washingtonexaminer | The Democratic establishment despises the insurgent candidacy of Rep.
Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii. From her decision to buck party orthodoxy and
endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders in 2016 over Democratic National Committee
favorite Hillary Clinton, to her constant criticisms of Democratic
foreign policy mistakes, Gabbard has made herself no friends with the party elite. She's perfectly fine with that if it's required to put the people first.
Still, this means establishment Democrats and their allies regularly smear and attack the Democratic congresswoman. But, as if we need more proof of how deranged the establishment’s hatred for Gabbard has become, the New York Times style section is now criticizing her… wardrobe?
In a piece titled “Tulsi Gabbard’s white pantsuit isn’t winning,” Times
style writer Vanessa Friedman savages the congresswoman for her choice
of wardrobe. Friedman correctly notes that Gabbard has made the white
pantsuit her defining campaign look, wearing the iconic outfit in most
of the debates and much of her prominent campaign promotional material.
Yet where Friedman goes seriously, sinisterly wrong is
arguing that the look isn’t working, and sinking into deranged,
hypocritical attacks on the congresswoman. Friedman argues that when
Hillary Clinton wore white pantsuits, it was feminist and iconic, but
when Gabbard does it, she is “using her white suits to tap into another
tradition, latent in the public memory: the mythical white knight,
riding in to save us all from yet another ‘regime change war.’”
It
gets worse. Friedman continues that Gabbard’s white pantsuits are “the
white of avenging angels and flaming swords, of somewhat combative
righteousness,” and the white of “cult leaders.” Friedman writes that
Gabbard’s wardrobe “has connotations of the fringe, rather than the
center.”
strategic-culture | The developing story about how the US intelligence and national
security agencies may have conspired to influence and possibly even
reverse the results of the 2016 presidential election is compelling,
even if one is disinclined to believe that such a plot would be possible
to execute. Not surprisingly perhaps there have been considerable
introspection among former and current officials who have worked in
those and related government positions, many of whom would agree that
there is urgent need for a considerable restructuring and reining in of
the 17 government agencies that have some intelligence or law
enforcement function. Most would also agree that much of the real damage
that has been done has been the result of the unending global war on
terror launched by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, which has showered
the agencies with resources and money while also politicizing their
leadership and freeing them from restraints on their behavior.
If the tens of billions of dollars lavished on the intelligence
community together with a “gloves off” approach towards oversight that
allowed them to run wild had produced good results, it might be possible
to argue that it was all worth it. But the fact is that intelligence
gathering has always been a bad investment even if it is demonstrably
worse at the present. One might argue that the CIA’s notorious Soviet
Estimate prolonged the Cold War and that the failure to connect dots and
pay attention to what junior officers were observing allowed 9/11 to
happen. And then there was the empowerment of al-Qaeda during the
Soviet-Afghan war followed by failure to penetrate the group once it
began to carry out operations.
More recently there have been Guantanamo, torture in black prisons,
renditions of terror suspects to be tortured elsewhere, killing of US
citizens by drone, turning Libya into a failed state and terrorist
haven, arming militants in Syria, and, of course, the Iraqi alleged
WMDs, the biggest foreign policy disaster in American history. And the
bad stuff happened in bipartisan fashion, under Democrats and
Republicans, with both neocons and liberal interventionists all playing
leading roles. The only one punished for the war crimes was former CIA
officer and whistleblower John Kiriakou, who exposed some of what was
going on.
Colonel Pat Lang, a colleague and friend who directed the Defense
Intelligence Agency HUMINT (human intelligence) program after years
spent on the ground in special ops and foreign liaison, thinks that
strong medicine is needed and has initiated a discussion based on the
premise that the FBI and CIA are dysfunctional relics that should be
dismantled, as he puts it “burned to the ground,” so that the federal
government can start over again and come up with something better.
Lang cites
numerous examples of “incompetence and malfeasance in the leadership of
the 17 agencies of the Intelligence Community and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation,” to include the examples cited above plus the failure to
predict the collapse of the Soviet Union. On the domestic front, he
cites his personal observation of efforts by the Department of Justice
and the FBI to corruptly “frame” people tried in federal courts on
national security issues as well as the intelligence/law enforcement
community conspiracy to “get Trump.”
