The American “left” is dead

(that’s the castle, in the photo, in Denmark where Shakespeare set Hamlet)

The American “left” is dead, thanks entirely to the American “left” itself, which over the last 3 decades has been morbidly depressed, and in the last year, first became totally unrecognizable as itself, and then committed suicide. I absolutely agree with everything Max Blumenthal says here:

(I’ll add a transcript when it comes up on YouTube)

Here’s what the American left should focus on, in opposition to it, not in total support of it like today’s Democratic Party  https://www.rt.com/op-edge/395709-yugoslavia-libya-syria-us-empire/  (by Neil Clark)

The American “left” is consumed now with, as Max Blumenthal says (video above):

“pushing corporate trade, pushing permanent war… the Democrats should have responded to Trump with a big narrative, against permanent war, and for economic equality. Instead they’re pushing Russia scandal mongering non-stop. It’s subsumed all of the progressive grassroots movements I believed in, and, it’s basically buried the left, in a militaristic narrative, that ambitious figures, like Jamie Ranskin, are advancing. Mark my words Tucker, when Trump is gone, this narrative will be repurposed by the political establishment to attack the left and anyone on the left … who steps out of line on the issues of permanent war, corporate free trade, things like will be painted as Russia puppets, so this is very dangerous, and people who are progressive who are falling into it need to know what the long term consequences of this cynical narrative are.”

Seemingly well-intentioned people are falling into it. I copy a discussion from Facebook, a glimpse at what people think.

The premise now underlying “russia collusion” (as it’s evolved into its latest current state) is that US presidential candidates should isolate themselves from information about political opponents if the information is provided by people who are not US citizens. Such an idea has nothing to do with the reality of politics, law, business, human relations generally, nor the protections of free association and speech, as they are (and that we expect and rely on), have been, or could be (in a free society). The Robert Parry article gives some history https://consortiumnews.com/…/forgetting-the-dirty-dossier-…/ Jonathan Turley comments on fundamental implications for law https://jonathanturley.org/…/the-media-rorschach-test-and-…/

CONSORTIUMNEWS.COM
Martin Bassani

Martin Bassani Our limited memory stack is a systemic bottleneck that the System fully exploits.

Since we cannot handle but a few issues at the time, we must define a hierarchy of issues. There is a real need for a long term persistent focus on a couple of critical issues. This means we must let go of less important issues.

Critical issues contain a leveraged solution. Solve the problem (root cause) and most of the problems (effects) downstream disappear. Then go to the next critical problem and devise a practical solution.

A good example would be corporate personhood. If we were to focus on a Constitutional Amendment that eliminates corporate personhood, this would resonate into an entirely different reality. The same goes with the nature of our money, etc.

We are constantly bombarded by less than critical issues, usually the bad effects of some root cause. This effectively prevents us from ever tackling anything of significance. The Thieving System deftly exploits our human weakness to conflate less important and trivial with issues of existential importance.

What do you all think about this?

Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Yes. We need to return to a set of clear principles that drive how we view, understand and shape the world. Our human principles are being systematically
Annihilated on purpose
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Why all the lying then, Rob?
Megan Bartell
Megan Bartell What lying are you referring to?
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac The multiple denials of meeting with Russians, the lying about the purpose of at least one meeting, and the lying (omission) of who was present at that meeting. I mean, you don’t buy the assertion by Donald Jr. and the Trump administration that they have been open and “transparent” do you?
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac This is not to say that the Dems and corporate media have not been hysterical about this stuff.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac But as the saying goes: “Just because someone is paranoid, it doesn’t mean they aren’t being followed.” Seems a great many are making this an either/or thing. Can be both.
Megan Bartell
Megan Bartell Thom Zajac no they are not transparent but I also do not care. They all do it all the time. I really don’t care. I care about his war crimes.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac War crimes- never a shortage of those!
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Thom, has your account been hijacked? Lying? You do understand that when thousands of people are searching for a year 24 hours a day for some omission of admission or whatever the fuck, or some contradiction, it will be found. By the way, no one is required to report all meetings with all people who are Russian, unless a mob forms demanding it, a mob of cretins
Thom Zajac

Thom Zajac Rob, I am truly surprised at the contortions you and Trump supporters are going through to avoid acknowledging the obvious. In this instance, that Donald Trump Junior has been caught lying and misleading about a fundamental aspect to this case. I’m not a Democrat. I loathe the military industrial banking war machine complex and I see the corporate media as a tool of it. Why lie? Because there is something the liar does not want to reveal. Junior lied about not having had a meeting with Russians. He lied about the purpose of the meeting. He misled about who attended the meeting. He lied about no dirt being presented at the meeting. This is undeniable. This doesn’t make a hero of the Democrats or the media or the deep state. They are all detestable. Rob, don’t you think it’s possible that your (justified) contempt of the media, the Dems, the Deep State etc. has perhaps made it difficult for you to see that Trump and Company are despicable as well? Come on man, you’re staring to remind me of this guy- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE

Subscribe to the Official Monty…
YOUTUBE.COM
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder There is no “case”. There is nothing more than witch hunt and Russia demonization. I’m disgusted by anyone who participates in that. It’s not lying, by the way. You fail to recognize the basic dynamics of a witch hunt. It doesn’t matter what they say or don’t say or who they meet with or why. Nothing matters but hunting the witch and killing it. You’re a joke to participate in it
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder I’m not contorted. You are. There is no law against meeting non-US citizens, and no law against listening to what they say about political opponents. This doesn’t change if the speaker is Russian, or is Russian-American, or is a lawyer who is Russian. You are the one contorting what is obvious and simple. And you’re doing it by giving credence to a wider systematic demonization of Russia campaign, which is hideous, and extends even to open discussion in American government and media of whether or not we should debate bombing Russia, and whether or not “Russians are genetically predisposed to deceive.”
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Okay, I guess we’re not going to find much common ground on this one, Rob. I understand your points, but I guess I think two things can be simultaneously true: that the war-mongering, Russia demonizing establishment could be out to get Trump, AND that Trump is a dishonest, deranged, and particularly dangerous president who very possibly welcomed and encouraged Russian government help in the 2016 election, and that such activity was very illegal. You are of the opinion that even if he and his campaign did this, that no laws were broken, or if that laws were broken, it was the kind of thing that is done all the time (unless I misunderstand you on that)….. This conversation reminds me of one I had with one of my brothers long ago. He called me a loon, and wild conspiracist nut when I shared with him that I was convinced that VP candidate George H.W. Bush had made a deal with the Iranians that if they turned down all deals with the Carter administration and held the hostages until after the election, that the Reagan administration would “give them a better deal” and sell them all the arms they would ever need. To my brother’s credit, he was eventually convinced that such a deal did take place. But it didn’t bother him. He explained that Bush and Reagan were just private citizens at the time and it was perfectly within their rights to make sure a deal. Probably needless to say, I did not agree with him on that, but I’m guessing that you do?
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder What does the Iran hostage subterfuge by Bush have to do with this fake story of “Russian collusion”. There’s not even any allegation of any crime, nothing that makes sense even on the surface, and no evidence of any kind presented. It’s a story for absolute idiots, feeble minded people who feel some kind of sick satisfaction demonizing Russia, and Putin. Totally pathetic
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Well, I guess I’m a totally pathetic idiot then, Rob. Thanks for the clearing that up for me.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Thom Zajac if the don jr. meeting, with a person who is Russian, did produce information that was useful in a political campaign, THAT is not “collusion” and it’s not “Russian collusion”. Adding the word “Russian” adds nothing to the allegation other than racist American war-mongering demonization of yet another foreign government. The same is true if the meeting did not produce useful information
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac What you are arguing, Rob, is that -in your view- a foreign government can legally provide information of any kind to a candidate to aid in that candidate’s effort to win an election. Have I stated your view accurately?
Peter Stamoolis
Peter Stamoolis Thom Zajac Our politics are so corrupted by both the Dems and the GOP (voter suppression, gerrymandering, media propaganda, crappy voting machines that our own people can manipulate, etc.) that foreign intervention is inconsequential. The Dems want war with the Russians, the GOP wants war with the Chinese, and both want war with Iran. That bothers me astronomically more than foreign meddling in our elections. Besides that we meddle in foreign elections all of the time. Pot, Kettle, Black.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac I get that, Peter, those things bother me MORE too. With you. Except I think an investigation of possible Russian/Trump collusion is a worthwhile undertaking.
Peter Stamoolis
Peter Stamoolis Thom Zajac With respect to that I’m more interested in investigating Trump family business dealings with both the Russians and the Chinese.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Peter Stamoolis , yes, I see it that way too, BUT I think it’s likely intertwined.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac That’s likely the reason for all the Trump lying and deception.
Peter Stamoolis
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac But perpetual war/obscene military budget is square one for me.
Peter Stamoolis
Peter Stamoolis Thom Zajac Same here and I think it’s the same for Rob.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac And I see the corporate media as a tool of the ruling bastards, obviously.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac So the dynamics of this Russian/Trump collusion thing is just killing me; the media, the establishment, the deep state, the dem party have all been so hysterical about it, and anti-Russia, that I just cringe at being perceived as being on their side.
Peter Stamoolis
