“They are living beyond their means and shifting a part of the weight of their problems to the world economy. They are living like parasites off the global economy and their monopoly of the dollar. If [in America] there is a systemic malfunction, this will affect everyone. Countries like Russia and China hold a significant part of their reserves in American securities. There should be other reserve currencies.” – Vladimir Putin in 2011
While I hate to give such praise to a foreign leader, Putin has undoubtedly run rings around the moribund and bureaucratic incompetence of the Laurel and Hardy-style Obama and Kerry team on Syria. Putin diplomatically has the swiftness and stealth of the South’s Stonewall Jackson and Germany’s Erwin Rommel, probably the two greatest military commanders in world history.
That’s over and above our payments to the big companies for energy and food and housing and health care and all our tech devices. It’s $6,000 that no family would have to pay if we truly lived in a competitive but well-regulated free-market economy.
The $6,000 figure is an average, which means that low-income families are paying less. But it also means that families (households) making over $72,000 are paying more than $6,000 to the corporations.
Many Americans think that Vladimir Putin was the most effective leader during the Syrian chemical weapons crisis, while approval for how Obama handled the crisis is still low.
Although Syria appears to have met the first deadline in its agreement with the United States and Russia, beginning the process of turning over its chemical weapons, few Americans trust it will fulfill its promises. That leaves President Obama in a difficult position: he continues to have little support for action against Syria, and Americans continue to disapprove of how he is handling this crisis. Worse for him, perhaps, the latest Economist/YouGov Poll finds twice as many Americans giving Russian President Vladimir Putin the nod over President Obama as the most effective leader in this crisis.
I suppose it takes a true radical these days to question the progressive’s sacred cow: Ronald Reagan. You read that right. This paradigm of modern conservatism was one of the most important American champions of gun control in recent decades, and so he has become a convenient talking point for liberals who want to argue that even Ronald Reagan favored strict gun laws.
And indeed, he did—all throughout his political career. As president he used executive order to ban the importation of certain shotguns, and later he threw his weight behind the Brady Bill and 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
Given the centrality of Syria to global politics, it is essential that anarchists understand what is going on there and develop a critical attitude toward the events that are unfolding. This is a position paper on the struggle in Syria by the First of May Anarchist Alliance. Libcom.org do not agree with it but we reproduce it here for reference and discussion.
Read the original critique by Mr. Lewis and the responding podcast here.
Mr. Preston, thank you for wrestling with my work and giving me a voice, as well as for being open-minded in dealing with these subjects. However, I believe that your response was misdirected in many respects. I will first begin with what I agreed with in your podcast and then explain why I think your arguments were misdirected.
I do agree that Lincoln’s Republican Party and today’s Republican Party are leftist, and in Lincoln’s day the Democrats were actually conservative. I agree that Marx’s heaven on earth shares similarities with Christian postmillennialism. Yet I fail to see the point of connecting Marxism with Christianity. On the one hand, Communism is a form of godless apostate Christianity, positing a heaven on earth without God; but Communism’s stated goal was the destruction of Christianity, so they really are not similar in any important sense. Marxism preaches hate, genocide and oppression, whereas Christ preached love, peace and righteousness. I also agree that universalism comes out of Christianity, but what does that prove? Even liberalism, which you also endorse, has universalist tendencies. Liberalism and Totalitarianism are both universalist in scope and both have roots in Christianity, yet in and of itself this proves little.
Keith Preston revisits some of the core ATS documents in light of contemporary events.
How the neoconservatives have been eclipsed by the liberal internationalists as predicted in the 2003 essay “Philosophical Anarchism and the Death of Empire.”
How a resurgent Russia is challenging the unipolar American empire as predicted in the same essay.
How the liberal internationalist/cultural Marxist alliance has become the dominant ruling class faction as predicted in the “Liberty and Populism” essay.
How totalitarian humanism is emerging as the ideological foundation of the present march towards ever greater state repression as predicted in past ATS analysis.
How ARV-ATS concepts like anarcho-pluralism, radical localism, pan-secessionism, and anti-totalitarian humanism are spreading into an ever greater number of political currents, including those who are outside of or even hostile to ARV-ATS.
How escalating state repression against dissident movements will necessitate the formation of a grand alliance against the common enemy, and how only anarcho-pluralism and pan-secessionist provide the framework for such an alliance.
The revolutionary vision of ARV-ATS for a future civilization that has hardly been conceived of at present.
“Let us seek together, if you wish, the laws of society, the manner in which these laws are realized, the process by which we shall succeed in discovering them; but, for God’s sake, after having demolished all the a priori dogmatisms, do not let us in our turn dream of indoctrinating the people; do not let us fall into the contradiction of your compatriot Martin Luther, who, having overthrown Catholic theology, at once set about, with excommunication and anathema, the foundation of a Protestant theology. For the last three centuries Germany has been mainly occupied in undoing Luther’s shoddy work; do not let us leave humanity with a similar mess to clear up as a result of our efforts.
I applaud with all my heart your thought of bringing all opinions to light; let us carry on a good and loyal polemic; let us give the world an example of learned and far-sighted tolerance, but let us not, merely because we are at the head of a movement, make ourselves the leaders of a new intolerance, let us not pose as the apostles of a new religion, even if it be the religion of logic, the religion of reason.
Let us gather together and encourage all protests, let us brand all exclusiveness, all mysticism; let us never regard a question as exhausted, and when we have used our last argument, let us begin again, if need be, with eloquence and irony.”
-Pierre Joseph Proudhon, from his last letter to Karl Marx
Read the full text of Proudhon’s original latter here.
ST. PETERSBURG (The Borowitz Report)—Hopes for a positive G20 summit crumbled today as President Obama blurted to Russia’s Vladimir Putin at a joint press appearance, “Everyone here thinks you’re a jackass.”
The press corps appeared stunned by the uncharacteristic outburst from Mr. Obama, who then unleashed a ten-minute tirade at the stone-faced Russian President.
“Look, I’m not just talking about Snowden and Syria,” Mr. Obama said. “What about Pussy Riot? What about your anti-gay laws? Total jackass moves, my friend.”