WaPo and Michael Gerson accuse the media of being liars

Today, the Washington Post and Michael Gerson went all ´jury and judge’ on the main stream media (MSM) accusing it, but glaringly excluding themselves from the accusations, of, well, basically lying. They say that the MSM “made Trump a winner” on the Kavanaugh issue with its ‘low quality’ journalism. Somehow Bezos has decided to appoint his newspaper, WaPo, as the judge of what constitute ‘serious and truthful’ journalism.

That’s funny coming from a MSM newspaper that spent the whole election year printing 24/7 negative and untrue ‘facts’ about Hillary Clinton’s emails and judging her negatively based on those ‘facts’, Of course, it was with Muller investigation that we later find that the “facts” were fake, created by just about every right-wing organization national and worldwide who wanted Clinton to lose and Trump to win. And of course, Bezos’ WaPo will NEVER admit that they helped make Trump “a winner” and become president of the USA precisely because of its persistent attacks on Clinton for a ‘crime’ they know was not real.

The WaPo CHOSE to ignore the big news about Putin meddling in our elections with Trump that came the SAME day it changed the conversation over to the Access Hollywood bus ‘incident’.

WaPo chose to keep you entertained with sex, crimes and video tapes, which are LESS likely to enraged the people than finding out that Trump was selling the nation to Putin.. Treason was too much for WaPo to discuss; they judged it to be a lesser crime compared to Clinton’s emails ‘debacle’.

Today we have the Muller investigation, but be certain, the media is not being investigated, even though they, especially the WaPo, were the TOOL used to disseminate the lies about Clinton. I know it should not be investigated, but is the unwillingness to admit their participation in the destruction of our democracy what we should be discussing today.

I’m still waiting for Bezos’ WaPo to apologize for facilitating the destruction of our democracy.

And now I’m wondering why is the WaPo CONFIRMING Trump’s accusations against the MSMedia.

There are so many ways to support Trump without looking the part.

It’s called dishonest media, meaning PROPAGANDA. I’m sure Bezos  is grateful to Trump for the trillions of dollars received from him in tax benefits.

You don’t destroy the rooster that lays the golden eggs.

Advertisements

California Just Officially Banned The Sale Of Animal-Tested Cosmetics

Good news for animal-lovers.

Let’s hope other states follow suit.

This from the Huff Post (WARNING: Graphic images):

California Just Officially Banned The Sale Of Animal-Tested Cosmetics
The new law is the first of its kind in the United States.

‘What Happened’: On feminism and the coup against the people of the USA

I watched Rachel Maddow’s interview of Hillary Clinton last Tuesday who was promoting her new book, a ‘part 2’ in paperback of last year’s ‘What Happened’, with the same title. The part of the interview that caught my attention the most was Hillary’s discussion about Putin’s continued meddling in our national politics and his attacks on her during the 2016 elections, which she discusses extensively in her new book.

Hillary asked, and I’m paraphrasing, If Putin wanted to punish her for her supposedly ‘anti- Putin’ actions as Secretary of State by blocking her path to the presidency, and if he anticipated, before the elections, that her presidency would be an “obstacle” to whatever his political goals were at the time, why, then, after having succeeded in removing said ‘obstacle’, is he still persistently attacking our political system and influencing our national political discourse? After all, he got what he and his billionaire supporters wanted:  Donald Trump, overwhelmingly rejected by popular vote, in the presidency.

Mrs. Clinton suggested that Putin’s attacks on her were neither just personal nor solely directed at her. She said that Putin is “paranoid” about any mass movement near his borders seeking political reforms and democracy (e.g. the LGBTQ and women’s movements). I propose to you, as I’m doing since the primaries  on this blog, that it was precisely that irrational fear of democratic movements what had, not only Putin, but the rest of the US and global oligarchs in a state of panic during the US presidential elections.

The mantra used by the American ‘Marxists’ during the elections (discussed on this blog) that Hillary Clinton hated Russia and was, consequently, an obstacle to ‘peace with Russia’, was a propaganda ploy devised by Putin and handed to them to disseminate among Bernies (proved by emails from Russia to Manafort). Bernies  believed the ploy and went on to vilify Hillary in the eyes of progressives supporting her. Is not for nothing that Putin was head of the KGB; his propaganda skills worked so well with Bernies that they still believe the myth of Hillary ‘the witch’ and Trump the ‘pro peace and anti-globlalism’ candidate. Heck, they might want to re-elect him.

