Todd Lewis vs. Brent Lengel.
One of the best debates I have ever heard between a left-anarchists and a non-anarchist.
Todd Lewis vs. Brent Lengel.
One of the best debates I have ever heard between a left-anarchists and a non-anarchist.
Powerful elites are using the credibility of the US Intelligence agencies to demonize Russia and prepare the country for war. This is the real meaning of the “Russia hacking” story which, as yet, has not produced any hard evidence of Russian complicity.
Last week’s 25-page report, that was released by the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, illustrates to what extent intelligence is being “fixed around the policy”. Just as the CIA generated false information related to Weapons of Mass Destruction to soften public resistance to war with Iraq, so too, the spurious allegations in the DNI’s politically-motivated report are designed to depict Russia as a growing threat to US national security. The timing of the report has less to do with the election of Donald Trump as President than it does with critical developments in Syria where the Russian military has defeated US-proxies in Syria’s industrial hub, Aleppo, rolling back Washington’s 15-year War of Terror and derailing the imperialist plan to control vital resources and pipeline corridors across the Middle East and Central Asia. Russia has become the main obstacle to Washington achieving its strategic vision of pivoting to Asia and maintaining its dominant role into the next century. The Intelligence Community has been coerced into compromising its credibility to incite fear of Russia and to advance the geopolitical ambitions of deep state powerbrokers.
he “Russia hacking” flap shows how far the Intel agencies have veered from their original mandate, which is to impartially gather and analyze information that may be vital to US national security. As we have seen in the last two weeks, the leaders of these organizations feel free to offer opinions on issues that clearly conflict with those of the new President-elect. Trump has stated repeatedly that he wants to reduce tensions and reset relations with Russia, but that policy is being sabotaged by members of the intelligence community, particularly CIA Director John Brennan who appeared just last week on PBS Newshour with Judy Woodruff. Here’s an excerpt from the interview:
In this episode of Head to Head, Mehdi Hasan challenges Sir Paul Collier, the former head of Development Research at the World Bank, author of Exodus: Immigration and Multiculturalism, and professor at Oxford University, on the costs and benefits of migration.
An assessment of Trump by libertarian-decentralist-populist Bill Kauffman, whose take on Trump pretty much mirrors my own.
By Bill Kauffman
The American Conservative
Gore Vidal once said that the three saddest words in the English language were Joyce Carol Oates. “President Hillary Clinton” would have dislodged the exophthalmic novelist from that epigram, but as for “President Donald Trump”… the jury is not only still out, the crime hasn’t even been committed yet, despite the drama queens caterwauling on the campuses.
(For 13 years college snots sat on their lazy asses while the U.S. government waged immoral and unconstitutional wars, but now they take to the streets because the candidate of the proles defeated the candidate of the 1 percent? Gimme a break!)
I voted for Jill Stein on foreign-policy grounds. Gary Johnson was unsound on the mandatory cake-baking issue, and as for his running mate, the only good Weld is Tuesday.
I walked to the polling place with someone quite dear to me. She, too, intended to vote for Stein, but about halfway there she halted, as if thunderstruck, grinned, and said, “To hell with it; I’m voting for Trump to stick it to the media.” That’s the spirit!
An interesting discussion of this question between Matt Zwolinski (pro) and Tom Woods (con). Listen here.
Some voices in the libertarian world have argued that a basic income guarantee for everyone would be better than the current welfare state from a pragmatic point of view. Matt Zwolinski adds that it is morally required, given the dubious origins of so many existing property titles. Result: an engaging exchange of ideas I know you’ll enjoy. But be sure to listen all the way to the end, since that’s where the best parts can be found.
Matt Zwolinski is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of San Diego and a co-director of the University’s Institute for Law and Philosophy.
Don’t be taken in by gold scams — and there are lots of them. Arm yourself with this free report from Schiff Gold.
The “war on drugs” is the third worst domestic policy the United States has pursued in the entire history of the nation, after slavery and the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous people. Drug prohibition is the modern version of crusades against witchcraft. https://www.amazon.com/Ceremonial-Chemistry…/dp/0815607687
I know what you’re thinking, but no, I don’t mean “Tea Party” in the sense of the happy meal conservative movement that emerged in the early part of the Obama administration. Nor am I referring to anything relating to the Boston Tea Party or the American revolution.
