The Quiet Coup...

[CDNBear]

An excellent article I read, which spawned a debate at another forum I frequent, on the topic of the US becoming an Oligarchy.

Have a read and give me your thoughts...there are 4 pages, so be prepared to spend a little time on it, lol.

The Quiet Coup - Magazine - The Atlantic

 

[darkbeaver]

For, I will git sum hep, i wil repleye aftrr grub

 

[Colpy]

Wow.

Shoot the oligarchs.

Seriously, this piece needs to be read.

 

[Bar Sinister]

Naomi Kilne's The Shock Doctrine and Robert Reich's Work of Nations both take very interesting looks at this phenomenon. Reich's work is a little out of date now, but still contains several interesting studies on the moneyed interests in the US and elsewhere.

Given the fact that US laws limiting political contributions are quite weak it is not surprising that most members of the US government act as if they are in the pockets of big business especially if you consider that the practice of buying
congressmen and Senators has now been going on for almost two centuries.

 

[Colpy]

Naomi Kilne's The Shock Doctrine and Robert Reich's Work of Nations both take very interesting looks at this phenomenon. Reich's work is a little out of date now, but still contains several interesting studies on the moneyed interests in the US and elsewhere.

Given the fact that US laws limiting political contributions are quite weak it is not surprising that most members of the US government act as if they are in the pockets of big business especially if you consider that the practice of buying
congressmen and Senators has now been going on for almost two centuries.

Personally, I think Naomi Kline is a complete drooling idiot.....if there is one thing I can't stand, it's a silver-spoon socialist. I can't get through one of her newspaper articles, her sense of moral superiority is just soooo grating.......

I am not familiar with Reich, and everything I know about economics could be written on the head of a pin............with a magic marker...........but I do know that massive deficit spending while cutting taxes is lunacy, and that you simply can't have guns and butter, and that the rapidly increasing gulf between rich and poor, along with the disintegration of the middle class, is a travesty and a cultural and political disaster.

I am very divided on political contributions...................from corporations anyway.....perhaps corporate donations should be controlled, but donations from individuals and organizations allowed freely..........either that or complete restriction. The mney spent on elections in the USA is obscene........

 

[CDNBear]

Naomi Kilne's The Shock Doctrine and Robert Reich's Work of Nations both take very interesting looks at this phenomenon. Reich's work is a little out of date now, but still contains several interesting studies on the moneyed interests in the US and elsewhere.

Naomi Klien is as Colpy described her. "The Shock Doctrine" is almost a work of fiction. She makes all sorts of statements, with no supporting empirical data. She completely rewrites the history of Tienanmen Square to suit her agenda. She is as detrimental to shedding light on the corruption behind the scenes of political circles, as those that claim holograms crashed into the Twin Towers, then to go and rant about the Rothschild clan and secret new world orders.

She's actually on to something, I actually agree with some of her assertions, but she loses all credibility with her fallacies and absurdity.

Reich, I will have to give his book a read. I'll let you know what I think of it.

Personally, I think Naomi Kline is a complete drooling idiot.....if there is one thing I can't stand, it's a silver-spoon socialist. I can't get through one of her newspaper articles, her sense of moral superiority is just soooo grating.......

Bang on.

 

[Bar Sinister]

I would like to suggest that if what you say about Ms. Klein is accurate, then she would be bankrupt due to the number of lawsuits for libel brought against her. The fact that not a single person mentioned in the Shock Doctrine has challenged anything she described in her book gives it strong credibility, especially since many of those mentioned are public figures. if you have any real fault with her findings I would suggest that you point out definite errors rather than simply dismissing her because she is on a different side of the political spectrum. I found some of the events described in the Shock Doctrine extremely credible considering that what was being described were events I experienced at first hand.

 

[Kreskin]

It's more of Netocracy. Whoever develops the biggest and best social networks wins.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Great article. It said near the bottom of the 1stt page that in the first ten years of the 21st century, profits of financial firms reached 41% of the US economy. From 1973 to 1985, the financial sector never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. An interesting stat never reported. I wonder what it is in Canada.

I sure favour tough restrictions on the financial industry and banks in Canada. No mergers, and no foreign takeovers to start. Wealthy capitalists have weak loyalty to Canada.

 

[theconqueror]

Better than,

Super Power of the World

Empire of America

or, the World Domination

 

[eh1eh]

The thing that you Bear are wrong about is the fact that the USA is not becoming an oligarchy. It was founded as one and hasn't deviated from that since.