The famous and mysterious “voters’ anger” (for a long time the mainstream media denied understanding what they were ‘angry’ about) at the globalist oligarchs manifested in the US Democratic Party as a solid united front of people of color, women, workers, immigrants (legal and illegal), LGBTQ, Muslims and many other oppressed groups. They were all behind Hillary Clinton, even some who didn’t like her.  The oligarchs of the world, of Russia, the U.S.A, China, Europe…were not pleased with the vision of the future flashing in front of their mind’s eye from all these expressions of solidarity among their nations’ oppressed groups.

Seeing these voters in the US behind a woman, nay, a feminist woman, was an intolerable sight indeed for the ruling male oligarchs. That’s why, as Hillary mentioned in the interview, more money was spend attacking her (over $30 millions) than on any other candidate running for president ever.

Politics is politics and I will not claim that Hillary Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State were all ‘kosher’. But at the same time she did stand for the interests of women and  oppressed group here and internationally.  I’m sure you can see why the same oligarchs that supported her as Secretary of State were not going to support her candidacy for president. Those are two different jobs. Running for president on a platform giving women more power and workers better salaries is not the oligarchs’  idea of a ‘good president’.

Case in point: By now the American public is aware that Putin didn’t act alone, that he joined, coordinated and ultimately received help from many U.S. entities. Among them were, and still are, the GOP, the NRA, the mainstream media (NYT and WaPo included), the pseudo-Marxists and the alt-right media. (Recall the infamous photo of Putin seating with Green Party’s Jill Stein and GOP senators). What interests could link this disparate group of political agents, particularly the ultra anti-anything-that-smells-like-socialism GOP and the NRA, to Putin?

It was the perfect political storm.

Ask yourself, what is it that our billionaire (and recently crowned as trillionaires) oligarchs care for the most on this planet? What terrifies them and their paid GOP servants the most, to the point of giving them nightmares?

Answer: What they have, and losing it.

First, they care for, no, actually, their lives revolve around investing the least amount of money on their workers and other incidentally necessary human beings (salaries and health insurance) and reaping insane profits from them and the consumers. Secondly, they care immensely for their power: political-economic-and male. (Male power, power over women, i.e., is a universal goal of just about every male.)

The two things that TERRIFY them the most are the opposite of those things they care for the most. They fear losing their power over women and workers (though they are more terrified of powerful women),  which would make them lose their ability to crunch humanity and, consequently, stop them from deriving their hugely immorally acquired profits.

And thus we arrive at the answer to ‘What Happened?’.

There was, and still is, a global anger at the globalist oligarchs. In the USA, the working class as such has become increasingly powerless, as shown by them having lost their union organizing powers (due to labor leaders’ corruption, political attacks from the oligarchy, and the almost total disappearance of the leftist movement since, at least, the 1980s). Meanwhile, the so-called identity issues have become more prominent, particularly the women’s issues. Hillary Clinton’s candidacy in 2016 automatically put feminism in the ballot, both because she is a woman and because she openly ran as a feminist.

Make no mistake about it: Feminism was in the ballot this past 2016 presidential elections. In my view, it was the most important issue, the defining issue in the elections and the least mentioned or examined after the elections. It is the one issue which the members of the exclusive club of male oligarchs, from Putin to Trump and every Wall Street and Silicon Valley CEO, and trillionaires like Jeff Bezos are still not prepare to accept: a woman, and on top of that a feminist, supported by women (self-identified as feminists or not), as president running their male lives and making decisions about their sacrosanct business practices privileges. (What type of feminism Clinton represented is not in discussion in this post.)

The male oligarchs  perceived that their absolute male power and privileges were being threatened by ‘feminists’. I remember reading a tweet from Michael Moore saying, under the assumption that Hillary’s victory was assured,

“guys, let’s admit it: 10 thousand years of male dominance over women is coming to an end” (I paraphrased.)

He was pleased about that.

How else do you explain the misogynistic coverage of Clinton in the media, even by those who ‘endorsed’ her? Look, no owner of big corporation in his right mind would have come out openly supporting Trump, a know amoral entity, during the elections. That explains, in part, how the WaPo, e.g.,, which ‘endorsed’ her,  spend 24/7 negative coverage of Clinton and the ’email’ ‘crimes’ up to November 9. Then they stopped talking about her ‘crimes’, one day to the other.

That’s also why only now we are finding out that the support for Trump was extensive, across party lines, from the extreme left supporting Putin to the extreme right also supporting him, and mostly by elitist men; but hidden from the public in plain view.

It was a magnificently globally crafted and implemented soft coup d’etate ON THE PEOPLE of the USA during and after the 2016 elections.

Hillary Clinton is right: Ultimately it was not about her, but about us, the people united against ‘strong men’ in power.

Women continue to be today the only revolutionary force capable of making significant changes to the system. Their struggle touches every aspect of our humanity: From cultural and gender issues, to labor and search for political power against the oligarchs. They just need to realize the awesome power they have in their hands.

