Zionist Fascism 266

Abbas To UN: "End This Settlement Occupation" By James Wall (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 3 pages)

Cross-posted from Wallwritings

On Friday, September 26, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas told the United Nations General Assembly, "The time has come to end this settlement occupation."

The New York Times described Abbas as "visibly enraged" when he spoke to the General Assembly.
In her analysis of the address for Ha'aretz, Amira Hass wrote that Abbas was obviously not directing his angry words to the Israeli public. His message, she notes, was directed primarily to the West. Abbas wanted the West to know:

"The negotiations with Israel, as they have been held until now, are over; forget about the Palestinians returning to them. Forget about the Palestinians continuing to meet and discuss while Israel continues to construct settlements and ignore even the simple commitments it agreed to, such as the release of prisoners."

Furthermore, Abbas wants the West to understand:

"The Palestinians will not return to any negotiations that do not take as a starting point the final objective of a Palestinian state to stand alongside Israel, based on the '67 borders, and a binding timetable for its establishment."

Hass points to words in the speech that sounded more like a prosecutor addressing a jury determined to prove to that jury, the guilt of the accused.
In his address directed to the west, Abbas used such words as "colonialist occupation," "racism," "a war of genocide," massacres, and a nation above the law."
The last time an angry Palestinian leader addressed the UN was on November 13, 1974, when PLO leader Yasir Arafat came to the General Assembly podium carrying a gun in one hand and an olive branch in the other.
Donald Neff, one of the most astute western journalists who covered the early days of the Israeli occupation, described Arafat's address to the UN General Assembly November 13, 1974 gathering:

"Chairman Yasser Arafat of the Palestine Liberation Organization made a dramatic appearance before the U.N. General Assembly and called on the world community to decide between an 'olive branch or a freedom fighter's gun.'" 

It was the first time a Palestinian leader had been invited to speak to the UN body. Neff described Arafat's presence as a "watershed for the Palestinian community." Neff's report ran in the November/December 1994, edition of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 20 years after Arafat's speech and 20 years before Abbas's "visibly angry" address. 
Neff's report is an indication of how little has changed in the colonial scenario in which the United States stands watch over, and finance, Israel's illegal takeover of Palestinian lives and land.
Neff wrote in his 1994 story for the Washington Report:

"The United States and Israel had opposed Arafat's [1974] appearance, as they had for years fought against recognition of Palestinians as a separate people. Washington and Tel Aviv insisted that the Palestinians be identified by their function or position such as refugees or terrorists rather than as a people."

  1  |  2  |  3

http://wallwritings.wordpress.com/

James Wall is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois. From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine. Many sources have influenced Jim's writings over (more...)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Abbas-To-UN--End-This-Set-by-James-Wall-ICC_Israel_Occupation_Palestinian-140927-578.html

ISIS 36

OpEdNews Op Eds 9/27/2014 at 10:53:20 Of Terorists and Referenda By Deena Stryker (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages) Headlined to H2 9/27/14

What a convenient word 'terrorist' has become! Until 9/11 the word was reserved for anarchist types in long black coats who set off bombs in public or assassinated heads of state. But when the World Trade Center was brought down, the word became a convenient designation for any individual who showed any sign of opposition to any government on the planet, democratically elected or not.[tag]

It's nothing short of a miracle that the Occupiers were not dubbed terrorists, although some language came pretty close, as I recall. Even so, the word was handily picked up by Mubarak before his downfall, then by Assad - legitimately - and is now applied by Poroshenko to an entire swath of the country he purports to govern.
The banalization of the word 'terrorist' goes hand in hand with a sudden rash of referenda: the mainly Russian speaking majority in Crimea held a successful one to secede from Ukraine, the Scots had a failed one to secede from Great Britain, Catalonia will hold one soon. Egyptians, once again safely governed by a military man, overwhelmingly approved their new constitution in a referendum, even after the judicial system condemned hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood 'terrorists' to death. Governments rarely make use of referenda, however that of multi-lingual Switzerland held no fewer than seven this year with more to come.
Is there a link between these two phenomena? I think so: leaving out the Swiss tradition, both point to a disintegration of the liberal-parliamentary nation state system and its replace-ment by global fascism. Though purporting to hold aloft the ancient principles upon which the nation-state rests, globaliza-tion signals the end of the nation-state as an entity regulated by laws applicable to all, its sole task now being to pass laws dictated by corporations for their sole benefit.
In a message that appalls citizens but seeks to reassure the stock market, the US and its allies have announced a long war against ISIS. In reality, this is a three-way standoff between fascism, its magic bullet, and an opposition that has yet to realize that ISIS - the most shocking of all terrorists whose followers behead single individuals (as opposed to a machine obliterating three thousand) - created to save the Western economy, will be kept alive as long as that crisis is deep, because there has never been a referendum about war.