Peter Stamoolis Agreed, and I suspect Rob cringes at being perceived as being pro-Trump.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac I was wondering 🙂 On the other hand, I don’t think turning a blind eye to the Trump/Russia connection -giving him/them a pass- is the way to go either.
Peter Stamoolis
Peter Stamoolis I can understand that, but why are we not also investigating voter suppression, media propaganda and all of the other things i mentioned above?
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Why wasn’t there an honest investigation into 911? Why is the official narrative that Oswald shot JFK? Why is it that virtually every politician and newscaster endorses the government’s fairy tale versions of those events?
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Talk about alternative facts- we’re living in an alternative political universe. It’s depressing as hell.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Thom Zajac your question is totally ABSURD. That you think your question is founded in reason or logic or law or common sense or any kind of real reality, is completely bizarre. Any American political candidate can receive information from anyone no matter what country they are from and no matter whether they are part of another country’s government or not.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Further, it is no crime to have business relations with people in other countries, or to do business in other countries, including in Russia, which should be obvious but is not to some people because of American demonization of one country after another
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder Your conversation here is unfounded, and grotesque
Beverly Burris
Beverly Burris Unfortunately it appears that the majority of the country is caught up in this anti-Russia hysteria, grasping at straws and foaming at the mouth. I think the DNC, in collusion with the corporate media, is to blame for their absurd coverage of Russiagate all the time, presenting unverified assertions as fact, and pretending that even to TALK to a Russian is a treasonous crime.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Rob, I’m not quite sure why you are being so bombastic. We obviously disagree on what is lawful and what is not, and no matter how loudly you present your view and no matter how many insults you hurl my way. I am curious though about whether or not you feel there is anything – regarding information and/or actions- that can take place between a campaign and people from another country (personal or government) that would be a violation of the U.S. law. In that spirit, I would like you to try your best to answer the following question: If the Trump campaign had agreed to a deal with an acting member of the Russian government whereby the Russians would deliver damaging information on Hillary Clinton and also clandestinely use social media to benefit Trump’s campaign in exchange for a promise to ease certain American sanctions currently imposed against Russia should Trump get elected, would that constitute a crime in your view? Not a trick question, not trying to trap you. Just truly understanding the full breadth of your argument.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder The sanctions are unjustifiable to begin with. Your question assumes their legitimacy. They are not legitimate in any way. Never were, are not, and will not be. Holding a President accountable for maintaining illegitimate sanctions is grotesque and absurd. But that’s not necessary for understanding the “breadth” of my position. Receiving information from anyone is not illegal. If the information involves alleged crimes of a political opponent and would be useful information for voters to consider, neither receiving the information nor making it known is illegal
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Thanks, Rob. But it seems to me that receiving information can most certainly be illegal if it involves pursuit of an illegal action: “We’d like to get together and talk with you about the feasibility of us killing your opponent in exchange for a better trade deal (or whatever).” Surely taking that meeting would be a crime, no? (I’m not saying this is what happened, obviously, just trying to completely understand your view.)
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder You said “killing your opponent”. Obviously plotting someone’s death is illegal. Providing true information about a person, is not illegal, not in the general circumstances that are relevant here. It doesn’t matter who the source is, what country they’re from, whether they work for a foreign government or not. This is true whether the information is useful in a political contest or not. I’m done with this conversation as long as you continue pretending that you have a reasonable point without having one. Your premise only stands in some bizarre fantasy world in which all communications received by American political candidates are censored by some kind of review authority that determines what candidates are allowed to hear and from whom. That’s not the world we live in, yet.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac I’m going to pretend that you’re not an asshole.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder I am an asshole. In the real world, I really am an asshole. So what?
Rebecca Olsen
Rebecca Olsen You may be an asshole Rob but you are right about this.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Well, Rob, at least we’re in agreement on something. Take care.
Maryvonne Marinelli
Maryvonne Marinelli Thom Zajac i really do think that you should drop this russian thing before you are embarrassed. ( like your brother )
Digging deeper and informing yourself would be helpful. Turn off rachel maddow, cnn etc. Only saying…
Here is a good article:
http://www.workers.org/…/russia-a-target-not-a…/…
The corporate media’s constant use of Cold War terminology to describe the meeting of the U.S.…
WORKERS.ORG
Martin Bassani

