Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 06, 2020


Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 12:16 UTC · Jul 5, 2019

Today, #Venezuela’s Independence Day, we are reminded of the country’s prosperous past – and the future the Venezuelan people deserve. The U.S. stands with @jguaido, @AsambleaVE, and all Venezuelans yearning for a return to democracy and a brighter future. #EstamosUnidosVE

Joe Biden @JoeBiden - 21:10 UTC · Jul 5, 2020

On this Venezuelan Independence Day, my thoughts are with Venezuelans who continue to work tirelessly for the cause of democracy. It’s time for free and fair elections so that the Venezuelan people can turn the page on the corrupt and repressive Maduro regime.


h/t Syricide

Posted by b on July 6, 2020 at 4:28 UTC | Permalink

« previous page


“Biden was the junior senator at that time - he is and was and is and will forever be a corporate hack”

And the silver tongued Obama, an even bigger corporate hack and lying sack of shit, made him his vp.

Posted by: krypton | Jul 7 2020 2:21 utc | 101

William Gruff #Jul6 13:17 #33

After all, Trump wins the award for "Best President Ever" for simply not starting any new wars.

Richard Steven Hack @Jul7 0:38 #93

Trump *will* start a war if he can be convinced that he can blame it on the "enemy" ...

Grieved @Jul7 1:09 #96

Lots of loose talk about the US engaging in war.

Wait ... what?
  • Isn't USA effectively at war with Venezuela? Isn't it an act of war to seize billions in State assets - including embassies - and support a coup?
  • Isn't USA effectively at war with Syria? If ISIS has been defeated - as Trump has said several times - then USA is illegally occupying Syria oil fields. In addition, USA "recognized" Israel's claim to the Golan Heights - against UN resolutions that deny that claim.
  • Isn't USA at war with Yemen? USA supplies Saudi Arabia and UAE with weapons for this war plus targeting.
  • Isn't it an act of war to renege on terms to end a war? If so, then one could say that USA has renewed it's war with North Korea.
  • Isn't it an act of war to impose a virtual embargo on a country via crippling third-party sanctions? And wasn't the assassination of Solemani an act of war? Then USA is effectively at war with Iran. Putin's reminder that Iran was a Russian ally after the downing of the USA drone may be the reason that we are not in a hot war with Iran.
  • USA argued for a "two-state" solution for Palestine for two decades, then (under Trump) switched almost entirely to Israel's side. That sounds like an act of war against the "State" that USA has argued should exist.
  • Isn't USA still at war with the Taliban? Or is that just a 20-year "police action" like Vietnam?
  • And what about Libya that NATO Turkey is seeking to conquer - after USA played a key (and illegal) role in destroying?
  • And then there are tensions with Russia and China, which only seem to grow more intense every week. The Trump Administration seeks to stop NordStream (for security reasons) and punish China for Trump's inept pandemic response and for exercising control of Hong Kong (which is long recognized as Chinese sovereign territory).

<> <> <> <> <>

IMO Trump has started wars but the countries and peoples he picks on know that it's best not to respond too forcibly or they invite greater damage.

I'm surprised that moa commenters give any credence to the claims that portray Trump as peaceful/peace-loving. In addition to his belligerence, Empire front-man Trump has initiated a huge military build-up, ended long-standing peace treaties, and militarized space.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 2:28 utc | 102


come on now, play nice. example of not being nice: saying someone said something when they didn't.

Posted by: lizard | Jul 7 2020 2:31 utc | 103

Jackrabbit @102

Thank you, thank you,and thank you again for articulating well what is soooo painfully obvious, yet others still cannot see it or admit it.

Posted by: Schmoe | Jul 7 2020 2:42 utc | 104

@ RSH @ 93
re: Trump *will* start a war if. . ."
There you go again, "will....if."
The fact is that he hasn't, despite your wills and ifs, which is a recent first for presidents.
Facts are interesting, no?

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jul 7 2020 2:53 utc | 105

This is the standard Washington rhetoric that accompanies their coup attempts. It is a companion to the "moderate democracy" rhetoric about U.S. satellite governments like Saudi Arabia. The rhetoric tells you that these people have zero interest in democracy, honesty, or avoiding hypocrisy. Some of Bush's neocons are Biden Supporters; what a surprise.

Posted by: Edward | Jul 7 2020 2:56 utc | 106

@ 102 jackrabbit... thanks jr... ditto your comment...

Posted by: james | Jul 7 2020 3:07 utc | 107

@ Jackrabbit 102
re: Isn't USA effectively at war with Venezuela?. . .etc
Obviously you don't know jack about actual war, do you.
Or give us your creds?

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jul 7 2020 3:13 utc | 108

I dropped back in to see what follows...imagine my deflation to find that people don't know what war is.

@108 Don Bacon

Precisely. No one who has ever experienced the tragedy of war will ever mistake the playground games of make-believe war with the real thing.


That's the problem with the US administration, and its satraps and the many camp followers and court jesters who follow it. They don't know the difference between posturing war and waging war.

The difference is so profound that it calls for not only a new language but a new departure point of reference within one's soul even to begin to speak of such things.

The US will pursue the make-believe war it postures through in order to score points within its small group circle. But real war, should it ever come to touch it - and it will if it pursues its childishness too far - will shock it into total frozen fear the moment that it strikes.

Iran knew this, and had the human strength to test it and to prove it. Everything else, up to this point, was an accommodation by the world's nations to the posturing of the US for its own internal coherence. It was a matter of supporting the US ego rather than of being close to the event when that ego falls apart, with potentially explosive consequences.

But Iran had the strength of character to stand on its principles, and to proclaim its truth. And by the way, that stand is by no means done, despite what the trolls may suggest. Iran has barely begun its action to remove the US from Southwest Asia, and we will only see the footprints of its actions as we realize that the US has departed. And this will happen, regardless of the US narrative and its many parrots.


