Showing posts with label Oprah Winfrey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oprah Winfrey. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 11, 2020

Bernie's Primary Setbacks Show 'Muricans Aren't Ready For Socialism


Bernie campaigning in Michigan yesterday.

Trump made it clear from the opening bell of this 2020 primary campaign that he relished Sen. Bernie Sanders as his Dem opponent and would use his socialism against him.  I believe the fear of this among huge swaths of Democratic voters is what mainly led to Bernie Sanders' drubbing in at least 4 states yesterday, including Michigan,  which he desperately needed.  That drubbing has now given Joe Biden effectively an insurmountable lead no matter what transpires in the Dem debate Sunday.

Why would so many millions of voters fear that Trump would succeed in trashing Bernie to a far thee well? Mainly because Trump is a clown, an entertainer who thrives on roping in victims to daily episodes of his "Trump show".  In such shows - thanks to a clueless media (that pays him way too much respect) - he is usually able to paint targets in whatever way he desires and essentially converts them into political pinatas.  This is what he'd do to Bernie, because most Americans are totally, seriously ignorant about democratic socialism. 

Add that to the fact he'd have an eager capitalist propaganda machine (such as FOX News, but also mainstream pundits) doing his work for him and we know Bernie wouldn't  stand a chance.  And it wouldn't even necessarily be to paint Bernie as a commie socialist. Recall, for example, a majority of Americans are so desperately ignorant they still think Hitler's national socialism is a true form of socialism like the democratic socialism of Bernie. Hence back in 2010 Tea baggers portrayed Elaine Kagan as a raving Hitlerite National Socialist when she was being considered by Obama for a Supreme Court position, e.g.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

And who can forget how even mainstream pundits and cartoonists have come after socialism, i.e.
No photo description available.
So this is the sort of crap Sen. Sanders would face in any presidential campaign vs. Trump.  (And why, if he had any chance of winning, he'd have to use TV ads similar to what Bill Maher imaginatively developed for his Real Time audience,  e.g.

https://lastnighton.com/2020/02/03/bill-maher-new-rule-democrats/

The fake ad, "There will be mud" was televised along with Maher's  advice that the Ds needed to play as dirty as the Reeps.  The fake ad itself included a terrific deep fake of the fat slug Trump in an imitation of what we envisage the notorious pee tape to be like.  Yeah, Sanders would need to use lots of ads like this if he had any chance to beat the Dotard.  He'd need to prove that having Trump again was vastly worse than having a democratic socialist.

But as I've pointed out in previous posts, what Bernie calls democratic socialism (for him) is actually closer to "Rhine Capitalism".  This is a market economy  but with high taxes and large redistribution component.  Indeed this is what most of those branded "Reds" by the Right, including Bernie  and AOC, aspire to, as opposed to outright democratic socialism.  (Which I embrace). To this end they have suggested using the tax commons to support such things as single payer health care, which the present system can't allow based as it is on Pareto capitalism, see e.g.


Brane Space: Is the U.S. Economic System Pareto-Compromised?

  

In truth,  a primary litmus test for whether U.S.  citizens are anywhere near actual democratic socialism would be their degree of happiness. We already know from The World Happiness Report ('Americans are becoming more miserable and data backs it up', Denver Post, p. 8A, March 24, 2019) the U.S. places at No. 17, down 6 places (probably coinciding with Trump's ascension).  Meanwhile, the Scandinavian nations that top the happiness list all practice democratic socialism - a point about which  even the great Oprah had to be educated.  See e.g.


Oprah got perfect response from Danish woman  


 What is instructive to see in this video is the transformation of Winfrey's visage to one near panic and disbelief, before the women straighten her out on socialism, and the more relaxed, rational countenance after.  Oprah appeared to have a mental readjustment in the wake of her brief  interview, but sadly such  an awakening would not apply to most Americans.  They've been conditioned by the Right's PR tanks to be virulently anti-tax and also suffer from the rampant commie paranoia and hysteria that's existed since the 1950s and McCarthy's "UnAmerican" activities crusade.  I've dealt with this in previous posts, e.g.
Also, taking away their existing health insurance and replacing it with something they have no idea of (Medicare for All) would not have worked. 

