Thread: The Factory of Selective Moral Outrage, by Victor Davis Hanson

Anton Chaitkin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chaitkin is a conspiracy theorist, a nutter as they are called. Here's how nutty he was taking a class in 1965:

In New York about two years after the JFK assassination, I saw a poster on the street for an ad hoc "Free University" conducted in a loft on 14th Street. I attended an economics class taught by Lyndon LaRouche. He said the change then being pushed through our national strategy by Anglo-American financiers– away from industry in the advanced countries, toward cheap labor, would lead to fascist policies and a systemic collapse.

1965 ... industry to cheap labor, fascist policies, and a systematic collapse.
1965 ... nice crystal ball huh?

I find it morally outrageous, that our economic doldrums have been planned since the early 1960's, by both parties. The rest is icing on the cake, outrage should be directed at those, who planned these traitorous actions against the American people and our government.

Originally Posted by michael h

Anton Chaitkin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:rolleyes:

Chaitkin is a conspiracy theorist, a nutter as they are called. Here's how nutty he was taking a class in 1965:

In New York about two years after the JFK assassination, I saw a poster on the street for an ad hoc "Free University" conducted in a loft on 14th Street. I attended an economics class taught by Lyndon LaRouche. He said the change then being pushed through our national strategy by Anglo-American financiers– away from industry in the advanced countries, toward cheap labor, would lead to fascist policies and a systemic collapse.

What I find laughable is that someone would consider taking an economics class from Lyndon LaRouche.

1965 ... industry to cheap labor, fascist policies, and a systematic collapse.
1965 ... nice crystal ball huh?

Not really. What fascist policies does Americans champion or embrace? The possibility of our collapse will have nothing to do with the demographic and technological changes in our industrial-manufacturing sector. The same fear mongering was done in the late 1800s and early 1900s, when the massive migrations of farm labor moved to industry. Our collapse will be caused by a bloated bureaucratic federal government that overspends its citizens wealth. America is still the top manufacture of the world.

I find it morally outrageous, that our economic doldrums have been planned since the early 1960's, by both parties. The rest is icing on the cake, outrage should be directed at those, who planned these traitorous actions against the American people and our government.

I find it morally outrageous that people listen to conspiracy nuts who learned at the feet of Lyndon LaRouche and consider their statements worthy of consideration.

Our economic doldrums have nothing to do with our industrial-manufacturing capacity. Its causes are twofold, first the housing market collapse, with the financial markets that are tied to the housing market and the ignorant economic-healthcare-energy policies of the Obama administration. This has caused a high degree of uncertainty in the markets, since no one knows what Obama will do next and no one knows the true costs of what Obama has already done.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

:rolleyes:



What I find laughable is that someone would consider taking an economics class from Lyndon LaRouche.

My thoughts when I first saw his name, but looking at the subject matter it is typical of the mid 1960's activism. I only found this when researching Lincoln.

Not really. What fascist policies does Americans champion or embrace? The possibility of our collapse will have nothing to do with the demographic and technological changes in our industrial-manufacturing sector. The same fear mongering was done in the late 1800s and early 1900s, when the massive migrations of farm labor moved to industry. Our collapse will be caused by a bloated bureaucratic federal government that overspends its citizens wealth. America is still the top manufacture of the world.

Laurence Britt Fascism link

http://http://www.oldamericancentury...iers_britt.htm

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. A controlled mass media.
6. Obsession with national security.
7. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
8. Power of corporations protected.
9. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
10. Obsession with crime and punishment.
11. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
12. Fraudulent elections.

As corporate power increases, I think we will see the west struggle with the consequences of trade policy (unemployment). Greece, Ireland, Spain, and Iceland. The US currently with major deficits.

I find it morally outrageous that people listen to conspiracy nuts who learned at the feet of Lyndon LaRouche and consider their statements worthy of consideration.

I'll take information from opposing views if it is true. Truth is good policy.

Our economic doldrums have nothing to do with our industrial-manufacturing capacity. Its causes are twofold, first the housing market collapse, with the financial markets that are tied to the housing market and the ignorant economic-healthcare-energy policies of the Obama administration. This has caused a high degree of uncertainty in the markets, since no one knows what Obama will do next and no one knows the true costs of what Obama has already done.
tashi deleks,

M

I tie the housing collapse directly to the reduction of income, in the lower 80% of Americans, and the use of credit sustaining employment ... instead of manufacturing. 2001 upticks in unemployment, till 2002, 2002 housing boom begins till 2006 (credit based economy) ... this sustains employment, glut of housing and income loss in the lower 80%, will no longer support valuations and additional home defaults add to the glut.

I do not dismiss other factors, only view them as minor next to 5% points of unemployment.



Tashi Delek, hopefully my context is correct.

Originally Posted by michael h

Originally Posted by Mahasattva
:rolleyes:

What I find laughable is that someone would consider taking an economics class from Lyndon LaRouche.

My thoughts when I first saw his name, but looking at the subject matter it is typical of the mid 1960's activism.

What was typical of mid 1960’s activism, should remain in the 1960s.

I only found this when researching Lincoln.

There are data bases on the web dedicated to collecting Lincoln’s personal writings, which is quite large, with thousands of pages, which I believe is complete, or as near much to it could be. Beyond that you need to read books, which there are many tens of excellent ones found at your local community or college library. Beyond that, the web is pretty shallow when it comes to serious historical analysis. Deep in data and just the facts, but for real deep analysis and interpretation of those facts, you got to go elsewhere. Going on conspiracy websites for your research, and relying on them as sources for facts is simply foolish.

I wrote: Not really. What fascist policies does Americans champion or embrace? The possibility of our collapse will have nothing to do with the demographic and technological changes in our industrial-manufacturing sector. The same fear mongering was done in the late 1800s and early 1900s, when the massive migrations of farm labor moved to industry. Our collapse will be caused by a bloated bureaucratic federal government that overspends its citizens wealth. America is still the top manufacture of the world2.

Laurence Britt Fascism link

http://http://www.oldamericancentury...iers_britt.htm

A loony leftists conspiracy website, attempting to dress itself in Tea Party drag, has very little credibility with me.

Each of the following are silly talking points promoted by conspiracy nuts and few bare any relation to policies that are exclusively fascist, some of which are actually false opposites, while others are just twisted versions of the truth. These do not resemble the core guiding principles of American culture, or reflect our best intentions as a people. Neither are they accurate descriptions of current America, as a country or in its structure of power.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.

While American patriotism can be powerful, other than when we are projecting power, American nationalism is usually expressed in an understated manner. Military events can have a lot of pomp and ritual, but for all nations -- the armed forces are by their nature an expression of nationalism.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

America and the other Western powers are the only nations which consider and promote human rights for the sake of human rights (rather than as rhetoric or as a weapon, as is the case with certain Arab concerns in regards to Israel). Yes, the concept of “human rights,” as the modern world has come to accept that concept, and yes, its importance was lacking in fascism. But so was it lacking in the socialism and communism of the Soviets, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Ho Chi Min’s Vietnam, the military juntas of Pinochet’s Chile, the nations of the Arab and the Progressivism of the early 1900’s.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.

That is largely and simply, basic human nature. Though please identify who has America identified and scapegoated as an enemy since 9/11? Individuals, not large groups, unless you consider Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Egyptian Brotherhood separate ethnicities or odd but legitimate religious orders on some strange level. Their have been those who have been unfairly scapegoated and those who have been fairly judged war criminals or homicidal maniacs.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.

This is largely due to the fall of the Soviets and the end of the Cold War. Because of that event America, along with the near collapse of European society, the near destruction of Japan at the end of WW II and the harsh ideological divide that objectively placed the Soviets and the US as polar opposition politically, America just by being the winner of the Cold War, obtained military supremacy of the world. Because of this, and a couple of other important factors, America has become an accidental imperialist power. Though I would hardly characterize this supremacy as “avid militarism.” Look up the percentage of Americans who are members of one of the armed services. Like farmers, there are not very many of them.

5. A controlled mass media.

While the mainstream American media is obviously biased, it is not a controlled state media. Nor is the internet controlled with its thousands of political blogs. Besides those outlets there is talk radio -- Americans have more choices for information and “news” then ever before.

6. Obsession with national security.

A healthy concern with national security is not only very important it is one of the duties specifically outlined in the U.S. Constitution. The attacks of 9/11 prove the need to be vigilant when it comes to national security.

7. Religion and ruling elite tied together.

Garbage. There is no single religious sect or denomination of America that is tied to the governing elite. Even though America is largely a Christian culture, Christians themselves have widely different views depending on how they view God, their own socio-economic position, their own level of education, and their own ethnicity, race, age or gender. Check out: Amazon.com: America's Four Gods: What We Say about God--and What That Says about Us (9780195341478): Paul Froese, Christopher Bader: Books

8. Power of corporations protected.

Baseless anti-capitalist talking point. The power of corporations are at the mercy of the government. Even more, fascism did not protect corporations, it controlled them. While ownership remained in private hands, those hands could do nothing without fascist approval. For example, the Nazis determined what corporations could do, how much of a given service or good they were allowed to produce, where and from whom they were allowed to acquire the raw materials they needed, and where and to whom they were allowed to sell their service or good.

9. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.

America, especially the Democrat-Progressives in office have guaranteed the protection of labor, especially union labor, often to the detriment of American workers and the economy as a whole. The fall of Detroit and the fall of American auto companies are prime examples of the damage over-protected unions can do to an industry and local.
While it is true that fascists suppressed or eliminated or took over labor organizations, the same was done by communists, socialists and Progressives in the early 1900s and during FDR’s reign.

10. Obsession with crime and punishment.

Obsession? Please reread my comments about national security.

11. Rampant cronyism and corruption.

:rolleyes: While there is cronyism within some sectors, I hardly call it rampant. Corruption, well, there’s an old haiku that I have always appreciated:

Wherever you find humans
You find Buddhas
And flies.

Compared to other cultures and countries, American corruption is tame and mild. Also, government officials and politicians are like any other groups, some are good and some are not so good. Those who are proved to be corrupt should lose office or their job. Republicans tend to resign at the first hint of corruption or impropriety, while Democrats circle the wagons and protect the offender.

12. Fraudulent elections.

:rolleyes: Garbage.

As corporate power increases, I think we will see the west struggle with the consequences of trade policy (unemployment).

Unemployment has little to do with trade policy.

Greece, Ireland, Spain, and Iceland. The US currently with major deficits.

