“As Florida’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law takes effect, schools roll out LGBTQ restrictions”

“Some school officials have been accused of warning teachers not to wear rainbow articles of clothing and to remove pictures of their same-sex spouses from their desks.”


Back to the closet. Nuff said.

Sue Katz: Consenting Adult: Will Young People Have to Learn How to be in  the Closet?Five things you didn't know about religious veils | CNN

WaPo: GOP gains ground on abortion, guns despite Democratic control

“GOP gains ground on abortion, guns despite Democratic control”

I challenge anyone to explain that. The ‘fact’ is stated correctly.

The causes for that painful reality are myriad. I will name just a few.

  1. The Dem party and the GOP represent the same class: the native and international billionaires of Wall Street and the tech giants.

You can’t say with a straight face that you are not aware of that. So by looking the other way, ignoring it, you contributed to that stark ugly factual statement above.

Dems and GOP seek our votes but are bought to serve the elite class. Biden is evidence that no matter how many dems you elect, the GOP is the ruling party. If you can’t see that then there’s no point in talking to you. Don’t get angry at me, put the anger where it belongs. Biden is there for the elite, not for you. And you KNOW IT. But you can’t change the system. You can’t even get your act together to demand TERM LIMITS FOR SCOTUS. What should have been ‘overturn SCOTUS’ is now ‘SCOTUS overturns abortion rights, gun laws, democracy, working people…’

Summing up, this explains the headline: citizens POWERLESSNESS. The strongest won, not fairly, though.

  1. The MSM has done a superb work at indoctrinating the public with propaganda from the elite class. We the people can’t fight a MSM and the propaganda corporations, with money from billionaires like Koch brothers, Thielsen, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc. The people globally have faith and trust in the media, just as the Pentecostals have faith in their bibleNow, with digital media, it’s worse. You have been trained by the media (NYT, WaPo, etc) to put your constitutional right of speech in the hands of the people mentioned above. You WANT them to censor you. And so they will continue doing as already they are doing. You can fall off your couch telling me you don’t trust the media; you are only fooling yourselves. You don’t question the news: period.

You have surrendered your rights in exchange of…what? I say in exchange of not being beaten up by the police state. That’s it. Not even for ‘national security’: you have been turned into microbes they watch through their surveillance cameras. You knew the after-9-11 laws were an excuse to turn you into state’s slaves. But your FEARS of state powers immobilized you.

  1. Propaganda has kept the people divided. You should have realized the power of the media when you realized that the workers’ union movement was dead by the early 1990s. And when you realized that the feminist movement had been turned into a modern pro-patriarchy-capitalist anti-feminist movement, also starting in the 1990s. Ooops! You haven’t realized any of those. I describe these feminists actions here and

You had a chance in the 2016 elections: the biggest people’s coalition since WW1 threatening the elite class. Women (feminists or not), working class, LGBTetc, immigrants, people of color…but you were manipulated by the media’s tentacles from here to Russia into attacking yourselves.

You made the case for Trump, you and bernies and Susan Sarandon by attacking Hillary Clinton, and in doing so you shot yourselves in the foot. Once the elite gave you the coup, they knew you are like plasticine in their hands: no will-power, no backbone, fear and cowardice (afraid of fighting the military police).

After the elections (2016) women marched in big numbers, but the misogynists and the media and the pseudo-left supporting Trump were ready. The Nation of Islam send women to divide the march organizers and women in general. You can read in this blog my comment on the pro-Trump leftists and that march. The ‘potential’ revolutionary power of women fizzled like a duded rocket by the ganging up of MSM and every male in power, from left to right.

Welcome, dystopian future: it is now here. Watch how it slowly starts to eat you up and how you attack each other on command. There’s nothing else you are willing to do.




The logic behind “Decision’s critics worry it will lead to repeal of other protections”

Reactions, like the one quoted in this post’s title, to the racist/misogynist SCOTUS court’ decision are very telling and unfortunate, or unfortunately very telling. (Pick your choice, that’s what your right to choose in this now-officially fascist nation of ours is now limited to: choosing between meaningless alternatives of the kind of ‘Netflix or/and HBO’, etc. etc. etc.)

[This is an ESL writer, pardon the errors.]

The logic behind these media headlines seems to be telling you that for other people who don’t have, um, vaginas with birth-giving capacity, e.g. men (gay or not) and trans, as long as the SCOTUS decision is limited to removing women’s rights to abortion and reproductive health but not their rights, they have no problem with the decision.

“What if gay marriage is the next thing?” WaPo

Now, now, calm down. I said “seems”. I propose that the media, in its sacrosanct right to manipulate our emotions for their profit and political goals, is phrasing the reactions in a way that surreptitiously isolate the women’s (half the people of this nation and the world) interests from the rest of the society.

Don’t tell me this is ‘conspiracy theory’. This SCOTUS decision has been put together ‘surreptitiously’ for years. What you see here is not magic, the SCOTUS power to move us to the extreme political right is the work of right-wingers up and down this nation through decades with the cooperation of the media opinion-manipulation craft chipping off at women’s rights and feminism.

New York Times

You can’t see it, that’s the problem. By the time you open your eyes, not only it’s too late but you are blinded permanently. You couldn’t prevent it because you refused to see the in-your-face signs of it coming. Now you can’t stop it. Those who voted against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 elections are partly responsible for this defeat of ALL the people of this nation.

Trans, LGBTQetc, non-misogynist men, etc, ought to speak openly about the misogyny in the decision and not just worry about the ‘consequences’ to them.

The more the ‘war’ rages between trans and women (feminist or not), the more the trans should be openly marching with us, showing their support, putting aside the divisions. Same for women, of course.

I want to see trans marching with their banners stating ‘trans for women rights’ or ‘trans against misogyny’ or something to that effect. Women have overwhelmingly stand up for trans. It’s time to trans to pay it forward.


If you don’t believe that, listen to yourselves:

“What if gay marriage is the next thing?” WaPo

Whatever is done to women eventually comes back to bite the rest of you in the arse. As long as there’s misogyny, there will be no peace. Not because we will fight back, but because the goal and consequence of misogyny is oppression of half the population of this planet and the upholding of men’s political, economic and violence privileges.

So, people, please. Stand up openly against misogyny. The rights of all of us depend on it. Women stand with trans and gays. We need them to stand with us for us.


Third wave’s Post-feminism and SCOTUS: the chickens have come home to roost

It goes without saying that the feminist movement lost. This ‘back to the 17th century’ ruling is evidence of both how well the right-wingers have been preparing for a fascist takeover of this nation and how badly women/feminists have been shredding their own power for at least the last 25 years.

Of course, this is not the time for self-evaluation, actually, there has never been a good time for that. So if you say, thinking with hind-sight, that the ‘liberals’ anti-Hillary Clinton campaign in the 2016 elections was a huge mistake, that bernies’ less-than-passive support for Trump is one of the many recent causes for yesterday’s appalling SCOTUS news, you’ll get the usual mindless attacks and insults. Cancel-culture kicks in. I would like to have a conversation with Susan Sarandon and Bernie (who laughed at the prospect of Trump attacking women’s reproductive rights -is in this blog) about how guilty they feel for helping Trump win. They don’t feel any.

Maybe, just maybe if our youth could put the freaking ‘mind-wipeout’ cell phone and social media technology down for a while, they might be able to see and think how these tools are being used to brainwash, manipulate them into attacking each other.

It’s easier to attack each other than to attack the billionaire class. Instead of ‘overturn SCOTUS’, we have ‘cancel anti-trans fascist feminists’.

How do you plan to get back on that horse again (women’s reproductive rights, i.e.) after you celebrated the demise of feminism, gloating about your ‘post feminism’ theory victory? Do you know how many decades it took to get those tenuous abortion rights in the first place? It was more than 50 years, FYI.

You think woman is now a wrong ‘concept’, that everybody should be treated equally even though, um, men (pre or after gender ‘assignment by medicine corporation’) for example don’t have need for abortion rights. Well, now women don’t exist as a group with rights of their own, and I suppose that’s OK with some of you because  SCOTUS decision doesn’t threaten trans’ rights (they don’t need abortions, do they?). Consequences.

This is the generation that blasted the 1960’s to 1990’s feminists as “anti-men bitches”, among some of the beauties they hurled at us. This is what you have to show your kids, those kids you are now forced to have, for your ‘enlightened’ intellectual-elite anti-feminism theories: your loss of reproductive rights and everything else in the fascist surprise box of chocolate.

You sided with patriarchy. Now reap the consequences. Except that all of us have to pay for your mistakes.

The war on women gets ‘under the hood’

Wow. That headline focuses on ‘trans’ while the article actually describes how ‘naturally born’ girls will be basically sexually assaulted by the medical profession for the purpose of  ‘corroborating’ their (I don’t know these days anymore) womanhood? Funny thing is, the right wingers are using EVERYTHING to justify taking our rights and owning our bodies, and ‘trans’ is their latest weapon.

In my opinion, ‘trans’ (a very small group of human beings in our society) is the right wingers political excuse for their assault on the other half of humanity, women/girls, i.e. No one should be oppressed, and I’m definitely for trans’ rights (being a lesbian myself) and against the attacks on ‘trans’ by the government.

But the political concept of oppression is in badly need of a ‘review’, of an ‘update’ in accordance to this new millennium’s art of casting oppressed groups against each other. I’m thinking ‘trans’, who want (I think, but I’m not sure) to be considered ‘women’, accusing women of bias against them but not recognizing the thousand of years of oppression of women. (Why these men want to become part of an oppressed and historically hated group, women, i.e., is truly beyond me, particularly since I don’t see them allied with women in fighting misogyny.)

It’s something out of a nightmare, this new millennium. (We also have workers against each other,. For example those who believe their billionaire employers are fatherly figures who will do good for them without having to get unionized, attacking those who know better and want to unionize.)

The fascists attack women’s rights under the pretense of ‘protecting’ them from trans. It’s time for trans to organize and join women against misogyny. That headline up there should have read:

another low in misogynistic laws that attack both women and ‘trans’ women: genital exam for female athletes.

The fact that the headline is focused on trans is part of the media subtle war on women, as if the inconvenience of genital exam is only for trans and not a bigger ploy for the submission of women to the state.

If you are a woman, a ‘trans women’, you must join the fight against misogyny, for if you claim you are a ‘woman’, you are in danger. Unless you think that misogyny doesn’t apply to trans women.

Trans rights can’t survive on its own: they are part of the bigger picture, this society’s hatred of anything female. So get on with the script, as the saying goes; let’s open channels of positive discussion and stop being manipulated against each other for the benefit of this male fascist society.

But more important for women is the destructive cumulative effect of all these new ‘laws’ have on women’s lives and economic stability. From banning abortion (trans have expressed no complains about this, maybe because they wont be needing one any time soon); to silencing women who report rape (Depp celebrated by both men and women as slayer of #metoo movement); to social security Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) scandal (85% of those affected are women), women have been slowly but steadily pushed back at least 100 years. And clearly there is much more to come to make the point clear: women, get back to the kitchen.

I’m too old to have to go through this fight all over again.

GPO/WEP Hurts Retirees

Good luck to the young intellectual feminist who will have to deal with this, although in my view, they have a lot to do with this debacle.

GPO/WEP Hurts Retirees

Particularly egregious, the Government Pension Offset currently affects more than 700,000 retirees, 83% of them women. The GPO reduces and usually eliminates all spousal and survivor benefits. https://ssfairness.org/a-major-womens-issue-repeal-the-wep-and-gpo-support-house-bill-by-davis-h-r-82/

SCOTUS and the end of feminism: self-inflicted wounds

The upcoming SCOTUS decision canceling Roe v Wade is the flashing bright lights signaling that feminism has finally been defeated. Isn’t that what the ‘third to fifth waves’ of anti-feminism post-feminism feminist wanted? Mission accomplished.

How did we women get here to this out and out reversal of fortune after the significant political progress we had achieved in the merely two decades of struggles of 1960-1980? Some of the answers to that question are embedded in the tragic story of the life of Shulamith Firestone, for there has never been a mightier enemy of feminists and feminism than feminists themselves. I offer you ‘post-feminism culture’ as the most recent evidence for the last part of that statement. Heck, ‘post’ means ‘dead’. They have declared feminism dead, and SCOTUS agrees.

I invite you to ponder for a few minutes, perhaps while taking a shower, on the fact that it is in this brand new millennium, in the midst of mind boggling scientific advancement and achievements, that our society is moving backwards towards medievalist religious autocracy and political barbarism, towards a culture of intolerance and lack of compassion for anyone except for the self. We’ve been there already, we KNOW that history. We can’t claim we are going backwards because we are ignorant. In most instances it is the highly educated, the intellectual elite the one promoting and facilitating – purposely or by intellectual laziness – this retrograde political agenda, this return to the rule of fear and of political and religious oppression of the human spirit.

Undoubtedly, something is amiss with this one brick short of a load humanity.

Any significant progress achieved by women as ‘women’ (not as trans women) in the 60s-80s came in spite of their in-fighting: viciously attacking each other’s credibility and leadership. It was not a pretty sight. But in so doing they limited the breadth and depth of the women’s liberation movement. And when you compare today’s ‘post-feminism’ of intellectual feminists with that past, you find that not only they have contributed nothing to that progress, even worse, they have gone beyond the in-fighting.

They have been determined all along in a conservative/right-wing project: ‘canceling’ the previous feminists’ waves as ‘useless’ and ‘shameful’, and fetching for patriarchy the liberties and power women had wrestled out its hands. All of it to the delight of today’s woman-hating men: from declaring prostitution a career choice (tell that to the thousands of women and girls kidnapped to be sold as prostitutes) to repealing Roe v Wade, and everything in-between. These women are taking us back to the 17th century. A women’s ideology scorning feminism and feminists of the past advances and facilitates patriarchy’s attacks on women; it agrees with patriarchy. Consequences which intellectuals refuse to see.

Anyone with a smidgen of knowledge of the history of feminism and of the anti-democratic nature of the capitalist ideology could tell that since its inception this new millennium’s feminism is a right-wing project at the service of ‘patriarchy’. The tragedy is in that, to this day, progressive intellectual women have either failed to see that reality or challenge its discernible right-wing-capitalist-male-oriented essence.

Two political forces neutralize progressive women: fear of the powerful ‘cancel culture’ (another rightwing tool) and of being demoted from their position as intellectual elite in academia if they dare to go, um, ‘radical’. I hesitate to use the term radical because, as with everything else in this new era, things don’t mean what they used to anymore. For example, denouncing the ‘new feminists’ as right wing and patriarchy is now considered politically incorrect, not ‘radical’, while denouncing the second wave is considered ‘radical’. In feminism, ‘radical’ meant going deep into denouncing patriarchy. Today, it means criticizing feminists of the past, something positive.

Thinking in retrospect, maybe it was all a fluke, or a sweet mirage, the progress we achieved.

the last 50 years of the history of American feminism could be analyzed as the story of the path taken by feminists towards self-inflicted defeat. That path has come, in this new century, to its predictable cul-de-sac with the proclamation by the new anti-feminism feminists, among other pearls of wisdom, that ‘woman’ is neither a social category nor requires to be liberated. They have lord it over the rest of us progressive women that all women are now free…just because they say so with the authority of their academic degrees; given to them, mind you, by the patriarchy’s institutions as some sort of intellectual inducement to say that which men want to say but can’t say it without coming across as modern brute Neanderthals. Women in academia: they get paid way below men, but there they are, working for patriarchy just the same.

In my view, the defeat of feminism has ultimately been cooked up in academia. They have been providing the ‘reasoning’ against feminism in the last 20 years.

Don’t expect this generation to pick up the debris of feminism to build a new movement. Voting against Hillary Clinton opened the door to these attacks on women. Bernies voting for Trump, directly or indirectly (voting for the Green Party), had consequences for women. But women said they wouldn’t vote for a woman just because she was a woman. Self-defeating women.

Don’t expect this generation to pick up the debris of feminism to build a new movement. This long incubating mistake will have to be corrected by women two or three generations down the road.


When Disney wishes upon a star, DeSantis delivers

The magic that eliminates a corporation’s billion dollar debt: pass the debt directly to the citizens and call it ‘a punishment” to the corporation.

Gotta give it to the republicans, they know how to trick you into believing that they are against corporations. Sure, it looks as if Disney is a victim of the GOP, but ask yourself, what has Disney lost in this drama? Don’t forget we are talking here about a capitalist corporation, about capitalism itself, not about your little disappearing bank account.

In 1967 Disney’s privileged corporation status as a state-within-a-state was very profitable. It took care of the cost of running its ‘magic kingdom’, taxing itself to pay its Florida’s taxes. So much money they could afford to run their kingdom; they even have the right to build a nuclear-power plant.  Fast forward 55 years later and the calamitous Covid pandemic governments’ policies, what do you have? You find that running the magic kingdom on your own dime is not as profitable as it used to be. Disney World is a (at least last year) $27 BILLIONS corporation, and corporations don’t like paying taxes or debts.  Per Reuters, it paid last year over $700 millions in taxes to the state.

Running any state or city is expensive now a days. So it makes sense for Disney corporation to want to ‘devolve’ to the city of Orlando and the state of Florida the privilege of of running its business. How to do it without incurring in the ire of the people?

Culture war to the rescue

As ‘punishment’ for joining the ‘social liberal’ youngsters (notice it is called “social”, not economic) in the ‘culture wars’, DeSantis took from Disney the debt and the cost of financing debt and passed it to the people. By losing the privileged status, now the cost of running the kingdom is in the hands of the citizens. Becoming a ‘regular’ corporation is less cumbersome and more profitable than taxing itself to pay debts.

What have Disney corporation lost in this farce? Tell me. It even gained in status as a ‘victim’ of the GOP.

The big capitalists corporations have found the sweet spot of culture war: they go soft on ‘social liberalism’ and amass financial profits in the process by passing the cost of running the business to the people, who now support them.

Capitalists always win.

When you wish upon a star to be relieved of debt and taxes, DeSantis’  ‘punishment’ looks more like a give away to Disney than punishment. And there’s the bonus of redistricting, reducing African Americans and Latins access to voting rights. To me, it all looks like a fake drama.

Keep you eyes open to how DeSasntis and the state of Florida resolves this matter after June.

Will Smith’s inglorious “slap” incident and the ‘cancel culture’ response to it: quick, which one is the most dangerous to our society? (P1)

OK. By now even the natives of planet Pluto have seen the now-entertaining video of “Will Smith just slapped the shit out of me”, but I get the feeling that, from that distance, contrary to us here, they are seeing the whole picture: the slap and its instantaneous aftermath. What we here can’t see is how the shocking incident instantly turned a shocked public into a shocking online hysterical mob-like mass immediately demanding nothing less than the total destruction of the ‘perpetrator’ -up until then considered a pristine actor -Will Smith.

In other words, because we are too closely immerse in the event, we fail to see something that until recently was considered an abhorrent and dangerous fad, ‘cancel culture’, i.e., being normalized,  taken for granted, and representing the will of a ‘nation united’ in the demand to cancel Will Smith. We don’t talk about dissenting views anymore.

It is possible that the global event is finally losing its effervescence, its capacity to outrage us. It has become now an old joke, so to speak.

But perhaps now is a good (not necessarily safe) time to look back at that global moment before it becomes history (‘cause in this new millennium a week old news is filed in the ‘old history’ cabinet of our memory).

FYI: Although the incident was televised globally, I will use “global” to refer to the ‘unanimous’ reaction to it here in the USA. I have no idea of how the rest of the world reacted to the incident. I have the feeling they have more pressing issues to focus on, though.

Let me advance here my answer to the question in the post’s title.  ‘Cancel culture’ – which is being applied to Will Smith by the public and the media – is more of a clear and present danger to our society than the image of him slapping Chris Rock at the Oscars and only at the Oscars (for had it happen behind the curtains there would have been no public mass-vomiting, figuratively reported by those thoroughly disturbed by the images). The following are the three basic reasons I use to explain my view.

  1. The APPARENT global unanimity in the public’s hysterical reaction to the ‘incident’, acting like a lynching mob after Smith, is a byproduct of cancel culture. By now you ought to have realized that there is no ‘calm and respectful’ discussion in cancel culture turf. The response to Smith’s single act of violence in his whole career (itself discussed at the second part of this post) has been a vitriolic online verbal violence barely hiding the public’s desire to inflict physical violence on the ‘perpetrator’.
  2. Cancel culture is now being used to create a false feeling of solid across-the-board ‘national unity’, of ‘absolute public agreement’ (‘solidarity’ is implied) that has no and will not tolerate dissenting views.  This repressive cancel culture, proudly flaunting ‘national unity’, extends its influence not only to the reactionary nature (and racist too) of the public’s response in the media to “the slap”. It also partially explains the absence of a meaningful anti-war movement in the USA (something never before seen in this nation), leaving this nation’s involvement in the war against Putin undisturbed and without questioning the real interests behind said war. I’m neither defending nor against Putin here: it’s the manipulation of public opinion which unsettles me and to which I’m calling your attention.pro-war propaganda3. Cancel culture is now a political repressive tool in the hands of the owners of our mainstream and ‘social media’ for the benefit of whom else but our oligarchs. Make no mistake: cancel culture is propaganda in the bad meaning of the word, and fascist at that.

Netflix, trans, Chappelle and violence: the ironic human paradox

I read in the New York Times an article about the new controversy related to Netflix protecting Dave Chappelle despite his atrocious pseudo-comedic attacks on just about anyone he feels threatened by, in this case the trans community.

The irony in the whole debate is in the following.

Netflix. It surpassed 200 million subscribers, won 44 Emmys and gave the world “Squid Game,” a South Korean series that became a sensation.

the tech company that revolutionized Hollywood is now in an uproar as employees challenge the executives responsible for its success and accuse the streaming service of facilitating the spread of hate speech and perhaps inciting violence.”

There, right there, “inciting violence”. So you happily and proudly work for a company that successfully sells violence (is there a more violent program than Squid Game”, there are, of course) to a general public  that loves it (including yourself) precisely for its violent content, but then accuse the same company of “inciting violence”.

Humans: don’t know what they want but will go to war for it.

'The Closer' - Why Dave Chappelle's new Netflix special is controversial

Global warming or global spilling?

The Washington Post and all media ‘news’ telling us that global warming is killing the reef corals, but the news come suspiciously in tandem with the news of oil spill in the US.

The way I see it, the ‘global warming’ is a product of capitalism, and the capitalists will continue with their successful propaganda to exempt themselves of the crime of damage to the environment. Not only that, they will succeed in making humanity pay THEM tax for ‘carbon footprint’, while they pay nothing for their crimes.

Unfortunately, these capitalists have learned to use the media (your source of ‘true news’) to convince you that the problem is of your own making, and you will agree to pay more taxes for them to continue their unethical search for profits at the cost of human suffering.

I guess they are right: this problem is of your own making, for you accept their ‘scientific’ explanations and will agree to pay taxes for breathing.


The day I met Shulamith Firestone

This post is from my other blog, Airless Spaces and mental illness, where I discuss my friendship with Shulamith Firestone and problems with the ‘feminist critique’ approach to her and her book.



Firstly, I intend to recount in this post some of my recollections about the first two days I met with Shulamith Firestone. My intention is to give a general picture of a human being (not of a ‘sick woman’) courageously fighting for her mental health , her dignity, and against the psychiatric system; and how she learned to successfully use that system to her advantage (put a peg here.) But some clarifications are necessary before I start this story.

I’m aware that personal stories of surviving mental illness are not valued by some of our intellectual feminists. Even worst, those stories may disqualify you as object of the ‘feminists’ gaze’ and cause you to lose your ‘feminist credentials’, as I have shown with direct quotes in previous posts here. But what do we do with the human courage these feminists are throwing out with the bathwater, where do we put it?  Human courage is found in moments of utmost oppression and despair; are they purposely avoiding the humanistic angle?

Breaking the spirit

Shulamith went through exhausting spirit-breaking periods of sanity and illness: sanity in the 60s-70s; illness in late 70s -80s; then sanity from 1990 to 2005 (more or less), and then illness ending in her death in 2012. And throughout each phase of illness she lost something valuable: all of her art work in one of those phases; her position as leader of the radical movement, and break ups with family and friends in others. But she never stopped fighting for her life nor gave up her political beliefs; you can find them in Airless Spaces, if you would only stop reading it as a scarier female version of ‘The Shinning’.

Those phases show that mental illness is not always or necessarily a continuous illness; there are periods of sanity and relapses. What happens to a person –Shulamith in this case – between them? Do the people in the person’s life stay the same throughout or does the quality of their relationship to the person change with each turn in mental status? How is the way she is depicted by friends and foes influenced by their attitudes and fears of people with mental illness during each changing phase?

To understand Firestone the human being, if that’s what we want, resorting  to prejudice  or the patriarchy’s emotionally detached (because emotions are ‘feminine’) scholarly approach won’t be enough; one needs to go down to the heart of it.

For example, I’m convinced that even a short biographical sketch of this courageous woman will entail more than just collecting memories of people’s encounters with her. These are necessary but not enough for an in-depth understanding of her life because they tell less than half of her story. It requires puttting events in perspective, in relation to how they may have influenced her and she the events. Consider that many people who relate their encounters with Shulamith stop at the point where they found her ‘symptomatic’; at that point there is a common thread in people’s stories. It usually goes like this: that they stepped aside (sometimes literally) when they saw her in the streets because they didn’t know how to interact with her or how to help her or because they were saddened by her condition or even because they were literally afraid of her erratic behaviors. That stepping aside, that evading her is part of the whole picture of Shulamith’s life.  It’s a theme with implications for the emotional ‘status’ of everyone involved. It leaves some of the people with feelings of regret that they couldn’t do something to help her or guilt; for the person been evaded it leaves them with feelings of loneliness and rejection, which could lead in some case to integrating these evading people in their paranoid delusions. I say this because she did talk to me about how in the past she recognized people in the streets and noticed how they avoided her.

None of us live in isolation nor is anyone totally impervious to the subtle messages in human physical interactions, even when we think we have not been seen by the other. Not being there can be a message in itself. It’s not blaming, it’s recognizing that it’s unfair to make the mentally ill carry the burden of stigma when we as a society make their recovery almost impossible with our own lack of skills to interact with them and our fears of them. And then some blame the person for not ‘helping herself’.

That’s why one must confront prejudice and stigma in oneself and in others, so that we can move into actually learning to help them.

Finding Firestone

So, yes, her recovery proved to be temporary (unpeg here), but the true story, in my view, is in that the ‘temporary’ qualification was probably due less to the illness itself and more to what she lost again when everybody around her disappeared as if swept away by the north winds of life. In a social environment that had been mostly uncompassionate towards her and where some of her ‘peers’ were the most vicious offenders, she lost the shield of friendship that had been protecting her for the last 15-20 years of her life.

I myself, her “closer support”,  had to carry my own burden with mental illness and had to suddenly – literally – leave everything to the side, work included, to take care of myself. I could not burden her with the sorry sight of my own struggle. But either way I went, telling her or ‘protecting’ her, the impact on her would have been the same, for I couldn’t be there for her anymore. I did tell her why I was leaving; I’m carrying her response to my grave. Anyway, I thought it would be ‘temporary’, but much to my chagrin, it wasn’t.  Once I started rolling down with depression, I remembered nothing and no one: not family, not job, not lovers, not friends, not myself. I’m still crawling.

First person narrative

Secondly, it’s impossible for me to tell her story without inserting myself in it, for obvious reasons. Thus my own feelings about working with her are part of the story I’m telling, for they were influenced by, and in turn influenced the relationship between her and I.

In my view, the story of the first two days I met with Shulamith in some ways had an impact on the next 10 years of her life. Firstly, it was then when she opened up her door to let other people, not only me, enter her life, people who helped prepare the conditions for her to write again. But more importantly, it was in those two days that, for the first time in many years, she felt safe to take the decision to treat her illness. I was ‘instrumental’, but without the appropriate services and resources I would have had nothing to offer her the first day, and chances are she wouldn’t have accepted me that day. And then again, the services were there but she wouldn’t have accepted them if it weren’t because I offered them with honesty and respect to her dignity. One without the other is not sufficient.

Finally, I waited 23 years to tell this story. I’m 67 years old and I can feel my clock ticking slower. I need to get this experience out of my system ahora before I kick the proverbial bucket. My hope is to motivate some professional writers to write her biography with compassion and dignify her memory.

The Referral

Advocacy and a good advocate required

Shulamith Firestone was referred to Visiting Nurse Services’ Intensive Case Management Program (ICM), where I was working as an ICM (I’m not a nurse), by Beth Israel Hospital’s psychiatric unit sometime in the fall of 1990, I don’t remember the exact date.

The referral described her history of involuntary hospitalizations and “refusal of services”, how once she was ‘stabilized’ she would be discharged but would not accept outpatient services – there were hardly any at that time – only to eventually ‘decompensate’ and be brought back involuntarily. It also described her as “a feminist who wrote “The Dialectic of Sex”.

I remember that our program managers and the psychiatrist who decided  if a referral was accepted were about to determine that she would not be admitted to the program because, they told me, she didn’t have health insurance or SSI ( I don’t recall the exact reason), and because she refuses services. I didn’t recognize her name but I did remember the book title. This fact, that I didn’t recognize her name, goes with my discussion in my post “Prelude to a Controversy” about how to this day she still has no public name recognition.

Anyway, as I recognized the book title my jaw kind of ‘fell to the floor’ in surprise that this woman was having such a horrible life. But more horrifying to me was that the program was about to deny her their services, Yet many clients initially refused services and were discharged if they continued refusing after we tried to ‘engage’ them for a period of time;  most ended up accepting the services. So as I discussed the case with them I argued that it was shameful (or something to that effect) to abandon and deny the wealth of resources our new program had (ICM started in 1989) to this woman who fought for women’s rights, and that she deserved we made an effort to engage her.

The point is that the system was about to fail her and that without advocacy services and a strong advocate chances were she would have remained another NYC’s statistic of ‘underserved’ mentally ill and/or homeless people.

This is the real reason, in my view, why Shulamith was not an ‘appealing’ case for the administrators: because she would not conscientiously follow the psychiatric script as long as it was to oppress her (more on this later); she was a ‘difficult client’ because she knew her human and civil rights and demanded them. She was aware of the politics of power restraining her. You see, most people are unaware that Shulamith was in ‘the system’ been difficult at the time when abuses of patients were been reported almost daily in the media. Let me take a minor detour here to put this in historical context.

Firestone and the New York State Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs’

Abuses of psychiatric patients have been long and continued, for example, they didn’t stop with the Willowbrook Consent Agreement in the 1970s.  The New York Times reported abuses throughout the late 1980s up to 2013 when Governor Cuomo, forced to do something about the abuses, decided to open the ‘fakey-fake’ ‘New York State Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs’ to stop the public outcry. Not surprisingly, today the ‘Justice Center’ has been cited for its inefficiency at protecting these people. The point is that prejudice and abuse have never waned and never will because they are part of what I call the human condition, the ugly things we do to each other since we ‘landed’ on this gorgeous savage planet. It has been part of our social human tradition to cover up or gloss over abuses with ‘new agencies’ created expressly to protect the abusers, politicians, and give the public a fake sense of ‘relief’ so they can say ‘you see, problem solved; what are you talking about, there’s no abuse of people with mental illness.’

The first face-to-face at the hospital

Back to the story, they told me they will keep her if I took the case; I accepted, although I felt inadequate to handle it.

Standing her ground

On my way to the hospital I started to feel anxious about meeting this brilliant woman. What can I possibly talk to her about apart from medication? I can’t even speak proper English, and I’m used to servicing clients at the very bottom of society’s priority, the poor, uneducated, substance abusers and the ‘colored’. I was so intimidated that I decided in my mind that if she accepted the services I would ask for her to be transferred to another ‘more capable’ ICM. So I basically entered the hospital anticipating failure as an ICM.

The attending nurse briefed me about her ‘mental status’. She said that Firestone always refuses services, that she doesn’t speak to any service providers and that I should not expect any ‘cooperation’ from Shulamith. With that information ‘lifting my hopes’, I slowly marched into her room.

The door was half-opened; I knocked. Silence from the other side. I tentatively stepped in and stayed by the door. And there she was: sitting in the bed in a 90 degrees Fowler’s position, hands on her lap, serious as a heart attack. Not too inviting, I must say.

I said “Hi” and introduced myself: name and work information, that she had been referred to us by the hospital. More silence. She didn’t deign look at me; she kept looking straight ahead, but not with a blank stare, not as an ‘escapee’ from reality, like Sam, the hero with bad luck in the last scene of the film ‘Brazil’ who escapes torture by fleeing in his imagination to happiness with his beloved . Her stare was in the present and so was she. There was a human being with a determined attitude – without moving, mind you – communicating me, with her posture, her stare, and with her silence to ‘go away, I don’t acknowledge you.’

As I walked towards her I told her that I knew who she was and that I was sorry that she had been mistreated like this, that she didn’t deserve this treatment (no one deserves it, but those who have done something for others deserve it ‘less’, if you follow my drift). I dared to sit at the chair next to her, without asking for her permission, mind you, but not arrogantly, hoping for a reaction. As I got a closer look at her, I saw the smooth face of a beautiful Jewish woman, who despite all the suffering and age showed not a single wrinkle.

She still was not looking at me. I wondered if it was because of my accent. 🙂  Then I started a 5-15 minutes spiel.

I told her that she didn’t have to go through all this alone; that my program was a new program with a different ‘philosophy’ for servicing people in her situation; that we have resources to help her, for example with rent arrears, help her access social services benefits, even help her get legal services if she was involuntarily hospitalized and wanted legal assistance. I knew that was one of the best things you could offer a person in her situation in those days, legal assistance. It was bound to at least lift an eyebrow, I thought. Nope.

I told her that I am no intellectual feminist but believed in solidarity among women, that I practiced my own idea of feminism. (I never asked her what she thought of that and about my first ‘spiel’. I guess I was afraid to find out.) I told her that I was there not to discuss feminism with her but only to help her get back on her feet to do whatever she wanted to do with her life.


Then I said the words that finally made her talk to me for the very first time:

“I’m here to work for you, not for the program or the hospital.” – said I.

You are fired!” she decreed calmly and coldly.

That’s how I felt when she said that.

It was the most anti-climactic moment ever. You spend 5-10 minutes seriously babbling about helping someone only to have them snap at you “you are fired”. It was not just ‘go away’; those three words packed a punch and you felt it, whether you were a psychiatrist, nurse, social worker; but most badly felt by the hospital orderlies, as I will tell you at the end of this post.

So as I tried to get hold of my senses and not show her she had shaken me. I calmly (and defeated) stood up and told her that I understood if she didn’t want our services but that she was missing on an opportunity for getting her life back together. That if she didn’t feel comfortable with me in particular I could arrange to have another ICM assigned to her. (I wanted her to know she had ‘options’ and the program ‘allowed’ her to make her own decisions.)  I told her that she should consider my offer and that I would return the next day to get her final answer.

As I was ready to leave, I remembered that the nurse had suggested I offer to bring her something, so I did. I asked if there was anything she needed that I could bring her the next day. She said she needed a washcloth.

DING!! At that moment I knew she was in.

She didn’t say anything else to me; those were the only words I got from her the first day: “you are fired” and “I need a washcloth”. And yet, somehow, a bond was established that day.

I left promising to bring her the washcloth.

As I walked out of the building I felt my body was straightened up and I could feel I had one of those annoying ‘winner’ smiles that others usually want to smack right out of your face. She’d listened to me.