I’m talking about the AltLeft and how for me it has come to resemble the tea party in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1972 version of course!) This film was always on HBO in the mid 1980s, even though it came out in the early 70s. I believe the reason they began to re-air it in the 80s was because the star, Fiona Fullerton, had grown up and re-emerged as a Bond girl in “A View to a Kill,” which came out in 1985.
Anyway, when I first got involved with the AltLeft about a year and a half ago, in my mind it was always meant to augment the AltRight, not outright oppose it. It was a way to view and examine the affects of multiculturalism and political correctness from a cultural and economically left lens as well as from a secular and futurist perspective rather than the radical traditionalist, socially conservative one that dominates right wing circles. In other words, recognizing the implicit whiteness that underpins the identities of progressive cities like Seattle or Portland, and asserting that it must become explicit to some degree in order for those places to maintain their culture, aesthetic and quality of life. It was to put forth the idea that someone can be pro-white without the albatross of traditionally conservative culture, pre-modern aesthetics, capitalist economics, or widely accepted republican historical dogma (“the 60s were bad,” “Vietnam draft dodgers were traitors,” “McCarthy was right,” “I hate modern architecture” etc.) If you hang around right wing groups for any period of time, you’ll find they have an assumed historical narrative that informs many of their beliefs. I say “assumed,” because they just take it for granted that everyone who agrees with them one issue such as race also accepts their historical framing of a wide range of other issues, such as economic systems, religious beliefs or aesthetic preferences (just as someone on the “left” might assume that anyone who supports trans rights and raising the minimum wage automatically accepts the idea that racial diversity is always a good thing.) Not everyone buys the package deal.
Press TV. Listen here.
US Senator John McCain, an 80-year-old Republican from Arizona, is “not credible” to comment on Russia’s alleged hacking efforts against the United States presidential election, which gave Donald Trump control over the White House, an analyst says.
Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of AttacktheSystem.com, made the remarks in a Saturday interview with Press TV, while commenting on McCain’s statement following a meeting with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko during a visit to the capital Kiev.
The West accuses Moscow of meddling in the crisis in eastern Ukraine and capturing the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea, where people voted to join the Russian Federation in a referendum in March 2014.
McCain, who is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has been using the recent escalation with Russia over hacking allegations, as a pretext to attack Moscow.
“We have to make sure that there is a price to pay so that we can perhaps persuade Russians to stop this kind of attacks on our very fundamentals of democracy,” he said in Keiv on Friday, calling Russia’s hacking and “act of war.”
“John McCain is not a credible figure. He is a front man for a political faction in the United States, called the neoconservatives. And these people have a very antagonistic attitude towards Russia… and nations in the Middle East that reject the Washington consensus,” Preston said.
In the run-up to the 2016 vote, WikiLeaks kept releasing batches of emails from the campaign of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as well as the Democratic National Committee.
Democrats pointed the finger at Russia, an allegation later confirmed by the FBI and the CIA.
According to Preston, “none of this has ever been proven; all of these are simply allegations; the government of the United States has never issued any definitive proof, indicating that Russia was in any way responsible for the things that they (Russians) are being accused of.”
Apart from that, noted the Virginia-based journalist, the US has “interfered in the domestic politics of other nations more times than we can count; I mean the United States has organized coups against the elected governments.”
Moscow has rejected any interference in the US 2016 presidential election through hacking.
A refreshingly non-sectarian look at anarchism from James Corbett.
Corbett also has an excellent overview of the thought of Proudhon.
As a libertarian of the anarchist persuasion (one who advocates the complete and total abolition of the state), I often find myself in discussions of how a truly “free” world might look. The truth, though, is that a free world would allow for the development of many diverse and dissimilar communities that bear little resemblance to each other. While some might be thoroughly modern, capitalistic communities where trade and commerce were central to human interaction, others might be nearly the opposite.
I am not attracted to the supposed allure of socialism and communism as typically portrayed because (among other reasons) I like my stuff and I have no desire to share it with a collective. I find the mantra of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” to be entirely incompatible with normal human motivation and a recipe for widespread sloth and indolence.
All that said, I’m just one individual with a worldview informed largely by my own experiences. I know people who despise the corporate environment and who would happily trade it for a simple life in a beach commune somewhere. How long they would last in that environment is perhaps debatable, but their willingness to give it a try is what is relevant to the discussion of what communities might form in a free world.
The administration of US President Barack Obama is trying to muddy the waters with Russia before the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump, says an American political analyst.
Keith Preston, the director of the attackthesystem.com made the remarks with regards to Obama’s reported plans to introduce new sanctions against Russia.