http://www.otherjonesii.blogspot.com

Born in Philadelphia, I spent most of my adolescent and adult years in Europe. I began my journalistic career at the French News Agency in Rome, spent two years in Cuba finding out whether the Barbados were Communists before they made the (more...)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Of-Terorists-and-Referenda-by-Deena-Stryker-Allies_Assad_Citizens_Crimea-140927-74.html

American Brainwashing

OpEdNews Op Eds 9/27/2014 at 12:30:17 Propaganda, Brainwashing, Playing Dumb to Avoid the Truth By Edward Curtin (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages) Related Topic(s): Avoidance; Courage; Death; Excuses; Fear; Propaganda; Truth To Power, Add Tags Add to My Group(s)  2    1    1  View Ratings | Rate It opednews.com Headlined to H2 9/27/14

By Prof. Edward Curtin

republished from globalresearch.ca/

"And we are all mortal" JFK -- June 10, 1963 -- American University
Not long after uttering those words in his startling and prophetic commencement address, President John F. Kennedy was publicly executed by terrorists operating from deep within the shadows of the secret state. A symbolic universe was shattered that day and a sense of fear and terror was unleashed into American society. The natural human fear of death was multiplied a thousand-fold as post-traumatic denial settled over the country and the Warren Commission released its fabrications fifty years ago this September 24th. (Did it win the Pulitzer Prize for fiction that year?)
That fear is the air we breathe today. We are choking on fear; trembling.

In a previous article, I suggested that Americans are propagandized on two levels: culturally and politically. The elite work to scare and discombobulate regular people in various ways. Call it propaganda, brain-washing, mind-control, double-speak, etc. The result is to try and reduce people to muddled, frightened messes. These manipulative machinations generally work.
But there is a crucial flip side to this. Many, many people want to be deceived. They choose to play dumb, to avoid a confrontation with truth. They want to be nice (Latin, nescire, not to know, to be ignorant) and to be liked. They want to tuck themselves into a safe social and cultural framework where they imagine they will be safe. They choose to live in what Jean Paul Sartre called bad faith (mauvaise foi): He put it as follows:

"In bad faith it is from myself that I am hiding the truth." But with this "lie" to myself, "the one to whom the lie is told and the one who lies are one and the same person, which means that I must know in my capacity as deceiver the truth which is hidden from me in my capacity as the one deceived."

Such bad faith allows people to fabricate a second act of bad faith: that they are not responsible for their ignorance of the truths behind governments' and corporate media's lies and propaganda.
But why? Why this widespread flight from seeking truth? What is at the core of this denial?

For while the mainstream media does the bidding of the power elite, there is ample alternative news and analyses available on the internet from alternative sources. It doesn't take a genius to learn how to research important issues and to learn how to distinguish between bogus and genuine information. It takes a bit of effort, and, more importantly, the desire to compare multiple opposing viewpoints and untangle the webs the Web weaves. We are awash in information and both good and bad reporting, but it is still available to the caring inquirer. The problem is the will to know. But why, why the refusal to investigate and question; why the indifference? Stupidity? Okay, there is that. Ignorance, there is that. Willful ignorance, ditto. But there are many very intelligent people who adamantly refuse to entertain alternative possibilities to the reigning orthodoxies.

