The Face of Imperialism is a powerful, frightening, and honest book. It will be hated by those who run the Empire, and it will be loved by people who are searching for truth amidst the piles of garbage of Western propaganda. Above all, this book will be like a bright spark of hope for billions of men, women, and children who are fighting this very moment for survival, defending themselves against the Empire and against all monstrous faces and masks of imperialism."
@PeaceAndJustice357 actually your naive.Life is war and always has been.White people are just the smartest,bravest and most courageous warriors so they dominate the world.
@PAULOcbi sigh, no its not ppl around the world when you ppl where coiming out of your ice age didn't understand the type of ppl they where dealing with. who just spent 10's of thousands of yrs in the ice. We where developed socially agruculturally and any other form of development there is. but being that ur cultured by white supremacy it would be hard to accept that. you rule because we trusted. bravey no deciteful yes. smartest no theifs yes. but your rule will come to and end.soon!!!lol!!!!!
@PeaceAndJustice357 'out of your ice age" ?? you should get to a reference library ,you are clearly un-educated,are you even an adult? We are all linked by DNA to be from the same tribe of Homo-Sapiens which probably originated in Africa,I know popular history teaches that NeadertalMan,PekingMan,Australopithicus were killed off by ice-age but its more likely we Homo-Sapiens killed them off cos they were different.Its the whites that left Africa to explore and conquer new lands.WARRIORS.
'The People! The People! What a joke in China and the old Soviet. There is no plutocracy and corruption like in the Communist Ant Colony where the idividual is nothing... zero...submerged in the collective run by the ruthless oligarchs. Yes, there is much injustice in the West but give us this rather than the brutal imperialist Gulag which exists in Parenti's hallucinations, where even private property is anathema..
This is just BS. Populations everywhere earn roughly what they produce. It's not a case that rich countries got rich by extracting resources from poor countries and vice versa.
@zefvor BOY are U ignorant,try reading "the council of TRENT" for starters,or "War is a racket" by GEN. Smedly Butler,,2 time cong medal of honor ,,,then None dare call it conspiracy by gary allen ...all online FREE
Parenti makes good points here. There are a number of African countries that have massive resources in terms of diamonds and other gems not to mention oil.
The first world has historically punished the third world for decades. Whether through IMF conditions, control of industries by foreign firms and continuation of piss poor conditions, militaristic imperialism morphed into economic imperialism.
Capitalism is a failed 19th century materialist economic theory plotting a grim future. It went bankrupt financing repression and went into decline in the final stage as a corrupt empire. Of course there are exceptions to this view. In the words of George W Bush," Our nation is the greatest force for good in history." Also note that beginning with the incineration of the populations of Hiroshima & Nagasaki these do-gooders are responsible for the deaths of not fewer than 4,000,000 in the process
@jazzbo66zz You're wrong.Capitalism works-for those who own the capital and have access to it. Capitalism works for the rich, upper middle class and a number of middle class people but not for upper, middle and lower working class people and the poor. Bush was right-The US is a force for good-good tax cuts, good military spending, good return on investment for the wealthier classes.
@MultiSmartass1 The group who are actually controlling the lions share of capital as well as the foundations and corporation boards is really too small to describe as a class per say. The U of Florida spent a couple of years compiling the names and came to the conclusion that fewer than 6,000 individuals are directing the entire US power structure including essentially all private wealth held as either capital assets or political influence. The classes you speak of have been decapitalized.
@jazzbo66zz Sounds like a top 1% or so. Class is closest lexical category I come up to describe in them in a collective way. Group is too general and vague. As I have mentioned elsewhere, the failure of capitalism in the US and elsewhere is in providing the common man and woman with access to capital that will make their lives decent and provide them with good housing, education and jobs.
Yes, this represents no more than a sliver of !%. .As the middle class was being decapitalized in the 1970s the elites became an insurgency. These elements grew conscious of sharing a set of interests that could best be served by using the leverage of wealth & prestige to acquire a controlling interest over the existing social and political institutions of power that previously were at least minimally autonomous. This movement precipitated an ideology of messianic capitalism
@jazzbo66zz I think its monetarism gone wild ( that's sound like the title of a new X rated DVD series) and the erosion in the US of such things as usury lwas leading to outrageous credit card interest and deregulation of the airline and other industries during the Reagan Administration. It was an insurgency all right-a right wing monetarist one.
The remaining US aristocracy has adopted a kind of double speak to assuage their consciences of the horrors they perpetrate. Words like good in their lexicon assume grotesque and other worldly meanings. The whole culture of messianic capitalism has resembles a self reinforcing thought reform program. I find myself in dialogs with people on this blog who literally are incapable of thinking. They exhibit a high resistance to Information out of the box, an abstraction threshold?
@jazzbo66zz They are resistant because of the waves of propaganda that have washed over them over the years. In the 50's, it was direct through pro-business film that workers were forced to looked at. In the 2000, we have cable business channels and the overall orientation of network tv which perpetuates a worship of the free market out of all proportion to common sense, logic and sanity.
@MultiSmartass1 I think of a class operating with some measure of power within a settled set of economic relations. What the present confluence of corporate interests represents to me is an insurgency that has destabilized the existing socio- political order in the interest of achieving a global hegemony reminiscent of Hitler's dream of a "Reich that would rule the world for a thousand years". At this extreme the "economy" resembles a paranoiac quest for power that begins to sound delusional
@jazzbo66zz Inteersting comparison to the Hitlerian version of the Reich. However, the corporate community is monolithic at times but mostly individualistic. In other words, CEOs are largely about protecting their fiefdoms and advancing profits for themselves and their firms. The idea of an integareted program of corporate control seems something new especially when you consider the rise of strategy in only the past 30 plus years or so.
@MultiSmartass1 Corporate culture to my way of thinking is a kind of avant guard I agree they are devoted to enhancing returns on investment & have found it convenient to operate behind the liberal sounding rhetoric of both rugged individualism and modernity. Beneath this carefully tended exterior these are highly standardized individualists. The executive level is a secretive society & an interlocking directorate that carefully controls American public & private institutions as a totality.
@jazzbo66zz Corporate culture is essentially hierarchal and authoritarian in nature. What worse is that the idea of corporate responsibility and creative capitalism have taken hold amongst some business barons. Corporations do not have a social responsibility-that's PR talk. They are responsible to shareholders and Directors only.
Yes these kinds of thought reform programs were introduced in the 50s & became a school of corporate film-making. The genera refers to Industrial Psychology or Industrial Relations. The intent of the management was to isolate workers by dividing them and using competitive pressures to play them off against one another. The goal was to reform the the workers by isolating them & reinforcing feelings of social dependency on job performance. TV was shaped by GE, GM & Westinghouse
@jazzbo66zz Ronald Reagan was the host of GE theatre for a while and then worked as a spokesman for the company and toured factories and plants giving right-wing speeches about communism and capitalism. Chomsky notes that companies wanted off-site control of workers thus the propaganda films.
The ways television was shaped and the picture of the world it trades on were a function of corporate power from the beginning. You raise some intriguing questions about what the propaganda content of the programming might be at a subliminal level. If you have any suggestions for selections from N Chomsky to read on this subject I would appreciate hearing from you
@jazzbo66zz I'm thinking about "Propaganda and the Public Mind" interviews with David Barsamian and Chomsky. That's the only one I can think of off hand.
Thank you. I am also interested in the Reagan business. This was a corporate shill if ever there was one but the story of how & by whom he was managed I have no idea. A retired dialog coach from his Hollywood days told me that she had to teach him every script one word at a time. His public image was carefully calculated but unlike Nixon who was driven by power Reagan seemed to be something of a Manchurian Candidate who was about two thirds front man & one third idiot savant
@jazzbo66zz Reagan was an actor so the corporate shill in him was partly survival mode. He had his expenses and doing GE Theater on TV paid the bills. I understand that. The idea of Reagan as a Manchurian Candidate is an interesting idea. Nixon was far smarter and wilier man than Reagan whom he saw as an amiable dunce. As for learning speeches one word at a time, I don't know anything about that.
why bother fighting over which system is better. ALL r manmade therfore unsustainable. whether capitalist or communist - its not natural t/fore not viable. Nature requires natural systems.. As human beings we r naturally going to be diverse - 1 manmade system cannot serve us well. so we need natural occuring and diverse ways to live.... Lets look at the ancient ways and how they operated and functioned and evolved. They seemed to work well - they were sustainable. PPL lived good quality lives
capitalism describes a theory for the upward .redistribution of wealth. What we should be trying to understand is how the agenda of Neoliberalism was inserted into the place once held by the commons" or a similarly derived meaning for the '"people" as the structure of a responsible community. Capitalism represents the infantilization of the individual and the negation of community. The notion of Neoliberal economics converts libraries and schools into prisons and police stations.
Communism is not monetary based. It's a classless, stateless, borderless society following the total destruction of capital. If you want to disagree with Marx, it's worth actually reading him.
@idunnobigandhappy Communism IS monetary based. The govt controls the money, not the citizenry. Research. Think. Support the Venus project for the world we ALL deserve.
Socialism as practiced in the 20th century involved the state controlling the money. Communism as advocated by Marx involved the abolition of money and the state.
Marx was a scholar and a revolutionary, and hugely different from Stalin and his followers. If you want to criticise communism, read and understand Marx first.
@idunnobigandhappy Marx ideology was just that, ideology that's never been practiced. Socialism UTILIZES money. The only difference between socialism and capitalism is the amount of regulation by the govt; socialism is more regulated by the govt than capitalism.
The difference is who controls the means of production, and it is a huge difference. You are trying to pretend there is two sides of a coin here. I'm not sure what sort of abstract point you are trying to make, but you fail, miserably. Kind of like capitalism for the people.
Capitalism has done more to help your average joe than communism ever did.
Your average joe in the west can now live a high quality of life with showers, baths, various skin products, soap, hot water, cell phones, internet access, computers, televisions etc all at a modest price, a result of competition and price regulation.
'the people' is an ambigious concept.
The third world isn't so much 'poor' as it is full of stupid people.
@cidseven Most of us have the choices that matter made for us, trapped in monolithic economic structures over which we have no influence. Our choices are being made for us by the wickedest of men for the express purpose of suppressing our aspirations for peace, justice, equity, equality and community. Michael Parenti has the unique ability to envision a world of possibility that lies beyond the imaginative confines of the cage. He asks us to become the people we always wanted to be.
@cidseven i am curious to learn which "Science" you are referring to? Eugenics otherwise known as race science would certainly support your assumptions concerning the nature of society as well as your antipathy for democratic rule. I would surmise that a two class model of society such as that which flourished briefly under apartheid in South Africa would offer a reasonable and necessary compromise with our essential inequality which is a function of your "scientific" conception of nature?
