The Scum Has Risen
The Scum Has Risen
Hunter S. Thompson some time ago, reminded us that the scum also rises. Well the scum has well and truly risen across the corporate and political worlds. Emboldened by decades of weakened regulation, and the concentration and politicisation of the media, they have sought ever greater profits and ever greater power. Like fragments of faeces in the froth atop a sewerage flotation tank, they cling together, billionaire to billionaire, banker to politician, politician to media mogul, while minor corporate criminals gather like flies, hovering above and around, waiting for the chance to pick up their own priceless fragment of shit.
The Panama Papers revealed that the tax evasion in African nations, funnelled through a single corporate entity Mossack Fonseca, was greater than the sum total of all African national debt. If that sounds like some abstract notion, consider what it really means. Think about the schools, hospitals and housing that might have been built. Think about how much poverty, now existing, might have been avoided; how many of the dead might still be alive, how much illness cured, how many opportunities created. And if you are of that sad and pathetic ilk that believe Africa's problems are no concern of us privileged white boys, then think about your own hip pocket and how much less tax you would have had to pay if this bunch of parasitical blood suckers had paid even a fraction of their share.
We live at the end of an era. Imperfect like all others, but vastly better than what is to come unless things change very quickly. The values that created the wealth, security and tolerance of western nations have been undermined and the values emerging to replace them will lead in the exact opposite direction, to poverty, war and hatred. It is tempting to think of this as some vast conspiracy created to further the interests of the parasitical classes. The truth is that, as ever where humans are involved, a fuck up is the more likely explanation.
The rich are always careless. Their wealth insulates them so thoroughly from the real world that they can never really understand it. They understand money and power but not people. This is not some recent phenomena. It is a historical constant. The rich, obsessed by the only things they understand, fail to notice when they overstep the mark and become vulnerable to economic or environmental collapse, or to the revolutions that usually accompany them.
In our case, technology and political manipulation by the wealthy, created an opportunity to concentrate wealth that has been ruthlessly seized upon across western nations. Beginning in the greed is good era of Thatcher and Reagan, political propaganda increasingly replaced fair comment in the media. The line from the reprehensible Murdoch empire to Bannon's incomprehensible Breitbart is all too clear.
To create and maintain the drift to the right they needed issues which could be used to undermine the centrist consensus. They chose to attack, not the politics, but the culture; the scientific, economic and artistic values on which western society has been constructed. From voodoo economics to climate change denial and on to the dismantling of mainstream artistic access for any but the bland, the thread is clear.
Distraction is the currency. From the moronic entertainments on our screens to the perfectly satisfying narcissism of social media, we have never been so distracted. Yet distraction breeds discontent. Even the feeblest mind senses that something is lacking, even if it is, mistakenly, only a better drug or a more explicit entertainment. From distraction to discontent is the journey of a moment. From discontent to a bloated sense of entitlement, is even shorter.
And that is the fuck up. That is where things fall apart. Discontent finds form in some distorted character. Someone offering simplistic solutions to complex problems. Someone pandering to that sense of entitlement, to the lowest and basest level of self-interest. Someone prepared to conjure the eternal outsider, Jew or Muslim, as the devil incarnate. Some Hanson, some Trump. Someone so profoundly deluded, so deeply ignorant that they, unlike our earlier propagandists, actually believe their own bullshit. And yes, if history teaches anything it is that things do fall apart.
But the fact that you failed to mention Blindboy, is that a suitable , moderate and acceptable alternative to unconstrained neo liberalism would have arisen except that it was hamstrung by the narrow vision of the equally vapid opposition in this compulsorily binary , yet entirely unrepresentative era of politics that we are currently enduring.
" Discontent finds form in some distorted character " - what a load of shit.
What a load of blame shifting shit.
If the liberal movement wasn't so self satisfied and blind to the situation and needs of a working class culture that is being abandoned betwixt the alters of globalisation for corporate benefit and globalisation for the benefit of the abstract " other " then the brain dead fucktards that are currently being elected would never have gotten a look in.
