background: the first lines of the Declaration of Independence which, as I love to remind my readers (i.e., the millions yet to discover this blog), include the phrase highlighted in the memes below. (The first from the debate, the second my last July 4th meme.)

Tuesday, August 23, 2016 - patriarchy beware!

Per previous posts, the last few months I spent a lot of time working on Pro-Choice Libertarians activism (Facebook page, website, twitter page, buttons, etc.). This was both before and after the Libertarian Party national convention where the less than perfectly libertarian Gary Johnson and Bill Weld were nominated for Prez and VP. We had to organize because once again the abortion prohibitionists and the "moderate" sell-outs eager to get their money and votes were conspiring to dump the pro-choice platform. For almost twenty-four years the platform explicity has said government should stay out of the matter of abortion.  (It used to say a lot more but the moderates did some successful gutting of specifics on most issues back in 2006.)

At least Johnson/Weld are described as pro-choice, though Johnson has cleverly positioned himself to appeal to abortion prohibitionists as well. He says he supports current law, even as he says he himself is pro-life and that it would be more constitutional to let the states legislate the issue. And, of course, he takes the totally unlibertarian position that the federal government should be able to force private and government restrooms, changing rooms, shelters, etc. let any deluded guy who claims he's a woman - not to mention any convicted sex criminal -  freely enter those facilities. They're even letting some into women's prisons where the prison staff ignore women who complain they've been raped by these "women"!  Yes, we are living in Big Brother's world where if he says a man is a woman or vice versa, we have to agree. In Canada they'll imprison you if you disagree. In NYC they only fine you.

Well, I think you can tell what another patriarchal issue is that's taken up a ridiculous amount of my time.  But I've met a bunch of hardcore feminists, online and in person, lately who are also really pissed off at patriarchy right now and they have inspired and energized me. (Finally, after 8 years of sulking in my room and fighting with statist, sexist jerks on Wikipedia.)

So now I've gotten back on track on updating and websites which are ridiculously 2003 in formatting.  But first I had to make a little detour to I needed a thoroughly RADICAL LIBERTARIAN FEMINIST SITE to refer visitors to, without turning that into a RADICAL DECENTRALIST LIBERTARIAN FEMINIST SITE. (Though who can tell, if enough women decide to join the libertarian decentralist feminist movement we might yet do it.)

So check out, all my visitors - current or future...

Saturday, August 06, 2016

From July 4th to Hiroshima Day

My last post was about July 4, 1776, the day Americans declared the right of the people to alter or abolish government. Today's post is about August 6, 1945, the day the United States used the first nuclear bomb. So symbolically from the day this country was created until the day this country is most likely to die - in a massive nuclear war, probably triggered by accident, probably in reaction to some act of aggression by the United States or one of its more vicious allies (think Ukraine, Israel and Saudi Arabia).

Below are maps of United States 1. nuclear bomb targets, 2. nuclear power plants that will be damaged and/or eventually melt down after nuclear strikes and 3. nuclear waste storage facilities (often at same site as plants) that will be damaged and/or eventually leak/explode after nuclear strikes. And then we have 4., likely fallout pattern in days after large nuclear attack. Eventually, of course, nuclear fallout will spread out over the whole country and the world.

So who's still voting Trump?   Or Clinton??

And here's one info filled meme to think about...My only commentary on domestic and international violence and political insanity we've seen in the last month.

Tuesday, July 05, 2016

A July 5th commentary on the "right to alter or abolish" government

This is most of a July 3, 2008 entry at my "Secede and Survive" Blog located for a few years at the "Vermont Commons" website. (Its editors have transformed it now into "The Vermont Independent".)  I've added a few graphics to the quotes from various pundits on the topic of "the right to alter or abolish government" found in the Thirteen Colonies 1776Declaration of Independence, for which we celebrate July 4th. Enjoy!
* * *

Did Thomas Jefferson know that putting the peoples right to alter or abolish government in the Declaration of Independence would encourage people to do it? Actually, he feared there would not be enough revolutions. As he wrote to William S. Smith Paris on Nov. 13, 1787:

The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, & what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure.
My News.Google search for “the right to alter or abolish” resulted in the usual full reprints of the Declaration of Independence which many newspapers provide to educate our many confused sister and brother citizens.  I also came up with a couple of editorials of interest.