Washington is set to announce measures designed to retaliate against what it considers Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to allegedly help Trump with his victory, CNN reported Wednesday, citing government officials.
“Well, what this seems to be is a case of domestic partisan politics in the United States intruding into American foreign policy and international relations,” Preston told Press TV on Thursday.
Preston said the presidential race between Trump and his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton as “one of the most contentious” votes in the US history and the political fallout was inevitable.
“Hillary Clinton actually won the popular vote, Donald Trump was elected by to the electoral votes,” he said, noting that the Democratic Party was looking for a scapegoat.
Pointing to the Obama administration’s “unsubstantiated” claims that Moscow interfered in the vote, Preston predicted that the allegations would continue until Trump takes office on January 20.
“Given that the Democratic Party is till the ruling party for the time being… it appears that the Democratic Party is trying to retaliate against Russia, on the belief that Russia cost them the election,” the analyst explained.
“There are a lot of foreign policy hawks in the Obama administration with a very negative view of Russia,” he added.
Unlike the current administration, however, Trump and his incoming administration have taken a reconciliatory line with Moscow.
“So it maybe that various elements in the American government are trying to retaliate or act against Russia before Trump takes office,” Preston argued.
Economic sanctions against Moscow were originally introduced in March 2014, after the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea joined Russia following a referendum.
The new sanctions are going to be a “token gesture” more than anything else, Preston said.
According to Obama, the CIA and other US intelligence agencies are in possession of evidence that shows Russian President Vladimir Putin supervised the hacks, which targeted the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and John Podesta, a top aide to Clinton.
Putin has categorically denied Washington’s hacking claims, calling on Obama and his administration to either provide evidence or stop their accusations.
Prince of Queens’ discovery of the Alt-left
The “Milo of the Alt Left?”
Prince of Queens’ vote for Jill Stein, and why he viewed Clinton as much worse than Trump
Rabbit appears 6 minutes in
Is the Alt-left, “the left-wing faction of the Alt-Right?”
How the Alt-Left includes both left leaning nationalist and race realist, as well as anti-racist and moderate feminist opposed to extreme political correctness, and whether those two factions can be coexist
A foundation for the Alt-left
Rationalism and the skeptic community
Bay Area Guy’s point that the Alt-Right has neglected economic issues, which are crucial to millenials
Books on economics including Michael Hudson’s Killing the Host, Ha-Joon Chang’s 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism, Dean Baker’s Rigged, and Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus
Why corporations must have incentives to invest in their communities
Prices for housing and causes of the housing crisis
Prince of Queen’s personal story about renting in the Bay Area
The FIRE Economy, and the importance of distinguishing between productive earned income and parasitic unearned income
Corporate control and private-sector oppression
Mundane working, productivity, and income
The Basic Income
Student loan debt
The need for debt forgiveness
Slavery to work, Job distribution, and Ponzi schemes
By Philip Francis
Together with Paul Gottfried, Richard Spencer is one of the founders of the Alternative Right – this being a loose coalition of non-leftists, brought together by a common dislike of the cultural left, and by a common hatred from the cultural left. How much he did to assist the election of Donald Trump last month I leave to the historians, though I suspect his help was considerable. For obvious reasons, he is unusually hated by the cultural left.
In writing this article, I could play safe and emphasise how little I agree with Richard. He does, after all, view the world through very racial eyes. He even wants to break up the United States, making its north-west into a white ethno-state. For the record, I have no opinion regarding the dissolution of the United States along racial lines, but would fiercely resist similar calls for the dissolution of my own country. It would, however, be dishonest to play entirely safe. I first met Richard in 2008, at the third conference, held in Bodrum, of the Property and Freedom Society. We next met in London in 2012, and there again in 2013. He has republished me a few times. We have occasionally corresponded. This may or may not make us friends. But it does allow me to say that I have always found him both approachable and charming. I do not recognise in the man I know the monster frequently described by his opponents.
Even so, he is hated by the cultural leftists, and they see no distinction between political debate and personal attacks. He is himself fireproof. He lives in a country where political censorship is not formally allowed. He has no job from which he can be hounded. He has long been excluded from every media outlet that is open to being scared. As for actual debate, the leftists are astonishingly shy when it comes to entering any forum in which they might be asked to provide a rational exposition and defence of what they claim to believe. Therefore Richard felt safe to plug away, all through the Presidential campaign in America, saying exactly what he believed to anyone who would listen. I repeat, its effect may have been considerable.