@jazzbo66zz Eugenics isn't specifically race science. Eugenics can occur within races. You don't know what eugenics is.
The reason south africa was a successful country at one point under a white elite was because that white elite were extremely intelligent and culturally superior.
I like democracy in theory, but in practice, the mob are stupid and I don't trust them. The mob is the natural enemy of my kind.
Thank you for that clarification. Although being an immigrant, you still consider yourself to be a member of the master race and not a member of the "mob". The term Eugenics or Racial Hygiene refers to race based social policies instituted by the Nazi that sought to eliminate all "life unworthy of life". These impure minorities included all criminals degenerate political dissidents Jews Slavs the weak feeble-minded homosexuals unemployed and communists from the chain of heredity.
@jazzbo66zz I'm not an immigrant. Eugenics can occur within races, infact, the majority of the time it is within a single race population. Racial hygiene is a form of eugenics, but eugenics could exist within heterogeneous populations. Infact, it does, it is commonly used to help ashkenazi jews from producing defective children due to jews being severely inbred.
As Eugenics in your view, is synonymous with both science and with nature itself, yet has not succeeded in eliminating the weak, would you have any objection to either a private militia or the state stepping in to help nature along? I mean why should the able bodied be required to care about the weak, you know... the losers so to speak. Wouldn't it be a lot better to streamline the process, in the name of scientific efficiency? Why not just do it & get rid of them... know what i mean?
@jazzbo66zz "my view" of eugenics is the scientific definition of eugenics. Eugenics more often than not occurs within a single race of people, it is not always preoccupied with racial impurities but enhanching the quality of the genepool.
You honestly dont know what the hell you are talking about. Just accept defeat and stop trying to save face you little fool.
@cidseven Obviously, you don't what you are talking about. Eugenics does concentrate on removing racial, mental, emotional and intellectual impurities primarily from "feeble-minded" whites. That why a supreme court justice wrote that "three generations of imbeciles is enough." Apparently, you are a Third generation imbecile. You know, maybe I will rethink my position-if you get lobotomized.
@MultiSmartass1 You are correct. The author of the quote you are citing I believe is none other Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Oliver Wendell Holmes from an opinion dated 1924 supporting the states right to inflict forced sterilization on all those in the states custody and mental patients in particular.
@jazzbo66zz You have done your research which is more than what I can say for some of the clowns on this page. The etyomology of Eugenics stems from the Greek. Holmes was like a lot of educated people-who somewhat logically though immorally-believed in forced sterilization of people of supposedly low intellect who were overwhelmingly white. I'm thiniing Eugenics should make a comeback-to sterilize rightwingers.
You have done your research as well. Some 60,000 Americans were forcibly sterilized after civil hearings to establish that their offspring would likely be "socially inadequate" . Thousands of European Jews were rejected for US citizen ship and repatriated where they died by the untold thousands as a result of America's eugenic race quotas. The real tragedy is that we defeated Germany in WWII but we have obviously not yet defeated Fascism.
@jazzbo66zz You have done your research as well. Let's not forget the Pioneer Fund. the Rockefeller and other foundation support for Eugenics research and of course Hitler and Nazi efforts which sprang from their studying of American work in Eugenics. The Nazi haven't gone away-they just vote Republican and serve as GOP House members and Senators in Congress.
@MultiSmartass1 The heiress to the Harriman railroad fortune put up the bulk of the money. Using her power over the rail system, plus her NY social connections to solicit other contributors & exert these together as political leverage over Immigration legislation and race quotas enforced at Ellis Island. The Rockefeller Foundation financed the Nazi Office of Racial Hygiene & brought in IBM to supply the computer technology to track eugenic experiments on human subjects in the death camps.
@jazzbo66zz Yes, good research. Eugenics is interesting because it has largely been in an effort to "purify" the white race. Eugenics hasn't really been tried on other races on a mass scale. Whites-supposedly "feeble minded" ones anyway-have been the victims of forced sterlization efforts and lobotomies for years. Eugenics has and will always be a threat to caucasians.
I am afraid it is you who has no idea what i am talking about when I say Eugenics embodies a fascist ideology and was never a legitimate branch of science. You are attempting to conceal the pre-scientific prejudices of Social Darwinism behind the pseudo-scientific fascist ideology of Eugenics.
@jazzbo66zz JESUS CHRIST, you are one confused little bastard arent you.
What the fuck?? eugenics = fascism? what the hell? eugenics has existed WELL before fasism ever did, and it existed in countries that werent fascist. USA, BRITAIN, Helvettia etc.
You dont know what you are on about you little moronic turd.
Eugenics was Hitlers inspiration for what became the Third Reichs social policies referring to "Racial Hygiene". Eugenics is a branch of pseudo science that has appeared under various guises in a number of places but first came to prominence in the US and Britain well before Hitler came to power in 1932. I have suggested all of this to you already. If we were having a conversation rather than a written exchange, I could resort to speaking to you veeery slooowly.
@jazzbo66zz What the hell are you talking about? You honestly have zero clue what eugenics is.
Eugenics isn't pseudo science, the only way it could possibly be pseudo science is if genetics were disproven to exist. So long as the hereditary unit exists, it is entirely possible to 'improve' a population through controlled breeding.
There is nothing innately racial about it, such things could occur within mixed populations. You are a fool.
@cidseven Out of sight of the world at Buchenwald and Auschwitz, Eugenic doctors like Josef Mengele would carry on the research begun just years earlier with American financial support including grants from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institution. Only after the secrets of Nazi Eugenics horrified the world & only after Nuremberg declared compulsory sterilization a crime against humanity did American Eugenics recede. Edwin Black ; WAR AGAINST THE WEAK
@cidseven I met a Chinese scholar immigrating to the US recently who had just completed his dissertation in Modern Literature and I asked him if he was relieved to be escaping from the revolution. He answered, " Yes but things are changing; America may be a democracy becoming a totalitarian state and China a totalitarian state becoming a democracy" I believe western history suggests that the modern empires closely resemble one another in the end and typically fail for similar reasons.
@jazzbo66zz That's nice. I have little if any respect for anything the chinese have to say. They are a pathetically weak people with a pathetically weak history of being conquered. America is may be becoming totalitarian, but this is not necessarily a bad thing. China on the other hand cannot escape totalitarianism. The mongoloid race are psychologically conditioned for slavery and submission.
@jazzbo66zz P.S. there are no modern empires, nor do the empires of history mirror the ones of the past, they are typically quite different.
The closest thing you have to a modern empire in the making is the European Union, and this would be an excellent thing if it werent for its overt communist attitude.
@cidseven The US dominates the world today by both the application & threat of its military power. This form of domination is supported by a network of some 900 US military bases world wide. This vast basing structure is part of a foreign policy complex used to justify a US military budget of $1.3 trillion which alone constitutes a new and fearsome kind of empire not to consider its recent military deployments to serve a strange new geopolitical-military doctrine known as 'preemptive war'
@jazzbo66zz The USA is not an empire. You don't know what you are talking about. The reason the USA became and international presence was because it was the only super power capable of standing up to the spread of international communism, which was a major threat for every intelligent person.
You choose to ignore this because youre a communist.
@cidseven The US has been an empire. Phillippines, Samoa, Puerto Rico-most of them grabbed in the Spanish American War. Now, The US is a economic empire not a wholly political or military one. The US became an empire in the late 1890's before Communism engulfed Russia (1917) so the commies has nothing to do with it. The US is no different from the Macedonia/Greek city states, Rome, Britain or the Ottoman empires.
The US employs state of the art militarized terror to preside over a vast empire of colonial possessions and protectorates from which US multinationals extract resources incl. oil copper strategic metals uranium timber rubber medicinals and slave labor in the manufacture of commodities for retail giants like Walmart & Nike in a dozen dictatorships that transfered ownership of rights to US companies in exchange for military assistance & IMF loans. The US controls a monopoly on terror
America has a long and fabled history at Empire, maintained by deploying militarized exterminations to eliminate indigenous challenges within its hemisphere under the rubric of the Monroe Doctrine & elsewhere e.g.; Vietnam under similar rationales comprising what is otherwise known as the "domino theory". Preliminary empire building began in 1880 with the massacre of 300 unarmed Lakota Souix at Wounded Knee. Modern tactics incl counter insurgency, low intensity conflict & outsourcing
Vietnam was a war against communism. You dont seem to realise that communists wanted to take over the world and the only people who were prepared to mount an global military effort to counter this were the americans.
What argument would that be? The US is using the ideological foil provided by its bogus war on terror to advance its economic claims over this planet. Capitalism is being imposed by unilateral military force. The US has simply replaced the USSR as the worlds primary soviet style expansionist threat to peace. US expansionism in the name of a fundamentalist crusade in Afghanistan is no different in its methods or its outcomes than the Soviet invasion we remember from a generation ago.
@jazzbo66zz The war on terror isn't bogus, radical islam genuinely doesn't like america and israel.
However, the war on terror is pussified as fuck, they should just wipe islam out, they dont for some bizarre humanitarian reason.
America obviously doesn't have much of an objective seeing as how it has a nigger president. What kind of empire allows its people to get displaced by inferior races?
Fundamentalist Christianity is a similar terrorist ideology bent on world domination as a religious crusade but this only accounts for one facet of the globalization of American power. Your contention that Capitalist Christianity could dominate the world if we would only exterminate the rest of the planet & who knows maybe you are right. Again i must salute you, Seig Heil!! Death to the inferior races. Das kapital Uber Alles!!!
@cidseven I cannot shake the feeling that you are prone to resort to name calling and making threats as a result of frustration at being unable to write persuasively while attempting to conceal what appears at least to me to be abysmal deficiencies in your sense of history. If you wish to defeat ignorance as your posts portend, then why not obtain a library card and show the rest of us whose boss? If defending Fascism then why not read Mein Kamph and get familiar with that point of view first?
My cards are very much on the table. America is not an empire, america is infact a very pathetic humanitarian shithole. America, SHOULD be an empire.
Fascism is not national socialism. And besides, whats wrong with fascism? what is your problem with fascism? how is fascism any worse than humanitarianism and socialism?
Originally you were going to "explain" Eugenics to me, then threatened to RAPE someone else to prove the US was not an empire. I must assume you have changed your mind again & wish to prove that you can out cuss me. I must concede this point to you. I have always found the foulest mouth connected with the least convincing argument. The US occupies some 900 military bases & it's a curious fact, that this # of military outposts also were held by the Roman Empire at its collapse
@jazzbo66zz I didn't threaten to actually rape someone, I said I would would rape them in an argument. It is a proverbial thing. You tit.