I don't blame the US or any of its supporters for threatening war when all it really does is act as a nuisance and a spoiler in those few platforms left to it. Those it oppresses have so far mostly chosen to bear the insult rather than to make a fuss. But Iran has shown the way, and one should not expect many more of those oppressed to put up with the abuse from the US many more times.

What is clearly known is that the very last thing the US can do is go to war, in the real meaning of that term. The very last thing the US is capable of, is war. And the generals of all the nations of the world know this because they have seen the proof of it. Anyone who doesn't see the proof of it is behind the curve, and may well have license to comment here and elsewhere, but fortunately does not sit in the security councils of the nations of the world.


If anyone wants to think that the US is "effectively" at war with another nation, then consider that Iran is absolutely "effectively" at war with the US, just as Hezbollah is beyond any doubt at war with Israel. And so what? When positions are "effectively" this or that, then they had better produce "effective" results. And it is only from these effective results that we can count the coup of the engagement. Hezbollah and Iran don't need to be told the difference between real attacks and propaganda attacks.

What they count is the real force.

Everything else is bluster. And I was 16 years old myself once, so in all humility I don't condemn this braggadocio, which I understand all too humanly.

But neither do I take it as real in the real world.

Posted by: Grieved | Jul 7 2020 4:28 utc | 109

@ Grieved 109
Thanks for helping to deliver us from all that illusory make-believe on war from the deep thinkers who apparently man this place. And yes, Iran has shown the way, which includes its ability to put a serious hurt on US forces if attacked. We're talking about the possibility of lots of US dead bodies, military and dependents, men women and children, also sunken ships, and not just some supporting proxies and aerial bombing with the attendant publicity that suggests to some that genuine war exists, when it doesn't.
People need to get real.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jul 7 2020 4:47 utc | 110

Thanks Grieved, karlof1, Gruff, james and this CitizenX barfly for their comments

Let me write about humanities choices in a different way than provided here by the empire way or the highway.

Public input to policy choices was something I watched be taken away in the early 1970's as the field of future studies was shut down in the US. I participated in college, state and international future studies that spoke of public policy decisions and processes. It is exactly the sort of discussions that should be ongoing about appropriate mixed economy decisions.

Most of the trolls here write about this "ism" or that instead of the reality of most nations mixed economies. Mixed economies are those with what many here can understand as socialist or capitalist....that is government run or subsidized or privately run under no/some level of government oversight/regulation.

Why aren't there public policy discussion processes where the public can have their nation's mixed economy (past and present) shown to them and they can express preference for what sort of mixed economies their countries might work best with. Go to my web site and check out the almost 50 year old study I published in college about an alternative futures scenario development process called FAR (Field Anomaly Relaxation).

The take away is that we have ways to organize ourselves in humanistic ways but simply lack the collective will to do so. The failure to take full responsibility for ones life, that stands in the way of this collective will, is faith/religion that gives humans outs for responsibility for their actions. If they have this faith or that, which justifies their lack of support for overall community under government, un humanistic cults can attain and retain social control....doing God's work.....gag!

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jul 7 2020 5:23 utc | 111

Trump is really no different than Clinton, GWBush, and Obama. Each a front-man for the Deep State/Empire. Each portrayed as well-meaning, peace-loving men that were FORCED! to war for all the right reasons. In that context, these Jedi mind-tricks fall flat:

  • USA can't wage war?

    Yet it's bullying other countries and engaging in acts of war.

  • Trump's belligerence is all bluster?

    Yet USA is preparing for war with a costly arms build-up and massive propaganda campaign (as described well by Caitlin Johnstone).

  • No one need fear USA?

    Yet power-elites in USA subscribe to supremacist ideologies (neoconservativism, neoliberalism, zionism), advocate a "New World Order", and a 'rules-based' international system that can only be described as "might makes right".


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 5:26 utc | 112

With only four months left to the U.S. presidential elections, and the increasing likelihood of Donald Trump, the most pro-Israel President in history, losing, Israel has been trying to provoke Iran to start a war, so that it can drag the United State into it. This is not anything new. For over a decade Benjamin Netanyahu has been trying to force the United States to go to war with Iran, and Israel itself almost attacked Iran three times between 2010 and 2011. But the with events of the last several months darkening the prospects of a second Trump term, Israel feels a new urgency for a war with Iran.

For over two years Israel tried to provoke Iran by attacking Iranian-backed Shiite forces in Syria, but Iran has opted not to retaliate. Since the attacks did not provoke Iran to retaliate, and also failed to dislodge Iran’s military advisers and the Shiite forces that it trained, armed, and dispatched to Syria, Israel has seemingly turned to attacking Iran directly within its borders.

The events of past two months in Iran are indicative of Israel’s new push for war. These events include large-scale infernos, explosions, and cyberattacks, all believed to have been carried out by Israel and its Iranian proxies, the "fake opposition" which is the part of the opposition that supports economic sanctions and military attacks against Iran, and has even allied itself with small secessionist groups that carry out terrorist attacks inside Iran.

Posted by: Mao | Jul 7 2020 5:52 utc | 113

In this video, Prof. Wolff talks about the breakdown of the capitalist system and outlines 4 major problems that the US has been faced with without for quite some time with no solution in sight: climate change, capitalism’s intrinsic instability, systemic racism inherited from slavery, and lastly the lack of mechanisms to manage viruses.

In this video, Prof. Wolff compares and contrasts the preparation for and management of COVID-19 with how the US has managed military preparedness and the handling of military confrontations and activities. It has succeeded at one and completely failed at the other. He explains why.

AskProfWolff: How the Fed Serves Capitalism

Posted by: Mao | Jul 7 2020 6:23 utc | 114

Posted by: Grieved | Jul 7 2020 1:09 utc | 96 Prediction: The US may start a war but the US will not finish that war. Its opponent will end that war, by causing unacceptable losses to the US - something quite easily achieved, and already proved to the world by Iran in this very year of 2020.

I agree. The US can not defeat Iran, short of nuking Tehran, which is not in the cards for geopolitical reasons. However, the US can devastate much of Iran's civilian infrastructure, which, like most such infrastructures, can't run and hide. The US can also kill a million or two milllion Iranians, as it proved in Iraq.