Is due to the federal government overspending, and has nothing to do with our trade policy. Those who whine about outsourcing or off shoring do so from ignorance.

I wrote: I find it morally outrageous that people listen to conspiracy nuts who learned at the feet of Lyndon LaRouche and consider their statements worthy of consideration.

I'll take information from opposing views if it is true. Truth is good policy.

Truth is always a good policy. LaRouche has very little of it and miss use what little he has.

I wrote: Our economic doldrums have nothing to do with our industrial-manufacturing capacity. Its causes are twofold, first the housing market collapse, with the financial markets that are tied to the housing market and the ignorant economic-healthcare-energy policies of the Obama administration. This has caused a high degree of uncertainty in the markets, since no one knows what Obama will do next and no one knows the true costs of what Obama has already done.

I tie the housing collapse directly to the reduction of income, in the lower 80% of Americans,

This is the problem with relying on conspiracy websites for your facts. There has been no reduction of income for any Americans. The housing collapse had absolutely nothing to do with a reduction of income. There is also no such thing statistically speaking of a ridged unchanging lower class that does not move up the income ladder.

and the use of credit sustaining employment ... instead of manufacturing.

:rolleyes: America manufactures more stuff than it did in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Yes, the employment levels in the manufacturing sector has fallen somewhat, but that has more to do with the structural changes in how and who is considered a working in the manufacturing sector.

2001 upticks in unemployment, till 2002, 2002 housing boom begins till 2006 (credit based economy) ... this sustains employment, glut of housing and income loss in the lower 80%, will no longer support valuations and additional home defaults add to the glut.

Your understanding of basic economics and the circumstances that brought about the housing market collapse are seriously lacking.

I do not dismiss other factors, only view them as minor next to 5% points of unemployment.

Where are you getting your numbers? We are not currently at a 5% unemployment rate, I wish we were. Still, the unemployment problem has nothing really to do with our trade policy or the rantings of conspiracists.

Tashi Delek, hopefully my context is correct.

Tashi deleks (Tibetan for: “may good things arise“),

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

What was typical of mid 1960’s activism, should remain in the 1960s.

I disagree, history is enlightening to the motivations of people in the past. Also useful to see motivations in the present.

There are data bases on the web dedicated to collecting Lincoln’s personal writings, which is quite large, with thousands of pages, which I believe is complete, or as near much to it could be. Beyond that you need to read books, which there are many tens of excellent ones found at your local community or college library. Beyond that, the web is pretty shallow when it comes to serious historical analysis. Deep in data and just the facts, but for real deep analysis and interpretation of those facts, you got to go elsewhere. Going on conspiracy websites for your research, and relying on them as sources for facts is simply foolish.

My computer is in my home and more accessible then a library 5 miles away, which may or may not have the information I am seeking. But I do not disagree that books are better. As to going on conspiracy websites, ... have you been checking my History? How are you doing that? Do you work for the government? Just kidding.
I do go to conspiracy sites but do simple searches also. I like to hear all viewpoints. I am well aware of supposed conspiracies, that turned out to be true. Truth is more important then falling in lock step for approval.

A loony leftists conspiracy website, attempting to dress itself in Tea Party drag, has very little credibility with me.

As I stated above calling something looney will not change truth. One does not sign up for admission. Nobody is forced to believe, merely examine facts and make a determination.

On the other hand if a conspiracy theory comes true, does it make you looney for not believing? I'm trying to apply the logic to both sides.

Each of the following are silly talking points promoted by conspiracy nuts and few bare any relation to policies that are exclusively fascist, some of which are actually false opposites, while others are just twisted versions of the truth. These do not resemble the core guiding principles of American culture, or reflect our best intentions as a people. Neither are they accurate descriptions of current America, as a country or in its structure of power.

You will notice I merely listed the points not his talking points. I had no desire to see his points, merely your judgement. I will list a link if you would like to counter or read his talking points. There are 14 points listed.

Laurence W. Britt, Facism Anyone?

While American patriotism can be powerful, other than when we are projecting power, American nationalism is usually expressed in an understated manner. Military events can have a lot of pomp and ritual, but for all nations -- the armed forces are by their nature an expression of nationalism.

I will say yes to nationalism as I fall prey to it myself. I served 8 years in the armed forces, and I am proud of my service to country. My economic views are nationalistic. I suspect those with no nation.

America and the other Western powers are the only nations which consider and promote human rights for the sake of human rights (rather than as rhetoric or as a weapon, as is the case with certain Arab concerns in regards to Israel). Yes, the concept of “human rights,” as the modern world has come to accept that concept, and yes, its importance was lacking in fascism. But so was it lacking in the socialism and communism of the Soviets, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Ho Chi Min’s Vietnam, the military juntas of Pinochet’s Chile, the nations of the Arab and the Progressivism of the early 1900’s.

Another yes, I recently watched a video of a woman in an airport screaming, while they tried to get this guy to turn off his camera. Also the recent post of people being trained to search high school students. Need I even say our counties support of madass dictators for convenience.

That is largely and simply, basic human nature. Though please identify who has America identified and scapegoated as an enemy since 9/11? Individuals, not large groups, unless you consider Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Egyptian Brotherhood separate ethnicities or odd but legitimate religious orders on some strange level. Their have been those who have been unfairly scapegoated and those who have been fairly judged war criminals or homicidal maniacs.

Another yes, targets include, communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, Muslims, Buddhists, secularists, homosexuals, and terrorists. Key word unifying.

This is largely due to the fall of the Soviets and the end of the Cold War. Because of that event America, along with the near collapse of European society, the near destruction of Japan at the end of WW II and the harsh ideological divide that objectively placed the Soviets and the US as polar opposition politically, America just by being the winner of the Cold War, obtained military supremacy of the world. Because of this, and a couple of other important factors, America has become an accidental imperialist power. Though I would hardly characterize this supremacy as “avid militarism.” Look up the percentage of Americans who are members of one of the armed services. Like farmers, there are not very many of them.

Another yes, Budget 680 billion plus, who is 2nd to that number in the world? probably China way less. We have soldiers all over the planet and highly doubt it is accidental. Nor is American imperialism an accident, it is policy of both republicans and democrats. If I had to disagree strongly on any point this is the one. We can't fund our own government, yet a country of 300 million people spend more then any other on the planet.

While the mainstream American media is obviously biased, it is not a controlled state media. Nor is the internet controlled with its thousands of political blogs. Besides those outlets there is talk radio -- Americans have more choices for information and “news” then ever before.

I'll go 50-50 on this one, because of less controlled media outlets.

A healthy concern with national security is not only very important it is one of the duties specifically outlined in the U.S. Constitution. The attacks of 9/11 prove the need to be vigilant when it comes to national security.

This is a healthy Yes, CIA, FBI, NSA, BATF, apparently do not know constraint.

Garbage. There is no single religious sect or denomination of America that is tied to the governing elite. Even though America is largely a Christian culture, Christians themselves have widely different views depending on how they view God, their own socio-economic position, their own level of education, and their own ethnicity, race, age or gender. Check out: Amazon.com: America's Four Gods: What We Say about God--and What That Says about Us (9780195341478): Paul Froese, Christopher Bader: Books

This merely means attaching ones self to the predominant religion. You know the religious right. I say yes to attachment, that buys votes but overall no.

Baseless anti-capitalist talking point. The power of corporations are at the mercy of the government. Even more, fascism did not protect corporations, it controlled them. While ownership remained in private hands, those hands could do nothing without fascist approval. For example, the Nazis determined what corporations could do, how much of a given service or good they were allowed to produce, where and from whom they were allowed to acquire the raw materials they needed, and where and to whom they were allowed to sell their service or good.

This is a definite yes, corporations own congressmen and presidents. They are of mutual interests. In our society business leaders tell government what policy will be.

America, especially the Democrat-Progressives in office have guaranteed the protection of labor, especially union labor, often to the detriment of American workers and the economy as a whole. The fall of Detroit and the fall of American auto companies are prime examples of the damage over-protected unions can do to an industry and local.
While it is true that fascists suppressed or eliminated or took over labor organizations, the same was done by communists, socialists and Progressives in the early 1900s and during FDR’s reign.

I will not argue against the failure of rigidity of unions. I am not, nor will I be a union man. Even if I take a job in a union I will not support rigidity that will not improve productivity. This is also a yes despite my personal beliefs. I am not blind to attacks on unions, and simple bargaining rights.

Obsession? Please reread my comments about national security.

U.S. prison population dwarfs that of other nations - The New York Times

another definite yes, this need to have a large criminal element supports a larger policing force. We managed to top 2 million, hooray for us.

:rolleyes: While there is cronyism within some sectors, I hardly call it rampant. Corruption, well, there’s an old haiku that I have always appreciated:

Wherever you find humans
You find Buddhas
And flies.

Compared to other cultures and countries, American corruption is tame and mild. Also, government officials and politicians are like any other groups, some are good and some are not so good. Those who are proved to be corrupt should lose office or their job. Republicans tend to resign at the first hint of corruption or impropriety, while Democrats circle the wagons and protect the offender.

Another Definite Yes, this one is a no-brainer. Corporations may now donate as much as they desire.

:rolleyes: Garbage.

This is a no, I'll have to roll eyes with you on this one. Though I am suspicious of recent attempts in Wisconsin to steal voting rights.

Unemployment has little to do with trade policy.

I think the unemployed would disagree with you.

Is due to the federal government overspending, and has nothing to do with our trade policy. Those who whine about outsourcing or off shoring do so from ignorance.

Tomorrow we will send 5 million jobs to India, I wonder how ignorant it is to know you are unemployed?

Truth is always a good policy. LaRouche has very little of it and miss use what little he has.

Do you have nothing to say of him noting the plans to move American industrial jobs to cheap labor? I mean it took 30 years to make progress bit it did happen. I don't care if his IQ is 55, he was spot on.

This is the problem with relying on conspiracy websites for your facts. There has been no reduction of income for any Americans. The housing collapse had absolutely nothing to do with a reduction of income. There is also no such thing statistically speaking of a ridged unchanging lower class that does not move up the income ladder.

Did you see something here of conspiracy websites? Or a rigid inability to improve ones position in life, why are you deflecting? Once again falling to the magic "conspiracy" word does not support your argument through derision. I also did not state their was a reduction in income for Americans, I said the lowest 80%.

:rolleyes: America manufactures more stuff than it did in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Yes, the employment levels in the manufacturing sector has fallen somewhat, but that has more to do with the structural changes in how and who is considered a working in the manufacturing sector.

