What Happened to the Republic of the USA? Is It a Feudal Society?

Below is a recent email I sent to a "Conservative" friend of mine.  It directly relates to the title of this piece.

Hate to say it, but I fear that it may be too late, Bob... for education, the economy, sound money, politics, the whole ball of wax.  Free Market Capitalism has been almost totally replaced by Crony Capitalism (aka, what FDR & Mussolini said equals Fascism).  The State has now inserted itself into every phase of human affairs.  Whether you see it or not, Mega Business, along with their puppets/cronies of both political parties, are well on their way to transforming this country into a feudal society.

Voting is the opium of the masses in this land.  The Oligarchs don't much care who wins any election.  Most politicians are not beyond their control; the very few who are, easily can be marginalized & made impotent.  [Examples:  Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich]

The "Republic" portion of the USA already is gone, or 90% gone.  Individual Rights matter little anymore.  Voters keep voting in the same type of people (in both parties) who erode our individual sovereignty.  The reasons given for such erosion are swallowed whole by a completely propagandized public who apparently no longer have the ability to think critically.

This whole scenario is nothing new to History.  Persia, Athens, Rome, etc. all went the same way... oligarchical, imperial decay... caused by the super-rich, and allowed by bamboozled commoners.  The USA is doing pretty much the same thing those empires did--- taking away individual rights in the name of "security/defense", and over-reaching in terms of imperial control...thus bankrupting their economies and their reputations.  But while Middle Class incomes essentially stagnate, the super-rich increase their incomes by 700% in 10 years.  Welcome to 2014.

But the world will continue after the collapse.  The only question is, after the Fall of the Republic of the USA (sooner or later), will We the People finally have learned that politicians & the super-rich as a whole are not to be trusted?  Or will we again be propagandized into supporting another political arrangement that results in a feudal society and an empire-building, aggressive, and hegemonic government?

For the sake of your kids & my grandkids, my hope is that Americans will wake up to a few facts:

1.  the super-rich usually do not care who wins most elections... they control the winners, whoever they are;

2.  thus, "voting" will not solve our problems;

3.  public & private Institutions, for the most part, are not on our side... they mostly favor Oligarchs.

4.  both Republicans and Democrats (at the highest levels) almost constantly spew out propaganda favoring the super-rich;

5.  we are almost at the point of being a feudal society;

6.  American politics is a complete farce;

7.  for the most part, the Constitution has been abandoned;

8.  we are living in a soft Fascist State;

9.  the new political paradigm is the Oligarchy v. the rest of us;

10.  radical but peaceful action is required to regain our freedom and sovereignty;

11.  what the Oligarchy dreads is people organizing around just causes... and such organization is our best hope...not politics, not voting, not Republicans v. Democrats or Conservatives v. Liberals (those labels are completely outdated);

12.  the Corporate Media (Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.) all are propaganda tools of the Oligarchs.  Ignore them.  The differences you think you see amongst them are phony.  It's all part of rigging the Game.  The super-rich long ago learned how important it is for them to control the "Press".  They've been doing it for decades and decades... and it's not a "conspiracy"; it's mostly in plain sight.  To them, it's just good business practice.

Be Well

Protests, Ferguson, the Hypocrisy of Brand Obama, & Oligarchies

A few years ago at some sort of Socialist Convention, John Pilger (a well-known Australian documentarian) gave a speech in which he characterized Obama as "Brand Obama...and it's all fake".  There are so many examples of Obama's hypocrisy and deceit that I couldn't possibly relate even half of them to you.  Despite that, two very recent examples have prompted me to comment.

1.  A day or two ago, our President stated publicly that he was very concerned over the use of militarized police in Ferguson, Missouri...relative to Mike Brown's death and the ensuing public protests.  Incredible.  For years and years, the Fed Gov't (including the Obama Administration) has been instrumental in purposely militarizing local police...with gear, vehicles, weapons, and training.  The excuse given, of course, is the Boogie-Man who replaced the Communist--- the Terrorist.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm all for being protected against terrorism, but here's the problem.  When police basically are turned into soldiers and use military-style vehicles in dealing with everyday citizens, a new dynamic becomes part of police-community relations.  Common, law-abiding people are made to feel as though they ALL are some kind of "enemy".  Peaceful protesters, exercising their Right to free speech suddenly are treated as if they are some sort of enemy.  This violates long-held principles in this country, such as dissidents being able to voice their protests without fear, and the principle that the military should be used against citizens only in cases of EXTREME violence or insurrection.