All that will do, however, is merely guarantee that Iran will never surrender. Nor would Iran ever surrender in the first place. Which is why I tend to reference the upcoming war as the "New Thirty Years War". The clear example is the near twenty years we've spent in Afghanistan - which is vastly weaker than Iran. Each war - Vietnam, Afghanistan, and arguably Iraq - has lasted longer than the last and with failure as an outcome.

The US can keep attacking Iran from the air and sea for thirty years - but without ever defeating Iran. It will do so because the military-industrial complex will make profits every year from that war - and in the end, that's all that matters to the US (along with the

Only if the US tries a land invasion will the US lose a massive number of troops. But even that will come over time, albeit at a *much* higher rate than the US saw in either Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. US annual casualties would probably be in the low to medium 5 digits per year, as opposed to the low 4 digits in most of those wars. In other words, four or five times the rate in Iraq. That's as compared with a hot war in North Korea which would see 50,000 US casualties in the first ninety days, or any war with China or Russia. See "United States military casualties of war" on Wikipedia. It's possible that casualties could rise to the level of WWI, if the war lasts five or ten years, or even WWII if it lasts twenty - or even higher if it lasts thirty.

Most people think the US will not try a land invasion. I've argued, however, that the *only* way to even attempt to prevent Iran from closing the Straits for the duration of the war will be for the US to put several score thousand Marines and US troops on Iran's shores to attempt to prevent launching of mines and anti-ship missiles. This would be difficult since Iran has a long Persian Gulf shoreline, Iran has fortified that shoreline, there are many places to launch weapons from that shoreline - and any such US troops would be subject to both conventional and guerrilla war by the Iranian military and perhaps a million or more Iranian Basij militia. Nonetheless, the US is likely to be dumb enough to try.

In any event, the US will eventually be forced to withdraw either because the US electorate would eventually tire of the war - although as Afghanistan proves, that could take a *very* long time, mostly depending on the casualty rate, however, as I indicateed - or because another "threat" takes precedence, which would likely mean either Russia or China.

"And the US will strain its mighty Wurlitzer to the utmost to declare victory as it retreats."

Yup. And the sad part is that the US electorate will probably believe that, then forget about the reality and be willing to commit to a new war within another ten years.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 6:36 utc | 115

Mao @Jul7 5:52 #113

increasing likelihood of Donald Trump, the most pro-Israel President in history, losing

1) The USA establishment are all pro-Israel.

2) Biden has proclaimed himself a Zionist.

3) In 2016 all the polls had Clinton ahead.

Fake populist outsiders (like Trump) have to be shown to defeat the establishment. That helps to sell them as being on the side of the people.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 6:36 utc | 116

Posted by: lizard | Jul 7 2020 2:31 utc | 103 come on now, play nice. example of not being nice: saying someone said something when they didn't.

I didn't say you said anything. I said you'd probably agree with General Zod on the subject of 5G. Did you visit that link?

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 6:39 utc | 117

Posted by: Don Bacon | Jul 7 2020 2:53 utc | 105 The fact is that he hasn't, despite your wills and ifs, which is a recent first for presidents.

What part of "yet" don't you get?

He has six more months of this year - and if he wins, another four years.

Only when his time is *over* do you get to say, "he's a first for Presidents."

And as someone else pointed out, he's effectively "at war" with Venezuela, if not directly anyone else. I'd argue he's "at war" with China and Iran - he just hasn't started actually shooting yet.

You give that asshole *way* too much credit. Who knows how often he's been restrained by cooler heads in the Pentagon or elsewhere? Remember that he threatened to attack Iran for the drone downing, but backed down only because Iran told him that if even on US missile landed on an empty beach, they would retaliate on a full-scale level. Then there's the stupid Soleimani assassination that almost got the war started. I suspect he was only restrained there because the Pentagon realized what a stupid move it would be to retaliate for the Iranian retaliation. And you can be sure the neocons would begging him to. Next time he might well be lured into doing something stupid.

In any event, Trump doesn't "want" anything with regard to foreign policy. His only concern is his own image, as befits a massive narcissist. If he can convince himself that a war won't hurt his image, he'll do it.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 6:47 utc | 118

In addition to the above, the idea that because there's a difference between "war" and "conflicts before war" there is *no chance* of war is absurd.

Every war started with this sort of enmity between nations historically. As I've said before, with this level of enmity between the US and Iran, and arguably between the US and Russia, and the US and China, war is inevitable. With the latter two countries, such a war is likely to be nuclear - which is why it hasn't happened yet - that risk is *way* too high (although it can still happen if a miscalculation causes a conventional war, which then escalates into nuclear.)

A war with Iran doesn't have that risk. No nuclear power that I am aware of is going to enter the war on Iran's side and thus risk a nuclear war over Iran. Iran itself will not develop or use nuclear weapons. Israel *might* consider using nuclear weapons against Iran - that would be a*huge* mistake geopolitically and probably result in Israel's destruction by geopolitical means if not by military means. But neither Russia nor China are going to directly engage the US military to defend Iran. That would be stupid and putting their own national survival at risk for the benefit of another nation. As Percival Rose would say, "That ain't gonna happen."

The real problem for some people is cognitive dissonance. They can't emotionally accept the possibility of these wars occurring - so they don't. They are reduced to saying, "well, it hasn't happened...yet."

The "yet" is the operative term. There is no logical extension of that term to mean "never".

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 7:00 utc | 119

Richard Steven Hack @Jul7 6:36 115

There are many other mistaken assumptions, such as:

  • USA wouldn't start a war it can't win

    We've seen that USA is often satisfied with just smashing another country.

  • USA would strain to justify a war or continue a war

    USA is very adept at propaganda. They can apply pressure that forces a country to "lash out", or intervene to help an abused population or an ally. USA also likes to use proxies. Example: destabilize with "freedom fighters" then intervene when the target country commits "atrocities" as it attempts to defend itself.