Its majority wins democracy . Maybe try listening to the reasons your chosen voices didn't get in rather than continuously trying to denounce those that did win.
Let's face it Blindboy. You're exasperated because you're SO much smarter than everyone else ...but your candidates weren't elected .
Democracy must be broken.
In a perfect world , yours would be the only opinion that counts and the world should abide by your decision and decree...or else !
And till that day happens - Down with fascism !!
Geez remember the days when there used to be a good movie on the telly on a Sunday night. Is that what your trying to say boys?
Some good points in there blindboy, particularly the one where we are now at the end of an era and people are too short sighted not to fuck things up. Personally, I think society/economy has the mother-of-all corrections on its way be it war/recession/housing/allofthem/whatever but how or where this will happen is anyone's guess. Perhaps the next Russian diplomat or malaysian airliner to go down will end up being our Franz Ferdinand.
There's quite a lot to digest, but I agree with the general overall theme that those wealthier or with influence will never release control to a fairer society now that they are the top dogs. I don't think I'd generalize it as much though as the adversarial theme you have going reduces the intelligence of the argument down to "them" or "the rich" vs everyone.
I'm gonna add that the rich are not necessarily the ones who are always careless and fuck things up. They tend to do alright for themselves. In fact us regular people seem to vote them in/ support them etc even defend them. Who are the real idiots here?
Ohhh dear..... So "the caberet" has closed? Is that what your are upset about BB?
I want to know how the likes of the clintons, soros, and the rothchilds fit into this the rich are our unsavoury overlords scenario
Blindboy, good to see a post without the "T" word in it.
Blowin I'm confused as to your use of the word "liberal".
According to the book beside me, liberalism encompasses
- respect of the rights of individual citizens
- respect of the rule of law
- divided power i.e. separation between the government (executive) and the courts (legislature)
- a written constitution
I know we touched on this ages ago but it sounds like you're using "liberal" with some reference to the political party.
Another thought - there is a famous quote that says "democracy is like the horizon - always approaching".
Blindboy's post aside, I would venture that the current version/incarnation of democracy is indeed a less than ideal one.
The two-party system has become a hoax and the idealist in me would really like to see a multi-party system in Australia. Unwieldy - possibly, but at least we would be moving towards a consensus democracy rather than a combative two-party system.
"The two party system hangs like a millstone around the neck of real democracy... Until we move beyond left vs. right politics we will continue asking the wrong questions. Until every vote is a conscience vote the best we can hope for is representation by crude power blocs within the parliament, and so far the traditional arrangement of LNP/Labor-Greens is just not delivering the goods."
https://theaimn.com/multi-party-democracy-work-australia/
and
"We could have the best of both worlds by establishing a proportional system in order to give minority parties a fighting chance, which would in turn keep the majority parties on their toes. Perhaps it would motivate them to work harder for their constituents, lest they be voted out in favor of a third party contender. It’s high time for America to join the majority of the world’s democracies by giving a multi-party system a chance."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rachel-eckhardt/the-more-the-merrier-woul_...
An interesting perspective that might explain the 'liberal' that blowin is refering to
...or I could just be completely wrong
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-exhaustion-of-american-liberalism-14887...
BB, seems such a narcistic article, where there is nothing but blame for those that are mainly silent on the scientific and economic values of our western society. The article ignores the plight of the silent working class, just as the left and Labor do. We see the scientific comments of people such as Prof Flannery twist the climate debate making it a goulash of opinion rather than fact. Prof Michelle Simmons highlighted the negative effect of the lefts impact for women in science. To imply the silent majority are 'deluded' and 'ignorant', shows the narcism and saying - I am right , you are wrong.
For your amusement, from the New Yorker
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a frenzy of early-morning activity on Saturday, President Donald J. Trump ordered aides to immediately cover every phone in the White House with tin foil, White House sources confirmed.
According to the sources, Trump contacted staffers Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer at approximately 6 A.M. and instructed them to purchase enough tin foil to cover every phone in the building.
The President, still wearing his bathrobe after what was reportedly a sleepless night, personally supervised the tin-foil installation, sources said.