Eugenics = the improvement of a population/species through controlled, planned breeding. This has been practiced in the past and is still being practiced to this day, often as a means of avoiding hereditary diseases.
It is entirely scientific.
You don't know anything about the Roman empire, shut the hell up, it is nothing like America.
"Economic Empire" is something more dangerous than a conspiracy. This is a system driven not by a small band of men but by a concept that has become the blind ideology of predatory capitalism. This is the belief that economic growth is an end in itself because the greater the growth the greater and more wide spread the benefits. The political corollary is that those who believe this should be entitled to shape the future of the world by force and coercion.
@jazzbo66zz America doesn't have an economic empire and it doesnt have a conspiracy.
America is a weak country with a fucking nigger ape as a president. For fuck sake. Americas military is awesome, dont get me wrong, but its culturally dead. There is no grand master plan in america, it has a fucking ape for a president.
True, America does not "have" an empire it is an Empire. The US military is ruinously costly to maintain but politically ineffectual despite its size & impressive capacity for destruction. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen Maxwell Taylor put it this way,"America is threatened by a turbulent and disorderly third world. As the leading "have"power we must engage in continuous war to protect our possessions abroad from envious have nots. So what have you got against Fascism anyway?
@jazzbo66zz America is not an empire. if it was an empire it would be called officially, the american empire. It does not act like an empire, it does not call itself an empire, it is not an empire.
The US military is obviously not ruinous to maintain, and politically it has more weight than any single american politician.
@cidseven Rome is understood to be an empire but called itself a Republic. The US empire deploys well over a half million soldiers, CIA agents, technicians, security contractors, engineers and dependents in other nations supported by not fewer than a dozen carrier task forces & large contingent of nuclear armed submarine commands. The US maintains some 900 military bases, covering every continent on this planet except Antarctica. US investment abroad averaged $50 billion a year from 2003-2008.
@jazzbo66zz You don't know what you are talking about. The Roman republic was not the same thing as the Roman empire. The Roman republic existed before the Roman empire. Aren't you aware that there was a civil war? Basically Julius Caesar then Octavian became the masters of what was then a Roman empire, the republic was something different.
The Imperial Romans didn't make any illusions as to what they were doing in other parts of the world.
You have not provided an adequate definition of what is or is not an empire & remain oblivious of the criteria historians use to make these kinds of judgments. You have insisted that the US is not an empire until it declares itself to be one. You also insist, "America is a weak country with a nigger ape for a president." but then you also believe "...the US was the only military power that could stand up to the soviet union.". You explain history about as well as you explain science.
Your problem is quite simply this, you think that 'Empire' = bad. Because you believe in moral absolutes like a fool. You also think that america = bad, and you feel that if you can prove that america is an empire, then you can prove that america is 'bad'.
The truth is, 1) no moral absolutes exist, 2) america isn't an empire 3) empires are fucking cool to have.
@jazzbo66zz To compare America to the Roman Empire is stupid.
America is not an empire. Americas military bases are primarily a result of the Cold war where the US was the only military power that could stand up to the Soviet Union.
You conveniently overlook this fact because you are a communist. You see no problem with the soviet union.
The Cold War provided a rationale for the US dominating half the world & with the collapse of the USSR in 1991what ensued was a rapid expansion of American ambitions for the other half focusing its unrivaled military supremacy. The military basing structure now represents a pattern of US military globalization. Empire rely on the threat of force & since 1999 the US has expanded its military reach to new bases in Qatar, the Gulf of Oman, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan Uzbekistan Iraq & Afghanistan
@jazzbo66zz Um, what the hell? are you some sort of stupid moron or something?
Little history lesson. Communists believe that pure communism will only be achieved once WORLD revolution happened, the soviet union saw itself as the base of a world wide revolution, hence the reason why it was arming so many people and trying to start revolutionary war efforts around the world.
Because the West realised that it was a pretty silly idea to have gone to war with the nazis and not instead supported him in his fight with the communists, they realised that america was the only country that was in the position to actually fight communism, thus, america saw itself funding, training, arming, and supporting people all around the world.
Now, while the cold war ended and the soviet union fell, this resulted in a situation where americas new obligation was to try and help the world recover, something which has brought america into conflict with numerous foreign peoples, who aren't educated enough to realise just why america was their countries in the first place.
When the nazis kicked the communist frankfurt school out of Europe, they moved to the USA, and went on to try and infect US society with cultural marxist views. A result of this is that many americans don't actually know very much about history and think their own country is this horrible capitalist power stopping the world from uniting into a single socialist 'utopia'.
@cidseven Many believe US foreign policy has been hijacked by a dangerously aggressive vision of remaking the world in the US image while imposing its failed 19th century economic utopia on the rest of the planet at gunpoint. I sense frustration in your efforts to rehabilitate the reputation of Nazism by defending eugenics as a branch of science & continuing the "kamph" to "restore order to the planet". I am sure you would have been proud to serve alongside the SS loading the gas buses.
@jazzbo66zz You don't sense anything, because you are slow.
'Many believe' does not = evidence. Fool sheep.
Dangerously aggressive vision of some stupid utopia sounds more like communism than the US.
You associate eugenics with the Nazis because you are totally ignorant of what eugenics is. Eugenics was implemented (and still is) all around the world, there were eugenic policies in the US, Switzerland, the UK. etc.
What "Eugenic policies in the US" would you be referring to? What scientific data can you cite as a product of "Eugenics". I sense your hostility & suspect this may be an attempt to protect yourself from feelings of inadequacy possibly related to poor social skills rooted in an antisocial personality disorder. Would you be inclined to imagine that your sense of being embattled might be part of a cluster of traits inherited from a racially inferior ancestor? How is hostility adaptive?
@jazzbo66zz Look up the history of US conpulsary sterilization laws.
You are, as I have pointed out before, extremely uneducated. You think eugenics only existed in nazi germany, you didn't know that it existed in the us and switzerland.
Poor social skills, lol. You've lost this debate.
What debate would yo be referring to? It is common knowledge that a eugenic program of forced sterilization was practiced in both the US and Nazi Germany. Is it your contention that either case or both provide examples of successful Eugenics practices as you have previously stated? In your assessment would the Holocaust be considered a success scientifically speaking?
@jazzbo66zz What debate? are you confused or something? You have been wrong about everything. You didn't know the difference between the roman empire and the roman republic, you thought america was an empire, You thought that eugenics was unscientific and invented by the nazis, you are an ABSOLUTE idiot.
The only way to disprove eugenics would be to disprove the existance of the hereditary unit. The fact that genes exist, = eugenics can work.You've lost the debate.
Eugenics is a fascist political movement not a science. The US emerged as an empire in part as a result of its determination to achieve military supremacy which came at the cost of a cycle of long term decline in social economic & political terms. The cost of US expansion via military intervention & weapons production has bankrupted the treasury and saddled the nation with a ruinous federal deficit. The quality of life in America has slid from first to 12th overall in world standing.
@jazzbo66zz What the hell are you talking about. There is nothing innately fascist about eugenics at all. Eugenics can exist in just about any political system, heck, eugenics doesn't even require state policy. If some woman for example, chooses only to procrate with attractive, intelligent men, then she is essentially practicing eugenics. It is very difficult to stop this and it is almost totally a-political.
You are an ignorant fool who doesn't know what she/he is talking about.
It is a curiosity that your conception of history has not prevailed in the end. Why do you suppose this is so? Could it be that you are another victim of that highly organized international conspiracy of Jewish bankers? As for the Frankfurt School only the powers of darkness could have supported them. It is more difficult to account for the obscurity of a patriot such as yourself endowed what is obviously a disciplined mind, singular courage & profound nobility of spirit...go figure
@cidseven Would your conception of inferior races make it seem reasonable to attribute financial success among certain groups to the influence of Eugenics? Scientifically speaking, would you assume that ruling races/classes are genetically superior to non ruling races/classes? Is it your belief that "any black or womens studies thing" can be blamed for preventing Americans from "understanding" history as you do? Is superior intelligence in your case instinctive or is formal training required?
@jazzbo66zz You really shouldn't attempt rhetoric, youre ability to think effectively is piss poor.
1) there is a low correlation with eugenic history and financial success, infact, often financial success can run the risk of producing mentally weak offspring due to too much luxury.
2)You don't know what I assume, Shut up.
3)wide spread inferior intelligence = the reason why people dont understand history.
To what do you attribute your brilliant grasp of history? Does your racial superiority contribute anything 'instinctive' to your record of high achievement in the discipline? As a case in point; should your description of Barack Obama, as a "nigger ape" be viewed as a contribution to our understanding of History or was this statement intended as an demonstration of your profound knowledge of Science? Would it be appropriate to think of you as 'mentally strong' & 'shut up' as rhetoric?
@jazzbo66zz I read alot but, unlike most people, I am very intelligent so I don't take things on face value alone, I question things, investigate, cross check and research intensely and seriously think about things before coming to a conclusion. This makes me a naturally very good historian. This is also why I don't fall victem to stupid conspiracy theory analysis of 'class conflict as a historical driving force' or 'history is written by the winner' fallacies/absurdities.
In view of your self professed expertise as an historian and an advocate of race science, who would you consider to be the top eugenic scientist of these examples; a.) Joseph (the angel of death) Mengele b.) Sir Francis Galton or c) Sir Francis Wood? Any judgement is of course is subjective but in view of your eminence and the enormity of your intellect I believe we can rest assured that your assessment will have the ring of scientific truth as have your other remarks thus far.
@jazzbo66zz Bit of a pointless question. I believe in classical liberalism, state over morality (the update of seperation from church and state), and a lack of social intervention by the state.
States, typically have an unfortunate habbit of messing things up completely, soviet union, british new labour welfare etc. I wouldn't want them handling eugenics, I advocate, like galton, more of a eugenic culture than state imposed eugenics.
The truth of the matter however is that no such utopia will ever come about based on marxist ideas, due to the fact that marx and his ideas are wrong and stupid.
America is not an empire, in many ways, america is a tragic hero that took the bullet for the rest of the world. It is now up to the few remaining patriots to destroy communism and restore order to the planet.
@cidseven Rome is understood to be an empire but called itself a Republic. The US empire deploys well over a half million soldiers, CIA agents, technicians, security contractors, engineers and dependents in other nations supported by not fewer than a dozen carrier task forces & large contingent of nuclear armed submarine commands. The US maintains some 900 military bases, covering every continent on this planet except Antarctica. US investment abroad averaged $50 billion a year from 2003-2008.