The labor and ‘leftist’ movement, they are no more. The few zombie ‘Marxist leftists’ out there are beckoning you to follow them and leave the ‘identity politics, the politics of fighting the oppression of women and all people, behind.

Follow the pseudo-Marxist leftists at your own risk.

Me, I’m done with them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The leftists’ (male) solidarity with Donald Trump: They heart Trump

I hate giving the pseudo-leftist online magazine Counter Punch free advertisement, but knowing that many progressives read it, I feel compelled to try to show ‘em the hidden pro-Trump propaganda they dish week in and out, at least as I see it.

Take for example their article by Nick Pemberton, Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America.

It starts like this:,

“If Donald Trump is anything, he is a victim.”,

and ends like this,

“If his narcissism wasn’t killing us all we could take some satisfaction in how sad the man really is.”

The headline is not sarcasm, it is an extended Trump-apology based, not on Marxist analysis, but on cheap (that bad it is) pop psychology analysis  of Trump’s personality, Counter Punch is insinuating that Trump IS  a victim because he is  mentally ill. The article intention is to make you feel, not class-related disgust at this corrupt and hateful elitist, but some sort of compassion for him because he is a VICTIM of an illness. These Marxists are telling you that Trump’s actions are not class-related, his policies are not the actions of a corrupt elitist; it’s just an illness. Feel sorry for him, please; have a heart for the man.

At a time when Marxists and the leftists should be encouraging the working class’ disgust at this man and use it to organize against his policies, they try to make you feel sorry for him. I guess that’s Marxism 101: The working class’ compassion for the oppressor will make him grow a heart and put an end to class struggles.

Mind you, throughout the primaries and elections the ‘leftists’ were nothing but apologists for Trump, especially the ‘leftist’ men. From Susan Sarandon to almost every Counter Punch writer, they all reached out to progressives, women, workers and people of color, trying to convince them that Donald Trump (and, consequently, the GOP) was a saner and better political alternative to “that nasty woman” Hillary Clinton. Explaining how can so-called Marxists arrive at that illogical and suicidal  conclusion for the working class is easy: They are NOT Marxists.

Now that Trump’s incompetence, hatred and corruption can’t be hidden behind their hatred of Hillary Clinton, the pseudo-Marxists won’t admit their mistake. Instead, they double down on the ‘man’. They continue to work for him, now with pop-psychology to ‘hypnotize’ you into making you feel sorry for him.

The pseudo-leftists never showed a sliver of compassion or empathy for Hillary Clinton despite the support that the working class and just about every oppressed group gave her against Trump. In their eyes, she is a total unredeemable human being, she is an evil witch: a powerful Woman, i.e. Trump, however, is NOT evil:

“I was thinking about Trump and if “evil” was the correct word to describe him. It certainly is a good word for Trump, but maybe not the best one. It is hard to imagine Trump cackling behind the scenes, twiddling his fingers. Trump is more driven by a self-obsessed paranoia than anything else.”

He is not “evil”, the “best” word to describe him is ‘mentally ill’, says Counter Punch and Pemberton. (But they can imagine Hillary Clinton “cackling behind the scenes…”)

Again, is that a Marxist class analysis or pop psychology?

It is clear that the ‘Marxists’ and some black men have a place for Trump in their hearts. Why? I will give you three reasons, among many others.

First, because of male solidarity. It is no secret that many men, leftists included, admire Trump’s machismo and the way he treats women. You can see it when they express their hatred of the women movement’s attacks on Trump’s misogyny. For the ‘Marxists’, during the elections, Trump was never portrayed as ‘evil’, despite his explicit hatred of the working class, women and people of color. Many black men like him precisely because of his misogyny. And don’t tell me there is no evidence of that.

The ‘Marxists’ don’t see misogyny as a problem to be included in their agenda. I refer you to that quote above again and to my recent post “OFFICIAL: Pseudo-Marxist left organizing against women and supporting Trump”.

Only misogynist and racists can be openly against fighting those problems. ‘Marxists’ claim that those are ‘identity issues’, not important, i.e. Of course, they are male and white and elitists, they don’t suffer any of those problems personally. They are part of the problem, though, for trying to brainwash the working class into letting the oligarchy oppress them with impunity.

The second reason is Trump’s love of oligarch Putin. They love him because they too love Putin, a misogynist. The idea that Trump’s love for Putin is a sign that he is pro-peace is another ‘Marxist’ 101 teaching. You know Putin’s interests are not aligned with those of the working class when our own GOP oligarchs and corrupt Trump support him. It’s just common sense: The GOP pro-‘socialists’? Putin is not a socialist.

