Correct Thinking

The discussion of philosophy is taking Europe by storm. According to Deutsche Welle, Germans, now more than ever, want someone to tell them what to think.

"Thoughts on life's big questions are hitting German kiosks. Two new philosophy magazines have appeared recently. Publishers see an unmet need for philosophical reflection in the country's media."

And, who do you think has the money to launch these two 'high gloss' publications?

---

“The unexamined life is not worth living” – Socrates (470-399 BCE)

Socrates felt so passionately about the value of self-examination that he closely examined not only his own beliefs and values but those of others as well. More precisely, through his relentless questioning, he forced people to examine their own beliefs. He saw the citizens of his beloved Athens sleepwalking through life, living only for money, power, and fame, so he became famous trying to help them.

“Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily” – William of Ockham (1285 – 1349?)

Commonly known as Ockham’s razor, the idea here is that in judging among competing philosophical or scientific theories, all other things being equal, we should prefer the simplest theory. Scientists currently speak of four forces in the universe: gravity, the electromagnetic force, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force. Ockham would certainly nod approvingly at the ongoing attempt to formulate a grand unified theory, a single force that encompasses all four.

“The life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” – Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679)

Whereas Rousseau said, “Man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains,” Hobbes believed we find ourselves living a savage, impossible life without education and the protection of the state. Human nature is bad: we’ll prey on one another in the most vicious ways. No doubt the state imposes on our liberty in an overwhelming way. Yet Hobbes’ claim was that these very chains were absolutely crucial in protecting us from one another.

“I think therefore I am” – René Descartes (1596 – 1650)

Descartes began his philosophy by doubting everything in order to figure out what he could know with absolute certainty. Although he could be wrong about what he was thinking, that he was thinking was undeniable. Upon the recognition that “I think,” Descartes concluded that “I am.”

“To be is to be perceived (Esse est percipi).” Or, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?” – Bishop George Berkeley (1685 – 1753)

As an idealist, Berkeley believed that nothing is real but minds and their ideas. Ideas do not exist independently of minds. Through a complicated and flawed line of reasoning he concluded that “to be is to be perceived.” Something exists only if someone has the idea of it.

“We live in the best of all possible worlds.” – Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 – 1716)

The principle of sufficient reason holds that for everything, there must be sufficient reason why it exists. And according to Leibniz the only sufficient reason for the world we live in is that God created it as the best possible universe. God could have created a universe in which no one ever did wrong, in which there was no human evil, but that would require humans to be deprived of the gift of free wills and thus would not be the best possible world.

“The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk.” G.W.F. Hegel (1770 – 1831)

Similar to “vision is 20/20 in hindsight,” Hegel’s poetic insight says that philosophers are impotent. Only after the end of an age can philosophers realize what it was about. And by then it’s too late to change things. It wasn’t until the time of Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) that the true nature of the Enlightenment was understood, and Kant did nothing to change the Enlightenment; he just consciously perpetuated it.

“Who is also aware of the tremendous risk involved in faith – when he nevertheless makes the leap of faith – this [is] subjectivity … at its height.” – Søren Kierkegaard (1813 – 1855)

Abraham was the ultimate “knight of faith” according to Kierkegaard. Without doubt there is no faith, and so in a state of “fear and trembling” Abraham was willing to break the universal moral law against murder by agreeing to kill his own son, Isaac. God rewarded Abraham’s faith by providing a ram in place of Isaac for the sacrifice. Faith has its rewards, but it isn’t rational. It’s beyond reason. As Blaise Pascal said, “The heart has its reason which reason does not know.”

“God is dead.” – Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900)

Nietzsche never issued this famous proclamation in his own voice but rather put the words in the mouth of a character he called the madman and later in the mouth of another character, Zarathustra.

Nevertheless, Nietzsche endorsed the words. “God is dead” is often mistaken as a statement of atheism. It is not, though Nietzsche himself was an atheist. “Dead” is metaphorical in this context, meaning belief in the God of Christianity is worn out, past its prime, and on the decline. God is lost as the center of life and the source of values. Nietzsche’s madman noted that himself came too soon. No doubt Nietzsche, too, thought he was ahead of his time in heralding this news.

 “There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide.” – Albert Camus (1913 – 1960)

For Camus, the absurd hero is Sisyphus, a man from Greek mythology who is condemned by the gods for eternity to roll up a stone up a hill only to have it fall back again as it reaches the top. For Camus, Sisyphus typified all human beings: we must find a meaning in a world that is unresponsive or even hostile to us. Sisyphus, Camus believed, affirms life, choosing to go back down the hill and push the rock again each time. Camus wrote: “The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s

heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

“One cannot step twice in the same river.” – Heraclitus (ca. 540 – ca. 480 BCE)

Heraclitus definitely isn’t alone here. His message was that reality is constantly changing it’s an ongoing process rather than a fixed and stable product. Buddhism shares a similar metaphysical view with the idea of annica, the claim that all reality is fleeting and impermanent.

In modern times Henri Bergson (1859 – 1941) described time as a process that is experienced. An hour waiting in line is different from an hour at play. Today contemporary physics lends credence to process philosophy with the realization that even apparently stable objects, like marble statues, are actually buzzing bunches of electrons and other subatomic particles deep down.

---

Who would've thought that people want someone to tell them what to think? Does that mean that they lack the ability to think on their own? Or, does it mean that people have become so lazy that thinking serious thoughts is beyond their grasp?

In light of this, it should be the duty of any aspiring political movement, or party, to take the time to lay out what it considers to be the correct World Outlook (Weltanschauung)... and, build on this logically in everything that it says and does... 

Traditionally politics is vague...so's not to offend anybody... the more vague the better... that way everybody thinks they'll get what they want. All things to all men... But, in reality everybody gets what they deserve. Promise them anything but give them the cock! That's all we can expect from the System. Nothing more and nothing less.

If you want something different you are going to have to make it yourself.

And, that's the Truth!

The New Man

A reader writes: "I believe that it was Nikita Khrushchev who stated that the a failure of communism was that it was unable to create a new man..."

Funny, the Nazis created a 'new man' in less than twelve years - the SS-man circa 1944! 

