Monday, January 19, 2015

Jan. 19: Lies our history books and news media told us.....

This is not the usual blog about the news. It's about what is terribly wrong about the ways we see the world - and those ways are designed deliberately to make us a lineup of puppets. The thought came to me as I read a story in The National Post (a paper so bad it occasionally makes the Irving press look good.) It's about a North Korean man who was tortured by his country. The story compares the camps, rightly enough, with Hitler's concentration camps.  Washington officials are quoted as breathing fire, and condemning North Korea for its human rights abuses.

Hey, guys, hey....

Washington was (and still is)  the headquarters for the most extensive torture system the world has ever known. We know about it. There's an official report about it. And nobody in Washington has done a damn thing about the people responsible. Nor have our news media followed up in any serious way. Nor have the Canadian news media even mentioned Canada's role - and Canada did have a role.

In the same way, our news media use the word 'terrorist' to mean 'Muslim'. It's standard for them to announce a terrorist attack - and we all know they mean Muslims.

Terrorism has been around a long time, of course, long before Muhammed or Jesus. But as a highly developed and planned strategy of war, it goes back only a century. Remember - terrorism means to destroy a people's willingness to fight. It uses indiscriminate killing, mostly of civilians. It was a natural development of aircraft which, until 1945 or so, had bombs that were not accurate enough to hit a compact, military target. So they were dropped on large, civilian targets, deliberately to kill civilians, children, whatever,  to break  the willingness to resist.

A pioneer was Winston Churchill who, in 1920, ordered the RAF to bomb defenceless Kurd towns in Iraq. Why would he think it was acceptable to kill innocent people? Because they weren't white, English-speaking people. Churchill, like the whole British aristocracy and most of the British people of his time was a racist. He believed that the British were a race, a superior race, and therefore entitled to kill everybody else. (That's another thing you won't find in your history books.) All the western empires since 1492 have been based on the assumption other peoples belonged to inferior races and,  therefore, did not deserve any human consideration. It was okay to abuse, torture, loot, starve, murder any of them. Hitler didn't think that stuff up all by himself. He was tapping into beliefs already well spread throughout the Christian world - including Canada and the U.S.

From 1942 on, terrorism in the form of bombing helpless civilians became the Christian world's main method of conducting war. The first two nuclear bombs deliberately targeted two cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that had no military significance. The murder of civilians also became the primary weapon of war against Vietnam, Guatemala, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan.  If you ever need a terrorist, don't waste your time on Muslims. Sign up some Christians.

To this day, American leaders think of Americans as having a special relationship to God, and therefore they have a right to rule the world. That's been true since 1775, It was called Manifest Destiny when they invaded Canada in 1812, It's now called American Exceptionalism. What it means is exactly the same as racism.

And, through the news media and those blank spots in our history book, we all excuse it, essentially for racist reasons. We have been profoundly, if unconciously,  racist toward native peoples, blacks, Jews, Ukrainians, Chinese, Japanese, francophones, anglophones...just about everybody at some time or other.

And we western Christians lead the world in terrorism and torture. That's the reality we will not look at.
____________________________________________________________________________

Then we added another onion to the pot - capitalism. Beginning about the 16th century, capitalism produced profits that created a class so wealthy that monarchies and aristocrats (and governments) depended on it. The new capitalism needed markets, resources, cheap labour (slave labour if possible); so it united with governments to conquer the world with all its economic possibilities. Government and capitalism was a marriage made in heaven. Its offspring was colonialism as capitalists used cheap armies (mostly the children of the very poor) to conquer the Americas, Africa, Asia, murdering  and looting on a grand scale, destroying societies that were functioning and had been functioning for centuries and even, as China, for millenia. And all for the glory of the monarch - or for 'patriotism'.

China, in particular, was a highly organized society, an effective one, and a relatively prosperous one in 1800. But, within just decades, European capitalists destroyed Chinese civilization, government, and made a prosperous country one of the poorest in the world. With slavery, child labour, cheap labour and utter barbarity Western capitalists effectively destroyed societies around the world.

But it was okay. The western peoples were racist - the higher on the income ladder they were, the more racist they were. That made it okay to destroy the lives of millions. They were inferior. Nor did the conquests  help the ordinary people  of the western nations a whole lot as almost all the returns went to the capitalists who,  being people, assumed that their wealth meant they were, almost racially, superior to people in their own country who were not as rich as they were. Their families came to think the same way. I've met some gems of the type in my day.

I vividly remember the media star who had piles of money on her own, and had a very rich husband.. I invited her to speak at a university convocation. (I didn't know her at the time; but she had a reputation as a feminist - so I thought she would be better than the usual speakers.)

First, I took her and her husband out to supper. For the longest supper of my life, she poured venom on anyone who wasn't rich like her. She had contempt for the poor, the unemployed, the middle class, for medicare, for public education....for anyone who had less than several million in the bank.  Even her husband, a decent guy, was embarrassed - though presumably accustomed to this.