To this day I don’t know what made her accept me from day one. Maybe it was the ‘solidarity’ thing. Or maybe she could read my character and sensed that I was been honest. My commitment to stand by her was real, maybe she sensed it.

Or maybe it was the washcloth.

Day two: Consenting for services – a step forward

Next day I showed up as promised. What a difference a day makes: I knocked at the door and she said “come in”.

I gave her the washcloth. Then to ‘business’.

I brought the papers to register her in the program and discussed them with her. She read each leaf carefully and after been satisfied with the terms, she proceeded to calmly signing them.

You see, she had been refusing services not because she was ‘crazy’ and difficult, but because she had been mistreated by a ‘system’ imposing itself on her, and was on her own without trustworthy support to advocate for her. But here she was now signing informed consent papers, by her own will power and volition, and without compulsion. Signing those papers meant that she had fearlessly chosen to treat her illness. I was blown away by her determination under the circumstances.

Even this process was special for me. I never had a client who would take the time to read any papers; I don’t even recall anyone signing any papers. Most of our clients were in such bad shape when they got into the program that just accepting our visits was considered ‘consent for services’. I don’t remember all the questions she asked me, but how to terminate services was one of them.

Maybe in part because the medications were starting to work, she was more open to me that day. She asked me about myself and I obliged.

It is a rule in social work not to discuss your personal life with the ‘client’. I always took that rule as a ‘recommendation’. Social work is the ‘art’ of understanding human emotional needs and facilitating conditions for people to change for the better. Putting a ‘professional’ barrier between the worker and the client is the best way to instill distrust, if that’s what you are after. One has to learn to be generous in sharing one’s life with clients, keeping a clear line between the ‘too much information’ and the necessary to convey openness and familiarity. At least that’s my ‘theory’. If someone is going to include you in their delusions, it will happen whether you disclose or not, as she did include me in her first ‘decompensation’ after she was in the program.

I in turn asked her about hers; and she obliged too. I didn’t expect her to be so open so soon after all the stories about her keeping her mouth hermetically shut for service providers. The stories she told me that day were heartbreaking. She told me about hospitalization and mental breakdowns, described some of the horrible delusions – she was aware she was describing delusions – how she fought back forced psychiatric commitment; everything with a touch of emotional detachment, as if she was talking about something that happened to her years ago. I could feel her sadness, though. It felt as when one relates a story just to say ‘I can’t believe this shit happened to me’.

The fact that she was aware that she had delusions makes for living life in constant fear that they will return. Think about it, you happy people out there.

Then we started to talk about her discharge.

The keys to her kingdom

This is probably the most outstanding moment for me in the whole story, that on the second visit she handed me the keys to her apartment. We were discussing what was needed for her discharge, including that she wouldn’t be discharged if she continued refusing services. Taking the meds was indispensable for a discharge plan. We discussed outpatient services to prevent relapses and forced hospitalization. We discussed how she recognized when symptoms were returning in order to control them; we discussed what I was supposed to do as part of my job, which I could not neglect if I wanted to help her, for the resources I needed for her where in their hands.

We also discussed her psychiatrist at the hospital. She said she trusted her, and we agreed I would coordinate services with her and Dr. Fraser, the psychiatrist.

We discussed her apartment. She said it was in disrepair because she had carved the walls looking for hidden cameras – she said this with one of those smiles, like ‘I know I know’. I told her that with her consent, I could talk to the landlord and have it fixed, and I could request funds from the program to buy any furniture she needed. But no matter what, she had to wait in the hospital until the apartment was repaired. She agreed and gave me the keys to her apartment to let the landlord in and to do whatever I thought needed to be done there.

If that is not the biggest sign of trust, I don’t know what is.

I will discuss her discharge in the next post.

The true meaning ofYou are fired

When Shulamith Firestone looks at you in the eye and tells you “you are fired”, you feel your head spinning and hear yourself in your mind mumbling ‘but but but’. It was powerful! Check her Forced shower story in Airless Spaces, the orderlies got furious at her for it and basically assaulted her. Firestone was no passive patient; she knew how to irk you. There’s a hidden psychological reaction to being told “you are fired”, even by this person who can’t fire you: you know you have been ‘evaluated’, and negatively at that. All those years in hospitals she was been told ‘I work for you’ but the promises were seldom fulfilled and, instead, she was constantly abused and humiliated. So she told you what she thought of your ‘benevolence’: ‘if you work for me that means I’m your boss, so I’m firing you for incompetency and abusive treatment’. That’s why she “fired” me, because she had heard the “I work for you” before and expected nothing from the promise but more abuse.

This is my humanistic interpretation of Firestone famous “you are fired”. You can take the psychiatric or psychological interpretation, which usually deals with theories of Freudian ‘complexes’ of superiority. To me, saying “you are fired” after having been abused under the promise of ‘helping you’ makes more sense: it’s a rational and psychological, if ineffective, form of self-defense. Your choice.


“Feminists’ zugzwang” in Airless Spaces and mental illness

This post is from my blog about my friendship with Shulamith Firestone, Airless Spaces and mental illness.

The link to the post is here.

The reason I’m ‘picking’ on feminists of academia: Feminist zugzwang

Zugzwang = compulsion to move even though your position will be worsened.

Women enter academia to play the patriarchy’s capitalist game of intellectual elitism. (Don’t get me wrong, I would like to be one too.) In general, academia represents and produces patriarchy’s and capitalist’s intellectual elite. I hope we can agree on this simple statement. It is not a secret that this academia is not particularly friendly to women, even less to feminists, and even less to radical feminists.

But feminists still want to climb that Ivory tower. That’s probably because there’s no other place for them to go, there being no ‘matriarchal academia’ to produce an intellectual feminist elite to protect women’s interests.

So those entering academia know that, once inside, they are obligated to play by the patriarchy’s rules of the game. One of the rules is ‘no Shulamith Firestone’s radical ‘Dialectic of Sex’ allowed and no ‘anti-men’ moves.

We know the story: capitalist men got spooked by the powerful ‘The Dialectic of Sex’ (Dialectic) and the radical women’s movement of the 1970s and unleashed hell on these women. The media ridiculed, vilified and labeled them as ‘mad women’, and academia did its part by providing the intellectual arguments necessary to discredit the theory and the author of Dialectic. They made leftist and radical feminism a no-no.

Thus since then no one wants to be associated with those ‘mad-anti-men women’, not even feminists, least of all our young feminists of the 3rd and 4th wave – so distant from those historical events and so determined to delete that history as to not understand the what, how and why they happened.

But despite the backlash, Dialectic remains the most radical book in feminist history in the USA, and the 1970s the most radical moment in the history of feminism after the first wave.

Zugzwang here.

The consequences of discrediting all this history of radical feminists of the 70s for today’s feminists of academia is that, per the patriarchy’s rule of academia, you can’t move to the left of Dialectic or to the left of the 1970s, you can only move to the right of those two historical markers, even if you just want to take a step to the ‘center’. And that’s what I call feminists’ zugzwang: a compulsion to move even though your position will be worsened.

This situation partly explains why feminism continues to lose ground, despite the mirage of the #MeToo movement. The feminists of the 3rd and 4th waves have been forced to move so far to the right of Dialectic and the 70s movement as to fairly be considered a ‘one giant leap for patriarchy’ movement.

“’[Third-wave feminism] presumes that women can handle the tools of patriarchy and don’t need to be shielded from them’, explains Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards in the iir third-wave text,’

‘it doesn’t mean man-hating or being humorless!’

‘Third-wave feminism’ has come to stand for a feminism defined primarily in opposition to its historic precedents, a departure from a certain kind of feminism –a feminism that does nt account in a meaningful way for some women’s desires for sex, subordination and (sometimes) sex that is subordinating.’”

All three quotes above cited in  The Third Wave’s Break from Feminism Bridget J. Crawford, Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University

This is why, if I come across here as too harsh against feminists of academia, it is only to call their attention to the consequences of what their are doing up there.


I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the capitalist patriarchy for successfully brainwashing the feminists into doing the work for them, destroying feminism from inside out, i.e.

Feminists’ zugzwang – Airless Spaces and mental illness

Feminists swerve to the right to enjoy a spanking (their own words) – Airless Spaces and mental illness

This post is from my other blog, Airless Spaces and mental illness, where I discuss my friendship with Shulamith Firestone.

Feminists swerve to the right to enjoy a spanking (their own words) – Airless Spaces and mental illness

“asserts the right to enjoy a spanking without risk of subordination”

“the pleasures of sexual intercourse for hire”

Second wave feminism “doesn’t account for some women’s desires for…subordination, and (sometimes) sex that is subordinating”

All quotes cited in Bridget J. Crawford’s  The Third Wave’s Break from Feminism

It is an undoubtably fact that the new feminists’ (3rd and 4th waves, i.e.) project is the destruction of the history of the radical movement of the 60s -70s. They may use more subtle expressions like “breaking away”, ‘doing away with’  or more optimistic phrases like ‘moving away from the past and into the future’, but the outcome is the same. And some of their phrases are more aggressive and violent in nature. I left a partial list at the end of this post.

When these new feminists speak about ‘breaking away” from the old feminism/feminists, they don’t mean breaking away from feminism as defined by the patriarchy. Nope. Read their descriptions of the deadly sins of the 1970s radical movement; it reads like a list handed down to them by the same patriarchy that back in the 70s used those same ‘sins’ against the radicals to weaken and defeat them. There is continuity in the patriarchy’s path of destruction of women who don’t submit to him. CONTINUE READING HERE

Is he truly gone, Mr. T, i.e.?

I guess all of my predictions about T…p staying in power will not come to be, although the electoral college has the last and only word that matters, coming on Dec 14, I think. There’s always a chance for a last minute coup, I mean, surprise.

The struggle continues with Biden filling his cabinet with conservatives. Did you ever consider that you were voting to give MORE power to the GOP? They actually won the elections, dems lost seats, so the idea of the losers “sharing power” with the winners is beyond ridiculous: it’s a soft-coup.

Please, don’t be passive citizens. Biden needs to be forced to stop seating conservatives who hate us and will not look for your interest.

Commenting the news: “Giuliani returns to Ukraine, signals apparent disregard for inquiry”

Today’s headline news at the WaPo is that, with his visit to Ukraine…

Current and former officials in Washington expressed astonishment at how President Trump’s private attorney — apparently on his behalf — seemed to be mocking investigators,”
Giuliani returns to Ukraine, signals apparent disregard for inquiry

Look people, Trump is going nowhere, he will survive the impeachment proceedings and will be re-appointed to the presidency by a slew of grateful men that includes:

  • the billionaires to whom he has given trillions in tax cuts
  • the billionaires who own the warmongering armament industries who have
    also received billions in contracts via the money given to the Pentagon to play
  • the ‘tech giants’ who have benefited from the two above
  • Jeff Bezos who is trying to buy Trump’s good mood to get the billions of dollars in contracts for war ‘games’ technology. Bezos gives Trump ‘good image’ via his mass propaganda media tool, The WaPo, by asserting, e.g., that there has been recently an increase in jobs, when Jeff knows it is a lie. Propaganda functions by presenting the ‘good’ after boring you with the usual Trump’s ‘antics’ which are dismissed precisely because they are presented as ‘antics’, not as the actions agreed upon with billionaires through behind-the-doors lobbying with him. That’s why Trump’s decisions benefit the billionaires and  not ‘we the people’, in case you haven’t noticed.

Trump is staying there. While the Dems wasted their time this four years, thanks to Pelosi, instead of impeaching him immediately, Trump has been appointing judges up and down that will help him stay in power. If you think that SCOTUS will stand for the people and support the Dems in their impeachment proceedings, you are politically blind.

And the crown of the whole chimichanga: PUTIN.

Yeap. He is ready to steal our elections, again.

And THAT’S why “Giuliani returns to Ukraine, signals apparent disregard for inquiry“: because he knows that Trump is safe in the WH. And Jeff Bezos et al billionaires know it too and are very happy.

If you had the power to name the president, would you name one that gives you money and takes it from the people and gives it to you, or one that will let the people keep theirs and make you pay your fair share of taxes?

Not even Putin is willing to put support someone who is pro-proletarians.

The working class is alone (politically speaking), and adrift, with no help from the politicians they elect.

History of Male Violence: From the Rape of the Sabine women to today

(WARNING: Photos below may be disturbing to some people.)

Some feminists today feel their heads spinning out of control every time they hear men talking about women or behaving towards women in this new and ultra-mobile 21st century of the 3rd millennium CE as a caveman from 100,000 years ago would. Not me; I don’t get discombobulated like that anymore. Why is that? Because, after reading some classic history books, I’ve stopped looking at today’s men as the pigs they resemble and emulate, and more as the perennially most imperfect, brutish and mindless half of the human race.  If one wants to move this human race/society away from its drive to self-destruct, one has to look at men, not in any of their ‘patriarchal’, ‘capitalist pig’ or religious douche personifications, but as humans. As irritating and taxing as this ‘project’ may sound, we need to see them as humans, for it is our (men and women’s) inability to manage our human condition the cause of ALL of our problems as individuals, as citizens and as a society.

Our problems with men violence today are not the product of capitalism, or communism, or liberalism. This violence has been here since ‘day one’ of humans on this planet because EXISTENCE IN THIS PLANET IS CHARACTERIZED BY ‘VIOLENCE’. Everything that lives here depends on the OUTSIDE of itself to survive: without food there is no life, and to feed, all animals, including us, must kill. Humans, as a species, contrary to ‘inferior’ animals, have NEVER stopped migrating, for whatever reasons – economic, environmental, wars…It’s a human thing, but we go through periods of killing each other for migrating, whether by choice or forced to, as if it was something we can stop doing (migrating, i.e.). As many migrating birds, we can’t stop continuously moving around the planet, even less now with our mobile technology that facilitates travel.

Sandhill Cranes breed in Alaska, Canada and Russia, migrating to wetlands and meadows of southern USA and Mexico for the winter (Leslie Reagan)

Early modern human migrations based on the distribution of mitochondrial haplogroups.[!!]









Image result for crisis of human migration

Roots of the Migration Crisis Aptly titled “World at War,” the U.N. report names wars and persecution as the drivers of forced displacement. https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/The-Making-of-the-Migration-Crisis-20150619-0019.html

But we can stop forcing masses of people to migrate by stopping our wars for profits. What does it take to agree to stop forcing masses of people to migrate? It’s doable, you know.

The difference between humans and animals, well, we all know it: We are the only animals capable of inventing TGIF.

I think that when one puts in perspective men’s history, it becomes clear that our next frontier is not interplanetary travel (where we are doomed to bring with us our historical murderous colonizing tendencies to other planets) or creating invincible robots-thinking-and-behaving-like-men (now THAT’S scary). Our next frontier is human moral psychology, our mind: to understand that we can raise above what moves everything on this planet , our bodies dependence on the environment, i.e. Life is about attaining the desirable and avoiding the undesirable: those are the two main objectives of our empirical lives on earth, and the two OBJECTS we deal with: desirable and undesirable objects. How we define the ‘desirable and the undesirable’ is part of the task of human moral psychology. Humans have a particular advantage over the rest of the animals here: I think it was Evelyn Reed who coined the term “biology is not destiny” in the 1970s. We humans share an invisible gift by nature: MORALITY. Without it we are just pigs.

We need to observe the recurrence of the same mistakes and behaviors throughout history and understand that to correct them we need to have a change IN ATTITUDE towards our humanity. Or not. In which case there is really NO HOPE for this humanity: perpetually living in a state of greed for power and victimizing each other like mindless animals.

Humans themselves, LET ALONE MEN, have not changed an iota since the day they somehow showed up on this dialectical planet, around 1.8 million years ago. Every deplorable thing men did in, let’s say, 750 BC they are STILL doing it, in the exact fashion, three thousand years later; the only thing that has changed is the TECHNOLOGY they use.

Every barbarian clan (men) around the globe, from early human migrations (east to west and west to east, north to south and south to north) to antiquity (from 750 BC to early pre-medieval barbarians invasions), plundered and then massacred the civilians – women and children – of the cities they invaded, every clan without exception, including the Romans from the first day they invaded Gaul (“Pax Romana”). Women and girls, of course, got the privilege of been raped before getting cut to pieces by these men, or sold as (sex) slaves. Also, in antiquity it was a tradition to sell the civilians of entire cities into slavery, and to demand hostages – the valuable elite of the cities; and forced them out of their cities en mass. But not all men participated willingly, something I intend to discuss in an upcoming post.

Nothing has changed. Neither capitalism nor communism will change it, for they are both based on male violence; we’ve seen it, haven’t we.

We need to start the conversation with the good men out there to get THEM to challenge the other men who think like cavemen. The way we are going is taking us nowhere. We need to start with our sense of morals.


Image result for RAPE OF THE SABINE

Rape (abduction) of the Sabine women. Per Livy’s history, it is clear that they were abducted as sexual slaves. Romulus knew there were not enough men to keep the new town, Rome, alive for one generation. He built the city with a few homeless and rejects from nearby towns. there were few men and they needed women to ‘reproduce’ themselves.  The homeless got lucky, didn’t they?

Abduction and rape of women and children in our new millennium, not to “build towns”. These are sexual slaves too, but they get ‘discarded’ (assassinated) after having been tortured.







Image result for boko haram girls

Abduction and rape of women and girls. “Boko Haram Appears to Be Using Abducted Girls as Suicide Bombers: Experts” That AFTER having been sexually assaulted.

Genocides and massacres









Image result for my lai massacre photos

My Lai massacre in Vietnam

Taking a city.











US taking Vietnam.









Image result for . https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-crisis-the-picture-that-shows-the-true-extent-of-the-devastation-inside-palestinian-refugee-9154455.html

A picture showing thousands of refugees queueing for aid has emerged exposing the shocking conditions endured by 20,000 people trapped inside a devastated Palestinian camp in Syria. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-crisis-the-picture-that-shows-the-true-extent-of-the-devastation-inside-palestinian-refugee-9154455.html

Image result for concentration camps

Adam Schiff is No Friend of Progressives, says Alt Right Counterpunch

You can easily recognize Alt-right-pro-Trump pseudo-leftist websites by their lack of articles criticizing Trump but filled with attacks on Democrats. Counterpunch is one of them; I’ve been saying this since the 2016 elections. It is more evident now during the Trump ‘impeachment’ crisis.

I choose this article, Adam Schiff is No Friend of Progressives, because it’s an example of an in-your-face collaboration of Trump’s millionaire supporters with the pseudo-leftists. I mean, the timing of the article alone is exquisite. How can anyone fail to see that attacking Schiff NOW is a plot to support Trump? Is there any other possible outcome, in terms of managing public opinion, than leading you to see Schiff as a perennial liar and thus weakening his accusations against Trump? They never before attacked Schiff. Why now? I know, you are convinced that Howie Klein, the only source for ‘proving’ that Schiff is an ‘enemy’ of progressives, is a ‘progressive’. Ah, propaganda, the tool of the millionaires/billionaires; it works miracles on their disappearing-middle-class admires.

Forget for a moment that these people consider the Democrats a bigger enemy of ‘the working class’ than Trump and the GOP. Is this the reason why Howie Klein’s Blue America Pac spends no money at all attacking Republicans, but spends more money attacking Democrats than money supporting them, as I show below?

Yes, Howie has made a ton of money in the music industry, and has been using it to attack the Democratic Party, not Trump.  Klein is a millionaire; the poor things have trouble putting their money into public campaigns to seriously and effectively attacking the man that signs presidential edicts to give trillions of dollars in tax break to them. Nope. Instead they are putting your donations into propaganda against the whole Democratic Party. Picking a few ‘candidates’ they know have no chance to win to pretend they are progressives is the oldest trick in politics.

If Howie and the other pseudo-leftists were truly for the progressives, he wouldn’t have used your money to defeat the progressives who wanted to defeat Trump in the 2016 elections. The excuse then was that Hillary Clinton is worse than Trump because she ‘hates’ Putin, and Trump is better because he loves Putin. Don’t tell you don’t see irony there. The love for Putin has been the only card these billionaires/millionaires have been showing you to get you to hate the Dems trying to impeach Trump for colluding with Putin against YOU in 2016. Heck, you should thank Trump and Putin for violating your nation to get that nasty woman out of your way. Yeah, they DO think like that.

That’s why they continue TODAY feeding you propaganda against ALL the Democratic Party. These pseudo-leftists know that dividing the dems will guarantee Trump winning the next elections.

Per OpenSecrets website this is how Howie’s Blue America Pact used their money in the 2017-18 cycle:

Total Independent Expenditures: $17,197
For Democrats: $6,197
Against Democrats: $11,000
For Republicans: $0
Against Republicans: $0

Pardon me if that means nothing to you. It means a lot to me for I understand the deception and amorality that is politics. If you spend MORE money “against” the Democratic Party and ZERO attacking the Republicans…um…yeah, I’m speechless. There is only ONE possible outcome: defeat of the dems. And of course, those monies reported there are just for government reporting purposes, you know its much more money than that, unless they are taking that money and distributing it among themselves. I have been checking their financial activities online and must say, am no expert but it sure doesn’t look kosher to me. My humble opinion, not a statement or accusation.

I don’t trust millionaire ‘Marxists’ or ”leftists’.  For them too it’s all about protecting their millions. Any doubts in your minds about that? Will Howie willingly pay more taxes and help you get music at lower prices??? Nah. I’m not a democrat, am a Progressive. I vote democratic only because there is no alternative against the GOP. I know many Dems are corrupt too, and I don’t vote for them. But attacking ONLY the dems is a sure way of making America a one-party nation in favor of the GOP. The day the leftists present an honest alternative, not one picked by pseudo-leftist millionaires, I’ll vote for he or she. But lying, using the media to deceive the public makes them as dangerous as the GOP.

Whenever you see millionaires/billionaires not-putting-their-own-money in campaigns against the dems, prick up your ears: listen for the lies they serve you intended to keeping them on top of you.

Wolves in sheep clothing.


The Greenland Syndrome: Trump and the billionaire class search for paradise

So Trump-the-snake wants to buy Greenland? (In Buddhism, the snake is the symbol of the poisonous personality trait of anger: it bites and poisons the self and the people who becomes the object of our anger and hatred.) Sure we all reacted first with typical dismissiviness of his words.

Nothing that this amoral human being says or does comes out of the blue. Maybe when he was not in the White House we could have dismissed his idea as inconsequential to us. What possible reason could he have had to buy the island other than personal greed, as a real-estate transaction?  But now he commands in his hands the powers of a nation’s politics and economy, and the owners of the nation’s media are  in a behind-the curtains relationship with him. We all know by now that Trump has no other interests than his personal ones; we all know by now that the idea that he is doing any policy (foreign or national) for the benefit of the PEOPLE of the USA is the idea of idiots and/or dishonest right-wingers.

So, please, put the idea that Trump is pursuing some sort of geographical battle with China in your trash can. The only reason he would do that is if he gets big under-the-table checks and stocks from the military vultures for him to approve their arms-and-debt money making interests. He just gave the ‘Pentagon’ a trillion dollars: that’s money for the armament companies CEOs and he gets a chunk of that under the table. What? You think he gives money away for free to anyone, even if it is not his money?

More in keeping with his scum-bag nature is the idea that the elite gods ruling over us are pursuing their dream to acquire, by deceit, islands around the globe because they are afraid the service is growing restless, and it’s time for them to live totally away from the rest of humanity. They must have approached him with the idea of facilitating the grabbing (he loves that) of the island for them. He has been very good at giving them what they want. So don’t go on thinking that this is just another instance of Trump idiocy. Really, the only ‘idiots’ here are the people who keep thinking he is an idiot.

PUERTOPIANS and the Libertarians’ Utopia

For at least the last 30 years the billionaire class (tech companies CEOs, cryptocurrency, Wall Street CEOs, casinos moguls, among others) has been running out of land on which to walk without bumping into the service – the rest of us, i.e. How many times have you bumped into, let’s say, Jeff Bezos while buying your groceries at Whole Food; or seen him searching for his seat in a movie theater, or waiting in line to eat at the trendiest new restaurant in your area? The chances of you bumping into any of them is basically zero, nada.

These men relate to us as gods; they are way up there in their castles, they don’t move around near the rest of us. They DON’T want to be around us, we are to them only a wallet: we carry the money they take from our pockets every day without us complaining. You don’t seriously complain to god, do you? Your relation to god, if any, is one of submissiveness. Your relation to the billionaire class is also one of submissiveness.

So for many years they have been looking for real estate to plant their castles away from us, own them so that we can’t go near them. They have discovered Puerto Rico as their newest possible paradise. I give you a few links for you to corroborate this.

Making a Crypto Utopia in Puerto Rico

The Battle for Paradise

Silicon Valley Is Letting Go of Its Techie Island Fantasies

Trump’s interest in Greenland is the interest of the billionaire class looking for their own paradise. They want the moon, literally, to plant themselves there away from us.

So really, the talk about Greenland is not about problems with China. It’s about grabbing paradise and evicting everyone else from it, just as God did to the two losers who followed the snake.

There’s a lesson for you to learn, people.


Image result for the battle for paradise

You HAVE to read this book.


New Caribbean geographic command and new Psy ops in Puerto Rico: a new COINTELPRO?

The huge march in Puerto Rico against the now kicked-out governor Roselló was on Monday, July 22; on Tuesday the 23rd the US Congress announced the immediate release of some of the food stamps ‘owed’ to the island as emergency relief after the huracán. The new governor of the island, Wanda Vazquez Garced, was sworn in on August 7, and on the 8th the US Military announced in the island’s main newspaper (rag), El Nuevo Dia (but nowhere else in English), that it has named Brigadier General Jeffrey W. Jurasek in charge of the newly created Caribbean geographic command now located in Puerto Rico. Interestingly enough,

Jurasek fue nombrado al cargo hace unos días, [“Jurasek was assigned to the job a few days ago’]

meaning that he was brought in a few days after the march and during the ongoing crisis in the island. This is no coincidence.

This article was next to the one announcing the new governor of the island, Wanda Vazquez Garced. That relevant was this announcement.

The first action, releasing the food stamps, was meant as a non-violent pacifier to the islanders; the second, naming this guy, is a veiled warning to the islanders that the US will not tolerate any more disruptions of their interests there by the people. Anyone who believes that the US sends any arm of its military complex to Puerto Rico, or to any other place around the globe for that matter, to ‘help the people’ is a poor delusional human being. The main value of Puerto Rico to the USA is, one, to pay the unpayable debt and, two, be a geographic point from which to train and ship soldiers specialized in psy ops around the globe.

First, that guy, Jurasek (park?), is up to his eyebrows with ‘helping experience’ in Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and even in Bosnia. What kind of help was he and the US military giving ‘for free and unselfishly’ to these nations? Easy to guess.

You see, what El Nuevo Dia rag doesn’t tell you when it says that Jurasek comes from having been in charge of the “comando 352 de Asuntos Civiles” (“Civil Affairs Command”) is the whole name of said command:

United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command

(Highlight by me.) After reading what this branch specializes on, I call it ‘legal COINTELPRO‘.

I give you these excerpts on this topic:

Used during peacetime, contingencies and declared war, these activities [psychological operations] are not forms of force, but are force multipliers that use nonviolent means in often violent environments. Persuading rather than compelling physically, they rely on logic, fear, desire, or other mental factors to promote specific emotions, attitudes, or behaviors. The ultimate objective of U.S. military psychological operations is to convince enemy, neutral, and friendly nations and forces to take action favorable to the U.S. and its allies.United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command

Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”
Psychological operations (United States)

Within the United States Army, reserve civil affairs units are administered through United States Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (Airborne), or USACAPOC(A), a subordinate of U.S. Army Reserve Command. USACAPOC(A) contains Psychological Operations (PO) and Civil Affairs (CA) units, consisting of Army Reserve elements.Civil affairs

Among the areas in which Jurasek has helped around the globe, Bosnia and Honduras, e.g., is popular elections, voting. That ought to tell you a lot. Is it to help the people elect democratic governments? Nah, you silly thing.

Civil-Military Operations (CMO). CMO are the activities performed by military forces to establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relationships between military forces and indigenous populations and institutions (IPI). CMO support US objectives for host nation(HN) and regional stability.Civil Military Operations pdf

That’s right: US objectives, not the native‘s (“indigenous”) interests. It includes infiltrating ‘indigenous’ political and cultural groups to “exploit relationships” and “to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

My point is this:

The US military is in charge, behind the curtain, of running the government of the Puerto Rico. Through the “Civil Affairs” branch, they will be telling the new governor what to do and how to handle the “threat” to “their interests” personified in the people’s democratic mass movement against the cut-throat fiscal impositions on the working class to pay the un-payable debt. The island is a colony, the governor has to follow the orders from the military and US Congress. And they don’t want any more marches and threats to their order. They will infiltrate the groups forming the people’s front, the women’s and the LGBT organizations to divide and conquer. That’s their psy ops, which always work for them.


This “new” command is there for two reasons: to prepare the soldiers who will be deployed in Latin America and Puerto Rico to quash violently and surreptitiously with psy ops the  people’s movement, and to continue to deploy around the world. Interestingly enough, again, these two news were released recently:

The first “training” announced the day following the swearing in of the new governor is a psychological training on, above all things, “applied” “suicide prevention”. How is this a priority in these political times? I expect a lot of ‘suicides’ in the ranks of political adversaries in Puerto Rico and Latin America. Maybe Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide was a ‘test’ by the Caribbean command. https://www.facebook.com/pg/1stmsc/posts/

And then this one:

Caribbean Geographic Command starts off the year with a deployment to Afghanistan

Courtesy Story
1st Mission Support Command
Subscribe 10

FORT BUCHANAN, PR- Approximately fifty Soldiers from the 166th Regional Support Group (RSG), U.S. Army Reserve-Puerto Rico, departed from the Luis Muñoz Marin International Airport, Jan 1, with Afghanistan as final destination.

If I were a social scientist in Puerto Rico, I would keep an eye on the statistics of suicides in the island since January 2019, and on suicides by active soldiers. These psy ops ‘trainings’  historically have tended to be tested on soldiers themselves and in the general population.

If the food stamps are not enough to calm the people (it worked in the early 1970s to diffuse the threat of possible victory of the pro independence party in the elections due to US induced poverty in the island), then any organized and pacific actions by the people will be violently repressed by the military police and the Civil Command.

I’m not too optimistic about the future there. The US has put itself, with the debt, in a dead-end situation, as discussed in my previous two posts about Puerto Rico. It can’t blame the chaos in the island to the communists, as it usually did. Clearly the problem is the colonial status of the island. Will the US move to give the statehood, which I doubt; or the independence?

Something has to give.

The future of Puerto Rico is in Promesa

What is Promesa but an eviction notice from Wall Street (WS) to the Puerto Ricans?

The WS sharks own us and our island. Period.

As such, our politicians and governor must obey WS/Promesa orders. Who do you think cut Roselló’s head? Why do you think he was left hanging to dry like a wet dirty rag?

In the answer to those two questions is the key to the future of Puerto Rico, at least as I see it, of course. I discuss this below.


As I said on my previous post, Roselló was been chased by both the WS mafia and the furious people of Puerto Rico. I gave as evidence that WS had judged him and found him guilty of insubordination the article at the Wall Street Journal, the official voice of WS’s CEOs, written by the WSJ editor board, June 25. The subtitle of the article headline says it all:

Puerto Rico’s political melt down: The island needs leaders who will work with the federal control board

For those of you who enjoy deconstructing written material, I propose that the phrase ” who will work” implies that Roselló was not working with the board, and that’s the reason that the island is in a political melt down, because WS/Promesa can’t find a ‘leader’ willing to obey their orders to the t. That is in the article.

Had Wall Street been satisfied with Roselló, they wouldn’t have ridiculed him in the American media. Even billionaire Murdoch, owner of Fox and and big WS gambler, trashed him.


Accepting the reality that Roselló was kicked out by the combined action of WS and the furious people may be of help to the boricuas to get ready to the next phase of this struggle: defining the political status of the island. This phase will be accelerated by WS/Promesa as a consequence of the impossible position in which they had put themselves and the people of Puerto Rico.


In so many years the Americans in Puerto Rico, only on two or three occasions were they near to lose the island to the independentistas. The last time was in the late 60s when the pro-independence party, el PIP, almost win the elections. To prevent this ‘almost’ from happening again, the US sent the food stamps to the island, and that took care of it.  And yet, the US could hide the colonial status of the island to the world by simply claiming that the problems in the island were caused by a handful of  communists.

But today’s political melt down in the island can’t be blamed on the communists: the colony is almost naked with Promesa.

The economic and political conditions imposed by WS on the island can be tolerated by NO NATION or people. But WS’ sharks disagree with me. They say that the people must follow their conditions as dictated by them in Promesa. Their capitalist arrogance will lead them to their own crossing of the Rubricon in Puerto Rico.

Any governor of the island, elected or not (from either of the two main parties) must obey WS/Promesa or have his/her chopped off, like Roselló. Even if the candidate has good moral intentions to protect the people, it can only be done by disobeying cut-throat Promesa’s rules. If the future governor obeys WS, the people will mince him or her; if obeys the people, WS will be doing the mincing.

There’s no exit: calle sin salida. 

The US and WS can’t be putting and removing governors in the island as it pleases them; it’s bad optic. The only way of doing it is by manipulating public opinion using the newspapers, TV, Youtube, social media…just as they did with Roselló.

So you can expect a public war against the women in the island, for they are truly at the head of the movement. They should be ready to engage, for the war is for sure. And don’t expect a peaceful treatment by the police. I expect blood in the streets of San Juan. WS controlled the cops in the island during the marches to let the people do their part. But don’t expect that to happen again.

Another unforeseen problem for WS: the people of Puerto Rico have become heroes worldwide. Manipulating the people’s emotion with the intention of making sure Roselló would not be reelected had the surprise consequence of the people saying NOW, not later to kicking him. Now it will be more difficult for WS media to denigrate the people of Puerto Rico, not impossible, but not as easy as it has been up to now.

When Promesa shows its teeth, the world will understand that the problem here is the colonial status of the island. That debt can’t be paid; the colony can’t be repaired; it’s not the ‘communists’. It’s the colony, stupid.

The people will find themselves in a dead end street. They will be forced to make a decision about the status. Only and independentista in the government can force the status issue because independentistas are not looking to patch the colony nor will allow WS/Promesa to take our nation.

There’s no other choice for us.





El futuro de Puerto Rico está en Promesa

Qué es Promesa si no el aviso de desalojo (eviction notice) de Wall Street (WS) a los puertorriqueños.

Los tiburones de WS son nuestros dueños, punto.

Y como tales, nuestros gobernantes tienen que obedecer las ordenes de WS/Promesa. ¿Quién creen ustedes que le cortó la cabeza a Roselló? ¿Por qué creen ustedes que a Roselló lo guindaron a secar como trapo sucio?

En la respuesta a esas dos preguntas está la clave a nuestro futuro politico, según yo, claro está.  Presento esto para su consideración.


Como dije en mi post anterior, a Roselló lo estában velando ambos: la mafia de WS y el pueblo encangrinao de Puerto Rico. Puse como evidencia de que WS lo había enjuiciado y encontrado culpable de insubordinación el artículo en el Wall Street Journal (WSJ), el vocero oficial de los tiburones de WS, escrito por los editores del periódico, fechado el 25 de julio. El subtítulo lo dice todo (mi traducción literal):

¨Puerto Rico se funde políticamente: la isla necesita líderes dispuestos a trabajar con la junta de supervisión¨ (The island needs leaders who will work with the federal control board.)