  • Trump is a negotiator, he doesn't want to fight

    Trump is a stooge. The Deep State will decide when they're ready to fight.

  • Americans are tired of war

    If only that were true. Most Americans just don't care. And are willing to accept what ever lies they're told (at least for the first months).


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 7:03 utc | 120

An investigation by the Aussies found that once Covid was gaining traction in China but before it hit the rest of the world, contrary to those claiming the stuff was sold back to China during the pandemic here, China sent it's agents around the world buying up all the PPE they could get their hands on. They even begged for donations. Italy, one of the hardest hit initially who was yet to be hit with Covid donated a bunch of PPE to China. When Covid hit the US and Europe PPE supplies were severely depleted and the major source for them was China including the stuff sold by 3M. The same China that gobbled up the worlds supplies. The Chinese SOLD the PPE they got free back to Italy complete with the Italian tags still on them. Then there were the what turned out to be hoaxes that Trump stole PPE destined for other countries.

If I look hard enough on the internet I might find someone claiming I'm young, handsome, well endowed, more muscles than Arnie in his prime and all sorts of good stuff. All would be lies of course. We've even got people trying to rewrite history that Hitler was one of the good guys. Covid has become a political football, as examples I've stated above prove, and all sorts of garbage getting quoted by "see I told you so" commenters as if it's gospel. Some doctor says hospitals are overloaded with Covid while others claim the overwhelming number of patients are there for procedures that were delayed due to Covid. Some say lock it down others say no way. Some docs claim Chloro whatever works others say no. Yet it's like a football rivalry with commenters serving up their "expert" as gospel. Many of those experts are nobodies. The riots, Covid, the new Russian "revelations" which are just more lies, and other stuff is all about the election.

My prediction is if Biden wins war with Iran is on the table and soon. Nutty yahoo has suddenly pulled in his horns on annexation and bombing Iran which means Trump said no and nutty is waiting for president Hillary to come through and have the US do the dirty work. Mideast oil fields go up in flames from Iranian rockets and gas goes to $50 a gallon and the Dems pay off the mob with the green new deal. Dems have sold their soul to the mob so to keep the cities from burning again they will make all kinds of concessions like opening the borders and caving to the communist BLM. BLM says they are Marxists and their web site lays out their communist agenda.

Posted by: snedly arkus | Jul 7 2020 8:21 utc | 121

from NZ, viva la revolution.

Posted by: Paul | Jul 7 2020 11:22 utc | 122

IMO, the word "WAR" means two sides are fighting.

What is plain to see is all of these "wars" are not wars but provocations, aggression from one side and bullying. In every case the other side does not want a war.

Interesting how the US has way upped its aggression on Venezuela without a peep from the people. This started off with some nonsense about an idiot named Guaido and is now full blown nastiness.

Posted by: arby | Jul 7 2020 11:59 utc | 123

In other news... not like you need it but here is further proof that Twitter etc are a potent enhancer of ignorance...

I googled news on FL covid cases, because I was curious. One of the top hits said average age of new cases was only 21! wow! link
The story was sourced to a tweet where someone saw a graph and badly misunderstood what average actually means.

actual average age is about 35, which isn't bad either, but nearly 2x what the reporter wrote, and Google promoted. And that's even before you have intentional fake news. We are set up for mass stupidity.

Posted by: ptb | Jul 7 2020 12:41 utc | 124


Sadly they are not the only stooges. It beggars belief that people everywhere believe that they can elect someone to change the system in the country in which they reside. Political stripes have very little meaning as the differences are incremental at best. The bureaucracies necessary to keep the modern systems of governance afloat are staggeringly monolithic. Electing one individual, or party, or parties and presuming that the system will somehow be improved upon is a laughable fantasy. It leads to a continuous cycle of four years of initiatives to tear down the previous four years initiatives unless you're a second term government. But actual change is still the sole purview of the entrenched bureaucracy or "deep state" or whatever other label you prefer. To Jackrabbit's point, most decisions hinge on whether or not the bureaucracies in charge believe a war, a social change etc. can be implemented and a desired result achieved. It takes a finely developed sense of myopia to think that the only stooges are those of the political class. Says volumes about the people that put them there, and continues to suggest that they are electing "change".
As an aside, the Frank Zappa quote that "government is the entertainment division of the military industrial complex" remains potently poignant.

Posted by: Digital Spartacus | Jul 7 2020 12:59 utc | 125

If there is such a thing as fascist propaganda it is these two quotes from these reprehensible war criminals.

Posted by: Al | Jul 7 2020 13:25 utc | 126

'mass stupidity' is the word; European MSM consider the rise in cases lately as a 'second wave' (although they are following expats return or mass gatherings) as if the first wave was ever controled or gone.

Posted by: Mina | Jul 7 2020 14:08 utc | 127

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 7:03 utc | 120

Agree with all of what you say there. Again, it's a case of cognitive dissonance on the part of many people.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 14:09 utc | 128

Dead and dying Venezuelans don't care what English word is used by a bunch of internet yahoos to describe the US policy of trying to destroy the Venezuelan nation. They just want the killing to stop. Today would be nice.

Posted by: Trailer Trash | Jul 7 2020 14:43 utc | 129

"South America's unelected, self-declared "presidents" had a Skype meeting today. "

Saw on Blumenthal's twiiter.

The Bolivian and Guaido.

Posted by: arby | Jul 7 2020 15:02 utc | 130

We've seen that USA is often satisfied with just smashing another country.

Let's apply Afghanistan to your theory of why America engages in military combat operations. Afghanistan was already smashed and it really was never much of a country. So, smashing Afghanistan was clearly not the goal, and still is not the goal, of military operations there. My theory, on the other hand, fits with why America is in Afghanistan still after nearly twenty years.

Louis, can you help me with some of these folks? I can't figure them. Are they "Leftists?" If so, there is no chance whatsoever for the "Left" with the likes of these folks if they are emblematic of the "Left." They're as much the enemy of the working classes as is Wall Street, siding with and promoting any despot and any tyranny so long as it's aligned against America where any and all means are justifiable in ensuring America's collapse.