I, as do many others, know many such people who will yes me to death and then never fully research issues. They will remain in limbo or else wink to themselves that what may be true couldn't be true. They close down. Why? To take one example of sound, rational advice usually dismissed, last year Professor James Galbraith of the University of Texas at Austin wrote, concerning the JFK assassination -- and without foreclosing the issue -- that one could readily arrive at a fair conclusion by a slow, careful study, including close attention to sources and footnotes. But few dare to follow such advice for an event that is paradigmatic for so much that has followed. Why this lack of will? Why the excuses?
This is a great dilemma and frustration faced by those who seek to convince people to take an active part in understanding what is really going on in the world today, especially as the United States wages war across the globe and the Obama administration expands and modernizes its nuclear weapons capabilities.
I believe there is a way to simplify the seeming complexity of this issue without being simplistic.
I think the answer was given forty years ago by Ernest Becker in his 1974 Pulitzer Prize winning (non-fiction) masterpiece, The Denial of Death. In that book Becker wanted to simplify a great deal of "needless intellectual complexity" about why people behave as they do. He felt we were "choking on truth" as a result of a plethora of brilliant writing and discoveries. He wanted to get to the heart of the matter, to cut through verbosity while "the mind is silent as the world spins on its age-old demonic career." He wanted to simplify without being simplistic.
His book is far from simplistic. It is deep and complicated. His conclusion, however, is simple.
It is the terror of death and the consequential denial of that reality that motivates so much human behavior. People kill out of this fear, they shrink from life and truth because of it, and they live in bad faith because of it. Born dying and knowing it, humans devise a thousand and one ways to shield themselves from this truth. And in the forefront of this great fear lie so many smaller "deaths." Becker uncovers them all. The fear of ultimate death generates many children: the fear of disease and health obsessions, of terrorists, of the powerful, of standing up for oneself without experts, of speaking out, of being an individual, of disagreeing emphatically with government propaganda about major events, etc. The person powerfully motivated by death fear refuses to seek truth; it's too overwhelming. Excuses are always at hand. Becker writes:

He accepts the cultural programming that turns his nose where he is supposed to look; he doesn't bite the world off in one piece as a giant would, but in small manageable pieces, as a beaver does. He uses all kinds of techniques, which we call the 'character defenses': he learns not to expose himself, not to stand out; he learns to embed himself in other-power, both of concrete persons and of things and cultural commands; the result is that he comes to exist in the imagined infallibility of the world around him. He doesn't have to have fears when his feet are solidly mired and his life mapped out in a ready-made maze. All he has to do is plunge ahead in a compulsive style of drivenness in the 'ways of the world' that the child learns and in which he lives later as a kind of grim equanimity -- the 'strange power of living in the moment and ignoring and forgetting' -- as (William) James put it. This is the deeper reason that Montaigne's peasant isn't troubled until the very end, when the Angel of Death, who has always been sitting on his shoulder, extends his wing. Or at least until he is startled into dumb awareness.

  1  |  2

I teach sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Art and am a freelance writer and researcher.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Propaganda-Brainwashing--by-Edward-Curtin-Avoidance_Courage_Death_Excuses-140927-313.html

ISIS 35

OpEdNews Op Eds 9/27/2014 at 13:14:30 11 Sure-Fire Predictions About the War Against ISIS By Arlen Grossman (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages) Related Topic(s): Afghanistan War; Iraq; Isis; Syria; Terrorism; Vietnam War; War, Add Tags Add to My Group(s)  5    3    2  View Ratings | Rate It opednews.com Headlined to H2 9/27/14

It is easy to predict what will happen as the United States chooses to start another overseas war. It's easy because we've done it so many times before and once more we have chosen to ignore the lessons of our previous foreign invasions. Here are eleven predictions we can count on:
1) Our military will kill a lot of people, a great many of whom will be civilians.
2) Citizens of the territories we invade will hate us for it and we will make new enemies, many of whom will be easy fodder for terrorist recruitment.
3) Many American soldiers will die or be traumatized by war and come home broken in body and spirit. We will be paying for their care (and aberrant behavior) for many decades.
4) The wars will cost more than they are supposed to and will deplete the U.S. treasury of billions--if not trillions--of dollars.

5) Despite the cost, certain segments in our society--weapons manufacturers, the Pentagon, security companies, cable news networks among them--will profit greatly.
6) The weapons we provide to our friendly rebels will eventually be used against us.
7) We will have other nations as allies, but the U.S. will provide more than 95% of the fighting and funding.
8) The American people will be lied to and manipulated with fear, thus giving the government further opportunities to spy upon or restrict the Constitutional rights of its citizens.
9) If we eventually provoke a terrorist counterattack on our soil, Americans can kiss their remaining freedoms goodbye.
10) Our stated objectives will fail to be accomplished.
11) Government propagandists and supporters of the war will try to convince us that we are winning.
You can count on these predictions coming true, because they always do when we start wars overseas--Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq being prime examples. But the massive military-industrial-security-media complex and their cheerleaders cannot resist. So hang on--because here we go again.

thebigpicturereport.com

Arlen is a writer/blogger living in Monterey, CA. His political blog is thebigpicturereport.com. He writes a weekly quotation quiz "What's Your QQ?" (Quotation Quotient) for the Monterey County Herald, as well as a quotationquotient.com website and (more...)