The lack of interest of the Young also contributed to Bernie's demise as he himself put it last night:

"Let me tell you the bad news, to be honest with you, young people vote at much lower rates than older people. That is the facts. I hope all of the old people vote, that’s great, but I want young people to vote at the same rates.”

And further, as we learned from a post election NY Times article::

"Through Tuesday’s voting, his theory of the election has not proven true. The surge of new voters in the Democratic primaries has featured mostly older people, moderate suburbanites and African-Americans disinclined to support his campaign."

So what happened to all the young voters, the Millennials and Gen Z's who were supposed to turn out?  Well, they clearly believed the effort wasn't worth their time or energy, or perhaps there were too many hurdles - such as obtaining the  right IDs to be able to vote.  But what most of us (older voters) don't want to hear now is any more whining (whigning?) from the young uns about their student debt, oldsters getting all the benefits, and so on.  If you don't vote, don't participate, you don't get to complain - or say "OK, Boomer."

But maybe most of the young  were also not as enamored of socialism as Bernie led us to believe.  Or,  in  the most  benign take, maybe they believe Bernie is simply too old to be its standard bearer.

See  Also:





And:





And:





Excerpt:

"So yes, I think it’s very possible for Biden to beat Trump. Because for so many people, it doesn’t matter what Biden says or doesn’t say, how incoherent he is, how many outright lies he tells, how atrocious his record is or how diligently he is serving the domineering elites who have blighted our society to such a degree. It doesn't matter that he has made it clear that he is not going to do anything about climate change, student debt, the healthcare crisis, rampant militarism, police brutality, economic injustice, low pay, ICE, and on and on. What matters that he is a fresh screen where our most unworthy fears and unrealistic hopes can be projected, for a time; where we can forget, for a time, the massive disasters that are looming ahead and pretend that things can somehow go back to “normal.”

Thursday, June 6, 2019

John Hickenlooper - Properly Jeered in San Francisco For Dumbo Comments On "Socialism"

Image result for brane space, John Hickenlooper images
John Hickenlooper, who got booed in San Fran for remarks against socialism, gained notoriety in 2015 for his PR stunt in drinking water from a polluted river in Colorado.  Can we trust a Neolib clown like this in the presidency - say more than a Socialist like Bernie Sanders? No way in hell!

As might be expected, the Neoliberal press got into a fit after Dem presidential candidate John Hickenlooper showed up at the California Democratic state party convention and got resoundingly booed for remarks made on socialism.  "Hick"   began soundly enough saying:

"Trump is threatening our democracy, not to mention dismantling our health care, destroying our planet and creating a culture of hate."

He then make the mistake of blabbing on, about a topic he's clearly uneducated on:

"If we want to beat Donald Trump and achieve big progressive goals, socialism is not the answer."

Whereupon most of the gathered state Dems rained down lusty boos and jeers.  No surprise the primary organ of finance capital, The Wall Street Journal tore into the SF Dems for their effrontery in an editorial three days ago ('When Democrats Jeer Democrats', p. A17)   The Denver Post - owned by Alden Global Capital (a hedge fund) then joined the bandwagon yesterday with its own editorial ('Hickenlooper is right to reject socialism and bad policies', p. 21A) basically regurgitating the same twaddle as the WSJ, but with a slightly softer tack, i.e. that if socialism isn't roundly rejected by all D-candidates then "Trump may be able to sow a seed of doubt in voters" .  Translation:  If Dotard and his cabal of traitor enablers keep screaming "Dems want Socialism!"  a new "red scare" will be generated, and independents and ignorant centrist Dems will either not vote D, or vote Trump. Again. Personally, I dispute voters - apart from Trumpies - could be that stupid, but who knows?

Outdoing even these two editorials was the one in the local right wing rag (Colorado Springs Gazette) yesterday. which fairly screeched: 'Facing a hive of booing bullies'.     Writing in part - referencing what Hick said earlier:

"This was friendly and honest advice for a party Hickenlooper loves. A rational crowd would have listened and contemplated the words of man successful in business and politics - the leader who completed two terms as governor in a swing state wit the country's best economy."