The Baltimore Chronicle, the Hawaii Reporter and doubtless other publications, printed an editorial by radical libertarian columnist Jacob Hornberger "The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July."

 [T]he real significance of the Fourth of July lies in the expression of what is undoubtedly the most revolutionary political declaration in history: that man's rights are inherent, God-given, and natural and, thus, do not come from government.

Throughout history, people have believed that their rights come from government.

Such being the case, people haven't objected whenever government officials infringed upon their rights. Since rights were considered to be government-bestowed privileges, the thinking went, why shouldn't government officials have the power to regulate or suspend such privileges at will?

Governments are called into existence by the people—and exist at their pleasure—for one purpose: to protect the exercise of their inherent fundamental and unalienable rights.

The Declaration of Independence upended that age-old notion of rights. All men—not just Americans—have been endowed by God and nature, not government, with fundamental and unalienable rights. Governments are called into existence by the people—and exist at their pleasure—for one purpose: to protect the exercise of these inherent rights.

What happens if a government that people have established becomes a destroyer, rather than a protector, of their rights? The Declaration provides the answer: It is the right of the people to alter or even abolish their government and establish a new government whose purpose is the protection, not the destruction, of people's rights and freedoms.

In the American Spectator Lawrence Henry celebrates the recent “DC vs. Heller” Supreme Court decision. (Dick Heller was a past officer of the Libertarian Party of DC.) Henry emphasizes that issue, writing: Fourth of July weekend, here's as good a time as any to review what the American idea really means. And how far we have fallen away from that idea.

Conveniently, we find a news hook: The Supreme Court's recent 5-4 ruling affirming that the Second Amendment to the Constitution really does assure citizens the right to keep and bear firearms. Along with many another commentator, I find that close decision frightening. How can there be any doubt? How can there be any argument?

Let's review:

Our Founders said, explicitly, that when a people found their rulers had usurped the rightful reach of their powers, it was the people's right to "alter or abolish" that government. And no mistake, our Founders, being realists, knew that "alter or abolish" might mean "change the government by violent means, if necessary." writes: In truth, no one ever expressed the purposes of a free society better than Thomas Jefferson in the opening words of the Declaration of Independence:

It is self-evident - it does not need to be argued - that all men are created equal, and have been endowed by their Creator with rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Governments are instituted by popular consent to guarantee these rights. If a government attacks these rights, the people have the right to alter or abolish it and try again....

for Americans, patriotism is not hard to define. If you accept the principles set out in the Declaration of Independence, and are ready to do all you can to live by and uphold those principles, you're a patriot. If you don't, you may be a fine person in other ways, but you're not a patriot.

And not to beat around the bush, conservative writer J.J. Jackson gets to the heart of it in his article “Alaska should just secede.” Quoting the Declaration, he writes: I think that it is high time some states start taking the issue seriously once again and using it as leverage against an out of control federal government that has expanded beyond the limited powers we agreed to give to it in our Constitution. While I would like to see all the states start pushing back against the gluttonous federal government and begin warning, that if it does not start acting as prescribed, they will leave the Union, one state in particular that should be seriously considering it, perhaps more than most others, is Alaska.

Al-Jazeera makes a telling comment in an article: "Before July 4th, the U.S. must confront July 3rd." It reminds readers about the July 3, 1988 attack on an Iranian commercial airliner that killed 290 men, women and children. And writes about talk of a U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities: As the U.S. readies itself to celebrate another Independence Day on July 4th, I cannot help but think how the U.S. Government has become enslaved to hatred, revenge, retaliation, belligerent policies, nuclear weapons, and of course, Middle Eastern oil.

