Creative Commons License

Green Island

Ch 13: Gullible's Travels in Neoconland: The Corporate Reactionary Revolution of the 70s

They're Building a Box - and You're In It

Ch 4: The Democracy Scam

Sept 2008

The Canadian Media and the 2008 Election: Reporting or Managing?
Sept 2008

911 Thought Experiment


PEI Revival Plan

The Onward Rocinante archive, for those interested in earlier commentary, and also recent longer missives to the CBC and others, and yet even more other stuff going waaaaaay back.
G'wan, I'm a dying breed, everybody else 'twitters' with 100 character max, and are well along the way to developing brainpower to match - but if you're one of the few looking for longer, thoughtful correspondances - this is one of the last places you're going to find any....


Pogo - what if the 10,000 is wrong and the one guy is right and the one guy is right?

"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." - Henry David Thoreau

It's every man for himself, the elephant said as he danced among the chickens.
- Tommy Douglas

In this world, we are all butterflies and we need to be mindful of what can happen when we flap our wings
- David Suzuki

Democracy is comin...

Orwell BBC pic
It's a pretty nice farm - but don't confuse being a cow with being a farmer... (no, GO didn't say that, I did, but it goes good with the pic)

...the most destructive form of untruth is sophistry and propaganda by those whose profession it is to report the news... - Walter Lippmann

martin luthor king I have a dream ...
I have a dream ...

Gandhi - be the change
Be the change you want to see in the world ...

picasso's don quixote

Onward Rocinante
Green Island Awaits ....

Monday Nov 24 08.

Kelly McParland: Lament of the baby boomers - this is SOOOOO neocon / capitalist - create serious problems through seriously bad policies, and then as soon as the shit is blowing through the fan big time and people are looking around for someone to string up, start finger-pointing and blaming the victims. We are short of money for looking after our seniors and other things because during the 70s the neocons took over our governments and began the racket I have written about called Banketeering . The baby boomers were, I'll grant, pretty lazy about looking after their democracy and allowing these people to take over, but they had a lot of propaganda thrown their way as well, and were far too trusting of the capitalist media and their lies. Which continues to this day - there are few people more brainwashed than the average person posting on the NP lists. It would take books to respond to this stuff, but you could start enlightenment here - The Corporate Reactionary Revolution , and get a heads up about the current meltdown and what is really happening here - Ultimate Sting . Careful, there's words with more than three syllables and sentences with more than 8 words, if you're used to tv soundbites, they could prove challenging. But then saving our country from these people is going to be a serious challenge, so this could prove useful exercise. (oh, and this is part of the blog at Onward Rocinante - if you want to tell all your friends where intelligent commentary can be found)


Economic storm engulfing cities - some suggestions for Cdn mayors: You can use the Bank of Canada for essentially interest-free loans. Neocon governments prefer you use commercial banks and enrich their friends, but maybe it's time to push back a bit and fight for Canada for Canadians. For more background, try Ultimate Sting and Banketeering


Daring to think about deficits - The so-called 'structural' deficit can also result from an intentional decision reduce income below projected spending plus reasonable surplus for rainy days. As the neocons have done. Not clever, catches up sooner or later. The solution is not more spending cuts, or borrowing, but increasing income (taxes) to reasonable levels. And then, if you have an income deficit, why, as the government, would you go to private banks and let them create money to borrow, when you could create the money yourself? Hmmm - things that cannot be explained in a few hundred words - more detail here - Banketeering (and even more more here - Ultimate Sting )


Deflation's big game - - Inflation - banks create too much money. Deflation - they don't create enough money. Funny there don't appear to be any 'economists' who understand such a simple idea. Kind of like explaining the Emperor's New Clothes to the King's Court whose posh lives depend on keeping the king happy, I guess. The simple root cause of everything wrong today, and for the last couple of hundred years, is that banks create almost all of our money supply essentially out of thin air - and demand something real as 'interest' on the payback (and that's a lot of money, even in Canada - something like three trillion bucks outstanding debt, on which they want interest every year). The thing is, you borrow X imaginary and you can pay back X imaginary - but the Y interest you gotta come up with some other way. When you kick that up to three trillion X, that's a lotta Y that is 'real property' that is going to get turned over to the banks. They win when they make bubbles, and they win when they stop creating money and strangle everyone. And it's all going to keep happening until We the People start acting like Canada is a sovereign country that creates its own money debt free, rather than a vassal country under the rule of they who create our money. Think about it. More here - Banketeering (and even more more here - Ultimate Sting )


PM discovers Keynes.. - Bubbles are too much money in circulation. Depressions are not enough money in circulation. Banks create money. Private banks create the money, either too much or not enough. Banks prosper in either inflationary times or depressions ( a few may go under, but that just leaves more for the rest and makes them more powerful). Go behind the curtain - Banketeering ...