What does that say? That the Russians were too lazy to mobilize their society? Or, that the Germans were way smarter? Or, better organized?

Here's a little country, the size of Texas, bringing the whole world to its knees... And, everybody is so fascinated by how 'evil' Nazi Germany was, that they are blind to the obvious miracle worked by the Nazis: They recovered from the depression, modernized their country, and became a major world power in less than 10 years (roughly two 5-year plans)... WOW! It took the whole world to defeat tiny little Germany... THE WHOLE WORLD! And, the 'big brains' just dismiss these terrific achievements with some inane comments on the 'Holocaust'.

Elsewhere, I have said that "Holocausts are human nature." Study history...study current events... THE Holocaust has become the modern Shekinah of Israel. And, what do the Zionists do when they get their own country? Why, they start Holocausting the Palestinians... Israel has become the new 'Nazi Germany' - without the social and economic miracle!

Where is the 'new man' that the kibbutzim was supposed to produce? Where is the new Zion? The spiritual point from which reality emerges... Its all bullshit.

Meet the new man, the same as the old man. 

"Any system will fail unless the fallen nature of man is dealt with. The corrupt nature of man will contaminate any system. Democracy is only as good as the people that are in that establishment. Wall Street was corrupted by the polluted desires of man." says our loyal reader.

More Abrahamic twaddle. Doesn't anybody get it? We are creating the New Man with every generation that we give birth to.

Those little children, who you look on as a nuisance, are our FUTURE. Instead of nurturing and protecting them we are fucking them. Instead of leaving them a better world, we are leaving our children a shit-pile. Expecting them to pay our bills. To live in austerity so we can 'live it up'.

The day will come when our own children will Holocaust us... and we deserve it. We have fucked and are fucking up the world more every day... That's a known. 

If our goal is to create a community where all of its members can enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - we have failed. Our leaders have betrayed us. Our wisdom is fallacy. Our path leads to oblivion. Our God is mammon. Our spirit is decay.

If we want to create a New Man - one that is capable of achieving miracles - we must first create a New Society. A society that is the complete opposite of the present one... If there is resistance to this idea it must be crushed. The stakes are life and death for the human race and the planet. It is a serious business that requires serious fighters for change. There can be no turning back. No holding out. It is a struggle for all or nothing. Victory or death... Our minds must be totally focused on the FINAL OUTCOME!

What will it be? A 'paradise' or a 'hell'? What will the New Man be like? Will he be compassionate and kind or ruthless and cruel?

The choice is yours... You have been armed with the Truth... YOU ARE THE FUTURE!

Anti-Semitism: Diverting the Focus Away From the Real Problem

The most persistent form of anti-Semitism has been a series of widely circulating stereotypes that constructed Jews as socially, religiously, and economically unacceptable to American life. They were made out to be marginal and menacing.

A set of distinct and consistent negative stereotypes, some of which can be traced as far back as the Middle Ages in Europe, has been applied to Jews.

1.-  [American] Jews are seen as being powerful and manipulative.

2.-  They are accused of dividing their loyalties between the United States and Israel.

3.-  Jewish materialistic values, aggressiveness, clannishness.

Statistics

The 2005 Survey of American Attitudes Towards Jews in America, a national poll of 1,600 American adults conducted in March 2005, found that 14% of Americans - or nearly 35 million adults - hold views about Jews that are "unquestionably anti-Semitic."

Among white people:  the number of Americans with hardcore anti-Semitic beliefs had dropped to 12%.

Among foreign-born Hispanics: 35%

Among black people: 36%

The 2005 Anti-Defamation League survey includes data on Hispanic attitudes, with 29% being most antisemitic (vs. 9% for whites and 36% for blacks); being born in the United States helped alleviate this attitude: 35% of foreign-born Hispanics, but only 19% of those born in the US.

A 2009 study entitled "Modern Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israeli Attitudes", published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 2009, tested new theoretical model of anti-Semitism among Americans in the Greater New York area with 3 experiments. The research team's theoretical model proposed that mortality salience (reminding people that they will someday die) increases anti-Semitism and that anti-Semitism is often expressed as anti-Israel attitudes. The first experiment showed that mortality salience led to higher levels of anti-Semitism and lower levels of support for Israel. The study’s methodology was designed to tease out anti-Semitic attitudes that are concealed by polite people . The second experiment showed that mortality salience caused people to perceive Israel as very important, but did not cause them to perceive any other country this way. The third experiment showed that mortality salience led to a desire to punish Israel for human rights violations but not to a desire to punish Russia or India for identical human rights violations. According to the researchers, their results “suggest that Jews constitute a unique cultural threat to many people’s worldviews, that anti-Semitism causes hostility to Israel, and that hostility to Israel may feed back to increase anti-Semitism.” Furthermore, "those claiming that there is no connection between antisemitism and hostility toward Israel are wrong."

Necessary Illusions by Noam Chomsky (1989) - Excerpt

There is no space to comment here on the vicious racist depiction of Arabs in novels, television, cartoons and cinema, or the crucial support in the American Jewish community for Rabbi Kahane, who is commonly denounced as a Nazi in Israeli commentary, and for other groups within Israel that are only marginally less extreme in their intentions with regard to the Arab population and attitudes towards them.

Those who express their fear and concern over manifestations of anti-Semitism among Blacks and others might be taken seriously if they were to pay even the slightest attention to what is said by their friends and associates. They do not.

The matter of racism and the Arab-Jewish conflict is more complex. The anti-Arab racism that has become so familiar as to be unnoticed has been accompanied by apparent concern over anti-Semitism; that the qualification is accurate is evident from a closer look at the revision that the concept of anti-Semitism has undergone in the process. There have long been efforts to identify anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in an effort to exploit anti-racist sentiment for political ends; "one of the chief tasks of any dialogue with the Gentile world is to prove that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not a distinction at all," Israeli diplomat Abba Eban argued, in a typical expression of this intellectually and morally disreputable position. But that no longer suffices. It is now necessary to identify criticism of Israeli policies as anti-Semitism -- or in the case of Jews, as "self-hatred," so that all possible cases are covered.