Yeah, but how did this swing state achieve that "best" economy?  By Hick bending over backwards as a puppet for the frackers - sacrificing citizens' health and now despoiling nearly 25 million gallons a day of our precious water for fracking operations. A guy who sat on his butt after a number of incidents including the home explosion in Firestone  that killed two men. The incident was blamed on a leaky flowline from a nearby well that hadn’t been capped properly.   Hickenlooper, willing tool of the Colorado frackers  (c/o the Colorado Oil & Gas Commission) that he is, has also ceaselessly inveighed against common sense measures including Proposition 112 on the ballot last November, i.e.

The passage of Proposition 112 would have spared front range families from noxious fracking fumes, as well as noise and soil toxicity - which have triggered myriad health problems. Oh, and let's not forget Hick's PR stunt of drinking (supposedly) polluted water from the Animas river in an effort to double down on his earlier stunt of drinking just- fracked water - complete with benzene and all the other chemicals. Only this time two eagle-eyed Denver Post reporters spotted the fool dropping iodine tables into his water bottle before slugging the yellowish sludge down. Probably to protect himself from giardia and E. coli. as well as minimize the effects of the pollutants, like cadmium, lead,  etc.

And THIS is the "business and political leader" the yahoos at the Gazette bid us to respect?    What all of Hick's stunts have shown is that he's a full fledged capitalist exploiter and propaganda purveyor,  quite happy for families to continue to get sick -  then  lose their health care and jobs  - as long as the profits for frackers remain on the rise  The Gazette's resident editorial apes then barked:

"Instead of considering his logic, Hickenlooper's fellow Democrats acted like barbarians at a cage match"

Not at all! In my humble opinion, they knew in advance that Hickenlooper has zero vested interest in the common welfare, and also they were likely aware of his previous PR stunts. They weren't buying the snake oil this fucker was selling and they let him know in no uncertain terms. Good on them!  The worst mistake, as Janice pointedly noted, is that Hick was conflating social democracy with socialism.  But why be surprised when most Americans have zero knowledge of the difference between socialism, communism and Marxism.

The real problem, as with the coverage of Trump and his asinine tweets, is the boundless ignorance  concerning socialism in the neolib (and rightist) media and its circulation to the reading and viewing public. We have already seen examples concerning this, some of which I've written about, e.g.


Corporate Media Pushes Socialism Bogey To Scare ... - Brane Space




In that post I skewered  the WaPo's resident Neolib  cartoonist Lisa Benson and her idiotic cartoon - actually a clever form of agitprop, see below:
No photo description available.

Writing:

"The asinine brainwashing of the American masses has occurred in many forms, but no where as consistently and insanely as the campaign against socialism (as embodied, for example,  in the cartoon above)."

I then described living in a city (Milwaukee) under socialist Mayor, Frank P. Zeidler:
 
Did Milwaukee go to hell in a handbasket as the current wave of anti-socialist media buffoons would have you believe? ? Not in any way! In fact, what Mayor Zeidler implemented were really more social democratic programs than socialist ones.   We saw that  the living conditions, opportunities in the city were never better. Jobs proliferated, especially in major manufacturing (Allis –Chalmers etc.) while the breweries hired thousands with excellent pay and benefits, including health care. Housing abounded as well, affordable housing off of Greenfield Ave. and Teutonia and in other suburbs to the north and west. Parks, meanwhile, were the envy of many other cities for their beautiful layouts, amenities and services. I can still recall going to Washington Park (across the street from where my family lived on W. 48th and Cherry Streets) on the 4th of July for band performances and later fireworks..

As I further noted:

"So my appreciation for a respectable, beneficial socialism commenced at a very early age, and was reinforced by further study of many different socio-economic systems as part of a wide-ranging liberal arts education."

Alas, that type of education seems not to have extended to much of the Neoliberal fourth estate which continues stoking hysterical fears, as Hickenlooper tried to do, and which imho - was answered appropriately.