Counter Punch’s goal  here: is Shampooing your mind to wash out any support you may have for impeaching  Trump. Putin nor the leftists want this ‘pro-peace’ man impeached. They will do anything to keep him in the White House, including attacking Muller when his report comes out, and inciting the white supremacists to revolt against any impeachment procedures.

And finally, because these people are not Marxists. They are part of the alt-right who have joined forces with the zombie leftists (the living dead remnants of past true leftists) to destroy the Democratic party and leave the GOP as the one party-rule in the USA. I’m not a defender of the Dem party, but THAT is all we have, until the ‘glorious Marxists’ lead us to create the ‘working class party’. But they are visiting Trump at the psych ward, don’t wait for them to do their job just yet.

I have many posts here about the ‘leftists’ new war on women. I invite you to read some. Look in the tags. The ‘leftists’ will never recognize their blame in us having this man destroying our lives because they supported and continue to support him.

That’s enough to prove that Counter Punch’ support is for Trump, not for progressives or the working class. They are a tool of Putin.

 

 

 

 

On ‘Monopsony’ and other euphemisms in The NYT’s “Are Superstar Firms and Amazon Effects Reshaping the Economy?”

The Sunday New York Times article “Are Superstar Firms and Amazon Effects Reshaping the Economy?” is interesting in various informative ways, including in its frequent use of euphemisms to discuss highly emotional economic issues. Also in how it discusses the unstated continued war between the ‘stars’ of the global financial corporations and the “superstars” of the (software) corporations. There’s envy there. Keep reading, please.

The article focuses on discussions going on between “professional economists and policy makers”, meaning leaders of the Federal Reserve and global central banks, about a problem they have just recently discovered affecting their capacity to make bigger profits: Monopoly, i.e.

“more industries are being dominated by a handful of extraordinarily successful companies…”

Except that these “professional economists” don’t actually like the term “monopoly”, even though that’s what they are talking about; so they use in its stead the less morally reprehensible term “monopsony”. That is a clue about how committed these global bankers are about ‘attacking’ their counter parts in the “superstar industries”, the software kings who are playing the monopoly game.

There are other good reasons hidden in the article for frequent use of euphemisms by these ‘concerned’ professional financiers. I would like to ‘uncover’ some of them for you.

THE EUPHEMISMS

Image result for political euphemisms

Euphemism #1: There is no problem; really.

One thing that stands out in reading the article, at least for me, is how  the writer of the opinion piece, Neil Irwin, joins the sources of his article in avoiding using any words or adjectives that may cast a bad light on the owners of the corporations  creating the problems he discusses. In fact, there is no problem with the way these “superstar” corporations function. He says that the leaders of the central banks discussing how the “superstar” corporations are messing up the economy are merelyconfounded” by the “trends they see”.

“It’s hardly the case that central bankers are becoming storm-the-barricades opponents of corporate power”.

That caveat is important; he is drawing the line in the sand for you to know how far you should take the ‘description’ of their problem. The warning is ‘it’s not what you think’ they are talking about.

So don’t you go on reading the article thinking that the ‘issues’ being discussed (not denounced) in it constitute a moral judgment on the “handful” of men who run the problematic corporations in question. These people are just “trying to understand the facts”…so that they can be part of the trend and pocket bigger profits like the other corporations are doing.

Euphemism #2: It’s not ‘monopoly’, silly. It’s “monopsony

Calling, e.g., Amazon a “superstar” corporation in the context of the economic damage it is causing to the economy is not the same as calling it a ‘super monopoly’ or a ‘mega globalist disrupter’ of the economy in the same context.

Monopoly is too much of a negatively emotionally charged word, so another one has to be used in the article. One which doesn’t carry the moral implications that naturally gives raise to a desire in the readers’ mind to revolt against these corporations. A revolt that usually takes the form of the most despised word in the capitalists’ dictionary, a demand for REGULATION, i.e.

That ‘new’ BENIGN word that means the same thing as monopoly is monophony. Here is it’s definition in the article:

“monopsony” — the outsize power of a few consolidated employers”

Gotta love euphemisms; “of a few consolidated EMPLOYERS“. That’s almost like saying ‘it is Jesus’ way’. Not corporations practicing capitalism’s greatest game, not the few ‘Jeff Bezos’ of mega corporations, but only a few good ol’ regular employers.Do you see how euphemism works in this article?

Monospony: Perfect competition?

But that is what the citizens have been calling these “superstar” corporations for a while now, monopolies, and complaining about it. Seldom have you heard the public saying ‘I hate this “handful of extraordinarily successful companies”. No, the complaint is about their monopolistic power, not about them being “successful” companies.