The point : manufacturing was and is preferable to an industry that is based on credit, as is quite clear given the bubble.

Your understanding of basic economics and the circumstances that brought about the housing market collapse are seriously lacking.

You may be correct or you may not know as much as you are pretending to know. Even common sense can replace the rigidity of a college book and a doctorates degree. I have not seen anybody support my debate, nor have I seen it online, I've come to my own conclusion the 2000 entry of China into the WTO is the beginning of major manufacturing and wage losses, to low wage economies, and leads to the bust of 2008. If you have seen this else where I would like to know so I can better support my debate.

Here's another conspiracy theory: The fantasy that loss of manufacturing jobs leads to other job creation. This is like trying support the debate that God exists.

Where are you getting your numbers? We are not currently at a 5% unemployment rate, I wish we were. Still, the unemployment problem has nothing really to do with our trade policy or the rantings of conspiracists.

That was the differential between Jan 2000 and now: 4.0 to 9.1

Of course you could support the argument that no jobs went overseas, there is another conspiracy theory.

May many good things arise, Mike

Tashi deleks (Tibetan for: “may good things arise“),

M

Originally Posted by michael h

Originally Posted by Mahasattva
What was typical of mid 1960’s activism, should remain in the 1960s.

I disagree, history is enlightening to the motivations of people in the past. Also useful to see motivations in the present.

Did I make a comment about history or the study of history? Nope. I commented on mid 1960’s activism.

I wrote: There are data bases on the web dedicated to collecting Lincoln’s personal writings, which is quite large, with thousands of pages, which I believe is complete, or as near much to it could be. Beyond that you need to read books, which there are many tens of excellent ones found at your local community or college library. Beyond that, the web is pretty shallow when it comes to serious historical analysis. Deep in data and just the facts, but for real deep analysis and interpretation of those facts, you got to go elsewhere. Going on conspiracy websites for your research, and relying on them as sources for facts is simply foolish.

My computer is in my home and more accessible then a library 5 miles away, which may or may not have the information I am seeking.

Obviously I have a computer at home and our local library is also 5 miles away. We go to the library every Tuesday as a family. We want our son to see both of his parents reading. We have done this since he was 3 years old. Now, at 7 years old, he reads at around a third or fourth grade level. Perhaps we our lucky to have the library system that we have here in Pinellas county Florida since it has a share system that allows us to check out books from any library in the county and even gives us access to the local college library.

But I do not disagree that books are better. As to going on conspiracy websites, ... have you been checking my History?

:rolleyes: Being well read in history I don’t need to blindly accept the twisted half truths and outright lies pushed by conspiracy websites, I have learned to check facts claimed. I also read what you linked and have developed the capacity to determine logical inconsistencies based on either bias, logical fallacies, and the acceptance of falsehoods.

How are you doing that? Do you work for the government? Just kidding.

Data is available on the web and it is possible to analyze that data with the twisted interpretations of conspiracy websites by comparing it with the work of “real” historians who have gathered their information from primary sources.

I do go to conspiracy sites but do simple searches also. I like to hear all viewpoints. I am well aware of supposed conspiracies, that turned out to be true. Truth is more important then falling in lock step for approval.

Not all viewpoints are equally valid or worthy of consideration. Very few conspiracies have ever turned out to be true. The approval of others has never impinged on my quest for the truth or the facts.

I wrote: A loony leftists conspiracy website, attempting to dress itself in Tea Party drag, has very little credibility with me.

As I stated above calling something looney will not change truth. One does not sign up for admission. Nobody is forced to believe, merely examine facts and make a determination.

:rolleyes: I have “examined facts” and determined that the alleged “facts” promoted by conspiracy websites are either falsehoods, twisted have truths, or biased illogical conclusions driven by an ideology.

On the other hand if a conspiracy theory comes true, does it make you looney for not believing? I'm trying to apply the logic to both sides.

No, you are attempting to promote a conspiracy website that dress itself in Tea Party drag as a legitimate source worthy of consideration.

I wrote: Each of the following are silly talking points promoted by conspiracy nuts and few bare any relation to policies that are exclusively fascist, some of which are actually false opposites, while others are just twisted versions of the truth. These do not resemble the core guiding principles of American culture, or reflect our best intentions as a people. Neither are they accurate descriptions of current America, as a country or in its structure of power.

You will notice I merely listed the points not his talking points. I had no desire to see his points, merely your judgement. I will list a link if you would like to counter or read his talking points. There are 14 points listed.

Laurence W. Britt, Facism Anyone?

Interesting article. You really should read what you post. I’ll cut and past what I found at the bottom of the page:

“This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

Due to its flaws I disagree with the article and its “points” as he applies them to America, but it is interesting. Historically America has suffered from two regimes which patterned their policies and programs on the fascist/socialist models. One preceded Mussolini’s and Hitler’s fascist governments, Woodrow Wilson’s Progressivism, while the other arose after and during their mad regimes, FDR’s liberal-Progressive administration. Both were carried out in their own unique American fashion, but Britt’s points describe those far better then any of the American administrations since WW II. I also strongly disagree with the conventional claim that fascism is a right-wing movement. Fascism arose out of socialism and was and has always been a leftist political philosophy.

Responding to: 1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.

I wrote: While American patriotism can be powerful, other than when we are projecting power, American nationalism is usually expressed in an understated manner. Military events can have a lot of pomp and ritual, but for all nations -- the armed forces are by their nature an expression of nationalism.

I will say yes to nationalism as I fall prey to it myself. I served 8 years in the armed forces, and I am proud of my service to country. My economic views are nationalistic. I suspect those with no nation.

Actually I would characterize your economic views as protectionist and isolationist and those have proved themselves failures both from an economic and a security perspective.

In response to: 2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

I wrote: America and the other Western powers are the only nations which consider and promote human rights for the sake of human rights (rather than as rhetoric or as a weapon, as is the case with certain Arab concerns in regards to Israel). Yes, the concept of “human rights,” as the modern world has come to accept that concept, and yes, its importance was lacking in fascism. But so was it lacking in the socialism and communism of the Soviets, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Ho Chi Min’s Vietnam, the military juntas of Pinochet’s Chile, the nations of the Arab and the Progressivism of the early 1900’s.

Another yes, I recently watched a video of a woman in an airport screaming, while they tried to get this guy to turn off his camera. Also the recent post of people being trained to search high school students. Need I even say our counties support of madass dictators for convenience.

:rolleyes: Garbage. Are you equating the screams of some woman in an airport with the policies and actions of China against the Falun Gong, Tibetans, Christians, artist, writers, and political dissidents? Are you equating the attempts of a few attempting to get a guy to turn off his camera with the actions of the Syrian leadership against peaceful protestors against the government? Are you equating the training of legally authorized people in searching high school students (most likely for drugs or weapons) with the actions of tens of regimes across the world detaining and doing full body searches and committing rape and the murder of political opponents? Moral equivalency is a delusional prop and a logical fallacy used by the disaffected to attack those who are not guilty of the crime of violating human rights. It is done by anti-American and anti-Israel radicals on a daily basis. Why join that club?

In response to: 3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.

I wrote: That is largely and simply, basic human nature. Though please identify who has America identified and scapegoated as an enemy since 9/11? Individuals, not large groups, unless you consider Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Egyptian Brotherhood separate ethnicities or odd but legitimate religious orders on some strange level. Their have been those who have been unfairly scapegoated and those who have been fairly judged war criminals or homicidal maniacs.

Another yes, targets include, communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, Muslims, Buddhists, secularists, homosexuals, and terrorists. Key word unifying.

What complete and utter garbage. George W. Bush and everyone in his administration specifically targeted terrorists and only terrorists and bent over backwards to point out that Bin Laden and their like were not representatives of the vast majority of Muslims. Terrorists have not been unfairly scapegoated, they have been judged by their actions not by their ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation or race. Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy. I am not interested in the rantings of some special interest group like the Westboro Baptist Church, which is neither representative of Baptists, Christians, and has no ties to the government.

In response to: 4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.

I wrote: This is largely due to the fall of the Soviets and the end of the Cold War. Because of that event America, along with the near collapse of European society, the near destruction of Japan at the end of WW II and the harsh ideological divide that objectively placed the Soviets and the US as polar opposition politically, America just by being the winner of the Cold War, obtained military supremacy of the world. Because of this, and a couple of other important factors, America has become an accidental imperialist power. Though I would hardly characterize this supremacy as “avid militarism.” Look up the percentage of Americans who are members of one of the armed services. Like farmers, there are not very many of them.

Another yes, Budget 680 billion plus, who is 2nd to that number in the world? probably China way less. We have soldiers all over the planet and highly doubt it is accidental. Nor is American imperialism an accident, it is policy of both republicans and democrats. If I had to disagree strongly on any point this is the one. We can't fund our own government, yet a country of 300 million people spend more then any other on the planet.

:rolleyes: Read my comment again. I agreed that America has gained military supremacy of the world, I just strongly disagree with how that came about or your projected motivations of either political party. I am also glad it came about, since it has made the world a better safer place then it would have been if the world had emerged from WW II as many equal powers or if the Soviets had some how won the Cold War.

In response to: 5. A controlled mass media.

I wrote: While the mainstream American media is obviously biased, it is not a controlled state media. Nor is the internet controlled with its thousands of political blogs. Besides those outlets there is talk radio -- Americans have more choices for information and “news” then ever before.

I'll go 50-50 on this one, because of less controlled media outlets.

Again, garbage. The mainstream media suffers from “group think” and is not a government controlled entity. The mainstream media is also suffering from that “group think” as it losses viewers and subscribers with each passing day. They will either be forced to change to remain competitive or they will slowly fall and be replaced by the new media that has been arising since the late 80s, early 90s.

In response to: 6. Obsession with national security.

I wrote: A healthy concern with national security is not only very important it is one of the duties specifically outlined in the U.S. Constitution. The attacks of 9/11 prove the need to be vigilant when it comes to national security.

This is a healthy Yes, CIA, FBI, NSA, BATF, apparently do not know constraint.

:rolleyes: Please list the rights that you have lost because of our efforts in the war on terrorists? What has the CIA, FBI, NSA, or the BATF done to you?

In response to: 7. Religion and ruling elite tied together.