  

http://www.opednews.com/articles/11-Sure-Fire-Predictions-A-by-Arlen-Grossman-Afghanistan-War_Iraq_Isis_Syria-140927-26.html

Neoliberal Eternal War

OpEdNews Op Eds 9/27/2014 at 13:26:28 Will You Be Free: Caught in the Trap of Permanent War By Chris Floyd (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages) Related Topic(s): Attack; Chaos; Fear; Isis; Syria, Add Tags Add to My Group(s)  1    1 View Ratings | Rate It opednews.com Headlined to H2 9/27/14

Cross-posted from Empire Burlesque

(image by Artwork by Frans Masereel as collected in Notre Temps from 1952.)

The murderous absurdity of the new American-led war in the Middle East almost defies commentary, although I'm currently working on a piece that tries to thread through the obfuscation. In the meantime, below is something I wrote about one of our earlier wars in the region -- but as we now live in a state of permanent war, it remains sadly apt for today ... and no doubt far into the future.

The questions in the lines are aimed chiefly at all those who give their support -- however grudgingly, reluctantly, with great sweatdrops of blood and wringing of hands -- to the continuing series of military attacks by Western powers in the Middle East, East Asia and Africa for the ostensible reason of quelling terrorism.
For after each such incursion, the question comes again: are you free now? Is it better now? Are you free from the fear of terrorism (a fear so expertly and copiously stoked by our elites)? Is it better now? Is it over now? Have our violent attacks made us -- or the people in our target nations -- freer, safer, prosperous, at peace? Even when there is "victory" -- Saddam ousted, the Taliban ousted, Gadafy ousted -- has this brought peace and freedom to anyone ... or simply more and more and ever more conflict, extremism, chaos and blood.
And now the fear has come round again: another war, more mountains of dead, more cities in ruins, more hatred spread, more extremism created. Yet even if ISIS is forced back from the territory it now occupies in Syria and Iraq (thanks to the hellholes of chaos and instablity that Western actions have induced in both those countries), the question will be hanging in the blood-flecked mist: are we free now?
WILL YOU BE FREE?

When the guns no longer sound
When the dead are in the ground
When the foe hangs from the tree
Will you be free?
Will you be free?

When blood and iron rule the day
When ash and bone mix with the clay
And choke the fruits of victory
Will you be free?
Will you be free?

When the children of the slain
Cry for revenge to ease their pain
Lost in the shadows you'll never see
Will you be free?
Will you be free?
When the fear comes round again
When they call for troops to send
To some new war across the sea
Will you be free?"
Will you be free?

Chris Floyd is an American journalist. His work has appeared in print and online in venues all over the world, including The Nation, Counterpunch, Columbia Journalism Review, the Christian Science Monitor, Il Manifesto, the Moscow Times and many (more...)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Will-You-Be-Free-Caught-i-by-Chris-Floyd-Attack_Chaos_Fear_Isis-140927-106.html

De Oekraïne 88

OpEdNews Op Eds 9/28/2014 at 04:09:14 It's Official! Resistance Defeats Kiev Junta in Ukraine By Michael Collins (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages) Headlined to H3 9/28/14

Become a Fan   (113 fans)

The results are in. The official tally is complete and the winner announced.
According to an opinion piece in in Bloomberg News (9/26), Russian President Vladimir Putin is the victor in the conflict in Ukraine (Bloomberg News, Ukraine Can't Hide Putin's Victory, Leonid Barshefky, 9/26),.
Clearly, Putin comes out ahead in this conflict but the real winners are the people of the eastern Ukraine and their resistance militia. Resistance forces fought brilliantly against much larger, better-equipped troops dispatched by the Kiev junta to assault people in cities and towns it declared terrorists. The terrorist acts consisted of political opposition to Ukraine's ruling neo Nazis and oligarchs along with an expressed desire for self-rule. The United States puppets in Kiev started the violence. The people of the east finished it, decisively.
The military tide turned at the end of August when the western politicians and media could no longer hide a string of stunning defeats suffered by Kiev forces. All of a sudden, Kiev's holy crusade against the east was replaced with a Russian brokered ceasefire, the Minsk protocol(9/5). This slowed the intensity of hostilities. The agreement also legitimized the resistance governments of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. Their representatives signed the protocol along with the Ukraine government, Russia, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
In an attempt to mask the extent of his nation's defeat, Ukraine oligarch and President Petro Poroshenko spoke to the United States Congress in mid September. The bought and sold politicians gave Poroshenko a dozen or so standing ovations for his warnings about the new Cold War. But, when he pleaded for weapons, he left empty handed. Congress sent Poroshenko off with a consolation prize of a few million dollars when he needs billions to avoid an economic meltdown.