NYPost | Not content with more than 10 million books sold, a Netflix deal in
the high eight figures, a joint publishing advance with husband Barack
worth $65 million, a highly profitable world tour, speaking fees that by
now surely average around $500,000 per, and a recently acquired
waterfront Martha’s Vineyard mansion purchased for $15 million, Michelle Obama is back with another craven money grab.
Billed as a sequel of sorts to Obama’s best-selling memoir, this
squat, slim volume, priced at $19.99, is Michelle “now provid[ing] you
with the encouragement to find value in your own personal journey,” the
publisher says.
“Printed on cream writing paper, with a grosgrain ribbon,
foil-stamped cover, and removable half-jacket, ‘Becoming’ … includes
thought-provoking prompts designed to help you reflect on your personal
and family history: your goals, challenges and dreams; what moves you
and brings you hope; and what future you imagine for yourself and your
community.”
Axios | "We need to stop believing
that more and bigger is better. We are chasing the wrong things," former
president Barack Obama told a Silicon Valley audience Thursday.
Why it matters:
Obama's warning has an added layer of meaning here, where the tech
industry has grown powerful and rich by mastering the art of "scaling
up."
The big picture: Speaking
at Salesforce's Dreamforce conference, Obama traced many of the
problems in today's society to uncertainty fueled by globalization and
automation, along with an underlying misconception of what it takes to
be satisfied.
"What I also see
is just this sense of anxiety and rootlessness and uncertainty in so
many people some of which is fed by globalization and technology," he
said. "So much of the political turmoil we are seeing right now has to
do with people feeling materially insecure."
The bigger picture:
Technology and globalization have "turbocharged" the anxiety, and we
need to deal with the social issues that has created, he said.
"Part
of the goal of solving big problems is not just a matter of finding the
right technical solution," he said. "Part of it is also finding out how
do we restore some sense of our common values."
mises | On Tuesday, Congressional impeachment hearings exposed an interesting
facet of the current battle between Donald Trump and the so-called deep
state: namely, that many government bureaucrats now fancy themselves as
superior to the elected civilian government.
In an exchange between Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Alexander Vindman,
a US Army Lt. Colonel, Vindman insisted that Nunes address him by his
rank.
After being addressed as "Mr. Vindman," Vindman retorted "Ranking Member, it's Lt. Col. Vindman, please."
Throughout social media, anti-Trump forces, who have apparently now
become pro-military partisans, sang Vindman's praises, applauding him
for putting Nunes in his place.
In a properly functioning government — with a proper view of military
power — however, no one would tolerate a military officer lecturing a
civilian on how to address him "correctly."
It is not even clear that Nunes was trying to "dis" Vindman, given
that junior officers have historically been referred to as "Mister" in a
wide variety of times and place. It is true that higher-ranking offers
like Vindman are rarely referred to as "Mister," but even if Nunes was trying to insult Vindman, the question remains: so what?
Military modes of address are for the use of military personnel, and no one else. Indeed, Vindman was forced to retreat on this point
when later asked by Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) if he always insists on
civilians calling him by his rank. Vindman blubbered that since he was
wearing his uniform (for no good reason, mind you) he figured civilians ought to refer to him by his rank.
arkansasonline | DNA testing has established, “with scientific certainty,” that Hunter
Biden is the father of an Arkansas baby, according to a motion filed
Wednesday in Independence County on behalf of the child’s mother, Lunden
Alexis Roberts.
Biden, son of former vice president Joe Biden, “is not expected to
challenge the results of the DNA test or the testing process,” the
filing states.
An attorney for Hunter Biden, former Arkansas Attorney General Dustin
McDaniel, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A hearing in the case was previously scheduled for Dec. 2 in Batesville.
The baby’s “paternal grandfather, Joe Biden, is seeking the
nomination of the Democratic Party for President of the United States of
America,” the mother notes. “He is considered by some to be the person
most likely to win his party’s nomination and challenge President Trump
on the ballot in 2020.”
