You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘populism’ tag.

With the rise of all of these authoritarians like Herr Drumpf, for example, it’s sometimes called “nationalism” or dare I say even absurdly “populism” (although  I don’t know that nationalism is any less absurd). I would say however that it’s more like kleptocracy and totalitarianism rising, myself! It definitely ain’t Nasserism… That people actually vote for these folks without one iota of integrity who have spent their lives fleecing people truly beggars belief! The Central Asian Republic model apparently will defeat democracy in that future that we’ve all seen in science fiction movies! (Paul Krugman had written a very apropos op-ed in this regard “America Becomes a Stan” not long after the election.)

The neocons have been so jubilant since the Berlin Wall fell that democracy defeated communism, but post-Sovietism apparently will be the next “progression” for humanity! What goes around comes around for all of our crimes of “Yanqui imperialism” during the Cold War, I guess that one might say! And for those who think that the Ruskies saddled us with perhaps the dumbest and most depraved leader since Caligula, Putin should look out for that playboy Jewish oligarch who owns the Brooklyn Nets! He may still yet be coming for you, Vlad!


“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

“History is a great teacher. Now everyone knows that the labor movement did not diminish the strength of the nation but enlarged it. By raising the living standards of millions, labor miraculously created a market for industry and lifted the whole nation to undreamed of levels of production. Those who attack labor forget these simple truths, but history remembers them.” – also Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

In terms of what is known as and what many people call, or even refer to as the “political divide”, perhaps it’s overly simplistic, but I believe that it can essentially be broken down into two parts. It comes down to those who want a “me society”, versus those who want a “we society” (toward my way of thought). Collectivist is a term that it seems is increasingly used as a pejorative term employed against the left by the right; usually right-wing libertarians, but by some mainline conservatives too though as well, I think. And yet another inane barb that is slung by the simple-headed libertarian-right, their associates, compatriots and others — against progressives and the left, is that of monolithic centralizer. Adversely however, whatever these groups, ideologues and their obsequious, kowtowing, slavish an ingratiating followers do or say (or think), I happen to “rather naively” submit that it is still presently humanity’s hope of the left — which will include centralization as well as decentralization — to thwart the rise of the globalist authoritarian dystopian project! A vomitous and furthermore wholly malevolent/virulent schema that would have us all exist essentially as beggars; that is, quasi-slaves with little recourse to the global power elite’s (.001%) treacherous diktats.

While the right-wing libertarians say that progressives and left-liberals want “centralization”, and they say that the left wants local freedoms usurped by a distant unfeeling/unflinching national governmental authority; we can all know that this is a mystification/simplification, however! And we can know that it is a cloddish tropism, veritably — and even more still, one that is bearing little basis in fact! There are a lot of decentralized initiatives that are “properly left” in my opinion, and it these aspects of genuine leftism that critics of progressivism or the left seem incapable of apprehending — or rather self-servingly myopically, and indeed lazily (as well as in artfully) leaving out. Real leftism/progressivism should be interested in things such as workers’ self-management; the existence of small farmers over solely the large behemoths; and the ability of a nation to grow enough food for itself, rather than to rely wholly on the faux so-called interconnectedness of globalization. The caricaturization of orders coming down from “on high” of a provincial or national capital — presumably from an individual wearing green eye shades according to this facile mythological fallacy/overall narrative — couldn’t be more addle-headed, simple-minded, or daft!

The federal government of the United States, as an example, does need to supersede the state and local on some things; for certain upon occasion, and indeed from time to time. A clear case in point is President Kennedy’s federalizing of the Alabama National Guard in the instance of Governor Wallaces’s famous Stand in the Schoolhouse Door. The arc of the moral universe was aided in bending toward justice, by the federal government of the United States in that specific event, and on that particular day! We should all we thankful for the efforts of “mother government” on that day of June 11, 1963, as an absolute, undeniable, certifiable and a resolute fact!

Many, reflexively and (sloppily) uncritically, want to point to Eastern European communism, as still a present reference point, as the template of what constitutes the ineluctable fruits of the left! I have always viewed that as a failed model/system. It wasn’t devoid of positives, I’d say, but it was — and is, something that I don’t think many, if any, would still (today) want. And I also think that it is right for Comandante Chavez to be remembered as a man of socialism for the present day (the twenty-first century generally). In fact, Latin America may be the laboratory or the vanguard, in fact — or even the tip of the spear if you like — of leftism/progressivism at the current stage! By bringing in a pink, rather than a red tide, the worst features of the “really existing socialism” of (Eastern) Europe have been largely, if not entirely, thus far left out. Of course, this could be looked at contradistinctively also. That the wealth and power is still owned and controlled in the hands of too few, in nations pursuing “socialism-lite” and/or this so-called pink tide that is welling. Using a more tepid method than Marxist-Leninist, Maoist or other traditional revolutionary praxes, techniques, or schools of thought.