But, if he is fireproof, his mother is not. Mrs Spencer owns commercial premises in Whitefish, Montana. She built these with her own money, and is the sole owner. On the 22nd November this year, she claims that she was approached by Tanya Gersh, a local estate agent, and told that, unless she sold her building, and donated some of the proceeds of sale to the Montana Human Rights Network, two hundred demonstrators would turn up outside, and reduce its sale value.
Press TV. Listen Here.
The United States has protected Israel from UN action and international criticism for decades, despite Tel Aviv’s violation of a broad range of international laws, and President-elect Donald Trump will maintain that cynical policy, an American political analyst in Virginia says.
“The United States has always been unremittingly aligned with Israel and when comes to the United Nations, rarely has the United States ever broken with Israel on any issues in the region, certainly when it comes to the Palestinian issue,” said Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.
“Donald Trump will be continuing what previous presidents have done,” Preston told Press TV on Thursday.
“It was predicted, even during the campaign, that Donald Trump will have a very pro-Israel position and he seems to be following up on that,” he added.
On Thursday, Trump urged the outgoing Obama administration to veto a UN Security Council draft resolution that calls for an immediate halt to illegal settlement building on the occupied Palestinian land.
“The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed,” the incoming Republican president said in a statement.
“As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,” he said.
The UN resolution calls for “the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-state solution,” stating that the activities are dangerously imperiling” and threatening the viability of any future Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank.
Last week, Trump nominated David Friedman, a hardline Zionist, as US ambassador to Israel, likely paving the way toward a controversial decision to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem al-Quds.
Over half a million Israelis live in more than 230 illegal settlements built since the 1967 Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem al-Quds.
All Israeli settlements are illegal under international law. Tel Aviv has defied international calls to stop the settlements expansion in the occupied Palestinian territories.
There are clear signs that the Neocons running the AngloZionist Empire and its “deep state” are in a state of near panic and their actions indicate they are truly terrified.
The home front
One the home front, the Neocons have resorted to every possible dirty trick on the book to try to prevent Donald Trump from ever getting into the White House: they have
This is an unusually balanced and, I think, largely accurate discussion of Trump from a left-anarchist perspective.
Long before Donald Trump’s recent electoral victory, but in a chorus that has grown deafening in the last month, people have been talking about the possible return of fascism. As terrifying as Donald Trump is, it is nonetheless important not to level just any criticism against the president-elect. And though the misogynist mogul’s favorite epithet, “just disgusting,” fits him like a glove, the charge of fascist is inaccurate.
Since we’re interested in an analysis that enables more effective resistance, and not simply in spewing, Twitter-like, any insult with a chance of sticking, it behooves us to examine just which right-wing model Trump is following.
I would argue that fascism was made definitively irrelevant by the Second World War and its aftermath, during which it was conclusively absorbed by democratic capitalism. Since 1945, when the victorious allies dismantled the Nazi state and recruited the elements they found most useful, fascism has been nothing more than a second-string linebacker in a game that is democratic to its very core. The future, of course, is full of surprises, but it would take much more than a Trump victory for fascism to be tenable or necessary again in a central capitalist country like the United States.
One of the very few actual neo-fascist parties to appear on the political scene in the last decade is Golden Dawn in Greece. True to the original model, they combined a political party and a terroristic street movement, recruiting within the police and military to create party-specific loyalty, and forging connections with national capitalists and the mafia, in order to create a dual power capable of intimidating or overriding the checks and balances of democratic institutions and non-partisan media.
Is the power elite just as fractious within itself as the wider society?
This is a blatantly politicized “report” that is not supported by any evidence, nor is it supported by the other 16 intelligence agencies.
The recent pronouncement by the C.I.A. that Russian hackers intervened in the U.S. presidential election doesn’t pass the sniff test–on multiple levels. Let’s consider the story on the most basic levels.
1. If the report is so “secret,” why is it dominating the news flow?
2. Why was the “secret report” released now?
3. What actual forensic evidence is there of intervention? Were voting machines tampered with? Or is this “secret report” just another dose of fact-free “fake news” like The Washington Post’s list of 200 “Russian propaganda” websites?
4. The report claims the entire U.S. intelligence community is in agreement on the “proof of Russian intervention on behalf of Trump” story, but then there’s this:
“The C.I.A. presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.”