- there have been a number of articles and comments lately about people like Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky not being actively on board the 911 so-called 'truth movement' (which I of course am one of, believing that whatever happened that day, the Official Conspiracy Theory is NOT it) - there are many people who start attacking these people when they are asked about the so-called '9111 Truth' and etc. I do not agree, and when a couple of things came through an email list I subscribe to, I responded thusly: (just so you know)

I don't entirely agree with this kind of thing - I think that people like Chomsky, Zinn, and Ali have been great fighters and thinkers and writers in their time against a lot of seriously bad things, and still are for that matter, and that they do not agree with everything that everyone who opposes capitalists or the crimes they are accused of should not, in my opinion, be grounds to dismiss them and all of their work out of hand - actually, you could make a good argument that this kind of tactic is another divide and conquer tactic - if you have ten strong beliefs, according to this kind of thinking, then you must be enemies with someone who only agrees with nine of those beliefs!! (or not necessarily enemies, but at least not friends, and dismiss everything the other person says - which is, I would submit, going to get you into some pretty strange places). I think it is better to just walk your own path (strongly), and when that path is shared with others, this is good, when some of your companions on a certain path diverge for a time, that should be fine too, as long as they are not active enemies in some way - and I don't think you can say someone's disinclination to support your every cause actively makes them an enemy, in the same way, for instance, with these guys, as say PNAC would be pretty much our enemy, in all ways at all times. People like these do not have to apologize to anyone, after lifetimes of fighting for (or against) things we all have agreed with in earlier days, and I think we do them an injustice when we attack them like this (or not 'we', for right or wrong, I haven't been on this bandwagon, actually). It doesn't really matter to me that these people do not see the 911 fight as important, or want to get involved - that in no way at all changes my beliefs about how important this fight is, nor makes me in any way inclined to abandon it - I don't formulate my beliefs on who believes whatever, nor do I reject my beliefs because of what someone else does not believe, I listen to all sides, and make up my own mind, regardless of who else shares or does not share those beliefs. And people who would abandon such a fight because someone like Zinn or whoever says they do not believe in it strongly enough to make it an issue would not really be a companion worth having in the fight - people who follow others, rather than fight because they believe themselves, are never of that much use anyway. More could be said, but that's about the heart of it and much else calls.


Wednesday - Distracted easily? You're getting older - junk science and junk 'journalism' - for what purpose? You have 12 older people and 12 'younger' older people, whatever that is supposed to mean, out of a population of millions - reliability very small. No indication of how the people were chosen, which is important - you can choose people to prove anything you want to prove, really - more small reliability. No indication of what the television show was that 'distracted' them - if you have an intelligent adult, and there is a documentary about something important, they will probably find that more interesting than dealing with some meaningless arithmetic calculation on a pocket calucluator they have just been handed but have never used before and don't see any need to spend time learning. Younger people these days have notoriously short attention spans, they have diseases named after them and special new drugs to make them more docile - how does this relate to the story? Why is the Star promoting yet more looking down on older people? And etc. How can you respond to an article like this in 1,000 characters? Does anyone else care? Onward Rocinante -


CBC News chief to become Toronto Star publisher - interesting they decided to put this info in the 'arts and entertainment' section. But I suppose good propaganda and indoctrination maintenance is something of an art form. Black art, but still .... and what we find in the 'news' papers these days certainly has a lot more to do with entertaining the masses rather than keeping them informed. Ultimate Sting .


John Ivison: Fiscal update now a declaration of war - I don't suppose kicking the libs, ndps and greens (or what is left of 'democracy' in this country for that matter) where it hurts will trouble many on the NP 'discussion/mindless rant' lists, but you ought to have a read of the Rev Neimuller story, and wonder who is going to stick up for you when it's your turn - if you think the neocons and the NWO will have any use for footsoldiers after you've done your work for them, you're going to be sadly disappointed, I predict. Ultimate Sting .


-the current, Indian 'terror' attacks - at the end, the final thing we get to hear, some 'senior analyst' talking about how this proves that there is an international terror plot!!! - and they hate our freedom and democracy and that is their only driving motive, so we have to protect ourselves!!