The leading official monitor of anti-Semitism, the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith, interprets anti-Semitism as unwillingness to conform to its requirements with regard to support for Israeli authorities. These conceptions were clearly expounded by ADL National Director Nathan Perlmutter, who wrote that while old-fashioned anti-Semitism has declined, there is a new and more dangerous variety on the part of "peacemakers of Vietnam vintage, transmuters of swords into plowshares, championing the terrorist P.L.O.," and those who condemn U.S. policies in Vietnam and Central America while "sniping at American defense budgets." He fears that "nowadays war is getting a bad name and peace too favorable a press" with the rise of this "real anti-Semitism." The logic is straightforward: Anti-Semitism is opposition to the interests of Israel (as the ADL sees them); and these interests are threatened by "the liberals," the churches, and others who do not adhere to the ADL political line.

The ADL has virtually abandoned its earlier role as a civil rights organization, becoming "one of the main pillars" of Israeli propaganda in the U.S., as the Israeli press casually describes it, engaged in surveillance, blacklisting, compilation of FBI-style files circulated to adherents for the purpose of defamation, angry public responses to criticism of Israeli actions, and so on. These efforts, buttressed by insinuations of anti-Semitism or direct accusations, are intended to deflect or undermine opposition to Israeli policies, including Israel's refusal, with U.S. support, to move towards a general political settlement. The ADL blacklist to campus Jewish leaders, stamped "confidential." Practices of this nature have been bitterly condemned by Israeli doves -- in part because they fear the consequences of this hysterical chauvinism for Israel, in part because they have been subjected to the standard procedures themselves, in part simply in natural revulsion.

Anti-Semitism, in short, is not merely conflated with anti-Zionism, but even extended to Zionists who are critical of Israeli practices. Correspondingly, authentic anti-Semitism on the part of those whose services to Israeli power are deemed appropriate is of no account.

These two aspects of "the real anti-Semitism," ADL-style, were illustrated during the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign. The Democratic Party was denounced for anti-Semitism on the grounds that its convention dared to debate a resolution calling for a two-state political settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In contrast, when an array of Nazi sympathizers and anti-Semites were exposed in August 1988 in the Bush presidential campaign, the major Jewish organizations and leaders were, for the most part, "curiously blasé about both the revelations and Bush's response to them," largely ignoring the matter, John Judis comments. The New Republic dismissed as a minor matter the "antique and anemic forms of anti-Semitism" of virulent anti-Semites and Nazi and fascist sympathizers at a high level of the Republican campaign organization. The editors stressed, rather, the "comfortable haven for Jew-hatred on the left, including the left wing of the Democratic Party," parts of the Jackson campaign, and "the ranks of increasingly well-organized Arab activists," all of whom supported the two-state resolution at the Party convention and thus qualify as "Jew-haters."

The point is that the ultra-right Republicans are regarded as properly supportive of Israel by hard-line standards, while the Democratic Party reveals its "Jew-hatred" by tolerating elements that believe that Palestinians are human beings with the same rights as Jews, including the right of national self-determination alongside of Israel. Following the lead of the major Jewish organizations, the Democrats carefully avoided the discovery of anti-Semites and Nazis in the Republican campaign headquarters and the continuing close links after exposure.

Further Reading

On The Jewish Question by Karl Marx

Anti-Semitism: Its Cause and Cure by Daniel De Leon

Some Strange Conclusions

Israel is a foreign nation. A sovereign state. For an American to place the interests of a foreign nation ahead of the interests of the United States is TREASON. It's as simple as that. Whether it is an organization or an individual - especially a member of our own government - treason requires a stern punishment. So stern, in fact, that none but a lunatic would commit it. As far as foreign nations carrying out acts of violence and terrorism against American citizens, that is an ACT OF WAR against the United States. It goes without saying, that an act of war against the United States amounts to national suicide.

Marx has an interesting idea: Get rid of huckstering and the worship of money and there is no basis for the popular conception of the Jew.

De Leon has another interesting idea: Get rid of the Bible and their is no basis for Semitism.

With only 9-12% of white Americans, 19-35% of Mexican Americans and 36% of black Americans believing in Anti-Semitism... Well, all you Anti-Semites, you'll just have to take your message to the minorities... nobody else is buying it. 

By the way, there is an interesting article by Amadeo Bordiga (1960), entitled: Auschwitz, or the Great Alibi. Check it out...HERE

This article has a slightly controversial history, having never been published under Bordiga’s name. It originally appeared, though, in 1960 in a French Bordigist journal, Programme Communiste, and Bordiga himself never spoke out against its theses. And so, echoing the ancients, we will call the author the pseudo-Bordiga.

The article was published as a pamphlet in 1970 by Pierre Guillaume, former member of Bordiga’s Parti Communist International and of the group around the ultra-left bookstore “La Vieille Taupe.” In a later incarnation La Vieille Taupe was to become the voice of left-wing holocaust denial, and it is in Guillaume’s early affection for this article – which appears on the web not only at marxists.org, but on revisionist websites – that we can see the germ of the movement.

"Indeed, it is an easy step from “Auschwitz or the Great Alibi” to complete denial of the Holocaust." say the Communists.

I think that perhaps they didn't really comprehend what the article was saying. See what you think....

Postscript

An article just came out today in Pravda: US Jewish community: The strongest in the world

The Time for 'Talking Shit' is Over

As I listen to the emanations from the mouth of 'Newt Romney' (the Republican Golem) and all of the other 'peanuts' from the right-wing, conservative, Christian, Republican 'peanut gallery'... I realize that the 'broad masses' are, by and large, too stupid to be trusted with making decisions concerning the future of humanity and the planet.

Since they (and this includes the Democrats too) are content to parrot someone else's slogans, and to parade them as 'truth', that's all we should give them. They are not ready, willing, or able, to 'think outside the box'. One can only wonder if they are capable of any real, or serious, thought at all...

There is nothing so powerful as an idea who's time has come... The key to winning the struggle for political power is to stay abreast of the times, and capture the most telling ideas and make them your own. The past is over. What happened yesterday has no meaning in the present moment. Everything was different then... a completely different combination of events, issues and problems requires a different combination of solutions... opportunities come and go... conditions are ever changing... Good management is flexible - it adapts, improvises and overcomes. To become stagnant and brittle is to become dead.