If the U.S. confronts the July 3rd massacre before celebrating July 4th, it may then be a true celebration! U.S. citizens may also want to recall the patriots’ purpose in signing the Declaration of Independence was not a call to alter and abolish a foreign country, but to change and abolish their own Government, which had become destructive and repressive.

Of course, potential tyrants also can quote the Declaration, as does Iranian Maryam Rajavi, head of the Iranian Islamic Marxist cult best known as “MEK” which seeks to overthrow the current Iranian government.  At a gathering of 70,000 Iranians in Paris she said: And I quote the Declaration of Independence, "Whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government." (For a number of years MEK was labeled a terrorist group by the State Department, but its usefulness in spying on Iran was paid off by neoconservatives and neoliberals in the government by lifting that description a few years back.)

I can't help but comment on politicians who can’t talk about the Declaration of Independence without bringing in that great enemy of altering and abolishing government, Abraham Lincoln. More specifically Barack Obama in his recent speech on “Patriotism.” He starts with an interesting statement about American revolutionaries fighting the British on April 19, 1775. “They did so not on behalf of a particular tribe or lineage, but on behalf of a larger idea. The idea of liberty. The idea of God-given, inalienable rights.” (Something those itching to engage in violent revolutionary secession for the sake of THEIR tribe or lineage might keep in mind.)

After that he quotes from the Declaration of Independence but conveniently leaves out our right to alter or abolish the government that might make him its president.

However he almost makes up for it later saying: As Mark Twain, that greatest of American satirists and proud son of Missouri, once wrote, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." We may hope that our leaders and our government stand up for our ideals, and there are many times in our history when that's occurred. But when our laws, our leaders or our government are out of alignment with our ideals, then the dissent of ordinary Americans may prove to be one of the truest expression of patriotism.

Ed Quillen facetiously updates the Declaration in the Denver Post.  Noting that it “has this seditious-sounding stuff about how it ‘is the Right of the People to alter or abolish’ their government. He thus offers this version:

"When in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for the Unitary Executive to dissolve the Political Restraints which have constrained him from assuming, among the Powers of Earth, his proper role as the Decider, a total Disrespect for the Opinions of Mankind means that no Explanation is required.

"Nonetheless, the Unitary Executive holds this Truth to be of divine Origin, that the Executive Branch of Government enjoys certain unalienable Rights, that among these Rights are Spying upon Citizens without a Warrant, the Rendition of Captives unto foreign Despotisms, the Invasion and Occupation of other Nations upon false Pretenses, and the Employment of Torture to gather Evidence to be used in secret Courts.

"And that to secure these Rights, the Unitary Executive has been instituted among Humankind, and if the Citizenry becomes destructive of these Ends, then it is the Right of the Unitary Executive to alter the Citizenry, and to institute an improved Citizenry, in such Form as shall seem most likely to effect the Safety and Happiness of the Unitary Executive.

Finally, Kirkpatrick Sale of the Middlebury Institute sends out an email wishing us all “Happy Secession Day.”

July 4 marks the day when the American colonies declared their secession from the British empire and their right to “institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles…as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

And thus began the War of Secession—not a revolutionary war, for there was no intent to overthrow the British government—that led to the free Confederation of American colonies and ultimately the United States.

It is in that great tradition that the modern secessionist movement in America takes its inspiration, hoping to dissolve the imperial government of the present United States and institute new governments, at state or regional levels, that will positively effect their safety and happiness.

Saturday, July 02, 2016

The Essential Declaration of Independence...

July 4th Update: The below has just too much "blah blah" so I cut it to the real essentials - and substituted "people" for "humans" (instead of "man"). So this is an even better MEME... (Note, no memes are NOT a complete political philosophy.)

* * * * *

Note that "people" might be a better substitute for "humans." Feel free to substitute if you do and circulate your own version. Something tells me NEXT YEAR people will be taking the July 4th Declaration of Independence language a LOT more seriously...