Paul Brancato

Pat - good analysis. Didn’t Nixon institute wage and price controls? Wonder what that would be like or if it’s even possible now in a far more globally connected economy? I know you didn’t exactly say this, but more demand doesn’t necessarily mean short supply. We are being force fed the notion that supply chain disruption explains everything. The dollar is at multi year highs. That would imply that it’s even harder for countries to buy American commodities, harder to compete with American consumers. So why is gasoline zooming up here? Or food, based on wholesale prices for feed grains? Or agricultural chemicals? In short, I don’t think our current inflation is based so much on macroeconomic forces but rather on price gouging. Your suggestion that a Biden attack on price gouging would be met with a full court media blitz is well taken. If I were advising him I’d say go full frontal, call it price gouging, and repeat those words over and over in Congress, make Republicans hold the ‘supply chain’ banner and shoot holes in it.

In my household growing up John Foster Dulles was the epitome of what was wrong in America.We had books like It Can’t Happen Here and The Ugly American.

When I read something like this I try to fact check. It’s mostly spin. Naomi Klein’s article in The Intercept buys into some of this, but she at least can see the spin. What started as criticism from the Left of all such Supra-National Capitalist groups (corporations and their leaders) has morphed into criticism from the Right which now blends all that with their old bugaboos - the New World Order, anti-Nationalist globalist agenda, big government control of our lives (which covers Covid policy, gun control, free (hate) speech and more. Similar to the Right wing donning of the anti-Deep State mantle. Now - do I think something is terribly wrong? You bet. I just don’t think we’ve really identified the enemy. I’m weary of the defenders of the Democratic Party, whose recent leaders have failed, and even more weary of the Republicans. That the only bipartisan thing they can agree on is sending arms to Ukraine, or Iraq Afghanistan Syria Yemen etc etc - all of it shameful and done in the service of Empire and the MIC.

The problem I have with the WEF theory is that it is so chaotic that there is no way any law and order could exist. Global Corporations are so profitable that I fail to see any reason they would be so disruptive. Could you flesh out how you view that new world order and how this plays out in that scenario?

I’ll answer it with another suggestion, which is that it’s very convenient for the US to blame China and Russia for the current inflationary spike. Maybe it’s largely corporate greed. I also wonder whether this guarantees a Republican takeover of Congress in 2022, amd whether that might be causative.

I’m curious if anyone wants to revisit this aborted thread. One thing that jumps out is the name Halpern, who, if Newman and others are right, was singularly focused on smearing the Kennedy family, even Joseph. The other is that, as David Boylan pointed out recently, Cubela’s case officer was Nestor Sanchez, and it was he who met with Cubela on Nov. 22, 1963 in Spain to deliver a poison pen. I’m not entirely sure why I have put Amlash on the back burner all these years, other than the fact that I suspected a CIA misdirection.

Yes - no peace dividend, because we had a new enemy - the Islamic state. Invasion of Iraq did not enrich our coffers with oil, as predicted. The question I’m pondering now:the current inflation is being blamed officially on supply chain problems due to Covid and Chinese shutdowns, and the Ukraine war. Federal reserve is now aggressively raising interest rates to, they say, combat inflation. The US dollar is at multi-year highs relative to other currencies. Strangely, the ruble has gotten much stronger of late. Is it weird to anyone that inflation is being blamed, perhaps caused, by our erstwhile enemies? Is that coincidence? Unintended consequences? I’m wondering …

Ben - you try present a balanced, nuanced, and thoughtful view, but I can’t help but notice that your criticisms of Republican antics are afterthoughts, brief tossed off comments. You seem to have it in for Democrats. Just sayin…

Kirk - there is a global movement for a 15% minimum tax, a good idea, depending on what that money is used for, and to tax stock transactions. As Jung said, paraphrased, it’s not what you say it’s what you do that counts. The fact that this remains an uphill battle speaks volumes, and from a citizen’s point of view it is a no brainer.