One of my main concerns with the collapse of the Soviet Union was that, in my opinion, the risk of nuclear war with what was left of it actually was much greater than when the Soviet Union was relatively stable. Same holds true for America and in fact an argument can be made the risk with America is many times greater than it was with the Soviet Union considering America has a history of using nuclear weapons on civilian populations.

Posted by: | Jul 7 2020 15:09 utc | 131


The only way that's going to happen, a war with Iran that resembles the invasion and occupation of Iraq, is if there is yet another Pearl Harbor. It's the only thing that would get Trump to sign off on an invasion and occupation of Iran. I wouldn't put it by the same folks who pulled off 9/11 to deliver the goods again. Without that pretext, there will be no invasion and occupation of Iran.

Posted by: | Jul 7 2020 15:13 utc | 132

@ 109 grieved / @ 110 don bacon... i suppose the lead up to war on iraq with all the sanctions and starving of innocent iraqi's wasn't war to you two either....

sorry, but the way i see it, these aren't empty gestures and they do have some serious bite to them... the usa is one fucked up country to think it can sanction, bully and threaten other countries and that everyone around the globe is going to make like these are the actions of a hostile nation at war and in the process of making war....

so, maybe we can just agree to see it differently....

Posted by: james | Jul 7 2020 15:33 utc | 133

Calling what the US is doing to these countries "war" is like saying that Floyd was in a fight with the cop's knee.
Yes,there has been some very measured retaliation from some of the victims, but it amounts to Floyd saying he can't breathe.

Posted by: arby | Jul 7 2020 15:52 utc | 134

@450 132
The provocations and responses of the formation of a war with Iran have been very interesting and I think that if Iran hadn't of shot down the Ukrainian airliner after their attack against the American base we may have already or continue to witness that war. As I see it there was a real hard on to go after Iran but word of the shoot down allowed the Don to pull back and let Iran suffer the black mark without escalation.
There are way too many itchy trigger fingers and pretexts for this and that can be easily engineered and sold to the masses. Helps Biden or whomever if he can blame the future cluster fuck on cleaning up donnies mess. I expect something expectedly unexpected in the coming months.

Posted by: PleaseBeleafMe | Jul 7 2020 16:11 utc | 135

snedly arkus, comment 121, starts off interesting and then descends into typical anti-communist lunacy. Really sad to see how bourgeois psyops of the 20th century still have victims.

BLM is Marxist? I wish. I'm not sure why conservatives think tarring anything and everything that they find themselves in opposition to as "communist" or "Marxist" does anything other than increase interest in these ideas among those being tarred, who weren't Marxist to begin with but who are all of a sudden being turned on to scientific socialism. You realize they have access to the primary texts, right? They can read Capital for themselves and find out, for themselves, that it is the greatest economics textbook ever written, to this day, and that it and it alone provides a foundation for a scientific understanding of capitalist political economy. That's my story, at least. I have the Tea Party to thank for the fact that I'm a Marxist, and I never would have found out about Marx if they didn't make the laughable claim that President Obama was one of his acolytes.

Posted by: fnord | Jul 7 2020 16:11 utc | 136

@136 fnord

Go to BLM's homesite and you will find their mission statement. It clearly says the movement was founded and grounded in Marxist thought, with a side of identity-politics (in this case, a trio of black lezbians who say Marxism ultimately stems from Queer-theory, or vice versa, I forget).

Irrespective of whether their proposed iteration of Marxist thought is intrinsically correct is the question, of course.

I absolutely concur however, with "Republicans", that their methodology with their action is indeed intrinsically Marxist, because it involves the putting aside of dialectics and philosophy with the intention of clear material ends in mind. Whether or not they themselves are able to articulate these ends is another matter.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 16:36 utc | 137

arby @Jul7 15:52 #134

Calling what the US is doing to these countries "war" is like saying that Floyd was in a fight with the cop's knee.

Well, if not "war", what is it then?

I said "effectively at war" due to "acts of war". Do you have a better term?

<> <> <> <> <>

IMO, anyone that is anti-war is just as concerned with threats to peace as they are the conduct of war.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 16:55 utc | 138


War is not a static proposition and its meaning and definition can and should change over time to fit the prevailing military strategies and economic paradigm of the day. We don't live and operate in an unassailable lexicon vacuum. War is not defined tautologically, meaning, war is not war. War is many things and can be fought on many dimensional fronts, meaning not just militarily.

Posted by: | Jul 7 2020 16:59 utc | 139

@ Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 16:36 utc | 137

Sure thing, dude. BLM is absolutely not a façade organization, not at all...

Posted by: vk | Jul 7 2020 17:07 utc | 140

To me a war means two sides fighting battles.

These wars seem to me to be very lopsided affairs.
The US in almost all cases is the aggressor and tid bits of defense from the targets.

I see zero attacks from the targets. . Maybe a tiny bit of retaliation now and then , but far from war.

To me a war is two sides going at it.

What is going on here is just aggression from one side.

Posted by: arby | Jul 7 2020 17:12 utc | 141

There’s a War Going On Over Kamala Harris’s Wikipedia Page, With Unflattering Elements Vanishing

The theory is that VP candidates have their Wikipedia entries edited to remove unflattering items, so this allegedly indicates that Harris is being considered. Don't know if that's true or not. Could be her own people doing the editing, could be Biden's people. There's no indication in the article who's doing the editing. In my view, there shouldn't be "anonymous" editors of Wikipedia articles except with permission of Wikipedia's staff - and especially not of people in state (or corporate) power.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 17:17 utc | 142

@137 Nemesis

You made me link and look. There might be some claim there that BLM is Marxist, I can’t find it quickly and the site is such a disaster it’s not worth the trouble.