And the power of that complaint is, in part, what got Trump to the White House. The unstated complaint is about the unrestrained personal greed in the heart of the handful of men controlling our economy and our lives, be it financial or industrial corporations. And the reason it is an “unstated complaint” is because the true causes and nature of these “confounding trends” are hidden behind euphemisms that mask the amoral personality character required to become a “superstar” corporation.

That’s why those euphemisms are there, to ‘accuse’ but not to stir the anti-capitalist/monopoly pot. It’s an undeclared war between ‘superstars’. More on this below.

Euphemism #3: Don’t name names, please.

In the world of the experts-in-opinion-shaping media, it is a forgone rule that you use negative words only when you want to hurt the subject of an article. For The NYT, there’s no point in going on hurting, e.g., Jeff Bezos by directly using his name to point out how hurtful his greedy business practices may be for society. The names of these corporate CEOs are seldom mentioned; their personal names can’t be associated with their amoral practices.

Image result for michael corleone it's strictly business

Your task as a reader is to remember how GRRRREAT! he (and Amazon) is. These are “superstars’ (wouldn’t you want to be a superstar?) and “extraordinarily successful companies”, nothing wrong with that, is it? It’s just the ‘trends’ that are bad.

The problem which “confounds” the leaders of the financial sector is that the boys of the industrial “superstar” corporations are unwilling to share their profits with them and play fair with them. It is as if the stars of the global financial elite are envious of the power of the mega software industry. So they tell the Bezos’s of the world that they have a secret weapon against them: The poor workers being screwed up by Jeff et al software kings.

And that’s what this article is about, the financial sector showing the software kings how they can turn the working class against them.  Showing to the “superstars” that they too have power, maybe even more than the software “superstars”.

WHAT THE WAR BETWEEN SUPERSTARS LOOKS LIKE

“By keeping interest rates low and allowing the labor market to strengthen, employers may eventually find they have no choice but to increase worker pay.”

That’s your euphemistic statement of war: “We are at war with superstar corporations because they refuse to let us play in their game. And we can force their hands.‘ Notice they are talking about “employers”, That’s euphemism paying off, for we know they are talking about Jeff Bezos et al software “superstars”. But they don’t want you to know who are the two sides feuding by name. Why? Because it’s THEIR war, between them; your part in it is, as always, as cannon fodder. They do not want you to know that there’s a fight up there between the elite  capitalists.

It’s dressed up for you to make the usual assumptions: That these financiers want to help you, it’s about YOUR economy, not about them.  But is it? Do you really, but REALLY think that the barons of Wall Street and the central banks gurus are on the side of the workers, our super heroes forcing the bad evil Bezos’ Amazon to increase worker pay?

Whether in the early medieval times, during feudalism, or in modern times, kings and presidents use the minions and workers as weapon to fight each other. We are in the modern feudal times. These  kings and lords of the financial and industrial manor use us against each other. The way to force the Bezos of the world to play ‘fair’ and share their exorbitant wealth with the bankers (not with workers) is by manipulating the financial system. After all, said system is private.

It would be foolish for regular citizens to take the above quote as meaning that the leaders of the central banks are ever so worry about how the economy affects you personally. These are leaders of mega financial businesses for profit. They never side with you.

Clearly, I’m no expert on economy, but you don’t have to be one to understand when two factions are at war.

Today’s biggest war is the one going on in the board rooms of our elite financial and software industrial “employers”.

We see the collateral damage, but we don’t see the CEOs-kings fighting each other. Mainly because they don’t want to change the field, just the rule of the games in their own interests.

That they can do behind the curtains.

 

 

 

 

OFFICIAL: Pseudo-Marxist left organizing against women and supporting Trump [Revised]

[No grammar police admitted here without a warrant.]

I just bumped into an article at the pseudo-Marxist Wold Socialist Website informing their naive followers that the “Socialist Equality Party (US) holds Fifth National Congress“.

One of the ‘issues’ discussed to organize against by these men (Did you expect women to be in any position of power in the party,?) is:

the right-wing character of the #MeToo campaign “.

When you look at these people’s ‘platform’ (in the article) you can see that the particular problems women face in this capitalist society are not mentioned. That’s intentional, it’s not an oversight. And it is the attitude across all the ‘leftist’ organizations today.

Judging the #Metoo movement, in its ENTIRETY, as “right-wing” makes all the women in that movement the target of attacks by the ‘socialists’. In the Marxist ‘world’, there is no space for in-between’s: you are either 100% of their brand of Marxism; but if you can’t be 100%, maybe only 60%, then you are a right winger, which automatically grants you a place in their BLACK LIST.