The real action took place behind the scenes between Ukraine's leaders and Russia. Unlike the very public chest thumping defiance, Ukraine's rulers offered a three-year period of autonomy for the regions it sought to crush plus other concessions that reflect the nation's diminished support by the U.S. financial elite.
The Bloomberg piece is of special interest since it comes from the homeland of the U.S. financial elite. Aside from one factual lapse, the author sums things up clearly. The piece may become the epitaph for the failed conflict.
Here are the high points from the article.
The Magic Show

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko is running a magic show. By pretending his country has a chance of joining the European Union or NATO, he is hoping to obscure Kiev's, and Europe's, gradual capitulation to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ukraine Can't Hide Putin's Victory, Bloomberg, Sep 26

Poroshenko's address to the U.S. Congress was the peak of his magic show. Nothing of substance was gained but it helped divert attention from his capitulation to resistance and Russian demands
Poroshenko's recent concessions to Putin's demands

Just last week, the Ukrainian parliament passed a Poroshenko-approved law granting self-government and budgetary support to the areas of eastern Ukraine held by pro-Russian rebels, and Kiev agreed not to lower trade barriers for European goods. In return, Russia apparently pulled out most of its troops from eastern Ukraine and facilitated some prisoner exchanges between the rebels and the Ukrainian military. Bloomberg, Sep 26

Self-government is another word for autonomy. The idea of a happy reunion between the breakaway regions and central government of Ukraine is inconceivable. They're likely gone for good. As for the author's claimed Russian troop presence in Ukraine (initially called an invasion), that falls in the same category as the accusation that the resistance shot down Malaysian flight MH17: a political convenience absent any supporting evidence.
NATO membership for Ukraine not likely

  1  |  2

http://www.opednews.com/author/author3863.html

Noam Chomsky and Paul Craig Roberts

General News 9/28/2014 at 09:18:53 Transcript: Conversation Between Noam Chomsky, Paul Craig Roberts and Rob Kall part 1-- the future of capitalism By Rob Kall (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages) Headlined to H1 9/28/14

This is part 1 of the transcript of my interview with Paul Craig Roberts and Noam Chomsky. More parts will follow in the coming days. 

Here is the link to the audio podcast.

Welcome to the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show, WNJC 1360 AM out of Washington Township reaching Metro Philly and South Jersey. Online at opednews.com/podcasts and at iTunes under my name, Rob Kall, K-A-L-L. 

My guests tonight, I'm very excited to say, are Noam Chomsky and Paul Craig Roberts. And we don't have a lot of time so I'm going to skip the introductions and go right to getting this conversation started. There are a lot of different things that you could talk about. I'm hoping that what will happen is you will do some jazz and blues, and riff off of each other and have an interesting conversation that will enlighten both of us and each of you. 

I'll start off with a quote from each of you. Paul Craig Roberts recently wrote "eventually the large US trade deficits produced by offshoring the production of goods and services sold into US markets and the collapse of the middle class and tax base caused by jobs offshoring will destroy the value of the US dollar. When that day arrives, US living standards, already endangered, will plummet. American power will have been destroyed by corporate greed and the Fed's policy of sacrificing the US economy in order to save four or five mega-banks, whose former executives control the Fed, the US Treasury, and the federal financial regulatory agencies." 

Noam wrote, in a forward to the book, Realizing Hope: Life Beyond Capitalism, "It is surely necessary to resist oppression and pursue liberation -- and also to advance towards realizing hope by gaining clarity about our objectives and constructing paths to attain them." 

So there's a whole lot of things I'd like to cover and I'd be happy with any of them. I'll just throw some topics at you and I'll throw a first question, and you can go where you want with it. Nationalism, Imperialism, Fascism, Corporatism, Capitalism, Industrialization, Neo-Liberals, the US economy...my topic that I like is 'Top down and Bottom up,' patriarchy, power, wealth inequality, psychopathy, sociopathy and narcissism, Bottom-up -- decentralization, localization, beyond the Arab Spring, revolution...there's Congress and the Supreme Court, and Citizens United, Global Warming,...and, because it is hard to ignore, Scotland, ISIL and Ukraine and Russia. 