Low voter turnout is pathetic. There are reasons for it that even mail in ballots don’t cure. I agree with you that non voters are mainly on the liberal side. This is where things get fuzzy, and where I find myself often agreeing with a more conspiratorial view, which is that forces behind the scenes determine who gets on the ballot for one of the main parties and whether they get funded. Tweetle D and tweetle Dumb describes the choices in many races, and that term goes back over 100 years. I agree with your post pretty much completely but just think it leaves out this issue of lack of good choices. In recent elections this has improved a bit, but - and I hate to say this - not through the efforts of the corporate DNC but through grass roots efforts to run candidates which in many cases the DNC has not supported. So the first step in my mind is to radicalize the Democratic Party. It’s way to centrist to excite the non voters you refer to. Of course there are other theories on low voter turnout - that’s mine.

That is how the Dems should deal with it. In fact it’s so obviously the best strategy that if they fail I may lose all trust forever in Pelosi - and Schumer.

We can hope. The odds are very stacked. The people don’t control anything. Is there one instance in human history you can think of that proves your thesis?

Kirk - they’ve been doing exactly that for our entire lifetimes. What were the 1960’s Assassinations about? What is Citizens United? Why don’t rich crooks go to jail? How does the hero of the people candidate sweep into power without the media? There are so many ways to control politicians. If Trump was a lefty humanist he’d be dead.

Great ‘what if’.

Chris - I don’t think the Chinese system would work here. I don’t think what we, or I, call the Deep State, as in the thread I started, has changed that much. Some are pointing to the Democratic Party as being Deep State. There is no danger of Socialism - is that what you meant by collectivism - breaking out here. What you have are disgruntled masses yearning to break free of their circumstances, for which politicians are blamed. Republicans, cynically, have emerged as the would be heroes of this underemployed and beleaguered working class, thanks to Trump. I surely don’t blame them for being pissed. Would a second Trump presidency usher in a new era where the downtrodden would find hope? If one defines that as white privilege maybe so, though that is simplistic. But no one is going to lift up the people being left behind by a callous out of control Capitalist system. They are useful fodder in many ways. Wage slaves when they work, soldiers when we go to war, addicts when the depression gets too heavy to bear, suicides, shortened life spans. I would bet on Republicans, presumably led by Trump, taking over in the next two election cycles, all with the blessing of the good old Deep State.

Inadvertently you attributed to Sandy several things from my recent post. “Lost in a sea of Irrelevance”. Feels like it to me. Two parts of our body politic are at odds with each other. I think these differences are being purposefully magnified, because a divided nation cannot come together and enact any meaningful change that might threaten status quo power structures and attendant financial interests. The mechanisms for this magnification are numerous, some hidden some not. Beneath all the noise there is a long standing battle of ideas, one progressive, one regressive. Human rights vs property rights, nationalism vs egalitarianism, many other dualities. This goes back thousands of years. Here’s a question: if there is a US deep state, and if they benefit from division, would they prevent a takeover by autocrats? There is ample proof that Social Democrats will never be allowed to assume the mantle of power, even within the political party under whose umbrella they function. This is because, in my view, redistribution of wealth not promoted by the elites themselves but imposed on them by a Democratic government is anathema, and elites clearly have the power to prevent it. But is the same true on the other side of the divide? I think this will be put to the test soon. Is divided government better for them than an autocratic nationalist ruler?

To paraphrase someone, there a good people on all sides of this debate. I think we are generally confusing two aspects of what some are calling an attempted coup. The first is the attempt by Trump to overturn the election results by mucking with the electors and the counting of votes. The second is the riot on Jan. 6th. Trump was still hoping things would break his way. He most assuredly attempted, through phone calls and political threats to change the vote count. He failed. Had he succeeded what would we have called it? A bloodless coup? The groundwork to change election rules in State houses controlled by Republicans, the efforts to win a majority in the House by all means necessary, those are ongoing in an attempt to make sure that he has a quasi legal way to ensure victory in 2024 even if he loses both the popular and electoral votes. For several years now Bill Maher has called this a slow moving coup, and it’s ongoing. How to stop this? I think the Democrats don’t know how to do so, and their fear is palpable. He is guilty of inciting a riot. It was not a full blown attempt to take power with mob violence. If it were it would have looked very different. Greenwald is right when he points out that this rally turned mob wasn’t truly armed. It looks more like a dry run, part of a long game. What would have happened on Jan 6th if the mob was carrying the assault weapons that many of them surely own? So I don’t think I agree that Jan 6th was an attempted coup, even though I’m sure that Trump wanted his mob to be successful. There was planning leading up to that day, and many Republicans are guilty in that regard. But sending out a weaponized army was a bridge too far, and I am convinced a deliberate decision was made not to for that reason. In my opinion Trump will not be convicted of anything except perhaps sometime in the future tax evasion. But he is a criminal through and through, and he should be behind bars. I could say the same for many power brokers and mega rich crooks. But our legal system cannot cope with people who hire phalanxes of powerful lawyers. Rich criminals rarely get punished. Ex presidents are nearly untouchable. The current hearings are both truth telling and political theater, put on by a Party that simply doesn’t know what else to do in the face of nearly complete obstructionism by the other Party. To me the future looks bleak indeed. Ben has been making a point repeatedly about ID politics, which I wish he would define. I wonder what the rest of you think about the extreme effort to change our language to accommodate the gender neutral movement. I do think language is important. But when we are guilted for using a term like women’s rights because some some people born female but now identifying as male, yet still able to carry a fetus to term, object to being left out I think we’ve lost it. If we would fight half as hard to tackle inequality I might feel differently.