I wrote: Garbage. There is no single religious sect or denomination of America that is tied to the governing elite. Even though America is largely a Christian culture, Christians themselves have widely different views depending on how they view God, their own socio-economic position, their own level of education, and their own ethnicity, race, age or gender. Check out: http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Four-...7302293&sr=8-1

This merely means attaching ones self to the predominant religion. You know the religious right. I say yes to attachment, that buys votes but overall [b]no]/b].

The power of the “religious right” has been greatly exaggerated by both the liberal press and by members of the religious right.

End Part 1

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by michael h

In response to: 8. Power of corporations protected.

I wrote: Baseless anti-capitalist talking point. The power of corporations are at the mercy of the government. Even more, fascism did not protect corporations, it controlled them. While ownership remained in private hands, those hands could do nothing without fascist approval. For example, the Nazis determined what corporations could do, how much of a given service or good they were allowed to produce, where and from whom they were allowed to acquire the raw materials they needed, and where and to whom they were allowed to sell their service or good.

This is a definite yes, corporations own congressmen and presidents. They are of mutual interests. In our society business leaders tell government what policy will be.

Sorry but that’s simply delusional anti-capitalist conspiracy talk. There are two kinds of business leaders -- political entrepreneurs, who like their forefathers are corporatists and mercantilists, who seek to gain wealth and power through their political connections, and market entrepreneurs or true capitalists who seek to gain wealth and power by providing services and goods to consumers without government interference. The majority of corporations (large, mid-size, and small) the vast majority of companies are run by market entrepreneurs and true capitalists. This is the same rhetoric that was used by fascists and is still used by leftists and Progressives today to regulate, constrain, or take control of businesses and the market. Fascism was not controlled by corporations, corporations were controlled by the Fascists.

In response to: 9. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.

I wrote: America, especially the Democrat-Progressives in office have guaranteed the protection of labor, especially union labor, often to the detriment of American workers and the economy as a whole. The fall of Detroit and the fall of American auto companies are prime examples of the damage over-protected unions can do to an industry and local.
While it is true that fascists suppressed or eliminated or took over labor organizations, the same was done by communists, socialists and Progressives in the early 1900s and during FDR’s reign.

I will not argue against the failure of rigidity of unions. I am not, nor will I be a union man. Even if I take a job in a union I will not support rigidity that will not improve productivity. This is also a yes despite my personal beliefs. I am not blind to attacks on unions, and simple bargaining rights.

More leftist talking points. The only effort to limit the power of unions has been to restrict government unions, not private unions, which is right and necessary and good. The unions have become the lap dog-handmaiden of the Democratic Party and extreme radical leftist world wide. Unions receive greater protection here in America at the detriment to the economy as a whole. Look up the actions of the NLRB against Boeing. The buying of GM and Chrysler by Obama was a bailout and payoff to the auto union.

In response to: 10. Obsession with crime and punishment.

I wrote: Obsession? Please reread my comments about national security.

U.S. prison population dwarfs that of other nations - The New York Times

another definite yes, this need to have a large criminal element supports a larger policing force. We managed to top 2 million, hooray for us.

So what? Are you claiming that those 2 million are all innocent? Are you claiming that it would be better if they were free to commit more crimes? How many purely political prisoners can be found in Chinese prisons? Thousands. How many purely political prisoners are found in American prisons? None.

In response to: 11. Rampant cronyism and corruption.

I wrote: :rolleyes: While there is cronyism within some sectors, I hardly call it rampant. Corruption, well, there’s an old haiku that I have always appreciated:

Wherever you find humans
You find Buddhas
And flies.

Compared to other cultures and countries, American corruption is tame and mild. Also, government officials and politicians are like any other groups, some are good and some are not so good. Those who are proved to be corrupt should lose office or their job. Republicans tend to resign at the first hint of corruption or impropriety, while Democrats circle the wagons and protect the offender.

Another Definite Yes, this one is a no-brainer.

:rolleyes: “No-brainer” would be the key word.

Corporations may now donate as much as they desire.

Good! And so can unions and environmentalist groups and whatever entity or special interests out there can donate however much they desire. Its about time that corporations were also given the same right every other special interest has benefited. Again, your moral equivalency does not help your arguments.

In response to: 12. Fraudulent elections.

I wrote: :rolleyes: Garbage.

This is a no, I'll have to roll eyes with you on this one. Though I am suspicious of recent attempts in Wisconsin to steal voting rights.

:rolleyes:

I wrote: Unemployment has little to do with trade policy.

I think the unemployed would disagree with you.

They would be wrong.

I wrote: Is due to the federal government overspending, and has nothing to do with our trade policy. Those who whine about outsourcing or off shoring do so from ignorance.

Tomorrow we will send 5 million jobs to India,

False, we will not send 5 million jobs to India tomorrow. A couple of examples: Carbonite plans new Maine customer support center - Mass High Tech Business News and Overseas Companies Hiring American Workers - Newsweek

I wonder how ignorant it is to know you are unemployed?

What would be ignorant is to assume that I am unemployed.

I wrote: Truth is always a good policy. LaRouche has very little of it and miss use what little he has.

Do you have nothing to say of him noting the plans to move American industrial jobs to cheap labor? I mean it took 30 years to make progress bit it did happen. I don't care if his IQ is 55, he was spot on.

I say he is wrong. America is the world leader in manufacturing and industry. We make more, much more today, than we did 30 years ago.

I wrote: This is the problem with relying on conspiracy websites for your facts. There has been no reduction of income for any Americans. The housing collapse had absolutely nothing to do with a reduction of income. There is also no such thing statistically speaking of a ridged unchanging lower class that does not move up the income ladder.

Did you see something here of conspiracy websites?

Then where are you getting your data and what have you been reading that leads you to the conclusions you hold?

Or a rigid inability to improve ones position in life,

There is no rigid inability to improve one’s position in life here in America. There is no rigid class restrictions that make it difficult or impossible to improve one’s position in life here in America.

why are you deflecting?

Dismissing false claims is not deflection.

Once again falling to the magic "conspiracy" word does not support your argument through derision. I also did not state their was a reduction in income for Americans, I said the lowest 80%.

Which has not happened. There has been no reduction in income for Americans regardless of their socio-economic ranking.

I wrote: :rolleyes: America manufactures more stuff than it did in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Yes, the employment levels in the manufacturing sector has fallen somewhat, but that has more to do with the structural changes in how and who is considered a working in the manufacturing sector.

The point : manufacturing was and is preferable to an industry that is based on credit, as is quite clear given the bubble.

:rolleyes: I don’t know where you got your conclusions of what caused the housing market meltdown and the derivatives fallout from the collapse, but it had nothing to do with either the fundamentals of the economy as a whole, or changes in the structure of the American economy. Our economy is not “based on credit.” Besides since America is still the leading manufacturer of the world with global manufacturing output of 19.8%. As of 2007 manufacturing represented $1.6 trillion of the American economy which was about 11.6% of the GDP.

Considering the way you paint corporations, I get the impression that you believe corporations are greedy heartless institutions bent on profit, regardless of the cost, which would be bad business philosophy and is illogical from an economic perspective. But you would have us believe that there is some vast conspiracy of Anglo-American financiers, who are bent on bringing about a systemic collapse of the American economy, by moving

Originally Posted by michael h

industry to cheap labor,

which hasn‘t happened, and will lead America to adopting fascist policies, which has also not happened. Manufacturing in America has moved to high skilled labor, innovation, and technologically intensive industries. Industry that requires cheap labor has been outsourced, which has been a net benefit for both Americans and those countries which have been able to expand their own economies. There is no casual connection between the declining percentages of GDP contributed by the manufacturing sector and the housing market meltdown. We make more today then we have ever made.

The facts about U.S. manufacturing above are from: Forging A Second American Century - Forbes.com What really stands in the way of American manufacturing? To quote the article: “A 2008 study by National Association of Manufacturers affiliate organization The Manufacturing Institute and the Manufacturer's Alliance/MAPI compared the cost of manufacturing in the U.S. to a group of nine industrial nations including Germany, Japan, China and Mexico. Because of higher taxes, energy and regulatory costs, U.S. manufacturers face a 17.6% structural cost disadvantage when competing against firms from these nine countries. But progress is being made. The same group estimated that just two years earlier, in 2006, American firms faced a 31.7% structural cost disadvantage.”

What do all of the Democrat-Progressives call for on the left, what do all of the protectionists and isolationists call for on the right … higher taxes and greater regulations.

This is a page with a list of excellent articles on American manufacturing:
Made In America - Forbes.com

I wrote: Your understanding of basic economics and the circumstances that brought about the housing market collapse are seriously lacking.

You may be correct or you may not know as much as you are pretending to know. Even common sense can replace the rigidity of a college book and a doctorates degree. I have not seen anybody support my debate, nor have I seen it online,

May be that should tell you something?

I've come to my own conclusion the 2000 entry of China into the WTO is the beginning of major manufacturing and wage losses, to low wage economies, and leads to the bust of 2008.

False. The employment levels of manufacturing in America have been declining since the 50s because of technological innovation, yet we make more today than ever before. NAFTA and the entry of China into the WTO in 2000 have been a net benefit for the U.S. economy expanding our economy and increasing our employment levels. Wages have not been lost, nor has our economy become dominated by low wages. And none of this had anything to do with the housing market meltdown or the related derivatives collapse.

If you have seen this else where I would like to know so I can better support my debate.

Only on conspiracy websites.

Here's another conspiracy theory: The fantasy that loss of manufacturing jobs leads to other job creation. This is like trying support the debate that God exists.

Except that the data that proves that outsourcing and off shoring has led to job creation here in America is empirical and easily proven. Liberalis has been doing a fine job of disabusing you of your ignorance of basic economics and the practices of outsourcing and off shoring here: [his most recent reply to you]

Originally Posted by Liberalis

Democrats and Republicans:A well played plan.

I wrote: Where are you getting your numbers? We are not currently at a 5% unemployment rate, I wish we were. Still, the unemployment problem has nothing really to do with our trade policy or the rantings of conspiracists.

That was the differential between Jan 2000 and now: 4.0 to 9.1

Our current unemployment rate is due to the uncertainty in the market place caused by ignorant Obama economic and energy policies and the enactment of Obama Crap Care.

Of course you could support the argument that no jobs went overseas, there is another conspiracy theory.

:rolleyes: Outsourcing and off shoring are good for the economy and American workers have benefited with more jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods from the practice.

May many good things arise, Mike

Yes, tashi deleks,

End of Part 2

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

Did I make a comment about history or the study of history? Nope. I commented on mid 1960’s activism.