So the first question, just to get things started, what's the future of the US economy and capitalism? 

NC: Who's supposed to answer? Who are you posing it to? 

PCR: You have a shot at it. 

NC: Okay. 

Rob: Go ahead Noam. 

NC: Well the first point to mention is that we're very far from a capitalist economy and have never been one -- it's a state capitalist economy with substantial state intervention that, in many respects from basic research and development to manipulating interest rates to determining the laws that administer regulations that permit CEOs to pick their own boards and hence to enhance their salaries, and thousands of other ways. What's the future of it? That depends on how the public will respond to the circumstances in which there are. I mean, there is an institutional logic which will perpetuate things in a certain direction, but it is not graven in stone. It has been in the past, and can be in the future, influenced, modified, even radically changed by public engagement and action. And there's no way to predict that -- those are matters for action not for speculation. 

Rob: OK, Paul? 

PCR: Well I think that's a very insightful view of it. All I would add is that in more recent years, the private interest groups seem to have taken control of the government. Wall Street, Military Security Complex, Agribusiness, the extractive industries -- their campaign donations elect the House, the Senate, the President, and they then write most of the bills that Congress passes and the President signs, so it's a form of state capitalism in which the capitalists seem to have the upper hand. 

I think that greed has run away with them to such an extent that they have let it undermine the domestic economy on which they themselves depend. For example, they greatly increased profits in managerial or executive performance bonuses by offshoring so many of the middle class jobs, not only the manufacturing jobs but the professional tradable service jobs, such as software engineering, research, design -- these things have left, or a large percentage of them, and it erodes consumer purchasing power. The middle class is damaged, the kids who graduate from university expecting jobs find that jobs are offshored, they've got debts, increasingly the big retail box stores just offer part-time employment -- you can't form a household on one of those jobs. You can't get married, buy a house. You have to work two of those jobs, some people three. There are no benefits, no pension. The years of zero interest rate, in order to save the big mega banks, have caused the retired element to have to draw down their savings because they don't get any interest income, and so inheritance for children is disappearing. And so the whole system has become a house of cards. 

Massive debt/money creation is not matched by the increase in real goods and services. As Chomsky said, interest rates are rigged, the gold price is rigged, the stock market is a bubble, the dollar is a bubble -- in a way it's a house of cards. And the power of the United States rests, to a substantial extent, on the dollar being the world reserve currency. And yet, when you create massive new dollars to support quantitative easing but the goods and services don't increase, you worry the whole world about their dollar holdings. And then you step in and threaten other countries with sanctions? That gives them an incentive to leave the dollar payment system, which means the demand for dollars drops. 

So, I think the whole thing is a house of cards and that change could come from a substantial collapse that simply totally discredits the elites from both parties; and some kind of collapse of that extent would give room for the sort of thing Noam mentioned -- that people could get back in and be determining factors in the process and some kind of new leadership could arise. 

  1  |  2

Rob Kall has spent his adult life as an awakener and empowerer-- first in the field of biofeedback, inventing products, developing software and a music recording label, MuPsych, within the company he founded in 1978-- Futurehealth, and founding, organizing and running 3 conferences: Winter Brain, on Neurofeedback and consciousness, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology (a pioneer in the field of Positive Psychology, first presenting workshops on it in 1985) and Storycon Summit Meeting on the Art Science and Application of Story-- each the first of their kind.  Then, when he found the process of raising people's consciousness and empowering them to take more control of their lives  one person at a time was too slow, he founded Opednews.com-- which has been the top search result on Google for the terms liberal news and progressive opinion for several years. Rob began his Bottom-up Radio show, broadcast on WNJC 1360 AM to Metro Philly, also available on iTunes, covering the transition of our culture, business and world from predominantly Top-down (hierarchical, centralized, authoritarian, patriarchal, big)  to bottom-up (egalitarian, local, interdependent, grassroots, archetypal feminine and small.) Recent long-term projects include a book, Bottom-up-- The Connection Revolution, debillionairizing the planet and the Psychopathy Defense and Optimization Project. 

Rob Kall Wikipedia Page

Over 200 podcasts are archived for downloading here, or can be accessed from iTunes. Rob is also (more...)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Transcript-Conversation-B-by-Rob-Kall-Capitalism_Climate_Greed_Predatory-Capitalism-140928-11.html