Para los que gustan de practicar ´deconstrucción´ y ´paratext´ de lo escrito: la frase ´who will work´ implica que Roselló era un líder que NO estába dispuesto a trabajar con Promesa/WS, y por eso es que la isla está ´fundiendose´ políticamente, porque Promesa/WS no encuentra un líder que obedezca al pie de la letra las ordenes de los tiburones. Eso está en el contenido del artículo.

Aceptar la realidad de que Roselló fue expulsado por la acción COMBINADA de WS y el pueblo de Puerto Rico puede ayudar al pueblo a preparar la próxima fase de ésta lucha: la definición del estatus político de la isla, la cual será acelerada por WS/Promesa como consecuencia de la encerrona en la que ellos se han puesto a sí mismos y al pueblo de Puerto Rico.


En tantos años los Americanos en Puerto Rico, solo en dos o tres ocasiones se vieron ellos a punto de perder la isla a manos de los independentistas. La última fue en los 1960s cuando el PIP por poco gana las elecciones, pero los tiburones soltaron por vez primera los cupones de alimentos y ahí quedó todo. Aún así, el estatus colonial de la isla podía ser escondido bajo el manto de ´son los comunistas causando problemas´.  Pero ese FUNDIRSE  Puerto Rico políticamente hoy NO puede ser atribuído a los comunistas: la colonia está casi desnuda con Promesa.

Las condiciones económicas y políticas impuestas a la isla por WS no la pueden tolerar ningúna nación. Pero los tiburones de WS dicen que sí, que los puertorriqueños TIENEN que aceptar esas condiciones tal y como están escritas. La intransigencia y arrogancia de los capitalistas  va a ser la barca en la cual van a cruzar el Rubricón boricua.

Cualquier político boricua electo o no (Popular o PNP), tiene que obedecer a WS. Incluso si uno de ellos tiene la intención honesta de proteger al pueblo, eso solo se puede hacer desobedeciendo las medidas económicas opresivas; sencillamente, no hay otra manera. Si obedece a WS, el pueblo le va a cortar la cabeza. Eso es de ahí. Y si se pone del lado del pueblo, WS le corta la cabeza.

Es una encerrona.

Los Americanos no pueden descabezar la isla políticamente abiertamente, quitando y poniendo gobernadores, porque es terrible para su imagen internacional. Solo pueden hacerlo por manipuleo de la opinión pública. Para eso está la prensa, TV, Youtube, social media…como hicieron con Roselló.

Esperen una guerra pública contra las mujeres, las que están empujando al pueblo. Las mujeres deben de prepararse para esa guerra de opinión pública en contra de ellas, es cosa segura. Y lo segundo es que se puede contar con más sangre en las calles de San Juan. WS controló a la policía, eso es de ahí. Pudo haber sido peor, como en otras ocasiones. Pero WS necesitaba dejar al pueblo hacer su parte. No esperen que se repita eso.

Otra encerrona para WS: el pueblo puertorriqueño se siente envalentonado, y la opinión mundial ve a los boricuas como héroes. Estoy segura de que WS no se esperaba esto. Les hace la tarea de denigrarnos más difícil.

Cuando Promesa enseñe sus dientes, el mundo estará claro que es la condicion de colonia lo que está en juego aquí.

La deuda no se puede pagar. No hay manera de salvar la colonia. No son los comunistas. Es la colonia.

Cuando el pueblo se encuentre en esa encerrona, va a tener que tomar una decisión. Solo poniendo a un independentista en la gobernación se puede forzar el estatus porque solo un independentista está dispuesto a confrontar a WS, solo los independentistas no aceptan curar la colonia ni aceptan a WS como sus dueños.

No hay otra salida.




Qué pasó in Puerto Rico?

As proud as I’m at how my people raised to the task of kicking that S.O.B out of office, a historical feat  indeed, a bit of ‘putting the feet back on the ground’ is now necessary. What REALLY happened there?

Image result for marcha puerto rico

This is my take on it.

First, one has to keep in mind that Wall Street/Promesa owns the island now. At it’s root, the people’s fight is a fight against those two. Second, WS/Promesa wanted Rosselló out, not because he is  a corrupt politician; WS wouldn’t exist without  corrupt politicians. They wanted him out because he was not following the script. My argument here will be that WS could not give him a coup (bad optics) so it choreographed the only way they could kick him out: the FBI and WS leaked the tweets. But in the process, the people now feel empowered, and WS will NOT allow them to continue being an example to the world of ‘people’s power’. At the end, WS/Promesa’s cut-throat capitalist goals of enslaving the people, will let the blood spill next time.

To get a hint at the answer to the question up there, go to Wall Street (WS), not the street but Wall Street as in the masters of the universe. Take as example this article by the WS Journal‘s editorial board (the masters’ official voice) discussing the ‘origins’ of the Roselló issue, “Puerto Rico’s political melt down”. The root of all problems in Puerto Rico, as they see it, is:

“Puerto Rico’s main problem is democratic socialism”

First, the WSJ makes it look as if Puerto Rico is an independent nation which happens to be ‘socialist’. Puerto Rico is a colony of the USA, what happens there is because the USA lets it or wants it. Second, the fact that the island is a colony of the USA is not a problem for the WSJ, that’s OK for WS, they actually like it like that. All capitalists and imperialists love to have colonies, it’s kinda a prestige thing for them, it has always been. Remember WWI? The war was fought in great measure to the fact that the allies and central powers wanted each to keep their colonies, and those who had none wanted to get some because natives are cute, not.

So what’s the definition of “democratic socialism”, according to WS?

“Puerto Rico’s main problem is democratic socialism, and Mr. Rosselló is typical of a political class that buys votes with handouts.”

The answer is “handouts“, democratic socialism is a verb, is the act of handing out something for nothing, according to the capitalists masters of the universe own dictionary. Is there any other way for politicians to get elected, apart from  outright lying to the public to protect Wall Street interests? GOP, anyone? Old dems? Wall Street honchos pay for the handouts to get the people elect WS’s representatives, and remove them from a politician who doesn’t obey the master.

Interestingly enough, that‘s Roselló sin, he sinned in a way that WS could not save him from himself despite having tried. Roselló failed his masters where it hurts them the most: in their Ayn Rand philosophy of inhumane excessive greed for money and power: in their stocks, i.e. Don’t jump to conclusions yet; Rosselló is the scum of the earth. He might have just been set up, though, by Wall Street.

When you read the WS Journal’s list of crimes committed by Rosselló you understand why he got kicked out, why he was framed by WS. You see, WS didn’t and doesn’t care about his or anyone’s political and financial crimes against the people of Puerto Rico because said crimes are actually MANDATES from WS. Let me give you a taste of mandated crimes against the people, as listed in the article:

Yet Mr. Rosselló has fought and flouted reform. The board last year eliminated Christmas bonuses for public workers, but Mr. Rosselló paid them anyway. He has refused to implement furloughs demanded by the board. As Mr. Rossello quipped in a leaked message to an aide: “Dear oversight board, go [expletive] yourself.

The board has slashed spending, but the Governor has sued to block the board’s labor and fiscal reforms” 

Had Wall Street been satisfied with Roselló, they wouldn’t have ridiculed him in the American media. Even billionaire Murdoch, owner of Fox and and big WS gambler, trashed him.

Poor Rosselló. It would seem as if he got shafted not only by WS but by THE PEOPLE too; he could have been the people’s hero with that quote about the “expletive“.

Of course not; the man is podrido (rotten) to the core. He was “shafted” by the greed and amorality in his DNA inherited from his father. But let’s admit too that greed and amorality is the other half of the human condition, together with the possibility of moral attitudes and choices. There is no difference between them and him: WS CEOs are as he is, the difference being that they are his bosses and he is their servant.

His political and financial crimes against the people of Puerto Rico (translated into death when it comes to his abandoning the people after the huracán) are his, his choice. He deserves more than just being kicked out of office because he has no sense of shame to make him regret his actions. He needs to be put in jail.

This is where the cookie crumbled for him and WS and Congress: they forgot the lesson not learned in the Cuba’s Bay of Pigs incident: listen to the natives you have rented to do your dirty work for you.

You can’t just dictate from outside the poverty of a nation and expect the people to stay on their knees all the time. That attitude or belief that it can be done is mere imperialist’s arrogance. In the Bay of Pigs the Cuban soldiers of fortune told the CIA that the Bay was the worse place for landing, but heck, ‘we are the CIA, we know your nation and people better than you know them’. The rest is history. The same thing is kinda happening here in good old Puerto Rico, that’s why the WS Journal calls it “a melt down”, as in ‘something got out of our hands’.

The Promesa (now there’s sarcasm from Congress and WS) was created to feed Wall Street’s shark-bondholders of Puerto Rico’s debt:

“The mess drove Congress in 2016 to pass legislation called Promesa that established a seven-member bipartisan control board to restructure government operations and debt.”

It’s the debt, stupid. “Government” there means the empire’s political and financial control over the island in order to make the colonized pay for a debt which they didn’t ask for in the first place. That’s the point of having a colony, isn’t it, force them into poverty, educate them into thinking that they are worthless and need US’s WS to run their lives, and then use their politicians to accept a ‘loan’ which can’t be repaid except by expropriating the island’s infrastructure and cultural real estate property; and keeping the natives in a state of slavery. WS always pays the loan processors a percentage for selling a debt-trap loan to the innocent consumers, in this case the loan processors are the elected politicians. Rosello was their man.

Related image

Wall Street main CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, has been salivating for years to get the island into bankruptcy to take our public University of Puerto Rico and turn it private. They keep trying, but the students have held strong, despite propaganda that turns the public against them.

Image result for blankfein

Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs CEO, Lloyd Blankfein.

The minimum salary in Puerto Rico is a ‘huge’ $6.55 an hour, but cost of living is the same as in New York, and unemployment is actually manipulated by the masters in their interest ( “implement furloughs” fancy word for ‘unemployment’). And yet “The board has slashed spending”  in an island sinking in poverty in order to send the federal money to the sacrosanct “bondholders”. The problem is not “democratic socialism”, it’s not handouts; Rosselló knows this to be the biggest contradiction facing greedy men: I can’t draw more blood from the dying!

The board dictates from afar, Rosselló promised WS, in exchange for the governor chair, to do as they wanted; then he found out that, in order to embezzle mo’ money from the feds BEFORE been kicked out in the next elections, he HAD to throw some crumbs -handouts to the people. Any corrupt politician in his place with a smidgen of greed would have done the same thing. This is what WS sharks can’t see from the tip of Manhattan, that Rosselló couldn’t withhold the crumbs if a revolt was to be prevented.

Promesas’s cut-throat capitalists orders will keep the island in a permanent “melt down” situation because the real thieves are them, WS masters of Promesa. But WS is not interested in keeping the island functioning for the Puerto Ricans. WS wants to get the island as a trophy, and put the people to work as slaves for WS. That’s why there is no discussion about the political status of the island: it’s immaterial to WS. 


Rosello had it coming from both sides, the poor thing, but it was WS who choreographed his ousting. And as in Bay of Pigs, they got a whacking from the natives. They WANTED Rosselló out for not following their orders. They tried keeping him in place until the next elections, but what for, if he was not following orders, just stealing everybody blind? WS wanted Rosselló out NOW. So they leaked the tweets to manipulate public opinion. The people already hated him, but there was still support for him from the typical right-wingers. We know the island is run by corrupt men, there is no secret there. The capacity of the people to tolerate them is painfully enormous.


Short of a coup directly from WS/Promesa board, they leaked the material. The people were offended by his disrespect to the dead from Maria and how he embezzles the federal money; by the outright amorality of that S.O.B. Now there was a ‘coup‘ rolling, never before seen in the USA.

Except that they underestimated ( a typical mistake of imperialist capitalists) the people’s anger. And now they have a hot potato in their hand: the people feel empowered.

Wall Street/Promesa didn´t listen to the people nor to Rosselló and walked in like an elephant in a small gift shop. Rosselló thought he could clip some money from the top of the WS mafia money and, somehow, believed he could get away with it without ´Gotti´s ire.

So they set him up. And now, if WS/Promesa don’t want to see more ‘melt down’ in the form of blood running through San Juan, they will have to roll out those damn handouts.

You see, it all comes back to the US way of appeasing the people: handouts. That’s how we got food stamps in the first place: in the 60s, when the people were ready to vote for the independence of the island, the US flooded the island with food stamps. Voila! And then they shame the people for being kept in poverty.

The people of Puerto Rico need to examine this historic moment with complete emotional detachment after the celebrations. These are some of the problems they will be facing:

  1. The #rickyrenuncia movement was spontaneous, lacking political organization. This type of success can seldom be reproduced in a a sustainable fashion.
  2. They must understand the power of WS to manipulate them through the media. The artistic class (they didn’t start the marches but were instrumental, the credit is not being given to the rightful people who started this on July 10)) can’t be relied on as political organizers, unless this a truly new form of political organizing never seen before. WS and the US government prefer to see politics in Puerto Rico run by the artistic class, not by a some umbrella organization uniting all the different political flavors. It’s exactly what happened in the 2016 US elections: WS and the tech billionaires were terrified at the possibility of a coalition of women, workers, people of color, immigrants all under one umbrella challenging them. So Trump got appointed. It was an early coup to the people, not to Hillary Clinton.
  3. The status is the root of the problem in Puerto Rico when it comes to the inability to have control over the decisions that affect their lives. You can’t be ruled by a WS and Congressional “board” and expect benevolence and compassion.
  4. Puerto Ricans want to work, they are intelligent and brave, but the fear sowed in their heart by the capitalists since 1900s is eating their dignity. There are times when dignity is the tool that can set you free. Making the colony ‘more efficient’ is an illusion. They know it: Rosello is the tip of the iceberg.
  5. It’s not “El Grito Boricua”. The difference is enormous. El Grito de Lares (to which el grito boricua is referenced) was a short lived victory of pro independence effort to separate from Spain. There is no ‘independence’ or cries to separate from the USA here; the colonial status is intact, only the men running it are being judged, not the status, at least not yet.

But how do you break with 100 years of colonial brainwashing?

It might be that we are closer than never before to it. If we can just ditch the delusions.


Fear and loathing of people with mental illness in Feminists’ reading of Shulamith Firestone’s Airless Spaces: an unauthorized biography

[UPDATE: I have a new blog about my experience working with Shulamith Firestone. https://airlessspacesandmentalillness.wordpress.com/ ]

Before I explain who I am and what right do I have to be writing an “un-authorized” biography of Shulamith Firestone (SF), consider the following paragraph (and the two badges to the right of this post):

SF “plunged out of history” sometime between the late 70s and early 1980s due to mental illness, which was probably caused by her long ideological fights with feminists, only to come back in the last 10 years of her life to write her second and last book, Airless Spaces. This is a “scary” book “not about feminism or politics but about her experience with schizophrenia.” It “seems designed explicitly to discourage sympathy” for people with mental illness, for it “makes us feel wary of forcing these short, terse, anti-pitying vignettes of illness and hospitalization into political or personal symbolism”. Airless Spaces is by no means an intimidating work”. She died of ‘complications’ with mental illness.

[All quotes above from Shulamith Firestone’s Airless Spaces by Sianne Ngai. All quotes on this post will come from that article, the focus of my discussion about feminists reading of Airless Spaces because it’s the one I found to be the most offensive.]

A not so ‘beautiful mind’: feminists angry at their ‘fallen icon’

That is how current and future bios about SF will end if her last 20 years of life continue to be ignored or covered up, reduced by some intellectual feminists to two or three unsympathetic sentences about her mental illness. You see, the lives of highly intelligent men with mental illness (mi) can be made inspirational, as in the movie A Beautiful Mind, their work saved from the ‘stain of mi.’ and actually presented as its magical product. Women’s, their mind and work are professionally ‘deconstructed‘ (as in butchered) by the ‘razor-sharp’ feminist critique, then presented to you as unappealing, irrational, devoid of inspirational qualities to others: in other words, without the tiniest smidgen of saving grace.

I can see where this ‘feminists anger’ at Firestone comes from. They imagine their icon, the fiery SF who challenged the male oligarchy at age 25, been passively carted out to a psych ward and involuntarily been pumped with psych meds.

In “Hospital” the characters are all dosed with medication, can’t sleep, gain weight,”

Not a salutary image to celebrate, is it?

It is as if they feel shamed and betrayed by her:

Nothing—not gender, class, race, or sexuality; nor shared or common oppressions based on these categories of social difference—defines the people in Airless Spaces more than the hospital does.”

How dare Firestone expose her ‘weakness’, and in a non-feminist book to boot.

Except that it is an illusion, not a reflection of reality. That image, represented in Mrs. Ngai’s reading of Airless Spaces (AS), is the artful construct of the ‘fear and loathing of people with mental illness we all carry hidden in the depths of our mind, using all the stereotypes and prejudices it has filed away for years in our mind’s rotary file cabinet.  You (general you)  didn’t get that image from reading AS; it has been there in your mind long before you read it. You just stuck SF’s ‘ugly photo’ in it and called it “SF’s plunge out of history“.

Airless Spaces: the object of Feminists’ scorn

The paratexts of Airless Spaces are hardly inviting: unhappy title, hospital-blue cover with dull, barely-distinguishable beige print, and large, anxious, unhappy-looking close-up of Firestone on the back cover.  “

https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347425556l/667855.jpgTodus criminalis, She just could find absolutely nothing positive to say about the book or author: bad from front to back cover and everything in between.

A feminist attack on an ill ‘sister’ can hardly get any more vicious and callous than that: Mrs. Ngai wrote that ‘lovely’ opinion in the belief that SF was alive, which means that she must have considered the possibility that Firestone would find her article and read it. It seems as if she intended to shame her publicly for becoming mentally ill and for daring to write about it. It’s the old story: people with mental illness can’t expect compassion from a normal and rational society, especially if you are a woman.

Mrs. Ngai expressions in her judgment on AS and Firestone through out her post is precisely what Firestone is depicting in AS: the destructive impact of social fear and loathing of people with mental illness on the dignity of a human being. I can see just about every ill feeling and stereotype about people with mental illness in Mrs. Ngai’s “paratext”. Here are some:

That the problems of psychiatric patients and mentally ill people in general are not worthy of our attention (“hardly inviting”) and not worth reading about their life, not even if that patient is the (former?) feminist icon herself. “But not depression about feminism or politics.”

All of them are “unhappy people” 24/7 by nature of the illness (not maybe because the hospital staff walks all over their civil rights and dignity 24/7),

Psychiatric hospitals are disgusting (“hospital-blue”) because it houses ‘irrational people’, not because of what happens to them in there.

And the mother of all covert expression of fear and loathing of people with mental illness laid down in digital ink by a feminist:

anxious, unhappy-looking close-up of Firestone.”

Mrs. Ngai might as well have quoted Firestone directly from AS:

she looked like an escapee from a loony bin”. [The jump suit}

The real ‘paratext’ in “she looks anxious and unhappy“ (a purely emotional assesment), based on Mrs. Ngai attitude displayed in her post, is ‘she looks like a crazy woman and I’m afraid of her, I don’t wanna look at her’.

t’s not just the content of the stories in Airless Spaces, or their sense of simultaneous pastlessness and futurelessness that I find depressing.”

Is there a difference?

But one can’t blame only the intellectual feminists, young and old, for uncritically petrifying in history SF the human being as a the feminist icon whose only legacy is that at age 25 she wrote in the 70s the ultimate feminist theory book, Dialectic of Sex (DOS), and initiated the 2nd wave of feminism, while dismissing her last 20 years of life as barren of any intellectual or humane worth. There are also political forces concealed in plain view feeding that attitude.

One of the most effective weapons in the arsenal of the powers that be are those which can be deployed hidden in plain view; it explains the military obsession with ‘stealthiness’, e.g. stealth war planes and ‘invisible soldiers’. Fear and loathing of the mi is one of those weapons, just as the war on feminism has been a stealthy one all along too, masked  as ‘culture’. One could  argue that it has been so effective against feminism as to finally getting feminists to self-destroy, for there is no “explicit” difference between the religious fanatic misogynist’s attacks on SF and her work, and the attacks some  feminists are now perpetrating on her on account of her mental illness. The outcome is the same:  discrediting a feminist and her feminist ideas as mental illness, and slowly  caving in the movement by autophagia. DOS is not evidence of her ‘early’ mental illness, and AS is not the crazy rantings of a mentally ill former feminist icon.

When feminists with mental illness have the courage of raising the topic of mental illness they risk public shame and ridicule from both the misogynists and the intellectual feminists in their small intra-self-bashing circle, as is happening to SF.

I sometimes wonder if these feminists share also the same goals with the misogynists, because for the life of me I still can’t see how the feminists’s cause can be advanced by openly setting out to viciously demolishing their own ‘icon’ as a ‘pathetic mentally ill woman’. It makes me imagine that Mrs. Ngai has a photo of Donald Trump on her desk; I don’t know.


So to finally answer the question above, I’m, as in Bob Dylan’s lyrics, the “complete unknown” woman/case manager to who Firestone dedicated her last book, Airless Spaces (AS). That fact alone allows me to talk with ‘some authority’ about the last 10-20 years of her life. But if you don’t buy that, I can talk about her thanks to my right of freedom of speech, the same one that allows some intellectual feminists to, um, how should I say it, trash her and AS

Bear in mind, though, that I’m not an intellectual, not in the elitist sense of the word – OK; I’m not an intellectual, of any kind. I’m sure that my basic level of ESL ‘gramar’ and poor composition skills tipped you off, didn’t it? Please, keep this in mind; I’m setting up a point for the ‘book dedication’ part.

In truth, this post is not a biography of any type about SF. If you want one, read AS (again), this time not as a female version of The Shining, but as her autobiography; I’m sure she wrote it with that in mind, including a chapter explaining how she thought her mental illness developed. But nooo, you can’t even see that in there because to you her life stopped to have any importance once you learned she had become mentally ill:

the book particularly discourages us from reading it as the story of Firestone, the Feminist.”

In fact, I’m writing this post in part because I dread imagining the type of bio the anti-feminists intellectual feminists will be writing about her life.

I’m not writing this post as a bio of Firestone because. not only I don’t have the intellectual skills  necessary for that, but also because I was not the only person involved in facilitating her temporary recovery, though I will be using some of my experience with her to make some points on the second part of this post.

So why am I writing this now, twenty years after the facts?

First, I recently noticed (online) an interest in the life and writing of Firestone, prompted undoubtedly, among other reasons, by the current national and global political conditions. As it turns out, Firestone’s political ideas are far from dated (she’s still dangerous). Second, I have also been reading online with profound consternation an implied judgment from some feminists that her last 20 years of life have no value to society, not worthy of being recorded and studied with impartiality as her earliest feminist material because, as the prejudice goes, people with mental illness can produce nothing of value for society: they are merely a scary burden to it; and that AS is neither a feminist nor a political book but a mere collection of “scary” (take notes, Stephen King) and depressing fictionalized stories about her experience with schizophrenia.

To change that type of prejudice and save Firestone’s whole life legacy, the facts of those 20 years of her life must be made public by those who have them. I recognize that Mrs.Ngai makes the point that she could find no information about Firestone’s life post DOS and that “How the narrator or characters became hospitalized to begin with, is a question Airless Spaces never asks us to ask,” (I don’t see why she couldn’t ask the question out of her own curiosity; well, I know the answer.)

“My surprise encounter with her name on the spine of Airless Spaces made me acutely aware of my ignorance.  What exactly happened, in the interval between 1970 and 1998, to Shulamith Firestone? “

That’s why the facts of those years must be made public: not being available facilitate these uncompassionate analysis of her life. Facilitate, not eliminate: even with the facts these feminists will continue writing in the masculine style: totally emotionally detached from the humanity of their ‘objects’ and without an ounce of compassion for the suffering of women, particularly feminist women who are not engaged in useless discussions about feminist theories.

Who has those facts, then? Mainly her family, her friends in and around her support group, and I as the ICM (intensive case manager) of Visiting Nurse Services (VNS) who enrolled her in the program. And why haven’t these people written about this part of SF’s life yet? Again, due to my poor composition skills you will have to read the answer to this question in the second part. First, I will be discussing in this post my ‘informed’ (!) opinion about:

  1. The political reasons why SF’s last years are being dismissed by some feminist as of no value to their feminist imperative.
  2. That some intellectual feminists’ misreading of ‘AS’ as the irrational schizophrenic rantings of a ‘has been-feminist icon‘ is clearly not a matter of lack of literature skills, but betray unexamined attitudes of fear and loathing of people with mental illness.
  3. That to correct this sorry state of affair – the denigration of SF’s whole life and legacy by feminists because of her mental illness – the people who were with her need to tell their experience for the record. I have lost contact with them; my hope is that somehow they bump into this post and consider meeting as a group to tell the story of SF’s dignified struggle with mental illness.
  4. How the story of her struggle with mental illness is of value for other people with the illness and for professionals and advocates of people with mental illness.

With all due respect to Susan Faludi, her compassionate article after Firestone’s passing, for which she interviewed all of us who were with her the last 10 years of her life, should not be the last words from us. We all refused to discuss with Mrs. Faludi details of Firestone’s illness. Maybe she should be the professional writer to put our collective experience in an article for reference to future writers of SF bio. By now, 20 years after the emotional shock of her passing, we should know how to tell her story and how is her life inspirational without getting into lurid details of symptoms and delusions.


I said at the beginning of this post that one can’t blame the feminist intellectuals for dismissing SF last 20 years of life as the ‘useless’ years of SF the mentally ill.

The culprit for this sorry state of affairs is humanity’s perennial fear and prejudice about people with m.i. (By prejudice here I mean ignorance, but not in bookish sense; ignorance as in lack of understanding of how we contribute to the suffering of other human beings with our unexamined emotions, deeds -of speech and body – and beliefs.)

Those two are as potent today in this brand new millennium as they were two hundred years ago. They exist today, undisturbed and unquestioned, in the mind of most intellectuals, be it feminists or  intellectuals in every field of studies –men and women; in those themselves suffering the symptoms of mental illness and in the minds of their supportive friends and families; even in the minds of mental health practitioners and service providers.

Not even today’s ultra-modern science and psychiatry have been able to make a dent in our collective and personal fear and loathing of  the m.i. This is not only because they are intent on nourishing those traits for political and monetary gains, but because ingrained human fear and loathing of mentally ill people are impermeable to science in many people.

This fear and loathing is the outcome of plain fear and prejudice: the ineradicable hallmark of the human condition, across the political spectrum from extreme right to extreme left and everything in between, in men as in women. They are the emotion which, left unchecked, becomes a weapon against humanity. For example, fear and prejudice are the indispensable emotions which greedy men in power successfully manipulate with propaganda in order to convince the rest of a reluctant humanity to accept fighting against each other in these men’s wars for profit, since WWI (the war that ended all peace) up to our current ‘war on terrorism’.

What is the impact of these traits in our society?

It is common knowledge that these two traits, when unexamined or challenged, have negative ethical and moral consequences that affect us all at both the personal and social levels. As they relate to people with mental illness, social expressions of fear and prejudices about them (manipulated or not by the NRA, e.g.) are powerful psychological triggers of deep seated feelings of shame in the minds, not only of the victims of these expressions, but in their families and friends as well, which of course may lead to feelings of guilt for harboring those feelings.

Speaking of the NRA, we have seen how they use the media to manipulate public fear of the mentally ill to sell guns and to get political support to pass laws that blame the mentally ill for all mass murders committed with weapons –whether by people with m.i or not – so as to deflect any responsibility away from the CEOs of the arms manufacturing industry. Their propaganda is crystal clear: buy guns because mentally ill people are a fearful and dangerous bunch whom we must be legally free to kill in self-defense.

On the other hand, this fear and loathing can defeat the moral value to society of a healthy sense of shame and regret, which is to refrain from acting with cruelty and disregard to the well-being of others out of personal fear of being rejected by one’s peer.

There is no limit to the evil that can be inflicted on others when one lacks the ability to feel shame and regret for one’s own acts of cruelty, especially if it can be justified as necessary. We’ve seen this with American psychiatrists feeling proud of torturing mentally ill children in Willowbrook in the name of ‘science’, and politicians and ‘men of science’ (pharma, i.e.) bestowing awards on these psychiatrists for cruelty perpetrated on behalf of science. It was all done on account of social fear and prejudice of people with mental illness: the doctors, themselves morally numb to the atrocities they were committing, convinced the public for a long while that it was done to protect both the children and society, and as ‘research to cure the illness’.

The difference between the actions of these American doctors and those of Dr. Mengele and Hitler’s ‘final solution’ to the problem of mental illness -proudly and yet covertly gassing those poor souls out of ‘necessity’, to keep the white race pure – is really tiny: only the methods changed. The immoral arguments were the same, science to protect you from the mentally ill, i.e.

But is it still going on?

You bet your derriere it is.

Modern treatment of Dystonia

Evolution through time of western methods for treating mental illness. Not much has change, has it?

The only thing that has changed is the wording in the contract that the family of the mentally ill signs consenting to invasive ‘neuroscience’ research of the mind and mental illness on their child: it’s not the ice pick anymore; it’s more like GOD in a white coat in the lab with new millennium type of cutlery.

In its seemingly tamer form, we see today in the public ‘critique’ of some intellectual feminists the impact of unchecked free-wheeling shamelessness in justifying contempt for people with mental illness. For example, Mrs. Ngai can justify her own “inability to understand, relate or feel compassion for them not perhaps as a result of her own unexamined personal prejudices but as a natural and legitimate response to these people’s ‘irrational’ behaviors.

it compels a strangely anti-empathetic empathy, an empathy with its explicitly anti-empathetic affect.

Now that’s spinning. The idea that Firestone set out to write her story with the intention of making you feel “anti-empathic” and ’empathic’ at the same time is one that only a feminist who set out to analysis AS as one would analyse The Shining could come up with. It is “strangely” indeed; it is irrational thinking on the part of Mrs. Ngai.

This shamelessness in blaming the victim of our prejudices in turn makes us callous and unsympathetic towards their plight in the hands of the state psychiatric system, accepting the state’s false justifications for the inhumane and barbaric treatment of people diagnosed as mentally ill we have seen through history, and even today. We then feel compelled to cover up their condition to hide our shame or, like in Nazi Germany, we look to other side when the atrocities are being committed.

And that’s how we have ended up today hiding SF’s last 20 years of life, the years of her courageous and dignified struggle with mental illness and the mental health system. Of that I am in part to be blamed. 


If the personal is political – the feminists’ favorite slogan – then it should stand to logic that living with mental illness is political. After all, this particular illness is not like, let’s say, diabetes: no one is afraid of a diabetic who doesn’t take his meds, and no diabetic person gets their civil liberties routinely trampled by the government when they get ‘symptomatic’.

And for crying out loud, are young feminists unaware that throughout history women who refused to stay in the kitchen were punished by labeling them mentally ill, and then lobotomized in the mid-1900s?  Do yourselves a favor: if you haven’t done it yet, please, don’t read “scary” AS as entertainment, watch the 1982 movie “Frances”.  Chances are you will miss the in-your-face politics and feminism in it too, but at least you will lay off of Firestone.

Movie trivia: in ‘V for Vendetta’, the character ‘Valerie’ is an homage to Frances Farmer.

Feminists are concerned with the connection between politics and the personal, yet they have persistently failed to make that connection in their reading of AS. Firestone made the connection; it’s the raison d’être of Airless Spaces precisely because the relation between the state’s routine daily trampling of one’s personal liberty and dignity  is seldom as explicit as in life in a state’s psych ward. Same with the politics of women’s oppression, it is not ‘explicit’; it is cloaked as ‘culture’, at least in the USA.

Why are feminists failing to see a ‘feminist’s dignity’ in AS?

Alas, it’s not because of their unexamined prejudices towards people with mental illness, it must be because she failed to “explicitly” make the connection for them by, for instance, entitling the book ‘feminists and psychiatry’ or put the word ‘feminism in the book spine.

I don’t consider it preposterous to read AS as Dostoevsky’s Notes from the Underground, with the added bonus of the author observing herself and reporting her own actions and thoughts.

There is no passive SF in AS. Read “The jump suit” again, this time not as a female version of The Shining, and consider using a writing style different from men’s. Mrs. Ngai only focus in her reading of AS was ‘did it help the feminist cause?’

it could be argued that Airless Spaces shouldn’t be read as a tragic allegory of the stalling or historical foreclosure of the radical feminist project.”

She crassly missed the human aspect of AS.

Next week I will continue with a discussion of how Shulamith Firestone’s life is inspirational.

Martin Scorcesese contribution to the art of fake documentary/history: Rolling Thunder revue

I just finished watching at Netflix (Netflix! That should have tipped me off.) Martin Scorceses’  ‘documentary’ Rolling thunder revue about Bob Dylan. My first impression at the end was ‘what a pack of pretentious and unlikable people’. Then I got curious about how Scorcese made the ‘docu’. That’s when my hope for this new millennium tanked.

You see, I discovered that this 2019 ‘docu’ is Scorcese’s intentionally made as a fake documentary about Bob Dylan. As the article in Variatey magazine says, Scorcese “prank the public”.

Maybe Scorcesese, a wealthy man, finds it cute to use his wealth, all of which comes from us, the consumers of his movies, to make us waste our time (and pay him for it too) watching something he is passing as ‘history’.

So Sorcesese joins Trump in debasing our culture and history just because they can. But here is one negative consequence of his prank.

From now on, the field of documentary-making has lost its credibility. Why? Because a documentary, as Scorcesese has demonstrated, can be like counterfeit money: made totally indistinguishable  from a real one. History has always been told from the eyes of the victor, but passing counterfeit history is worse: it is circulating fake information out of open greed and disrespect for the public.

This practice of counterfeiting history is Hollywood’s trade mark, but we have known it and learned to not believe everything it passes as history; we know is fictionalized history, purposely made to be consumed as entertainment, not as fact. But now, the trend is to actually tell you that ‘this is true, it did happen as described’.

The same thing happened with the Cohen brothers movie Fargo. As a consequence of labeling the movie as ‘based on real events’, one real woman (mindless, true) died trying to find the money “buried in the snow”, because she thought it was true that the money was still there. But we learn in ‘the making of Fargo’ that the story is totally fiction. Again, the directors decided that it is cute to tell the public that what they are watching really happened as told in the movie, when they know it’s not true. Total disregard to the social value of honesty, no regards to consequences.

From where our millionaire Hollywood men get the idea that we, the consumer, are looking forward to be lied to and fooled about history for entertainment, I don’t know.

All I know is that my list of movies by Hollywood directors and actors I would go to see in the future is getting shorter by the minute.

Scorceses joins the Cohen brothers in my black list of directors to ignore and not give my money to them.

My final thought goes to Bob Dylan himself: why did he agree to participate in this faking of his own history? Was it the money? The same goes for Joan Baez.

Bob Dylan is seen as a god by his fans. I see a god with feet of clay.


Update on Bernie Sanders (he is still trying)

I wrote on this blog after the Russian/US oligarchs’ 2016 elections coup that Bernie Sanders would disappear from our political scenery, eventually blamed and ignored by the pseudo American leftists.

Truth be told, yes, he was later blamed for not joining the Russians/GOP on their attack on Hillary over her ‘dangerous emails debacle’. Had he join them, he would have certainly defeated her and be the president today instead of el sucio (pervert) Trump, say the zombie leftists.