Most of what passes for serious political thought is dead. In its day, it might have been powerful, vital, and dynamic. But now it is weak, dried up and stagnant. It is of no relevance to the present - it is obsolete!

Yet, humans like to cling to old, worn out things - like a pair of comfortable slippers - because they have become used to them, and because they are too lazy to give any thought to their replacement.

In fact, people have become so lazy and indifferent that they cannot think anymore... so, basically, they are just 'cattle'.

What do we do with cattle in modern society? We slaughter them and make use of their physical bodies to create a myriad of things. (From steak to Jello). And, no one sheds a tear about it (except maybe a few vegetarians and animal rights people).

This isn't a horrible 'conspiracy' - it's the way we do things in modern society! This is our real 'culture'. It has nothing to do with outmoded concepts, and everything to do with pragmatism. "Whatever works!" is the slogan of our society. Religion, philosophical belief, personal feelings - none of these has anything to do with the actual workings of the world! (Except maybe in the minds of the deluded.)

As long as you cling to outmoded thinking you will be at a disadvantage in the world.

As long as you fail to see the true nature of the world, and society - the interconnectedness of people and things - you will be a loser.

To be a winner you need to look at the 'Big Picture'.

But first, you need to acquire 'illumination' - you need to light up the dark corners of your mind, and brush out the cobwebs!

Everything is really very simple. Man is a biological creature, driven by chemicals that act upon his brain and body. The 'prime directive' of the species is to survive and reproduce. In order to survive, in ever changing conditions, Man must evolve (both mentally and physically). He must develop new techniques to enhance his chances for survival. Those who fail to evolve cannot survive. Therefore, they must perish. Good riddance! Nature does not cry for those who do not make it. Nature is indifferent to human suffering. Humans have been 'given' everything they need to survive and evolve. And, if they cannot make due with what they have, well, they will simply cease to exist. The world will keep on going without them.

The same 'natural order' also has dominion over the institutions that humans create. Either they win a place in the world or they must perish. There is no such thing as a second-place winner... People and things either serve their purpose or they become obsolete.

It's all about 'nuts and bolts'... 'pretty ideas' and 'warm feelings' have nothing to do with reality. Nature doesn't give a rat's ass what you believe. The important thing is what you 'achieve'.

Speaking of illumination: The individual cannot survive alone. Even under the most primitive conditions, survival requires a community. What has brought our civilization low is the 'cult of the individual'. Plain and simple. All the rantings of Ayn Rand are bullshit. The great mind is the 'frosting' on the cake - always a product of the greater society. Like Elizabeth Warren so aptly points out, "Nobody ever made it alone." They just don't want to recognize the fact that they are just another 'brick' in the wall. The race will go on - with or without you.

Nothing is written in stone. Everything is in a state of flux. You snooze - you lose! You sought our help in creating a successful political movement. We were content to explore the Spiritual. But, we put our money where our mouth is... because we believe the 'proof is in the pudding'. Anybody can talk shit. (And they do.) But only such a one who is filled with the Spirit (H'si of EsLi) can accomplish anything real or lasting. Nobody gets it. The time for 'talking shit' is over.

And, that's the Truth!

What the Revolution Can Learn From the CIA

US and allies involved in covert operations in Iran 

A catalogue of unsolved killings, unexplained explosions and sinister computer viruses are leading many security experts to believe the US and its allies are carrying out covert operations against Iran's nuclear program.

Could the United States and allies such as Israel already be involved in a covert war against Iran? Many former US intelligence officials and Iran experts have suggested so with the alleged shooting down of a US Air Force unmanned drone last weekend over Iran adding to the growing belief that covert operations are being staged against Iran.

Combined with reports of explosions at military bases in Iran, the release of tailor-made computer viruses and the assassination of Iranian scientists linked to Tehran's nuclear program, security analysts are joining the dots to form a picture of an undeclared conflict unfolding within Iran's borders.

Covert tactics?

Of course, in a covert war, by its nature, no-one claims responsibility. There has been no acknowledgement of involvement by anyone in the explosions or in the deaths of two senior Iranian nuclear physicists killed by car bombs in the past 12 months. The mystery extends to the source of the Stuxnet computer worm which was secretly fed into Iran's nuclear program in 2010, causing centrifuges used to enrich uranium to spin out of control and shatter.

"It seems very plausible that covert operations against the Iranian nuclear program have already been going on for some time," said Michael Bauer, the head of the Middle East Program at the Center for Applied Policy Research in Munich.

Professor Volker Perthers, director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, is more cautious in his assessment. "(However), rather than speaking of a covert war, I see patterns of a Cold War and containment - remember that in the Cold War, covert operations of this or a similar kind were used rather frequently."

The usual suspects of the US, Israel and other allies such as Britain and France are being held responsible by the Iranian regime of either being directly or indirectly involved in all or some of these incidents.

Iran says it has arrested dozens of CIA informants in recent months, a claim that has been reluctantly confirmed by the US.

Iran Captures CIA Terrorists 

Iran’s security forces say they have arrested elements of a terrorist group in eastern Iran who had a hand in the execution of 15 police officers.

“The Iranian intelligence and police forces have arrested some terrorists who were behind the killings of 15 Iranian police members,”" Kazem Jalali, a senior lawmaker told reporters on Monday.

“A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News,” Brain Ross reported on April 3, 2007. “U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or ‘finding’ as well as congressional oversight.” 

In other words, the murder and destabilization campaign against Iran is a U.S. sponsored covert operation.

“Some former CIA officers say the arrangement is reminiscent of how the U.S. government used proxy armies, funded by other countries including Saudi Arabia, to destabilize the government of Nicaragua in the 1980s.”

ABC, of course, did not bother to mention that the CIA sponsored Contras were brutal terrorists who wantonly targeted civilians, attacked agriculture, destroyed Nicaragua’s fishing industry, and assassinated hundreds of Sandinista government officials. “They regularly destroyed health centers, schools, agricultural cooperatives, and community centers — symbols of the Sandinistas’ social programs in rural areas. People caught in these assaults were often tortured and killed in the most gruesome ways,” writes William Blum (Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, Common Courage Press, 1995).