This is called straw man argument isn’t it? Why quote me if you aren’t going to literally respond to at least a few points. Yes we agree sometimes, but disagree other times. Why can’t you see that right wing zealots have been far more disruptive of civil discourse, far more divisive?

It was a fantasy, but real nonetheless. It was an attempted coup that we all could see coming. It wasn’t effective, nor was the follow on cooperation of unelected leadership secured. It’s not clear what would have happened had Pence gone along. But Trump was then and still is now claiming the election was stolen, and he is planning the next go around. What would it take for you to see Trump as a traitor? Is the bar not high enough?

You’re spinning literally everything and ducking a bit too. 10 years ago was like now btw. I complained about the airwave problem 30 years ago, not that any of us could do anything about it. Socialist ideas are anathema to most from our ruling class. Is that not obvious? The scandals you specifically mentioned? Bipartisan Senate agreed something fishy between Trump and Russia. Biden’s laptop? NYT apologized for their initial coverage. Still don’t know what was on it. Do you? Wuhan lab leak or not? Jury is still out. I know a prominent pathologist who is well connected. At first the scientific community doubted it, but have at least come to the conclusion they can’t be sure one way or the other. Brian Sicknick ruled dead of natural causes. Media had that wrong. But he was pepper sprayed. And anyone can see the violence in the mob if they watch. I watched enough. I don’t need the theater. I hope it does some good. your comments about the left being over concerned with pc language - Yup that’s true, though it’s not the old left, it’s something else entirely. I don’t identify with that, take George Carlin’s view on it to heart. It’s funny - I’m from a left milieu, my whole life. I don’t know anyone who doesn't think it’s over the top. We all find it annoying. Wonder how other posters feel about it. ID politics? What’s that?

Indeed. Let’s see if Ben can spin this one. It’s clear to me that big money has always been against the left with its socialist ideas. This isn’t new, it’s old as the hills.

I know there are a lot of fringe right news sites, and of course tons of right wing radio. There is very little equivalent on the left. Reminds me of the old Point Counterpoint CNN show which I thought was a right wing pundit and a barely left of center pundit debating. One rarely sees left wing intelligentsia in any media format. The Hate that spews from right wing talk radio has no equivalent on the left. So what conclusions to draw? It takes money to own radio bandwidth, and that money is almost always right wing Republican money. So who is doing the dividing?

There you go. Someone feels strongly about child deaths from gunshots and you respond by chastising them. If you think gun laws should remain as they are why not argue your case?

Well, of course it’s a wedge issue, as are many other issues, and of course there a buttons being pushed all the time. But I don’t believe that means it’s wrong to have a point of view on these issues. What it does mean is that we should not let our differences obscure our commonalities. In my personal life I don’t allow our differences to drive wedges in my family or among my friends, all of whom have diverse opinions. What is the phrase I’m looking for? Moral relativism? Standing by ones principles needn’t make one blind. To me you confuse two issues that overlap but are not equivalent.

I have to ask - what’s your point? why limit your exploration to mass shootings? I’ve pointed out here and elsewhere that gun shots were killing far more children every year than Covid. I believe if you dig down you will find a hundred times your number dying of gunshot wounds, many by suicide. What kind of gun control would you support?