@cidseven Jesus, come out of the closet already. Its clear you are a closet gay attempting to transfer your gayness onto me, a straight man. Otherwise you wouldn't have threatened to rape me, linguistically or otherwise. Maybe you should try pussy for a change. I said the US WAS an empire militarily. Some historians have argued that the US is still an empire economically. If you don't like it take up with them.
America is as ruthless and self destructive an empire as has come down the pike.You are in agreement with a consensus of historians and a phalanx of academics including Arendt, Williams Kolko, Chomski, Zinn Kline Marcuse, Grandin, Magdoff, Said, Little Phillips and Johnson. I am of the opinion that the power of stupidity lies in its willful ignorance which it perceives as conviction.
@jazzbo66zz You cite some interesting names there that I doubt some of the idiots on this page have read-if they know how to read. Zinn died recently and his PEOPLES HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES is one of the most important historical books to emerge from the 20th century. Besides, if you are going to be ignorant of the facts, having conviction about that is de rigeur. There's no fool like a stubborn fool.
@MultiSmartass1 A book you might find interesting on the subject of The US domination and globalization Is THE SHOCK DOCTRINE; the Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein. She documents a case representing US foreign aid as a coup that has outsourced terror to death squads and mercenaries in many places as proxy support to US Multinationals. World Bank and IMF loans are found out to be a loan sharking hustle for seizing public assets in the 3rd world while taking control of their economies
@jazzbo66zz I have read SHOCK DOCTRINE. Thanks for the citation and recomendation though, Klein's book is not bad and it is very clear that the first world is making money off the third world theough the world bank and IMF. This represents a sort of financial and resource imperialism of the underdeveloped world.
@MultiSmartass1 multidumbass, are you honestly accusing ME of being gay? that is absolutely outrageous.
'some historians' are these historians anti capitalist socialist marxist post modernist historians? Nobody outside of those circles considers america an empire.
The real evidence against is the fact that the US doesnt call itself an empire. I mean, whats stopping it from doing this? who would stop them?
@cidseven Calling yourself something is not evidence of anything. Alcoholics don't call themselves drunks, drug addicts don't call themselves druggies and gay people like you keep thinking they are straight.
As I have mentioned, US was an empire and talk of empire resurfaced after 9-11. Iam not arguing that the US is a real, tangible empire in the Ottoman sense-those days are over.
@Multigay1 Why you calling me a homosexual? that is outrageous. There is nothing gay at all about me. I am completely straight. I only like skinny pretty girls with large boobs.
The US isn't an empire, it would be cool if it was but it isn't.
the ideology of the market fundamentalism seeks to explain poverty as a product of individual moral failure or inadequacy. The ability to conceive of a more representational & rational model of the world to supersede this ideology of the market place involves discovering the existence of those mechanisms of social leverage that perpetuate injustice & locate them in the more abstract and less accessible institutional structures & methodologies of power. Poverty is a function of wealth
@jazzbo66zz Your opinions and objectives are stupid, bizarre and poorly explained.
Capitalism has no doctrine. Market fundamentalism obviously isn't a problem as the big capitalist societies do not even operate under it. Most of them operate along the keynesian economic lines.
The reason economic and social inequalities exist amongst different countries and particular groups of people is primarily due to genuine inequalities.
Give me one reason why I should care about poor africans.
@cidseven: Totally agree with U here. This "jazzbo66" clown who comments against capitalism is beyond pathetic & preposterous. I actually lived under both systems. Fuck socialism! It sounds nice in theory. But the reality and the empirical evidence show the contrary. Most of these ass clowns who put Marxism on a pedestal never lived in East Germany, Cuba, North Korea, USSR, etc. I was born in East Germany. I came to the U.S as a 10 yr. old when the wall came down. Fuck, I am glad 2 I live here!
I cannot think of a reason why you should care about Africa's colonial "natives" beyond the interest you might share with a butcher with respect to a cow.
@idunnobigandhappy My point is that the people get screwed by all of these systems, thus, these systems are FAILURES.
A resource based world economy highlighting efficiency, technology and education would benefit the entire planet and all citizenry of the world with a lifestyle and educ. like we've never been afforded before.
If you have an alternative solution that is more beneficial for the people and planet, please share it....otherwise research the Venus project, bias set aside.
Are "omics", "isics", "atics", "graphies" and "logies" also about money?. Communism is a special word that designates a resource (sharing for efficientcy)-based, family- rather than profit- style, economy without money in the ideal. Educate yourself and do not repeat anticommunist follies.
Educate yourself. Communism is NOT a "special" word NOR exception. It's monetary based and their IS elite who govern and live better than the populace, engaging in market. MONETARY....investing for the countries interest.
faltering to the suffixes doesn't negate that, only distracting from the real truth of the matter.
No matter which bullshit you spread about communism to favour the private owners of your country who fight communism all over the world, communism is a TERM and it means a special kind of society. A society that is based on true values rather than money. There is plan and common property, there is no trade/market in socialism/communism. It is in capitalist societies where majority of people compete in market to feed the rich who enjoy socialism. Socialims must be for everybody.
It's monetary based, whether you want to admit it or not...and our capitalistic society has "true values" too: all are created equal and we spread freedom and democracy around the world.
"Freedom and democracy"? Who are you talking to? You spread capitalism (the monetary lifestyle) and US imperialism. Your "true values" are individualism and self-profit (no matter what happens with the environment).
I do not think that claming that socialism is the same as capitalism (profit-oriented ideology) is a sarcasm. I do not think that opposing socialism to resource(true value)-based economy is a sarcasm. It is bad sarcasm to insist that term communism is opposite to its meaning.
Ok. If you like mind-blowing sarcasm, take mine: your resource-based economy highlighting efficiency, technology and education IS monetary based by authority who promotes the Zeitgeist and NWO Venus project ;-)
@greenhell666 Most people dont even want an education. most people hate learning and absolutely hate thinking about stuff. It confuses them and upsets them.
Most people are idiots, why should I care about them?
You're falling prey to ignorance and propoganda. Put your science hat on and do your homework. I hate laziness in regard to our responsibility to educate ourselves. It WILL take education to obtain a better world......period.
A resource based economy CANNOT work unless it's global...understand that the resources of the world need to be shared, thus, a "global" economic system. This doesn't equate to a NWO or a big monster you call one world govt.
Parenti is a brilliant Marxist intellectual. The third-worldization of the planet is underway, and has been for decades, to the detriment of global communities and resources
He is brilliant and I first learned of the concept of "maldevelopment" from his excellent book "Against Empire."
But like most Marxists, Parenti also sees history as being in a EUROCENTRIC vacuum...it's all about modern America, it's all about post-1913 America, instead of really framing it from a better context of 1492, when Europeans emerged out of Europe into a world that was already First World in many places, like Mexico and Peru and China.
A better Marxist (in my opinion) was James Blaut. He wrote "The Colonizer's Model of the World" and framed all the modern stuff in the context of the 1492 European colonial beginnings.
People like Michael Parenti and other Marxists because he sanitizes the GENOCIDE that allows a thing called "America" to exist in the first place.
Marxists don't like to see the blood on their own hands and the Apartheid that is happening right under their nose, and Parenti is a good Marxist in that regard.
There is a huge difference between a Marxist and a "Liberationist".
1) A Marxist visits the concentration camp and tells the prisoners that they need to "organize" and learn to speak their captor's language.
2) Liberation is about wanting the people freed from their captors, free to reclaim their land, language, and self-determination independent of their captors.
Most Marxists are white. Their very identity is not under assault, their nations NOT under occupation.
true. if people understood that say, even latin america has rich people, nice girls, culture etc. they would dream of moving there instead of sweden.
SUpersaiyajinjerkbag 4 months ago
They are poorer because they don't have free market. End of thesis
johammbass 5 months ago
@johammbass You have got to be kidding me?
fearghalgill 3 months ago
The Face of Imperialism is a powerful, frightening, and honest book. It will be hated by those who run the Empire, and it will be loved by people who are searching for truth amidst the piles of garbage of Western propaganda. Above all, this book will be like a bright spark of hope for billions of men, women, and children who are fighting this very moment for survival, defending themselves against the Empire and against all monstrous faces and masks of imperialism."
— Andre Vltchek
MichaelParentiOrg 8 months ago
Was that Hitler with Africans?
HoGraz 9 months ago
Ahhh, Sir, You were right.
OurFadedGarden 10 months ago
Who are these foreign investors WHITE PEOPLE!!!!! Any where they go the bring with them destruction and corruption to the heights of heights!!!!
PeaceAndJustice357 10 months ago
@PeaceAndJustice357 actually your naive.Life is war and always has been.White people are just the smartest,bravest and most courageous warriors so they dominate the world.
PAULOcbi 9 months ago
@PAULOcbi sigh, no its not ppl around the world when you ppl where coiming out of your ice age didn't understand the type of ppl they where dealing with. who just spent 10's of thousands of yrs in the ice. We where developed socially agruculturally and any other form of development there is. but being that ur cultured by white supremacy it would be hard to accept that. you rule because we trusted. bravey no deciteful yes. smartest no theifs yes. but your rule will come to and end.soon!!!lol!!!!!
PeaceAndJustice357 9 months ago
@PeaceAndJustice357 'out of your ice age" ?? you should get to a reference library ,you are clearly un-educated,are you even an adult? We are all linked by DNA to be from the same tribe of Homo-Sapiens which probably originated in Africa,I know popular history teaches that NeadertalMan,PekingMan,Australopithicus were killed off by ice-age but its more likely we Homo-Sapiens killed them off cos they were different.Its the whites that left Africa to explore and conquer new lands.WARRIORS.
PAULOcbi 9 months ago
'The People! The People! What a joke in China and the old Soviet. There is no plutocracy and corruption like in the Communist Ant Colony where the idividual is nothing... zero...submerged in the collective run by the ruthless oligarchs. Yes, there is much injustice in the West but give us this rather than the brutal imperialist Gulag which exists in Parenti's hallucinations, where even private property is anathema..
orbis2009 11 months ago
The information in this video is conspicuously absent in mainstream education and media
dabcore 1 year ago
CRRECT ,yeah mike+++++
patous2 1 year ago
This is just BS. Populations everywhere earn roughly what they produce. It's not a case that rich countries got rich by extracting resources from poor countries and vice versa.
zefvor 1 year ago
@zefvor BOY are U ignorant
patous2 1 year ago
@zefvor BOY are U ignorant,try reading "the council of TRENT" for starters,or "War is a racket" by GEN. Smedly Butler,,2 time cong medal of honor ,,,then None dare call it conspiracy by gary allen ...all online FREE
patous2 1 year ago
Parenti makes good points here. There are a number of African countries that have massive resources in terms of diamonds and other gems not to mention oil.