But the taste of the-power-almost-won and the human ego left good ol’ Bernie berning with the continued desire of getting ‘there’, and getting all the donations with which to buy more mansions.

So Bernie wants to run again.

He thinks he can run again as a GOP mole to defeat the Democrats by, again, giving arguments to Dump and the GOP against our candidates. He is counting with the media elevating him again to sainthood, as they did to him during the past presidential elections.

Do you remember these memes?






Or articles at the Washington Post like this, reviewed by me on this blog, of conservative WaPo reporter and Brookings Institute praising Sanders ‘socialism’ in the open? https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/sanders-at-brookings-institution/

February 9, 2015, The Brookings Institution hosted Sanders for a ‘conversation with Senator Bernie Sanders” (transcript).

Poor Bernie.

He still doesn’t get it. The media will NOT be there for him this time because they never liked him. They just used him as the ‘cleaner’ tool against Hillary. You see, it was not the same thing to have only the GOP attacking her using character assassination; the public would have recognized the GOP propaganda. So they (all members of the perfect storm against us -media, Putin, GOP, male oligarchs, male decrepit zombie leftists, Assange, Comey, i.e) enlisted a non-democrat independent to run on the Democratic ballot but attacking the democratic candidate using misogyny and character assassination. Let me refresh your memory: It was him and his bernies who poisoned the campaign with the ‘lock her up’ chanting, for which later Dump expressed him his gratitude.


Nor will the zombie leftists.

The Washington Post, one of the most fervent manipulators of Sanders’ campaign against Hillary, have been publishing articles against him. Of course, they are not going to come out with a pipe to hit him over the head. No. You don’t do that to a saint. YOU SIMPLY CRUCIFY HIM. Now, his ‘socialism’ is a problem, despite crowning him a saint for the glorious deed of ‘making socialism mainstream’ during the 2016 presidential campaign.

The pseudo leftists are already rumbling against him too. NOW, not during the 2016 campaign, they are pulling out how friendly he is with the warmongering armaments corporations. I was talking about this at that time, of course I got insulted for portraying their saint in such bad light. But not now.

So this is the latest article crucifying Bernie. I’m just saying.

Sanders could face more scrutiny for socialist leanings


What happens when the GOP accuses Dems of being racists?

We are back at it again, at racism, i.e.

This week is about a recently elected democratic governor in the south with an unbeknown-to-voters history of racist attitudes. The WaPo says

  Northam mum about his plans, after a flood of calls for his resignation for ‘racist and offensive’ photo

But is this a healthy discussion about the evils of racism? What happens when the GOP and the media accuses democrats of being racists? As I will conclude later, Racism Invictus.

One would have to first define what “healthy” in this case means.

I, personally, would define  “healthy in this case” from the negative: as long as the GOP is not involved in the discussion it is “healthy in this case’. Why? In addition to the obvious reasons consider the following.

The Politics of Racism

It’s not only that republicans are being “dishonest” and guilty of hypocrisy (as Rubin correctly discussed at the WaPo), we know they are that and much worse. The problem is that, in meddling in the discussion between democrats about this particular instance of racism, they are intentionally politicizing the issue.

Politics is about power, not about philosophies of good and evil.

They don’t bring an honest discussion about the immorality of racism because they are incapable of talking about something they are not: moral human beings. They are the opposite of that. So  what is their goal in paying someone to find in others the dirt that is in themselves and  in the person right next to them and whom they admire, on their own president Donald el sucio Trump, i.e?

“Of human bondage”: The power of racism to grab political power

That’s the height of immorality. Their goal, not that you didn’t know it, is to find ‘moral stains’ in democrats already in positions of power to stir public outrage and force us to politically defeat ourselves. The GOP lost the governorship of the state? No problem, they will make YOU remove your elected official. It’s a temporary victory for them, but a victory, non-the-less.

Finding moral stains on anyone is as easy as finding a MacDonald because ‘moral stain’ is the motor that propels human beings into the search for redemption via religions, philosophies, and mystic paths. Every human being is born with the ‘curse’ of moral stains; we all have sinned in the past and are on our way to do it again in the near future. Most humans feel the ‘call of the flesh’ as a heavy burden, and most of us have an innate desire to cleanse ourselves as much as possible of that stain.

But the amoral human beings don’t have that imperative in life. Theirs is the opposite: how to live a life of hedonism, of sensual self-indulgence at the cost of trampling over other human beings.

Racism Invictus

So the answer to the question What happens when the GOP accuses dems of f being racists is: racism itself remains untouched: racism Invictus. The discussion about racism itself is flipped over and we are forced instead to act, to prove that we do as we preach, but the ONLY proof or evidence accepted by the republicans and the media is that we remove the person in question, even if that person has shown concrete political benefits to society or if he or she has shown remorse. (I am definitely not defending Northam here.)

The racist GOP divide us and make us lose political power when they enter our discussion about racism. The same doesn’t work around for them.

When we accuse republicans of being racists, the accused person is actually leading a life of amorality: they have shown hatred of women, of people of color, of the poor and the immigrants…and they are PROUD of it. They call it ‘not being liberal’. Their policies are aimed at dividing and hurting us, while benefiting the white male racist oligarchs. When we succeed to remove one of them, racism remains untouched because their racist policies remain untouched, their racist agenda continues to live in the rest of the party.

Michael Ertel, Florida’s Secretary of State.

As long as one believes that racism has to be dealt with as a  knee jerk reaction, we will be at the mercy of the republicans’ emotional manipulation machine; victims of their experts in the arts of propaganda and opinion-shaping.

Then it is not a moral issue any more, it’s a political issue.

Find alternative solutions to racism in politics;  it doesn’t always have to be relinquishing political power.






DIY Rockwool panels for apt. windows a success on today’s winter storm

I live in da Bronx, NY. Tired of the noise outside (mostly ambulances, fire trucks and police cars) I ‘researched’ in the internet how to sound proof the windows. The intention was that the panels would serve also as cover for the wind drafts in the winter. I never imagined this would work. BUT IT DID!

I made the panels removable, but left three of the panes covered and kept the bottom one on and off to let air and the cats in and out to the balcony. It works reducing the noise. And today, Feb 30 2019, in the middle of the ‘polar vortex’ winter storm, the panels have withstood the wind so far. I just came to my apartment (7:30 pm), the wind almost blew me away as I was entering the building. Anxious about finding the panels all over the place and the apartment freezing…YEAH!!

TOASTY apartment! NO DRAFTS!

If you have issues with outside noise and drafty windows, do what I did. UPDATE APRIL/22

I bought a bat of Rockwool R23, and Owens Corning R-3.0 insulating sheath boards (1 inch is better, 1/2 is fine too). Corning is fine but you can use any other material that helps with soundproffing (cork, cardboard, etc).I cut the boards to the size of each window pane (from frame to frame). Then sliced Rockwool insulating material at about 2 inches thick. I used 3M Super 77 glue on the board (this is important, remember you can’t remove the rockwool once you place it over the board. Make sure your measurements are right.) and put the insulation on top (on one side only). THEN i covered the board with fabric:(research online which fabrics are best for your project. I should have used prettier ones but was just testing. Now i want to change the fabric.)3M SUPER7 GLUE is good for fabric too. Then put the glue on the window frame where each panel would go. Put the panels and …voila! (Make sure you put enough glue: my windows are right above the apt. Heater. The heat from the heater will eventually unglue it if not enough glue used initially. You may have to hold the panel in place until it dries: otherwise it will slip down because of the wetness. )

It’s my first time. I made a mistake with the door panel: the insulating should go facing the glass.

BUT IT WORKED!!! Be creative. Do your research on using rockwool for windows soundproofing and anti-drafts. There are many ideas out there.

There is salvation, my friends. Just SAVE YOURSELVES. lol

Now I have to make panels to put on the walls. It will further  reduce the noise by absorbing the bouncing noise waves. You can use fancy fabric. I used cheap one thinking that the project wouldn’t work. Now I’m changing the fabric and use beautiful ones for the walls.

That’s it.

Trump plans invasion of Venezuela: US pseudo-Marxist left is silent

US Marxists. You know them, they are ‘internationalists’ and ‘anti-imperialists’.

Not any more. Now they stand by their Putin-loving president Trump, so, sorry third-world people, Marxists can’t attack Putin-loving Trump. Don’t expect the Marxist- left marching out in front of the UN to protest US imperialism in Venezuela as they used to do a couple of decades ago. That’s passé. Save yourselves, third-world.

I have been talking and demonstrating on this blog how the American left died and became a ‘zombie left’ since the 2015 primaries when they went all out for Trump and against Hillary Clinton.

Now the evidence is out there that the American Marxist-left disappeared as such and merged with the alt-right: for Trump, against women, racist and against democracy. To see the evidence all you have to do is navigate the usual ‘Marxist’ websites and see the lack of in-depth coverage on the situation in Venezuela.

The World Socialist website has one article today at the bottom of the website, not denouncing Trump, only ‘describing’ the situation there. Counter Punch, the official alt-right website passing as Marxist, had no articles last week on the topic; it has one very short article today to basically say that, nah, they can’t condemn Trump:

both sides, American politicians and Maduro are right”.

A tough situation for Counter Punch to take side if it means attacking Trump. They are so blinded by their love of Trump that they, Counter Punch,  forgot how to do a Marxist analysis of US imperialist attacks on a third-world nation. Oh they are so ‘balanced and fair’ now, as Fox Friends are toward Trump.

If you navigate these websites, notice that they don’t discuss Trump, they discuss EVERYBODY else but Trump. They name Pompeo or the ‘warmongering’ Democrats as planning the coup, I mean, the “intervention”. But absolute zero criticism of Trump himself. [Update: Counter Punch added a new article the day after this post to criticize, not Trump, but Bernie Sanders. I’m no fan of Sanders;  the point is that they accuse everybody except Trump.]

The pseudo-American Marxist left responds to Putin. Putin is having a romance with Trump. The pseudo-American Marxists have their instructions from Putin: DON’T YOU DARE DENOUNCE TRUMP.

And thus it was that the pseudo-Marxists threw anti-imperialism and socialist internationalism under the bus out of love for Trump.

If these are not the strangest days of our existence, I don’t know what is.

Basically, progressives, colored people, women, immigrants and workers are on their own now, especially if they denounce Trump.

Not looking good out there, is it?

weird lights over NYC

I was watching MSNBC online when the lights in the apartment flickered and stayed dim. I thought it was in my building. The fan I have running stopped, then I could hear a strange humming, like electrical or electromagnetic. I looked outside the windows and saw the area as if it were day light. I went to the balcony and saw the sky to the south of the city with weird white and blue colors. It kept changing color, white to blue to violet. It covered a large area of the sky and I could hear the humming coming from ‘out there’.  I went to get the cell phone. When I returned to the balcony this is all I could record. The light stopped as when you turn the switch off. The second video is the best I found online. The first one is mine, poor quality. I’m trying to rotate the video at Youtube. Hopefully will fix in an hour.

The story that it was an explosion in Con Ed is pure COVFEFE.


Update: Unfortunately, Youtube eliminated the enhancement that allowed for vids to be rotated. I have tried everything. WordPress allows vids to be uploaded for a fee, which I’m not paying. So there you have it. The second video is excellent.  Thanks for visiting. UFOs are out to get Trump. LOL


The whole experience was AWESOME: beautiful and scary at the same time.


Counter punch magazine: the new GQ for the pseudo leftist male elite

Counter Punch magazine has become an all-male for men website, like CQ or Penthouse, but for the pseudo leftist male elite.

Heck, they have ditched all pretenses of being ‘for women rights’ and now don’t include articles by women. Why should they? They have judged the modern women’s movement, in their fascinating ‘Marxist’ male dictum,  as a white right-wing women’s movement, all of it. So women now are  not allowed or invited  to publish articles in their male-controlled magazine; and if, for appearances, a woman is ‘invited’, she is not allowed to write about ‘male testosterone’ ‘real’ politics, only about feminine  issues like  ‘women’s contribution to science’.

Image result for counterpunch magazine


Just thinking while eating my meal and surfing the net.


Image result for counterpunch magazine


‘The Turn of the Screw’: Henry James’s manual on how to vilify a woman

OK. Henry James didn’t set out to write a  ‘manual on how to vilify a woman’. He self-reported that he was just, basically, screwing with his readers’ mind; he called his work “a jeu d’esprit”.

But answer this in your own beautiful mind: what is the link between seeing ghosts and women’ sexuality?

That’s what most literature critics and psychologists of culture think Henry James’s groovy novella, ‘The turn of the screw’, is all about.

Image result for the innocents movie

Gorgeous Deborah Kerr as ‘the governess’ with creepy ‘Miles’ in ‘The Innocents’, 1961 film version of ‘The turn of the screw’. Screenplay by Truman Capote and William Archibald. A must see classic. But, only the governess as a mad woman is presented in the movie. None of the other elements author Henry James referred to were used in the movie,


If you haven’t read it yet, I recommend you do it; you won’t regret it. Be aware that  I’m giving its whole enchilada here.

I read the story which means that I have first hand knowledge of it. This business of having ‘first hand knowledge’ of something is an important element of the story. I will show to you why this novella serves as an example of how character assassination, particularly women’s, is produced as matter of fact in our culture.

Also, conceit aside, I think my analysis is better than ‘the governess was an hysteric’ analysis.

[Take note of the two badges on the right of this column.]

The only way I understand

What is the story about?

People see what they want to see.

It’s a ghost story. Of course it is also about women’s sexuality (based on one fictional woman).

For 120 years (the novella was published in 1898) just about every analysis of the story is focused on the main female character’s sexuality. Did the governess see the apparitions because she was an hysteric? Or because women, more than men, are prone to faulty reasoning that leads them into seeing what is not there? Or did the incident really happen?

Maybe  the reason for such an obsession with Freudian analysis has something to do with the fact stated by one listener in the introduction when told that the “story won’t tell in any literal, vulgar way” who the governess was in love with:

More’s the pity then. That’s the only way I ever understand.

That was Henry James passing judgment on his readers.

He knew his readers well. He has kept them for 120 years passing judgment on the poor governess’ sexuality and mental health based on the story told in the novella by a man (the anonymous narrator) about whom he intentionally tells the reader absolutely nothing. Mr. James played on the readers’ innate capacity to ignore the obvious.

There is universal agreement between literature critics in that the author intentionally left the ending of the story ambiguously enough as to let the readers decide, based on his clues, whether the incidents narrated really happened.

To make that decision readers need KNOWLEDGE of facts, knowledge being the main issue of the story: how do you know anything? And yet the author chose to deprive the readers of any conclusive knowledge about the characters in the story. Our literature professors and psychologists prefer to ignore this fact and instead they focus on the governess’ sexuality as if what they read about her is TRUE, accepted as described by an anonymous ‘reporter’.

Critics never question the ANONYMOUS narrator or his intentions., not even how did he get his information. Surprise, surprise; it was all in HIS head.

How do we know anything?

Of course there were other themes in the story.

From beginning to end of the story, there are three constant themes openly discussed by the main characters – the governess, Mrs. Grose, and Miles,  but ignored by just about every critic of the story, and which I discuss below:

People see what they want to see,

The Innocents Screen

Class privilege and ‘class envy’,

Image result for the innocents movie deborah kerr

Upper-class male privilege and women’s loss of power,

Image result for the innocents movie

child abuse and neglect

Image result for the innocents movie


Let me start at the beginning.

This is a story about how to tell  a good ghost story – Mr. James said so. But the inevitable question, stated or unstated, at the outset of ANY ghost story is:

Do YOU believe in ghosts?

That’s the first question Henry James implicitly poses to the reader:

Do you believe in ghosts? Yes or no?

That question is inevitably followed by a second implied question, the one stated throughout the story by each main character at least once:

And how do you know?’

How do you know either way? How do you know anything?

There are three sources of knowledge, at least as agreed by philosophers (and Henry James was a philosopher),  of which their reliability has been in question since humans learned to use their thumb:

Personal acquaintance with the object through direct sensual perception,
knowledge by inference (object is absent, only its marks are perceived), and
knowledge from information given to you by others.

Henry James makes use of these three sources in the story to guide you, no, to misguide you into the thicket of the story. This brings me to the introduction, where Mr. James starts the word-game that keeps the reader going back and forth to unscrew him/herself from the mystery.

The mother of all clues: Hello? Who’s talking to me?

This is where Henry James shows why he is the master.

If one source of knowledge is the words, the testimony given by another person, then that person’s character, his/her trust-worthiness must matter to the listener, wouldn’t you agree? Would you take the statements of a known liar and criminal at face value?

Henry James gives us the first clue of the story in the introduction, in what, interestingly enough, the anonymous narrator calls

“the proper prologue required for an intelligent understanding of the narrative”.

And what is that?

One important fact ignored and seldom mentioned by critics is that the story is not, as most readers assume, being told by Douglas, the purported story-teller. Henry James intentionally feeds this information to the reader in the introduction. The story and all the facts about it are given to the reader by the unknown narrator, a person no one knows, not the people at the meeting or the reader; and given from his old memories to boot.

This is the anonymous narrator talking to the reader:

 “…the narrative he had promised to read us…Let me say here distinctly, have done with, that this narrative, from an exact transcript of my own made much later, is what I shall presently give.”

“Have done with” as in ‘let me get it out-of-the-way before you start asking me the relevant questions: I don’t know the facts first hand or otherwise, I can’t know the truth’.

The author must have had a reason to put this clarification there. The readers can’t say that he didn’t warn them about how to treat the facts given to them by the anonymous narrator.  No one today would accept the ‘evidence’ provided by this man if one’s life depended on getting the ‘true facts’.

Only Douglas knew him, but not when the meeting took place, which begs the question why did the anonymous narrator believed him at that time?

The “narrative”, the story itself, is told from the anonymous narrator’s old memories about what happened at the meeting where Douglas supposedly read from the original manuscript, also supposedly written by the governess. The narrator tells us that Douglas denied having personal knowledge of the facts and events he was about to read from the governess’ manuscript. Douglas knows only what the now dead governess told him.

This means that no one telling the story knows the facts first hand, it’s all ‘she said’, but the reader is to pass judgment on whether the story is true or not, on whether there were apparitions or on whether the governess was mentally ill or not, based solely on the old memories of an unknown person of whose character and trustworthiness we have not a shred of evidence to rely on.

Image result for the innocents movie 1961

Flora, the girl, seems to be able to see the apparition but denies she did.


Does it matter today, or has it ever mattered, that scholars and psychologists continue to pass conclusive and ‘professional’ judgement on a fictional woman’s sexuality, and extrapolate that judgment to real women, based on the intentional lies of a genius fiction writer? Or is it the other way around, they bring their prejudices about women in general and use the fictional woman to validate their prejudices?

But, did it happen?

More important than whether it all happened or not is WHY DID IT HAPPEN? Why was the governess alone in a mansion with six “respectable SERVANTS” and two children abandoned by their wealthy relatives? The servants are “respectable”, says the master-boss, but we don’t know that., do we? Why must he readers believe him, especially when they are given clues that the servants were NOT all very “respectable” at all?

"The Innocents"

Poor little Flora with ‘strangers’ bathing her.

Either way what we have with ‘The turn of the screw’ is a work of literature art used by literature critics and psychologists to cement a cultural negative stereotype of women in general, and their  sexuality in particular. This despite the fact that the author did not set out to write about women’ sexuality, although the governess’ sexuality was one among the many elements.The cultural verdict is that the governess is a crazed sexually repressed woman driving the children mad and to death. Ignored are the other elements:

-That at the master who hired the governess neglected the children when, it is hinted, he knew they were in danger with the previous ‘servants’ but abandoned them and refuses to be in contact with them. Miles is marked by this neglect, as the author let us know in one scene.

-That wealthy men do not want to be bothered with raising or protecting children, even those of their own dead relatives. This is established clearly at the beginning of the story itself, second part. He orders the governess not to inform him of ANYTHING related to the children; he basically gives them away to any woman willing to be paid well for the job of taking care of them. But never do we hear about this by critics. it’s all about the crazy woman.

-That something was going on at the Bly mansion. Other women interviewed for the job refused to take it because they were ‘scared’ of what the master described.

All of these elements are totally ignored by every professional literature critic and psychologist using literature to spread their judgments on women.

Henry James stated that his intention was to write a story to confuse his readers, to play with their minds, so to speak. He wanted to write the best ghost story, not the best study of women’ sexuality. But that’s what literature critics have focused on for over 120 years.

The author kept a link throughout the story between class divisions and the governess attitude towards both  the ‘master’ and Mrs. Grose, the housekeeper. The master gave her “supreme authority” over Bly and the children, the first time this young woman was given any power over anything. There’s a reason why Mr. James put that in there.

But that power over the children was TEMPORARY because Miles in particular was growing up and recognizing his place of superiority in society. And the governess was aware that the boy was getting ‘naughty’ with her because ‘he could’. She knew her power over him was temporary and coming to an end. I’m sure the author wanted us to think about that.


"The Innocents"

Does any literature critic and psychologist care or have noticed?

I will continue the discussion about how Henry James presented women’s loss of power next week.




Counter Punch magazine finally ditches women?

Hmmm. Interesting. Consider this:

For the last two weeks, pseudo-Marxist Counter Punch magazine has published not one article by women.

Now, don’t you go on thinking it’s a serendipitous event. And before anyone raises the misogynistic argument that Counter Punch doesn’t engage in Affirmative Action for women, consider the following.

The ‘left’ has declared a war on ALL women movements. You can read on this blog some instances of misogyny exploding on online ‘leftists’ magazines like a pimple on a teenager’s face.

From bashing the Women’s March on Washington D.C. for committing the crime of being openly anti-Trump, to officially branding the #metoo movement as “right-wing”, the men on the ‘left’ completely identify with the fear of that king of misogyny, Trump, that women are out to attack men.

One of the sorriest recent example of men identifying with Trump was Kanye’s cooing for Trump.

Not all men are identifying with Trump, but the many (or few?) who do come from all walks of life: blacks, Latinos, poor, wealthy, white, educated, uneducated, scientists, entertainers…


Image result for misogynist men

That’s so funny I even had to go and stick some needles on a Borat look-alike doll’s genitals.

So the saga of the pseudo-leftsists’s turn to unite with the misogynistic right-wing continues.

I’ll try to keep you posted.

Image result for men's fear of womenImage result for men's fear of women

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.

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.


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”.


“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.)


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.


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 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.



We The People of Russia and the USA: On the Siberian mall fire

I, as many, many US citizens, am heart-broken by the death of Russian children in the Siberian mall fire a few days ago. I have read the American people’s comments in the mainstream media, the Washington Post and The New York Times, among others.

Let it be known to our fellow citizens of this planet earth in Russia that most of us, an overwhelming majority of us, are in pain for your loss in that fire.

“Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that coordinated U.S. and European expulsions of Russian diplomats yesterday showed disrespect for the dead. “We have learned a lot about the politicians of Europe and America today,” she said. “We have always sympathized with the Americans and the Europeans during their moments of grief. . . . This is hard to believe and to forget.”

‘We the people’ of the USA are NOT represented by this putrident’s misadministraton (I can’t even use the word ‘president’ to refer to this conniving man). We didn’t elect him. His actions are, if you have followed the ‘news’ here, around 100% against the wishes of the people.

The people of Russia is like the American people, like any other people in this planet for that matter, when it comes to politics: Some are mindful and aware of how politicians play with us; some are mindless and adhere to conservative lines (in Russia, I assume that to be ‘conservative’ means to support the government BLINDLY).

So, please, don’t let your politicians divide our humanity. The peace-loving and mindful Americans stand with you in your moment of pain. Like us, and maybe with more success, you will gather and DEMAND answers and changes to what constitute government accountability for what happened there.

Maybe we differ in opinion about Putin’s policies, but rest assure: The mindful people of the USA can separate him from you. No matter where we live, politicians take decisions in our names with which we disagree, some times. Then, as a consequence, we are forced to choose between our independence or to stand by our flawed politicians in the face of international billionaires’ interests manipulating our lives.

At the end, we all suffer equally, with a different accent.

My heart goes to you in this horrific moment of pain, and so does many American’s heart.


Andrew Levine -Did he just follow Trump into the GOP?

Sometimes it is amusing to watch how some people, in trying to come to grip with their mistakes but lacking the courage to admit to them, get all bent into a pretzel to prove they were actually right.

That seems to be the case with Andrew Levine, of Counter Punch online magazine, in his latest pro-Trump-apology propaganda article “Had Hillary Won: What Now?”. It starts as an apparent effort at admitting a mistake for attacking Hillary Clinton during the elections, but ends as a full-blown support for Trump and an invitation to join the GOP. Seriously!!

Twice in the article Andrew invites you to be thankful (yes, thankful) that Trump was, basically, imposed on the voters by the ‘oligarchy’, and all through it he tries to convince you that, under Trump, the GOP is not a fascist party, that the Democratic party is the fascist one. He actually makes the case for switching to the GOP as an alternative to the “corrupt” Democratic Party; maybe he has already switched, who knows. Then, he ends his article the way he intended to start it: He concludes that we should be grateful that Hillary Clinton is not the president and Trump is:

Even so, there is some reason to be grateful that she did not. [win, i.e.]

All this tells me that there may be another explanation for Mr. Levin’s Trump-apology article apart from an act of remorse, of ‘guilty feelings’ for his unrelenting attacks on Clinton. It may be just another piece from the Putin troll farm (propaganda) coming to the rescue of Trump in time when the Muller investigation is casting an ominous light on him with the indictment of 13 Russians. I think Andrew’s article fulfills this second explanation, and I will discuss his statements proving this below.

For Andrew, as for the zombie-leftists (he finally admits that there is no ‘leftist movement’) it is only Putin that matters. So here he goes again telling you that, for the love of God, understand that if Trump is in love with Putin (because of the millions of dollars in business with him, not because Trump is pro-peace) you must come to love Trump also.

That is the mark of the Putin troll farm, their love for Putin. All pseudo-leftists show it in their defense of Trump. They may receive monetary compensation for it, or do it for free, just for the love of Putin. We’ll never know which applies to Andrew Levine.

Once, right after the elections, Mr. Levine came this close to admitting that his and his magazine constant attacks on Hillary Clinton during the elections may have contributed to the appointment of racist/misogynist/racketeering/fascist Trump to the presidency. He must have felt a pang of guilty feelings, that’s for sure, for no self-respecting Marxist in his/her right mind would have campaigned for Trump, directly or indirectly, no matter who was running on the democratic side. If Mr. Levine lacks the political education to see that Trump is a 100% corrupt, amoral, anti-everything that is even mildly humane, let alone anti Mr. Levine’s ‘beloved’ working class, then he should stop representing himself as a leftist. I don’t believe he is a ‘leftist’. If he is one, he is a traitor to the working class. Any one who is glad that Trump is the president is a traitor to the working class.

Troll farm propaganda #1: Don’t mourn for Hillary, celebrate Trump

Here is Andrew again, in the anniversary of Trump’s first year of giving in simony this nation to the white-male billionaires, telling you that there’s no need to feel bad about having your democratically elected candidate supplanted by an amoral gangster. (Are there moral gangsters? The Godfather had some morals: don’t sell drugs to children. But that’s a movie and I’m digressing.).

That’s why he wrote this article. It’s a psychological propaganda attack on you to get you to accept Trump despite the political debacle this nation is experiencing at his expense. The technique is by reminding you how ‘evil Hillary and the Democratic Party are’, by feeding you the same emotional arguments that worked so well in creating this public image of Hillary Clinton as a monster. Andrew rehashes all the usual crimes and depiction of Hillary as a “beast” used during the elections in the article. It’s the Putin weapon reloading and discharging.

The above explains why the article starts like this:

“Suppose the polls had been right; suppose that what practically everybody believed would happen actually did happen.”

Instead of Marxism 100, Mr. Levin resorts to tasseomancy to explain why Trump is better than Clinton for the nation.  Mr. Levine is reading the tea leaves for you, he knows for a fact that, had the candidate with the overwhelming, historical majority of votes be in the presidency now…

Then Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, would be president of the United States, but the Senate, probably, and the House of Representatives, certainly, would have remained under Republican control.

So, his line of thinking is ‘Don’t feel bad, even if we pseudo-leftist screwed up by attacking her instead of attacking Trump, she would have still lost Congress.’  Right; he knows that for sure because he is a professional tassologist, not a Marxist.

He can see in his tea leaves what a Clinton administration would have looked like also:

had Hillary won, we would now have pretty much what we had when Barack Obama was president…

Funny thing here is that Mr. Levin was absent during the Obama administration from the leftist movement, he was supporting him, but now he is casting blame for the demise of the leftist movement on Obama.

So, again, Andrew goes on rehashing all the usual attacks on Clinton, saying that she would have been ‘more of Obama’.

Troll farm propaganda #2: ‘OK. We were wrong but will never admit to it’.

This is the thing: You can’t justify the unjustifiable, even If you are Mr. Levin or any other pseudo-leftists. Justifying support for Trump is possible only if you are like Trump. And so Andrew finds himself having to grant, in order to attack her later, nonetheless, that something good must have come out from a Hillary Clinton presidency. If you followed Andrew’s, Counter Punch magazine, and all the other zombie-leftists online blogs attacks on Hillary, like I did, this next statement by him is bound to have your head spinning in a rage.

He says that, had Hillary be the president now, some good would have come from her:

…the likelihood that the United States would blunder into a nuclear Armageddon would now be significantly less. [with Hillary, i.e.]

Throughout the elections Andrew’s and the pseudo-leftists main attack point on Hillary was that she is a warmonger.  He and the pseudo-leftists invited you to not vote for Clinton because she is a “warmonger beast” intending, purposely and for her beastly pleasure (literally) to cause “a WWIII”; that, because of Trump’s love of Putin, he was the peace candidate. I called the attention in my blog to this propaganda, you can search it.  It’s all there, including Susan Sarandon’s mind blogging statement that “Trump is less dangerous than Hillary”.

Troll farm propaganda #3: “We are a lot better off with Trump”

Look, if you have children reading this post, please, send them to their room; don’t let them see Andrew’s obscene argument in defense of Trump.

 It grieves me to say anything good about Donald Trump, but, to his credit, he did force Republicans onto a less unreasonable track…

Do I really have to spell to you the meaning of that statement? I’m going to choose not to do it. You just focus on the words “credit” and Republicans “in a less unreasonable track”. You will get there on your own.

What could possibly make a professional political ‘leftist’ thinker utter such an egregiously incorrect and offensive claim? Not even Republicans themselves dare to soil themselves by claiming that Trump has made them more reasonable. What could be so important to make Mr. Levine crap his reputation as an ‘intellectual leftists’ with such a sorry comment?

Answer: Putin, of course.

Trump has turned the GOP into the peace party, he says:

 …not in general, but towards Russia, a country with a nuclear arsenal so formidable that only maniacs would want to mess with it unnecessarily.

Thank God for the GOP for they are the peace party that will prevent a nuclear war with Russia because they have Trump’s man-crush on Putin to protect us.

Troll farm propaganda #4: “The GOP is not a fascist party.” Join them.

You can bring the kids back now. This will help them recognize propaganda in the future.

Andrew tells us that the Republican party is not a fascist party anymore, the implication being that they are not as dangerous, and that, when compared to the “corrupt” DNC, which he does ad nauseam,  well, they may be a better alternative for your interests as a (white) working class/middle class man.

And so, Reagan-style friendly fascism has largely disappeared from the Republican fold.”

Wow. And to think that I thought they were more fascist today under Trump. Thank you, Andrew for showing me how wrong I’ve been in insulting that progressing party.

Mr. Levine gives you a history class about the GOP, how that party under Reagan was a full-fledged fascist party, but not anymore under comrade Trump.

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is the devil incarnate.

Troll farm propaganda #5: Save the white working men from the evil party, the Democratic party, i.e.

Mr. Levin faithfully brandishes GOP’s and Trump’s racist arguments in favor of white men with pseudo-leftist language.

He describes the political crimes, subterfuges of the Democratic Party, all with ‘fascist’ roots. One of the biggest crimes of Hillary and the democratic party is their defense of people of color. As the GOP and Trump said, Andrew says that the dems “abandoned” the white working class, meaning the deplorables who supported Trump. That alone is enough to run out of the dem party into the GOP. You have to understand, the GOP is not fascist any more. They will stand for your rights as people of color, women, above all as workers. Do you really believe that the GOP and Trump cares about people of color, other than white color? Do you?!

This reminds me when, during the primaries, Levin et al pseudo-leftists advocated at Counter Punch for progressives to go to Trump’s rallies and pick up  a physical fight with his supporters, the same white working class he is standing for here. That’s dishonesty and manipulation of emotions, then and now.

Conclusion: Women are the hope for the future, but not really.

Mr. Levine may pretend to cover up his pro-Trump-GOP tracks by using some name calling on Trump, but the fact remains that he has created a masterful piece of propaganda, one that actually tells you that both the GOP and Trump are good for you.

The artful part of it is in the claiming that having Trump will automatically produce a ‘leftist movement’ against him. The problem is this: Mr. Levin clearly is pro-Trump, so every action by anyone against Trump is seen by Andrew as an attack on Putin and on his white supporters. And so him and the pseudo-leftists have consistently attacked the women’s resistance on account of them being anti-Trump. Let alone the fact that, as Andrew himself just admitted in the article, there is no leftist movement in the USA. That’s why they are a zombie-leftists: they are dead and and still roaming around the living trying to suck the blood out of us from their fancy leftists’ websites traps.

He knows there is no leftist movement alive to guide Levine’s beloved working class against the billionaires takeover of our nation. He knows it. So why  did he tell you during the elections that better vote for Trump than for “crooked Hillary” because Trump would ‘spark’ the revolution? He was doing Putin’s work to elect Trump. That’s why.

The zombie-leftists were absent during the Obama administration, this Andrew admits. But they were dead long before Obama, among other reasons because the workers can see that the professional left has left them behind long ago.

Today, Andrew attacks women, the only ones who have raised to the challenge against all that Trump represents. True, they are disorganized, but they are there, waiting for the right  bearers of ‘socialist’ ideology to help them focus their energy. Don’t expect that from Andrew or any other of the zombie-leftists.

At first, when the women organized the first Women’s March, the zombie-leftist, including him, ignored them, then started to attack them for being ‘women-centered’. Today it is obvious that it is the women the one at the forefront against this misadministration, and Andrew had to admit it:

It started with the Women’s March, immediately after Inauguration Day, and has been growing ever since; with women – black, brown, and white – leading the surge.

But he can’t control his misogyny. At the beginning of the article he called the women’s resistance a “sparking anodyne “resistance,”. It had to be “anodyne” because women issues are not important enough, not to the zombie-leftists. The leftists have always been misogynists, not all, but as a movement. The oppression of women is not important, girls. Don’t bother your male leftists with your problems.

Look, no one is saying that the democratic party is the socialist party or that it is controlled by the billionaire CEOs. But to say that the GOP is “less fascist” than the dems and that Trump is an opportunity for peace, simply shows the dishonesty of a man that claims to stand for the working class but is a fascist at heart.

The pseudo-leftists should have join the dems and force a coalition of sorts with the owners of the party, and take from there. No one can expect any ‘revolution’ in these political conditions. There is no space for a revolution since 1945. But the intellectual leftists have capitulated and sold their soul to Trump.

So women are a distraction, there’s no leftist movement; what are we to do now?

Follow  Andrew Levine into the Trump party, for the love of Putin!

Trump, women, and fascism: You must remember this.