In that  same Sept. 2018 post  to which I linked above I also referenced Oprah Winfrey's own badly needed education re: socialism. (And social democracy) This was after she raised misbegotten fears of socialism and the welfare state.e.g.



As Oprah rumbled on  about "socialism" with a fearful expression, a Danish citizen on Skype quickly informed her: "We think of it as being civilized. As taking care of each other...the elderly, the sick."   The Danish woman had clearly exposed Oprah's brainwashing - and Oprah is not a dumb American.

Want to see a "welfare state?"  Look at the trillions Trump's rich cohort are packing away (from his corporate and wealth tax cuts) as they laugh all the way to the banks, or their hedge funds. Look at how the loyal Trumpie MAGA voters - who thought they were getting such a "deal" for the working class - barely snatched $620 from Trump's tax cuts last year and now face the (effective) tax imposed from his Mexico and Chinese tariffs.


See e.g.



Dotard Doubles Down On Crashing The Economy By ... - Brane Space




All of this as Americans under Trump's one man fascist oligarchy now face the fact that there is no city, no county in these United States where a person earning minimum wage - at even two or three jobs - can purchase affordable housing. (In Denver one needs an income of at least $91,000 /yr. to buy a median value home. How many teachers do you suppose can make that cut?)

The programs and policies of social democracy - such as peculiar to Rhine capitalism - seek to address these anomalies. But we can't do so when we have histrionic know -nothings spouting off ignorant bollocks like in a recent WSJ op-ed ('Socialists Don't Know History', May 31, p. A15)  when it is THEY that don't know history.  Else they wouldn't conflate socialism (democratic socialism) with social democracy or communism, or the magazine Jacobin with The Daily Worker, or the Soviet Pravda. (As the uninformed WSJ author Joseph Epstein did). 


Fortunately, despite the flood of rubbish about socialism in the press lately, one can find the occasional rational and well thought out article, even in The Wall Street Journal.  For example, Greg Ip  in his piece 'Parsing the Lessons of True Socialism'  (Feb. 7, p. A2)  In which he wrote:

"Medicare for All wouldn't  nationalize doctors and hospitals, though it might drive private insurers out of business- putting the U.S. where many industrial countries already are."

Yet to have heard Hickenlooper's codswallop one would have thought a vast "central committee' would suddenly  be taking over everyone's medical care- as opposed to simply an evolutionary step, a dying out - akin to Blockbuster videos giving way to the Netflix model.

In contrast to Hickenlooper's bitching about the Green New Deal i.e. "We should not try to tackle climate change by promising every American a government job"  - which no Green dealer ever claimed, Mr. Ip noted:

"If the federal government ends up financing significant expansion of renewable energy under a Green New Deal, it wouldn't be unprecedented.  It created the Tennessee Valley Authority in the 1930s and the Interstate highway system in the 1950s."

So once again, we aren't talking about a radical takeover of the means of production, just a redirection of capital for the common good.  Moreover as author Naomi Klein has noted ('This Changes Everything: Capitalism Vs. Climate Change'  ), we now know the extent to which capitalism's growth dynamic has stoked global warming.  It is also directly based on reckless  resource extraction, so she uses the term, "extractionism" for the relentless plunder of scarce reources.  (Including using scarce supplies of water here in Colo. for fracking operations.)

The worst, most egregious blather comes from the Gazette is when its editor yaps:

"Socialism by nearly every definition is the bully's philosophy. In soaking the rich and burdening the middle class socialism takes by force the rewards created by constructive endeavors. In doing so it raids capital that would otherwise fund additional achievement, charities and 'big progressive goals'.