The first world has historically punished the third world for decades. Whether through IMF conditions, control of industries by foreign firms and continuation of piss poor conditions, militaristic imperialism morphed into economic imperialism.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
Capitalism is a failed 19th century materialist economic theory plotting a grim future. It went bankrupt financing repression and went into decline in the final stage as a corrupt empire. Of course there are exceptions to this view. In the words of George W Bush," Our nation is the greatest force for good in history." Also note that beginning with the incineration of the populations of Hiroshima & Nagasaki these do-gooders are responsible for the deaths of not fewer than 4,000,000 in the process
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You're wrong.Capitalism works-for those who own the capital and have access to it. Capitalism works for the rich, upper middle class and a number of middle class people but not for upper, middle and lower working class people and the poor. Bush was right-The US is a force for good-good tax cuts, good military spending, good return on investment for the wealthier classes.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 The group who are actually controlling the lions share of capital as well as the foundations and corporation boards is really too small to describe as a class per say. The U of Florida spent a couple of years compiling the names and came to the conclusion that fewer than 6,000 individuals are directing the entire US power structure including essentially all private wealth held as either capital assets or political influence. The classes you speak of have been decapitalized.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Sounds like a top 1% or so. Class is closest lexical category I come up to describe in them in a collective way. Group is too general and vague. As I have mentioned elsewhere, the failure of capitalism in the US and elsewhere is in providing the common man and woman with access to capital that will make their lives decent and provide them with good housing, education and jobs.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
Yes, this represents no more than a sliver of !%. .As the middle class was being decapitalized in the 1970s the elites became an insurgency. These elements grew conscious of sharing a set of interests that could best be served by using the leverage of wealth & prestige to acquire a controlling interest over the existing social and political institutions of power that previously were at least minimally autonomous. This movement precipitated an ideology of messianic capitalism
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I think its monetarism gone wild ( that's sound like the title of a new X rated DVD series) and the erosion in the US of such things as usury lwas leading to outrageous credit card interest and deregulation of the airline and other industries during the Reagan Administration. It was an insurgency all right-a right wing monetarist one.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
The remaining US aristocracy has adopted a kind of double speak to assuage their consciences of the horrors they perpetrate. Words like good in their lexicon assume grotesque and other worldly meanings. The whole culture of messianic capitalism has resembles a self reinforcing thought reform program. I find myself in dialogs with people on this blog who literally are incapable of thinking. They exhibit a high resistance to Information out of the box, an abstraction threshold?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz They are resistant because of the waves of propaganda that have washed over them over the years. In the 50's, it was direct through pro-business film that workers were forced to looked at. In the 2000, we have cable business channels and the overall orientation of network tv which perpetuates a worship of the free market out of all proportion to common sense, logic and sanity.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 I think of a class operating with some measure of power within a settled set of economic relations. What the present confluence of corporate interests represents to me is an insurgency that has destabilized the existing socio- political order in the interest of achieving a global hegemony reminiscent of Hitler's dream of a "Reich that would rule the world for a thousand years". At this extreme the "economy" resembles a paranoiac quest for power that begins to sound delusional
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Inteersting comparison to the Hitlerian version of the Reich. However, the corporate community is monolithic at times but mostly individualistic. In other words, CEOs are largely about protecting their fiefdoms and advancing profits for themselves and their firms. The idea of an integareted program of corporate control seems something new especially when you consider the rise of strategy in only the past 30 plus years or so.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Corporate culture to my way of thinking is a kind of avant guard I agree they are devoted to enhancing returns on investment & have found it convenient to operate behind the liberal sounding rhetoric of both rugged individualism and modernity. Beneath this carefully tended exterior these are highly standardized individualists. The executive level is a secretive society & an interlocking directorate that carefully controls American public & private institutions as a totality.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Corporate culture is essentially hierarchal and authoritarian in nature. What worse is that the idea of corporate responsibility and creative capitalism have taken hold amongst some business barons. Corporations do not have a social responsibility-that's PR talk. They are responsible to shareholders and Directors only.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
Yes these kinds of thought reform programs were introduced in the 50s & became a school of corporate film-making. The genera refers to Industrial Psychology or Industrial Relations. The intent of the management was to isolate workers by dividing them and using competitive pressures to play them off against one another. The goal was to reform the the workers by isolating them & reinforcing feelings of social dependency on job performance. TV was shaped by GE, GM & Westinghouse
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Ronald Reagan was the host of GE theatre for a while and then worked as a spokesman for the company and toured factories and plants giving right-wing speeches about communism and capitalism. Chomsky notes that companies wanted off-site control of workers thus the propaganda films.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
The ways television was shaped and the picture of the world it trades on were a function of corporate power from the beginning. You raise some intriguing questions about what the propaganda content of the programming might be at a subliminal level. If you have any suggestions for selections from N Chomsky to read on this subject I would appreciate hearing from you
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I'm thinking about "Propaganda and the Public Mind" interviews with David Barsamian and Chomsky. That's the only one I can think of off hand.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
Thank you. I am also interested in the Reagan business. This was a corporate shill if ever there was one but the story of how & by whom he was managed I have no idea. A retired dialog coach from his Hollywood days told me that she had to teach him every script one word at a time. His public image was carefully calculated but unlike Nixon who was driven by power Reagan seemed to be something of a Manchurian Candidate who was about two thirds front man & one third idiot savant
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Reagan was an actor so the corporate shill in him was partly survival mode. He had his expenses and doing GE Theater on TV paid the bills. I understand that. The idea of Reagan as a Manchurian Candidate is an interesting idea. Nixon was far smarter and wilier man than Reagan whom he saw as an amiable dunce. As for learning speeches one word at a time, I don't know anything about that.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
Parenti has amazing insight - its so refreshing to look at this with new eyes - a different perspective that they dont teach u at school
Excellent post :)
Badwolf182 1 year ago
why bother fighting over which system is better. ALL r manmade therfore unsustainable. whether capitalist or communist - its not natural t/fore not viable. Nature requires natural systems.. As human beings we r naturally going to be diverse - 1 manmade system cannot serve us well. so we need natural occuring and diverse ways to live.... Lets look at the ancient ways and how they operated and functioned and evolved. They seemed to work well - they were sustainable. PPL lived good quality lives
maiwandwal 1 year ago
capitalism describes a theory for the upward .redistribution of wealth. What we should be trying to understand is how the agenda of Neoliberalism was inserted into the place once held by the commons" or a similarly derived meaning for the '"people" as the structure of a responsible community. Capitalism represents the infantilization of the individual and the negation of community. The notion of Neoliberal economics converts libraries and schools into prisons and police stations.
jazzbo66zz 2 years ago
Read "guns steel and wheapons" by Jared Diamond and you'll have the answer
Giovannisenzaterra 2 years ago
you mean, "guns, germs and steel", right?
aewester 2 years ago
Yes right,that's the correct title of the Pulitzer Price's book
Giovannisenzaterra 2 years ago
Capitalism, Socialism, Communism; all the "isms" are monetary based...the ony difference is the amount of regulation by the govt.
It is time to move to a resource based, global society....the world we ALL deserve.
Venusproject/Zeigeistmovement
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Communism is not monetary based. It's a classless, stateless, borderless society following the total destruction of capital. If you want to disagree with Marx, it's worth actually reading him.
idunnobigandhappy 2 years ago 5
@idunnobigandhappy Communism IS monetary based. The govt controls the money, not the citizenry. Research. Think. Support the Venus project for the world we ALL deserve.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
@blaziermissy
Socialism as practiced in the 20th century involved the state controlling the money. Communism as advocated by Marx involved the abolition of money and the state.
Marx was a scholar and a revolutionary, and hugely different from Stalin and his followers. If you want to criticise communism, read and understand Marx first.
idunnobigandhappy 2 years ago
@idunnobigandhappy Marx ideology was just that, ideology that's never been practiced. Socialism UTILIZES money. The only difference between socialism and capitalism is the amount of regulation by the govt; socialism is more regulated by the govt than capitalism.
You've been propogandized by a twist of words.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
The difference is who controls the means of production, and it is a huge difference. You are trying to pretend there is two sides of a coin here. I'm not sure what sort of abstract point you are trying to make, but you fail, miserably. Kind of like capitalism for the people.
marcelthemaoist 1 year ago
The world CITIZENRY control the means of production....no leader, power monopoly, but a system interdependent with cooperation.
It's called a solution.
blaziermissy 1 year ago
Capitalism has done more to help your average joe than communism ever did.
Your average joe in the west can now live a high quality of life with showers, baths, various skin products, soap, hot water, cell phones, internet access, computers, televisions etc all at a modest price, a result of competition and price regulation.
'the people' is an ambigious concept.
The third world isn't so much 'poor' as it is full of stupid people.
cidseven 1 year ago
capitalism has done good stuff and bad stuff
right now it needs a really big fix
greenhell666 1 year ago
@greenhell666 It doesn't need fixed because it isn't broken.
Bad business is happening at the moment because people are greedy and stupid. If something needs to be fixed, it is people.
I propose basically exterminating inferior people. That will solve the problem.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven you are clearly and a**hole and I refuse to take part in any further
discussion
have a nice day ... NOT!
greenhell666 1 year ago
@greenhell666 How am I an asshole? for pointing out that most humans are a bunch of stupid little shits?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Most of us have the choices that matter made for us, trapped in monolithic economic structures over which we have no influence. Our choices are being made for us by the wickedest of men for the express purpose of suppressing our aspirations for peace, justice, equity, equality and community. Michael Parenti has the unique ability to envision a world of possibility that lies beyond the imaginative confines of the cage. He asks us to become the people we always wanted to be.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Equaliy won't happen because humans are not equal.
Science is your kinds number 1 enemy, not capitalism.
'peace' a pointless concept for the weak. 'justice' subjective. 'Equity' = pathetic. 'equality' hahaha pointless and lame. 'Community' hows about no?
The idiot communists tried to create such a stupid world and look at how well that turned out.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven i am curious to learn which "Science" you are referring to? Eugenics otherwise known as race science would certainly support your assumptions concerning the nature of society as well as your antipathy for democratic rule. I would surmise that a two class model of society such as that which flourished briefly under apartheid in South Africa would offer a reasonable and necessary compromise with our essential inequality which is a function of your "scientific" conception of nature?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Eugenics isn't specifically race science. Eugenics can occur within races. You don't know what eugenics is.