Their site is slightly larger than last time I looked. Still dominated by t-shirt sales and vague LGBTQ mush. They need a web page designer and editor badly. What is most notable is a total absence of content. Vague is too nice. Supposedly a huge organization with a big budget, nothing to show for it. Purposely set up so you can’t find out anything. My guess would be the site is managed from a cubicle at Langley, with instructions to the clerk-in-charge to keep it simple, keep it impenetrable. This is not a popular movement in any sense at all.

Posted by: oldhippie | Jul 7 2020 17:23 utc | 143

arby @Jul7 17:12 @141

I think war is a state of mind. That's why we talk about "the war on poverty" or a "propaganda war".

You might say that there is a "Cold War" but the number of acts of war is too numerous for that and targeted at multiple countries/peoples. It's more like a 'hybrid war' on everyone that opposes the New World Order that the AZ Empire seeks to impose on the planet.

Importantly, you can't prevent war if you only start thinking of it as 'war' when the shooting starts.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 7 2020 17:25 utc | 144

NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 16:36 utc | 137

Go to BLM's homesite

There is "BLM", the mass movement which resembles a network of contentious and largely autonomous activist circles (i.e., there is no central leadership), and then there is "BLM" a 501c-something organization that exists for young middle class "people of color" to get some activist credentials that look good on applications to elite colleges. I'm guessing you're talking about the latter, but conservatives confuse that (maybe deliberately) for the former.

Posted by: fnord | Jul 7 2020 19:33 utc | 145

thanks fnord.... unfortunately many people don't make these distinctions and some are not interested in making them either... i wonder how the black panther party would have done in this day and age? as it was they were infiltrated by the cia-fbi and made to appear completely different then their mandate, but of that no one will be reporting on factually...

Posted by: james | Jul 7 2020 20:01 utc | 146

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jul 7 2020 17:17 utc | 142

"There’s a War Going On Over Kamala Harris’s Wikipedia Page, With Unflattering Elements Vanishing"

Good luck and Blessed President Biden and V President Kamala Harris..... what a joke, Americans truly deserve it.

Posted by: JC | Jul 7 2020 20:12 utc | 147

After making his comeback, steeped in pseudoemotional egosyntonic personaesque fakery, MemesisFailing strikes again.

Welcome back, troll. Watching you.

Posted by: Lurk | Jul 7 2020 20:32 utc | 148

Further to my last post..
I really doubt Biden will last 4-yrs and If you think Obama American born a Kenyan ancestry is bad just wait for Kamala Harris American born Indian ancestry in Jamaica

Posted by: JC | Jul 7 2020 20:50 utc | 149

Posted by: Robert S | Jul 6 2020 13:45 utc | 41

Yes! That would be interesting!

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jul 7 2020 22:32 utc | 150 | Jul 6 2020 16:36 utc | 58

Of course I have no certain knowledge of why Trump has not caught Covd-19, but at the start of the epidemic he was touting hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for it. In Wuhan there were before the epidemic was recognized for what it was, a group of 291 patients being treated for lupus with hydroxychloroquine. None of them caught covid-19. Fauci was cross because he did not want HQ to be used as he was hoping for more expensive alternatives to be used and eventually Trump shut up about it.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jul 7 2020 22:57 utc | 151


If you understood my comment you would notice that I did pose the question as to whether or not BLM was intrinsically Marxist. I did not answer this.

I merely stated that their methodology is akin to any Marxist movement. See the difference?


@ Old Hippie

Indeed, their website is jumbled as is their messaging. What is it that they want?

But their actions belie something that they can not just come outright and say. This is probably at the directive of their funders/handlers. IMO, it is a bridging movement of the "left" in this country which has seized upon the issue of police brutality and black poverty and taken it into the ground, dropped it entirely, with political intentions in mind. In this case, it is to dethrone POTUS.

And if you are of a mind to think that POTUS represents a more Nationalist orientation of one section of our elites as opposed to the Globalist section, the pieces begin to fit a little better.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 23:33 utc | 152

@ Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 23:33 utc | 152

BLM's methodology is nothing like any Marxist movement's. Unless you Americans have another completely different meaning for the adjective.

Posted by: vk | Jul 7 2020 23:40 utc | 153

NemesisCalling @152: "I merely stated that their [BLM] methodology is akin to any Marxist movement."

Really? I totally missed where BLM was organizing tenant associations, labor unions, and farmers' associations. Thanks for cluing me in on the fact they were doing these things!

Posted by: William Gruff | Jul 7 2020 23:41 utc | 154

Are you guys trolling me? Lol

I stated that their methodology is the same, not their mission statement. I have said since the beginning of these shenanigans that their intent isn't to cast a light on our current neoliberal plight. Then they would have to admit that whites are just as affected as they are. And these racially divisive tactics must stand!

They view themselves as the historically oppressed class where only government intervention (in this case, getting rid of POTUS) will ensure their material ascension into "mattering." At least they looked at the Marxist playbook, eh?

They are gathering up the feeble-minded and guilt-ridden whites among us as their vanguard. To what end?...obviously to get Uncle Joe to help them out.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 7 2020 23:59 utc | 155

NemesisCalling @155

Where I come from "Marxist methodology" is all about organizing the working class. What you are talking about has nothing to do with Marxism.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jul 8 2020 0:06 utc | 156

@156 gruff

I get that, sir.

But you can't see how x can be subbed for y in this case?

If you say American history has been building to a point where black lives can finally matter if only we do...*static* *garble* *warble*...then everything will be ok, but we have to make sure that we...*hiss* *static* *hiss*. Do you understand?

If we are talking about the material ascension of a historically victimized class of people, we are talking about the Marxist-playbook.

But in this case, you are walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, but it isn't a duck.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 8 2020 0:17 utc | 157

@ Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 8 2020 0:17 utc | 157

The BLM looks like an intrinsically American phenomenon (racial wars, the unsettled racial question, etc. etc.). They don't look Marxist at all.

But your point highlights us a potentially interesting information: the hidden fear Americans of from the post-2008 era have of communism.

After 2008, the word "socialism" suddenly came to forefront, as if from nowhere, in the USA. This must certainly have generated a timor among the traditional American population.