Were George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin...etc, common men. No they were part of the elite class, such as it was in colonial times. Last year I went to Mt. Vernon, Georges estate from before he was Pres. This man was a multi millionaire by our standards. He pioneered farming and distilling methods which made him a rich man. None of the founding fathers were in want for money, even under colonial rule. After the revoloution they could write their own tickets to power and riches, as they proceeded to do. Of course they let anyone in on the game so long as they were willing to play along. Like Dupont, Rothchild... but that is best left to a tin foil hat thread.

My point is, the US was formed as an oligarchy. You don't think a bunch of working class people and farmers thought it would be a good idea to lay Washington out with the streets going all cockeyed do you. No it was the Freemasons who at the time were involved in the revolution and the formation of the US government. I think they liked the power and were trying to keep it within their ranks. The fact remains that they did just that. Hell, what about that eye pyramid thingy on the $1 bill.
What about Lincoln? He took away power from a large group of people. Look what happened to him. Hell they even tried to secede from the US to keep their power and money.
Kennedy tried to institute a system to issue US currency by the government, not the Fed a privately held entity that issues currency for the government based on gold, and look what happened to him.

I just don't see how the US was ever not an oligarchy. The 'democracy' they have is great for adminstrative purposes but doesn't affect the real money and power.

 

[CDNBear]

The thing that you Bear are wrong about is the fact that the USA is not becoming an oligarchy. It was founded as one and hasn't deviated from that since.

Were George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin...etc, common men. No they were part of the elite class, such as it was in colonial times. Last year I went to Mt. Vernon, Georges estate from before he was Pres. This man was a multi millionaire by our standards. He pioneered farming and distilling methods which made him a rich man. None of the founding fathers were in want for money, even under colonial rule. After the revoloution they could write their own tickets to power and riches, as they proceeded to do. Of course they let anyone in on the game so long as they were willing to play along. Like Dupont, Rothchild... but that is best left to a tin foil hat thread.

My point is, the US was formed as an oligarchy. You don't think a bunch of working class people and farmers thought it would be a good idea to lay Washington out with the streets going all cockeyed do you. No it was the Freemasons who at the time were involved in the revolution and the formation of the US government. I think they liked the power and were trying to keep it within their ranks. The fact remains that they did just that. Hell, what about that eye pyramid thingy on the $1 bill.
What about Lincoln? He took away power from a large group of people. Look what happened to him. Hell they even tried to secede from the US to keep their power and money.
Kennedy tried to institute a system to issue US currency by the government, not the Fed a privately held entity that issues currency for the government based on gold, and look what happened to him.

I just don't see how the US was ever not an oligarchy. The 'democracy' they have is great for adminstrative purposes but doesn't affect the real money and power.

You've thrown out some pretty deep thoughts there eh1. Thus forcing me to look at the issue from a different angle. You'll have to give me some time to examine that. I hope you don't mind.

 

[CDNBear]

The thing that you Bear are wrong about is the fact that the USA is not becoming an oligarchy. It was founded as one and hasn't deviated from that since.

On the surface. Yes, a group of men, with an agenda formulated and exacted a course of action, that best benefited them. And they may very well have put in place something that was more aptly or easily 'swallowed, by the masses, to simply protect and further their own interests.

But I think in so doing, they made available, the ability to perform an end run around their own groups control on power. Whether accidental or not. At that time, that is simply what was. The ability of any person, so choosing, to be part of and help guide/lead the Government.

The same can not be said for today. As you point out further on, citing Lincoln and Kennedy. When someone deviates from the path, they simply become expendable. And thus dispatched.

Were George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin...etc, common men. No they were part of the elite class, such as it was in colonial times. Last year I went to Mt. Vernon, Georges estate from before he was Pres. This man was a multimillionaire by our standards. He pioneered farming and distilling methods which made him a rich man. None of the founding fathers were in want for money, even under colonial rule. After the revolution they could write their own tickets to power and riches, as they proceeded to do. Of course they let anyone in on the game so long as they were willing to play along. Like DuPont, Rothschild... but that is best left to a tin foil hat thread.

I can provide provable, attributed quote, after provable quote, that would indicate that the Founding Fathers were against and set forth a system to ensure the freedom of the people under the Government they created. This contains commentary explicitly in reference to and in context of, the banking industry. Which of course is the villain in my formulated opinion.