The reason south africa was a successful country at one point under a white elite was because that white elite were extremely intelligent and culturally superior.
I like democracy in theory, but in practice, the mob are stupid and I don't trust them. The mob is the natural enemy of my kind.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Thank you for that clarification. Although being an immigrant, you still consider yourself to be a member of the master race and not a member of the "mob". The term Eugenics or Racial Hygiene refers to race based social policies instituted by the Nazi that sought to eliminate all "life unworthy of life". These impure minorities included all criminals degenerate political dissidents Jews Slavs the weak feeble-minded homosexuals unemployed and communists from the chain of heredity.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I'm not an immigrant. Eugenics can occur within races, infact, the majority of the time it is within a single race population. Racial hygiene is a form of eugenics, but eugenics could exist within heterogeneous populations. Infact, it does, it is commonly used to help ashkenazi jews from producing defective children due to jews being severely inbred.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
As Eugenics in your view, is synonymous with both science and with nature itself, yet has not succeeded in eliminating the weak, would you have any objection to either a private militia or the state stepping in to help nature along? I mean why should the able bodied be required to care about the weak, you know... the losers so to speak. Wouldn't it be a lot better to streamline the process, in the name of scientific efficiency? Why not just do it & get rid of them... know what i mean?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz "my view" of eugenics is the scientific definition of eugenics. Eugenics more often than not occurs within a single race of people, it is not always preoccupied with racial impurities but enhanching the quality of the genepool.
You honestly dont know what the hell you are talking about. Just accept defeat and stop trying to save face you little fool.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Obviously, you don't what you are talking about. Eugenics does concentrate on removing racial, mental, emotional and intellectual impurities primarily from "feeble-minded" whites. That why a supreme court justice wrote that "three generations of imbeciles is enough." Apparently, you are a Third generation imbecile. You know, maybe I will rethink my position-if you get lobotomized.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 You are correct. The author of the quote you are citing I believe is none other Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Oliver Wendell Holmes from an opinion dated 1924 supporting the states right to inflict forced sterilization on all those in the states custody and mental patients in particular.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You have done your research which is more than what I can say for some of the clowns on this page. The etyomology of Eugenics stems from the Greek. Holmes was like a lot of educated people-who somewhat logically though immorally-believed in forced sterilization of people of supposedly low intellect who were overwhelmingly white. I'm thiniing Eugenics should make a comeback-to sterilize rightwingers.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
You have done your research as well. Some 60,000 Americans were forcibly sterilized after civil hearings to establish that their offspring would likely be "socially inadequate" . Thousands of European Jews were rejected for US citizen ship and repatriated where they died by the untold thousands as a result of America's eugenic race quotas. The real tragedy is that we defeated Germany in WWII but we have obviously not yet defeated Fascism.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You have done your research as well. Let's not forget the Pioneer Fund. the Rockefeller and other foundation support for Eugenics research and of course Hitler and Nazi efforts which sprang from their studying of American work in Eugenics. The Nazi haven't gone away-they just vote Republican and serve as GOP House members and Senators in Congress.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 The heiress to the Harriman railroad fortune put up the bulk of the money. Using her power over the rail system, plus her NY social connections to solicit other contributors & exert these together as political leverage over Immigration legislation and race quotas enforced at Ellis Island. The Rockefeller Foundation financed the Nazi Office of Racial Hygiene & brought in IBM to supply the computer technology to track eugenic experiments on human subjects in the death camps.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Yes, good research. Eugenics is interesting because it has largely been in an effort to "purify" the white race. Eugenics hasn't really been tried on other races on a mass scale. Whites-supposedly "feeble minded" ones anyway-have been the victims of forced sterlization efforts and lobotomies for years. Eugenics has and will always be a threat to caucasians.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@cidseven
I am afraid it is you who has no idea what i am talking about when I say Eugenics embodies a fascist ideology and was never a legitimate branch of science. You are attempting to conceal the pre-scientific prejudices of Social Darwinism behind the pseudo-scientific fascist ideology of Eugenics.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz JESUS CHRIST, you are one confused little bastard arent you.
What the fuck?? eugenics = fascism? what the hell? eugenics has existed WELL before fasism ever did, and it existed in countries that werent fascist. USA, BRITAIN, Helvettia etc.
You dont know what you are on about you little moronic turd.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Eugenics was Hitlers inspiration for what became the Third Reichs social policies referring to "Racial Hygiene". Eugenics is a branch of pseudo science that has appeared under various guises in a number of places but first came to prominence in the US and Britain well before Hitler came to power in 1932. I have suggested all of this to you already. If we were having a conversation rather than a written exchange, I could resort to speaking to you veeery slooowly.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz What the hell are you talking about? You honestly have zero clue what eugenics is.
Eugenics isn't pseudo science, the only way it could possibly be pseudo science is if genetics were disproven to exist. So long as the hereditary unit exists, it is entirely possible to 'improve' a population through controlled breeding.
There is nothing innately racial about it, such things could occur within mixed populations. You are a fool.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Out of sight of the world at Buchenwald and Auschwitz, Eugenic doctors like Josef Mengele would carry on the research begun just years earlier with American financial support including grants from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institution. Only after the secrets of Nazi Eugenics horrified the world & only after Nuremberg declared compulsory sterilization a crime against humanity did American Eugenics recede. Edwin Black ; WAR AGAINST THE WEAK
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz HAHA, as if anyone actually gave a shit that the jews were getting wiped out an experimented on.
Why should I care that a bunch of losers were getting slaughtered?
You still dont know what eugenics is. Eugenics is not the same as genocide.
That said, genocide is really cool and a very good solution to various problems.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven I met a Chinese scholar immigrating to the US recently who had just completed his dissertation in Modern Literature and I asked him if he was relieved to be escaping from the revolution. He answered, " Yes but things are changing; America may be a democracy becoming a totalitarian state and China a totalitarian state becoming a democracy" I believe western history suggests that the modern empires closely resemble one another in the end and typically fail for similar reasons.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz That's nice. I have little if any respect for anything the chinese have to say. They are a pathetically weak people with a pathetically weak history of being conquered. America is may be becoming totalitarian, but this is not necessarily a bad thing. China on the other hand cannot escape totalitarianism. The mongoloid race are psychologically conditioned for slavery and submission.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz P.S. there are no modern empires, nor do the empires of history mirror the ones of the past, they are typically quite different.
The closest thing you have to a modern empire in the making is the European Union, and this would be an excellent thing if it werent for its overt communist attitude.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven The US dominates the world today by both the application & threat of its military power. This form of domination is supported by a network of some 900 US military bases world wide. This vast basing structure is part of a foreign policy complex used to justify a US military budget of $1.3 trillion which alone constitutes a new and fearsome kind of empire not to consider its recent military deployments to serve a strange new geopolitical-military doctrine known as 'preemptive war'
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz The USA is not an empire. You don't know what you are talking about. The reason the USA became and international presence was because it was the only super power capable of standing up to the spread of international communism, which was a major threat for every intelligent person.
You choose to ignore this because youre a communist.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven The US has been an empire. Phillippines, Samoa, Puerto Rico-most of them grabbed in the Spanish American War. Now, The US is a economic empire not a wholly political or military one. The US became an empire in the late 1890's before Communism engulfed Russia (1917) so the commies has nothing to do with it. The US is no different from the Macedonia/Greek city states, Rome, Britain or the Ottoman empires.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 Multidumbass, the US is not an empire. 'economic empire' what the fuck is that?? you moronic faggot.
How is the USA the same aas the greek city states you fucking imbecile? what the hell are you talking about you uneducated fool?
I'm going to RAPE you in this argument.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
The US employs state of the art militarized terror to preside over a vast empire of colonial possessions and protectorates from which US multinationals extract resources incl. oil copper strategic metals uranium timber rubber medicinals and slave labor in the manufacture of commodities for retail giants like Walmart & Nike in a dozen dictatorships that transfered ownership of rights to US companies in exchange for military assistance & IMF loans. The US controls a monopoly on terror
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You are whining and bitching like a female.
1) america is not an empire.
2) what is wrong with empires anyway?
3) what the fuck are you whining about you vagina?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
America has a long and fabled history at Empire, maintained by deploying militarized exterminations to eliminate indigenous challenges within its hemisphere under the rubric of the Monroe Doctrine & elsewhere e.g.; Vietnam under similar rationales comprising what is otherwise known as the "domino theory". Preliminary empire building began in 1880 with the massacre of 300 unarmed Lakota Souix at Wounded Knee. Modern tactics incl counter insurgency, low intensity conflict & outsourcing
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Key word being 'fabled'.
Nice way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Vietnam was a war against communism. You dont seem to realise that communists wanted to take over the world and the only people who were prepared to mount an global military effort to counter this were the americans.
You are uneducated.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
What argument would that be? The US is using the ideological foil provided by its bogus war on terror to advance its economic claims over this planet. Capitalism is being imposed by unilateral military force. The US has simply replaced the USSR as the worlds primary soviet style expansionist threat to peace. US expansionism in the name of a fundamentalist crusade in Afghanistan is no different in its methods or its outcomes than the Soviet invasion we remember from a generation ago.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz The war on terror isn't bogus, radical islam genuinely doesn't like america and israel.
However, the war on terror is pussified as fuck, they should just wipe islam out, they dont for some bizarre humanitarian reason.
America obviously doesn't have much of an objective seeing as how it has a nigger president. What kind of empire allows its people to get displaced by inferior races?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Fundamentalist Christianity is a similar terrorist ideology bent on world domination as a religious crusade but this only accounts for one facet of the globalization of American power. Your contention that Capitalist Christianity could dominate the world if we would only exterminate the rest of the planet & who knows maybe you are right. Again i must salute you, Seig Heil!! Death to the inferior races. Das kapital Uber Alles!!!
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@cidseven I cannot shake the feeling that you are prone to resort to name calling and making threats as a result of frustration at being unable to write persuasively while attempting to conceal what appears at least to me to be abysmal deficiencies in your sense of history. If you wish to defeat ignorance as your posts portend, then why not obtain a library card and show the rest of us whose boss? If defending Fascism then why not read Mein Kamph and get familiar with that point of view first?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz My objective is not to persuade you.
My cards are very much on the table. America is not an empire, america is infact a very pathetic humanitarian shithole. America, SHOULD be an empire.
Fascism is not national socialism. And besides, whats wrong with fascism? what is your problem with fascism? how is fascism any worse than humanitarianism and socialism?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Whew, what a runaround you have given me!! So now you finally admit to being an advocate of Fascism? Thank you, and again I salute you, Seig Heil!!