From your comment historic here in this blog, you seem to be highly susceptible to conspiracy theories. The fact that you don't doubt an American is Marxist merely from the fact he/she states she's Marxist gives us a sign Americans like you have a deep respect and fear for the term.

Are Americans really afraid of a communist revolution happening in their own soil?

Posted by: vk | Jul 8 2020 0:38 utc | 158

@158 vk

Of course I am worried about Marxist infiltration. I am a Catholic. I want as little government as possible. And, furthermore, this is America. It is not a potential Marxist utopia and will never be one except by the barrel of a gun, but in that case you will have 100 million+ guns pointed right back atcha.

I respect Marxism for its contributions to the laborer's plight. But I also respect Marxism for its ability to destroy western philosophy. But the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, these were all brought forth long before Marx and they are enough to work off.

The CCP has a polluted form of Hegelianism, which is the absolute knowledge of Hegel's Logic, or the ability to project such knowledge in its appearance. It is a powerful force on the world stage. And I do not underestimate it.

We Americans have room, liberty, and faith.

I respect China in its natural traditions and feel that the CCP can do wonders for its people if it ceases the world dominance aspect of its Hegelian-Marxism and return to the teachings of the Tao Te Ching and stay within its lanes.

Is it too late to call it a draw and avoid the bloodshed? I hope so, but *shakes 8-ball*..."outlook grim."

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 8 2020 1:23 utc | 159


"Will Europeans shy away from the Outlaw US Empire's determination to fail, see the rising East as their future savior, and abandon their chosen Neoliberal path for it's not too late?"

I'm wondering, karlof1, whether our oligarchs in the US might themselves see the writing on the wall, (as well as the Europeans if not before them) simply as this country and those become so crippled by what is happening thanks to the remorseless onslaught of the covid virus, that all pretenses of having an 'economy' fly out the window. This came to my mind as I looked at a photo on another site of a group of protesters advancing with pitchforks on NY Hamptons estates. The pitchforks turned out to be plastic, but the headline did not say that, and had I been on or near such a happening, the mere fact that they could have been real but were not, would have given me considerable pause.

There has been a flexibility about protests in the past, a large amount of goodwill on the part of protesters while enduring the state's inflexibility. That, it seems to me, is going to change.

The pitchforks may not remain plastic much longer. Desperate times make for desperate people. Surely a modicum of self preservation resides in the hearts of the well to do. They have the power to change course, but time's running out.

Posted by: juliania | Jul 8 2020 1:57 utc | 160


Of course I am worried about Marxist infiltration oligarch control. I am a Catholic human. I want as little government fascism as possible. And, furthermore, this is America global. It The World is not a potential Marxist neofeudal utopia and will never be one except by the barrel of a gun, but in that case you will have 100 million+ guns pointed right back atcha.

I respect Marxism capitalism for its contributions to the laborer's plight technological progress. But I also respect Marxism denounce capitalist excess for its ability to destroy western philosophy via cruel exploitation and corrupt misallocation of resources (thousands of nuclear missiles, 2008 Global Financial Crisis, etc.). But the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, these were all brought forth long before Marx Robber Barons and CIA and they are enough to work off.

The CCP USA has a polluted form of Hegelianism democracy, which is the absolute knowledge of Hegel's Logic perversion of Western ideals that sprung from the enlightenment, or the ability to project such knowledge in its appearance. Maybe that's whyIt is a powerful declining force on the world stage. And I do not underestimate it the difficulty of righting the ship.

We Americans have room, liberty, and faith. once led by example (shinning city on hill!) now we force compliance via dollar hegemony and force of arms.

I respect China America in its natural and Western traditions and feel that the CCP USA can do wonders for its people if it ceases the world dominance aspect of its Hegelian-Marxism and return to the teachings of the Tao Te Ching and stay within its lanes.

Is it too late to call it a draw restore democracy and avoid the bloodshed? I hope so not, but *shakes 8-ball*..."outlook grim."


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 8 2020 2:30 utc | 161

@ Posted by: NemesisCalling | Jul 8 2020 1:23 utc | 159

Be my guest. Kill how much BLMers you want. Won't impose Marxism any loss whatsoever.

The Spartans always lived with the fear of a Greek revolt overthrowing them in the Peloponnese (they considered themselves "sons of Hercules", i.e. Dorians; they knew they were the invaders of the peninsula). That shaped their entire societal structure, and guided their entire foreign policy after the reforms of Lycurgus.

The revolt never happened. The Spartans lived with their system intact, happily ever after.

And even then, they withered until they simply disappeared. Whatever rested of them was easily subjugated by the Roman Republic at the 2nd Century BCE, and, by the time of Augustus, Sparta proper was just a curiosity for Roman tourists.

Posted by: vk | Jul 8 2020 2:37 utc | 162

Smithsonian Special Issue: America at War

By one count, the United States has been at war at some time in 93.5 percent of the calendar years between 1775 and 2018*. Of course, this depends on how you define “war.” We defined it as using military force, or the imminent threat of force (as in the “gunboat diplomacy” of the 1850s), to achieve national ends.

This Map Shows Where in the World the U.S. Military Is Combatting Terrorism
The infographic reveals for the first time that the U.S. is now operating in 40 percent of the world’s nations.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 8 2020 3:43 utc | 163

NemesisCalling @157: "If we are talking about the material ascension of a historically victimized class of people, we are talking about the Marxist-playbook.

You are apparently confusing some Abrahamic religious trope with a study of capitalism and how societies built upon that economic foundation work. There may certainly be others who are just as clueless as yourself about Marxism but who view it as you do, and some of those people might even call themselves "Marxist", but like you they've never read any source material aside from the first couple paragraphs from the Communist Manifesto.