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette posted a story early this
afternoon about the DNA test-related court filing. Soon after, the Trump
campaign tweeted out a link to the article, adding three words of its
own: "Congratulations, Joe Biden!"
Hunter Biden, who initially denied having sexual relations with
Roberts, eventually agreed to take a DNA test, according to documents
filed by Roberts’ attorney, Clint Lancaster.
Sorry about the irony of using this ABC News Video.
off-guardian | The choking cloud of Jeffrey Epstein’s paedophilic legacy has been floating over the Atlantic for some time.
It does its best (or worst) in matters of US and British celebrity,
warts and all. It has not, for instance, exempted the British Royal
Family, whose cupboard stocked with misbehaviours and raunchiness got
just more crowded with the antics of the Duke of York.
Prince Andrew’s performance on Saturday on the BBC’s Newsnight
was an object study of how not to self-exonerate. The prince had been
thick with Epstein, though hardly a luminary when compared to that
particularly chocked address book. The meetings between them were
sufficiently frequent to warrant questions.
Madeleine Aggeler reminds us:
Mar-a-Lago in 2000; his presence at Epstein’s spacious abode in 2010;
the foot massages from “two well-dressed Russian women” in 2013.
But when it came to alleged misdeeds, the prince can count himself
high up in the rankings, with one of Epstein’s accusers, Virginia
Roberts Giuffre, adamant that she was forced when underage to have sex
with the royal on three separate occasions.
In September, it became clear that the FBI was conducting an
investigation into Prince Andrew’s Epstein link. As a member of the US
Department of Justice revealed, “The
US investigation is focusing on several potential victims in the hope
that they can provide more details about Prince Andrew and his
connection to the Epstein case.”
The level of Buckingham Palace’s seriousness regarding such claims is
measured by the degree royal excursions are shortened. The palace has
not been quite so sympathetic to Prince Andrew as they might, a point
made by the shortening of a golf vacation in Spain over the summer.
PCR | With the entirety of the presstitute media endeavoring to turn
second-hand hear-say into an impeachable offense, do not expect to hear
any contrary news. Such as:
NYPost | A congressman from California became the butt of everyone’s joke for appearing to fart on live television Monday night.
Rep. Eric Swalwell was mid-sentence on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews” when it sounded like he let ‘er rip.
“Chris, so far the evidence is uncontradicted that the president used
taxpayer dollars to help him cheat —” Swalwell says with a pause, as
the noise is clearly heard, “— an election.”
But the 39-year-old Democrat, who’s been in Congress since 2013 and
sits on the House Judiciary Committee, was quick to deny the apparent
tummy troubles.
“It is real you can tell the pause he takes to push it out,” one person wrote.
Another noted, “The slight pause as he realizes he can’t hold it in any longer is pure gold.”
“Hardball” issued its own cheeky explanation, blaming the fart faux pas on a production snafu.
“Sorry to disappoint the conspiracy theorists – it was the #hardball mug scraping across the desk,” the show’s Twitter page posted. “Get yours today and let’s get back to the news!”
By Tuesday morning, #fartgate was trending on social media.
summit | The Duke of York was attempting to rebut allegations that his
relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein included the
provision of trafficked underage girls, including Virginia
Roberts-Giuffre who was 17 at the time she alleges Prince Andrew had sex
with her.
The royal attempted to debunk one of Roberts-Giuffre’s claims, that
he was sweating profusely during a dance between the two at a London
nightclub, by claiming that he had suffered a medical condition which
prevented him from sweating.
Still shaking my
head at the train wreck of an interview that was #PrinceAndrew.
I don't sweat and I don't party or make public displays
of affection pic.twitter.com/gIZP0z7Uz3
NYTimes | When members of the British royal family
consent to warts-and-all television interviews about their troubled
private lives, it generally has the effect of roiling the waters rather
than calming them.
So when Prince Andrew set out to explain his friendship with the financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a BBC interview broadcast Saturday night, it backfired predictably.
Viewers
were left shaking their heads at the wisdom of consenting to a
polite-but-relentless grilling by the journalist Emily Maitlis in the
first place. Many said they found his statements alternately defensive,
unpersuasive or just plain strange.