“Wrap it tighter,” he was heard bellowing at Conway.
After the installation was complete, Trump ordered the Secret Service to check every room in the White House for signs of former President Barack Obama.
“He’s still here somewhere, I know it,” Trump reportedly muttered.
Blindboy, after your own frenzy of activity over the past few weeks, you clearly lack the ability to self-reflect.
BB, do you really believe the media is TRUTHFful. Specifically NYorker. Or has it published what you wish to hear.
One of the great risks of the Trump presidency is that it is normalised. Sure much of the current criticism of the political classes is justified but it does not follow that Trump is the answer or more importantly he is the new normal. The risks are extreme and no-one should want them realised.
What risks GuySmiley?
What risks? That's the funniest thing I have heard in a day full of laughs Andy!
"As for the best leaders, the people do not notice their existence". Lao Tzu
There are indeed plenty of real risks with Trump, Blindboy, in addition to the overblown ones under your tinfoil hat - just the same as any other administration.
However, the intent of previous administrations (and the puppet masters) were made evident in the hundreds of thousands of dead civilians, not to mention overthrown and compromised governments worldwide.
I have no love for Trump but I'll wait a bit before I start foaming at the mouth.
I find it interesting that a tame and compliant mainstream media, after supporting so many U.S. (and "coalition of the willing") atrocities is so venomously against Trump.
Doesn't that give you cause for thought Blindboy?
Trump the elite rogue dickhead, playing the media like a cheap Taiwanese fiddle, while the mainstream media pull your strings at the same time?
That's worthy of a laugh.
FWIW, Trump's dealings with the media remind me of Joh Bjelke-Peterson "feeding the chooks".
Shirley, you can't be serious. Okay, your AndyM.
My primary concerns on America predate Trump in fact they go back to Nixon and Vietnam and centre on its foreign policy and its habit of picking the wrong side to fight or starting the fight in the first place. The extra concern is that Australia as the arse licking subservient junior alliance partner gets suckered into conflicts that are none of our business. I just think the risks for Australia getting involved in another war, perhaps closer to home, in support of our alliance partner under Trump, a person who I believe is immensely unfit for office, is very high.
I'll add I believe he will harm and divide the country he leads greatly for reasons already widely covered. Its a great tragedy because I strongly believe America has some of the best things humanity has to offer.
I like BB's Lao Tzu's quote a lot.
Your comment about Joh, not good, we all know how that ended!
AM , the real risk with Trump is not like any other President we have seen and media is highlighting his blatant lies , and attempts to cover up the short comings of his administration in their dealings with Russia.
As far as the puppet masters , being the banking system , Trump is replacing the Political elite with the economic elite , so maybe you are in affect saying that Trump is part of an Economic Coup?
To use Joh , as reference to anything , is very dangerous grounds , being one of the most corrupt politicians Australia has seen , which Trump perhaps is starting to mirror , everyday we see more and more lies from Trump , and the media are simply reporting these , unless of course you are talking about Breibart News?
GuySmiley, I'm glad that we both agree that American/corporate global policy and militarism have been cause for grave concern for a fair while now.
And I agree that Trump is most likely a loose cannon with the potential to do significant damage within the U.S.
But there are a few questions that don't sit easily for me within a "Trump is really bad" simplistic point of view.
As mentioned above, the media campaign against Trump is enormous, way bigger than any questioning of America's outrageous and criminal military interventions over the past 15 or so years.
Why? What's the mainstream media's angle? They're all so "kept" that it's hard to believe that their interest is purely altruistic.
What threat does Trump pose to current business interests, that's the big question in my mind.
Option B for me (with poorer odds) is that Trump is just a huge distraction while business as usual continues, similar to how Obama was a charismatic smooth talking frontman for the status quo.
The heavyweights are still there and with trillions of dollars at stake, I'm pretty sure that they're going to want to get their way.
Don't worry about the President, let's talk about financial institutions, oil, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, the military...
GuySmiley, if things kick off in the South China Sea my belief is that it'll have virtually nothing to do with one orange man.
The Lao Tzu quote might actually be quite prescient, but not in the way it was intended by Blindboy.