As for Black Americans (or "People of Color", which is not the same thing) who call themselves "Marxist", there are a couple that I know about in America. You can pretty much count them on your fingers, assuming that you've not had many amputations. A characteristic of the subculture many young Black Americans embrace is the appearance of being a tough and dangerous badass. "They vilify us for being dangerous anyway, so we might as well be as dangerous as they claim we are. We might as well make the most of it." At the same time, in America, "Marxist" is just a synonym for "meany" or otherwise bad and dangerous person. Given these two trends in American culture it should not be at all surprising that some people, and Black youth in particular, will hang the "Marxist" label on themselves even while knowing as little about it as you yourself do. They want to offend and frighten people like you, and if a particular label helps them do that then they will wear it proudly (and, as the case is, ignorantly).

A positive side to this situation in America is that some of those who call themselves "Marxists" might actually start reading what Marx wrote. Unlike the Bible, the full reading of which is the best cure for people calling themselves "Christian", after a study of Marx's works most readers will discover a lack of anything controversial for them to disagree with Marx on. While the mystique surrounding Marx has grown more bizarre with each passing year, the man's words have aged remarkably well as the social sciences inexorably and with great resistance converge on what he illuminated so many decades ago.

I suggest you give reading Marx's works a try. At least then you will not look so silly when you pretend to know what you are talking about.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jul 8 2020 10:40 utc | 164

Fnord @ 146

No, BLM is not a 501c3. It is a “project” of another organization which goes by Thousand Currents and does maintain 501c3 status. The organizational structure is set up for maximum opacity. The organizational structure is designed to hide the man behind the curtain.

Thousand Currents has a known Board of Directors. The active director appears to be Susan Rosenberg, ex-Weathermen. Hopefully most know by now that Weather Underground was purely a government organization.

Posted by: oldhippie | Jul 8 2020 11:35 utc | 165


The pitchforks may not remain plastic much longer.

Bull. Wishful thinking. Americans have got nothing. No fight. Hell, there isn't even a resistance. Sixty years prior, DJT would have been assassinated twenty times at least by now by the likes of Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray. In today's information overflow electronically-controlled society, there is no yesterday and there is no tomorrow. Instead, there is only the here and now and thus there has been an evisceration of continuity and thus an evisceration of any potential for solidarity under the umbrella of a common cause. Americans, much like the Chinese people, are Electronic Sheep. The only question now is, do the androids coming on line dream of them?

Woke means asleep. An electronic slumber.

Posted by: | Jul 8 2020 13:38 utc | 166

I am wondering if the BlM folk may indeed be impossible to corral. I say that because of the disorderly and unimpressive claim to be Marxist that I see even is highlighting. My take on the claim, and I'll agree that they are not any such, is that they remember that FDR used that threat, that the communists would indeed gain power, to deflate oligarchical supremacy and divert it to at least acquiescing in his New Deal policies. Social democracy was what we got, and even some alignment with the chief communist country at the time, in fighting the clear and present danger. And social democracy served us well until the Vietnam War as USians had shown they were ready to sacrifice in a legitimate cause. Then, on Vietnam, that trust was betrayed. But, I'm with james in saying that since such sacrifices are ongoing today in the countries the US has attacked and sanctioned, for them this is war. Not by definition, but by actual destruction of community life. One nation can wage war against others. Hitler did. Johnson did. Nixon did. We in the US did, and are doing it now.

There is no difference between the two main candidates - both are warmongers.

Posted by: juliania | Jul 8 2020 14:05 utc | 167

re: BLM being "Marxist"

BLM's financial sponsors may well have ulterior motives. Thats the ugly reality of protest movements in the US. Someone pays to print the signs.

The movement and the idea it represents are real and not hard to understand, no need to repeat the reasons. Violent racial abuse by police. Nothing to do at all with economic ideology. Most black people deserve to be accepted as middle class Americans, to be part of the system. This is also how most sympathetic white people see it - those willing to go in for a minor symbol of support like a BLM sticker or yard sign.

However people (of any race) actually willing to attend a protest or volunteer significant time usually have more on their plate. Because once you start looking, there is a lot to see. In some parts of the country, the prevailing culture of social justice activists is socialist. Hence the image of being socialist. I don't see that as a bad thing.

I would suggest sudestepping arguments over the exact classification. When someone in the US says socialist/communist/marxist, most of the audience won't know the difference anyway. At this stage of common knowledge, in my opinion, we are just talking about recognizing that inequality is systematic and designed to perpetuate itself.

Posted by: ptb | Jul 8 2020 14:33 utc | 168

typo/ screwed up edit... *all* black people deserve to be accepted as party of the middle class. *most* desire it.

Posted by: ptb | Jul 8 2020 14:34 utc | 169

@ Posted by: juliania | Jul 8 2020 14:05 utc | 167

The most likely cause of the "Marxist" labeling fever going on in the USA since 2008 is a very simple one: it's the easiest target. Every American hates Marx, after all, so it is the label to go if you want to de-Americanize an internal (domestic) enemy.

If that's the case, then it is ironic, because that would make Marxists the Christians of the 21st Century. The Christians were the universal target for everything bad that happened in Ancient Rome during the Principate (the most famous case being the fire that happened during Nero's reign).

Posted by: vk | Jul 8 2020 14:41 utc | 170

vk @170

That is also why some anti-establishment individuals might label themselves Marxist even without knowing what it means.

So long as they follow it up with a little study, I suppose that isn't the worst way to get one's feet wet with Marxism.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jul 8 2020 14:58 utc | 171

Seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread.
Are there any black folk here ?
Let’s ask one shall we.

This guy is the aurthority on the subject, worth following his twitter ect ect.
For this topic watch from 12 mins
A must see.
He goes into the difference between BLM the ‘movement and BLM the organisation,
Relivant to this thread.

Posted by: Mark2 | Jul 8 2020 20:06 utc | 172

You all realize it is just one party serving the interests of the international financial system and their corporate serfdom.

Posted by: Marian Pyle | Jul 9 2020 16:16 utc | 173

There is a choice for president, there are more than two candidates. America, with first past the post voting, have let it become a two donkey race.

Posted by: Mighty Drunken | Jul 9 2020 21:09 utc | 174

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.