Is Ann Coultier a member of the #metoo movement? Is she and other ring-wing women defending any aspects of the women’s movement in general? The #metoo movement is basically a progressive movement, except that it is not formed, shaped nor controlled by the politically inefficient Marxist men of our ‘left’. And the fact that some right-wingers are trying  co-opt the legitimate women’s fight against sexual abuse doesn’t mean that the movement is right-wing.  Is Trump a leftist and pro-peace just because he claims to be anti-globalism and pro-Putin? I say no, but that doesn’t prevent the Marxist left to support him as “better for the working class” than any member of the democratic party.

The judgment of this party/men is not without consequences, it is a call to attack the women’s movement. After all, if you remember, the majority of the pseudo-leftists in this nation were against the women who marched in the Women’s March when Trump was inaugurated. But, surprise, there was no “#metoo” movement at that time. So what could have been the reason to attack the Women’s March at that time as a ‘right wing ‘ movement? You know the answer by now, if not, keep reading. The answer is below, together to why the ‘socialists’ are working to make the USA a one party system, with the GOP as the only party. Seriously.

This that I described above is evidence, to me, that these American pseudo-leftists are no leftists at all. I have been saying in this little blog since 2015 than the left is kaput, dead. What you see passing as leftists is really (gulp)  the ZOMBIE LEFTISTS. Even Marx and the “International” in its beginnings had the advancement of women’s rights in their platform. The condition of women in society was a concern of socialists in the old times.

But not today. Women have been betrayed by the fake socialists. There is no difference between the GOP, the alt-right and the ‘socialists/leftist’ men in their position  on the women and the #metoo movement.

These ‘leftists’ have married the alt-right and joined them in their hatred of women AND of anyone who is not a white-working-male. That’s why they state in the article that the ‘party’ is against “identity politics”. The only thing that these leftist-alt-right will bother with is with economical issues of the white men; they have stated so. They blamed Hillary Clinton ‘loss’ to her “ignoring” the white men in the norther states, and are now inviting the DNC to go there and, well, rescue them. If the dems don’t do that, then they are “right wing”.

Identity politics is a complex issue, but I always say, to simplify it, that only white racists and misogynists can tell women and people of color that fighting racism and misogyny directly and face-to-face is, not only not a priority, but bad. Bad to whom? Do you have any friend of color who would agree to not fight racism and just focus on the salary interests of the ‘forgotten white working men’?

Only white people dare to dismissed the pain suffered by people of color due to racism. Any ‘leftist’ organization which assumes an anti-identity politics position is a racist organization. Period. Why?

The term ‘identity politics’ was re-introduced recently (during the elections) by the alt-right and the ‘Marxists’ as a tool to quash the indignation of people of color and women, and to de-legitimize their struggles against racism and misogyny.  It was introduced as an attack on Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which was being supported by people of color and women.

The Pollyanna ‘leftists’ will teach you to be a proper worker

These people at the SEP, and all ‘socialists’ out there who have a website to pass their toxic message of concealed hatred of women,  consider themselves in high regard. They consider themselves the EXPERTS on class-struggle, they are the brains of the movement, the intellectuals. They have NEVER been out there organizing anyone; but heck, they write a lot of books on the subject. And so they decided that it is time to EDUCATE the (white) working class on “class identity”. Ooops. Didn’t they just say they are against “identity politics? What is ‘class identity’ if not Identity Politics?

They, socialists, who were MIA all these years, are now going to the streets to teach the workers to be proper working class. That’s their (old) new task. And god forbid you disagree with them.

No one in the working class, be it white, colored or women, follow these people. THE LEFT IS DEAD. But they are back from the dead (that’s why I call them ‘zombies’) to ‘educate’ you and to sow more divisions.

‘If you can’t unite them, divide them: Go after Ocasio-Cortez’

The SEP, and the rest of the ‘leftists’, have RULED that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a ‘pseudo-leftist’ and needs to be defeated. They have already joined the main stream media (MSM) in attacking her.

And now you have the beautiful specter of all ‘socialists’ of assorted flavors accusing each others of being ‘pseudo-leftists’. Ocasio is a fake socialist because she is in the Socialist Democratic party.  Why does it matter?

It matters because they print their trash in their websites, and, unfortunately, many progressives read it. Well-intentioned progressives are exposed to the divisive-propaganda of these ‘leftists’-alt-right groups.

For the love of Trump

I have been arguing since the primaries/elections on this little blog that the ‘left’ has become part of the right-wing Alt-movement, joining them in support of Trump. Once again they show the evidence, their card, so to speak. In the article they again hint – more like state – that Trump is a better alternative for the  (white male) working class.