Obviously I have a computer at home and our local library is also 5 miles away. We go to the library every Tuesday as a family. We want our son to see both of his parents reading. We have done this since he was 3 years old. Now, at 7 years old, he reads at around a third or fourth grade level. Perhaps we our lucky to have the library system that we have here in Pinellas county Florida since it has a share system that allows us to check out books from any library in the county and even gives us access to the local college library.



:rolleyes: Being well read in history I don’t need to blindly accept the twisted half truths and outright lies pushed by conspiracy websites, I have learned to check facts claimed. I also read what you linked and have developed the capacity to determine logical inconsistencies based on either bias, logical fallacies, and the acceptance of falsehoods.



Data is available on the web and it is possible to analyze that data with the twisted interpretations of conspiracy websites by comparing it with the work of “real” historians who have gathered their information from primary sources.



Not all viewpoints are equally valid or worthy of consideration. Very few conspiracies have ever turned out to be true. The approval of others has never impinged on my quest for the truth or the facts.



:rolleyes: I have “examined facts” and determined that the alleged “facts” promoted by conspiracy websites are either falsehoods, twisted have truths, or biased illogical conclusions driven by an ideology.



No, you are attempting to promote a conspiracy website that dress itself in Tea Party drag as a legitimate source worthy of consideration.



Interesting article. You really should read what you post. I’ll cut and past what I found at the bottom of the page:

“This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

Due to its flaws I disagree with the article and its “points” as he applies them to America, but it is interesting. Historically America has suffered from two regimes which patterned their policies and programs on the fascist/socialist models. One preceded Mussolini’s and Hitler’s fascist governments, Woodrow Wilson’s Progressivism, while the other arose after and during their mad regimes, FDR’s liberal-Progressive administration. Both were carried out in their own unique American fashion, but Britt’s points describe those far better then any of the American administrations since WW II. I also strongly disagree with the conventional claim that fascism is a right-wing movement. Fascism arose out of socialism and was and has always been a leftist political philosophy.



Actually I would characterize your economic views as protectionist and isolationist and those have proved themselves failures both from an economic and a security perspective.



:rolleyes: Garbage. Are you equating the screams of some woman in an airport with the policies and actions of China against the Falun Gong, Tibetans, Christians, artist, writers, and political dissidents? Are you equating the attempts of a few attempting to get a guy to turn off his camera with the actions of the Syrian leadership against peaceful protestors against the government? Are you equating the training of legally authorized people in searching high school students (most likely for drugs or weapons) with the actions of tens of regimes across the world detaining and doing full body searches and committing rape and the murder of political opponents? Moral equivalency is a delusional prop and a logical fallacy used by the disaffected to attack those who are not guilty of the crime of violating human rights. It is done by anti-American and anti-Israel radicals on a daily basis. Why join that club?



What complete and utter garbage. George W. Bush and everyone in his administration specifically targeted terrorists and only terrorists and bent over backwards to point out that Bin Laden and their like were not representatives of the vast majority of Muslims. Terrorists have not been unfairly scapegoated, they have been judged by their actions not by their ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation or race. Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy. I am not interested in the rantings of some special interest group like the Westboro Baptist Church, which is neither representative of Baptists, Christians, and has no ties to the government.



:rolleyes: Read my comment again. I agreed that America has gained military supremacy of the world, I just strongly disagree with how that came about or your projected motivations of either political party. I am also glad it came about, since it has made the world a better safer place then it would have been if the world had emerged from WW II as many equal powers or if the Soviets had some how won the Cold War.



Again, garbage. The mainstream media suffers from “group think” and is not a government controlled entity. The mainstream media is also suffering from that “group think” as it losses viewers and subscribers with each passing day. They will either be forced to change to remain competitive or they will slowly fall and be replaced by the new media that has been arising since the late 80s, early 90s.



:rolleyes: Please list the rights that you have lost because of our efforts in the war on terrorists? What has the CIA, FBI, NSA, or the BATF done to you?



The power of the “religious right” has been greatly exaggerated by both the liberal press and by members of the religious right.

End Part 1

tashi deleks,

M

Hi Mahasattva, I am of the belief that Democrats and Republicans both represent a corporate agenda, at the expense of other Americans. The cooperative agenda, has reached it's destination, but more gains will be made in support of this agenda. I call it Fascism. Others do not.

In my short time of posting, I have come to the recent conclusion that left/liberals and right/conservative beliefs are not going to be changed by debate. I base my logic in the belief of environmental and hereditary influences, which cause differences in empathy and self interest. Pretty much, I think people on opposite sides of an issue are like trying to move a huge boulder by hand. I do not imply the collective groups are identical, merely they will fall where they may.

While I may still attempt influence, I am quite well with accepting differences.
I remain curious and still enjoy debate, and am open to factual information. My caring for all Americans is staunch enough to accept truths and probably I'll will wrap those truths in my debate.

I'll wait till you have time to finish, before responding, but I find your responses interesting.

tashi deleks, Mike

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

Did I make a comment about history or the study of history? Nope. I commented on mid 1960’s activism.

I have no problem with activism. Civil rights, anti-war, green, ... why does activism bother you?

Obviously I have a computer at home and our local library is also 5 miles away. We go to the library every Tuesday as a family. We want our son to see both of his parents reading. We have done this since he was 3 years old. Now, at 7 years old, he reads at around a third or fourth grade level. Perhaps we our lucky to have the library system that we have here in Pinellas county Florida since it has a share system that allows us to check out books from any library in the county and even gives us access to the local college library.

Keep him reading, it's enjoyable and a positive outlet.

:rolleyes: Being well read in history I don’t need to blindly accept the twisted half truths and outright lies pushed by conspiracy websites, I have learned to check facts claimed. I also read what you linked and have developed the capacity to determine logical inconsistencies based on either bias, logical fallacies, and the acceptance of falsehoods.

If a conspiracy rings true to anyone, it should be supported by logic and reading multiple sources ... pro,con, and neutral. How many can be proven? Not many. History for me is the key, and knowing what was the mindset and actions of governments of people at the time. Operation Northwoods and Operation Ajax are a couple of my faves. Another favorite was the spraying of San Francisco by the US Navy, killing one and hospitalizing others. Facts, that used to be conspiracies. I believe I saw the San Francisco one on 60 minutes.

Data is available on the web and it is possible to analyze that data with the twisted interpretations of conspiracy websites by comparing it with the work of “real” historians who have gathered their information from primary sources.

see above

Not all viewpoints are equally valid or worthy of consideration. Very few conspiracies have ever turned out to be true. The approval of others has never impinged on my quest for the truth or the facts.

see above

:rolleyes: I have “examined facts” and determined that the alleged “facts” promoted by conspiracy websites are either falsehoods, twisted have truths, or biased illogical conclusions driven by an ideology.

Or distrust of government. see above.

No, you are attempting to promote a conspiracy website that dress itself in Tea Party drag as a legitimate source worthy of consideration.

I will take info from the left, right, above, under, and around. If a teapartier spoke the truth ... so be it.

Interesting article. You really should read what you post. I’ll cut and past what I found at the bottom of the page:

“This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

Due to its flaws I disagree with the article and its “points” as he applies them to America, but it is interesting. Historically America has suffered from two regimes which patterned their policies and programs on the fascist/socialist models. One preceded Mussolini’s and Hitler’s fascist governments, Woodrow Wilson’s Progressivism, while the other arose after and during their mad regimes, FDR’s liberal-Progressive administration. Both were carried out in their own unique American fashion, but Britt’s points describe those far better then any of the American administrations since WW II. I also strongly disagree with the conventional claim that fascism is a right-wing movement. Fascism arose out of socialism and was and has always been a leftist political philosophy.

I rarely care about the post talking points. They are an opinion. I am capable of forming my own opinions by observation and logic. I have used charts, data, and graphs to support my debate, where the talking points disagree with my view.

Actually I would characterize your economic views as protectionist and isolationist and those have proved themselves failures both from an economic and a security perspective.

Very much so, protectionist as trade policy is a failure. Not so much isolationist More can be accomplished through respect then war.

.

:rolleyes: Garbage. Are you equating the screams of some woman in an airport with the policies and actions of China against the Falun Gong, Tibetans, Christians, artist, writers, and political dissidents? Are you equating the attempts of a few attempting to get a guy to turn off his camera with the actions of the Syrian leadership against peaceful protestors against the government? Are you equating the training of legally authorized people in searching high school students (most likely for drugs or weapons) with the actions of tens of regimes across the world detaining and doing full body searches and committing rape and the murder of political opponents? Moral equivalency is a delusional prop and a logical fallacy used by the disaffected to attack those who are not guilty of the crime of violating human rights. It is done by anti-American and anti-Israel radicals on a daily basis. Why join that club?

Where did equating come from?
Pulling over people for being Hispanic, torture, police brutality ... recent murder of a marine in Arizona asks some questions (denied medical attention also), airport searches, recent attempts to stop people from filming police.

It's all OK though, it for our safety.

What complete and utter garbage. George W. Bush and everyone in his administration specifically targeted terrorists and only terrorists and bent over backwards to point out that Bin Laden and their like were not representatives of the vast majority of Muslims. Terrorists have not been unfairly scapegoated, they have been judged by their actions not by their ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation or race. Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy. I am not interested in the rantings of some special interest group like the Westboro Baptist Church, which is neither representative of Baptists, Christians, and has no ties to the government.

Tell that to communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, Muslims, Buddhists, secularists, homosexuals, and terrorists. Let me know next time you are pulled over for your skin color.

KEY word unifying, to sustain power. Add women to that for abortion issues, gay marriage.

:rolleyes: Read my comment again. I agreed that America has gained military supremacy of the world, I just strongly disagree with how that came about or your projected motivations of either political party. I am also glad it came about, since it has made the world a better safer place then it would have been if the world had emerged from WW II as many equal powers or if the Soviets had some how won the Cold War.

Exactly why are we still spending 680 billion after the cold war? How many years ago was the cold war? Have we found any WMD's yet in IRAQ. Why are we bombing Libya? Why are we still in Afghanistan? Be cause the military is now a wing of corporate America. We are imperialistic and your talking about the cold war.

Again, garbage. The mainstream media suffers from “group think” and is not a government controlled entity. The mainstream media is also suffering from that “group think” as it losses viewers and subscribers with each passing day. They will either be forced to change to remain competitive or they will slowly fall and be replaced by the new media that has been arising since the late 80s, early 90s.