Prince Andrew, also known as the Duke of York, repeatedly denied accusations by Virginia Roberts Giuffre
that he had sex with her when she was 17 years old and had been offered
to him by Mr. Epstein. Under insistent questioning by Ms. Maitlis, the
duke insisted he had “no recollection” of meeting Ms. Giuffre.
But he could not explain the photograph
taken in a London house that appeared to show him with his arm around
the girl’s bare waist, and with Mr. Epstein’s former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, smiling in the background.
He
disputed her account of an alleged meeting between him and Ms. Giuffre
in a club in London. She has claimed that he sweated profusely while
they danced, but he told the BBC that he could not have sweated while
dancing with her at the time because he had a medical condition, dating
from his combat tour in the Falklands War, that did not allow him to
perspire.
quillette | While Harris and other anthropologists in the United States continued
to criticize Chagnon, his standing began to deteriorate on another
front. From the moment he arrived in the Amazon, Chagnon maintained
cordial relations with a missionary priest of the Salesians of Don
Bosco. In fact, Chagnon and the priest became such good friends that the
priest asked Chagnon to kill one of his fellow missionaries for him, a
man who had broken his vows of celibacy by sleeping with a Yanomamö
woman. The priest worried that this could bring shame to the Salesian
order. Of course, Chagnon refused, and his refusal strained their
relationship. Their relationship worsened when Chagnon discovered that
the missionaries had been distributing shotguns to the natives and that
these were being used in warfare. Furthermore, all of Chagnon’s
recommendations for preventing measles outbreaks were ignored by the
Salesians, who built missionaries and tried to have the Yanomamö
concentrate around them, which helped the disease to spread rapidly.
Their relationship finally collapsed altogether after Chagnon cooperated
with a documentary that painted the Salesians in a less than flattering
light. By the early 1990s, the missionaries were increasingly worried
about Chagnon’s presence in the Amazon, especially when it came to light
that the BBC and Nova would be producing a new documentary in the
rainforest about his dispute with Marvin Harris. By the early 1990s, the
Salesians were attempting to block his lifetime of fieldwork in the
Amazon, and they successfully lobbied Maria Luisa Allais, the head of
Venezuelan Indian Commission, to refuse him a permit he required for
re-entry.
Then, in 1993, tragedy struck in the Amazon when gold miners crossed
the border from Brazil and slaughtered a number of Yanomamö, including
women and children. The explorer Charles Brewer-CarÃas was chosen to
head a presidential commission into the massacre, and he wanted Chagnon
on the commission as one of the few anthropologists in the world who
spoke Yanomamö. When President Carlos Perez of Venezuela learned that
Chagnon had been denied an entry permit, he telephoned the Ministry of
Education and ordered them to issue Chagnon with one at once. A visibly
nervous Maria Luisa Allais offered Chagnon his papers. That Chagnon went
above the head of the Indian Commission and was now installed on the
presidential commission investigating the massacre only infuriated the
Salesians further. They believed that they ought to be the ones
conducting the investigation. On the very first day of their
investigation at the site of the massacre, a helicopter arrived bearing
men armed with machine guns and a Salesian bishop, who ordered
Brewer-CarÃas and Chagnon to leave. With the government on the brink of a
coup and unwilling to enforce law and order in the deep interior of the
Amazon, the commission to investigate the massacre quickly fell apart.
Chagnon was left with lifelong regrets that there had been no justice
for the dead. Fist tap Dale.
PCR | Jeanine Anez, one of the Bolivian Spanish elite, has declared herself
the President of Bolivia. She is one of the elite allied with
Washington who accused Evo Morales of rigging his reelection. But the
CIA’s Bolivian lackeys who forced Morales to resign his presidency don’t
bother with elections. They just declare themselves president like
Juan Guaido, the CIA creep in Venezuela, who hoped to unseat Maduro, the
elected president, by declaring himself president. Neither Anez nor
Guaido ran for the office. They just self-appointed themselves
president. The organization of American States, a CIA front
organization, accepted the unelected presidents as rightful rulers.