Gradualism I think can be used as a powerful tool by faux populists, and other phonies that exist in “progressivism” and “the left”. Barack Obama is one such deceitful and unscrupulous ostensibly populist individual; who under the banner of gradualism, has hoodwinked large swathes of well-intentioned and otherwise well meaning people. Using a kind of intoxicating aura combined with a mix of dilettantish, cipherous “flowery” rhetoric (written for him to read off of a computer), to enchant the masses to accept, and even at times welcome their own misfortune/plight! In Latin America today for the most part, however, this has not been the case. Most of the leaders who have come to power there, at least in the left-of-center led countries, wouldn’t dagger one in the back, as Barack Obama in a myriad of ways; both figuratively — as well as a strong case can be made for literally — has rather quite easily, facilely, and unthinkingly, of course, done!  Most of these leaders wouldn’t — and haven’t, pursued such a venal, as well as perfidious and indeed deeply insidious direction/bent! The gradualism in Latin American today is actually that really existing movement of that essential moral arc of the universe, in fact! That was, indeed, spoken about during the lifetime of the eminently venerable Dr. Martin Luther King. The arc presided over by Obama, if he actually presides over anything that his handlers will allow for him, is an arc of unparalleled dubiousness that should never be taken at fully, or looked upon wholly (in its entirety) on its face!

The Latin American substantive change governments although they may not be operating under laws and forces prescribed by the sacred tomes of the “proper” left; nonetheless, they are bending in the correct direction, and proposing a major challenge to global homogenization, immiseration, corporatization, and dehumanization: all as it has it has been prescribed (and planned out for us) by the global power elite gangster-esque clique! This evilness and indeed unfathomable insidiousness has all been laid out; as I said “for” us, to erase the “pesky interferences/meddlings” of national parliamentary government, and particularly when it can be empowered/emboldened by the influence of the engaged “dangerous class” (essentially anyone who has to sell his or her labor power in order to eat and to live and to survive, including those who are subsisting in the informal economy as well the slum dwellers and the exceedingly poor/down-and-out)!

The ultimate goal here is, of course, to arrive in a global order, with as few impediments as possible to turn the planet’s wealth, power, people and resources over to the global so-called creme de la creme! In a “nifty little” neo-serfdom model such that — whether on the NWO approved “left” or “right” (such as George Soros or the Koch “Cock” brothers respectively) — that this “ingenious” neo-serfdom model will benefit, ultimately and virtually solely the .001%! The dangerous ones — we the people the 99+%, must rise and unseat these walking and breathing zombified vampiric actual subhuman maleficent creatures/cretins! We must rain down on their machinations to create a global dystopian world playground/order, that is utterly and unreservedly without any kind of certifiable resistance movements, or verifiable struggles for hope! In other words, solely a “dolly”, a “nick-knack”, or indeed verily a dark, and deeply insidious birthing of their own dubious and profoundly pestilential creation.

The Financial Times has opined recently that there is a rising libertarian tide in the United States of America. Particularly among the so-called Gen Y or Echo Boomer generation, who they claim do not easily jell with the current mainline American political schema. I have opined myself in the past that these ideas are foreign to America, and in fact are indeed Austrian in their derivation/origination/progenation. One only needs to read a healthy dose of Dickensian literature, if s/he wants to understand the monstrous repercussions of the insidious philosophy known as right-wing libertarianism! Noam Chomsky recently was interviewed by one of these (ideologically) dangerous so-called libertarians, where he aptly pointed out that traditional libertarians — of the Continental European variety — were quite disagreeable to having any sort of gods or masters, whereas today’s American right-wing so-called libertarian movement; which has essentially flipped traditional libertarianism 180 degrees on its head are quite content, in fact, in having (as well as serving) “illustrious” masters.

Read about the economic proposals of the American Whig Party if one wants to see some rational takes/views on economics! Along with the work of Henry Charles Carey, an economic adviser to Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was immensely Whig influenced. The Whig politician from Kentucky Henry Clay even referred to his economic theories as the American System! Today we rather unfortunately have a senator in that state who is subsumed/transfixed by the economic models/theories of Austria! Such a sad turn of affairs in the state that gave birth to titans such as Henry Clay, as well as his eminently capable and remarkably industrious — and indeed far ahead of his time — emancipationist cousin, Cassius Marcellus Clay (of who the famous boxer was, of course, named for prior to his religious conversion).

In spite of whatever the bourgeois European elite FT maybe be bellwethering, I was heartened to read a recent piece of the long-toiling populist Jim Hightower. Hightower had a completely different reading of the political winds of America, and the nature in which future political configurations/power formations may be forging. Peter Beinart, former New Republic editor of all people, also had a much rosier assessment IMHO of America’s political eventuality/unfolding, in a piece that he wrote for the Daily Beast around four months ago. I have prognosticated at times myself; I must declare, although, much like the so-called dismal science of economics, I think that the “science” of soothsaying/oraclizing is (sad to say it) even more dismaler!

I think that libertarians are just as utopian as the social anarchists. Actually there are probably far more historical examples of anarchism — just not in post-tribal society. Just as contemporary society (or even going back over a thousand years) society has not been organized decentralized via horizontal collectives, I don’t think there has been a single example of capitalism that was not of the crony variety. You can’t eliminate corruption, I don’t think, although you can tamp it down.

When you have large successful corporations/businesses, invariably you have government tied up in their activities. They have probably been corrupted by business — to work hand in glove with them — but there have been populist and reform periods in history, where government(s) have sought to work for a wider swath of folks. They have actually cracked down upon unscrupulous business practices, and the middle and lower classes have benefitted from this; and this is illustrative of the type of situation through education and activism that can be developed once again.