Ha, interesting Sharkman, maybe it's a scramble for influence amongst domestic cartels!
In any case, I think it's a mistake to take things on face value as dictated by the MSM and go for the "Trump is the anti-christ" angle.
He may well be but keep your options open.
Not sure if I've posted this before, but anyway...
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/15/us/examining-who-runs-the-united-stat...
The term "cross-party consensus" stands out for me.
Andy why don't you try thinking up a coherent line of argument instead of trolling me? Your posts read like your fingers hit the keys as the thought enters your head. Endless speculation without a single clear thread of logic is not an argument. 90% of what you say does not even address what I have posted but is just free association on Trump larded with insults to me. You contribute nothing to the discussion and your presence, with that of some of the other regular trolls, is a disincentive to anyone attempting serious discussion.
As far as I can work out Blindboy, everything I have said is a relevant reply or comment to other posters on this thread - I didn't realise that every comment had to address your initial post.
As for my endless speculation, I think that your waffle over so many threads trumps me hands down, no pun intended.
Seriously though, if you want to kill a few hours with your writings, good for you.
However if you wish to seriously address the issues you're touching on, I think you've got an incredibly narrow field of vision.
I'm not trolling, I'm trying to shine a little light beyond your fixation with Trump.
I sincerely suggest that it's you who is discouraging serious discussion.
I don't buy the media is against Trump conspiracy theory, mostly they are reporting on his actions and words and how that clashes with accepted social, political and legal norms. To accept the media conspiracy theory is to buy into Trump's spin. We are not talking about some loud mouthed smart arse here we are talking about the President FFS. The highest standards ought to be expected. But beyond that my assessment of Trump is based on what I perhaps naively consider to be the essential qualities a good leader. Trump has none of them. Lets start with the first and most important role of a President, namely is to unite the country. #massivefail #sobad
The man plays the role of a liar, a buffoon and a pig so perfectly, it's no wonder the media crucify him.
But I'm so wary to accept the MSM's simplistic take on him, especially with the clear neocon agenda of every news agency from the BBC to CNN to The Australian.
If what I write is waffle, why bother reading, or replying to it?
So Blindboy - you consider any debate an attack .
You consider the slightest pisstake an unforgivable offence.
You're worried that this forum thread isnt a safe space and it might deter some more sensitive readers from contributing.
You believe in and utilise the " no platform " technique of limiting criticism of your utterly subjective opinions.
You routinely start a new thread to maintain the centre stage rather than accepting that your opinions would potentially be unremarked upon if left to stand on their merits alone.
You believe that your opinions don't actually need defending as they are entirely self evident with the delusion that can only be mustered by those that fancy themselves as perennially on the moral high ground.
Your self righteousness leaves no room for self doubt , contemplation or general self awareness.
You actually use the term " troll ".
Conclusion : Blindboy is an 18 year old , first year arts student.
Blowin if all that is true, then your purpose in being here is ....... oh yeh to troll me! I ignore what does not interest me, you may have noticed.
I don't think there are domestic cartels , only a dominant elite through of the banking system, which is Global organization , and seems like with the political elite now being replaced by the Billionaire elite , and very scant regard for our democratic system ,by creating false news alternative facts , or one could call it lies and bullshit , or just plain Narcissism .
Watching nationalism raise its ugly head globally , one only has to look locally at Hanson , Bernardi etc to see how this new Trump era of bullshit has infected and emboldened those who pine for a gone by era!
Too bad that like most iron clad morons , what doesn't interest you is anything that contradicts your narrow opinions.
Hey Sharkman - how do you maintain the position that nationalism is bad, but Aboriginality as a concept is something to be cherished and valued ?
What is the difference ?
Both are an abstract social construction maintained through a faith based belief that a thread of commonly shared values can run through a collection of individuals.
Unless you're saying that the Aboriginal nation is something to be opposed and abhorred ?
At least it'll save a world of debate telling the First Nation people's that they've just got to let go of a bygone era and release all claim to Australia's future.
BB, maybe find out what 'troll' means in today's context. It is not simply a contrarian view.