I later, very briefly, met the daughter. She made her mother sound like a socialist. Now, the daughter, on the basis of no notable accomplishment in life, is a senator who will live well the rest of  her life on us taxpayers. She's a real Stephen Harper kind of gal. She'll make sure that all the money goes to the right sort of people, and that nothing will be wasted on the hungry.

Arrogance, superiority, racism and greed (all four commonly associated with low intelligence) are what have caused most of our wars for the last 500 years.)

Oh, then the Christian churches got the insane idea that this was all something they should associate with. So they sent missionaries. Now, I have known many missionaries, and liked them. But when they followed the conquering capitalists,  they identified themselves with the barbaric forms of cruelty that capitalism had inflicted. And Christianity became hated for the association. Unhappily, I notice every Sunday on the Faith page of the Irving press that the churches haven't figured that out, yet.

For centuries, the conquered peoples (most of the world) anguished over their lack of freedom and loss of identity, and loss of any control over their own lives. Then, early in the twentieth century, two things seemed to offer hope.

One was communism, an alternative to capitalism. Now, communism, like capitalism, came out of the West. But, unlike capitalism, communism was based on Judaic/Christian thought. Karl Marx was born a Jew, and became a convert to Christianity - not unusual at the time. What he saw was the terrible suffering that capitalism had inflicted on Europe. (As I mentioned, the average westerner got very little of the plunder. It went to the super-rich). So communism was a direct product of Judaism and Christianity.

The conquered saw it as fitting in to their religions, too, and recreating the world that had been torn from them. After all, most religions around the world have a great deal in common.  (And if you read the early writing of Mao Tse Tung, you will find nothing evil about him. In youth, at least, he was a young man terribly concerned about the fate of his country and his people,and quite devoted to Confucianism. ) The thoroughly evil bastard in China was Chiang Kai Shek, a Christian and the puppet of western capitalists.

The other hope that arose came at the end of World War One when President Wilson of the US announced his Fourteen Points to spread freedom around the world, and to establish a world at peace. Here was new hope! (Of course, the miserable of the world didn't know that Wilson was a liar and a racist and a butcher with the worst of that type.  Most American history books still haven't figured that out, either.)  Wilson lied about freedom and democracy just as Churchill and Roosevelt would lie about them in World War Two.)

So there was a Russian revolution and, by World War Two, a spread of communism to China, North Korea, Vietnam....These were the acts of people made desperate by the brutalities of capitalism.

But none of them (despite what our news media and history books say) ever achieved communism. And, with the advantage of time, one can see why not. Communism was far too idealistic. It was based on the assumption that people would some day come together voluntarily to rule themselves without government. It didn't. And it never will. People aren't built that way.  Communism, as defined by Marx, held that people would all work together without government. That's similar to Norbert Cunningham's belief that capitalism would be great if only the major capitalists were allowed to do what they want, and if government just weren't there. Maybe we should call him Karl Cunninghan.
____________________________________________________________________________

So what do we have now? We have constant warfare - partly because it's good for big business, partly so we can force more cruelty and destruction on people we've been destroying for years. The current challenge is from the Muslim world which has, if anything, been amazingly patient with our killing, looting and destruction for two centuries.

In their determination to survive, Muslims have turned to their religion and, in many cases, to an extreme form of it. Well, that's what happens when people act as we have acted. That's how French-Quebeckers reacted to the British conquest. That's how Poland reacted to Soviet control.

You don't like Moslem extremism? Then stop creating it.

The greed of uncontrolled capitalism is what lies behind the Ukraine situation, too. It's what is leading to nations all over the world uniting against us.And, as always, we (those of us who aren't billionaires) are victims of uncontrolled capitalism. And very soon, the leading capitalists will be their own victims.

In the United States, the leading capitalist country, and the one where major capitalists have effectively ended democracy to take control of the country, one-quarter (at least) of all the school children live below the poverty level. That's one of the worst records in the developed world.

The countries with very low levels of poverty are those, like Sweden, that control their capitalist, and that also include socialist measures.

Canada has a better record than the US; but it's still way down the list, and nothing to sing "O Canada" about.

Add to that another example of future chaos from an Oxfam study. It shows that very soon the top  1% will have more wealth than all the rest of the world put together.  Think that's good? If so, that's because you're thinking like the top 1% - which means you're not thinking at all.

In such a world, labour would certainly be cheap. But where would the market be? Who would buy the goods?