There is pretty much a consensus among the American public in that the Donald, that mafioso occupying our White House, is a sexist misogynist…um, that he really really hates women.

Many of us see him not simply as your regular every-day misogynist, but as one who is intent on bringing women back to the kitchen, as the saying goes. His misogyny is not only a feeling in him, it is an active hatred of women seen, not only in his verbal output but, worse, in his political actions.

While until November 8 2016 he was your regular sexist Joe, making  millions of dollars from objectifying young women in his ‘beauty contests’,  while until that fateful date his misogynist comments were ignored or even taken humorously, after he was appointed to the presidency of the USA, he finds himself with the power of government as a weapon in his tiny creepy hands to act on his hatred of women, to actually hurt women.

Take as example the power of the Presidential Executive Action. The very first one he signed, he signed two weeks after the Women’s March in Washington, D.C., as punishment for women world-wide for their support to women marching here : He ordered that any nation who wants to receive financial aid from the US for humanitarian purposes must stop supporting or using said money for abortions, or for educating women to prevent pregnancies.

The fascist in me

There is no public consensus, though, in that the misogynist-in-chief is a fascist, although people may be coming to the realization that, if he isn’t a fascist, he is coming close to be one; as close as he is to Steve Bannon.

One of the salient, if not the principal, characteristic of all fascists of all times and in all places around this gorgeous blue planet is their intense hatred of women. Personally, I don’t accept any questions or doubts about that statement. Is not that I may be close-minded; it is simply that I know their history. Theirs is an open male-supremacy ideology.

And that is what you must remember.

There may be doubts about whether the Donald is a full-fledged fascists, but there can be no doubts in that he has brought to our government his ideology of male-supremacy, which is the same fascist ideology. The public may not be acquainted with the cultural ‘revolution’ of fascists worldwide since the late 1800s all the way up in history through the defeat of Hitler; but that history of misogyny and male-supremacy is in the history books and old newspapers clips for you to inspect.

Women must remember this. The time has come for women to learn and remember that male-supremacy is fascism. The time has come for them to create their own political organizations to protect themselves and our children. Many men joined women in that march, these men need to join women in any organization they create.

What you saw this past month, powerful men and ‘celebrities’ been called to task for their past sexual attacks on women and children (girls and boys, they don’t discriminate)…I saw in it the media using the victimization of women as a political weapon to unseat politicians or to prevent some from running for office.While it was successful for progressives (except for the unfortunate case of Al Franken), there is no change in the status of women from these events. Not a single bill was proposed to correct the problem of sexual abuse.

Once the media stops focusing on the issue of sexual harassment, the topic disappears from the public conversation. It’s been a week now that we don’t see any articles about the issue. The public discusses what the owners of the media decide is the topic of the day.

Women can’t wait for the media to decide when we talk about the oppression of women.

This is the most important time to unite and create some organization.

Don’t waste this moment. You will have to wait another 20 years for another opportunity like this.


Image result for fascist + misogyny

Jill Stein and the zombie-Leftists: collusion, stupid, or plain carrying the water for Trump?

Do you remember Jill Stein collecting millions of dollars for a “recount” of votes in the states where she took votes from Clinton, giving Trump an advantage, and then passing her ‘judgment’ that there was no voting ‘theft’? Is it possible that she was helping ‘cleaning up’ any ‘breadcrumbs’ from Putin’s interference? More on this later.

I spent the 2016 presidential elections in this non-professional political blog (exercising my glorious citizen’s Constitutional Right to Speech) denouncing and giving examples of how the American zombie-Leftists were, in my view, making the case to those who read their websites to vote for Trump. I showed how they were Trump-apologists, savaging Hillary Clinton with misogynistic attacks and defending Trump as an alternative to “peace”, against Clinton’s “thirst for war”; him as an ‘anti-globalist’. In Hollywood ‘star’  Susan Sarandon’s infamous words

“Trump is less dangerous than Hillary Clinton”.

I amuse myself today with the realization that, in my naiveté, I didn’t use the term ‘collusion’ (no one used it then)  to refer to this leftists’ losing approach in ‘defense of the working class’ of portraying Trump as a ‘better alternative’ to Clinton. Instead, I used a term of my own creation: the zombie-Left. 

Why didn’t I or any progressive-leftist see the “collusion” with the Russians? I leave that for the last part of this post. Before I  show how Jill Stein and the zombie-leftists gave us this Trump Christmas tax bill present,  let me clarify:

Who is the zombie-Left?

I defined them as mostly those old so-called Marxists who have no party (there’s no organized left in the USA) but only political websites to brainwash the young progressives. I focused on Counterpunch, Blackagendareport, Democracy Now!, Socialistworld, and few other ‘leftist’ websites trapping the young millennials. I always exempted The Nation from this list because they came across as balanced; their criticisms of Clinton weighted against the danger of electing Trump.

Was the Left “colluding” with Putin, just plain stupid, or  just the ‘alt-right’ impersonating the ‘left’?

That question is important if you are searching for an answer to the headline of this post: Were these leftists in “collusion” with Putin or merely carrying water for Trump? Jill Stein is now suspected of “colluding” with Putin, but what about the others?

Through out the elections, I made the case that ‘leftist’ Counterpunch’ magazine favorite right-winger, Paul Craig Robertson, was right when he said that the American-left doesn’t exist anymore. I presented as first evidence of their death that they had become Trump apologists. That is what makes them the zombie-leftists: they are a ‘living dead’ political ideology roaming around our political community trying to drag the living into their ‘alt-right’ world.

Even today, when there are no doubts that Trump is stealing this nation’s wealth clean with his gang of billionaire globalists, the zombie-leftists can’t get themselves to attack him. Their websites have very few articles attacking him. On the contrary, they are defending him against that ‘Hillary’s campaign of fake Russian collusion’.

Silence is complicity, especially in this case.

Trump Apologists: This they offered to the working class

Maybe these zombie-leftists are not all of them in direct “collusion” with Putin, but they are NOT the ‘traditional’ left we thought we knew. And don’t forget, to be pro-Putin today is not the same as what it was to be pro-Russia in the past. Today’s billionaire class is in love with Putin, not because of his leftist-politics, but because they share with him his corrupt personal capitalist interests. It is not the Russian people whom Trump and Tillerson love.

As I discussed in this blog, any person claiming to be a Marxist and who offers to the working class a man like Trump to represent their interests, a man who represents the most corrupt element of the elite millionaire class, with a history of having done  NOTHING for the working class, whose blatant amorality is acknowledged by everybody…that person is comically impersonating a leftist Marxist. Some of you may be asking:

‘Oh, but what about Hillary; isn’t she the same?’

If by now, as you see what Trump is doing, you still think she is “the same” as he is, you are definitely a zombie. I’ll expand on this later.

Counterpunch and the alt-right

That guy, Paul Craig Robertson, is a known right-winger, but Counter Punch magazine has no problem giving him space to spew his venom, sure, in the name of “open-mindedness”. You don’t see the right-wingers giving progressives the same treatment in their websitesPaul Craig Robertson said it very clear, that the “left is dead”, but Counterpunch doesn’t care. Why?

Because the American left has turned into the alt-right. That explain their support of Trump. You can roam around this blog, look “Counterpunch” and see my evidence.

My point all along has been this:

The American ‘left’ is dead. What remains of it is the ‘leftist lexicon’. The alt-right has taken possession of their body. Only if you understand what truly is the ‘alt-right’, its historic background in Hitler’s Germany, will you be able to recognize them in the ‘leftist’ websites. Please, read this article, which I used extensively in my blog, about the alt-right, Counterpunch magazine, and the history of the alt-right movement. Counterpunch of sucker punch?

I didn’t think of “collusion”, but I did see the pseudo-left in cahoots with the billionaire globalists. I still believe that the election coup given to the American people was the result of a perfect storm:

The male globalist oligarchy (billionaires of Silicon Valley, MSM, warmongering arm builders and Pentagon), with the  zombie-leftists-alt-right misogynistic. What they were trying to prevent was the taking of power of a coalition of women, feminists, immigrants, working class behind ‘that open feminist woman’. I proposed that, in this past elections, feminism was in the ballot and that our male oligarchy is not ready for that. I proposed that they couldn’t morally justify supporting Trump against ‘that woman’, and so it was the MSM spend 24/7 attacking Hillary Clinton over the emails while at the same time “endorsing” her. It was FBI’s Comey who gave the final blow to our elections.  The MSM knew that the email scandal was based on Putin’s effort to derail our elections, but they used the material anyway, helping him to achieve his goal. I assert it was done intentionally. They are all doing business with him behind the curtain.

I think the biggest guilt for the debacle we are living rests  on our MSM and the zombie-leftists. Putin’s effort would have been in vain had it not been for the American media and the zombie-leftists making his work viable.

I can see now Jill Stein, whom I criticized during the elections, ‘colluding’ with Putin. It does make sense now. The same with Amy Goodwin. I’m not saying they derived any monetary gains from this; I doubt it. But they and the zombie-leftists joined the alt-right who loves Putin too for different reasons.

These people, Stein et al, can’t find cover behind the curtain of ignorance, “I didn’t know”.

They knew very well what they were doing.


Why didn’t discriminating leftists like me, and other progressives, didn’t see the “collusion”?

You will have to chalk it off to human foible, our natural inclination to believe uncritically when the time has come to ditch old assumptions.

OK, what I mean is this.

Many older leftists like me have had a tradition of support and sympathies for the Russian PEOPLE and for their more ‘socialist’ government. Sure, we are completely aware that the US has interfered in their lives for many decades, we know about the political crimes our nation has committed there. And sure, we want the US to pay for those crimes…but in a diplomatic way. We don’t want wars with the Russians or manipulation of their economy; we have always wanted to ‘settle’ differences using  diplomacy.

In our minds it would have been unconscionable and a betrayal for the Russian government, Putin in particular, to mess up with the election process of the people of the USA to help that beast that is Trump get to the presidency. Putin knows what Trump means for  our working class, and for the safety of the people in this planet.

But little did I know that the acid of capitalism, the personal greed that fuels it, had already spilled into the hierarchy of the Russian government. Russia has drifted far away from ‘socialism’; maybe we should congratulate our Western oligarchs (the billionaire globalist class) for their success. Putin, just as the bureaucrats in China, is the nuovo capitalist. My condolences to the people of those two nations. You are just starting to live in what we may be on our way of getting out from.

It will take decades, sure; but we have started the process. What will come out of it is an incognito; it will NOT be socialism nor communism. But whatever it is, if our ‘glorious leaders’ don’t evaporate us  first in a global atomic war, it will be superior to capitalism, socialism and communism.

For posts here discussing these issues, search “American left elects Donald Trump”, and click tags: identity politics, Counterpunch, American left and Donald Trump. For the media: Attacks on Hillary Clinton. Most of the posts on this blog are about the zombie-leftists.


Al Franken and sexual harassment: The haunting scandal

So he resigned.  True, he did it with a metaphorical gun to the back of his head.  By having him removed, have women achieved any enduring progress against the universal problem of sexual harassment and men hatred of women? Of course not. Actually, they have actually lost by having him removed. Now people are going to be wary of complaints of sexual harassment in politics.It may be the end of the issue in the public media.

Let me elaborate, for this problem entails at least two different but overlapping aspects: politics and culture. [Grammar police needs a warrant to enter this blog.]

First consider that Congress is not your neighborhood. Congress is the house where politics live. Whatever happens there to affect the elected politicians is done with the purpose of influencing politics and policy. We all know that, don’t we?

What makes you think that the media denouncing  Trump and Moore as perverts has anything to do with protecting women? Nothing. It has to do with power struggle to pass policies unrelated to the oppression of women here or worldwide. The victimization of women is being used as a political weapon; that’s all there is to it. Evidence? How many laws have been passed or proposed to curb the issue of sexual harassment at large? If women were to try to enact policy in that direction, the media-owner-men would be the first to attack the effort, surreptitiously of course; they never do it in their personal character.

Is the problem  of sexual harassment always a problem of an individual perpetrator? Yes and no.

It is a personal issue when we deal with it in the general society. We accuse and take to court a perpetrator, or try to and mostly fail So women need LEGAL POLICIES that help them protect themselves. For that they have to go to Congress.

Al Franken, as complicated a human being as we all are, is a perpetrator AND a supporter of women issues, and in a position to help women pass POLICIES. You have to weight THAT when you deal with him. Sorry, but this issue is not ALWAYS black or white; nothing is in this life.


Look, the problem of  male hatred of women is universal. Not all men hate women, many are supporters. But the problem is universal, is part of our culture;  which means that you CAN’T go around trying to put in prison every man who hates women and acts on it. It is with this realization that the problem moves from the cultural to the political: you have to empower women, not use their victimization as political tool to benefit men who stand against women. You see, it’s a complicated issue. The Moores and  Trumps of the world have no problem admitting they are perverts. They are confident in their power. And it works for THEM.

You can’t deal with the issue from the perspective of each person if you want to fix the problem.

Humans are complicated, men more than any other humans. They want virginal wives but fantasizes of slutty ones. Go figure. Anyway….

The victimization of women has been used against women for political purposes. The problem remains unsolved and unaddressed. All you have achieved is removing a man who could probably be ‘re-educated’. Have you considered that? Not all crimes are the same in degree.

Women. You need to wise up. You have been used, victimized twice. The solution is becoming a problem. It’s going to turn into a ghost haunting women for the next 100 years: a missed opportunity to enact political policies to empower women of the next generation. The problem is not Al Franken; is women powerlessness. Only politics gives you power.

Start developing a political approach to this political problem. Organize and develop policies to protect yourselves, and then scorch the earth to secure the passage of said policies.

Intolerance in US Political Parties

The US establishment’s duopoly. Two political parties that supposedly deny each other. Unity is forbidden, having similarities is forbidden. It has to be ‘all or nothing’. Negate each other, hate each other. Divide and conquer.

Somehow it’s not working for the moribund middle class. Despite the duopoly  and its mutual hatred and mutual negation, the billionaire class continues to suck all the money from down here, enriching themselves to historical proportions. Clearly, the duopoly works for them.

It’s the minions who can’t understand that they have something in common: that they are minions. And so they go on voting for one or the other party, hating each other, denying each other, negating each other.

The cartoon minions are “buddies”. The human minions hate each other.

Image result for minions buddiesImage result for brawl at trump

On Hillary Clinton’s hair DNA sequence as the barometer of freedom of speech

Hillary Clinton has become everything to us.

I wholeheartedly supported her during the elections, but I’m nobody’s “hardcore follower”. Every leader of every era has had hardcore followers, the type that accept them no matter what. I meant that opening line with another meaning.

This is not about her per se, though; it’s about that tenuous concept of ‘freedom of speech’. Is about how a man’s business ‘practice’, figuring out DNA sequence to create pharmaceutical products, became not only his downfall, but also the test for the limits of freedom of speech.

And yet! Hillary Clinton has actually become ‘everything to us’. Every time she shows her face in public there’s mass convulsion. She is the perennial she-devil that half the nation needed to block from access to the most powerful political seat in the world because they were sure she was intent on seeking the presidency to, in her evil way of thinking, destroy the world (for fun, mind you) by causing the third World War. That’s worse than being a ‘bitch’. That’s a witch.

Martin Shkreli felt compelled out of his arduous business of making life-saving drugs by her merely showing her face in public…to sell some books.

Possible humane background for Martin Shkreli need for Clinton’s DNA sequencing

Since distant times, the witches’ own hair have been used by heroes to paralyze them. Heroes of  very far away times, well, of mythology, used to cross the planet trying to pull a lock of hair from a witch’s head to make a potion with which to kill her, or to cut her head off, which always proved easier to do. Medusa comes to mind. Medusa, a man-eater. That’s the danger these witches pose to ‘mankind’.

Fast forward to the most modern and advanced millennium in (organized) human history: the 21 first’s.

Medusa, er, Clinton is the embodiment of that mythological man-eater. And Martin Shkreli is the (anti) hero in search of Clinton’s head. Except that he doesn’t carry a sword but a sack of money to pay, as he advertised on FB, any fool who dares grab her by the (head) hair and bring him the evidence of success. He is more like SALOME in that respect, isn’t he?

He can afford to pay $5 grands per hair strand because he is in the pharma business of making people pay with their blood for one vial of life-saving medication. He is a blood-sucker, i.e., a (male) vampire going after a witch. That’s rich, isn’t? He wanted to create a modern potion with her hair, figuring her DNA sequence to make the ‘antidote’ to kill her. Literally.

Well, the case is that he is now, supposedly, in a Maximum security prison for “solicitation to assault in exchange for money that is not protected by the First Amendment,” the judge said. To which Shkreli’s lawyer responded:

“Indeed, in the current political climate, dissent has unfortunately often taken the form of political satire, hyperbole, parody or sarcasm,” Brafman wrote. “There is a difference, however, between comments that are intended to threaten or harass and comments — albeit offensive ones — that are intended as political satire or strained humor.”

This is where my opinion on the issue starts.

The discussion of the political issue of Freedom of speech has become as mindbogglingly ridiculous as those laws passed mostly in the western states of the US prohibiting the collection of rain water, even the rain falling on a citizen’s house roof.

In this latest case of ridiculously mind boggling use of freedom of speech it is MONEY the trigger for the dispute. Had Shkreli just asked for a few strands of Mrs. Clinton’s hair, he would still be a free vampire, um, man, but his crime was in offering monetary payment, in engaging in a business transaction, the type that has made him a billionaire, to wit, figuring out “DNA sequence” of things that would make him richer beyond our imagination. He claims now that it was all just in jest.

He got himself a direct ‘go to jail’ for offering payment, not for the many instances of abuse of freedom of speech in which he has engaged, mostly against women.

His lawyer has a point when he says that “in the current political climate, dissent has unfortunately often taken the form of political satire, hyperbole, parody or sarcasm”. I propose that this satirizing of dissent is a sign of the times, a sign of the political powerlessness of the citizens of this nation.

There has been so many instances of clear abuse of freedom of speech in the past years sanctioned by the SCOTUS and by politicians that We The People are left only with “satire” to fight it off. A corporation is a person. Mind boggling, isn’t it?

Up to the last 20 years of the last century most of us  had a good idea of what abuse of freedom of speech meant, we could hear it and read it when expressed. After 9/11 that clarity has become a fog. But more than anything it is globalism which has muddled our minds with its insistence in conflating freedom of speech and freedom of doing business.

Doing business requires advertising the products created through advertisement, and the advertisement industry has  desensitized the public to their playful use of freedom of speech to sell the business’ ware with ads portraying ‘bad’ as cool. Shkreli himself prided, not anymore, on being that bad boy of social media.

We live in a world that is politically and economically disturbed. Billionaires feel that they are exempt from moral rules, just as the feudal lords of the 1800s saw themselves. Bad is good, good is bad. War is good, peace is a sign of weakness, according to the elite’s bible. And freedom of speech will continue to be mediated by how much freedom we need to take from corporations to be able  to live in a moral social agreement.

The limits of freedom of speech will be tested by how far the likes of billionaires like Shkreli can push immorality,  not by ‘DNA testing’.

That is farther down the line.




Trump’s Afghanistan war strategy: Perpetual war

Trump’s teleprompter speech to Americans on his ‘strategy’ on the continued undeclared war in Afghanistan was about, well, he’ll do things his way. “No time limit”, just when the “conditions” change, then the war ends. Good luck with that.

First, the war party continues. Of course, being in the Oval office ‘changes’ everything for him. What he means is that the war industry, government and private, found another excuse to continue the war: to kill terrorists. Is not about democracy any more.

He is a “problem solver”, and the Afghanistan ‘problem’ will be solved, one way or another.How?

Second, it will be a SECRETIVE undeclared war. He will not tell terrorists, nor the American public, of course, about how many American citizens will be sacrificed to continue funding the war mongering corporations. So we don’t know how he will solve the ‘problem’, except…

Third, more BILLIONS of dollars to arm soldiers here and there. That’s music to Grumman and the Pentagon ears.

Fourth, he will let somebody, maybe the generals and the Pentagon but probably Prince, run the war. He can’t be bothered with it.

Because the war will be a secretive war, the fact that he announced that BILLIONS of dollars will be spent in the undeclared war, and that he will let ‘others’ run the war, leads to the reasonable conclusion that he signed Prince into a private war, giving him what he asked: 10 billions a year to run the war.

Yeap. In so few words, that’s what the greedy amoral man in the WH has just told you. Permanent and private war. You don’t need to know ANYTHING else about it. Put the war off your mind. 

So there you have it.

Go fight and put your life in danger for this greedy immoral corrupt amoral man occupying the White House.


U.S. Senator Cotton’s doppelganger is Norman Bates

To the left is Senator Cotton, to the right is Anthony Perkins, aka Norman Bates. Mr. Cotton loves the movies. I’m sure he is a fan of Mr. Bates.

The missing ‘peace’

It’s been a long time since I don’t hear or see the word peace anywhere.

The last time that word was trending was in the 60s, you know, when the stoned-headed hippies were tripping with it. It gave them a bad reputation, that and the acid they were consuming, courtesy of the CIA.


The First World War was “the war to end all wars”. That was the first and last time humanity actually fought for peace itself. The newly minted working-class (product of the new kid on the block, heavy industry and capitalism) took their masters to task. In Germany, there were actually legislation demanding “peace without annexation”, and international solidarity among the workers (male and female). There were uprisings of soldiers and sailors against the war.

New Yorkers carry a peace banner down Fifth Avenue in a protest against the First World War.

Text supplied by the German Federal Archive: “With the rebellion of the sailors and workers on 3 November 1918 in Kiel the November revolution starts. On 6 November the revolutionary movement reaches Wilhelmshaven. Our picture shows the soldiers’ council of the Prinzregent Luitpold.”

Those were the days. Well, those were the days of open warfare between the working class and the capitalists; that’s what it was really all about, that and colonialism for stealing the wealth of weak nations for the industrialists’ profit.

Today…well, today we still go to war to take the wealth of other nations; we still cover the truth with words like “for freedom”, “to save people from their dictators” while bombing said people.

What can be said about today’s working class? They don’t have that spirit of the past; they are merely trying to survive in their own nations. They are so poor, they are willing to sell themselves as soldiers-of-fortune. They can’t even elect people willing to pass a resolution against any war. And don’t tell me it’s because the “democratic party is the party of Wall Street”; that’s a cop-out. The only thing people do here is vote and call their ‘representatives’. That was fine for a while, can’t you see it’s not working anymore?

The word peace has become permanent collateral damage of our permanent wars ever since…”The only thing to fear is fear itself”, said Roosevelt to walk Americans towards war, and we have marched towards war ever since. We haven’t been without wars since then. Then the new millennium started with Bush’s invasion of Iraq after 9/11; now it seems we are marching towards another atomic conflagration, another hecatomb, this time in North Korea. Our crazy president may have to nuke the people of that nation to save them from their own crazy leader.

I tell you, war is ‘so cheap’; people buy it wholesale for $0.50, the cost of the newspapers they read filled with pro-war propaganda they accept mindlessly. That word, mindlessly, reminded me of The Buddha.

The Buddha had an interesting message: The Doctrine of the Mind. He said that

Whatsoever  there is of evil, connected with evil, belonging to evil – all issues from the mind.

Whatsoever there is of good, connected with good, belonging to good – all issues from the mind.

He then taught:

  1. to know the mind – that is so near to us, and yet is so unknown;
  2. to shape the mind – that is so unwieldy and obstinate, and yet may turn so pliant;
  3. to free the mind – that is in bondage all over, and yet may win freedom here and now.

But I’m done with humans. I have come to accept that the human race is incorrigible. They believe Trump and admire warmongering billionaires like Tillerson, but mock The Buddha. They care not about another atomic hecatomb, this time in North Korea.

So I will go on reminding people about the word ‘peace’. It is in our minds if we want it to be. Don’t put conditions on peace; if you want peace, then it can’t be “after Assad is removed from power”, or “after we get rid of Isil”.

It has to be NOW, PERIOD.  Demand a NEGOTIATED PEACE without bombing for it.


Michael Hudson on Identity Politics: to strengthen the working class, dump women and ‘colored’ people

Identity politics strips away thinking of one’s interest in having to work for a living.
Michael Hudson

Only racist people can shame you for fighting racism, misogyny and xenophobia.

The specter of stealthy racism and misogyny rises again in the progressive movement, this time from the pen of famous leftist economist Michael Hudson (is he leftist?) in his recent article Trump is Obama’s Legacy: Will this Break up the Democratic Party? at Counter Punch magazine. I have to ask “is he leftist?” because Counter Punch is the preferred site of alt-right third-way conservatives who speak, without an accent, the leftist lingo to better contaminate with their racism and misogyny the minds of unsuspecting progressives. Paul Craig Robertson is one of those alt-right and openly conservatives whose right-wing ideology is often published there under the guise of ‘leftist’ opinion; that good they are at impersonating leftist’s ‘thinking’.

But that’s a different story. I’m here to talk about Mr. Hudson’s, and the alt-right’s,  anti-women and racist ideology passed on in his article as criticism of “identity politics” (IdPol)

The enemy within: Identity Politics as anti-labor politics

Mr. Hudson opens the discussion of Identity Politics defining in  the heading IdPol as “anti-labor”. It’s the only definition  he offers of it to the reader, passing then to wrongly describe what IdPol does. By defining it as “anti” labor, he clears up the battlefield for the confrontation between the two enemies: the ‘labor movement’  vs everybody else.

You see, if you happen to believe that there are other forms of institutionalized oppression, in addition to labor, with roots both in culture and economic politics, then Mr. Hudson will cast you on the side of the enemy of the white male “working class”: you are “everybody else”; and if you ARE a unionized working person, then you must be the enemy within.  Let’s be honest, today, the intellectual leftists are more preoccupied with the suffering of the white male working class “abandoned and insulted by Clinton and the democratic party” than with that of  women and children,  be it as workers (child labor) or sex-slaves; not even interested with the economical well-being of ‘colored’ laborers. So when the intellectual leftists, Mr. Hudson and the alt-right use the term “working class”, white male working class is what they mean. And they mean race and gender are the enemies of that particular segment of the working class.

The article does not  mention the  unemployed women and ‘colored people’ demands for jobs, whether historically or in the present. The non-whites’ struggle for jobs is not part of the author’s idea of ‘working class’.   That’s why Mr. Hudson implies that the reason these people ‘practice’ IdPol is because they don’t want to work for a living, as he says in the article:

Identity politics strips away thinking of one’s interest in terms of having to work for a living.”

Mind you, not even the ‘labor movement’ itself adopts Mr. Hudson’s extreme stereotyping definition of IdPol, for they continue to support  with actions the demands of so-called ‘identity’ groups: women, immigrants, people of color, LGBT. But with his anti-IdPol, Mr. Hudson and the extreme GOP alt-right can light up in what remains of the labor movement the fire of hatred of women, with the leftist intellectuals fanning that fire in their leftist media.

Answer this quickly: When have you seen a racist/white supremacist/GOP/conservative calling for an end to  racism and misogyny? That’s why only “labor politics” matters to Mr. Hudson and the leftists intellectuals.

The Black Panthers: enemies of labor?

He starts the discussion of Idpol by saying that the term ‘identity politics’ is a “new term introduced to the English language“; that’s it, period. He forgets to state ‘when’ or ‘who’ “introduced” it. It matters, ‘who’.

According to some writers (e.g., Howard J. Wiarda in “Political Culture, Political Science, and Identity Politics: An Uneasy Alliance”), the term has been in use since at least the 1960-70s; that doesn’t make it “new”, or does it? The revolutionary movement of that time used the term to inform the public about oppression by capitalism in all spheres of human relations, including the personal. Groups like Black Panthers and feminists used it, you know, the people who, according to Mr. Hudson’s definition of IdPol,  you should condemn today  for using ‘identity politics’. But we don’t want to condemn them, do we?, at least not consciously.

That’s why Mr. Hudson’s assertion about the origin of the term IdPol  is purposely superficial, because it surreptitiously leads to the condemnation of the recent history of the people’ struggles against all forms of capitalist/conservative oppression. And what is good for the goose is good for the gander: if we accept that it was necessary for those people in the 60s and 70s to fight against the racism and misogyny that comes intertwined with economic oppression, so it is today.

Culture and the culture of oppression

Mr. Hudson’s and the alt-right’s racist ideology stands on the believe that the oligarchy, globalists, and conservative elites of all flavors don’t use culture to oppress the rest of humanity; that only our 9 to 5 work-life interest them, but not controlling what happens in our ‘cultural space’ after hours. Believe that ideology on your own peril.

Were concentration camp ‘Jews’ anti-labor?

But IdPol have been in use since MANY years before the 7os. Mr.Hudson  forgets to mention that the legs on which Hitler’s Nazism stood was precisely identity politics: German ‘racial superiority’, the ‘inferiority’ of Jews, Blacks, women, homosexuals, the mentally ill; and of non-German ‘ethnic nationals’…all of whom were so ‘inferior’ as to deserve been incinerated in concentration camps. Consider this: If you were a non-mentally ill/not physically disabled white ‘Aryan’ male in Nazi Germany, would you have feared Hitler’s RACIAL policies? What if you were a ‘Jew’, would you have feared his racial policies? Would you have said, in those days, ‘let’s not talk about Hitler’s identity politics of persecuting me because of my Jewishness/Blackness; let’s concentrate on Hitler’s union-busting practices?’

Yep, identity politics never existed before until Hillary introduced it.

Only RACIST people don’t fear racist policies and politics. Only racist people can shame you for fighting against racism, misogyny and xenophobia. Only racists can tell you that you should worry ONLY about wages, that you should NOT support anyone who stands to defend you against racism…Only Mr. Hudson, a white male who has done nothing for “the working class”  can define for you your priorities: racism and misogyny are NOT the priorities of the white male labor ‘movement’, so they can’t be yours either.

Yep, healthy-looking, happy nothing-to-fear white boy. I should trust you when you tell me not to fight against racism and misogyny because?

Woman, where were you on Trump’s inauguration day?
(The “52% of white women who voted for Trump”)

Mr. Hudson wouldn’t be worthy of being called a white elitist man if he didn’t attack women in his piece. He blamed. literally, the women’s march on D.C. for the absence of the left and unions on Trump’s inauguration day. Was he there that day? I didn’t see him.

I went to the inauguration, and my first observation was ‘Where are the unions, where are the leftists, where is everybody?’ There were less than 3K people where I was. Mr. Hudson answered the question for me: it was the women, stupid! Somehow those evil pro-Clinton women bewitched the leftists, the anti-war ‘movement’ and the unions members on January 20 to stay at home that day. Sounds to me like Mr. Hudson suffers from typical men’s primordial fear of women.

Maybe he should talk to Paul Craig Robertson who wrote an article about the demise of the American left. Paul is right, the American left is dead, and the alt-right has taken its place, that’s why they didn’t show up. But also because they are supporting Trump dreaming that he is the new revolutionary of peace because of his love for Putin. Everybody knows that the union movement have been decimated too, but not by the women’s movement. There were no leftists, unions or anti-war marchers in the millions at Trump’s inauguration because those movements have been destroyed: by the conservatives, GOP, globalists, and SOME in the Democratic party.

Also, Mr. Hudson states that “52% of white women voted for Trump”. I tell him  98% of BLACK women voted for Hillary Clinton. These are women who, with good reasons, are afraid of Trump’s racism; white women are not afraid of his racism. I congratulate Black women for being the ONLY group on which the media propaganda (left and right) failed completely to manipulate voters into voting for Trump.  They may not all be feminists (must of them aren’t) but they sure knew that, in terms of national policies, Trump is the enemy. They know that the killing of their Black children will continue under Trump, but their boys bought the misogynistic fear of a woman running the nation and decided to stay home; they voted in that way against their own interests and their mothers.

Mr. Hudson says that the media “informed” us that white women didn’t feel welcome at the march. The media has ignored women’s activities, and when they mention them, it is ALWAYS to denigrate the women or to create division. The march in D.C. was very white indeed. Propaganda, what do you expect from  our mainstream media?

The question is Where were those people who Saturday? Did they come to show support to working women, to victims of violence, to children, to disabled people; to stand against Trump’s upcoming wars, which we knew were around the corner? So much for ‘anti-war movement’.

The women’s march was open for everybody who knew that the struggle continues with Trump. But our intellectual leftists have filled the minds of some men and women with the idea that we must wait and give Trump a chance to prove that he is the “revolutionary” they have made him to be in their puny imaginations. These ‘leftists’ would rather stick a fork in their eyes than get caught marching with women!

Mr. Hudson didn’t show up there, actually, he doesn’t show up ANYWHERE, because he is a conservative. He considers women’s issues to be “non-issues, non-threatening to the donor class”; in other words, women are ‘wimps’. He and the intellectual leftists lament that women were marching against Trump. I’m sure that after Trump’s bombing of Syria, they will not recognize that women were correct in marching against him. As long as women don’t do as men tell them, men will be angry at them.

Women’s Strike for Peace-And Equality, Women’s Strike for Equality, Fifth Avenue, New York, New York, August 26, 1970. (Photo by Eugene Gordon/The New York Historical Society/Getty Images)

Mr. Hudson misses ‘the simplicity of the past’
(typical of conservatives)

According to the author, identity pol.

used to be about three major categories: workers and unionization, anti-war protests and civil rights marches against racist Jim Crow laws. That ended when these movements got co-opted into the Democratic Party.”

When you put it like that, the people’ struggle against all kind of oppression seem less cumbersome, for we can now see what it is NOT about. The following is an incomplete list of non-issues derived from Mr. Hudson’ statement above:

  • The fight against capitalism and for control of the means of production (only union-issues matter)
  • Fight against institutionalized racism
  • Fight for climate and environmental issues (poisoning of water resources…)
  • Fight against institutionalized misogyny and oppression of women (gender pay gap, sexual harassment everywhere and in the job (not a problem of male workers),  physical violence against women on a daily basis…)
  • Globalists exploiting child-labor is a non-issue
  • Keeping an army of unemployed humanity to serve as regulator of the cost of labor (if you are not working, you are a non-issue and Mr. Hudson will put you in the ‘enemy of the working class’ side)

Interestingly enough, these are all economic issues that affect the elite conservative businesses and the globalists, which is why they oppose the people fighting to achieve them. Fighting “Jim Crow” was OK, but not fighting against the institutionalized racism that Mr. King fought, the one from which white conservatives profited; and Black women are not in the image we get in our minds when we talk about racism. By mentioning only Jim Crow, Mr. Hudson shows us his true colors.

If we had focused only on those three issues, the following would have never  happened, but they did:

  • there would have been no disability movement to stop the atrocities committed in psychiatric hospitals,
  • no removal of environmental barriers to help people with physical disabilities navigate the outdoors,
  • no child protections laws, against child labor and child abuse in general,
  • no attention to the problem of sex-slavery of women and children,
  • no changes to the justice system that oppresses Blacks and minorities…

We take for granted many of the rights we ‘enjoy’ today, but they were all won with blood. Only conservatives and globalists want us to ignore those issues, mainly because they created and benefit from them.

Put the blame on Mame boys

That ended when these movements got co-opted into the Democratic Party.

Not only Mr. Hudson and the alt-right don’t blame the GOP for the ending of “these movements”,  you will NOT find the leftist intellectuals blaming them either. All the blame for the loss of workers rights goes to the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton, as if the persistent attacks on labor didn’t start in the 1900s with the advent of the new capitalism. Don’t socialists agree in that capitalism can’t exist without the proletarians and is perpetually fighting against them? Is it possible that the GOP is not the representative of  capitalists? Why attack the party with the most working class in it and leave the white supremacists’ party untouched?