Second part - some lady from the Monk Center and some thing called the 'International Center of Political Psychology' (really...) - talking about Harper's 'cognitive dissonance' - the trouble he must be going through, etc, the poor man, after he earlier said no deficit, NEVER NO SIR!!, and now actually having to consider such a thing, and even say it is a good thing - this is complete, 100% in the box bullshit - politicians lie without a second's thought, this whole show is just more damage control to keep people from going anywhere near the root causes of the whole problem - neither of these speakers (AM and the interviewee) can believe this, so their contempt for the listeners is total, playing out this little charade for the peasants, treating people like morons, like robots, automotons who will believe anything the people in the Ministry of Truth feed them. And to the extent 'the people' listen to this without protest - they are. What else can you say?

- 3rd half hour = Diane Francis and the lady from the CCPA sharing in the damage control pep talk, a little good cop-bad cop stuff, but basically they are all (3) on message, and not a word about bank created money, the source of the entire meltdown, and the door to the solutions

Life in capitalistland. Same old same old.


The Dirty Thirties offer some important lessons for Harper: The main lesson that was learned following 29 was that banks and unbridled capitalism are very dangerous to society. Various measures were put in place to control both, including the Bank of Canada, which did a good job of bringing the country back to prosperity, funding the Canadian effort in the WWII, and the great infrastructure building and social programs following the war. In the 70s the neocons took over, and the bank of Canada was phased out - and the capitalists deregulated again, and it's been a roller coaster of bubbles and bailouts ever since, culminating with the current global financial meltdown. How truly is it said, he who forgets the lessons of the past is bound to repeat them. Two things to help relearn things forgotten - Banketeering and Ultimate Sting .


masters voice - reporting news or writing on blank slate! - Island Morning, some 'economist' explaining how the current deflation is actually caused by consumers not spending - and then on the Current, another 'guest' making the 'point' quite strongly that when we look for the causes of this financial meltdown, you damned peasants look in the mirror, right!!!??? Too much credit with credit cards!!! Them damned people in the US buying houses they could not afford, wow!!

This is damage control gone insane - it's apparent the financial wizards who have engineered this whole mess out of sheer greed and stupidity are pretty concerned the peasants might start to understand what actually happened here, and be looking for some blood, so the proactive drive to shift blame away from the people who ought to be in jail to the victims is on big time, with, as usual, the willing compliance of their media. Apparently successfully - there don't appear to be many clues out there in tv-viewerland about what is really going on.


Saturday - How bad will it get? Facing the worst financial crisis in decades, five experts chart out the future ... - but, but, but .... he queried with some confusion, aren't these the same people who completely failed to foresee the current meltdown developing, speaking as financial 'experts' for the same institutions which have been involved in a series of Canadian bubbles and bailouts and other assorted crises going back to around 1980? Doesn't anyone know of Einstein's famous quote about not solving problems with the same level of consiousnesss from which the problems arose? Or what about the old (but well true) notion that he who refuses to learn history, and learn from history, is bound to repeat it - again, and again, and again, it appears with these people, and those who listen to them and lazily, foolishly, refuse to think for themselves? And what about the very truism that these people are working for institutions which are hardly neutral in this debate - they have been centrally involved in creating this problem, and are very much interested in maintaining a system which affords them great wealth and power - you can be quite sure that anything they have to say will be said with this as their first priority, and if actual solutions to this crisis would involved serious restrictions on that wealth and power their willingness to talk about such things might be less than forthcoming?

We are not going to get out of this mess with any chance of a more stable future until people start to understand one thing - the root of this entire problem is that banks create almost all of our money supply (~98% in Canada) essentially out of thin air, with no effective government oversight and no practical rules of any sort to stop them from creating far too much for speculative purposes thus leading to bubbles such as we are just suffering the crash of, or no way to stop them from, in moments of panic and withdrawal, then shrinking the money supply they create thus leading to the various hardships associated with too LITTLE money floating around rather than too much. And, of course, they demand 'interest' on all of the money they create out of thin air, which has led to all of our current financial problems, including inflation, low savings, and high debt loads in general. And this is an insane situation anyway, for any country that pretends to be sovereign - as you cannot be sovereign as long as some other power is creating your money supply. And for those whose knee-jerk reaction is that governments creating money leads to inflation and other problems - just get your heads out of the sand and see what bank-created money hath wrought. More here - Banketeering . Peter Foster: Ferguson's fears - We have to remember that the alternatives to capitalism have always wound up worse - Well, first we have to note this - "...Professor Ferguson is - unusually for an academic - a fan of capitalism..." - but this just exposes the writer's fantasies about the way the western world works, which are quite untrue, as are most NP-ian fantasies about the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy - the implication that university courses (taught, of course, by 'academics') are somehow hotbeds of anti-capitalism simply doesn't accord with the facts. You may be able to find the odd independent thinker in 21st century universities, but the great bulk of 'economics' courses taught in university are solidly pro-capitalist in orientation, stressing the supremacy of 'the market' and Freidmanian economic 'ideas' (I just made that up, I think, I like it - that suggestion of 'mania >> maniac >> insanity' etc is quite appropriate when applied to Freidman and Chicago-school 'economics'). Well, if you can call 'policies' with the sole purpose of justifying greed and stupidity an idea. C'mon, anybody tell me just ONE economist getting space in Canadian newspapers or radio who speaks an anti-capitalist message? There are none (there may be a few in Canadian universities, but they certainly get no space in the mainstream media). And those modern things attaching themselves like parasites to universities, 'business' schools and etc - all teaching the glories of capitalism - maybe I've missed something, but are there any adjunct institutions in Canadian universities calling themselves something like the 'College of Socialist Economics' or anything? Of course not (who would fund such a thing, after all?)