2.  Obama also stated just recently that journalists should not be harassed or jailed by the police just for trying to do their jobs.  That statement is in direct contradiction to Brand Obama's actions via his Administration's relentless harassment of the New York Times reporter, James Risen.  Never mind the Fed Gov't treatment of many other journalists whose "crime" appears to be that they're getting news stories from Fed whistleblowers.

All of the above illustrates some worrisome tactics of various Oligarchies.  Too often, everyday people no longer are allowed to peacefully protest in this country.  A day or two ago, a 90-year-old woman was arrested (with several other people) in a public space in front of the building that contains the Governor's Office in Missouri.  They were protesting the situation in Ferguson.  I'm wondering, did the police think this 90-year-old protester was a "terrorist", or some other threat to Missouri?  I doubt it.  The name of the Game in the USA today is to clamp down hard on lawful dissidence.  The Oligarchs simply don't want to hear it.  The abrogation of the First Amendment is nearly complete.  Politicians still tell us that we have the Rights of free speech & assembly, and the Right to petition our Government...but in reality, we rarely are allowed to exercise those Natural Rights.  Those at the highest levels in our Gov't, like Obama, say one thing and then do another...and they don't even try to hide it anymore.  Instead, they simply spew out Gov't-Speak and Edward Bernays style propaganda.

Another long-standing tactic of Oligarchs and their Cronies in Government, a tactic being exacerbated in recent years, is instituting the idea of the "crime" of PRE-CRIME into our supposedly free society.  So, for example, lawful and peaceful protests are confined to designated areas---usually distant from the event being protested---because someone MIGHT break the law.  Or worse, public protesters are immediately arrested and hauled off because they MIGHT commit a crime.  The protester is guilty of Pre-Crime.  Another example--- pre-emptive invasions of certain foreign countries are deemed by the Oligarchs as Constitutional and ethical because the "enemy" country MIGHT attack us or our allies in the future.  The "enemy" is guilty of Pre-Crime.  This was Dubya Bush's primary public reason for invading Iraq in 2003.  The private reason, I'm guessing, is a completely different story.  Another example---  it is against the law to possess certain plant substances and imbibe them behind the closed doors of your home.  The reason:  you MIGHT commit a crime once you become "high".  This concept, of course, does not apply to America's Drug of Choice, booze.  You can possess all the alcohol that you so desire.  That's because we discovered a long time ago that prohibition of substances does not work...never has, never will.  I guess that lesson has been lost.  Here's a clue, Oligarchs:  in any sane Universe, possession of a plant substance is not a crime; it's not even the crime of Pre-Crime, which is a totally egregious and unconstitutional concept.

Partly just my opinion.  Be Well

The Third Iraq War for America, & the Constitution

Here we go again.  The first Iraq War was in the early '90s.  Just prior to that one, the Fed Gov't supplied weapons to Saddam for his war against Iran.  The second Iraq War started in 2003, I believe, and went on seemingly forever; however, it did eventually end (for the U.S.).  Now we're beginning the third Iraq War for America.  [For those who may not know, when one country drops bombs or shoots missiles from aircraft into another country, that's war.  Even if you're not bombing, say, the forces of Iraq, it's still war.]

My point here is this:  apparently I missed the preludes to those three wars---  the part where the U.S. Congress, as mandated by the U.S. Constitution, issues a Declaration of War.  Some time ago, John McCain in response to a question from Congressman  Jesse Jackson Jr. on this very subject, essentially stated that such a Declaration of War was not necessary because the War Powers Act gave the President (with the approval of Congress) the authority to go to war at his discretion.  In his defense, McCain is not the only DC Crony who uses that reasoning.  What they all appear to be ignoring is that no law supercedes the Constitution.  That means, despite what McCain and others tell us, Congress must declare war before troops (or war planes, or war ships) are sent into battle against some enemy.  I challenge any politician (or anyone) to disprove that.

For decades now, the Fed Gov't has been ignoring the restraints of the Constitution whenever it suits politicians or their Mega Business Cronies.  They use Laws to justify their war actions; there is nary a peep about the requirements and restraints imposed on the Fed Gov't by the Supreme Law of the Land regarding war and the proper use of the military.  I find it exceptionally strange that the U.S. public appears to accept this scenario.  Perhaps that is due to propaganda, or disinterest, or poverty, or being super-rich, or being too busy, or feeling helpless, or something else.  Maybe people don't believe that the Constitution does require a Declaration of War; or perhaps they believe that Laws actually can alter the requirements stated in the Constitution.  It especially puzzles me that "Conservatives" (nowadays that means Neoconservatives) accept this travesty against Constitutional Gov't.

Perhaps we as a People have forgotten the primary purpose of the Constitution:  it is to restrain the Fed Gov't.  For that to work, the requirements of the document cannot be ignored.  Simple logic.

Be Well