I recently went looking for the story that emergency funds would be denied to Joplin. I could not find Cantor's original comment's, but for some hick site. Wow, you won't get a dime until ..., and it doesn't make the news until he does the TV show.

:rolleyes: Please list the rights that you have lost because of our efforts in the war on terrorists? What has the CIA, FBI, NSA, or the BATF done to you?

Why me? That is the sneeky little implication, that it's "OK" if you don't get on a plane, or you don't get illegally wiretapped ... it's OK if it's someone else.
Wiki
The NSA warrantless surveillance controversy (AKA "Warrantless Wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United States during the collection of foreign intelligence by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the war on terror. Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the "terrorist surveillance program",[1] part of the broader President's Surveillance Program, the NSA is authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, phone calls, Internet activity (Web, e-mail, etc.), text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S. Critics, however, claimed that it was in an effort to attempt to silence critics of the Bush Administration and their handling of several hot button issues during its tenure.

The power of the “religious right” has been greatly exaggerated by both the liberal press and by members of the religious right.

as I said no. But religions are useful to government , as is our religious right. That's why pubs are so focused on abortion and gay marriage. It distracts from jobs.
End Part 1

tashi deleks,

M[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by michael h

Originally Posted by Mahasattva
Did I make a comment about history or the study of history? Nope. I commented on mid 1960’s activism.

I have no problem with activism. Civil rights, anti-war, green, ... why does activism bother you?

I had written: “What was typical of mid 1960’s activism, should remain in the 1960s.” What was typical of mid 1960’s activism was its vicious in your face confrontational approach. We saw this viciousness with the anti-war, Black Panther, and student protests on college campuses, and the green environmentalists movements, but we did not see it with the Civil rights activists guided by Martin Luther King Jr. I would have marched with King, the others not so much. Its not the activism, it’s the manner and the why of activism. So, much of the protest during the 60’s amounted to an adolescent scream, “You’re not the boss of me. You can’t tell me what to do,” rather than from any kind of higher moral conviction or insight. The anti-war protests against the Vietnam War nearly evaporated once the draft was ended.

I wrote: Obviously I have a computer at home and our local library is also 5 miles away. We go to the library every Tuesday as a family. We want our son to see both of his parents reading. We have done this since he was 3 years old. Now, at 7 years old, he reads at around a third or fourth grade level. Perhaps we our lucky to have the library system that we have here in Pinellas county Florida since it has a share system that allows us to check out books from any library in the county and even gives us access to the local college library.


Keep him reading, it's enjoyable and a positive outlet.

We could not stop him if, for some delusional reason we wanted to.

I wrote: :rolleyes: Being well read in history I don’t need to blindly accept the twisted half truths and outright lies pushed by conspiracy websites, I have learned to check facts claimed. I also read what you linked and have developed the capacity to determine logical inconsistencies based on either bias, logical fallacies, and the acceptance of falsehoods.

If a conspiracy rings true to anyone, it should be supported by logic and reading multiple sources ... pro,con, and neutral. How many can be proven? Not many. History for me is the key, and knowing what was the mindset and actions of governments of people at the time. Operation Northwoods and Operation Ajax are a couple of my faves.

:rolleyes: Operation Northwoods was not a conspiracy. It was a military plan that was soundly rejected by the civilian leadership. It never got further than the paper it was written on. Operation Ajax was not a conspiracy, it was covert operation carried out by the Eisenhower administration carried out along with the Brits to remove a socialist from power in Iran who was likely going to join with the Soviets. Given the period of the time and the amount of oil in Iran, it made complete sense. I had close friends I went to school with during the Iranian Revolution and while they did not like the Shah they all acknowledged that the mullah were far worse, and history attests to that fact.

Another favorite was the spraying of San Francisco by the US Navy, killing one and hospitalizing others. Facts, that used to be conspiracies. I believe I saw the San Francisco one on 60 minutes.

Is this about chemtrails? Please link to what you are referring.

I wrote: Data is available on the web and it is possible to analyze that data with the twisted interpretations of conspiracy websites by comparing it with the work of “real” historians who have gathered their information from primary sources.

see above

Ditto, see the above.

I wrote: Not all viewpoints are equally valid or worthy of consideration. Very few conspiracies have ever turned out to be true. The approval of others has never impinged on my quest for the truth or the facts.

see above

Again, ditto, see above.

I wrote: :rolleyes: I have “examined facts” and determined that the alleged “facts” promoted by conspiracy websites are either falsehoods, twisted have truths, or biased illogical conclusions driven by an ideology.

Or distrust of government. see above.

An informed and vigilant populous is one thing, conspiracy driven and manufactured distrust is something else completely. One is healthy, the other is destructive.

I wrote: No, you are attempting to promote a conspiracy website that dress itself in Tea Party drag as a legitimate source worthy of consideration.

I will take info from the left, right, above, under, and around. If a teapartier spoke the truth ... so be it.

I also take the truth from all, but your website was not and is not a Tea Party website. It was a conspiracy Progressive website in Tea Party drag.

I wrote and quoted: Interesting article. You really should read what you post. I’ll cut and past what I found at the bottom of the page:

“This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

Due to its flaws I disagree with the article and its “points” as he applies them to America, but it is interesting. Historically America has suffered from two regimes which patterned their policies and programs on the fascist/socialist models. One preceded Mussolini’s and Hitler’s fascist governments, Woodrow Wilson’s Progressivism, while the other arose after and during their mad regimes, FDR’s liberal-Progressive administration. Both were carried out in their own unique American fashion, but Britt’s points describe those far better then any of the American administrations since WW II. I also strongly disagree with the conventional claim that fascism is a right-wing movement. Fascism arose out of socialism and was and has always been a leftist political philosophy.

I rarely care about the post talking points. They are an opinion. I am capable of forming my own opinions by observation and logic. I have used charts, data, and graphs to support my debate, where the talking points disagree with my view.

That is your opinion and your belief. Interesting that you had no reply to the comment: “This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

I wrote: Actually I would characterize your economic views as protectionist and isolationist and those have proved themselves failures both from an economic and a security perspective.

Very much so, protectionist as trade policy is a failure. Not so much isolationist More can be accomplished through respect then war.

You really think that isolationism has proven itself a successful trade policy? How and when? It should always be with great trepidation that a country would consider going to war, but for many powers or cultures in the world, it is the perceived threat of war that engenders respect.

End of Part 1

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by michael h

I wrote: :rolleyes: Garbage. Are you equating the screams of some woman in an airport with the policies and actions of China against the Falun Gong, Tibetans, Christians, artist, writers, and political dissidents? Are you equating the attempts of a few attempting to get a guy to turn off his camera with the actions of the Syrian leadership against peaceful protestors against the government? Are you equating the training of legally authorized people in searching high school students (most likely for drugs or weapons) with the actions of tens of regimes across the world detaining and doing full body searches and committing rape and the murder of political opponents? Moral equivalency is a delusional prop and a logical fallacy used by the disaffected to attack those who are not guilty of the crime of violating human rights. It is done by anti-American and anti-Israel radicals on a daily basis. Why join that club?

Where did equating come from?

You. It is what you attempted to do. You gave examples of what you considered violations of human rights here in America. Those examples bare no resemblance to the policies or practices of China, Syrian, or for that matter Iran or North Korea, or a host of other countries who do regularly violate human rights.

Pulling over people for being Hispanic

Can you link to a source that shows that there is a state or federal policy or law that empowers the police of any community that requires them to pull people over just for being Hispanic?

torture

:rolleyes: Oh, so you believe that our enhanced interrogation methods are a form of torture? I disagree.

police brutality

Please link to a source that shows a state or federal policy that promotes or advocates for or authorizes police brutality.

... recent murder of a marine in Arizona asks some questions

Please link to this story.

(denied medical attention also)

That would be illegal.

airport searches,

Obnoxious yes, and I would rather we approached airport-aircraft security as the Israelis do, but it is hardly an example of a human rights violation.

recent attempts to stop people from filming police.

:rolleyes:

It's all OK though, it for our safety.

None of your stories were supported by any links that showed any kind of government policy or program that authorizes violating human rights. You would need to link to examples of each and show that these examples are government policies.

I wrote: What complete and utter garbage. George W. Bush and everyone in his administration specifically targeted terrorists and only terrorists and bent over backwards to point out that Bin Laden and their like were not representatives of the vast majority of Muslims. Terrorists have not been unfairly scapegoated, they have been judged by their actions not by their ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation or race. Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy. I am not interested in the rantings of some special interest group like the Westboro Baptist Church, which is neither representative of Baptists, Christians, and has no ties to the government.

Tell that to communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, Muslims, Buddhists, secularists, homosexuals, and terrorists. Let me know next time you are pulled over for your skin color.

I asked you to: :Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy.” Since you were unable to do so, and replied with a snide remark I shall consider your rant nothing more than noise.

KEY word unifying, to sustain power. Add women to that for abortion issues, gay marriage.

To repeat: “Please, present a link of either the Bush or the Obama administration engaging in scapegoating any of the above groups, as government policy. I am not interested in the rantings of some special interest group like the Westboro Baptist Church, which is neither representative of Baptists, Christians, and has no ties to the government.”

I wrote: :rolleyes: Read my comment again. I agreed that America has gained military supremacy of the world, I just strongly disagree with how that came about or your projected motivations of either political party. I am also glad it came about, since it has made the world a better safer place then it would have been if the world had emerged from WW II as many equal powers or if the Soviets had some how won the Cold War.

Exactly why are we still spending 680 billion after the cold war? How many years ago was the cold war?

Do you actually believe that with the fall of the Soviets the world has suddenly become a safer place? I’d say the world is potentially less safe.

Have we found any WMD's yet in IRAQ.

Which was only one of what, 24 reasons for invading Iraq. If Saddam had not been removed from power we would now be worrying about two terrorist supporting mad regimes seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.

Why are we bombing Libya?

Good question. Ask Obama. If you are going to act militarily then act with real force and get the job done.

Why are we still in Afghanistan?

We went into Afghanistan to remove the Taliban from power and eliminate a safe heaven for terrorists training camps. If we leave Afghanistan the power vacuum would set the same conditions that allowed the arise of the Taliban in the first place.

Be cause the military is now a wing of corporate America.

:rolleyes:

We are imperialistic and your talking about the cold war.

No, I mentioned the Cold War and its end, since it contributed to the conditions for us becoming an accidental imperialist power. But our power is not militaristic, it is commercial and cultural.