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz WTF? what does 'sieg heil' have to do with fascism? When did I say I was a promoter of fascism? You don't even know what fascism is.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Originally you were going to "explain" Eugenics to me, then threatened to RAPE someone else to prove the US was not an empire. I must assume you have changed your mind again & wish to prove that you can out cuss me. I must concede this point to you. I have always found the foulest mouth connected with the least convincing argument. The US occupies some 900 military bases & it's a curious fact, that this # of military outposts also were held by the Roman Empire at its collapse
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I didn't threaten to actually rape someone, I said I would would rape them in an argument. It is a proverbial thing. You tit.
Eugenics = the improvement of a population/species through controlled, planned breeding. This has been practiced in the past and is still being practiced to this day, often as a means of avoiding hereditary diseases.
It is entirely scientific.
You don't know anything about the Roman empire, shut the hell up, it is nothing like America.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
"Economic Empire" is something more dangerous than a conspiracy. This is a system driven not by a small band of men but by a concept that has become the blind ideology of predatory capitalism. This is the belief that economic growth is an end in itself because the greater the growth the greater and more wide spread the benefits. The political corollary is that those who believe this should be entitled to shape the future of the world by force and coercion.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz America doesn't have an economic empire and it doesnt have a conspiracy.
America is a weak country with a fucking nigger ape as a president. For fuck sake. Americas military is awesome, dont get me wrong, but its culturally dead. There is no grand master plan in america, it has a fucking ape for a president.
Americas easy going nature killed america.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
True, America does not "have" an empire it is an Empire. The US military is ruinously costly to maintain but politically ineffectual despite its size & impressive capacity for destruction. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen Maxwell Taylor put it this way,"America is threatened by a turbulent and disorderly third world. As the leading "have"power we must engage in continuous war to protect our possessions abroad from envious have nots. So what have you got against Fascism anyway?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz America is not an empire. if it was an empire it would be called officially, the american empire. It does not act like an empire, it does not call itself an empire, it is not an empire.
The US military is obviously not ruinous to maintain, and politically it has more weight than any single american politician.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Rome is understood to be an empire but called itself a Republic. The US empire deploys well over a half million soldiers, CIA agents, technicians, security contractors, engineers and dependents in other nations supported by not fewer than a dozen carrier task forces & large contingent of nuclear armed submarine commands. The US maintains some 900 military bases, covering every continent on this planet except Antarctica. US investment abroad averaged $50 billion a year from 2003-2008.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You don't know what you are talking about. The Roman republic was not the same thing as the Roman empire. The Roman republic existed before the Roman empire. Aren't you aware that there was a civil war? Basically Julius Caesar then Octavian became the masters of what was then a Roman empire, the republic was something different.
The Imperial Romans didn't make any illusions as to what they were doing in other parts of the world.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
You have not provided an adequate definition of what is or is not an empire & remain oblivious of the criteria historians use to make these kinds of judgments. You have insisted that the US is not an empire until it declares itself to be one. You also insist, "America is a weak country with a nigger ape for a president." but then you also believe "...the US was the only military power that could stand up to the soviet union.". You explain history about as well as you explain science.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You're not in a position be an authority on what is adequate.
Historians? I am one. You didn't know the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, stfu.
America didn't have a nigger ape president during the cold war you fool.
America does not RULE outside of America, it is that simple. It isn't an empire.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Continued:
Your problem is quite simply this, you think that 'Empire' = bad. Because you believe in moral absolutes like a fool. You also think that america = bad, and you feel that if you can prove that america is an empire, then you can prove that america is 'bad'.
The truth is, 1) no moral absolutes exist, 2) america isn't an empire 3) empires are fucking cool to have.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz To compare America to the Roman Empire is stupid.
America is not an empire. Americas military bases are primarily a result of the Cold war where the US was the only military power that could stand up to the Soviet Union.
You conveniently overlook this fact because you are a communist. You see no problem with the soviet union.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
The Cold War provided a rationale for the US dominating half the world & with the collapse of the USSR in 1991what ensued was a rapid expansion of American ambitions for the other half focusing its unrivaled military supremacy. The military basing structure now represents a pattern of US military globalization. Empire rely on the threat of force & since 1999 the US has expanded its military reach to new bases in Qatar, the Gulf of Oman, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan Uzbekistan Iraq & Afghanistan
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Um, what the hell? are you some sort of stupid moron or something?
Little history lesson. Communists believe that pure communism will only be achieved once WORLD revolution happened, the soviet union saw itself as the base of a world wide revolution, hence the reason why it was arming so many people and trying to start revolutionary war efforts around the world.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Continued:
Because the West realised that it was a pretty silly idea to have gone to war with the nazis and not instead supported him in his fight with the communists, they realised that america was the only country that was in the position to actually fight communism, thus, america saw itself funding, training, arming, and supporting people all around the world.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Continued:
Now, while the cold war ended and the soviet union fell, this resulted in a situation where americas new obligation was to try and help the world recover, something which has brought america into conflict with numerous foreign peoples, who aren't educated enough to realise just why america was their countries in the first place.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Continued:
When the nazis kicked the communist frankfurt school out of Europe, they moved to the USA, and went on to try and infect US society with cultural marxist views. A result of this is that many americans don't actually know very much about history and think their own country is this horrible capitalist power stopping the world from uniting into a single socialist 'utopia'.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Many believe US foreign policy has been hijacked by a dangerously aggressive vision of remaking the world in the US image while imposing its failed 19th century economic utopia on the rest of the planet at gunpoint. I sense frustration in your efforts to rehabilitate the reputation of Nazism by defending eugenics as a branch of science & continuing the "kamph" to "restore order to the planet". I am sure you would have been proud to serve alongside the SS loading the gas buses.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You don't sense anything, because you are slow.
'Many believe' does not = evidence. Fool sheep.
Dangerously aggressive vision of some stupid utopia sounds more like communism than the US.
You associate eugenics with the Nazis because you are totally ignorant of what eugenics is. Eugenics was implemented (and still is) all around the world, there were eugenic policies in the US, Switzerland, the UK. etc.
You have lost this debate.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
What "Eugenic policies in the US" would you be referring to? What scientific data can you cite as a product of "Eugenics". I sense your hostility & suspect this may be an attempt to protect yourself from feelings of inadequacy possibly related to poor social skills rooted in an antisocial personality disorder. Would you be inclined to imagine that your sense of being embattled might be part of a cluster of traits inherited from a racially inferior ancestor? How is hostility adaptive?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Look up the history of US conpulsary sterilization laws.
You are, as I have pointed out before, extremely uneducated. You think eugenics only existed in nazi germany, you didn't know that it existed in the us and switzerland.
Poor social skills, lol. You've lost this debate.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
What debate would yo be referring to? It is common knowledge that a eugenic program of forced sterilization was practiced in both the US and Nazi Germany. Is it your contention that either case or both provide examples of successful Eugenics practices as you have previously stated? In your assessment would the Holocaust be considered a success scientifically speaking?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz What debate? are you confused or something? You have been wrong about everything. You didn't know the difference between the roman empire and the roman republic, you thought america was an empire, You thought that eugenics was unscientific and invented by the nazis, you are an ABSOLUTE idiot.
The only way to disprove eugenics would be to disprove the existance of the hereditary unit. The fact that genes exist, = eugenics can work.You've lost the debate.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
Eugenics is a fascist political movement not a science. The US emerged as an empire in part as a result of its determination to achieve military supremacy which came at the cost of a cycle of long term decline in social economic & political terms. The cost of US expansion via military intervention & weapons production has bankrupted the treasury and saddled the nation with a ruinous federal deficit. The quality of life in America has slid from first to 12th overall in world standing.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz What the hell are you talking about. There is nothing innately fascist about eugenics at all. Eugenics can exist in just about any political system, heck, eugenics doesn't even require state policy. If some woman for example, chooses only to procrate with attractive, intelligent men, then she is essentially practicing eugenics. It is very difficult to stop this and it is almost totally a-political.
You are an ignorant fool who doesn't know what she/he is talking about.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
It is a curiosity that your conception of history has not prevailed in the end. Why do you suppose this is so? Could it be that you are another victim of that highly organized international conspiracy of Jewish bankers? As for the Frankfurt School only the powers of darkness could have supported them. It is more difficult to account for the obscurity of a patriot such as yourself endowed what is obviously a disciplined mind, singular courage & profound nobility of spirit...go figure
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz My conception of history has not prevailed? what? what the hell are you talking about you conspiracy theory fool?
Banking conspiracies are stupid, economics doesn't influence that much, history shows this. Armies and belief have more weight than money.
The frankfurt school, DID become extremely influential in the west, look up any black or womans studies thing if you don't believe me.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Would your conception of inferior races make it seem reasonable to attribute financial success among certain groups to the influence of Eugenics? Scientifically speaking, would you assume that ruling races/classes are genetically superior to non ruling races/classes? Is it your belief that "any black or womens studies thing" can be blamed for preventing Americans from "understanding" history as you do? Is superior intelligence in your case instinctive or is formal training required?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You really shouldn't attempt rhetoric, youre ability to think effectively is piss poor.
1) there is a low correlation with eugenic history and financial success, infact, often financial success can run the risk of producing mentally weak offspring due to too much luxury.
2)You don't know what I assume, Shut up.
3)wide spread inferior intelligence = the reason why people dont understand history.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
To what do you attribute your brilliant grasp of history? Does your racial superiority contribute anything 'instinctive' to your record of high achievement in the discipline? As a case in point; should your description of Barack Obama, as a "nigger ape" be viewed as a contribution to our understanding of History or was this statement intended as an demonstration of your profound knowledge of Science? Would it be appropriate to think of you as 'mentally strong' & 'shut up' as rhetoric?
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I read alot but, unlike most people, I am very intelligent so I don't take things on face value alone, I question things, investigate, cross check and research intensely and seriously think about things before coming to a conclusion. This makes me a naturally very good historian. This is also why I don't fall victem to stupid conspiracy theory analysis of 'class conflict as a historical driving force' or 'history is written by the winner' fallacies/absurdities.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
In view of your self professed expertise as an historian and an advocate of race science, who would you consider to be the top eugenic scientist of these examples; a.) Joseph (the angel of death) Mengele b.) Sir Francis Galton or c) Sir Francis Wood? Any judgement is of course is subjective but in view of your eminence and the enormity of your intellect I believe we can rest assured that your assessment will have the ring of scientific truth as have your other remarks thus far.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Bit of a pointless question. I believe in classical liberalism, state over morality (the update of seperation from church and state), and a lack of social intervention by the state.