"In our case, technology and political manipulation by the wealthy, "
I have to pull you up on this one BB. While technological change was certainly around at the same time, it was neither a force for good or evil, only what we made of it. It is correlative, not causative, of what has happened.
The tech change could just as easily seen us all working less, more leisure, well distributed wealth, a cohesive and harmonious society. It was neither cause nor effect.
The rise and full-blown implementation of neoliberal economic theory sits at the heart of it. That is where it all comes unstuck. How did it happen? At this point you can bring in the effect of the big corporates and media, who have universally been cheerleaders for the breakdown of the social contract. Whether it was their attacking things like a mining tax, or the ongoing cheer-leading of Murdoch's papers and FauxNews, the big media most particularly of Murdoch has been instrumental in people having their pants pulled down without knowing it.
Howard's (and Latham's) 'aspirationals' were conned, too stupid to realise that they were never going to join the group of super-wealthy to whom the tax and other policy benefits were flowing. They were happily soma-ed into thinking they would one day be rich, and therefore it was ok to give tax cuts to the rich and powerful. One day, that'll be us!!! God help them.
For those who weren't sufficiently interested to get themselves up to speed on what was going on, which is Tonybarber's silent majority, they left themselves open to exploitation.
There is no conspiracy of world-wide business organisations to take advantage of it, only standard western business practice, which is opportunism. They are very good at that. Reagan and Thatcher were certainly pivotal, but the seeds go back some very nasty individuals indeed, the Ayn Rands, Hayek and other right wing apologists/political economists.
But most of all are the business schools and the economics profession, which were deludedly complicit in grand theft, from the people. Our 'intellectuals' failed us as much as the 'greedy corporates'. They didn't see it coming, (mostly) and they should have.
On the other hand, the scientist have been warning us about climate change. We have only our stupid selves to blame for that one.
It is in guardian land tonybarber
....and 18 year old feminist arts student land, which is much the same, as pointed out above...
Sypkan, sorry don't get ya. 'Guardian land' ?
Bat fink, and the scientists failed. Dr Karl is convinced we can have 100% renewable but does not really explain how - very entertaining though. How many believe our Chief Scientist ?
I agree with most of that batfink. In my defence, that sentence continued "......created the opportunity..." . Technology did not determine the direction but its exploitation intensified that agenda.
Hey Sharkman - how do you maintain the position that nationalism is bad, but Aboriginality as a concept is something to be cherished and valued ?
What is the difference
Both are an abstract social construction maintained through a faith based belief that a thread of commonly shared values can run through a collection of individuals.
Unless you're saying that the Aboriginal nation is something to be opposed and abhorred ?
At least it'll save a world of debate telling the First Nation people's that they've just got to let go of a bygone era and release all claim to Australia's future.
Blowin one is an indigenous culture , the other is Nation .
Its your words that say there is an Aboriginal nation , where as I would say it is a collection of varying cultures relative to the land.
Semantics Sharkman.
Well said batfink well said. May the big open barrels come your way today.
please explain your idea of how there is /was an Aboriginal Nation , and the difference you see between Australia as a nation?
Blindboy, this is worth having a look at when you've got a few minutes.
It's interesting in that it's very similar to the discussion we were having above, and it certainly explains my beliefs and position better than I can.
The following is a quote by Peter Oborne, political journalist and associate editor of The Spectator (a conservative magazine, no less).
"the characteristics of the Trump presidency, and in particular its media handling, the attempt to side-line the press, the complete contempt for the truth, there's nothing new here.
It happened with the Clinton years, it happened during the Blair years. Actually, it was worse during the Blair years, because the press was so reverential, and they sold us the lie about weapons of mass destruction and the Iraq war.
And then they sold us – Cameron, the inheritor of Blair – sold us the lie about Libya and that catastrophe in north Africa. And the press and the BBC cheered him along. They didn't question it and now that they've got somebody they don't like, they're going after him....'"
http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2017/839-the-sup...
I'm not looking for an argument Blindboy, I think that this is an important perspective worth considering.
.