From Tomas Jefferson's feelings about paper money, to one of Benjamin Franklin's expressed reasons for the revolution, before the British Parliament. There seemed to be a common theme. That so single group, should be able to control a countries wealth. Furthermore, that it would lead to corruption and ultimately its destruction.

My point is, the US was formed as an oligarchy. You don't think a bunch of working class people and farmers thought it would be a good idea to lay Washington out with the streets going all cockeyed do you. No it was the Freemasons who at the time were involved in the revolution and the formation of the US government. I think they liked the power and were trying to keep it within their ranks. The fact remains that they did just that. Hell, what about that eye pyramid thingy on the $1 bill.
What about Lincoln? He took away power from a large group of people. Look what happened to him. Hell they even tried to secede from the US to keep their power and money.
Kennedy tried to institute a system to issue US currency by the government, not the Fed a privately held entity that issues currency for the government based on gold, and look what happened to him.

Now we're getting into theory. I do recognize the problems with examining this issue, without having to hurdle this. As you saw in a similar thread at the other place. It's very difficult to look at one aspect of this issue, without seeing the basis of conspiracy. The reason, IMHO, is because there is a conspiracy. It may not be overt, or as covert as some would have us believe, but I truly do not believe there is a conspiracy at play by the Illuminati. I think it is a matter of coincidence and one faction using the actions of another, to further their goals. Are there major players and bit players? Yes. Do I think that the Founding Fathers were part of the larger culmination of coincidence? No. I think they were centered on their own interests and not that of the financiers of the time.

I just don't see how the US was ever not an oligarchy. The 'democracy' they have is great for administrative purposes but doesn't affect the real money and power.

I'm not comfortable conceding here. I think you raise some interesting points, but in the face of what the Founding Fathers created, which was an open, transparent and publicly controlled system of Government, they removed themselves from the seat of power and gave it to the people.

The democracy they have now, is not the democracy they created. It has been bastardized, manipulated and distorted to remove the the very premise of the Founding Fathers core beliefs.

The US is but a shadow of it's former self and is not the visage of what the Founding Fathers saw as her future. The very system they fought against, railed against, warned the people about. Has usurped their gift and turned it on the people. So I concede, a form of oligarchy formed the US, but in so doing, removed themselves from the equation. It took years of abuses and money changing hands in back rooms, to destroy it. Thus creating a true ruling oligarchy, of money lenders and thieves. Who by hook or crook, control the highest office.

Pheeewww, you made me sweat eh1, thank you.

 

[eh1eh]

The US is but a shadow of it's former self and is not the visage of what the Founding Fathers saw as her future. The very system they fought against, railed against, warned the people about. Has usurped their gift and turned it on the people. So I concede, a form of oligarchy formed the US, but in so doing, removed themselves from the equation. It took years of abuses and money changing hands in back rooms, to destroy it. Thus creating a true ruling oligarchy, of money lenders and thieves. Who by hook or crook, control the highest office.

Pheeewww, you made me sweat eh1, thank you.

Thanks for the sweat equity on that post. You have made some powerful counter points and believe it or not have somewhat changed my view of the situation. While the founding fathers were of the financial upper class you remind me of their actual reasons and philosophies for breaking away from Britain. I do see how much that has changed over the years so therefore I guess maybe you are right in saying the US is 'becoming' an oligarchy. It seems to have started with the advent of paper money.

 

[Cliffy]

YouTube - Zeitgeist - The Movie: Federal Reserve (Part 1 of 5)

 

[CDNBear]

Thanx, watched it Cliffy. Actually, on two levels it started my thinking about things. 1, About the astronomy in the opening half hour. 2, About the current crisis in the financial sector.

Hence my posts on this topic. The part about astronomy, is being conducted in private with Dex Sinister, one of the brightest and sharpest minds on this board.

 

[CDNBear]

Thanks for the sweat equity on that post.

Not a problem. I hope you weren't disappointed that it wasn't filled with ad hominem attacks, because you don't agree with me 100%...;-)

It seems to have started with the advent of paper money.

I don't think it was with paper money per say, as apposed to fiat currency.

Thomas Jefferson is well quoted on his belief in Specie vs fiat currency.

I chose this quote to leave you with, because of the Native reference, lol. I also submit a link to quotes by Thomas Jefferson, (I'm trying to find one of similar value to Benjamin Franklin and other Founding Fathers) on banking and money in general. Look it over at your leisure. I found it to be quite reveling as to his position on finance and the banking system of the time.