You must ask yourselves why these people deflect attention from the GOP, who benefits from it and from destroying the democratic party; who benefits from leaving the GOP as the only party in the nation?

Propaganda is a fun when you know how to do it

In describing how IdPols ‘works’, Mr. Hudson says:

“Its aim is for voters to think of themselves as separatist minorities – women, LGBTQ, Blacks and Hispanics. The Democrats thought they could beat Trump by organizing Women for Wall Street (and a New Cold War), LGBTQ for Wall Street (and a New Cold War), and Blacks and Hispanics for Wall Street (and a New Cold War). Each identity cohort was headed by a billionaire or hedge fund donor.

Well…that quote is so offensive I don’t even know where to start. OK. I will start with the propaganda in it.

Many people accept that there is such a thing as “propaganda”, but most refuse to accept the examples of how it manifests, so you may not see propaganda in that quote. The phrase “and New Cold War”, in caps and all, is an emotionally negative message repeated over and over, and associated with the names of each group representing a political issue. This IS one technique of propaganda. “New Cold War”, that was the bogeyman used against the democratic party, not against the GOP.

Mr. Hudson expertly associates the fights against misogyny, racism and other forms of oppression by conservatives and globalists, with the hatred inculcated in some progressives against the democratic party. We LGBT, women, Blacks…we are all for “the Cold War” the dems are planning, according to Mr. Hudson. Hate them! (“1984”)

Of course, typical of a smear campaign, Mr. Hudson provides no evidence that there were “groups of women for Wall Street…” nor that there is a “billionaire” behind “each identity cohort”. Mr. Hudson, you are a liar, and your opinion drips with disdain for anyone who is not a white male like you.

But that doesn’t matter for those who believe in the “evil witch”; the attacks don’t have to be proven. The accusations themselves have become the ‘evidence’: just say it, it will become true by the magic of pronunciation.

Conclusion: Divide and conquer

Mr. Hudson’s article is an effort at dividing the progressive movement, just as the conservative white racists divided the labor movement by pitting Blacks and whites against each other. Here they are doing it again.

I know it’s too late to bring attention to how the alt-right has invaded  the progressives’ consciousness with their racism and misogyny via the ‘leftists’ media: it’s fait-accompli (we saw it in the results of the elections). I lack the skills to make a sound argument, let alone writing skills. But this I can tell you: The alt-right wants us to forget history, ours and theirs. They shame us for fighting against the many forms in which we are oppressed daily. They portray us  in the same way Nazis portrayed everyone who was not a white Aryan man: corrupt, lazy and ignorant. If they are planning concentration camps with ‘the wall’, we all are going to be shoved there.

For you out there who see what I see (am not alone), please, don’t stay quiet. Denounce these people, denounce Counter Punch magazine for passing alt-right propaganda as ‘leftist’ to progressives.

Attack on Russians: We the People must stand in solidarity with Russian civilians

Whatever misgivings we may have against Putin and his government (and I have some), the American civilians must stand with the Russian civilians.

Political acts of violence by the right or the left against civilians are acts against humanity by a handful of terrorists in governments, or power seeking groupuscules in the midst of human nations. Direct your political anger and violence at the head of states, if you must act; leave the civilians out of your hatred.

Violence engenders violence. I know it sounds preposterous, but The Buddha supposedly said “love everything, so you may not wish to kill anything”. I may not get to love everything, but I certainly love humanity enough to not want to kill other humans for any ideology. Violence is easy; peace seems ‘unnatural’ to human efforts and unreachable Let’s not fall for the easy. Peace, people, peace. Make it natural for humans to aim at it.



The WaPo on the “divided GOP”, or “Piggies Clutching Fork and Knives”

The Washington Post published an interesting article (Inside Trump’s White House, New York moderates spark infighting and suspicion) that shows how Bezos wants readers to see the in-fighting in the Trump administration. Spoiler alert: he doesn’t want you to see the root of the real conflicts. And you should play the Beatles’ song Piggies while reading the article.

Since the primaries last year  I have written ( since February) about the divisions in the GOP, the ‘paleo-conservatives’ against the globalists (and about the myth of the billionaire businessman as outsider).  The WaPo nor any of the other mainstream media bothered to touch on the issue; they were busy controlling the angry voters (remember them?). Now, just NOW the WaPo touches on what is impossible to hide anymore: that the right-wing political and oligarchy elite is, in the words of that brilliant Beatle,

“clutching fork and knives to eat their bacon”

eating each other, i.e. That’s from George Harrison’s ‘Piggies‘, of course.

Drawing the lines: The “Democrats” in the GOP

The first thing I noticed is that the writers of the article, Philip Rucker and Robert Costa, refer to Bannon and his allies as the “Republican populists”. Naming is one of the most important acts of human consciousness; how we name things determines how we relate to them. Calling Bannon and his faction a “populist” gives the impression that they actually care for the regular people. He’s a populist actually sounds positive; heck, he sides with the regular folks. But does he? Is he really against the big corporate billionaires he has helped put in government? I read many of the readers’ comments; few seem to question the writers (Bezos’) point of view, which portray ideological conflict where there is none. That’s why the naming is important, because the point of view implied in the naming gets to be taken blindly.

The other side of the ‘warring’ faction for Trump’s attention are those “often aligned with Trump’s eldest daughter and his son-in-law…” Wow. Imagine that: Trump’s daughter and son-in-law are NOT in line with him; that’s implied in the description. So those are the two camps! The “moderate” side is with Trump’ son-in-law. Yeah, well, keep reading, please.

Notice, if you read the article, that there is no right-left dichotomy here; that’s too old fashion, right/left, i.e. There can be no right/left in the Trump administration because there is no ‘left’ there, there’s only ‘right’ wing there. Whether ‘paleo-conservatives’, GOP conservatives, or globalists, they are all right-wingers, differing only in wallet-size. But to be meaningful, a political division must imply opposing and contending ideologies, which is lacking here. The article gives as example of ideological battle a traveling decision:

One revealing episode came as Trump weighed where he would travel this past Wednesday following an auto industry event in Michigan.

There’s no meaningful (to us) ideological war at this time there, only a war for power and money.

So, to establish the non-existent meaningful division, the writers give you the line, first line in the article too, that one side of the warring factions is named  and “dismissed” by their opponents as “the Democrats“. But there are no “democrats” in Trump’s administration!  or around him. There are only right-wingers. The first line in the article is meant to put you in a ‘right-left’ state of mind over a ‘right-left’ division that doesn’t exist in the administration. The so-called “democrats” in the fight, the “liberal‘ side, is made of big globalists. Remember, the “liberals” are “behind” Trump’ son-in-law, who happens to be:

Kushner and Cohn are particularly close with the Cabinet’s industry barons — Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

These are the ‘enemies’ of “populist Bannon”, whom he himself and the other ‘traditional’ ‘faction’ of the GOP (Rubio, etc.) helped put in control of our government. Do you see why it is appropriate to sing Piggies while reading the article?

What, then, is the division and bickering inside the Trump administration about? MONEY, what else?

I say that the main division for political power in the administration comes from big globalist corporations against the interests of the smaller business elite of the GOP. The article touches on this ever so carefully, like walking on eggshells. It’s not only that, but also that the smaller fish in the GOP tank are political bureaucrats in danger of losing their chairs in Congress. Why would they lose their chair? Well, that’s the second leg of this non-dialectical fight.

The Populist Weapon

They are the unnamed, referred to only in reference to who holds them, the “populist” Trump/Bannon. Be clear about this: the term “populist” is a reference to a weapon, a political weapon, i.e. The people who support Trump in a frenzied-cult-like, the angry voters of yesterday, are the ‘populist’  weapon in the hands of these two politicians. That is ALL  Trump/Bannon have to hold to power: his ‘deplorables’. These people scare the bejesus out of EVERYBODY! They are the reason the GOP is divided. Remove them and see Trump/Bannon and the globalists run out like maniacs. No one in their right mind would want these people in direct control of government, precisely because of what they are doing now.

So the power struggle is between factions of the right-wing plutocracy and political bureaucracy  for direct control of government. The globalists are fed up with their paid ‘incompetent’ politicians whose interests is holding to their chairs in Congress. The globalists want to run the government directly. Then there are the other globalists, who understand that this is dangerous because it will make the people rise in revolt against them. Then there are the usual GOP politicians, waiting to see how much money they can suck from the globalists in exchange for their support.

The fight described in that article is not a fight for YOU, dear reader. It’s a fight where YOU have been weaponized and used a threat by your own enemies against each other.

We are in the lowest ebb of human society. You who voted directly or indirectly for Trump have succeeded in electing the most amoral men to run our lives. They are fighting for the right to push you out of their way towards total direct domination over the planet.

How long will it take us to remove them from power is yet to be seen.





Media ignores the Women’s Day march: Build a Women’s Coalition

[I’m currently plea-bargaining with the grammar police over words and composition style transgressions on this post. So please, ignore them transgressions.]

Well, what else is new? That the mainstream media ignored the nation and worldwide women’s protests about various female and non-female issues during the International Women’s Day is NOT news. They never cover women’s political actions, unless it is to smear them with anti-feminism. But there is a twist to this year’s solidarity of the men in the media conglomerate ignoring women: Trump. Consider this:

Supposedly, just supposedly the media is at  ‘war’ against Trump; or more correctly, Trump is at war with the media. All over the media is this expressed ‘fear’ of Trump “attacking the freedom of press”. The media is not at war with him, they have never ‘confessed’ to such a subversive attitude against the man they have called ‘lewd, unfit to be president’ and even assigned to him ‘dangerous dictator tendencies’. So you would suppose, thinking logically, i.e., that the men of our media conglomerate would use their powerful communication tools to give a voice to ‘we the people’ who are fighting against the policies the first lewd president is implementing. WRONG.

The twist to Jeff Bezos (WaPo), Carlos Slim (NYT), Rupert Murdoch and all other media-men ignoring the worldwide marches in the International Women’s Day is that they chose to ignore the people most affected by the lewd president at ‘war’ with the media. There is no coincidence of ALL of them at unison ignoring the women’s protests: it is intentional. OK. So it is irrational to expect that the men of the oligarchy would give women a space in their world. If you agree with that statement, then, why aren’t you organizing against them?

Women are the ‘bogey-man’ of the men in the oligarchy, and of most men in general, which brings me to the next twist in the men solidarity in ignoring the Women’s Day: the men in the left. Consider this also:

The usual leftists-suspects totally ignored the Women’s Day: Black Agenda Report and Counter Punch. TOTAL SILENCE about the women’s protests. And the few leftist organizations at the march in NYC, well, they were pushing economic issues. These organizations are opportunistically using women’s anger to push non-women’s issues. The chants during the march about violence against women and women’s health care issues were coming from non-organized leftists/non-leftists women.


Women, if you don’t take your cause, which is the cause of humanity, by the horns, your energy will be diffused and used to advance the needs of men. Progress in solving women’s problems  benefit men, but men’s issues don’t necessarily benefit women. There in the humanistic nature and importance of organizing women by women. There are MANY men who will join us. There will ALWAYS be free men, men not threatened by women’s determination to not be abused. So, don’t be afraid to call it ‘women organizing women’; men are automatically included. After all, men and women need each other. So, as Lenin said, “what the fuck is to be done?”

There are many things that women can do to advance their economic and political goals, but I think this one is an IMPERATIVE (yes, I had to emphasize it): COALITION BUILDING.

Don’t be afraid of the phrase ‘feminist movement’

The media, leftists and mainstream, have succeeded in turning the phrase ‘feminist movement’ into a pejorative term. Yes, the 1960s and 1970s women’s movement made many errors, but NO ONE IS PERFECT. Humans have been making mistakes since the day they started walking erect: men have killed each other by the millions since they learned to use their thumbs. Their first mistake was using it to grab…weapons. I’m sure you saw ‘2001 A Space Odyssey‘: men had the idea of the Pentagon cooking since those days. (If you can’t find humor there, I’m sorry for you.)

So, should women stop trying to organize just because mistakes were made 40 or 50 years ago? The labor movement has practically disappeared for the same reasons; should we not revive it? Young women must understand that it is their time to make mistakes: it is their time to carry the movement forward, with mistakes and all.

The women’s and the labor movements are not lost causes; many good things came out from them.

But today, there’s no ‘leftists’ movement to give impetus to the women’ struggle: women are today’s revolutionary force.

So, put all those groups out there (the lecture groups, the pussy hat groups, the leftist groups…) under one umbrella to serve as your collective voice. Coalitions preserve each group’s interests and actions, it serve to give a sense of unity in the common goals.

From there, women can create a Manifesto of goals to be pushed against the power that be. To force politicians to adopt policies we need, etc.

Today’s women’s political energies will not last long unless they find ways to overcome the divisions and complaints against each other. There is elitism, there is racism EVERYWHERE and forever. Women must learn to work from different perspective, coming together united in what they share. Find it. SOON.

You need to be ready for the next presidential election.



On March 8th, the International Women’s Strike NYC – a coalition representing dozens of grassroots groups and labor organizations – is organizing a day of action! At 4 PM there will be a rally in Washington Square Park featuring artistic performances. At 5:30 PM a march will begin to Zuccotti Park.

Check this link for more interesting info:

Here’s What a Day Without Women Will Actually Look Like


Trump, the conservative elite and We the People, so far.

It looks gloomy from here.

[Grammar police, stay out of this post.]

The mainstream media (MSM) is playing a dirty game with the people. It is keeping the public as passive observers of the infighting between conservatives, globalists and Trump, and it is presenting itself as the ‘victim’ of the ‘angry’ Trump. There is no information in the MSM  about how the people are or are not organizing any form of resistance to this fascist administration. Clearly, they don’t want the ‘regulars’ to have any ‘crazy ideas’ about challenging Trump, especially not with those economic boycotts.

I know women around the nation are planning activities for the International Women’s Day (March 8) , but not because I read it in the MSM or the  ‘leftist’ media. Don’t look for the American zombie “leftists” to be involved in informing progressives about these activities. They are against feminism because feminism is  ‘identity politics’ and the men in the left think women’s issues are not a priority… for them.

So, this is what the political territory looks like here in the USA.

The American people are not ideologically motivated against Trump; not even the zombie Marxists are.

What we have is a disorganized fight to preserve a few of the gains achieved in the last century (wow! it sounds so far away in the past).

Gone is the word ‘socialism’. The last time it appeared in the news was in the beginning of the primaries when Sanders flashed it like a pervert flashes his ‘junk’ to little school girls. He quickly hid the stuff and never again did he use the word, for fear people will not elect him president.

The point being, there is no working class struggle for the ‘means of production’. Hell, there’s no ‘working class’; no one wants to be that. There’s only a ‘middle class’ doubling up with the poor in their low income neighborhoods.

We are here just to make capitalism more humane. The zombie leftists define that as not attacking Putin, not engaging in identity politics, fighting only for the ‘economic’ well-being of the white and racist blue-collar working men of the American mid west.

There is no leftist movement in the USA: So let’s destroy the DNC!

What passes for ‘organized left’ here is a handful of old fashion (zombie-like) intellectual ‘Marxists’ who own and edit some ‘prestigious’ online leftist’s websites-magazines. The image we had of what used to be “organized left”…gone. If you want to see what it looks like now, go to any of their websites: that’s about it.

Anyone who dares mentioning the ‘communist party’ as a living-leftists political force, is living in the past century.  All the activities going on since 2008 have been spontaneous, anarchist-like actions by non-affiliated people. Around them you can usually see the handful of ‘leftist’ parasites distributing their ‘leftists intellectual’ analysis of how the unaffiliated active people ought to organize the ‘resistance’.

These ‘intellectuals’ are intent in attacking, not the GOP, but the democratic party! They have join the paleo-conservatives in their effort to leave Trump in a ONE PARTY USA. The ‘intellectual’ leftists can’t build the ‘workers party’; instead of trying to use the DNC for coalition building, they agree with the conservatives in that the democratic party is “corrupt and controlled by Wall Street”. Now, don’t be rude, reader; we are not talking about the GOP. They are OK. They are for Putin. See? Conservatives and Marxists have something in common.

The zombie “Marxist left” has join forces with third-wave-paleo-conservatives white supremacists

Who benefits from attacking the struggles against misogyny and racism as ‘unimportant’? White  male racists elitists. These conservatives, call them what you prefer, have joined the ‘leftists’ media to propagate their ideology, passing it as leftist; but not the other way around, you don’t see leftists in the conservative magazines. I invite you to ponder on why is that happening?

Most of Counter Punch articles are by third-wave conservatives using what used to be leftist’s lingo. This is no new; it actually started in the early 1900s when right wingers joined with fascist left wingers. Look it up. I have written many posts here about today’s merger between right and left extremists.

The point is: there is no leftist movement in the USA, only a stealth coalition between Marxists and anti-globalist conservatives. They have in common their love for Putin and their hatred of everything that smells like ‘identity politics’. See them attacking the women’s march to Washington DC  in particular. When they say ‘identity politics’, they mostly mean women’s politics.

Quoting Lenin: What the fuck is to be done?

I hope you are not expecting me to answer that question. I’m just saying.

But I have some ideas. I’ll let you know if I get to go out and spread them. Try to work with the idea of COALITIONS. That’s all I see for the near future. Get some groups to unite to force some agenda on the DNC. I must say I’m for making ‘capitalism humane’, because that’s all we can do at the moment. But TODAY, it is women who can charge the movement against Trump and fascism. The male leftists are burn-out, can’t follow them.

That’s all for now. Keep the hope alive.



Anti-feminism: the place where Infowars and Counter Punch go to shake hands

“their protest…perfectly aligned with the aims of the global neoliberal establishment…relentlessly delegitimizing Trump” CJ Hopkins at Counter Punch

“What where we going to protest? That Donald Trump won the election? That Hillary lost?”  Ann Garrison at Black Agenda Report (BAR)

“The “Women’s March on Washington” is actually an anti-Trump march” Alex Jones at Inforwars

It is a scary day when, in the beginning of a historical political crisis in the US, the white supremacists’ anti-women and pro-Trump sentiments, expressed in alt-right websites like Alex Jones’ Inforwar and WND, are shared and echoed in so-called leftists sites like Counter Punch, Black Agenda Report (BAR), World Socialist Website (WSWS) and Information Clearing House, and OpedNews, to mention just a few.

Perhaps you didn’t notice in the scant articles the leftists dedicated  on their websites to the Women’s March on D.C. (most of which have been deleted!) and passing as ‘correct’ Marxist analysis, that  they could find NOTHING positive about that historic event. When Marxists and the racist ultra-right conservatives converge to  characterize about six million people marching in the US and worldwide  as mere anti-Trump and ‘neoliberal’ Democrats, the march as ‘identity politics’ (a ‘bad’ thing  that ‘Hillary’s fans’ do); and when both of them ridicule the female marchers (reason for articles being deleted?), it’s time progressives start asking themselves  ‘WTF is going on here?

Below is a sample of other opinions shared and published by America’s extreme right (in leftist jargon) and ‘left’ wings on their respective websites (as always, grammar police need a warrant to enter this blog):

  • We are hypocritical if we accuse Trump’s anti-Muslim ban and immigration policies  as racism because we never complained about Obama’s racist anti-Muslim and Mexican immigration policies. So shut up now, I guess.
  • The democratic party must be destroyed because it represents Hillary Clinton’s and Wall Street’s interests. That leaves Trump with a one-party (GOP) nation because no one, not even the leftists, is demanding the destruction of the GOP. But the leftists are OK with handing the nation to the white supremacists, I guess.
  • It is a false analogy to compare Trump to Hitler. Trump is anti-globalism, i.e., a revolutionary. The WaPo reported about Jeff Session, Trump’s candidate to AG: “Sessions’s ideology is driven by a visceral aversion to what he calls “soulless globalism,” a term used on the extreme right to convey a perceived threat to the United States from free trade, international alliances and the immigration of nonwhites.” So, according to our leftists, Sessions must also be a revolutionary. Interesting, isn’t it?
  • We should give Trump a chance to go after the criminal globalist class. The leftists believe he is about to do that. The poor things haven’t heard what he said the other day about his promise to “punish” Carrier.
  • Trump will unite with Putin to avoid the world war Hillary Clinton and the pro-war neoliberal democrats want to start. Don’t wait standing for that one. President Bannon, I mean, Trump said there will be a war with China or Korea “soon”.


  • Identity politics (issues related to gender, race, nationality, etc.) is a distraction created by Hillary Clinton and the neoliberal Democrats to attack Trump’s anti-globalism message. That’s why we got distracted with the ‘non-identity issue’ of Trump’s refusal to name the Jewish people as victims of Hitler’s war on women and gays (not an identity issue either, I guess) and ethnic nationals. If you don’t have a salary (economic issue), you are not important. OK?

Glen Ford and BAR are against identity politics, except when they are for it.

This unanimity in pro-Trump and anti-feminist sentiments between the opposing extreme right and the left-wings is no coincidence, unless our Marxists are comfortable openly aligning with white supremacists without qualifying the alliance. Marxists are aware of their meeting of the hearts with right wingers; they can’t claim ignorance of it. They (Counter Punch in particular) constantly invite people, like Paul Craig Robertson, for example, without telling their readers the “guests” are white supremacists. They allow these people to taint their website with their veiled racism and anti-feminism, all in leftist jargon to better cover their right-wing propaganda.

And finally, Trump and white supremacists blabber against ‘political correctness’, but, ask yourselves, how many times have you seen them inviting leftists to their websites to share with their readers Marxist ideology, just to prove that they too are anti-political correctness?

So, if it isn’t coincidence, then what is this meeting of the hearts between white supremacists and Marxists? Could it be:

  • the result of a stealthy alt-right/Marxists alliance against globalists? That would be utterly  dishonest, wouldn’t it?
  • the alt/right and third-way conservatives infiltrating the leftist space? That would make the Marxists look like zombies, braindead, i.e.
  • CIA/FBI psy ops a la COINTELPRO? Haven’t  the Marxists learned their lesson yet?
  • mere ignorance on the part of old-fashioned Marxists? This is the ONE reason we can’t accept at all. That leaves the others to be considered, or this last one:
  • there is no meaningful leftists movement in the USA, only third-way conservatism passing as leftists.

There is a reason for everything, and I intend to discuss on my next post some of the reasons behind the meeting of the hearts between white supremacists and the disappearing American leftist movement. For the moment, I will close this post by clarifying who I define as the pseudo-leftists and who are the Third-way alt-right passing as leftists. My conclusion next time will be whether there is a leftist movement at all in our nation if it is anti-feminist and anti-identity politics.

From Left to Right

Who is “the pseudo-left”?

I define ‘the American pseudo-leftists’ as the owners of most of the so-called leftists websites, Counter Punch, BAR, OpEd News, Information Clearing House, and World Socialist Website among others (am excepting The Nation because during the elections they showed balance of ideas); and the various socialists/communist parties and intellectuals (of leftist think-tanks) supporting anti-feminist positions, and labeling identity politics as ‘reactionary’.  Andrew Levine and most of the Counter Punch intellectual elite are included in this group, people who give us Marxist gems like this:

“In my opinion, it turns bolshevism on its head by using race or ethnic identity instead of class identity as the supreme, mobilizing force in national life.” Peter Lee at Counter Punch. [Typo in source, highlights by me.]

Maybe these old-fashion leftists forgot the early 20th century international socialist movement: women, people of color and ethnic nationals were part of the movement, and their needs were  integral part of  progressive demands they made. In the new millennium, the American leftists have closed its decaying doors to that same group of humans as not-welcomed, their needs relegated to the kitchen, not worthy of fighting for.

Who is the “alt-right”?

I define them as the white supremacists and ‘third-way’ conservatives, whether members of the GOP or not; people of the like of Bannon, Paul Craig Roberts, Glen Beck.  Third-way and paleoconservatives are mostly the same people. What follows is a useful description of this third-way ‘movement‘:

Craving the legitimacy that an alliance with progressive forces can provide, reactionaries seize on ostensibly shared positions, chief amongst them opposition to corrupt élites, to create the impression that progressives could benefit from making common cause with them.

Today’s (crypto)-fascist and other hard-right suitors, for example, focus on the commonplace left themes of opposition to war and corporate globalisation, the depredations of the ‚banksters‘, civil liberties, and Palestinian solidarity. Because the problems described by Querfront propaganda overlap so well with left-progressive causes, it may even superficially appear to be standard left-progressive discourse.

If – as is the case with many of today’s (especially US) left-progressives – one lacks the historical knowledge and analytical tools to recognise this propaganda for what it is, it is quite easy to be sucked in. [All typos in source.]

Next: Can a movement be called ‘leftist and progressive’ if it is anti-feminist and anti-identity politics, and pro-Trump’s policies?






Iran “on notice” and Exxon’s CEO Tillerson confirmation

So Trump tells Iran “you are on notice”. Why? Better ask By whom?

It doesn’t take a genius to notice that the “notice” was delivered hours after Exxon’s CEO Tillerson, who has intense interests on more wars for oil, was confirmed as Secretary of Sate.

That’s about all we need to understand the meaning of “you are on notice”.

The next question is: are Americans willing to go to war for Tillerson, or are they going to sit this one out?

In my humble opinion, let the deplorables serve their leader. We ought to dance on their tombs like Trump’s crazed evangelists do on our soldiers. But we have more class and compassion than that. The comment was just to remind you about the evangelicals mindlessness.

Hillary Clinton and Anti-Feminism in images in the Presidential elections

If you were forced to choose a boss from between an incompetent but inoffensive  clown, and an evil and cruel  human monster, who would you choose? The evil and cruel boss? I doubt it.

And yet, that was the choice the media and pseudo leftists’ propaganda presented to the American voters: Hillary Clinton was the evil and cruel feminist candidate, and Trump the incompetent but inoffensive buffoon. The printed media, TV/cable ‘news’ and the pseudo-leftists media fed the voters, on a daily basis, that fake opposing characterization. These two cartoons encapsulate that message to perfection.

Even today, despite Trump’s cruel and unlawful actions with regard to immigration, the public still refers to him as a clown and buffoon. And despite having been ‘vanquished’, the pseudo-leftists and the mainstream media still refer to Hillary as the bitch, the power thirsty feminist who gave us Trump with her “incompetence”. Susan Sarandon went so far as to promote the propaganda that Hillary is more dangerous than Trump; that Hillary is evil and Trump a “clown”. No betrayal is more painful than the one coming from your own group.

The hatred promoted against her puts her, today, in danger of being dragged back into the cauldron of ‘send her to prison’ animosity. Bernie’s followers would happily unite with the ‘deplorables’ if Trump were to rekindle the promise to “investigate” her for the emails. She would be a good distraction for him; so, I’m actually waiting for him to go that way to keep us from attacking him.


Communication in these modern times is heavily based on images, even more than on word content. Even WordPress suggests new bloggers make ample use of images to illuminate their blog content. Images seem to be more powerful than words, and their effect or impact is almost instantaneous. We are aware that printed media is in decline, that social-media is the new vehicle of fast and effective communication. So, these two cartoons are just two examples. If you google Hillary Clinton memes, you are treated to ugly Hillary; do it for Trump, you get goofy images and him saying stupid things. It’s like what we had with Bush Jr. and Cheney: one was a clown president, the other the evil vice president. Except that no one cursed any of them for being ‘bitches”, or evil men. Not even the second time, when it was clear that Bush Jr. was no inoffensive clown. No one said ‘we have had men presidents for over 200 years, it’s time to not vote for one’, they are corrupt and cruel’.

For Hillary, Sanders demanded she be a Virgin Mary, just as he was almost blessed by the Pope.

With Hillary…the problem with her, the REAL problem no one dared to pronounce, was, not only her gender, but her feminism. I discussed that “real” problem many times on this blog. I still believe that the US, the white male elite in power can’t tolerate a feminist woman as their ‘boss’. So, they “supported” her while bashing her 24/7 about the emails and her ‘corrupt’ personality. No one liked her, according to the fake news media and the pseudo-leftists; despite having won the popular vote by three million votes!

When Trump spoke about his “high energy”, as compared to Hillary’s, it was a clear anti-woman statement. The pseudo-leftist kept referring to her as “that woman”, “that power thirsty woman”, and many other sexist insults. Gender and anti-feminism was at the top of the issues; no one wanted to touch that one with a long stick.

Until women come to accept that anti-feminism is here to stay and they must fight it in the open, here in the USA we will have to wait another 100 years before we get a woman president. We must be anti-imperialists, anti-racism, anti-everything you want. But we must NEVER again push the interests particular to half the population of the planet in the back burner.

The oppression of women has nothing to do with imperialism; it has existed since men learned to use their thumbs. Nations that are not imperialists today are guilty of abusing women even more than imperialists nations.

So, let’s get moving, girls. You are the revolutionary class today!

Trump declares war on women after Historic massive Women’s March against him: Cuts funds for abortion

Donny told us so, that he is vindictive. You didn’t want to believe him.

So, he said NOTHING about the Women’s March on DC, well, except that “the elections are over….”

I knew he couldn’t take that PUNCH in the face that was the more than 3 million human beings marching against him here and around the world.

So he is punishing you, girls. His first salvo:

Trump reverses abortion-related policy to ban funding to international health groups

“President Trump on Monday reversed the Obama administration’s 2009 decision that let the money flow. The decision means nonprofits abroad will either have to end patient counseling in which abortion is mentioned or forego the lost U.S. dollars”

This was today, and is a DIRECT attack on women for their historic march against him. This is the beginning of Trump’s war on women. You ‘deserve’ it for humiliating his over-sensitive ego. He will NEVER forgive you for that HERSTORIC  march.

Get ready to rumble, people. It’s going to be a NASTY  war against women.

Empowered Women, and the demise of the American Left: the new revolution

Calculations (by organizers) are 2.5 million people, mostly women, in Washington, DC. They can’t even march: they are stuck shoulder to shoulder all over the city! There was fear of a stampede due to inability to move, per Malveux, a CNN reporter.

Image result for women's march

I was there yesterday for inauguration protests by the working class. There were maybe two or three thousand people. ANY ONE can organize a march against the first lewd president except the American leftists.


From UK’s Independent: “Women’s march: Women hate Donald Trump so much they are even marching against him in Antarctica”

What this means is that WOMEN are the new revolutionary force in the USA, and in the world (see at the end of post).They will be the target of psy ops by Trump’s minions, they will suffer efforts at dividing them and their movement.

But they will learn as they go to exercise their power and fight their terrified  enemies.

Those enemies include the pseudo leftists, who have become fascists themselves.

Not only they dismiss women’s issues as “identity issues” to be ignored. They now feel empowered to ‘strip’ people of their dignity and historic contributions if they don’t show love for Putin and express hatred of Hillary Clinton. They did it to Angela Davis (The Zombie Left Trashes Angela Davis For Supporting Hillary Clinton), now to John Lewis:

Black Agenda Report

“Revoke” his “pass”? Did he mean to say revoke his ‘past‘?

The issue here is not that Lewis has become a negative element in Black politics, which I agree he has. The problem here is the leftist’s attitude that they can tell people who to HATE, and to engage in re-writing history by erasing people they don’t like out of collective memory. That is so Putin.

I don’t need the left to tell me who to hate. Even though I disagree with Mr. Lewis, I don’t feel the need to tarnish his past, nor to kill him and hang him in a bridge for all to see as a warning  like the fascists leftists are doing, FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING, with other leftists who don’t do as they tell them to do. They want to kill Hillary Clinton, NOT figuratively speaking.

The reasonable and rational humanity are being pushed against the wall by both the right and leftists fascists. There is no difference between today’s white fascists racists and the pseudo-communist/socialist leftists. They both love Putin and hate anyone who don’t love him AND Trump. Remember this: the American leftists LOVE Trump; they don’t like ‘some’ of the things he is doing, but they love that he LOVES Putin. So, be careful not to express negative comments against Trump and Putin in front of a pseudo-leftists.

They are misogynist too. The American leftists treated women as sex toys in the 60s, and they haven’t change much.

The REAL  men are men with the attitude that drove many of them to the Women’s March and to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Stay away from the pseudo leftists, please.

A new revolution with a new ATTITUDE is developing: It is feminine, compassionate and inclusive.

NOW I’m hopeful!




Fascist Dictator Inauguration Day: Show which side you are on.

I’ll be there tomorrow, in D.C., to tell this lewd man he is NOT the people’s president by any measure.

The more people show up that day in their cities and nations, the louder the message to Trump. Louder than a twit.

Let’s show him that we are READY TO FIGHT THE MO-FKER!

Sorry, some emotions should NOT be restrained.

Image result for ugly trump

Dictator in Chief, Fascist President, Donald ‘H’. Trump. Either way, we are ready for you, mother….


Trump’s ‘press conference chaos’, or The Media distracting from GOP coup in Congress

That’s right, folks. All the headlines today (Wednesday Jan 11) were about Trump’s press conference: him ‘admitting’ that Putin hacked the DNC, that he insulted reporters, the BuzzFeed “dossier” on Trump by Putin…and the media is actually protecting Trump from BuzzFeed.

The REAL news were going on in Congress. But ALL the MSM pushed that information  down in small letters on their front pages.

There’s only ONE article in the NYT about the confirmation hearings, one about Exxon’s Tillerson being “grilled” in Congress, all the way down that page.

The WaPo showed a shred of more decency than the NYT by inserting those three articles down there. But they are not the main focus.

Why are they focusing on the press conference?

The media has the power to move public opinion against the coup d’etat that is the confirmation hearings. The GOP is pushing many hearings at the same time to make the confirmations easy by chaos. The media should be covering that. Once those people get confirmed, there’s nothing we can do to stop them.

Ask yourselves: why would the media want to call your attention away from what is going on in Congress? Is BuzzFeed, an “unverified” report, worth much more attention than what’s going on in Congress? Trump is a showman, and this is a show for you, with the media willingly participating in distracting you from the coup in Congress.

We know how the media propaganda works. They decide what is being publicly discussed. They even admit they had the “dossier” during the elections but refused to publish it then. It is Bezos and Murdoch et al media owners who decide whether the information is worth publishing. They decided to publish the hacking of Clinton’s email 24/7, but refused to publish something that would have probably hurt Trump too.

Don’t buy it was because the “dossier” was “unverified”. The hacking of Clinton was illegal, but they didn’t care. No one is asking for Assange to be prosecuted for it. But the media is suggesting that BuzzFeed’s journalist be investigated for “leaking” “false information”. No one knows yet whether it is false, though.

This is the same thing the media moguls did when they had their secret meetings with Trump a few weeks ago. To cover up the secrecy of the media discussing with Trump how they are going to cover him, they gave you a litany of headlines about Trump ‘punishing” the media, a picture of him as powerful and causing them to feel “threatened” by him. But no words about the secret discussions.

Well, I invite you to consider these observations and see if there is something there. The media, in my view, is focusing on creating an environment of public confusion and an anxiety about Trump’s relation with the media, not focusing on his appointment of globalists to directly run our government.

THAT’S WHAT REALLY MATTERS.  But they are waving their hands, calling you to pay attention to the Donald’s first press conference and his ‘battle’ to protect Putin, while the confirmation hearings are going on.

Trump is a showman. And the media loves him. This press conference was a show for you. This is the result of the media’ secret meeting with Trump: laying out how to distract the public from the real issues. It’s perfect. This game can go on for the next four years: ‘Trump hates the media’ forever FAKE news.

Want to know who hacked Clinton’s emails? You can’t handle the truth.