No doubt the CIA and its proxy Jundullah terrorists are committing likewise atrocities and crimes in Iran.

“Pakistani government sources say the secret campaign against Iran by Jundullah was on the agenda when Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February,” Ross wrote. “A senior U.S. government official said groups such as Jundullah have been helpful in tracking al Qaeda figures and that it was appropriate for the U.S. to deal with such groups in that context.”

A Look At Nicaragua Establishes a Pattern of CIA Activity

Nicaragua's distant past is a portrait of conquest, subjugation, plundered resources and oppression by both internal and external forces. A country invaded, for example, by an entrepreneurial filibuster Yankee, William Walker, who declared himself President and legalised slavery. This is another reality of Nicaraguan history, and another of its many definitive moments.

For most of its political history after winning independence from the Spanish in 1839, Nicaragua maintained a privileged middle-class and ruling upper-class elite who were in no way representative of the average state of Nicaragua's people. They were, however, divided between "Liberals" and "Conservatives" the former based in Leon, the latter in Grenada. Although Nicaragua's history will show frequent squabbling between the two, they maintained very little in ideological difference. Neither offered any true hope for the vast majority of Nicaraguans who remained illiterate, unemployed, hopeless and yet passive. 

More recently, Nicaragua was the proud home of one of the world's longest running dynastic dictatorships, the Somozas'. This dictatorial era subsisted with the support and guidance of the United States and drove the population deeper into unforgivable poverty. 

But if there ever was a true, more nationalistic Nicaraguan patriot, it must have been Augusto Cesar Sandino, a baby-faced "bandit" who organised his troops well enough in the late twenties and early thirties to defeat and eventually expel the barefaced imperialism of US marines occupying parts of Nicaragua. And, do this without the support of the Nicaraguan Government who, in fact, also fought against him and after his triumph, treacherously shot him in the back during a negotiating session, literally. So was born the legend of Sandino, but for the next 40 years or so, this history was veiled by the fearful Somozas, who were obviously in no mood to give the people a martyred hero, a successful example of struggle against oppression. 

The first of the Somozas was Anastasio Somoza Garcia. Consolidating his grip on power through a rigged election in 1936, he ran the country until September 20th 1956, when a young poet, Rigoberto Lopez Perez, put 4 bullets in him, before being cut down by Somoza's bodyguards. "Tacho," as he was known, died soon after on September 29th. Luis Somoza Debayle, the eldest son, then ruled until 1967 and from here, his younger brother, Anastasio Somoza Debayle ascended to the throne until the revolution of 1979 ousted him and the rest of the Somoza family. Their long time at the top was sustained by the National Guard, a powerful and merciless police/army then also the most heavily US trained military establishment in all of Latin America. They ran the country with ingrained corruption and abuse of power, amassing a fortune estimated at between $500 million and $1.5 billion by 1979.

During their time, they accentuated food shortages by displacing peasant farmers to grow cotton and other exploitive export crops. The average income for Nicaraguans remained far below even the regional impoverished average. Infant mortality and illiteracy rates soared as life expectancy plummeted. Nicaraguans virtually lived as slaves, subjugated to the will of the Somozas who were described by the North Americans as admittedly "bastards, but our bastards nonetheless."

Even as the suffering of the Nicaraguan people seemed complete, it descended to a new low with Somoza Debayle's particular ruthlessness following a big earthquake in 1972, which destroyed most of Managua, leaving over 10,000 dead, 50,000 injured and 200,000 homeless. More than $100 million in international aid was allocated to relieving some of the acute suffering of the city's poor majority, hit hard by the quake, but most of this was shamelessly funnelled into Somoza's personal bank accounts, leaving the people even more impoverished and desperate. Somoza saw opportunities in the re-building process and had his construction companies, and those of his cronies, awarded lucrative contracts by his own government. He let the GN (National Guard—Guardia Nacional) sell food and material aid supplies donated freely by the international community which, along with other similar attrocities, eventually lost him the support of even the domestic elite leaving him and his family as unpopular as they'd ever been in Nicaragua. Even the US, shamed by Somoza's ruthlessness, veered away from the dictatorship by cutting off military aid and some non-military assistance, demoralising the dictatorship and inadvertently encouraging the fledgling insurgency movement in Nicaragua. 

Heading this movement was the FSLN (Frente Sandinista de Liberacion National—Sandinista Front for National Liberation) formed in 1961 by a group of Marxist students inspired by the example of Sandino and the 1959 Cuban Revolution which liberated that country from the tentacles of imperialism, but left it open to relentless persecution ever since. It adopted the popular Latin American insurrectionary colours of Red and Black, also used by M/26/7 of Cuba, the MRTA (Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement) of Peru, the FMLN (Farabundo Marti de Libercion Nacional) of El Salvador, the FARC of Colombia and more recently, the EZLN of Chiapas, Mexico. Initially, the FSLN (or the Sandinistas, as they were also known) were never any real threat to the Somozas. The GN quite often hunted down, tortured and murdered FSLN members with little resistance. They were, however, eventually to become a very intelligent and flexible guerrilla force capable of confronting and often beating the GN, especially after the 1972 earthquake. Some spectacular insurrectionary victories by their swelling numbers turned them into a real force by 1978 giving them the momentum to finally topple the GN and send the Somoza family fleeing into exile, but not before looting the country's coffers. By this stage the hated GN even consisted of international mercenaries, professional soldiers paid to fight, the deadliest of which were the South Koreans who fought rambo style high on cocaine, corner-to-corner with machine-guns in both hands. 

The strength of the revolutionary movement was bolstered by the overwhelming support of average Nicaraguans, and it was mainly due to this the FSLN was eventually victorious on 19th July, 1979. The war had cost the country 50,000 dead, or 2% of its total population; a staggering number considering the equivalent number in the United States would have been over 2,500,000. However, the irrepressible enthusiasm of having liberated their country led to a period of "National Reconstruction" by the Sandinistas who suddenly found they were heading an entire nation.