At one moment one may think [incorrectly, i.e] that no one could be worse than Trump. But then,[surprise!] one watches Democratic Party Senator Mark Warner threaten war against Russia… Trump appears almost civilized”.

The Democratic Party is worse than Trump! Trump is “civilized”.

The ‘Marxist left’ have been riling progressives since the elections against the Democratic Party (DP) as worse than the GOP, and Hillary Clinton as worse than Trump. Granted, Clinton is no ‘angel’, but to propose to the working class and women that Trump and the GOP are better alternatives…That’s not only the job of the Devil: That’s right-wing propaganda in your face.

The Socialist Equality Party is a zombie organization. They came back from the dead five years ago (per the article), and the fact that their efforts were directed at attacking the DP but NOT the GOP is a clear indicator that they can’t possibly be a genuine leftist group.

Putin and Peace

I’m for peace. Actually, I’m more for peace than Putin and his supporters in the USA.

First, Putin is not ruling the Soviet Union. That’s in the past. Putin, today, is an oligarch, he doesn’t represent the ‘working class’; he represents the billionaire globalist class there and here. But the American ‘left’ glosses over that fact. No mention of it.  He is actually NEVER portrayed as a representative of the working class. Have you  noticed that???

His ‘leftist’ supporters here are talking to you about Putin AS IF we were in the 1950s. They are using the old leftist lingo of that time to sell you a totally changed reality. Notice that they talk ABOUT Putin, not about Russia. The people of Russia, like here, is not the main concern of the American ‘left’/alt-right. But people-working class there too are fighting oppression against their own government.

As for peace, Putin is as involved in war armament business as any other capitalist.

The point I want you to take is that no  genuine Marxist group can logically and MORALLY support Trump and the GOP. Anyone who believes that these two represent the interest of women and the working class…is a confused soul.

The Democratic Party is NOT the ‘workers party’. We know that. But the American left failed to move the working class and to create a viable political tool for them. Now they joined the right wingers, and want to leave the GOP in charge, as the one-party fascist system of America.

The Left’s call for Political Suicide

Attacking and destroying the DP, the GOP does, as do the oligarchs, will end up with a ONE PARTY fascist nation in their hands.

The pseudo-left’s call for the destruction of the Dem Party, at a time when the progressive working class is in disarray and powerless (where are the unions?) is a call for progressives to commit  POLITICAL SUICIDE.

The secret-subliminal message

If Putin is with the GOP (support for Trump = support for the GOP) and the ‘left’ is with Putin, then the working class, if they follow the ‘left’,  must be with the GOP too. They will be ordered to attack the Dem Party. Putin wants the GOP to hold power in Congress to avoid Trump being impeached.

That’s the hidden message in these ‘left’/alt-right’s  defense of Trump: he is ‘better’ for you because he is a Putin fan.

Trading our liberties for the sake of Putin?

Even if I’m wrong about Putin and his intentions, all I can see is what he is doing here and to us.

‘We the people’ of the USA are not in a position to trade our rights and freedoms for the benefit of Putin. And THAT is what happens when anyone supports the GOP and Trump.

There is no Marxist ideology or pamphlet dating back to Marx’s times that would support the idea that the GOP and Trump, knowing who they are, are the best alternative for women and the working class. (Women ARE part of the working class, but are in need of rights to get them out of the second-class citizen position in which they still are.)

Conclusion:

We are living in the times of unbound psy-ops and propaganda coming from the right-wing and left wing.

There is no ‘left’ left in the USA. The sooner you come to understand that, the sooner you will be able to recognize propaganda; and the sooner you will be able to organize around those who are truly on your side.

The pseud-Marxist left is not on your side.

 

 

Bernie Sanders, bernies and the Left, in hindsight.

“The destruction of the Democratic Party and creation of a truly progressive political movement is the only hope for black America.” Black Agenda Report

As the discussion about Putin meddling in our elections deepens, more information slowly drips in about how ‘bernies’ and the pseudo-left were targeted for anti-Clinton propaganda. I used this blog during the elections to denounce how the ‘left’ united forces with the GOP to defeat our votes and Clinton. As time goes by, my observations are being proven correct. So let me refresh your mind with this post.

The main element in all this conversation about Putin meddling in the 2016 presidential elections is the use of propaganda. We know that propaganda is a dishonest method of influencing opinions. “Dishonest” because it is based on the manipulation of information (misinformation/disinformation), and emotions through it.

Then there is the issue of what is the purpose of propaganda. It can be commercial, to sell more products and push a specific brand; that would be advertisement. But it has a nefarious goal when it is used for political purposes, ‘public relations’ as a tool of power to put in the political body –government more specific – people who represent interests rejected by the citizens, manipulating them to vote against their own interests.