The email hacking-blame–games is quietly disappearing from our fake news purveyors’ sites, so, before it totally does and you forget about it, I will leave for posterity my observation on how the ‘issue’ was managed by our media.

Who knows the truth about who hacked Hillary Clinton’s and the DNC’s emails with the intention of manipulating public emotions against her and influencing the outcome of our presidential election process?

Answer: Assange and Wiki, Obama, the CIA, Putin. And of course, the elements involved directly or indirectly in carrying out the instructions.

Who doesn’t know the truth about the hacking and will NEVER get to know it?

Answer: We the people. Please note that the truth about this hacking conspiracy is, by design, meant to not reach you, not available to YOU.

Consider that we live in a global cyber warfare environment, and we have been told that it has to be a secretive warfare. All nations deny it, both Russia and the USA deny they engage in cyber warfare against each other to influence each other’s citizens’ political opinions against their own governments. It’s called propaganda, mind control by the use of technology. Everybody is doing it! And everybody is denying it!

What is news about this hacking conspiracy is not that it exists at all, but that it was SUCCESSFULLY used against we the people of the USA. News is that we lost that cyber war with the help of our government and the media. And the people around the globe ought to be scared shitless, because they lost too. What was done to us here is the evidence of the effectiveness of the cyber war, AND that it is directed at the citizens who have no means of protecting their heads against the intrusions of cyber propaganda aimed at manipulating their emotions.

Who knows the truth about the emails conspiracy?

They all (governments and Assange) are lying to we the people about who knows/don’t know who inflicted the coup d’etat on them, because they all played a part on it, directly or indirectly, including the US media. Actually, it was the media who IMPLEMENTED the coup.

The owners of the media (Bezos, Murdoch, Slim of the NYT, and the rest of them) could have chosen not to propagate Assange’s hacked material 24/7 last year.  The day after the elections, they stop writing about it, they had finished their ‘hacking’ job. They even had Assange on record saying that he didn’t  want to show the other candidates’ emails; he didn’t want us to judge them.  The media knew Assange had the power to do that, to let us judge the other candidates, to influence the elections, but they chose to play his game in support of Trump. They are complicit in the coup to install Trump. Period.

You can’t get the truth from the media, the only place most Americans go for nformation. They don’t give you the truth because, truly, you can’t handle the truth – at least in their eyes. They feed you fake news mixed with pieces of truth hidden in carefully chosen words accompanied with images for maximum effect. They are the willing tool used by those with the power that you don’t have, to reach you…because YOU are always the aim they are shooting at to get their ways. That includes Assange.

Putin, Obama and the CIA are up to their ears with cyber warfare. They know what they did or didn’t do about the hacking, and what part was Assange’s, but tell you they won’t. Shhh. It’s a government secret. You get the lies, try to find the truth there.

Like children playing with toy guns, the global governments’ misleadership are pointing their cyber guns at each other and shooting, except that we the people are the ones who really get hurt. That’s the nature of modern politics; is not like in the medieval times when the kings actually went out and fought the battles themselves. They discovered they had the power to force their minions to go and die in their names. So, here we are, the victims of the cyber warfare, forced to tolerate a mentally unstable soon-to-be dictator.

Why they did it?

A lot of power and interests were at stake in this presidential election cycle. Apart from calming the ‘angry voters’ threatening an uprising, and the candidates themselves, battling for control of our government were globalists, conservatives of all flavors, war and armaments mongers…and Assange.

Assange, you see, needs sun light. Seriously, lack of exposure to sun light for such a long time have an impact on a person’s mental health. So, not only he is a prisoner there, he is also (probably) mentally unstable, which puts him closer to Trump. That may explain his hatred and vindictiveness against the people of the USA. That’s right, is not only Hillary he hated.  He was and is still willing to throw his supporters, people like me, under the Trump bus of fascism for his freedom. (Of course, he doesn’t have my support anymore.).

Assange is working hard for Trump’s pardon. Not only he helped putting the presidency in his hand, now he is proposing helping him use Twitter, Trump’s favorite mind control tool, to black list his opponents. Who would have thought that our minds are so easily controlled;  all you need is 140 characters well organized, and voilà! People vote the way you want.

Please, if you are thinking Assange did his evil deed out of love for humanity and the ‘truth’, STOP.  It’s all about himself.

Edward Snowden was absent during the elections. He still has my support, for he is not playing with our minds, as Assange is doing.

As for the other participants in this conspiracy to use cyber warfare to manipulate humanity into doing what the powerful controlling our politics and economic policies want, well, I trust you can figure that out too on your own. Suffice it to say that Putin had an interest, personal, in Trump winning the elections. Also, men who hated the idea of a feminist woman running the nation (the white elite men, of course) also had an interest in letting Assange hack her emails. Obama, well, let’s say he wants to stick it to Putin, although there’s more to it. A sector of the globalist are having a field day with Trump, putting them directly in control of our government. Those are the ones who will help  cover the truth about the hacking, for they want you to believe that Trump won honestly by popular vote, another lie.

The battle between the other globalists, the conservatives and Trump is a long discussion. I have addressed some on this blog.

Well, that’s all folks. I hope you made it to the end of this post.

Amy Goodman and the pseudo-leftist media ignore Assange’s attack on US democracy

Amy Goodman and the pseudo-leftist media in love with Trump for his love of Putin have ignored Assange’s threat to American democracy, whatever is left of it. They are coming too close to Trump for his love of Putin, joining him as traitors of the people of this nation.

Hoping to get his freedom, Assange has worked for Trump since the elections. For his freedom Assange is throwing the rest of us who supported him under the fascist bus. Now he is helping Trump by devising a system to keep track of everyone who uses Trump’s favorite tool of mind control, propaganda and of mis/disinformation: tweeter accounts (see insert above).  What other reason would interest Assange on how tweeter is used but to get Trump to pardon him in exchange for his expert services in hacking, to have all users under surveillance, and critics blacklisted?  It is reasonable to suspect that he and Trump have been discussing his freedom in exchange of professional hacking services; just look at that piece of information and all the help he gave Trump during the elections. But that possibility doesn’t cross Amy’s mind, nor the minds of the pseudo-leftists in love with Trump. They are too busy protecting their other idol, Putin.

They preferred turning the US into the fascist playground of the global and Wall Street oligarchs as long as said oligarchs were willing to kiss Putin’s derriere, which many are doing. That’s all that mattered to Goodman and the zombie American leftists during these past elections: Putin. As long as the lewd candidate was speaking lovingly about Putin, there was no other national issue that mattered. As Trump himself said during his campaign, as long as he kept saying the things his racist followers wanted to hear, he could kill people on Fifth Avenue and not lose one vote. That was true too (and still is) for the racist ‘leftists’ who loved him for his love of Putin while he was trashing people of color and women.

This weekend, Goodman plastered her fake news website (she defends the WaPo and the mainstream media, as discussed in previous post, which makes her purveyor of fake news too) with pro-Putin propaganda. The “information” defending Putin is fake too.  Believe it at your own risk. But the fact remains that, to make sure you LUUUVE Putin, she went on a Putin binge and gave you PUTIN THE VICTIM  galore, with a couple of ‘other news’ interspersed for appearances sake:



And of course, her HOPE that Trump the barbarian will pardon Assange is there, in that list of ‘news’.

I know, Amy is the Joan of Arc of the leftist media. But ask yourselves, Why wouldn’t she and the other leftist zombies comment about Assange’s  “suggestion” of  having everyone’s private info handed out to Trump’s government? That is an important piece of news, but they all had their tongue eating by the cat.

Assange is angry at the US, for good reasons. But he has proved he is no Snowden. Assange is willing to join forces with fascist Trump and use his skills to keep the opposition fearful of speaking out. Trump’s infamous tweets are the sign he will be using the social media as misinformation/disinformation tool. He uses it to threatens opponents with the wrath of the emotionally manipulated deplorables/zombie leftists who support him.

And Assange will be helping Trump use tweeter more effectively to blacklist anyone who opposes him. 

It will take many years to repair the damage done to our democracy by the ‘progressives’ who voted for Trump, directly or indirectly, Hold to your pants for the next 50 years of fascist madness.

And count on the leftists to turn you in if you speak bad about Putin.

OH, boy.


Putin and Globalists in Control: Bitch-slapping Obama Over Trump

Well, I never thought I would live to see globalists publicly bitch-slapping an outgoing US president goodbye. Did you see that? Double-slapped in one day:


This is the international ‘leaders’ reactions to Obama’s last effort at castigating Trump (discussed below): They All  decided to PUBLICLY stick their necks out for Trump and tell the world that the globalists trust and support their new commander-in-chief.

Trump is the future, one that sheds all pretenses of democracy and collectivism to openly embrace Ayn Rand‘s philosophy of the elite. The future looks good for them, for Trump is putting the business of government directly in the hands of globalists, not on elected politicians representing them.

Those two pieces of news inform us that the globalists want the world to know that the actions and policies they will enact will follow the ideology of Reaganism and Thatcherism, this time on steroids.

This week, Britain’s ambassador in Washington, Kim Darroch, expressed hope that Trump and May would build “on the legacy of previous leaders such as President Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.”

First, let’s not get heartbroken or offended by the shaming of Obama. Him “punishing” Putin and Israel was not an act of ‘justice’. It was plain and simple personal revanchism, revenge on Trump. It was an attack on Trump (I’m not complaining). Believe me, Obama has good reasons for harboring personal grudges against Trump, mostly  for his and his followers racist attacks on Michelle.

Obama has been in power for eight years, that’s more than enough time to do what he did this week, i.e., ‘punishing’ Putin for all the crimes he accused him of, and for voting against Israel. He could have frozen Putin’s money around the globe. That he took these two actions, literally, at the last-minute of his presidency indicates there is another reason for his show of ‘power’.

In my view, Obama failed to come out publicly in defense of his wife after she was called various racist names, including that she “is is really a man“. And, if we all agree that Trump has lowered the moral level of political action and discourse, there is no point in acting ‘politely’ when your wife is being continuously savaged the way Trump and his minions have done to her (he never criticizes racists remarks). That the director of the non-profit organization who used the extreme racist words against her was “fired” is no consolation; Trump can give him his job back (expect that to happen).

This is personal, not business.

Business is the international ‘leaders’ reactions to Obama’s last effort at castigating Trump for his racism. As Kerry said with his jaw on the floor

We are surprised by the U.K. Prime Minister’s office statement given that Secretary Kerry’s remarks…were in line with the U.K.’s own longstanding policy and its vote at the United Nations last week,” the State Department said in a statement.

That’s right, there is no logic behind their slapping Obama in the face when they acted with him to secure the UN vote:

The transatlantic split was particularly unexpected given that May’s government acted as a key broker between U.S. and Palestinian interests ahead of a U.N. Security Council vote last week to declare Israeli settlement construction “illegal…shaping the measure to ensure that the language was acceptable to the United States, Britain’s Guardian and Israel’s Haaretz newspapers reported this week.

What reason could they have to bitch-slap Obama other than they are counting on Trump to put the world OPENLY in the oligarchs’ hands? Obama is the past, they squeezed him and got out of him what they could given the political environment.

With their Rand philosophy, don’t expect them to care for the poor or the broken middle class. If you don’t own stocks in the millions, you deserve your suffering for not being a creative genius.

Putin, well, there’s a wise guy. I don’t live in Russia, so I don’t know how good or bad he is for his people. But in terms of foreign policy, he is just another politician in love with power. He may have better ideas about war, but he is an alpha-male politician. He identifies with Trump in that sense. He is counting on Trump for globalists’ rapprochement.

All politicians ruling the world today are corrupt and working for the billionaire globalists. The people is the last thing in their minds.

So, there. That’s the meaning of this public shaming of Obama.

January 20 is around the corner. Get ready for feeling Ayn Rand’ ghost turning your dinner table upside down.



Explaining Trump’s ‘victory’ for dummies

This post is in reaction to the NYT article Sorry, Liberals. Bigotry Didn’t Elect Donald Trump.

OK. Let’s start from the beginning. Memorize this sentence:

The Donald LOST the popular vote. He was elected by the Electoral College.

In the USA, as we have come to realize since the beginning of this millennium, the presidency is decided by the ELECTORAL COLLEGE. That’s the only DIRECT deciding element on who is to be the next president, that’s the only element that MATTERS. Understand, a majority of votes do NOT DECIDE the elections, as we saw in 2000 and 2016.

Trump WON the presidency on a TECHNICALITY, that’s the ugly and unpleasant reality, the truth. A candidate wins either by popular vote AND the Electoral College, or by the electoral college alone. No candidate wins by majority of votes and minority of electoral votes. Trump won by the electoral college alone.

Any statement or political analysis to the effect that Trump won by the popular vote, that he was elected because Hillary was ‘incompetent’ or whatever, IS A MYTH created to be included in high school history books of the near future. It covers up the truth about how the so-called democratic process was subverted by the elite class using their media and the “faithless” elected politicians who voted against the people’s expressed wishes.

People will accept and believe the myth the more it is repeated.

To understand this myth, we need to define ‘winning’, the same as ‘victory’.(Caps for emphasis, not screaming.) There are rules that determine the winner, and the PSYCHOLOGICAL element of victory, the one that can be manipulated with words and images.

The definition of winning the presidency has always been “the people choose democratically who will be the president”. That’s the foremost value of democracy, the thing we go to war for, to make other people learn to live by this democracy. But the rules are tainted: you must vote for the one the elite and our elected politicians want and approve; if not, the electoral college makes the decision for you.

That is NOT winning.

The perception that the democratic process was followed is missing when that happpens. It creates a sense of collective anger; you don’t normally get angry when you believe you won, do you? The people are angry with the results of the elections because they correctly see it as undemocratic. We go to war for ‘democratic’, the brainwashing worked. Now the elite has to explain why they are treating us like any third world dictator treats his people, taking away the people’s democratically expressed wishes.

But there is the other element in the definition of ‘wining’, the PSYCHOLOGICAL one. It is the one that makes the ‘winners’ by technicality distort that same reality with their misplaced conceit. Trump’s followers didn’t give Trump the ‘victory’. Almost three millions more votes went for Hillary Clinton. Also, they, his followers, constitute part of the ‘people’s vote‘, the popular vote. Trump didn’t win with their popular votes, he won by elected politicians of both parties who voted for him.

This psychological element is used by the media continuously. Every time they publish opinions upholding the idea that Trump won, period, and his administration must be respected as that of an ‘elected president’, they are adding pieces to the myth of his presidency as that of the people’s, and the myth of the democratic process. You must accept him as president because rejecting him is rejecting the democratic process; the mythical one, i.e.

Also, he can’t be a dictator if you accept him and the process. It’s what happened with Bush Jr. The media refused to publicize the people’s discontent and his inauguration day mess. The oligarchs’ ORDER must be protected, no matter what. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be getting trillions of dollars in a perpetual war justified on the actions of a president not elected by the people.

No analysis can change that reality. Saying that he ‘won’ because people hated Hillary is the worse of the myths. She won the popular vote. PERIOD. People didn’t hate her. People HATED TRUMP, that’s why he LOST the popular vote. The emails are the INDIRECT reason of him ‘winning’. The second element deciding the elections is the indirect one, the MEDIA and any other hanky panky going on, like the emails bomb.

The media continues to publish the MYTH that the people hated Clinton. If they tell the truth, then Trump can’t govern as the people’s president, and his administration is in danger. But keeping the myth that he is there because Hillary is ‘corrupt’ and the people hated her, provides psychological cover and argument against reality.

The psychological element is the one we live by, the delusion that OUR VOTES count for something. The elections are SUPPOSED to be won by the one with the majority of votes. That’s the PSYCHOLOGICAL winning. We think, and correctly so, that our president is the one elected by ‘we the people’. That’s the propaganda about our democracy, that’s why it is “correct” to think that ‘we’ decides the presidency, because we have been brainwashed into thinking like that. It’s a nice delusion, I don’t deny it.

But when the majority of the votes go to one candidate and that candidate is not confirmed by the Electoral College, the elected president is as good as appointed, not the ‘winner’ of the ELECTIONS. Here, elections means the people’s votes. Hillary Clinton got almost three MILLIONS more votes than Trump.

So, it is a myth that Trump was elected by the people. He is not the people’s president. He can’t claim ANY of his policies are supported by the people. He doesn’t have the people‘s authority to rule.

It is being said that the Electoral College was created to prevent some crazy populist candidate be elected to subvert the status quo. Donald Trump is that crazy ‘populist’, and the DUTY of the electoral college was to uphold the people’s wishes. Almost three million people gave Hillary Clinton the victory, the ONE THAT MATTERS to the people. The Electoral College should have affirmed the people’s wishes.

So, Trump won on a TECHNICALITY. He is NOT the people’s president. He has no mandate from the people.

So, please, stop feeding the MYTH of Trump’s victory. It sound as if he won by a majority of the people’s votes.

This is the ugly reality. We are doomed as a nation thanks to the the electoral college. The over-sensitive one, who lashes out at people who don’t kiss his ass, is ruling over the people who hates him.

Now, chew on that for five minutes.


The (dis)state of the dis-union

First, a reminder, ’cause the masses tend to have very short memory (the oligarchs count on that). So far we have had the following (the news clips bring back the emotions of those moments):

  • threats to unions
  • threats to bigly corporate globalists
  • playing with nukes, China and Taiwan
  • fake news about Trump’s fake fight with the media (please, read the captions)


These two pieces of news are related. Can you tell how?


The media showed you on those two headlines the power struggle between Trump and the military vultures. Not many people noticed, though. And it is not about saving you money.















A FAKE FIGHT: Two different tweets. Top tweet says 3:16 AM. Bottom one says 6:16 AM. Different ‘heart’ and re-tweet amounts. The first has more on all counts, which doesn’t make sense.

My point being:

You are living in a FAKE existence, fake politics.

The media decides what are the news of the day, then they stop reporting about it; and the breaking news, the ‘threats’ are forgotten. Forgotten are the angry voters, the emails, the fights and hatred between the Bernies and Hillary’s against the deplorables…that is passé, not a problem anymore.

The people’s anger is under control by that charismatic leader of the sewer. As Trump said the other day, after acknowledging his followers’ anger during the elections:

President-elect Donald Trump (above) spoke in Orlando on Friday to a crowd of more than 11,000 people during his Thank You Tour rally where he admitted that his supporters during the election were 'violent'

“But now, you’re mellow and you’re cool and you’re not nearly as vicious or violent, right? Because we won, right?’

The true existence, the one that matters, is going on where you are not allowed to enter: in the news rooms, in the private meetings between Trump and the oligarchs. It is there where the extortion, the threats, and the in-party cannibalism covered daily as ‘news’ is going on; that’s the real world.  The news are intended to get you ready to take sides when the bell rings for the start of the real fight between Trump and the oligarchs for a piece of the loot.

That’s the purpose of propaganda, keep you reacting. Today with anger, tomorrow with anxiety…always waiting for the next jolt of shocking news to get that machine moving as planned.

We are passive observers of our lives being destroyed and a new world order being erected around us. All of this with our consent because we are being deceived by Trump, the media, and those holding the true power of our government: the GOP, Congress and the CEOs of globalist corporations.

We, my friend, are the weapon these corrupt and greedy elitists use against each other. Trump is winning because he has the angry deplorables on his side.

But don’t count on that for too long, pussy grabber.


Trump unveils true cause of Syrian war, no one noticed; keeps his private detail, just in case.


Politico: Trump drops Twitter bomb on Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet


I’m baffled by this news; must admit I don’t know where this orange man is going with these attacks on the military…oh, wait, I know! It’s called EXTORTION. He wants these globalist warmongering corporations to share their loot with him, or else he throws the angry anti-globalist deplorables on them. But he is playing with fire. More on this below.

First interesting detail about that headline news: Politico doesn’t tell the public the cost of that jet program. The WaPo did. It costs $400 BILLION dollars……….

OK. Did it hit you yet? What’s the first question that came to your mind when you read about that? I’ll tell you mine.

That amount of money represents the true reason why we are, using Obama’s words, in a permanent war. The first question in my mind was this:

What are the chances that Lockheed Martin’s CEO wants to end the Syrian war, or ANY war for that matter, and give up that amount of money back to our society as ‘peace dividend’? How badly do these warmongers want peace? Or do they believe, like Mussolini did, that it is good for humanity to live in a permanent state of war, and that peace is an obscene word?

Marillyn A. Hewson is Chairwoman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Lockheed Martin. In 2015, Hewson was named the 20th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes. Wikipedia

It did take me by surprise finding out that a woman is heading that mammoth war machine that is Lockheed. Oh, well. Live and learn, folks.

Vietnam and the new millennium wars

Many people, not all, are aware, thanks in part to The Pentagon Papers, that the Vietnam war was a fake war to feed the Pentagon and military warmongering vultures. It seems ‘we the people’ didn’t learn the lesson of that war, or maybe we are more powerless as citizens to stop the madness than we were at the time of the Nam war.

When Trump disclosed this and Boeing’s price tag for their fighter jets, he did it, and the media discussed it, in terms of “the budget”. Too expensive, let’s bring the price tag a few notches down. It was not discussed in terms of the wars price tag. How many notches down are the vultures willing to go without blowing a gasket? A billion dollars? Can he really scratch the contracts and start new ones and live to tell how much he ‘saved’ the ‘public’?

Is Trump the con, the one who said that evading paying taxes makes him intelligent, truly working on behalf of the ‘deplorables‘? Can you trust his intentions?


“I didn’t mean it quite that way,” Trump said. It was, he explained: “A euphemism. I was talking about Carrier like all other companies from here on in, because they made the decision a year and a half ago.” How Donald Trump forgot about his promise to keep Carrier jobs in the U.S.

The cost of the war is not open for discussion, it is taken for granted, just as it is taken for granted that we will be at war for the next 20 years, at least. Neither is open for discussion how this expenditures on military armament creates an elitist class that INVESTS on:

  • Media coverage of the war – These people PAY journalists, retired military personnel to speak at CNN and MSNBC and other MSM outlets as ‘private’ experts to ‘inform’ the public about the state of the war.
  • Surveillance companies to spy on members of any anti-war movements, blogs, or online chat against the war.
  • Lobbyists to promote war dividends in the form of legislation that keeps their wars going, but also legislation that curtail democracy.
  • Hollywood and pro-war movies. Movies that portray soldiers as heroes.
  • With their TRILLIONS of dollars in military investments, they OWN our political system.

For them, every aspects of our social life is a war scenario. Don’t you go on thinking they invest only on direct war issues. They permeate our lives with their war propaganda, ‘terrorism’, maintaining the status quo…


“If it seems a little creepy to you that the same company making ballistic missiles is also processing your taxes, accessing your fingerprints, scanning your packages, ensuring that it’s easier than ever to collect your DNA, and counting you for the census, rest assured: Lockheed Martin’s interest in getting inside your private life via intelligence collection and surveillance has remained remarkably undiminished in the twenty-first century.” Mother Jones

Trump the Con

By now you may have noticed the pattern: the media reports Trump says the big globalist companies (Carrier, Boeing, Lockheed) are ‘robbing the public’, the deplorables and Berniebots have an orgasm, Trump then denies he promised to make these companies ‘pay’ for their crimes, the CEOs meet with Trump, the issue disappears from the news.

If you think that Trump is straightening these people out, I’m sorry for you. Will you stop it, giving him the ‘benefit of the doubt’?

Trump is extorting these people. And they will make him pay for it.

Trump and JFK: Is there a shared future looming ahead?

Trump is messing up with the powerful military vultures. These are people who own TRILLIONS of dollars in military investments. Remember TSA’s Michael Chertoff and his airport full body cameras? He and his pals used the ‘war on terror’ excuse to build his private camera company and then influenced his department and federal government to buy his product at an exorbitant price. The cameras give you cancer, but who cares. It’s not about protecting you. If it were, they would protect your money.

These people own the planet, well, together with the other vultures at Wall Street. They decide whether we work or not, what types of jobs and at what meager salary. It’s not conspiracy theory. It’s our lives.

So, it boggles my mind seeing him playing this dangerous game. It’s plain logic, people.

If you mess up with the guy with the bigger gun, even if you are just kidding with him, he is not gonna like it. Eventually you are going to really piss him off (pardon my English).

Then what? JFK was assassinated for a little less. Well, if you belief the lone bullet theory, you don’t believe these military vultures have evil ways to protect their trillions of dollars. But I think Trump’s decision to keep his own private security detail, he will use the government’s too, but he keeps his own security guards, say something about him. He doesn’t trust ANYONE. Smart of him, isn’t it?

But I think Trump is playing with fire. Not all globalists are on his side. Remember, the oligarchy and the conservatives ARE experiencing an existential moment. Trump seems intent on acting like the bully he is, demanding the vultures share their loot with him. He has surrounded himself with military brass, put them in civilian government positions; and keeps the deplorables happy with tweets about chastising the oligarchs. They are his true army, or at least he think they are. But in the US, the people can’t prevent a coup d’etat. 

That was the JFK lesson.

Amy Goodman clears WaPo and MSM reputation as purveyors of fake news

[Attention, grammar police: you need a warrant to enter this post.]

This article at Democracy Now illustrates how the media is covering all the bases, going everywhere to clear its reputation as purveyor of fake news after the beating it got from the public for demonstrating during this presidential election cycle that they are nothing but publishers of propaganda. Amy Goodman is working with them to save the credibility of the corrupt media by attacking Trump for ‘attacking’ the “lying media”.

Amy Goodman,  who has suffered in her own skin the media barons and the government punishing ‘alternative’ journalists, seems to have been coerced into bending over to defend the Bezos and Murdoch and Slim’s barons of the media.

Instead of using the opportunity to denounce the media, she joins in the effort to cleans their corrupted souls. You don’t have to agree with Trump, just use his own propaganda to show the truth about the media. But that’s asking too much from the zombie left.

Amy Goodman interviews Robert Reich, who is thoroughly offended by Trump’s cojones to call the WaPo and the media purveyors of propaganda. She tells us who Reich is:

“Robert Reich, who served as labor secretary under President Bill Clinton. Reich, who now teaches at University of California, Berkeley, has emerged as one of Donald Trump’s most vocal critics. He recently wrote a piece headlined “Trump’s Seven Techniques to Control the Media.”

I read the article happily anticipating Amy engaging in a powerful indictment of the ‘presstitute’ media, but not such luck. Au contraire, I got another heartburn by reading how the pseudo-leftist media is a tool of the big media conglomerate. Prove me wrong.

I’m giving you this quote from the article, and warn you not to look for Amy correcting this guy’ statements, for you won’t find any corrections:

that is designed to undermine the credibility, in the public’s mind, of anything that The Washington Post might publish. It is an absurd allegation. There is no reason to believe that the Post‘s reporting turns upon Jeff Bezos’s concern about Amazon and any antitrust issues. But, you see, by creating this kind of conspiracy theory or this kind of paranoid notion about the press and planting it in the public’s mind, the public, or at least a portion of the public, is led to think that anything that The Washington Post, or another paper whose credibility the president-elect tries to undermine, says is [not] justified or is [not] true. And again, that is terribly dangerous in a democracy.

How dare ANYONE undermine the credibility of our media? Reich went to Amy to help him protect the crashing credibility of our media conglomerate.

How dare ANYONE question the credibility of our media, the same one that lied to the public on behalf of Bush and Cheney to “plant in the public’s mind” the idea that we had to invade Iraq because of the WMD?

And finally, how dare ANYONE question the credibility of the media that gave us Trump by engaging in the practice of character assassination against Hillary Clinton and the 24/7 coverage of the fictitious emails scandal that caused a significant part of the public who trust the WaPo and the NYT to not vote for her, costing her the presidency?

As I commented in my previous posts, that coverage of the emails was tantamount to a premature coup d’etat. They were getting the bed ready to have Hillary Clinton impeached for the emails had she won the elections. But the FBI jumped the gun, and they got her before she set foot on the White House.

But don’t expect Amy Goodman to mention any of this. She agrees with Reich that Trump is ‘vilifying’ poor Bezos and the media.

There is no discussion in the article  about the idea that the owners of our media conglomerate, elitist billionaires themselves, have good reasons to lie to the public, mainly to protect their class interests  from the ‘deplorable masses’, the ‘angry voters’ who are threatening to put their heads in a pitchfork.

There is no discussion either of how Trump is playing a game for the deplorables, pretending to hate the media, just as he pretended to hate the globalists but is filling his cabinet with the biggest and most corrupt of them. Trump may be lying, but he is not lying about the media as propagandists; he knows them because he uses them for propaganda.

Those who know the media shouldn’t be attacking him for ‘attacking’ the media. Use the opportunity to unmask the media, not to protect its corrupted soul.

Maybe my post about the theatricals between Trump and the NYT pretending to be at war can help you read between the lines when he ‘attacks’ the ‘lying media’.

MSM (Fake News) and Trump: The Truth About Their Secret Meetings

Jeff Bezos (WaPo) Covering Up for their partners in the 2016 election coup

Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post; nothing of political weight can be printed without his approval. That’s a fact, and inability to recognize it or willingness to ignore it is the result of the public having been trained to not question the intentions behind the information the owners of the media conglomerate feed them daily.

Under the guise of ‘journalism’, The WaPo published today Sari Horwitz’ article The attorney general could have ordered FBI Director James Comey not to send his bombshell letter on Clinton emails. Here’s why she didn’t. It’s about covering up what amounts to a premature coup d’etat, not only against Hillary Clinton, but against the people of this nation, by the FBI, the Department of Justice and those who are yet to be uncovered.

It bears mentioning that Horwitz, a WaPo award-winning journalist, was found guilty by the WaPo of plagiarism in 2011.


Her article today is nothing but opinion passing as information. Its goal is to exonerate FBI Director James Comey in the public’s eyes for a behavior that was, without a doubt, politically motivated. The public knows it was, Bezos and Murdoch and Carlos Slim know it too; they often stated, after him releasing the now infamous emails letter to Congress, that Comey “must have known the repercussions of his actions”.

That’s why Comey is protected by a wall of media articles exonerating and casting him as a ‘well intentioned’ ‘worker’. If it is found that he acted out to influence the outcome of the elections, it would implicate many more people in what amounts, again, to a premature coup d’etat. For, remember, he is not just any ‘worker’, he is the director of the FBI. And we all know the first image the word FBI conjures in our minds is the opposite of political honesty.

One example of stealthy opinion passing as fact to exculpate Comey and the Justice Department:

But Comey and Lynch repeatedly underestimated how much their actions would reverberate in a closely contested presidential race.

How did Horwitz arrive at the conclusion that these two highly intelligent politicized bureaucrats “underestimated” their actions, and not that their actions were politically motivated? It seems an innocuous assertion from her part, and many readers would not take notice of the opinion being fed as fact. That’s the problem: it is not an innocuous assertion. It was written to manipulate public opinion about the players’ intentions in this   must horrific case of collusion between the media owners spewing their propaganda and the cover up of the political crime.

Horwitz said the following as if agreeing with Comey, never questioning whether the director’s present or past behaviors  confirm or put in doubt his self-perception

Into that vacuum stepped Comey, an FBI director who prides himself on having a finely tuned moral compass that allows him to rise above politics.

Comey’s sense of obligation to Congress was the key factor driving his decision.

When journalists and media editors want to cast blame on any one, politician or not, whether deserved or not, they don’t go pussy footing around it: They charge the person with the crime and repeat their verdict enough times as to making it become  a fact. And when they want to exculpate some one, they tend to succeed. This is the verdict in favor of the Director of the FBI:

Comey’s sense of obligation to Congress was the key factor driving his decision.

There you have it. It is a an opinion; he acted out of ‘duty’. Keep moving folks, there’s nothing else to see here.

When Comey did  his disreputable deed a week before the elections, The WaPo was not the only one to come to Comey’s defense. There was, and continues to be, consensus and agreement by the owners of the media in casting Comey as a good FBI worker caught in the jaws of party politics, and in particular, in Hillary’s ‘web of deceit’, which is how they characterized her involvement in the scandal. You can google Comey and this is what you get:

Comey a Good Man, But He Made a Serious Mistake

Comey’s unintended consequences…

Of course, Hillary Clinton was cast throughout the campaign as dishonest and corrupt by choice. When it came to cast the blame on the outcome of the elections, Comey was a victim, and Clinton lost because, well, she had to.

For one, why are Democrats making Comey the scapegoat when their own presidential candidate was disliked by 56 percent of the population? WaPo’s Cilliza

Comey is “the scapegoat”, and the public shouldn’t complain about manipulations of their democratic process by the media or by a cabal of politicians acting behind the curtains. The message there is simple: We the media told you that Clinton is disliked even more than Trump; that’s a fact and shut up.

Of course, Hillary won the popular vote by almost three million votes more than Trump. The public didn’t want Trump, but the message, even after the facts, the MYTH is that the public didn’t like her and Trump is the people’s choice.

It is the curse of mass of humanity that it can be manipulated at will by a handful of powerful men.

I don’t see how this is going to change any time soon.

For the moment, Comey is the good guy and “scapegoat”.  Hillary is the evil doer. Trump is El Duce.

Enjoy your bizarro life.






The WaPo agrees with this blog: “conservatism has hit rock bottom”

In my previous post I opined at length about the divisions between our elitists classes, the globalists and the conservatives running the GOP. I mentioned that the media never addresses that division; I think they heard me. Of course they didn’t, just saying.

Michael Gerson, in his opinion article  at the WaPo, The GOP is at its peak, but conservatism has hit rock bottom, hints at the defeat of GOP conservatives, but doesn’t name the victors. I find it interesting that the article comes after the Electoral College appoints Trump as president. That article is a slap in the face from Trump to McCain and the other conservatives. It has no value except that one.  It’s pure nonsense about political values, which no one in government, and least of all ExxonMobile CEO, care about.

Thus, the timing of the article is no coincidence, well, at least not in my view. But as I said in my post, the elites can’t name their war openly; it’s too unseemly to show your house in disarray. But the fact remains: There is a war between globalists and conservatives of assorted flavors.

And the globalists are winning, bigly they are winning. They are buying with their trillions of dollars the conservatives who have only our money to play politics with. But they are politicians, they are selling themselves knowing that there’s nothing they can do against the oligarchs who own the planet.

And the oligarchs have El Duce, the alpha-male leader of the incautos. Oh, and the military, just in case the deplorables become too antsy for that wall that will not materialize. The only wall Trump is building is a wall of generals and military brass surrounding him every branch of government that matters.

Well, there you have it. You heard it here first, in this inartful and grammatically challenged blog. The globalists are winning, the conservatives are kaput.

Trump and globalists slowly but steadily turning US into fascist nation

Words that matter in current political events: Consolidation of power, cracks in the elites’ wall, one-party nation.

It is impossible to get a clear picture of current fights for political power without putting the pieces of news together, for our only source of information is the media news.

But we read the news as trained to read them: As today’s news, not yesterday news. The public receive the news as discrete pieces of information, and the least connections or relationship between the pieces the readers find, the most successful the propaganda is.

Connect the headlines that are related, then decide what the message is.


The CEOs of the media conglomerate (it means here the Bloomberg’s, the Murdoch’s and Bezos, the Mexican national owner of the NYT, Carlos Slim, among others) they all present the public with the same picture about our current political environment: it’s all about the GOP against Trump, or Trump against the GOP. They NEVER mention or discuss the divisions between the conservative and the globalist elites

The true power struggle in our nation’s politics is between the globalists and the conservatives of assorted ideological flavors, warring for control of our government. 

shameful seven 1

From somewhere in the internet.