"The evils of this deluge of paper money are not to be removed until our citizens are generally and radically instructed in their cause and consequences, and silence by their authority the interested clamors and sophistry of speculating, shaving, and banking institutions. Till then, we must be content to return quoad hoc to the savage state, to recur to barter in the exchange of our property for want of a stable common measure of value, that now in use being less fixed than the beads and wampum of the Indian, and to deliver up our citizens, their property and their labor, passive victims to the swindling tricks of bankers and mountebankers." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1819. ME 15:185

Jefferson on Politics & Government: Money & Banking

 

[Colpy]

Okay'

Naomi Klein:

I read the continuing banter between CDN Bear and Bar Sinister.....and decided I should go back and re-read my initial opinion expressed here, and then take another look at Ms. Klein.......

I wrote:

Personally, I think Naomi Kline is a complete drooling idiot.....if there is one thing I can't stand, it's a silver-spoon socialist. I can't get through one of her newspaper articles, her sense of moral superiority is just soooo grating.......

After some careful study and a re-assesment of my original position, I must confess to an error in my attack on Ms Klein.... I misspelled her name.

as for "Silver-spoon socialist"

Naomi Klein was born on May 5, 1970 in Montreal, Quebec into a political family. Her mother, Bonnie Sherr Klein, directed Not a Love Story, an anti-pornography film which looked into the life of a stripper named Linda Lee Tracey, in 1981, while her father, Michael Klein, is a member of the Physicians for Social Responsibility.

Uh-huh, the horror, the oppression, the nightmare she must have lived through, the fires of which purified and hardened the steel of her core convictions.......(sarcasm alert)

Here is what I found in her articles.........first of all, CDN Bear is completely correct in his assertion that Klein absolutely misrepresented the facts of the Tianamen Square incident.....the attack was not "Shock" to further the cause of world capitalism, far from it.....it was an attempt by the Communist gov't to keep complete and absolute control of Chinese development.....the free marketers were on the point of the bayonet, not behind it.

So, I go to her website and start reading articles.

let's see..."Apartheit" Israel "occupies" both the West Bank and Gaza........

Israel commited "war crimes" in its defensive attacks on the Gaza Strip......

Yep......an idiot. An especially disingenuous individual considering she is Jewish......errors in fact,,,well, just one question....if Gaza is "occupied", why did Israel find it necessay to "invade" in December 2008???

Every single propaganda lump of BS provided by the left against Israel coughed up verbatim.

On to Global Warming......

Once again, not a single, solitary thought that threatens to break out of the radical leftist box..........mankind is solely responsible for climate change, and we must be punished.....especially the wicked West, who must now be punished by shipping boatloads of cash to China...

Michael Moore is "America's Teacher".....I'd call the hypocritical, lying scumbag a snake-oil salesman....except that would be an insult to smake-oil salesmen everywhere....

The wonderful opportunities supplied by the proposed Coalition of the NDP, Liberals and Bloc........a chance to radically change the direction of the nation, starting with unilateral and immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan........included, of course, an upraised finger to the West in general and Alberta in particular.

Praise for the masked Anarchists that violently disrupt every major summit.....the front line of major change!! Not that Ms. Klein would ever dirty her hands by stooping to manning a barricade.......but she'll be around after the revolution to instruct the peasants in how to build their Brave New World......

After a bit of study, one glaring element in Ms. Klein's make-up convinces me completely that she has all the intellectual ability of your average tape recorder....all she ever does is promote and regurgitate the most radical of the "truths" of the academics and artists of the "intellectual" left.......not once does she depart the path, not once does she show a glimmer of original thought, not once does she question the dogma.....

She is like a High Priestess........elevated above the common masses, blessed with the knowledge of Truth, to passed unquestioned on to the unenlightened....

If anything, I now like her LESS.

 

[CDNBear]

...If anything, I now like her LESS.

Sad, it actually overshadows some of the sense she makes. Oh wait, I already said that...

You missed her obsession with Milton Friedman and her bastardized use of his commentary, oft misquoted and always taken well out of context...

 

[Colpy]

Sad, it actually overshadows some of the sense she makes. Oh wait, I already said that...

You missed her obsession with Milton Friedman and her bastardized use of his commentary, oft misquoted and always taken well out of context...

Well exactly......when she wants to "fire the bosses", hey, I'm there.......and on a point or two otherwise she actually makes some sense....

But what that shows is that you and I have some minor ability to see good sense outside of the narrow parameters of ideology.....

Naomi Klein is severely limited in that she can not....Intellectually, Klein is a stopped clock.

And even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.....