So, we just need to note, when considering anything this author writes, that it is all to be taken with some rather large grains of salt, proceeding as he does from an obvious and substantial disconnect with reality in the first place.

And I suppose I've written beyond the average attention span of an NP reader, so will leave it here, although much more could be said. Perhaps later.

{{AND later, in response to some comments (needing a short break) -

Standing - obviously, along with the writer of this piece, you keep your head firmly inside some Great Left Wing Conspiracy Hide the Children!!! box, and write from there without bothering to stick your head out to see what the real world is like - ( a capitalist dominated dystopia these days). I actually do listen to the first few hours of CBC morning shows every day, and every day I get Business Digest a couple of times, and a couple of times a week I get Michael Hlinka, and we get regular commentary from speakers from the Conference Board of Canada and such places, all telling us how WONDERful!!! capitalism is, and many others giving the same message. I am aware of no regular commentator on the morning shows who regularly gets a chance to answer these people with anything even remotely approaching a 'Maybe Capitalism isn't so great, eh??' stance - I have written them frequently about this, but of course such letters are never read or responded to. You're right (no pun intended, but if the shoe fits...) about a complete lack of balance on the CBC, as in the Cdn media in general - it's about 50% rightwing wacko (take your pick of NP writers), 45% sort of center right wing (Globe, most of the Star), and the very odd central-leftist who gets a few words every now and then (Stanford, Salutin once a week, Linda McQuaig (OMG HEX SIGN HEX SIGN!!!) every couple of weeks in the Star - can't think of any other regulars offhand).

As to 'a range of academics in universities' - you may note that I never said there weren't a range of academics in the universities, I simply said that economics **courses** are all capitalist oriented in nature, and graduates well indoctrinated in the capitalist message. As to that being because Capitalism (ALL BOW!!) is the greatest economic system ever invented - again, get your head of the fantasy box you live in and look around at the huge global meltdown and ongoing theft of your gods. This is not as good as it gets. (have a read here - Ultimate Sting - if you're ready for some OTB (out of the box) thinking )

Bb- Jim Standford does not speak any anti-capitalist message, he just speaks of a kinder, gentler capitalism - and as such he is just as wrong-headed as the rest of you - this is a cancer, and the only cure is complete excision. But he gets a pretty good paycheck for being a 'good' capitalist. They pay their better minions pretty good. It's a pretty shallow vision that sees only two choices - that in order to avoid the problems of a centrally controlled economy, the only alternative is unbridled capitalism. What about just one more alternative, something sort of between the two extremes of complete control and complete freedom - a 'free' sort of market where people work as they like and buy as they like with the money they make, but with some rules to ensure that it is actually free - that some larger players in the market, with perhaps a certain lack of normal human inhibitions against things like stealing and lying and intimidating others to get their way, are controlled so they do not dominate the 'free' market and turn it to their own interests? And these rules not imposed by some central authority, which would tend to negate the 'freedom' aspect we speak of, but rules democratically chosen, after proposals and debates and votes and such things, rules that a clear majority of the citizens of this democracy supported? No, that is very much NOT what we have nowadays - people are kept very much in the dark about what rules their society operates under, rules which are made in secret and favor the interests of the few over the many, and there is very little actual 'democracy' to be found here, all propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding.


The Onward Rocinante archive can be found __here__, for those interested in earlier out-of-the-box commentary, and also recent longer missives to the CBC and others, and yet even more other stuff going waaaaaay back. the tv abyss is watching

Einstein - cannot solve a problem with the same consciousness you created it with - come to Green Island

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.