The properties of the Somozas (including over 30% of Nicaragua's best farming land) were quickly nationalised, as were the assets of many of their cronies and those that appeared abandoned by wealthy people who panicked and fled. Most were turned into state farms, peasant co-operatives, and in some cases, individual plots. These expropriating policies effectively gave land back to Nicaragua's poor, making them much more self-sufficient in food production than at any other time in recent history and helping Nicaragua tackle its enormous food shortage problems. The vigour of Nicaragua's newly found freedom and independence was reflected in skyrocketing GDP growth of 7% from 1979 to 1983, while Central America as a whole suffered a 14.7% decline.

This period also saw the innovative and highly effective use of social policies that radically expanded Social Security and Welfare programs to reduce some of the extreme suffering of the poor majority. Agrarian reform gave many thousands of peasants access to land. But the best results came from programs in health and education with an extremely enthusiastic volunteer program cutting illiteracy down at world record rates, to national record levels. This, coupled with a very successful grass-roots preventative medicine program, forced the United States to admit, "Nicaragua's government has made significant gains against illiteracy and disease." 

Organizations representing neighbourhoods, women, youth, urban and rural workers and peasants were encouraged to grow as fervour for truer participatory democracy grew. The Sandinistas drafted a National Constitution in close consultation with many Western European countries and even adopted electoral laws closely based on, and monitored by, the Swedish Electoral Commission. Open and free elections in November 1984 in which 75% of the total electorate participated (a massive turnout for a country without a compulsory voting law), saw FSLN candidate Daniel Ortega Saavedra win with a total of 63% of the vote. The international legitimacy of the elections was never questioned, but the US, fearing a popular victory by the FSLN, denounced them as a "Soviet style farce" as soon as they were announced in late 1983. Delegations from the British and Irish parliaments found the elections to be clean and valid but this news never reached mainstream US newsreaders who instead were alarmed to learn, from a CIA story "leaked" to the press, of Soviet-built MiG jet fighters being sent to Nicaragua aboard Socialist Bloc freighters, a very complete and timely fabrication aimed at distracting them from the truth of Nicaragua's elections. 

Nonetheless, the overwhelming popularity and rapid social victories of Nicaragua's revolution, now gathering international praise, stung the Reagan administration, which decided to take action. It immediately imposed trade sanctions on Nicaragua in an attempt to isolate it from US allies considering normalised relations with the revolutionary government. Following this, the CIA recruited exiled GN as well as other international mercenaries, trained and equipped them in bases in the US and Honduras to brutalise Nicaragua's young revolution for the next 7 years. The "contras," as they were known, were very successful in their deliberate strategy of targeting government, social services and personnel. They attacked and destroyed rural clinics, schools, food-storage facilities and paid particular attention to slaughtering teachers, doctors, nurses, technicians and other professionals. These losses meant large sectors of rural Nicaragua were deprived of government services they'd come to expect in the early '80s. Ronald Reagan, then US President, was delighted, calling the contras "freedom fighters" and boldly proclaiming, "I'm a contra!"

The legitimate Sandinista government was forced to invest heavily to protect the gains of the revolution—its costs were in manpower and resources used to fight the contras who never really won a battle against the Sandinista People's Army, but were successful in their debilitating aims nonetheless. As well as this, the Sandinistas were pressured into becoming more and more authoritarian, playing into the hands of US propagandists, who then pointed to a repressive government as the reason for the strong action against this third world country. 

The contra aggression was dramatically escalated by Washington leading up to the 1990 elections when the US decided to "micro-manage the opposition" to the FSLN to be certain of victory. The debilitating war, coupled with a massive propaganda campaign against the Sandinistas, led to the shock defeat of the FSLN government in what were "legitimate" elections as far as the practical vote casting and ballot counting processes were concerned. Clearly, a battered Nicaraguan population, ravaged by years of war, understandably saw no way out of the hell they'd been subjected to by the United States than to vote against the FSLN in support of Violeta Chamorro. Violetta was thus declared Nicaragua's first-ever female President and immediately let her profoundly conservative views influence her policies. She eliminated legal therapeutic abortions, drafted a policy condemning the use of contraceptives and re-criminalized homosexuality. Washington urged the contras to end their war as Nicaragua's people breathed a sigh of relief, having paid with over 30,000 dead and material losses estimated at $1.15 billion. 

The electoral loss was a massive shock to the FSLN, but one it had to accept if it was to adhere to truly democratic, socially conscious ideals. The United States had triumphed again with war, destroying another spark of potentially all-inclusive, conscious and compassionate society. I say "potentially" because the FSLN never really had a chance to implement anything resembling a total array of progressive policies; in fact, even with the astounding accomplishments it did manage, little of the full potential of the Sandinista revolution was ever realised. 

Before all this, in 1986, Nicaragua took the US to the International Court of Justice to sue for damages. The court ruled the contra war "illegal," describing it as "terrorist" and awarding $17 billion in compensation to be paid by the US to Nicaragua. Predictably, not a cent ever exchanged hands. Washington completely ignored the ruling, saying the court didn't have jurisdiction on the matter. On November 12, 1988, the Sandinista government introduced a resolution in the UN General Assembly concerning the "need for US compliance with the ruling by the International Court of Justice concerning military and paramilitary activities against Nicaragua." The resolution was adopted 94 votes to 2, the US and Israel against. Ronald Reagan, when asked about the resolution against his policies in Nicaragua, calmly replied, "It didn't interrupt my breakfast." This money would have been enough to completely lift Nicaragua out of debt and poverty. Even today, the $17 billion could pay off Nicaragua's debt three times over. Unfazed, the Sandinistas persisted and introduced another resolution in the General Assembly, further shaming the US internationally. It urged "... an end to the US trade embargo on Nicaragua." Again, 94 countries voted for the resolution, with two against—the USA and Israel.

And, as for the World Court ruling, recent deals with the US by the corrupt right-wing Managua governments have all but ended any hope of Nicaragua, and average Nicaraguans, ever seeing any of this money. 