President Trump declared the CIA coup to be an increase in freedom and
democracy.
As Trump approves of the attempted coup against Venezuela’s Maduro
and the successful coup against Bolivia’s Morales, how can he complain
about the CIA/DNC ongoing coup against him?
Live by the sword and die by the sword.
The whores that constitute the Western “media” pretend that
self-declared “presidents” are the real presidents, and those elected by
the people are not. Every Latin American election that does not elect
Washington’s candidate is reported by the Western presstitutes as a
“disputed election.” It doesn’t matter if the winning candidate gets
85% of the votes. As he is the wrong candidate from Washington’s
standpoint, his election is disputed and illegitimate.
Washington paid the corrupt Bolivian military to unseat Morales, the
elected president. This has always been the way Washington has ruled
the entirety of Latin America. Buy the corrupt military. They will
prostitute their wives for money.
lifesitenews | An international group of 100 priests and lay scholars published a
statement today to protest the pagan worship of Pachamama that took
place last month during the Amazon Synod in Rome with Pope Francis'
active participation and apparent support. They called upon the Pope to
“repent publicly and unambiguously of these objectively grave sins” and
asked bishops’ around the world to “offer fraternal correction to Pope
Francis for these scandals.”
The priests and scholars “protest against and condemn the
sacrilegious and superstitious acts committed by Pope Francis, the
Successor of Peter, in connection with the recent Amazon Synod held in
Rome,” and they give detailed evidence of the different incidences of
pagan worship during the Amazon Synod.
Most prominently, Pope Francis hosted a pagan ceremony with Pachamama statues in the Vatican Gardens on Oct. 4 and even blessed one of the statues. Additionally, he prayed
in front of the Pachamama statue at St. Peter's Cathedral on October 7
and then accompanied it in procession into the synod hall.
The rich oligarch
leader of Bolivia's right-wing coup, Luis Fernando Camacho, was
the leader of an explicitly fascist paramilitary
group. Here are some clips from a promotional
historical documentary it published:https://t.co/gFMyfjsi2ppic.twitter.com/XXNQfhD7ii
thegrayzone | Bolivian coup leader Luis Fernando Camacho is a
far-right multi-millionaire who arose from fascist
movements in the Santa Cruz region, where the US has
encouraged separatism. He has courted support from
Colombia, Brazil, and the Venezuelan opposition.
When Luis Fernando
Camacho stormed into Bolivia’s abandoned
presidential palace in the hours after President Evo
Morales’s sudden November 10 resignation, he
revealed to the world a side of the country that
stood at stark odds with the plurinational spirit
its deposed socialist and Indigenous leader had put
forward.
With a Bible in
one hand and a national flag in the other, Camacho
bowed his head in prayer above the presidential
seal, fulfilling his vow to purge his country’s
Native heritage from government and “return God to
the burned palace.”
“Pachamama will
never return to the palace,” he said, referring to
the Andean Mother Earth spirit. “Bolivia belongs to
Christ.”
coreysdigs | How do you
build an industry? How do you market it and provide support backing up your
marketing? How do you exploit a community, while creating a glamorized trend
throughout society, stemming from chaos and confusion? How do you grow your
margins and take it all the way to the bank? How do you do all of this, and
still sleep at night? The exploitation and manufacturing of the transgender “industry”
kicked off in the 1950s with a mix of social and medical engineering, with a moving
target on children. The manufacturing of this industry goes far beyond anyone’s
wildest imagination, and if you dare question it, it is discrimination. The
real discriminators are those exploiting a community who truly suffer from
trauma, depression, and an attempted suicide rate of 40 percent. They are the
ones who should be angrier than anyone about the atrocities these people have
committed. They are now exploiting your children, and they have taken this to
dangerous extremes.
Why are transgender people being glamorized, the idea of switching
genders pushed upon children, and it’s all prohibited from being
discussed or debated? The remaking of a population by creating mass
confusion and chaos while dishing out puberty blockers as though it’s
the next best Botox treatment, has avalanched into dangerous territory.
Faster than one could daringly speak the incorrect pronoun, gender
clinics are popping up across this country, surgeons are sharpening
their scalpels, and money is pouring into this agenda. With the suicide
rate of transgenders being nineteen times greater than the general
population and a large percent of transitioned transgenders wishing they
hadn’t done so, one wonders how this destructive agenda got its
kickstart and who’s really benefiting from it. Certainly not those
dealing with gender dysphoria.
Part one will
take you through the timeline and origins of the social engineering used to
create this industry. Part two will cover the medical engineering behind this,
and the danger to children. Part three will get into those funding this agenda
and those profiting from it. Part four will show how they have manufactured a
reality, who’s assisted, and how it must be stopped.
strategic-culture | The Deep State here is the US-and allied Deep State, no merely
national organization. It consists mainly of America’s billionaires,
plus of the billionaires in US-allied countries such as UK, France,
Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Israel — but many more (including, for example,
in Honduras, Brazil, etc.). These people number fewer than 2,000 in
total, and they do deals together, and their contacts with one-another
are both direct person-to-person, and indirect by means of
representatives or agents. However, America’s billionaires lead the
US-and-allied Deep State. That’s to say, the leaders are among the 607 US billionaires, the people who mainly fund American national political campaigns and candidates
— and these 607 individuals determine who will get an opportunity to
become a US President or member of Congress, and who won’t. For example:
these individuals don’t necessarily select the politician who will
become America’s President, but they do select who will get the
opportunity to be among the serious contenders for that position.
(Basically, what the mullahs do in Iran, these super-rich do in America.
Whereas in Iran the clergy rule, in America the aristocracy rule.)
One, in particular, is George Soros, and this article will detail the
views of one of his many beneficiaries. Another of these billionaires
is Charles Koch, but he will not be discussed here, and inside the
United States he is popularly considered to be an enemy of George Soros,
only because the two men oppose each other on domestic issues.
(Billionaires tend to be much more concerned with, and united about,
foreign affairs than about domestic affairs, though they do oppose both
their taxation and their regulation — they are for ‘free markets’, both
domestically and abroad, and yet they also favor imposition of economic
sanctions against countries which resist becoming controlled by them,
and so they don’t really favor free markets except to the
extent that free markets favor their own increase in power and thus tend
toward oligopoly and away from competition.) Both men are much more
alike than different, and both represent what’s called “neoliberalism,”
which is the universal ideology of billionaires, or at least of all
billionaires who donate to (i.e., invest in) politicians. Only few
billionaires don’t invest in politicians; and, though politicians
disagree with one-another, almost all of them are neoliberals, because
politicians who aren’t that are not funded by the Deep State (the
billionaires). The foreign policies of neoliberals are called
“neoconservative” and this means supporting regime-change in any country
that’s labeled by billionaires and their government an “enemy” nation.
So, “neoconservative” is merely an extension of “neoliberal”: it favors
extending neoliberalism to other nations — it is internationally
aggressive neoliberalism; it is imperialistic neoliberalism. It is
fascism, but so is neoliberalism itself fascist; the difference between
the two is that neoconservatism is the imperialistic extension of
fascism — it is the imperialistic fascism that, in World War II, was
represented by the three Axis powers — Germany, Italy, and Japan — not
by the purely domestic fascism that was represented by Spain. Whereas
Spain was merely neoliberal, the Axis were also neoconservative
(expansionist neoliberal), and the latter is what the Allies in WW II
were warring against. But now the US has emerged as the world’s leading
neoconservative regime, invading and occupying country after country,
none of which had ever invaded nor even threatened to invade the United
States. Propaganda is necessary in order to ‘justify’ doing that. This
article will describe how that’s done.
The Deep State doesn’t concern domestic issues, because virtually all
of its members control international corporations, and the Deep State
is almost entirely about international issues: foreign policies,
diplomacy, military issues, and international spying agencies called
“intelligence agencies” — extending the empire. The Deep State controls
all of that, regardless of what Party is nominally in power. (The public
care little about foreign policy, pay little attention to it, and
believe the government when it alleges that “national security” is about
protecting them, and not about expanding the power and wealth of the
billionaires.)
The dictatorship of the US Deep State really is more international
than national; it provides the continuity in international relations,
when it chooses and defines which nations (which foreign governments)
are “allies” (meaning “we sell arms to them”) and which are instead
“enemies” (meaning “we should sanction them and maybe even bomb them”).
Both allies and enemies are essential in order for the
military-industrial-press-government complex (here: “MIPGC”) to thrive,
and the Deep State controls the entire MIPGC. In other words: the Deep
State is an international empire, and, as such, its supreme aspiration
is to conquer (via subversion, sanctions, coups, and/or invasions) all
countries that it labels as “enemies.”
blackagendareport | The world birthed in the near extinction of one-fifth of humanity
still exists, in the social relations bequeathed to the Americas by
conquistadors and enslavers.
“In Latin America, U.S. influence means White Power.”
The events in Bolivia lay bare the central role that racial
subjugation has always played in the “New World,” a hemisphere whose
“discovery” by Europeans resulted -- within the span of only 50 years --
in the death by genocide and pandemic of fully a fifth of the Earth’s
human population. The Conquistadors frenzied “primitive accumulation” of
precious metals, mined by enslaved Natives who died quicker than they
could be replenished, created a demand for the capture and importation
of millions of Africans with immunities to both European and tropical
disease. For centuries, until deep into the 1700s, the vast majority of
the Western Hemisphere’s population was Indigenous and Black, with
African slaves comprising the great bulk of newcomers to the New World.
Thus was laid the material basis for the rise of Europe, the beginnings
of capitalism and the global supremacy of whiteness.
“My crime is to be a union leader, to be indigenous…and anti-imperialist,” said Evo Morales,
the three-time elected president of South America’s most indigenous
nation as he entered exile in Mexico. Bolivia is roughly two-thirds
native. Morales’ election victory, October 20 – his fourth since 2005 --
was aborted in the ensuing weeks by rampaging gangs of thugs employed
by oligarchs based in the whitest – and most fossil fuel-rich – regions
of the country who terrorized, beat and kidnapped government
and Movement for Socialism party officials and their families and
eventually laid siege to the capital in La Paz, with no resistance from
the police and army. Unable to protect his comrades or kinfolk, Morales
resigned, and was quickly replaced as president by the leader of the
white-dominated minority legislative party. Morales’ party had won
absolute majorities in both houses of the legislature, but was left
leaderless and terror-struck by the coup. The white rump prevailed.
“Morales’ election victory was aborted by rampaging gangs
of thugs employed by oligarchs based in the whitest – and most fossil
fuel-rich – regions of the country.”
The United States did not immediately recognize the new government
of Senator Jeanine Añez Chavez, but will doubtless soon do so, having
schemed incessantly for regime change ever since Morales joined
Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (1998) and Brazil’s Lula da Silva (2003) to set
in motion Latin America’s “pink tide.” When Argentina
(Cristina Fernández de Kirchner), Nicaragua (Daniel Ortega) and Ecuador
(Rafael Correa) elected leftish presidents in 2007, US imperial power
sank to its nadir in the hemisphere. But the CIA never sleeps, and
neither do the white oligarchs who remained at the commanding heights of
the economy and media in the “pink”-led nations of the hemisphere. One
by one, the anti-imperialist presidents were removed, with U.S.
assistance, in Brazil (2016), Ecuador (2017) and Argentina (2015), for a
time leaving only Venezuela and Nicaragua in the anti-imperialist camp –
along with, of course, Cuba, which has not had a U.S.-allied oligarchic
class to contend with since the revolution of 1959.
Rejuvenation Pills
-
No one likes getting old. Everyone would like to be immorbid. Let's be
careful here. Immortal doesnt include youth or return to youth. Immorbid
means you s...
Death of the Author — at the Hands of Cthulhu
-
In 1967, French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes wrote of
“The Death of the Author,” arguing that the meaning of a text is divorced
from au...
9/29 again
-
"On this sacred day of Michaelmas, former President Donald Trump invoked
the heavenly power of St. Michael the Archangel, sharing a powerful prayer
for pro...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...