Given that the N.S.A. (National Security Agency) was so secret that its existence was denied for decades, do you really think the NSA is going to go public if it disagrees with the C.I.A.?
It is nothing short of a massive paradox, bordering on the ridiculous, for the CIA to allege that Russian cyber attacks had influenced the outcome of the recent Presidential election “to favor one candidate over the other” and sought to “undermine confidence in the US electoral system.” Seriously?
For the CIA, of all ‘intel’ sources to make that claim; the least credible, the most culpable of indiscriminate destruction of sovereign nations throughout the world since 1947, some while struggling to become democracies, is directly out of their “How to Initiate Regime Change 101” playbook which has proven so effective in the last sixty years. (See “Legacy of Ashes: History of the CIA” by Tim Weiner) That is sixty years of some of the most unhinged elements in the intelligence gathering world, sixty years of malicious skullduggery as well as unbridled murders and treasonous assassinations including JFK for his efforts to dismantle the Deep State. (See The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret Government” by David Talbot)
And now the CIA has added a new, politically-motivated Chapter entitled ‘Regime Change at Home” including those democratically-challenged Democrats who refuse to accept responsibility for the election loss they themselves created, are now publicly identified as willing pawns and co-conspirators with the CIA. What a way to rebuild the party!
By Bob Egelko
San Francisco Gate
San Francisco’s chief judge says he and his colleagues discarded 66,000 arrest warrants issued over five years for quality-of-life crimes, like sleeping on the sidewalk, because it made no sense to lock people up for fines they couldn’t afford.
The crimes, which also include urinating on sidewalks and being drunk in public, are infractions punishable only by fines. But when those who were cited failed to show up in court, judges in the past have issued bench warrants ordering them to appear, with a sentence of five days in jail for failing to show up.
But San Francisco Superior Court judges stopped issuing the warrants a year ago and recently disposed of about 66,000 bench warrants issued since January 2011. The city’s police union and some members of the public have protested, but Presiding Judge John Stewart defended the court’s action Tuesday in a meeting with The Chronicle’s editorial board.
“You’re putting somebody in jail because they’re poor and can’t pay a fine,” he said. “We got a lot of criticism, but we thought it was the right thing to do.”
By Keith Preston
American political culture has come to be defined by enormous divisions. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt notes that present day political polarization is wider than at any time since the Civil War. Social science research finds that more Americans would oppose their son or daughter marrying someone of the other political party than would oppose marriage outside of their race, religion, or social class.
The Right and Left are coming to regard one another not merely as competitors, but as threats to the nation or even as personal enemies. Polarization has been sharpened by the election of Donald Trump. Indeed, the reaction of the Left has often been one of panic, hysteria, or terror. One leftist blogger professed to be as terrified on the night of Mr. Trump’s election as he had been when he was once arrested and put in jail. Intense polarization of this kind inevitably leads to talk of secession.
I have a fair amount of personal experience with this question. For nearly 20 years, I have advocated dissolving the US federal system through regional and local secession movements from across the political spectrum. Although I am a left-wing anarchist, I have also tried to build bridges between those opposed to, or under attack by, the US power elite from across the political and cultural spectrum–including racial nationalists.
The Trump victory has been a particular stimulus in California, where progressives have suggested that much of the rest of the nation is so out of touch with the values of their state that California should consider seceding. A group called “Yes California” has formed for the purpose of placing an initiative on the state ballot in 2019 approving California’s exit from the United States. This project has come to be known as “Calexit” as a nod to the “Brexit” referendum.
This is the direction I’ve been saying the Left should be moving is for the past 20 years.
In the era of Trump, we will need to consolidate counter-power via participatory democracy and economic self-management at the local level.
he mass protests across the United States in response to Donald Trump’s presidential election victory constitute a palpable and growing potential for the formation and constructive utilization of various anti-fascist fronts and coalitions. While these might be limited to protest and survival in typical Trump strongholds, the situation is markedly different in urban settings.
In many cities, anti-Trump demonstrations have included far-left groups, immigration-rights advocates, Black Lives Matter activists, reproductive rights supporters and a number of other political actors. Amidst calls for “people power,” these different movements together chanted “not my president!” and vocalized their support for so many other groups that have been marginalized, ridiculed and discriminated against by the president-elect.
People power need not be confined to a chant. The formation of anti-fascist coalitions provides the opportunity to convert these dreams and aspirations into a concrete and transformative program at the municipal level. What role can anti-fascism play in building this alternative?