During this time, the world also learnt of more malevolent US activity when the Iran/Contra Scandal was exposed. The National Security Council of the US, having had its military funding for the Nicaraguan contras cut by a Congress concerned about contra atrocities, decided to fund the contras illegally instead, from the basement of the White House. Colonel Oliver North, via an organization aptly named "the Enterprise," bought weapons from various international arms dealers and passed them to Israel who sold them to Iran, then fighting an appalling war with Iraq but crippled militarily by an international arms embargo. In return for being able to buy these arms to continue the war effort with Iraq, Iran released US hostages held in Beirut and other places in the Middle East.

So what did this have to do with the contras in Nicaragua? Profits from the sale of the weapons to Iran were invested in more arms, supplies and training for contras to murder more Nicaraguans trying to build the revolution. Such were the lengths the Reagan administration was prepared to go to scuttle another threat of a good example in Central America—an example, in fact, which could have positively resonated around the world, in every impoverished country. This of course, being the true reason the US was violently opposed to it. 

It was only when a Sandinista jungle patrol shot down a CIA Hercules military cargo plane over northern Nicaragua, with clear evidence of the entire plot contained within (in the form of arms and documents) that the entire operation was uncovered and the whole world shocked. Oliver North took the blame to save President Reagan's "ass," who denied ever knowing of the operation. North spent a miserly amount of time behind bars before being pardoned as a "patriot" by Reagan's successor President George Bush (Sr). Today, he presents a "War Stories" program on Fox News, one of the most reactionary news networks in the world; he's also a personal family favourite of the Bush clan.

Since the FSLN defeat in 1990, US interventionism in Nicaragua has persisted with blatant anti-socialist policies coming to the fore with every Nicaraguan election. Subsequent Nicaraguan right-wing governments, backed by the US, have once more turned corrupt and ruthless as with the most recent example of the piggishly greedy and internationally detested Arnoldo Aleman, who plundered the country and left average Nicaraguans in the most horrid of conditions. 

Neo-liberal dictates masquerading as "recommendations" by undemocratic and irresponsible institutions like the World Bank and the IMF have added to Nicaragua's crippling international debt, which is, on a per-capita basis, among the highest in the world. Today, in the entire Western hemisphere, Nicaragua sits just above Haiti as the most impoverished country.

In November of 2001, the FSLN lost another election to the US, who now sees nothing wrong with meddling in the internal democratic processes of sovereign nations. And Nicaragua has gone back to being another "market," another energy source, kept weak and desperate in order to feed the world's greatest-ever empire, the United States of America. 

How did they pervert another election?

    * By threatening an already indigent Nicaraguan electorate with re-introduced sanctions if they dared elect the FSLN.

    * By threatening to withdraw aid if they dared elect the FSLN.

    * By hinting at possible hostile repercussions if they dared elect the FSLN.

    * By declaring the FSLN Presidential candidate (and former democratically elected President of Nicaragua), Daniel Ortega, a "terrorist" comparable to Osama bin Laden, and a supporter of terrorism.

    * And, by taking out full page ads in Nicaragua's most widely distributed newspapers declaring open support by Florida Governor Jeb Bush (GW's brother) for the PLC (Constitutional Liberal party), the FSLN's bitter opponent, headed by a millionaire businessman whose former assets were so vast some were confiscated and redistributed by the equitable land and property reform policies of the revolutionary '80s. 

After the poisonous US attempt to pervert the 1984 elections, the Sandinistas painted a mural in Leon depicting the CIA as a two-headed serpent rising from the remnants of the GN, one head submitting a ballot box, the other hissing at the hand of the voter casting the ballot in an attempt to influence the vote.

And so to the Nicaragua of today, plummeting head-first into complete disaster once again, reliant heavily on coffee production and export, when the price of coffee as a commodity has been consistently devalued by international speculators and commodity traders since 1997. 

Companies like Nestle declare ever-increasing profits mainly from the falling prices of such commodities as more and more Nicaraguan farmers are forced, during this "coffee crisis" for them, to clear more virgin rainforest to plant more coffee to survive. In fact, a farmer might have to harvest four manzanas of coffee today, for the same amount of money received two years ago for only two manzanas.

And the farmers (in particular) suffer. Most live in disgusting conditions, in tiny shacks with their families, completely lacking basic amenities like power, running water, sewerage or a telephone. They have little if any access to educational or health services, but they persist, passively exploited. As they're forced further into pristine jungle areas they endanger further Nicaragua's already irreparably damaged environment. But no environmentalist in their right mind could blame them.

Nicaragua is testimony to brutality, violent revolution and hope, then further brutality and exploitation. It is an example of what can be achieved using methods that ultimately fail, because they are eventually reproducing of themselves, or because there exists a hegemonic imperialist power willing to use violence to consolidate its domination over any country unwilling to toe the Corporate Capitalist line.

Can this evil monster be defeated by passive resistance and non-violence? 

I don't think so. I think that in order for the Revolution to defeat Corporate Capitalism it must become twice as brutal and cold-blooded as the mercenaries that it employs to surpress the People... They say, "Everything that you do will come back to you." How ironic that in studying the tactics of the Enemy its weaknesses are revealed.

Poor Iran, it is next in the cycle of Corporate Capitalist 'intervention'... Someday, it will be the American people who will be the target of these operations... 

Will you be ready to resist?

Law and Lawlessness in America

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is the first street protest I've known of to state its values not with a manifesto but with a library. The People's Library held a corner of the encampment at Zuccotti Park in New York City, and consisted by the end of over 5,500 books, neatly maintained and cared for by volunteers.

The movement's other stylistic innovation is the General Assembly, a daily meeting, at which the crowd relays each speaker's words by repeating them, phrase by phrase. This started out as a way to counter a ban on megaphones.

But it has morphed into a political syntax, for two reasons: it engages the audience, since they must listen in order to repeat, and it disciplines the speakers, to keep their sentences pithy and their interventions short. In consequence more people take the floor.

Ideas and discourse

The People's Library and the General Assembly convey that OWS is about a politics of ideas and discourse. It is in plain opposition to the prevailing politics of money and force.

Nobody has to say this; it just is - a small model of middle-class organization, with a field kitchen, medical station, cleared pathways and clean-up crews. By its forms, the movement asserts the claim of republicanism and democracy against the ethos of markets and empires.