States, typically have an unfortunate habbit of messing things up completely, soviet union, british new labour welfare etc. I wouldn't want them handling eugenics, I advocate, like galton, more of a eugenic culture than state imposed eugenics.
cidseven 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz dr.Gallo=aids
patous2 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Continued:
The truth of the matter however is that no such utopia will ever come about based on marxist ideas, due to the fact that marx and his ideas are wrong and stupid.
America is not an empire, in many ways, america is a tragic hero that took the bullet for the rest of the world. It is now up to the few remaining patriots to destroy communism and restore order to the planet.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Rome is understood to be an empire but called itself a Republic. The US empire deploys well over a half million soldiers, CIA agents, technicians, security contractors, engineers and dependents in other nations supported by not fewer than a dozen carrier task forces & large contingent of nuclear armed submarine commands. The US maintains some 900 military bases, covering every continent on this planet except Antarctica. US investment abroad averaged $50 billion a year from 2003-2008.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@cidseven Jesus, come out of the closet already. Its clear you are a closet gay attempting to transfer your gayness onto me, a straight man. Otherwise you wouldn't have threatened to rape me, linguistically or otherwise. Maybe you should try pussy for a change. I said the US WAS an empire militarily. Some historians have argued that the US is still an empire economically. If you don't like it take up with them.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1
America is as ruthless and self destructive an empire as has come down the pike.You are in agreement with a consensus of historians and a phalanx of academics including Arendt, Williams Kolko, Chomski, Zinn Kline Marcuse, Grandin, Magdoff, Said, Little Phillips and Johnson. I am of the opinion that the power of stupidity lies in its willful ignorance which it perceives as conviction.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz You cite some interesting names there that I doubt some of the idiots on this page have read-if they know how to read. Zinn died recently and his PEOPLES HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES is one of the most important historical books to emerge from the 20th century. Besides, if you are going to be ignorant of the facts, having conviction about that is de rigeur. There's no fool like a stubborn fool.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 A book you might find interesting on the subject of The US domination and globalization Is THE SHOCK DOCTRINE; the Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein. She documents a case representing US foreign aid as a coup that has outsourced terror to death squads and mercenaries in many places as proxy support to US Multinationals. World Bank and IMF loans are found out to be a loan sharking hustle for seizing public assets in the 3rd world while taking control of their economies
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz I have read SHOCK DOCTRINE. Thanks for the citation and recomendation though, Klein's book is not bad and it is very clear that the first world is making money off the third world theough the world bank and IMF. This represents a sort of financial and resource imperialism of the underdeveloped world.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@MultiSmartass1 multidumbass, are you honestly accusing ME of being gay? that is absolutely outrageous.
'some historians' are these historians anti capitalist socialist marxist post modernist historians? Nobody outside of those circles considers america an empire.
The real evidence against is the fact that the US doesnt call itself an empire. I mean, whats stopping it from doing this? who would stop them?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven Calling yourself something is not evidence of anything. Alcoholics don't call themselves drunks, drug addicts don't call themselves druggies and gay people like you keep thinking they are straight.
As I have mentioned, US was an empire and talk of empire resurfaced after 9-11. Iam not arguing that the US is a real, tangible empire in the Ottoman sense-those days are over.
MultiSmartass1 1 year ago
@Multigay1 Why you calling me a homosexual? that is outrageous. There is nothing gay at all about me. I am completely straight. I only like skinny pretty girls with large boobs.
The US isn't an empire, it would be cool if it was but it isn't.
One day I will be an emperor.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven
the ideology of the market fundamentalism seeks to explain poverty as a product of individual moral failure or inadequacy. The ability to conceive of a more representational & rational model of the world to supersede this ideology of the market place involves discovering the existence of those mechanisms of social leverage that perpetuate injustice & locate them in the more abstract and less accessible institutional structures & methodologies of power. Poverty is a function of wealth
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz Your opinions and objectives are stupid, bizarre and poorly explained.
Capitalism has no doctrine. Market fundamentalism obviously isn't a problem as the big capitalist societies do not even operate under it. Most of them operate along the keynesian economic lines.
The reason economic and social inequalities exist amongst different countries and particular groups of people is primarily due to genuine inequalities.
Give me one reason why I should care about poor africans.
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven: Totally agree with U here. This "jazzbo66" clown who comments against capitalism is beyond pathetic & preposterous. I actually lived under both systems. Fuck socialism! It sounds nice in theory. But the reality and the empirical evidence show the contrary. Most of these ass clowns who put Marxism on a pedestal never lived in East Germany, Cuba, North Korea, USSR, etc. I was born in East Germany. I came to the U.S as a 10 yr. old when the wall came down. Fuck, I am glad 2 I live here!
WarezDaBeef 1 year ago
@cidseven
I cannot think of a reason why you should care about Africa's colonial "natives" beyond the interest you might share with a butcher with respect to a cow.
jazzbo66zz 1 year ago
@jazzbo66zz If by colonial "natives" you mean 'white' people, then I typically care about them, but only typically.
As for the rest of the people living in africa? I don't care about them, and I have no reason to care for them.
cidseven 1 year ago
@idunnobigandhappy My point is that the people get screwed by all of these systems, thus, these systems are FAILURES.
A resource based world economy highlighting efficiency, technology and education would benefit the entire planet and all citizenry of the world with a lifestyle and educ. like we've never been afforded before.
If you have an alternative solution that is more beneficial for the people and planet, please share it....otherwise research the Venus project, bias set aside.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Stalin did not "differ" from Marx, the world never reached the stage of communism, is all.
marcelthemaoist 1 year ago 2
Pure fantasy.
The world does not have infinite resources, at least not without an effective way of restricting human population it doesn't.
ymirfrostgiant 2 years ago
Are "omics", "isics", "atics", "graphies" and "logies" also about money?. Communism is a special word that designates a resource (sharing for efficientcy)-based, family- rather than profit- style, economy without money in the ideal. Educate yourself and do not repeat anticommunist follies.
valtih1978 2 years ago 2
Educate yourself. Communism is NOT a "special" word NOR exception. It's monetary based and their IS elite who govern and live better than the populace, engaging in market. MONETARY....investing for the countries interest.
faltering to the suffixes doesn't negate that, only distracting from the real truth of the matter.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
No matter which bullshit you spread about communism to favour the private owners of your country who fight communism all over the world, communism is a TERM and it means a special kind of society. A society that is based on true values rather than money. There is plan and common property, there is no trade/market in socialism/communism. It is in capitalist societies where majority of people compete in market to feed the rich who enjoy socialism. Socialims must be for everybody.
valtih1978 2 years ago
It's monetary based, whether you want to admit it or not...and our capitalistic society has "true values" too: all are created equal and we spread freedom and democracy around the world.
Nice "words," arent they?
blaziermissy 2 years ago
"Freedom and democracy"? Who are you talking to? You spread capitalism (the monetary lifestyle) and US imperialism. Your "true values" are individualism and self-profit (no matter what happens with the environment).
valtih1978 2 years ago 2
Re-read my last post. Apparently you didn't catch the sarcasm.
And communisms "true values" are no different, just pretty words.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
I do not think that claming that socialism is the same as capitalism (profit-oriented ideology) is a sarcasm. I do not think that opposing socialism to resource(true value)-based economy is a sarcasm. It is bad sarcasm to insist that term communism is opposite to its meaning.
Ok. If you like mind-blowing sarcasm, take mine: your resource-based economy highlighting efficiency, technology and education IS monetary based by authority who promotes the Zeitgeist and NWO Venus project ;-)
valtih1978 2 years ago
You say imperialism as if it is a negative thing.
What is wrong with individualism and self profit?
cidseven 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
> @cidseven
> You say imperialism as if it is a negative thing.
> What is wrong with individualism and self profit?
What is wrong with fascism? Prosperity for one nation -- that is great!
valtih1978 1 year ago
yeah, whats wrong with mediocre wages and no access to health and education.
oh I know, maybe they should sell a kidney or something, selling kids and whoring your wife also works.
profit is gooooooooood
greenhell666 1 year ago
@greenhell666 Most people dont even want an education. most people hate learning and absolutely hate thinking about stuff. It confuses them and upsets them.
Most people are idiots, why should I care about them?
cidseven 1 year ago
@cidseven your views of humanity
are "fascinating" your mother must be
really proud *_*
greenhell666 1 year ago
@greenhell666 Why the sarcasm? I am a very wise person.
You could save yourself a lot of trouble by just accepting that most people are absolute fucking clowns who might as well drop fucking dead.
cidseven 1 year ago
You're falling prey to ignorance and propoganda. Put your science hat on and do your homework. I hate laziness in regard to our responsibility to educate ourselves. It WILL take education to obtain a better world......period.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
A resource based economy CANNOT work unless it's global...understand that the resources of the world need to be shared, thus, a "global" economic system. This doesn't equate to a NWO or a big monster you call one world govt.
Don't be so ignorant.
blaziermissy 2 years ago
Parenti is a brilliant Marxist intellectual. The third-worldization of the planet is underway, and has been for decades, to the detriment of global communities and resources
blahblahblah8183 2 years ago 6
He is brilliant and I first learned of the concept of "maldevelopment" from his excellent book "Against Empire."
But like most Marxists, Parenti also sees history as being in a EUROCENTRIC vacuum...it's all about modern America, it's all about post-1913 America, instead of really framing it from a better context of 1492, when Europeans emerged out of Europe into a world that was already First World in many places, like Mexico and Peru and China.
TruthandJustice101 2 years ago
A better Marxist (in my opinion) was James Blaut. He wrote "The Colonizer's Model of the World" and framed all the modern stuff in the context of the 1492 European colonial beginnings.
People like Michael Parenti and other Marxists because he sanitizes the GENOCIDE that allows a thing called "America" to exist in the first place.
Marxists don't like to see the blood on their own hands and the Apartheid that is happening right under their nose, and Parenti is a good Marxist in that regard.
TruthandJustice101 2 years ago
There is a huge difference between a Marxist and a "Liberationist".
1) A Marxist visits the concentration camp and tells the prisoners that they need to "organize" and learn to speak their captor's language.
2) Liberation is about wanting the people freed from their captors, free to reclaim their land, language, and self-determination independent of their captors.
Most Marxists are white. Their very identity is not under assault, their nations NOT under occupation.
TruthandJustice101 2 years ago
action without theory is just as bad as theory without action.
kutthroat84 2 years ago
I wish Marxists would just once look at the blood under their own feet.
But they are too fixated on the sexual hard-on they have for an economic theory to take notice of such inconveniences.
Both Capitalists and Marxists reduce people down to economic units...and both are Eurocentric about their worldviews.
TruthandJustice101 2 years ago