But they've got it backwards. In fact, it is unchecked, unregulated capital that plunders the tax commons to advance the wealth of the few and becomes the de facto bully.  This is nowhere better demonstrated than in the Pareto economics our grafting system is grounded in,  e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/06/modern-economics-its-evil-basis-pareto.html
and:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/06/modern-economics-its-evil-basis-pareto_13.html

Hence, no surprise that the billionaires that make up the Forbes 400 list have more wealth than the bottom 64 percent of Americans.  Process that!  In addition, the system is set up to literally take by force from those who have the least, in multiple ways. All to kowtow to the shareholders of large corporations.  This is also why wages in the U.S. have remained literally at a standstill. No progress despite the "great economy", so 40 percent of our countrymen- in the same middle class the Gazette's cretins talk about being "burdened" by socialism  -  cannot even finagle $400 for an emergency.  They are burdened all right, by cowboy capitalists dominating corporations what would rather use their tax cut monies for share buybacks than paying higher wages.  As for the claim this capital would "otherwise be available to fund additional achievement, charities etc." - that doesn't even pass the most basic smell test.  As set up the system is geared to keep plying shareholders with $$ not contributing anything to the commons.

The Gazette's pro-capitalist cowboys don't stop there, further babbling this idiocy:

"Socialism creates nothing. A parasitic ideology it survives on the ill gotten gains of confiscation:

Which is, of course, total unadulterated horse shit. Again, most of this local Reich rag's baloney can be traced to abject ignorance and conflating socialism (under a more rigid Marxist interpretation, i.e. control of means production) with social democracy within which capitalism is present - but not run amuck. As Barnard College's Prof.  Sheri Berman articulates the relationship:


"Communism certainly failed, but social democracy has arguably been the single most successful movement.  Look at the rise of  stable European democracies after World War II...because a stable social consensus married relatively free markets and private ownership with expanded welfare states, progressive taxation and other forms of gov't intervention in economics and society."

Did the European democracies suddenly lose it and start drinking a socialist 'kool aid'?  No, they grasped the powerful meme of self interest and survival, and if they didn't enable free markets with welfare states, there'd be no more free markets, period. To quote one commenter on smirkingchimp: "The elite better be prepping with their underground bunkers to ward off the hordes stat."    

In other words, the populist hordes - already making their mark on Europe - would come with their pitchforks and torches for the self same elites.  That is, unless states directed the more equitable distribution of critical resources, wealth.  Let's also bear in mind "wealth" is another term for captured limited resources from a finite Earth, hence such extraction affects all the inhabitants of the planet.

State direction of resource allocation generally has gone by the term "dirigisme" and was what JFK attempted to use in his  'Alliance for Progress' and in his own domestic tax policies. However, in the latter he lacked the majorities in congress to implement.  (See, 'Battling Wall Street - The Kennedy Presidency', 1994, Donald Gibson).  As Prof. Gibson, as well as Prof. Berman have taken pains to point out, capitalism as a proper engine of job creation and wider benefits can work - but not if it is allowed to exploit resources relentlessly, engender massive pollution along with  producing goods, and fill up every landfill in the world with trash and plastics that rebound to literally strangle all the planet's denizens, e.g.
No photo description available.
Including us.  Naomi's Klein's point in 'This Changes Everything' is yes, we do need an engine of creation of wealth such as capitalism provides.  But it has to be a regulated capitalism,  not a deus ex machina, to control and dominate us - its ultimate creators!  This is what the so-called socialists, actually more social Democrats, are about, i.e. when they call for a more forgiving, equitable health care system.  This as opposed to one in which cancer victims can be driven into bankruptcy by outsized medical bills in no relation to the services.  Merely because the private system allows providers to package each service  and bill it separately without regard to cost or benefit. Greed dominates, and greed is what needs to be controlled for the larger good.
As for John Hickenlooper, his candidacy doesn't pass muster for even the most basic laugh test.  Not merely because of his transcendent ignorance re:  socialism and the Green New Deal, but because he's simply one more clown politico aspiring to a position he doesn't merit.  A tamer, less bilious Dem version of Trump if you will - who has no business running a whole nation. He's damned near turned our state into a fracking hell. We can't let him do that to the country. Wait! Can't let him? In fact his current polling (0.5%) shows he won't even make the cut for the first Dem debates in Miami in 2 1/2 weeks.  So perhaps the San Francisco 'greeting' was the last we'll see and hear from him.

See also:
by Robert Reich | June 7, 2019 - 7:10am | permalink

And: