Showing posts with label Bill of Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill of Rights. Show all posts

23 May 2013

Again the Stench of Political Bullshit Proves Inescapable

USian object d'art, 2013. Originally this was to have been one of three illustrations to an essay on the role of old equipment in the evolution of new photographic methodology and aesthetics, but an unwelcome political interruption delayed that project for another week. Rolleicord III, Kodak TMax100 in D-76. Photograph by Loren Bliss copyright 2013. (Click on image to view it full size.)
 
A CHAIN LETTER touting a constitutional convention was emailed me by a well-meaning Leftist relative and compelled an immediate answer, forcing me to spend the entire afternoon sifting through the reeking contents of the political Dumpster I am trying desperately to abandon. 

The above image – new work with the old Rolleicord – is thus eerily appropriate to what follows. But it nevertheless infuriates me how the useless-yet-still-reflexive ethics of my murdered journalism career again triumphed over aesthetics that are very much alive, forcing me to set aside a half-finished essay about photography, a piece that was far more emotionally true than anything political could ever be now that any “change we can believe in” has been proven the biggest Big Lie in USian history. 

Hence instead of the anticipated pleasure of an afternoon of psychological healing, there was its exact opposite: a seven-hour submersion in the depressing methodology of investigative reporting culminating in yet another encounter with the utter hopelessness that should by now be the political default position of any genuinely thoughtful USian citizen.

The chain letter that ruined my afternoon is entitled “35 States So Far” and is reproduced here: 

 
What follows is the note by which I replied to my relative and everyone else on the chain letter's mailing list. (Links are not embedded because my email system does not allow it, and because I was unwilling to spend the time revising the text to accommodate embedding.) 

Though in my entire journalism career I wrote or edited no more than a half-dozen reports about the various calls for a constitutional convention, the common theme all these stories shared was how – given the savagely reactionary majority that rules the old Confederacy and nearly all the inland states –such an event would undoubtedly mean total nullification of the Bill of Rights. Unions, abortion, contraception, marriage equality, academic freedom and religious liberty would all be swept away in the name of a new nation under god, the United Christian States of America. Those of us who refused to bow to the theocratic sword would be punished – tortured and slain – as demanded by Biblical law. 

Meanwhile the so-called progressives of the coastal cities would have fought for their own agenda – chiefly the forcible, zero-tolerance disarmament of the entire civilian population and the end of any civilian right to self defense. And – yes – the theocrats would certainly allow the progressives this one triumph as part of what would no doubt be labeled “the Grand Christian Bargain.” Indeed the imposition of mandatory pacifism – that is, compulsory victimhood – is already a plank in many theocratic Christian platforms. 

Thus the nation that emerged from the convention would look religiously more like Iran or some territory controlled by the Taliban than the (former) United States. Politically – with the federal government shut down by the “goddamn-the-gummint” reactionaries – the new nation would soon resemble Somalia...or what miasma of states-rights anarchy and Ku Klux chaos the South would have become had the Confederates won. 

For those who doubt this prognosis, here are some selected links, the result of six hours of reasearch. The first three links urge the convening of a constitutional convention. Two of them are from the far Right; their significance is in their viciously oppressive demands. The third of these links is from a Leftist source that focuses on a constitutional convention as the sole means of repealing the Citizens United decision. But – given that a major progressive goal is forcible civilian disarmament – its absence from the rationale is itself indicative. 

 
 
 
The next link opposes a constitutional convention, but is included here because its pro-convention readers state an unapologetic assertion of theocratic intent: “Glory be! A second call for a Constituional (sic) Congress is due and needed. Changes would clarify there is no seperation (sic) of Church and State as our U.S. Constitution clearly sets forth.” 

 
These three links below summarize the arguments against a constitutional convention. The first two are from hard-Right sources but are nevertheless well reasoned and eloquently presented. The third is from a nominally hard-Left website, but its arguments are very weak, no doubt because demanding a convention has shifted from the Rightist cause it was c. 1960-2008 to the Leftist cause it has since become.) 

 
 
 
The last two links are for those who scoff at the magnitude of the theocratic threat. Though Theocracy Watch errs in attributing the threat exclusively to the Republicans – as Jeff Sharlet reveals in The Family: the Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power, Hillary Clinton is as much a theocrat as Sam Brownback – the Theocracy Watch collection of data is nevertheless without peer. As for Catholic Watch, that documents how the Roman Catholic Church, by acquisition of hospitals and clinics, is methodically nullifying reproductive rights throughout the United States.

 
  
LB/23 May 2013
-30-

20 May 2012

How Citizens United Is the Death of All We Hold Dear

NOW WE ARE WITNESSING how the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision ensures our eternal enslavement by the One Percent. It has not only slain our fragile experiment in constitutional democracy; it is murdering our collective conscience as well.

In fact I cannot doubt the Citizens United date of 21 January 2010 will live in infamy centuries after 7 December 1941 is forgotten. Pearl Harbor was but an initial loss in a victorious war. CU marks the end of the United States as We the People had known it, the moment of our descent into terminal Ayn Rand barbarism and resurrected Ku Klux bigotry – as deadly to our civilization as the events of 4 September 476 were to Rome's.

Meanwhile the ugly extent to which Citizens United has transformed our elections becomes ever more obvious. It was most recently demonstrated by a scoop-the-world New York Times exposé of the blatantly racist anti-Obama hatemongering planned by one of the many Republican political action committees.

Though The Times failed to note how the proposed attacks were facilitated by the CU decision, the omission – or more likely the deliberate suppression of fact – was partially remedied by Lee Fang, a United Republic investigative reporter. The ruling, wrote Fang, “may unleash a new level of ugliness in (U.S.) campaigns. Technically, the decision only allows corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts in elections. But in practice, Citizens United might fuel a wave of advertising designed to stir racial divisions and hatred against minority groups.”

Unfortunately Fang's use of “may” and “might” severely weakened his analysis, a flaw all the more perplexing given his Asian-American ethnicity. But even the timid wording of his conclusion could not dilute the obvious – that Citizens United has bolstered to new extremes an already raging resurrection of white racism in the United States. The burgeoning bigotry Fang curiously reduced to mere potential became clearly visible during the 2008 election campaign. It was already apparent three years beforehand in the genocidal aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Its resurgent Ku Klux hatefulness is evident on even the earliest Teabagger picket-signs and in literally all the pronouncements of the anti-Obama birther cult. Now – bolstered by CU's approval of limitless expenditures for election propaganda – the One Percent are using their inconceivably vast wealth to catapult white racism out of our national closet and back into the Moronic Majority's mental mainstream.

At the very least, Citizens United allows the Republicans the endless funding to fulfill their Southern Strategy, methodically restoring bigotry to all its de facto Jim Crow venom and perhaps even launching the re-imposition of de jure segregation. At the worst, CU gives the Ruling Class carte blanche to infect the huge Moron Nation segment of our population with the Nazi mindset the barons of Wall Street and Big Business have fervently sought to impose on the U.S. since the days of Adolph Hitler.

Are they succeeding? Note the Trayvon Martin target, a best-selling outrage that would have been unthinkable outside a Ku Klux Klavern even a few months ago. Surely somewhere in Hell Josef Goebbels is chortling with glee.

Within the same week, as The Times revealed and as Fang repeated in his own lead, Joe Ricketts, the billionaire founder of TD Ameritrade, was close to finalizing the plans for a $10 million race-baiting advertising blitz intended to guarantee Obama's defeat. The ads – a formidable combination of video and print – were to be launched so late in the campaign Obama could not muster an effective counterattack. And even if the plan were canceled, as seemed likely late Saturday, Citizens United denies us any protection against advertising that would be equally vile if not far worse.

A day earlier, after Fang's report was further disseminated by Truthout, I had realized Ricketts' ploy – or any other such defamation now encouraged by CU – would doom the Obama presidency as surely as the Willie Horton ad doomed the Michael Dukakis candidacy in 1988. I commented accordingly:

I don't normally make election predictions this far in advance, but the outcome of the 2012 presidential vote just became obvious.

Given the malevolent racism of U.S. whites – a national characteristic already evident in the statistically proven hostility of Caucasian males toward a Black President in the White House – Citizens United's hatemongering will combine with the bitter legacy of Obama's multiple betrayals to ensure his defeat in November.

The president's oft-repeated transformation from Obama the Orator to Barack the Betrayer has turned the energized progressives of 2008 into the dejected nonparticipants of 2012 – a mass of voters whose initial chants of "yes we can" have become a barely audible mumble of "whatever."

Given the ruinous magnitude of those betrayals, I cannot but wonder if Obama himself intended he would never be more than a one-term president. Could it be his real service to Wall Street – his actual repayment of its overwhelming financial support in 2008 – was opening the political doors to the final triumph of imperialism abroad and ChristoFascism at home?

Surely that's what happened in 2010, when Barack's betrayals cleared the way for unprecedented Republican victories. And now – note how Obama's Democratic National Committee has abandoned the Wisconsin recall effort – it's obviously happening again.

As bad as the theocratic misogyny of the Romney presidency will be for women, its tacitly Nazi atrocities will be infinitely worse for those of us who are elderly and disabled (I am both) or otherwise no longer exploitable for capitalist profit.

Indeed, for us – we who face extermination via the cancellation of Social Security pensions and the end of Medicare and Medicaid – the deadly realities of a Romney presidency are tantamount to the horrors facing German Jews as Hitler was sworn into office.

Welcome to the Fourth Reich, where methodical destruction of the social safety net serves the same murderous Ayn Rand purpose that was served by the Third Reich's death camps.

Such is “change we can believe in.”

***

But are the Caucasians of the United States truly so irredeemably racist such hatemongering would ensure the president's defeat?

Sadly, I believe the answer is an unequivocal yes. And not just because of the Trayvon Martin target.

A white male in the southern Civil Rights Movement (Knox County Jail, 1963), I was publicly damned by my fellow Caucasians as a “nigger-lover” – all the more vehemently since I had been raised partly in the South. The denunciations and the accompanying attempted murders and other acts of violence gave me a unique opportunity to experience the hatefulness suffered by African-Americans literally from birth. Perhaps because I myself was always something of an outcast – a vindictively unwanted child, an abused and bullied teenager – I had developed as a survival mechanism what I suppose is an acute sensitivity to hatred and contempt. Thus in the context of the struggle for black civil rights I found myself in constant agreement with blacks who saw many manifestations of race-hatred to which most other whites were self-servingly blind.

But the evidence for the toxic depth of the white citizenry's lingering hatred of blacks is far more political than personal. The most telling examples come from the genocidal intent implicit in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

An academic study entitled “Perceptions of Racism in Hurricane Katrina” is also worth reading. Not only does it reveal the substantial number of blacks who (justifiably) suspect the New Orleans levees were bombed by the government to murderously flood the black neighborhoods of the city, it recovers the forbidden 1927 history in which the levees were so destroyed.

The most telling part of “Perceptions” is its public-opinion data. In a Pew survey conducted shortly  after the disaster, 77 percent of the white respondents denied the racism 66 percent of the African American respondents recognized in the lethal sluggishness of the government’s response. An even higher proportion of blacks – 71 percent of compared with 32 percent of whites – felt the disaster revealed the persistence of white racism as a major cultural undercurrent in the United States. 

More significantly, 70 percent of the black respondents told Pew they were angered by the events that followed the storm. But only 46 percent of whites expressed similar sentiments. In other words, 54 percent of white America was sufficiently racist it was not troubled by Katrina's genocidal aftermath.

Combined with present-day statistics on the skyrocketing growth of hate groups in the United States, that 2005 number – 54 percent – is probably the margin by which Obama will lose.


***


Lest we forget, one of the parties to blame for the Citizens United decision is the American Civil Liberties Union, which provided an amicus curiae brief in support of corporate personhood and the One Percent's contention there should be no limits on the money spent to obliterate constitutional democracy and replace it with ever-more-authoritarian capitalist tyranny.

In response to the ACLU's back-stabbing revelation of its true colors, untold numbers of its members, myself included, resigned in protest. Untold more people refused to renew their memberships. But the organization – which lives entirely on dues and grants – seemed curiously immune to the boycott.

Which raises three questions. (1)-When and for how much money did the One Percent buy off the ACLU and turn it into another instrument of oppression? (2)-When did the ACLU receive sufficient corporate funding to immunize it against disaffected members? (3)-Given its obvious servitude to the One Percent, was the ACLU functioning as a latter-day Father Gapon? That is, was it collecting names of dissidents to be turned over to the secret-police agencies that protect and serve the One Percent?

Question (3) is made especially relevant by the police-state reality of today's United States, which beyond the obvious technological differences is increasingly indistinguishable from that of Tsarist Russia.

As Lev Bronstein observed, “In any gathering of three revolutionaries, there is at least one agent of the Okhrana.”