I wrote: Again, garbage. The mainstream media suffers from “group think” and is not a government controlled entity. The mainstream media is also suffering from that “group think” as it losses viewers and subscribers with each passing day. They will either be forced to change to remain competitive or they will slowly fall and be replaced by the new media that has been arising since the late 80s, early 90s.

I recently went looking for the story that emergency funds would be denied to Joplin. I could not find Cantor's original comment's, but for some hick site. Wow, you won't get a dime until ..., and it doesn't make the news until he does the TV show.

:rolleyes: You mean like these stories?
Roy Blunt to Eric Cantor: Find the money to offset tornado aid - Jonathan Allen - POLITICO.com
Cantor Says Congress Won’t Pay For Missouri Disaster Relief Unless Spending Is Cut Elsewhere | ThinkProgress
Eric Cantor to Joplin, MO: Drop Dead - Tony Wang - Open Salon
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) says no aid for Joplin without cuts - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com These were taken from a simple google search of Cantor and Joplin. Cantor did not state he was going to deny funds to Joplin. He said that if the government was going to give emergency funds to Joplin then the government needs to make cuts somewhere else to offset the costs of those funds.

I wrote: :rolleyes: Please list the rights that you have lost because of our efforts in the war on terrorists? What has the CIA, FBI, NSA, or the BATF done to you?

Why me? That is the sneeky little implication, that it's "OK" if you don't get on a plane, or you don't get illegally wiretapped ... it's OK if it's someone else.

Nothing “sneaky” about it.

Wiki
The NSA warrantless surveillance controversy (AKA "Warrantless Wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United States during the collection of foreign intelligence by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the war on terror. Under this program, referred to by the Bush administration as the "terrorist surveillance program",[1] part of the broader President's Surveillance Program, the NSA is authorized by executive order to monitor, without search warrants, phone calls, Internet activity (Web, e-mail, etc.), text messaging, and other communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S. Critics, however, claimed that it was in an effort to attempt to silence critics of the Bush Administration and their handling of several hot button issues during its tenure.

What garbage. No American was illegally wiretapped. There were no warrants required since foreigners in foreign lands are not protected from the efforts of our intelligence services. Even here in America where the government is required to get a warrant for a wiretap, the government is not required to also get a warrant for every person the subject of the warrant talks to. The federal government was required to get a wiretap to listen to John Gotti, they weren’t required to get a warrant for anyone Gotti spoke to, regardless of them calling him or he calling them. The “terrorist surveillance program” listened to known terrorists or those with connections to terrorists calling people in the United States. When the New York Times broke this story, America lost a key tool in acquiring information on the aims of terrorists seeking to do harm to Americans.

I wrote: The power of the “religious right” has been greatly exaggerated by both the liberal press and by members of the religious right.

as I said no. But religions are useful to government , as is our religious right. That's why pubs are so focused on abortion and gay marriage. It distracts from jobs.

Neither issue is as important as job creation right now. The abortion issue for social conservatives or religious conservatives is understandable considering that the first right enumerated in the Declaration of Independence is “life.” Gay marriage has been more of a reaction against a concentrated gay agenda attempting to force gay marriage on a culture not ready for it.

End of Part 2

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

Sorry but that’s simply delusional anti-capitalist conspiracy talk. There are two kinds of business leaders -- political entrepreneurs, who like their forefathers are corporatists and mercantilists, who seek to gain wealth and power through their political connections, and market entrepreneurs or true capitalists who seek to gain wealth and power by providing services and goods to consumers without government interference. The majority of corporations (large, mid-size, and small) the vast majority of companies are run by market entrepreneurs and true capitalists. This is the same rhetoric that was used by fascists and is still used by leftists and Progressives today to regulate, constrain, or take control of businesses and the market. Fascism was not controlled by corporations, corporations were controlled by the Fascists.

The problem with corporate political connections is the empowerment of corporate legislation. Capitalism is corrupt ... period. What is neglected is that those who might have a more libertarian view of trade, is that they receive the same benefits created by corruption, they they did not initiate.

Fascism as I perceive it is not inclusive of the nation as a whole. That is where I separate myself from the two brothers that support corruption (dems and pubs). Those who are not able to see the obvious, may continue to do so. They are welcome to delude themselves, or maybe they know but benefit from a fascist system. Self interest of course is a great persuader.

More leftist talking points. The only effort to limit the power of unions has been to restrict government unions, not private unions, which is right and necessary and good. The unions have become the lap dog-handmaiden of the Democratic Party and extreme radical leftist world wide. Unions receive greater protection here in America at the detriment to the economy as a whole. Look up the actions of the NLRB against Boeing. The buying of GM and Chrysler by Obama was a bailout and payoff to the auto union.

Trade policy has worked well to eliminate Union power has it not? :rolleyes: Sometimes you just have to acknowledge the victor. Unions did not help themselves.

So what? Are you claiming that those 2 million are all innocent? Are you claiming that it would be better if they were free to commit more crimes? How many purely political prisoners can be found in Chinese prisons? Thousands. How many purely political prisoners are found in American prisons? None.

What are they guilty of? How is it that we have 22.5% of all those jailed? Drug addiction rates have stood at 3% to 5% for 100 years. Jailing people for addiction is an industry and supports a police state.

Perhaps drug trade is better when it's conducted by government, you know the Iran/Contra conspiracy.

:rolleyes: “No-brainer” would be the key word.

Yes legalized purchase of Congressmens votes is for the betterment of us all ... isn't it. And when it comes time to hand out government contracts I'm sure that 5 million dollar contribution would not influence a decision. :rolleyes:

Good! And so can unions and environmentalist groups and whatever entity or special interests out there can donate however much they desire. Its about time that corporations were also given the same right every other special interest has benefited. Again, your moral equivalency does not help your arguments.

I love legal corruption. It benefits so many, like about 6 million out of 300,000,000. Go team!

They would be wrong.

Of course this would be where the job creation fairy comes into the conversation. The theory of trade openness of blibbity creates .76 per blah.
Theoretically jobs must be created. Goods are produced for less ...
The one that gets me most is the job creation fairy. Send a million high paying jobs out ... and presto chango poof, they are back. Excuse my sarcasm, job creation from trade policy is like how you feel about conspiracy theory.

False, we will not send 5 million jobs to India tomorrow. A couple of examples: Carbonite plans new Maine customer support center - Mass High Tech Business News and Overseas Companies Hiring American Workers - Newsweek

I do not deny job creation by the way. I deny the speed of job creation, and the reciprocity of the arrangement, for anyone other then corporate interests.

What would be ignorant is to assume that I am unemployed.

See next answer about the use of commas.

Is due to the federal government overspending, and has nothing to do with our trade policy. Those who whine about outsourcing or off shoring do so from ignorance.

Tomorrow we will send 5 million jobs to India, I wonder how ignorant it is to know you are unemployed?

No your not unemployed, but the ignorant people who lost their job and whine about off shoring and outsourcing apparently are.

You will feel an assumption when you take a sentence at a comma and divide the sentence into two different thoughts, instead of the original intended complete sentence.

I say he is wrong. America is the world leader in manufacturing and industry. We make more, much more today, than we did 30 years ago.

Did he not say the plan was to move jobs overseas to cheap labor? It seems like you are having difficulty with him telling the truth 30 years ago.

Then where are you getting your data and what have you been reading that leads you to the conclusions you hold?

A simple version. Lost jobs to trade policy (outsourcing or off shoring) create unemployment, unemployment creates downward pressure on wages. Lower real wages create under consumption and credit based consumption. Also trade imbalances create investment, in addition to glut saving. The Chinese invest in America, valuations increase, and credit based construction occurs until you have a glut in housing. The 600-700 million lost from the lowest 80% of Americans, will not allow valuations to be sustained, nor is it enough to support the credit. What makes it worse is deregulation of banking, and Fannie and Freddie.

But I return to causation. Just as people will argue at what point is not optimal for taxation, on the Laffer curve, and its detrimental effect upon an economy, I argue the same for under consumption due to a breaking point on division of income distribution. Where is the magical point? I could only venture a guess based upon the recession. Maybe 43% for the lowest 80%?

The underconsumption, I attribute to trade policy job loss and its downward pressure on wages for the low 80%.

There is nothing novel about the idea. Loss of high paying jobs, higher unemployment.

An 80%/1% comparison and deregulation
Bank%20Failures,%20Regulation,%20and%20Inequality%20-%20Chart%20with%20Comments%20(David%20Moss,.pdf

Housing bubble and trade deficit:
Policy and Economy: The housing bubble and the trade deficit
Your original quote:

This is the problem with relying on conspiracy websites for your facts. There has been no reduction of income for any Americans. The housing collapse had absolutely nothing to do with a reduction of income. There is also no such thing statistically speaking of a ridged unchanging lower class that does not move up the income ladder.

You replied to this: I tie the housing collapse directly to the reduction of income, in the lower 80% of Americans,

There is no rigid inability to improve one’s position in life here in America. There is no rigid class restrictions that make it difficult or impossible to improve one’s position in life here in America.

I do not claim the inability of class restrictions, nor did I. This was my statement:I tie the housing collapse directly to the reduction of income, in the lower 80% of Americans. Where did rigidity come from?

Dismissing false claims is not deflection.

Read your quote above about " this is the problem with relying on conspiracy ... You assume to have a belief contrary to yours on economics is a conspiracy theory? It's deflection
Read your quote:
There is no rigid inability to improve one’s position in life here in America. There is no rigid class restrictions that make it difficult or impossible to improve one’s position in life here in America. deflection

You have tied conspiracy sites and class rigidity to a statement:

I tie the housing collapse directly to the reduction of income, in the lower 80% of Americans.

Which has not happened. There has been no reduction in income for Americans regardless of their socio-economic ranking.

Table 6 disagrees with you. link
Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

h:rolleyes: I don’t know where you got your conclusions of what caused the housing market meltdown and the derivatives fallout from the collapse, but it had nothing to do with either the fundamentals of the economy as a whole, or changes in the structure of the American economy. Our economy is not “based on credit.” Besides since America is still the leading manufacturer of the world with global manufacturing output of 19.8%. As of 2007 manufacturing represented $1.6 trillion of the American economy which was about 11.6% of the GDP.