There is public agreement in that Putin’s goal was to help Trump win over Hillary Clinton. That’s bad enough, but there’s more to it.

Putin is clearly a ‘right-winger’ who supports the GOP. You can’t help Trump without helping the GOP, and now more than ever considering that  Putin sees the democrats as attacking Trump. Putin and his oligarchs (we saw them celebrating Trump’s ‘victory’) are now interested in securing the GOP stay as a majority party in Congress.

Also, Putin, coming from a history of believing in the one-party system, would love it if the Democratic Party were to disappear; destroying it would be a natural inclination for Putin and Russian oligarchs.

The American pseudo-left’s love affair with Putin would be understood if it was based on a Soviet era Putin, a ‘Marxist against the globalist imperialists’. That’s what they were defending in the past.  But this Putin is himself a globalist-imperialists oligarch supporting the GOP in the USA. The fact that they, knowing this fact, pretend that we put all of our struggles on the side to give the GOP a chance to make ‘peace’ with Putin is beyond outrageous. It is treason by a pseudo-intellectual-pseudo-Marxist elite. I include in the ‘pseudo-left’ all the typical leftist organizations and websites (Counter Punch, Socialist World, etc.), but exclude the people at The Nation because they showed some balance and dignity during the elections.

I discussed on this blog how Bernie Sanders and the pseudo-left were determined, and still are, in destroying the Democratic Party and support the GOP. That was the focus of this blog, the pseudo-left.

In hindsight, Bernie Sanders and the pseudo-left left crumbs of support for Putin all through the elections. Their whole anti-Hillary-anti-DNC campaign was the crumbs.

Sanders has gone as far as inciting the voters at the Electoral College to vote, not to restore the people’s’ wishes expressed on November 8, but to, instead, appoint Kasich,  a racist, right-wing member of the party of the enemies of the people, the GOP, i.e.
https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/12/11/sanders-leftists-embrace-trump-and-white-supremacists-a-love-affair-made-in-hell/

THE MANAFORT TRIAL

This is in the reporting at the Washington Post about the first day at Manafort trial, a statement by Ted Devine, Sanders’ campaign manager:

“Ukrainian’s campaign “delivered the message with numbing repetition,” thanks to Manafort… Devine said Manafort hired a range of other campaign consultants from the United States, including pollster Tony Fabrizio, who also worked on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

We now know what happened in the Ukrainian campaign (more or less), how Manafort used propaganda to influence their campaign. And Devine was helping him. It stands to logic that whatever disinformation and character assassination techniques he, Ted Devine, used there, he used here too.

I propose that the bernies’ repeated ad nauseam “lock her up” and “crooked Hillary” came from the fountainhead of Ted Devine, a Putin supporter. And boy, did Trump thank them, as he thanked Putin, for it. He publicly thanked Sanders, but Sanders never responded to deny he was helping him in any way, shape or form.

Silence is complicity, some times.

THE ONE PARTY SYSTEM

The quote that opens this post is not the only example of the pseudo-left engaged in the elimination of the Democratic Party; there are many more on this blog. These people, advocating the destruction of that party, know that doing that will make the USA a one-party system with the GOP as the only party.

They know this because this outcome is so logical and evident that even a three years old toddler can see it.

So why is the pseudo-left, Sanders and bernies so intent and adamant in destroying the party when they know that they cannot build anything on the ashes of that party? Do they have the following with the political knowledge to immediately, before the elections, build a “new democratic party” that will fix all the ‘class problems’ they say are the only problems this nation has? Of course not.

That’s why the quote up there from Blackagendareport suggest destroying the party and putting in its stead “a movement”, not another party.

Sanders and pseudo-left are Putin followers. Jill Stein even got to dine with Putin. Whatever Putin’s goals are, those are the pseudo-left/Sanders’ goal. Putin want to help Trump by eliminating the Democratic Party. So there you have it.

Today they are still at it, calling for the demise of the party.

I’m not a fan of that party. I vote dem because there is no other alternative. Instead of destroying it, those who don’t like its politics ought to work for some coalition within it to make it ‘better’. It would not be the first time that the ‘left’ makes coalitions with the ‘right’ within a party, or anywhere else.

The evidence is there today with the ‘left’ helping the GOP. It would make more sense for them to work to fix the DNC, not to put the GOP at the head of the one-party USA. But then, that would defeat Putin’s purpose, wouldn’t it?

In my book, Sanders and the pseudo-left are complicit with Putin and Trump in the coup that was the elections.

To me they are guilty of treason as much as Trump is, if not more.

Follow Sanders at your own risk.