For this reason, and unlike past movements that sought to provoke and outrage the middle classes, OWS tapped into a well-spring of public goodwill. Though the actual protesters were few, they were fed and sustained by many more, treated well in the press, visited occasionally by the famous, and could call people into the streets to back them up if they were needed. And the movement began to spread around the country.

Rattled bankers

This disturbed the quiet world of the bankers. Unlike in Europe where the most serious stresses from the economic crisis - in Greece or in Ireland, say - are highly visible but remote from the bank headquarters, in America they are mostly invisible but close at hand.

Bankers here are used to going about untroubled by the people they've harmed - and yet they are conscious that those people are not far away. When the victims surface, right outside the office window, it's distressing. The very sight of the encampment, disciplined and clean and legal though it was, was an affront.

New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg made two efforts clear to OWS from Zuccotti Park. The first time he gave fair warning, the campers mounted an effective mass resistance, and the police backed off.

The second one came at night, on November 14, without warning. It was widely and correctly compared to a military operation. While the level of brutality did not reach that of 1968 in Chicago or Paris, methods were rough and people were hurt. The tents, kitchen and personal belongings were trashed. And the library was destroyed.

False claim

The raid was lawless. Before they moved in, the police read a statement declaring that the city had "determined" that the site was a health and fire safety hazard. This was false - no such determination had been made.

At his press conference the next morning, the mayor took "personal responsibility," saying that the raid met the demands of the "owners" of the park - a development corporation which had agreed to maintain it open 24/7 in return for a zoning variance on a nearby building, and on whose board the mayor's girlfriend sits. This was, indeed, the ugly truth.

Elsewhere in the country, 18 mayors coordinated their attacks on Occupy encampments. In Oakland and Berkeley and Portland and Seattle there was police violence, including the pepper-spraying of an 84-year old woman, and a pregnant teenager, who was kicked in the stomach, has now miscarried.

At the University of California, Davis, a police officer pepper-sprayed an entire row of seated, non-violent students. Photos and video quickly went round the world. Reports that the Federal Government played a role in all this remain unconfirmed so far.

Prosecutors asleep

Meanwhile as the journalist Matt Taibbi said, in the skyscrapers above, "anything goes." While a few state-level prosecutions have started, the Federal Department of Justice remains to all appearances fast asleep.

This is despite official reports, including that of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (which made criminal referrals) and that of the Senate Permanent Committee on Investigations, which laid out a road map for prosecutions in certain high cases.

Thus we have extra-legality in two dimensions. One is the use of force against unarmed, nonviolent protesters who have committed no crime, pose no threat, and uphold the political values of the middle class. The other is the failure to enforce existing law against those who have committed vast crimes, for which millions have paid with their jobs and their homes.

That's the state of law in America today. But the People's Library is being rebuilt, book by book.

An Interesting Question

Psychiatrists who have examined the Norwegian man charged with killing 77 people in a shooting rampage in July have concluded that he is insane, the BBC reports.

The psychiatrists concluded that Anders Behring Breivik, 32, is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia.

In their 243-page report, the psychiatrists said "Breivik lived in his own delusional universe where all his thoughts and acts are guided by his delusions," the BBC reports.

They found that he was in a psychotic state during the two attacks in July and during 13 interviews they held with him.

Breivik has admitted carrying out the attacks but has pleaded not guilty to charges against him. He is scheduled to go on trial in April.

The BBC says it is unclear what bearing the findings of the psychiatrists will have on the trial if their conclusions are approved by a panel from the Norwegian Board of Forensic medicine.

Anders Behring Breivik is obviously mentally defective... We do not need a psychiatrist to make any pronouncement... The interesting thing is that they define his 'illness' as living in his own delusional universe where all his thoughts and acts are guided by his delusions... 

Aren't we all living in our own delusional universes where our thoughts and actions are guided by our delusions? What is 'reality'? What is 'Truth'? Who is the ultimate authority on what is delusion and what is reality?

Aren't 'freedom' and 'democracy' delusional concepts? (Especially when faced with the reality of Corporate greed and cruelty?)

Breivik was a Christian. Isn't that 'paranoid schizophrenia' in action?

Breivik was a right-wing conservative. Isn't that also 'paranoid schizophrenia'?

I think therefore I am. All my thoughts and actions are based on the things that I believe. If I believe in human progress, human kindness, or that the Future can be a better place, there will always be someone who will say that I am 'delusional'... If I say the world is majorly fucked up someone will say that I am 'paranoid'... Jesus, most of the people in the world go to work everyday in a 'psychotic state' - it's just a matter of degree!

Breivik committed his crimes against humanity in order to be heard. That is the simple truth. Now he will be neatly tucked away in a 'nut house' and declared unfit to stand trial. The logic of his thinking will never be debated because he is 'crazy'. End of story.

Not so fast... The issues still stand, especially for Europeans... Do we have the right to our own nationality? Who decides what is 'politically correct' and what is not? Business? Government? Bureaucrats? Intellectuals? Or, the People?

Why do we have to let foreigners enter our countries, and change our values? Especially when millions of our own people are unemployed?

Doesn't anybody get it?

All over the world, lately in Russia, Germany, France, United Kingdom and Norway (to name a few), the people have said NO to immigration. But the Corporate Capitalists want that cheap labor... they want to stir the workers up against each other... keep the wages down... generate hatred and mistrust... Ultimately, they want to tell you what to think... 

"Just buy some more useless bullshit you dumb ass," they say, "And, get back to work."

The problem is not immigrants. It's not people of other religions. It's not people of other races. The problem is Corporate Capitalism!

Remember the 'Golden Rule' - Whoever has the gold makes the rules!

They own the politicians and the police. They run the schools. They buy religious leaders, the media... they decide what kind of entertainment we can watch and listen to... they decide what's funny and what's not... What the fuck do you know - you're just a working-class slob! One step above a slave... who thinks you're 'middle-class'... 

Buy some more useless bullshit, you dumb ass. And then get back to work. (If you still have a job.) 

You'll will never get to debate any 'important questions' because the people who ask them are 'crazy' - paranoid schizophrenics - living in their own delusional universes where all their thoughts and acts are guided by their delusions...

Reality is what the rich and powerful say it is....