Up until this presidential election, the globalists happily  controlled our government, politics and politicians from behind the curtains, hidden from the public’s eyes. For this they have always counted on the Myth of the businessman as political outsider, not interested in politics but in making money. This myth creates a physical distance between the little people and them oligarchs: The little ones see each other and the paid politicians, but not the hands moving their nation behind the curtains.


Google for images of “myth of the outsider” and this is the very first image they give you. It is well known that Google and FB manipulate search results. They are globalists, so they want Trump as your first ‘outsider’.

That explains in part why the conservative masses (and poor Sandernsnistas) identify with Trump; they see him as the politically uncorrupted and ‘outsider’ businessman. But the media conglomerate fed that image to the public throughout the campaigns. Yes, he was lewd and immoral, but they never accused him of being a corrupt billionaire elitist. That would be akin to calling the attention on themselves as a class.

The most valuable personality trait, the one the media conglomerate made sure, day in and day out, you don’t forget, is that Trump is a businessman. Without it there’s no magic. The public then makes the subconscious association (trained by years of propaganda), an ‘outsider’, and the media reinforces  the ‘correctness’ of the association.

All of the above also explains the “angry voters phenomenon”. They want to tear down “the establishment”, by which they mean the political parties and the old politicians in it. They are not against globalism or capitalism, they are against politicians who don’t throw them a bone. That’s the way it has to be, according to the oligarchs; politicians are paid patsies. As long as the elite is invisible, the little people sees only corrupt politicians enacting the policies that benefit the oligarchy.

And that is how we arrived at the 2016 presidential elections cycle.

Donald the chameleon: Ditching the paleo and wearing the ‘future’

The Donald is cypher to the public, that’s how he likes it. He is anything he needs to be according to the times and situations surrounding him. The man is on for himself, his only alliance is to himself and his family. He will do whatever he needs to do to get you to do his bidding. He was a democrat until he wasn’t, he was paleoconservative until he became globalist. He was pro-abortion and non-religious until he courted the fanatic religious right. It’s called shameless opportunism

Right now, he is doing the globalist bit. He has to because he is no loser. Who has the most power and the most money on this planet? “We the people’? Paleos like McCain, Rubio or Cruz?

Conservatism, paleo or third-way, is old fashion. Hey, I’m not the one saying it.

Roy Bailey, a Texas-based insurance executive who also gave to Rubio’s presidential campaign, said he backs Tillerson. The resistance to Tillerson, he said, “sounds like old politics to me as opposed to a new way of thinking.

Rex Tillerson is the globalist in charge of globalist corporation ExxonMobile, its CEO. It doesn’t get more globalist than that. And per Bailey, opposing Tillerson = opposing globalism, which is a modern ideology compared to ‘paleo’ conservatism, which looks to the past.

But the ‘new way of thinking’ is not what you imagine. To be sure, the article doesn’t tell us what Bailey means by it. You have to use your political acumen to read between the lines the meaning of those words.

The new way of thinking is using Trump’s pseudo-populism graft the globalists’ cream de la cream directly into the branches of power in our government. It is a take-over of government by the globalist elites. The new way of thinking is putting aside the fears Trump engendered in the globalists and join him in a new America: a fascist America led by a new El Duce, a populists who can control the masses.

Anyway, that quote up there announces that with Trump, globalists won. They are the new kid on the White House.

Putin wins: Conservatives bow to globalist money

Image result for tillerson

Rex Tillerson and the man.

We see the triumph of the globalists, not only in Trump filling his cabinet with them, but in that every GOP paleocon is bowing to the king. I doubt anyone reading this would disagree with that assessment. It is so evident I don’t need to dwell on it.

But the globalists coup is painstaking; the rest of the conservatives are wishing and waiting for the best offers to switch sides. It’s a matter of time, but the offers are flying off the shelf like Wal-Mart’s prices.

At the start of the week, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) [anti-globalist] seemed bent on opposing the nomination of Rex Tillerson for secretary of state…By the end of it, Rubio had heard directly from former vice president Richard B. Cheney.

Robert McNair, a Texas-based GOP donor who gave $500,000 to a super PAC supporting Rubio for president, said he plans to call the Florida senator to coax him to back Tillerson.

Tillerson boosters enjoy direct lines of communication to Rubio

What are the chances that Rubio, under that heavy pressure,  will put his conservative values above half a billion dollars, and in the process disappoint the hand that feeds him, McNaire, the guy who got him that money for his super Pac? I bet no chances.

After Trump officially tapped Tillerson on Tuesday, Rubio released a statement saying that he has “serious concerns” about his nomination, but will work to “ensure he receives a full and fair but also thorough hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

These old fashion conservatives have no money, but they have dreams of power. Globalists’ money can make those dreams come true.

“Anyone who knows Marco well, and I’m one who does, knows foreign policy is his first, second and third interest,” said George Seay, a Texas-based Rubio donor. “I think Marco will plant his flag in that area.”

As I said above, the paleoscons are waiting in line for their turn to join the Trump magical ride. Paul rand is ready to support globalist Tillerson.

Paul said he has “an open mind” on Tillerson.

As you can see, this article gives you a picture of what is going on behind the ‘we the people’s  back. A fight for the powerful cabinet position between globalists and conservatives. It’s not the GOP vs Trump. Is globalist, with Trump, Cheney and ExxonMobile vs the GOP conservatives.

Putin is a sign, a symbol the conservatives give the public to distract from the real issue with Putin: that globalists want to continue doing business with him openly and officially, as part of the function of government, and paleocons don’t want globalism.  It’s not about Putin rigging the elections, but Dick Cheney and his globalists must fight that false narrative about Putin. So you hear them  praising Putin as peace lover and defeating the “Obama criminal Syria policy”.

Expect the GOP’s old conservatives changing turning their hatred of Putin into loving-everything-Putin. The hacking of the elections? If I were Hillary Clinton, I would take a long vacation to Sweden or some place away from here. The masses are still chanting “lock her up”; the oligarchs will have no problem feeding her to the masses if it takes the pressure and attention off themselves

The new way of thinking: the one-party USA

Image result for trump and the one-party nation

Image result for trump and one-party nation

This is a globalists’ coup, and they need to take control of the government openly immediately if they are to survive.

One reason is that they know, once they start fleecing the people of this nation, Trump won’t be able to charm his populist deplorables and Sandersnistas into obedience. Also, all of them, and specially Trump, know that he doesn’t have the support of the people; he didn’t win the popular vote. Trump is not the people’s president; he is the politicians’ president. The politicians in the electoral college will confirm this once they ratify their will over that of the people.

It is an imperative for the globalists to take control of the government, so don’t expect for it to happen haphazardly. These people have been working on this since before Trump won. The time is ripe for a one-party nation. The Democratic Party is dying, poisoned by the so-called third-way conservatives, the one who speak the leftists lingo because they are anti-globalists. But as we are seeing, anti-globalists are being bought by the globalists.

This is the bells tolling for the DNC, this could not have happened without planning:

Amid outcry, N.C. GOP passes law to curb Democratic governor’s power

…the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature has passed changes that would severely limit the incoming Democratic governor’s power.

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

“The destruction of the Democratic Party” has been the goal of the so-called third-way conservatives. These are the conservatives who sound like leftists because they speak the anti-globalism lingo. These conservatives have aimed at the banishment of the Dem Party since the elections, joining the pseudo-leftist at Counter Punch and other online ‘leftist’ magazines in their misogynistic attacks on HC and the party as her ‘tool’ for doing ‘evil deeds’.

Bernie Sanders is helping them in the destruction of the party. While he was running on it, he never stopped casting the party as ‘old’ and in need to be ‘reformed’. Now that the elections are over, he joined these third-way conservatives to push the electoral college voters to elect a REPUBLICAN! Kasich.

The globalists need every government agency, and zero opposition at home. The two-party system is an obstacle for obvious reasons. Not much that is happening since Trump took the presidency has not been previously planned. The globalists have been busy working their international connections, and as evidence I give you the Taiwan incident. You see, the media conglomerate can’t avoid giving the truth in their news, they give you true facts; it is up to you to recognize them and put the pieces of the political puzzle together. The Taiwan incident was cooking since at least 2015. See my post Trump’s Taiwan Connections

There is an ongoing battle to control our government between conservatives and globalists. I have said it since the primaries, and gave you as evidence that globalists are winning the article about Dick Cheney coming out to support Trump. As I said then, Trump doesn’t have to worry about lacking experience running a government; Cheney and Bush Jr. and that despicable bunch of humanity has his back. They are counseling him, they are guiding him to create a wall of generals in key government positions to militarize the nation when the real switch from democracy to fascism happens.

It will all start the day Trump is sworn in as president.


MSM Propaganda ‘against’ fake news propaganda threatens internet free speech

Facebook Mounts Effort to Limit Tide of Fake News

The Trump election coup has open the doors for a veritable attack on democracy. He is the strong-man the oligarchy was waiting for.

Thanks to him, and on account of him, our nation’s media moguls are blaming, not themselves, but social media (they mean the internet) for the propaganda (a taboo word replaced now with the less offensive “faked  news“), that changed the outcome of the elections, for it did change it. That is to become a historical fact.

NBC News Just Admitted The NY Times’ Story Based On Clinton Cash “Doesn’t Hold Up That Well,” Here’s Why

Now, they who own the media are enacting the most ingenious, the most crafty, the most devious idea to limit democracy and practice censorship at will: get the users of the internet to censor themselves and each other. That’s what that article is about.

All of the attacks on our democracy since Trump was elected by a minority of votes are happening stealthy, under the guise of protecting your freedom! That’s the main characteristic of propaganda – designed and deployed secretly.

Consider that, for you to censor other people’s communications as fake news, as FB’s Mark Zuckerberg is proposing, somebody must train you to identify what is fake and what isn’t fake news. That much the NYT’s article says. Well, guess who will be teaching you to recognize fake news? The dishonest media! Who else?

Funny thing about what Zuckerberg is doing, ‘testing’ techniques for users’ censoring each others, is: he was caught last year “testing” psy ops on his users. The probabilities that he is being honest in trying to “stem the tide of fake news” have to be tested against his past practices.

Sure, ask them. That’s testing psy ops, from posting the image, to telling the public, to asking the question.


What is Fake News?

Fake news is actually an euphemism for propaganda, of the political type. There’s advertisement, which is also propaganda but aims at commercial purposes, you know, buy that beer brand advertised with the photo of a scantily clad woman drinking it.

Fake news is what Rupert Murdoch dishes day in and day out on his cable news and newspapers. But how much coverage have you read recently linking him with the morally dishonest practice of fake news, or with how his practice contributed to Hillary Clinton losing and Trump winning the presidency? Can we close Fox News for being a fake news site? Or CNN?

Fake news is what the Donald used to call (not anymore) “the lying and dishonest media”; he meant propaganda, but he would have NEVER used that term. In fact, he never did, did he? Clearly, there is a campaign to eliminate the word ‘propaganda’ itself from our vocabulary. Guess which one inspires in the public more disapproval, anger and even fear: fake news or propaganda?

These people know what they are doing; they invented fake news. And if you are not alert, they will drive the public into believing that the CEOs of the media conglomerate don’t engage in propaganda/fake news. That means you will be trusting the trash they serve you every day; no need to question it. But the outcome of the elections teaches you otherwise.

Related image

“These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America” Business Insider

Imagine if the first lewd president, instead of saying “we have to deal with the lying media”, had said ‘we have to deal with CNN and the rest of the media that publish propaganda against me all day long‘.

Trump is a media-creature, that’s the medium in which he feels at home. He made his name using the media, he is an expert in manipulating the media; don’t expect him to trash his baby as propaganda. It would neuter him as a media-creature, for his ‘charisma’ as a ‘successful’ and alpha-male businessman depends on manipulating the media. He is so exquisitely good at it that he doesn’t have to shame Rupert or Bezos as propagandists; he lets the public switch the words in their minds: from ‘lying media’ to ‘propaganda’. It’s all done subconsciously, isn’t it?

Just the same, don’t expect Murdoch or Bezos or Carlos Slim (NYT) to practice self-evaluation or oversight of their media practices. The same goes for the pseudo-leftist media.

Propaganda is dead, long live propaganda

Fake news became trendy precisely because of how the media owners faked the news and information they gave the public during the primaries and presidential election. It was that, the public’s realization that the NYT, the WaPo, and CNN and all the rest of the media did influence the outcome of the elections by providing 24/7 coverage of emails and equating Hillary Clinton and Trump as equally immoral (character assassination is among the many propaganda techniques they used), that realization is what brought the term fake news into our dialogue. 

When you start reading what the media moguls are proposing to deal with fake news, it is difficult not to believe that they had already plan the introduction of the term ‘fake news’ to erase the one that people can’t tolerate, propaganda, and deflect attention from themselves. They knew, oh yes they did, that there was going to be backlash against them for the election’s outcome. It happened when they served the public propaganda to get them to support the invasion of Iraq. That can’t happen again in the same 16 years. The media in a democracy doesn’t have that luxury, to be seen as tools for propaganda.

They media moguls have an important job to do. After all, one characteristic of propaganda is that they who control the medium are the ones who engage in it; they decide what we read, and manipulate how we feel about it and how to respond to it.

Propaganda is here to stay, it can’t be prevented. When its bad angle shows, those who practice it adapt. Voilà! Fake news.

Image result for fake news is propaganda

Sensationalism is not the prerogative of Enquirer ‘newspaper’. It is also fake news, propaganda, and the mainstream media is as good at it as Enquirer.

Blaming social media, but Mark admits he is a propagandist

The media barons like Murdoch and Bloomberg have succeeded in casting the blame of propaganda on social media. That is a fact.

Image result for fb and fake news

That Zuckerberg ‘initiative’ to stem the tide of fake news…it is fake news. Fake news is good for Zuckerberg’s bottom line, and he is not about to change it for you. So, he is the one who controls FB, became a billionaire with it, but wants us to do surveillance on each other.

Now they are directing your attention away from them, the professional practitioners, and into FB, Tweeter, etc., keeping their own faces clean , ‘it’s not us, they are the dishonests’.

And now they have the bed ready for you. The mainstream media is blaming social media and, softly, no need to rock the boat, is organizing psychological methods to repress freedom of speech. This is something no democracy can openly tolerate, curtailing freedom of speech and practicing self-censorship. So they have already sketched ‘suggestions’ to ‘suppress’ fake news.

Well, again, no one can suppress PROPAGANDA, it is here to stay, folks. It is going nowhere but into your head. Here’s looking at you, kid.

Read it all here: Facebook Mounts Effort to Limit Tide of Fake News.

That article is so full of bad news. It also acknowledges that, as with Google, Mark decides which topics or news are trending. So, if he wants, let’s say, candidate Clinton to trend way below Trump, voila! Done. That capacity to tinkle with news and what people are actually interested in, that is propaganda. And Mark admitted he practices it.

Read the article, but do it with trying to see where is the propaganda. Think of it as presenting you with the bait you must bite in to be fished out of your own mind.

And then, don’t bite anymore.

Image result for propaganda is fake news





How the media binds Trump, Putin, Syria with Clinton’s emails

What do Trump, Putin and our intervention in the Syrian conflict have in common with the now-infamous Hillary Clinton-emails?

Answer: Propaganda; from all sides – the USA, Russia, and China; all for your benefit. Here you have ‘conspiracy theories‘ (was he or wasn’t he hacking the DNC?), and fake news (Putin is controlling the US’ elections, hate him! or fear him!). That, my friends, is psychological warfare, courtesy of you own American media.

After the Trump ‘A’ bomb landed on us on 8 November, the media (MSM and leftist) took a quick look at themselves to assess their responsibility on the election’s outcome. It took them a nano second to evaluate themselves and come to the conclusion that…hey, look there. Is PUTIN!

NOTE: I’m not taking sides on the Putin ‘issue’. This post is about how propaganda is working here in the USA.

How does it work, propaganda and fake news? Emails 1.0

You probably remember, it happened a month ago, that the American media, MSM and pseudo-leftist, spend over 12 months giving the public that consumes their information, 24/7 ‘coverage’ of Hillary C’s ‘crimes against humanity’, particularly speculating on the meaning of the ‘contents’ of the illegal emails dump. That the emails were acquired illegally stopped being an issue from the get-go.

With its constant daily coverage, the media achieved stealthy impressing in the minds of a significant amount of voters the emails as a sign; they were not ’emails’ anymore but actually a ‘code-word’, an image in their collective minds representing Hillary C’s supposed perversity, dishonesty and corrupt personality. By 8 November those voters had it with reports of emails and Clinton’s corruption. They actually had it with the emails stories, but because the emails had morphed into an image of her, they thought they wanted to stop the stories by stopping her, not stopping the media driving them nuts with the 24/7 maddening reports.

It is plausible, this analysis. It’s what propaganda does, it goes after the masses, the ‘public’, with techniques of psychological warfare. This is what professionals who study media propaganda say,  not me.

The genius of propaganda is that its crimes are difficult to prove. It is in your face and yet you (generic you) can’t see it. But consider this: If the NYT and the WaPo and CNN and the rest of the media, all of them, were in agreement that they all should talk continuously about her emails because it was ‘high crime’, how come all of them, in unison, stopped ‘reporting’ on HC’s emails crimes on 9 November?

Clearly, the media owners, Murdoch and Carlos Slim (NYT), Amy Goodman and the people at Counter Punch among a few, decide what we read. And, clearly, what they decide we should read and talk about collectively not always has to do with real morals or real high treason, for they dropped the ‘high treason’ charge the day she lost the elections.

They kept the public talking about HC’s emails for over a year, and guided many of them into concluding that HC is a corrupt woman; “lock her up” was the populist clamor.

The masses were seething with hatred of HC because of the emails stories.

Once you have them, play with them

The media had work the public into a frenzy, a collective feeling which resulted in a particular action: many who were considering voting against Trump by voting for her without liking her either, were so repulsed by the 6 November FBI dump of emails that they either voted for Trump, for Jill Stein, or simply stayed at home. That’s how Trump ‘won’.

Propaganda is not just about manipulating ‘public opinion’. Modern propaganda is about guiding the public into action (voting against HC), or inaction, as was the case of voters who stayed at home. It is also about preventing people from interfering. Read Jacques Ellul’s book Propaganda; excellent source for understanding how propaganda and fake news work.

Emails 2.0: Putin’s turn to be the villain

But the emails and Putin are the gifts that keep on giving the media moguls the joy of manipulating the public like a puppeteer manipulates his puppet. They need your consent to continue the war on Syria, the permanent Middle East war that benefits the war mongers of the likes of Grumman and the CEOs who own big surveillance corporations.

But they also need you to support the elite who wants to continue doing business with Putin. Dick Cheney wants Congress to confirm Rex Tillerson, Exxon’s CEO, as Secretary of State. You see, the divided elite needs you to take sides, but not informed decisions.

That’s right: they tell you “what you need to know”. They mean it, you literally don’t need to know anything else.


Their message to you is this: Hillary Clinton was defeated, period. Forget about that and look here now.

If the public were able to see how the media manipulated them with the HC emails, moving them into doing something they were not planning on doing, they would see a repeat of emails coverage 24/7, and would question Why is the media bombarding them with this new take on emails? Now the criminal is not Hillary Clinton but Putin.

On which direction does the media wants you to move? To which action or inaction are they guiding you? Do they want you to not interfere?

Hey, look here, not there

Propaganda technicians know that one of the most important rules they must obey is not letting the group they are targeting to think for themselves or look away from the object they are presenting them.

Don’t interfere with plans to build more armaments, please

They don’t want you, for sure, to look at them as ‘the lying media’. The don’t want you to consider that it was them who made the decision to cover the emails 24/7, not Putin, nor that they discussed the emails from the perspective of Hillary Clinton as a ‘dishonest and untrustworthy’ candidate, not as illegal material. They don’t want you to see how they do propaganda.

There is a campaign going on against Putin and for the US participation in the Syrian conflict that should not be interrupted by the public’s complaints and criticisms about how their own national media manipulates their emotions.

Carlos Slim and Jeff Bezos and Amy Goodman and Counter Punch, they are all engaged in a ‘battle’ for and against Putin, that’s all that should matter to you, per our media owners. Did he do it, did he not do it? That discussion qualifies as conspiracy theory.

Weaponizing the emails

These people have turned the useful emails into both a distraction away from their ‘journalistic practices’, and a political weapon. The public’s decision on war and on our relations with Russia will depend on the emails. But the battle here is not only over Putin, but over the elites’ political divisions. You can see how the representatives of the warring conservative sides are responding to the ‘Putin threat’, can’t you?

There is the question of continuing in Syria for the benefit of  the big corporations that benefit from a permanent state of war: the Grumman’s and the surveillance corporations war mongers. Your consent is needed, folks. Think Vietnam.

In a democracy, there must be two sides to every issue, otherwise it would look like a dictatorship. Some of the divisions you see presented in the media is just for appearances sake. But the public has to be able to see the signs.

The nature of propaganda is that it is secretive and works stealthily, but it exists.Today is the best time to start educating ourselves about how propaganda works. It’s not as it used to be; it has matured.

As Alex Jones says, and he knows about this, “There is a war on for your mind”.



Putin: The gift that keeps giving our media a cover for their sins

The New York Times’ extensive article about Putin supposedly hacking the DNC is the finest piece of propaganda I’ve seen recently. The only conclusion I could arrived at after reading it is that the American people have lost control of their nation’s politics.

The ‘public’ have been weaponized by all segments in which the elites have divided itself, and used at will as ammo against each each other. The lathe that makes bullets out of the ‘public’ is the conglomerate of mainstream media with its daily propaganda pitting the ‘public’ against this or that elite’s group.

Carlos Slim, owner of the NYT is the Einstein of propaganda, with Murdoch and Bezos following him.

Look, the US media gave Hillary Clinton and the voters a coup, period. It was emails and ‘Hillary the dishonest woman’ 24/7. They chose to publish Assange’s emails dump and comment on them too. The US media relies on the public’s trust in  American institutions, including the media, to sell the lie that it was ONLY Putin who manipulated the media. The media acted willfully and with malice in its coverage of Hillary Clinton.

The media owners chose to print all the emails and comment on them and lead the public to conclude that Hillary Clinton is a corrupt woman without redeeming qualities. Trump was cast as a naive, outsider and clownish, who was never hated because people don’t hate childish ‘immature’, men. The public would accept a corrupt but cuddleable clown over a witch, wouldn’t they?

It is easier for the public to believe that it was Putin, than to believe that the elite in the US manipulated them with the ease with which they manipulate their iPod. They can’t see that when the FBI says that they don’t have ‘evidence’ that Putin did the ‘deed’, it means that all blame stay here at home.

It is less important that someone hacked some computers than what was done with the material. Again, the media took the loot and ran with it. They are the to be blamed for Trump’s coming debacle presidency.

As I have discussed on this inartful blog, the globalists and the conservatives of assorted flavors never wanted a FEMINIST woman as their president. Hillary’s focus on identity issues was a no-no to these men. Her feminism was having an impact on women and on men not afraid of women in power. But we are dealing with a band of misogynist men at the top of the pyramid. They would have NEVER allow ‘that woman’ to be president’. They almost lost, but the emails was the nail that sealed our coffin. She lost the crucial votes needed to win those electoral colleges because people couldn’t take more ‘Hillary corruption’.

The NYT wants us to believe that they were ignorant and innocent in this political debacle, but they were the instigators, not the victims. Now they are using Putin to cleanse themselves of guilt, and as propaganda for the segment of the elite that wants a cold war with Russia so they can give more welfare to Grumman and et al warmongers and armaments builders.

Unfortunately, the public will continue to be prey of the Carlos Slim (NYT owner) and other media owners.

This is the best time for you to read about propaganda; fascism relies on it, and our media has shown they are supporting the fascist president-elect.

I recommend you start with this book: Propaganda by Jacques Ellul.

NBC and Joe Scarborough: Trump’s official mouthpiece

I read the news today, oh boy. It was about the media crowning Joe Scarborough as Trump’s official media mouth piece, with picture and all of him (and Mika, of course) posing as the media royal couple.

“Might have” is code for ‘he did’. Joe, and Mika to a lesser degree (that’s what happens to you when you are a woman), is now “important”.

But that’s not the appalling news there. The depressing news is that the article describes nonchalantly how the mainstream media (MSM), NBC and WaPo in particular, deceived the public about their so-called “biased” and “negative reporting” on Trump. It just so happens, it was all a farce. It was the lying media doing what the are expert at: lying and propaganda.

Trump has referred to the duo as “supporters” and thanked them for helping make him “almost as a legendary figure.”

That’s not how you feel when someone ‘attacks’ you as you run for president.

Even worse; as many professional media analysts had described, the article confirms that the media was helping Trump with advice in their ‘reporting’. And MORE! The article hints at their willingness to not be subjected to ethical journalistic standards from now on while they will continue advising him as he performs his presidential duties.

They are old pals, but who knew?

I didn’t. Trump and Joe know each other since, at least, 2007.

After Scarborough was promoted to his morning slot in 2007, Trump followed, as both a guest and fan…they had golfed together…“‘We were friends before the campaign,…” In 2010 they (Joes and Mika) guested on “The Apprentice.”

That wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t for the fact that Joe (a former GOP congressman) spent the primaries and presidential campaign pretending to hate Trump. He never disclosed his close personal relationship with Trump. It was so close as to involve money. Well, what relationship with Trump doesn’t involve money?

He came to their book parties and donated to their fundraisers…Scarborough and Brzezinski would occasionally dial up Trump on speakerphone during their own speaking engagements to rile up the crowd,

That close it was; they had immediate access to him at all times. But you wouldn’t know it based on Joe’s ‘attacks’ on Trump during the election cycle.

NBC owners paid Joe to promote Trump

The article mildly criticizes Joe for

It’s an odd position, advising and reporting upon a president, sometimes on the very same topic. It’s engendered some bad feelings within NBC News.

But the fact remains that not Joe nor any TV news personality makes any report without the consent of the company’s CEOs. Saying that his lack of journalistic ethics (words the writer would not use because the purpose of the article is not to judge the media as an institution) caused “some” bad feelings (a minor discomfort) masks that he was allowed to behave like that non-stopped. The author calls this unethical journalism “odd“.

Did Joe “lent legitimacy to the Trump phenomenon”?

None of the big media owners, Murdoch, Jeff Bezos, Carlos Slim (NYT) would take responsibility for their lack of professional ethics. They will cast the blame, if any, on news personalities. The WaPo wants you to believe that all those millions of dollars in free press even they acknowledge was given to Trump (24/7 coverage, as they are still doing today) didn’t “lent credibility to the Trump phenomenon”. No, it was not Joe who did that; it was Murdoch and Bezos and Slims…They own their companies, they decide when something will or will not happen in their news reports.

In NBC “Rigid standards of journalism” don’t apply to journalists

She [Mika] maintains that just because they build sources and conduct interviews with newsmakers doesn’t mean they should be held to the rigid standards of journalism.

Well, now we know that that is the case, for there was no journalistic ethics with ANY of their TV news personalities. I guess that’s why Brian Williams is still there.

Not only their ‘journalists’ receive money from politicians running for office, which of course shouldn’t concern anyone watching the news, but they are all friends with politicians they favor.

Scarborough views the criticism as “hypocritical,” he said. “Andrea Mitchell is friends with everyone in D.C. Chris Matthews is friends with people who have run for president of the United States.” No one seemed to mind, he said, that he had off-the-record conversations with President Obama or considers Obama’s campaign strategist David Axelrod a friend.

Clearly Hillary Clinton had no friends in the media. Rachel Maddow was not a friend of Hillary before the elections.

There is no Trump war on the media

 He [Joe] has no regrets…After all, he may already have something more than your average veep.

“I’m good here,” he said. “We have influence.”

How he got that influence matters, for it could not have been gained by dishonoring the source (Trump) nor will it be  jeopardized by ‘attacking’ him.

Trump said that he gets his political information from watching TV, that he doesn’t need to be briefed by the military. You can believe that at your own risk.

The message for the little people: their leader is like them, he doesn’t read and is as misinformed as the rest of us. That makes for a great president, doesn’t it? It’s the old form of anti-intellectualism for the intellectually impaired.

If Joe Scarborough was helping Trump while you thought he was attacking him (Trump thanked him, remember?), that means that you were had. The only way that can happen is if you are not aware of propaganda techniques.

The media will play the game with him, day in and day out. They will complain about how he bashes the media. It’s a winning tactic with the ‘deplorables‘ and the naive Sanders followers. Meanwhile, they continue to provide advice to him for free in the same articles on which they ‘attack’ him.

In that way, the divided elite will keep you supporting Trump or hating him. You can never make your own mind on your own unless you know how these people manipulate the public opinion. Remember, there’s no other place for you to get your information but from the media.

Now is Trump against NBC. Well, it means Trump is happy with NBC.

This WaPo article aimed at giving the impression that the media can self-criticize. But the focus is not on the media owners, the ones who make the decisions; it is on news personalities. The media (decided in the private  meetings of all owners) will continue planning how to divert the public’s attention away from their dishonest practices by focusing on Putin as provider of fake news. Meanwhile, the most efficient fake news we had during the elections came from our own media. The 24/7 emails fake news gave Trump the presidency. That was not Putin, that was Murdoch, Bezos, Carlos Slims…

While Trump was ‘attacked’, it was as a clown. Hillary Clinton was attacked as a ‘corrupt woman’ who had no redeeming qualities. The false equality of two equally dishonest candidates has already been denounced by experts in media ethics.

The art of political propaganda is convoluted. If citizens are not willing to inform themselves about it and continue  relying blindly on the media for their political information, they will only see their democracy thinning out like an old man’s hair.





Trump, Exxon and Putin: Your daily dose of MSM Propaganda, courtesy of the WaPo

Humor me here, please.

This WaPo article is a good example of propaganda in action. It relates to Trump nominating an Exxon CEO to head his State Department. The main article is “ExxonMobile chief is Trump’s pick…”


First, keep in mind that the media format, the way the news are presented in front pages and headlines, is not unintentional or by coincidence. Sub-messages are sent when you put images and headlines near each other, subconsciously linking them together. This is what experts in advertisement and propaganda say, I’m not inventing this.

In this case, note how the ‘concern’ about the CEO is cast in terms of the new anti-Putin war. It’s not that we know the Exxon CEO is a globalist who has no interest in humanity; who profits from destroying the environment, a liar and immoral capitalist. No, the problem with him is that he had ‘dealings’ with Putin.

I’m not defending Putin, he is not my friend. I’m only pointing at the shifting of the problem from having globalists running our government, who are unaccountable for their crimes against humanity (yes, humanity), precisely the type of people Trump supposedly ran against, to a Putin problem.

This is an example of the MSM ability to switch the public opinion away from what it once defined as ‘the problem’ with Trump (his pseudo-anti-globalism) towards a new ‘threat’. The media is in the process of crystallizing Putin as our main public concern, not a president’s cabinet filled with criminal globalists. We have our enemy, defined by the MSM. Now focus on him, please.

Once the GOP bends, as they will, for an almost trillionaire company Exxon and CEO, your personal opinion will follow public opinion that this CEO is good for the nation.

The WaPo editorial board already OKed this guy by saying he is “an efficient manager”, but their only ‘concern’ is that he ‘likes Putin’. Well, we can deal with that soon, can’t we? You have already been prepared to accept this guy.

Second, note the photo next to the article. Of course, it is Putin.

Third, note the Stars Wars photo next to Putin’s. Funny, isn’t it? It is not coincidence, people.

The WaPo has send you a subliminal message there.

You can figure it out by yourselves. I will let you with this thought:

That war on Putin, it is a movie. While you are watching it, Trump and the globalists are picking your pocket.

The bloody war the MSM doesn’t want you to see: Trump’s War of the Elites

In a recent post I mentioned that the lying media (MSM and pseudo-leftist) refuses to publish opinions recognizing the now calamitous internal divisions and political war of the elites against each other: the globalists and conservatives of all flavors – neocons, paleocons, third-positioners conservatives, and everything in between.

The problem is: ‘we the people’ are the ones who will be spilling their blood after Trump is crowned king of the paleoconservatives.

Trump as the heroic outsider, not the ruthless paleocon

On the contrary, the owners of the media, Bezos, Murdoch, Carlos Slim (NYT), etc., who are involved in that war of the elites, have given us, since the primaries to today, the myth of the billionaire businessman as political outsider. They know that Trump has long been a paleocon, and even if they didn’t, they know and can recognize a paleoconservative political position when they see one. There is no space for these media CEOs to claim ignorance of either the ongoing war of the elites or of Trump’ side on that war: they are crusaders for their own faction in that war.

Why hide the elites’ intestine strife

They hide it from the public because the elite is clear that it is a war among themselves, that ‘we the people’ is not part of the elite and should not take any part in their war except as live ammo.

The warring sides, all of them, use the media to weaponize the ‘civilians’ against each faction. The ‘opinions’ in the media that pass as ‘information’ are nothing but propaganda to manipulate the citizens’ emotions into supporting/rejecting the different factions. That’s one of the political functions of the media, to manipulate the masses’ opinions.

Who are the warring factions?

For ‘we the people’, this is probably the most important aspect of that internal fight between the elite. If we can’t recognize the various members of the elite and the side they are taking, then we will continue to be peons on their chess board, with no say except ‘yes, my Lord‘.

But the dishonest media has made it extremely difficult for citizens to recognize the many warring sides. It hides behind the cult of personality the political interests of elite groups. All we see is Trump being attack by so-and-so, maybe a battle between the GOP ‘establishment’ against Trump (not against paleos but against him, the populist leader) with no specification of which of the various factions of that group is involved in the attacks.

The ‘establishment’ now is anybody who is not in Trump’s camp: globalists and non-paleoconservatives, with  ‘Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment’ as the most “evil” representative of that generic ‘establishment. The conservatives want to demolish the Democratic party and are using the pseudo-left to do the job. More on this later.

Orwellian newspeak in reverse

Another element that makes it difficult to recognize the different pieces that form the whole of the elite is language. I wish it were ESL but, no; it is the manipulation of political language.

The elite (globalists, but conservatives more than them) uses the same political concepts of ‘liberals’ and, more significant, the leftists’ old Bolshevist political dictionary.

Thus you read paleos and ‘third-positionists’ talking about “the lying media” (Trump and his paleos) and “the presstitute media” (Robert Craig Roberts and the ‘third-positionists in the leftists media – Counter Punch, e.g.), about “greedy Wall Street capitalists” and “anti-American-anti-humanity globalists”, just to name a few examples. These are the expressions of an angry mass of people, furious because they feel oppressed by globalists, big corporations and Wall Street. What this mass of people doesn’t realize is that the conservatives have the same enemy; but that doesn’t make them friend of the masses, does it?

The dishonesty resides in speaking and presenting themselves as liberals and leftists when their elitist and conservative goals are in exact opposition to the people’s. They publish their opinions in pseudo-leftists magazines, attracting with their anti-globalist verbiage the unsuspecting readers. That’s how Trump ended up as the modern El Duce; by pretending to be the enemy of the people’s enemy. Job well done!

What passes today as the American Left is not leftist at all; it is the conservative third-positionists speaking anti-globalism, anti-capitlalism, and anti-oligarchy. The Left doesn’t exist anymore.

…and the left-wing (to the extent that one still exists)… Paul Craig Roberts

Sorry, The Nation.

Next: Tasting the different conservative flavors: paleos, third-positioners, neocons.