Well, yes, we could fight wars in order to hire soldiers to kill, and to create jobs in the defence industry - which is roughly what's happening in the US right now. But the reality, even in the short term, is that our society would collapse - just like all those other conquered countries. Indeed, American society is in collapse right now; and the very ugly part could start up quite soon. The belief in freedom and democracy has fallen so low that a majority of Americans won't even vote. That's a real danger sign.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Canada has to get its capitalists under control. They've had enough time in power. (And forget that crap about how John A. built this country. The big decisions have been made by big capitalists for a very long time. John A. was just a very useful flunky.) And the big capitalists are now sending us downhill very rapidly. Canada has to come to grips with capitalism, and make it serve us. The very rich are not gifted simply by being very rich. Many, probably most, are simply greedy, well-born, and utterly without any moral code at all. Those qualities make for foolish decisions, and those foolish decisions will destroy it as well as us. In just one example, the oil business has spent billions to convince the world there is no climate change. We have lost years of preparation because of that. But even today, the oil industry shows not the slightest interest in dealing with the problem.  Wealth plus Greed = Stupidity.

The Conservative party, especially under Stephen Harper, is of no use whatever to us. Indeed, he has all those qualities of ego, self-admiration, arrogance, indifference to others that have put us in such danger.

The Liberals are a party of wimps who play up to big business, but who pretend to be more moderate. Expect nothing from Justin Trudeau or Brian Gallant. If they really had anything to offer, they wouldn't be Liberals.

The Greens - too little, too late.

Our problem is that we are governed politically and economically largely by people who have no moral code whatever. I don't want to get all religious on you - particularly since I don't see much in the way of moral code left in our churches, either.

But the reality is that no society survives without some moral code. Almost all the religious moral codes are much the same. Now, I really don't care whether you believe that the streets of heaven are paved with gold or whether the virgin Mary had a fling with the angel Gabriel. I have no great interest in the 'magic' parts of any religion. But it is the experience of millenia of history that moral codes are what hold societies together. The greatest anguish of conquered people and the greatest sense of loss of identity came from the dismissal of their moral code.

Moral codes, principals, values are what hold a society together. The failure of Christian churches to uphold their code is a major factor in causing the crisis of uncontrolled capitalism - and, incidentally, a major reason for the decline of the churches, themselves.

I'm not crazy about today's NDP. I'm afraid it has surrendered too many of its principles in its struggle to win power. But the NDP still has some principles - and it's the only major party that does. And it is not a coincidence that the NDP grew out of the CCF, the only major party in Canada that was founded on the basis of a moral code, on the basis of concern for all of us. Clergy were key figures in the founding of the CCF. (This was in the days when the clergy's time wasn't filled with church dinners and auction and concerts  that feature performers who can play gospel music by blowing through their noses.)

However, there ain't nobody else. The Conservatives and the Liberals have no relevance. The Green party is  marginal.

The NDP leads the pack, still, in having some sense of principle. Its candidates are almost always more intelligent than you-know-who with the smirk. It's leader is morally and intellectually far above Justin and Stephen.

And we don't have much time.





6 comments:

  1. Just one small point, the Oxfam study indicated that by the end of 2016, the top 1% of the wealthiest capitalists will hold 50% of the world's wealth.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, yes. And as the night follows the day, 2017 will follow 2016 - with even more for the very, very rich. Any scenario from that is pretty bad - for everybody.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The only 'morality' I will credit the rich is lust. Caring for anyone outside their families is not in evidence.
    But I am curious. You say the oil business has spent millions to convince us there is no climate change. Rather I would say energy interests have promoted carbon tax by fearmongering dire predictions ( a wealth control scheme by globalists ) ; rescinding the gift from Prometheus freeing mankind. I do not need to trust the representations of the usual suspects - and liars - that they have suddenly developed a sense of what is in the public good. Weapons makers are inherently careless of such in the extreme. It should be considered odd indeed that the UN has a department dedicated to flogging policy based on an unprovable premise ; that our collective future depends on their assumption of control of trillions.
    I was born in N.B. and was amazed at the trust the NDP.caused in the West in contrast to eastern despair which could see little hope past recycling the elected in hopes of minimizing corruption. The Council of Canadians evolved from the disillusioned who believed Job One was to know what mischief was in play - because the party system and Parliament itself was inherently locked into control of the purse ... suppressing any hope of rule by principle.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was thinking of such disgraces of public information such as that caused by 'the war of drugs' - where people are punished for what they use in their bodies. the state regulates such by excesses of punitive action and by hyping the dangers of black market goods - something not properly present in the use of manufactured pharmaceuticals. ( A look at the postings of former science adviser Nutt in the UK is instructive, as well as LEAP information )
    Being concerned about mandatory use of agents attacking bodies ( vaccines and their proliferation ) is cause for discrediting by media asan 'antivaxxer' despite there being no possible way that safety could be assured of reason of past experience..
    Misrepresentations of his fathers field ( Roger Pielke Sr. is known to disagree with promoted views on predicting the future of cimate ) led his son to note public misrepresentation of 'knowledge' as a political tool...with politics in control - not science. http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.ca/2015/01/five-modes-of-science-engagement.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.opednews.com/articles/JFK-to-911-Everything-is-by-lila-york-911-Profiteers-Political_Inequality_JFK-Assassination_Wealth-Inequality-150118-510.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://westchestergasette.blogspot.ca/2013/08/perforating-horizontal-wellbore.html

    ReplyDelete