Martin Bassani The relevant fact about Russia bashing is that there is a hidden motive behind it, which is more important than whatever Russia could have done.

Empire cannot stand independent nations. All nations must become obedient vassals. Anti Russian sentiments heard from propaganda machinery is primarily about that. Empire wants Russia as an obedient vassal. Russia does not wish to be an imperial vassal. Whatever Russia does to counter the imperial meddling will be called aggression.

Propaganda is a powerful weapon in the imperial arsenal. All this anti Russian propaganda is an overture to building military pressure which is extremely likely to end in a hot war, which is quickly going to escalate to nuclear Armageddon. And for what? For the benefit of the parasitic imperial banking interests which have destroyed America.

Jeffrey Hotchkiss

Jeffrey Hotchkiss Your strenuous debate, Rob and Thom , has clarified something for me, for which I thank both of you.

It is the time, and also intent factor that worries me, and I’m guessing is implicitly behind Rob’s vehement arguments.

Jeffrey Hotchkiss

Jeffrey Hotchkiss Intent first: given the huge propaganda effort unfolding in the mainstream, one has to acknowledge that tremendous financial and human resources are being devoted to a story that is intended to paint Russia as a huge scary enemy. The factual merits, as with all propaganda, are beside the point. The real point is to make a casus belli, a “cause of war”.

In and of itself, that is highly concerning and insanely dangerous. Combined with the actual economic, covert and military moves carried out by Washington against Russia since the Berlin Wall came down, red flags (pun intended) are waving all over the place.

Jeffrey Hotchkiss

Jeffrey Hotchkiss Time: the actors that want to bring that casus belli to fruition – whatever form that takes for them – need time to get all the pieces in place without interference from public opinion or Congress. So far they are doing great.

If, instead of wall-to-wall coverage of Russiagate, MSM were to do stories on the NATO troop buildup in Poland and the Baltic States, maybe interview some folks who could talk about Ukraine halfway intelligently, do a side-by-side breakdown of military budgets by country, analyze the BRICS dynamics, peak oil, and especially the U.S. plans for huge nuclear weapons buildup – any and all factors that create enormous pressures toward warmaking – then time would quickly run out on the plans being executed on the ground.

So, in debating the veracity or falsehood of whatever latest debacle has taken center stage, we waste the time we need to pay attention, at the very least, to what’s really going on.
Considering the many signs that someone wants us on a fast track to nuclear war, that is time we can’t afford.

Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac I agree, Jeffrey, and have been saying this since the beginning.
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac I essentially agree with this as well, Jeffrey. The hysteria exhibited by the corporate media and democrats and establishment has/is wasted energy. But here’s where I think I’m being misunderstood in this thread; what’s really at issue here is the matter of degree. I agree that way less attention and resources and focus would serve all of us much better, but I don’t think failing to investigate the Trump/Russia connection would be the way to go either. I’m not saying that proof of criminal activity has been uncovered (not publicly anyway), but I am arguing that the behavior of the Trump campaign and administration demonstrate a desire to deceive, and that these deceptive behaviors strongly suggests a desire to conceal criminal activity. Donald Trump Jr.’s changing of his story several times regarding the meeting in question in just a matter of a few days moved my needle quite a bit this past week -from very close to the way my current critics view things to more open-minded about the likelihood of serious criminal activities. So yes, I agree that too much time, resources and focus have been applied to this matter. But I don’t think failing to investigate possible wrong doing in light of what we’ve learned in the past week isn’t the way to go either. Lastly, I thank you for your thoughtful and respectful ways- truly helpful to a fruitful exchange of differing viewpoints.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder The US war on Russia, current fact and propaganda ramp up, yes, is my biggest motivator. Minor motivations include an interest in common sense, otherwise known as logic or reason. Opposing these motivations is Thom’s interest in legitimizing the dynamics of witch hunt (“the witch changed her story!”) while maintaining pretense of “respect, and fruitful exchange of differing viewpoints”. I had a friend of almost 30 years who talked like that. We’re no longer friends
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Opposing logic and reason? And that’s because I have a differing viewpoint? Does everyone who disagrees with you on this view oppose logic and reason? You’re a real piece of work, Rob, I’ll give you that.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder you don’t have a differing viewpoint, Thom. You have an unsupportable idea that politicians should be quarantined from foreign businesses and governments
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac For some one who claims to use logic and reason, I would think you might at least be able to state my position correctly.
Rob Snyder
Rob Snyder You add to that this: “if information of value in a political contest is exchanged”. Any sensible description of political contests includes this as just basic – information is exchanged, and taken into a fight, of ideas and information. Adding this to your idea actually weakens the idea further. But no worries. You can ignore me. I’m nobody and nobody listens to me. There’s plenty of company out there with lots of people who believe your idea
Thom Zajac
Thom Zajac Brilliant!
Jeffrey Hotchkiss
Jeffrey Hotchkiss When I saw last year what was developing, I began to tune out, stand aside from the propaganda tsunami, just for my own mental health. As it is, the topic still distracts me from constructive projects I have that will contribute to community and healing. It is hard to tear one’s eyes away from the collapse of an empire, but one must, if only to help the survivors.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s