***


During the on-line discussion triggered by Fang's analysis of The New York Times report, a poster who hides behind the screen name Howienica denounced me for characterizing the United States as the Fourth Reich, calling me “extreme even for Truthout.”
Because my response reviewed many taboo elements of U.S. history, all of which can be Googled for confirmation, it too is worth reproducing here:

Not extreme, Howienica, just historically accurate, as demonstrated by the following points:

(1)-We are ruled by capitalism – infinite greed elevated to maximum virtue. Exactly as urged by Ayn Rand, capitalism is the deliberate rejection of every humanitarian principle our species has ever uttered. This is indisputable, proven so by capitalism itself.

(2)-Capitalist governance – the principles of capitalism expressed in federal, state and local policy – means absolute power and unlimited profit for the One Percent, total subjugation and genocidal poverty for all the rest of us. This is the New Order gradually imposed on the United States following the coup of 22 November 1963. It too is indisputable, proven beyond argument by the history of the subsequent decades, particularly the methodical destruction of the New Deal and the equally methodical reduction of the 99 Percent to inescapable debt slavery.

(3)-“The Fourth Reich” is an entirely appropriate label for the present-day United States because its roots – the roots of the New Order – extend to fascist Rome and Nazi Berlin (each financed by Wall Street). These toxic roots then snake back from the Third Reich to Wall Street via the (failed) Bankers Plot of 1934; thence to the official embrace of thousands of Nazi war criminals immediately after V-E Day (especially Hitler's entire intelligence apparatus, which eventually became the CIA); thence to the purge of Leftists and intellectuals that began immediately after World War II; thence to the destruction of the labor movement imposed by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1948; thence to the apex purges of the McCarthy Era; thence to the political murders of the 1960s and 1970s; thence to the war on the 99 Percent that began under Nixon in 1973; thence to the increasingly authoritarian regimes of Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton; finally to the unabashed tyranny imposed by Bush II and intensified by Obama – jackboot imperialism complete with Nazi-type atrocities abroad, police-state fascism and ChristoFascist theocracy at home, the elimination of undesirables either via enslavement in for-profit prisons or death imposed by elimination of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and unemployment compensation.

Creation of a “Fourth Reich” is also – by the way – a chillingly accurate description of the intent most of the Nazi war criminals brought to their new homeland.

Hence “the Fourth Reich,” though metaphorical, is nevertheless a brutally accurate description of the nightmare reality in which We the People are imprisoned – the most internally oppressed realm in the industrial world, the most savagely aggressive empire on the planet.

I would clarify only one point, that the steadily escalating capitalist brutality described in items (1) and (2) was equally characteristic of the Third Reich, especially in terms of its huge reliance on slave labor to boost and sustain corporate profits. Indeed German Nazism was merely capitalism taken to its logical 1930s extreme – exactly what our Ayn Rand-minded One Percent is inflicting on us in 21st Century form today.

And I would add one point more. The Republican landslide of 2010 and its subsequent war against women and minorities is already demonstrating how Citizens United facilitates the imposition of Christian theocracy, fascism and racism of an intensity that edges ever closer to outright Nazism. To imagine the 2012 presidential race will not bear similarly toxic fruit is to imagine Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy are all real. The pattern is now obvious, established by 2010's results. That 2012 is the first presidential vote conducted in the Nazified climate of CU is thus reduced in significance to little more than a footnote.

What is most revealing about the 2012 election is the precedent set by the fact it's a contest between two undeniable enemies of the U.S. Constitution. Never before in our national history have we been limited to an alleged “choice” between two unabashed tyrants: Barack the Betrayer versus Mitt the Malevolent. Obama has proven relentlessly hostile to the Bill of Rights, concealing his despotic agenda behind oratorical deception and a few gestures toward women and homosexuals, while Romney is already notorious not only for his enthusiastic embrace of the Republican brand of fascism in general but for his specific antagonisms toward women, homosexuals and dogs.

And this year's shift toward de facto Nazism is not over yet. Now there's a growing possibility we'll witness the emergence of Scott Walker as the true Führer the Republicans and their Ku Klux Christian kinsmen have always sought. If Scotty the Sadist and his endless supply of Citizens United money wins Wisconsin as anticipated, he'll be uniquely positioned to oust Malevolent Mitt as insufficiently brutal, then win the Republican National Hate Rally and emerge as the Betrayer's opponent.

Whatever, there's no doubt the fascists will win.

LB/20 May 2012
-30-