Considering the way you paint corporations, I get the impression that you believe corporations are greedy heartless institutions bent on profit, regardless of the cost, which would be bad business philosopy and is illogical from an economic perspective. But you would have us believe that there is some vast conspiracy of Anglo-American financiers, who are bent on bringing about a systemic collapse of the American economy, by moving which hasn‘t happened, and will lead America to adopting fascist policies, which has also not happened. Manufacturing in America has moved to high skilled labor, innovation, and technologically intensive industries. Industry that requires cheap labor has been outsourced, which has been a net benefit for both Americans and those countries which have been able to expand their own economies. There is no casual connection between the declining percentages of GDP contributed by the manufacturing sector and the housing market meltdown. We make more today then we have ever made.

Forging A Second American Century
John Engler, 05.28.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Despite excessive taxation and regulation, the U.S. remains the largest manufacturing nation in the world.

image
Forbes article
T

he 20th Century is often called the American Century, marking the U.S. rise to global pre-eminence. Manufacturing powered our ascendance, factories created our prosperity.


The facts about U.S. manufacturing above are from: Forging A Second American Century - Forbes.com What really stands in the way of American manufacturing? To quote the article: “A 2008 study by National Association of Manufacturers affiliate organization The Manufacturing Institute and the Manufacturer's Alliance/MAPI compared the cost of manufacturing in the U.S. to a group of nine industrial nations including Germany, Japan, China and Mexico. Because of higher taxes, energy and regulatory costs, U.S. manufacturers face a 17.6% structural cost disadvantage when competing against firms from these nine countries. But progress is being made. The same group estimated that just two years earlier, in 2006, American firms faced a 31.7% structural cost disadvantage.”

How does this change the fact that jobs left the country?

What do all of the Democrat-Progressives call for on the left, what do all of the protectionists and isolationists call for on the right … higher taxes and greater regulations.

This is a page with a list of excellent articles on American manufacturing:
Made In America - Forbes.com

And jobs did not leave the country?

May be that should tell you something?

So the lack of a cheering crowd behind me ... would make me automatically wrong. John Locke disagrees with you ... I have one supporter.

False. The employment levels of manufacturing in America have been declining since the 50s because of technological innovation, yet we make more today than ever before. NAFTA and the entry of China into the WTO in 2000 have been a net benefit for the U.S. economy expanding our economy and increasing our employment levels. Wages have not been lost, nor has our economy become dominated by low wages. And none of this had anything to do with the housing market meltdown or the related derivatives collapse.

The unemployment rate disagrees with you. And so does lost income of the lowest 80%.

Only on conspiracy websites.

Funny, do you visit them often? I cannot find support for this debate there.

Except that the data that proves that outsourcing and off shoring has led to job creation here in America is empirical and easily proven. Liberalis has been doing a fine job of disabusing you of your ignorance of basic economics and the practices of outsourcing and off shoring here: [his most recent reply to you]

Funny, I didn't get that impression, one more of a lack of desire to read or interpret data. Are you the same? Can you read the data?

Our current unemployment rate is due to the uncertainty in the market place caused by ignorant Obama economic and energy policies and the enactment of Obama Crap Care.

He's part of the fascist regime, what do you expect of him but stupidity?

:rolleyes: Outsourcing and off shoring are good for the economy and American workers have benefited with more jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods from the practice.

Maybe one day you will be correct about the job creation fairy, that day is not now. When it happens I will acknowledge your wisdom. In the meantime it is just like the tooth fairy and conspiracy.:rolleyes:

Yes, tashi deleks,

End of Part 2

M

tashi deleks, mike

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

I had written: “What was typical of mid 1960’s activism, should remain in the 1960s.” What was typical of mid 1960’s activism was its vicious in your face confrontational approach. We saw this viciousness with the anti-war, Black Panther, and student protests on college campuses, and the green environmentalists movements, but we did not see it with the Civil rights activists guided by Martin Luther King Jr. I would have marched with King, the others not so much. Its not the activism, it’s the manner and the why of activism. So, much of the protest during the 60’s amounted to an adolescent scream, “You’re not the boss of me. You can’t tell me what to do,” rather than from any kind of higher moral conviction or insight. The anti-war protests against the Vietnam War nearly evaporated once the draft was ended

.

Lots of people didn't like activism, particularly those in power, and if you were an activist you were called a communist. What was the higher moral power in "go to the back of the bus?" What was the higher moral power of starting a war over a whale hunting trip (Gulf of Tonkin)?

:rolleyes: Operation Northwoods was not a conspiracy. It was a military plan that was soundly rejected by the civilian leadership. It never got further than the paper it was written on. Operation Ajax was not a conspiracy, it was covert operation carried out by the Eisenhower administration carried out along with the Brits to remove a socialist from power in Iran who was likely going to join with the Soviets. Given the period of the time and the amount of oil in Iran, it made complete sense. I had close friends I went to school with during the Iranian Revolution and while they did not like the Shah they all acknowledged that the mullah were far worse, and history attests to that fact.

Operation Northwoods was a conspiracy until info was declassified:

They call these false flag operations.
Would our government do that? Terrorism on US cities? Killing innocent civilians and soldiers? Hijacking planes?

It must have really pissed off the Joint Chiefs of Staff, when JFK told them to take a hike? I wonder what conspiracy stories could arise when a President goes against allowing the military to kill American citizens? Probably just coincidences?

It must have been the high moral conviction of the US Military wanting to kill American civilians.

Operation Northwoods: In the early 1960s, American military leaders drafted plans to create public support for a war against Cuba, to oust Fidel Castro from power. The plans included committing acts of terrorism in U.S. cities, killing innocent people and U.S. soldiers, blowing up a U.S. ship, assassinating Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees, and hijacking planes. The plans were all approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but were reportedly rejected by the civilian leadership, then kept secret for nearly 40 years.

Author James Bamford, “A Pretext For War”, discusses the declassified “Operation Northwoods” documents revealing that in 1962 the CIA was planning to stage phony terrorist attacks on the US and blame it on Cuba to start a war

Operation Ajax: Just another conspiracy story that turns out to be true.

Operation Ajax: For years, Britain had a spiffy trade deal with Iran regarding their prodigious oil fields. The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was basically a giant money machine for the Anglo half, while the Iranian half got shafted. That all changed in 1951 when Iran nationalized the AIOC and the Iranian parliament elected Mohammed Mossadegh as Prime Minister. Mossadegh was relatively secular, something that pissed of Iranian clerics, but he was also very nationalistic. He was a democratically elected, pro American figure but the West saw his nationalizing of the oil fields a communist move(something Mossadegh thought was the right of the people to profit and pay for services in the country with). Those oil fields were under the control of British Petroleum, but unfortunately Mossadegh overruled this long standing business control. The United States sent Kermit Roosevelt, FDR’s nephew and CIA coordinator in to figure out the mess. The best he could come up with was to confront Mossadegh and have him overthrown and this was accomplished by bringing in what the agency refers to as “jackals.” The United States backed the return of the Shah of Iran, one of the most brutal dictators the country had ever seen and intentionally overthrew years before with the democratic leader, Mossadegh. Until 1979, that is, when a pissed off Iranian populace finally revolted and replaced the monarchy with an anti-West Islamic Republic. The result was a violently anti-American revolution lead by the Ayatollah Khomeini which overthrew the Shah and took hostage US Embassy workers, many of whom were involved in the plot with Kermit Roosevelt that installed the Shah. The planning for the Coup took place largely in that embassy, but Americans were told this was due to the rise of radical Islam and rise of democracy hating Muslims, which of course was far from the truth.

More high moral conviction. You know when you don't like a foreign leader just kill him. We still do it today.

Is this about chemtrails? Please link to what you are referring.

Chemtrails are barium salts lol duh

You still manage a lol as the "conspiracy truths are listed".

here you go ... lol

Of Microbes and Mock Attacks - 51 Years Ago, The Military Sprayed Germs on U.S. Cities

This one made 60 minutes, and if you read the full article on the link ... it was more then just San Francisco.

SAN FRANCISCO - Fifty-one years ago, Edward J. Nevin checked into a San Francisco hospital, complaining of chills, fever and general malaise. Three weeks later, the 75-year-old retired pipe fitter was dead, the victim of what doctors said was an infection of the bacterium Serratia marcescens.

Decades later, Mr. Nevin's family learned what they believe was the cause of the infection, linked at the time to the hospitalizations of 10 other patients. In Senate subcommittee hearings in 1977, the U.S. Army revealed that weeks before Mr. Nevin sickened and died, the Army had staged a mock biological attack on San Francisco, secretly spraying the city with Serratia and other agents thought to be harmless.

The goal: to see what might happen in a real germ-warfare attack. The experiment, which involved blasting a bacterial fog over the entire 49-square-mile city from a Navy vessel offshore, was recorded with clinical nonchalance: "It was noted that a successful BW [biological warfare] attack on this area can be launched from the sea, and that effective dosages can be produced over relatively large areas," the Army wrote in its 1951 classified report on the experiment.

An informed and vigilant populous is one thing, conspiracy driven and manufactured distrust is something else completely. One is healthy, the other is destructive.

Truth is truth and truth is truth and truth is truth, there is no need to manufacture distrust, lies support mistrust, and being informed is not destructive ... lying is destructive.

Maybe you would like to add the plan by corporations to take over government from FDR.

I also take the truth from all, but your website was not and is not a Tea Party website. It was a conspiracy Progressive website in Tea Party drag.

Sometimes you gotta go where you gotta go to get truth. Funny thing is I show truth, and your response is, your truths are creating mistrust. Isn't it lies that create mistrust?

That is your opinion and your belief. Interesting that you had no reply to the comment: “This is a highly flawed article. It is not a very accurate picture of fascism and frankly was a ripoff from a much better article by Umberto Eco: Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt Eco - "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt"
The Britt article started with what is happening in the U.S. and then crafted a description of fascism that only highlights those points that will support the thesis. This is a logical fallacy (the false notion that things that are similar in some aspects are identical in all aspects).”

OK I will repost my answer:
I rarely care about the post talking points. They are an opinion. I am capable of forming my own opinions by observation and logic. I have used charts, data, and graphs to support my debate, where the talking points disagree with my view.

I form my own opinions, from reading, I'm not waiting for papa or a writer to post their talking points.

A movie reviewer says this movie is bla bla, I can form my own opinion.

You really think that isolationism has proven itself a successful trade policy? How and when? It should always be with great trepidation that a country would consider going to war, but for many powers or cultures in the world, it is the perceived threat of war that engenders respect.

I don't think isolationism is a good trade policy. Some form of protectionism is a necessity to counter job loss for low overseas wages.

End of Part 1

tashi deleks,

M[/QUOTE]