Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts

28 March 2021

Petition calls on Biden to restore Obama-era "We The People" site

A petition launched by American libertarian writer Thomas Knapp calls on the Biden administration to restore (ironically) an Obama-era petition website cancelled by Biden.

Launched at Change.org, the petition argues:

"We The People," while imperfect, served a valuable function. While it could not compel action on an issue, It put the executive branch on the spot, requiring it to explain itself when Americans demanded such action.

We call upon President Joe Biden to restore the "We The People" site, and, in keeping with his inaugural comments lauding "the will of the people," to commit to responding in a timely manner to petitions which gather 100,000 or more signatures.

One signatory had written, "I believe one of the most important things that President Obama did was to actively seek the involvement of his fellow citizens in creating policies and providing the political pressure needed to pass controversial legislation. And the White House's "We The People" web page was probably the best example of that. So I was shocked to discover today that the Biden Administration had pulled the plug on it."

The arrival of signatures has slowed since last month. If you support the restoration of the White House's former petition site, you can take part in the signing at https://www.change.org/p/joseph-r-biden-restore-the-white-house-s-we-the-people-petition-site

- ClubOfInfo

Read More »

17 October 2020

Violence, instability to spread in the US - election result won’t matter


In 2016, the late leading US sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein wrote of a problem of growing instability in the US

We are used to thinking of instability in states as being located primarily in the global South. It is about those regions that pundits and politicians in the global North speak of “failed states” in which there are “civil wars.”

The late sociologist noted the “golden era of U.S. dominance of the world-system began to come undone circa 1970 and has been unraveling ever since, and increasingly.”

On protests and the formation of anti-government forces in the US, Wallerstein’s commentary tells us:

The problem is that both the federal and local governments are unsure what to do. They “negotiate” for fear that asserting their authority will not be popular. But when the negotiations fail, the government finally uses its force. This more extreme version of action may soon spread. It is not a question of moving to the right but of moving towards more violent protest, towards a civil war.

All this time, the United States has been truly losing its authority in the rest of the world. It is indeed no longer hegemonic. The protestors and their candidates have been noting this but consider it reversible, which it is not. The United States is now considered a weak and unsure global partner.


It should be noted that this commentary from 2016 was authored before Donald Trump was elected as president. Even during Obama’s years in office, the US was in a steep decline, falling out of favor with its allies.

The US may not be faced with civil war as a result of some specific crisis following the election this year, as suggested by many. However, there should be no doubt that the social conditions leading political violence and disintegration are growing in the United States and unlikely to be affected by any election.

In an earlier commentary in 2015, Wallerstein had concluded that the prevailing policies of a state do not change even if radicals or outsiders are elected. Referencing seemingly disruptive election results in Europe, he stated, “in the end neither the geopolitics of the country nor the middle-run economic options of the country seems to have changed”.

This does not mean people should refrain from voting, but it does mean no-one should expect real change as a result of just casting a ballot. The same pig putting different-colored lipstick on doesn’t bring about fundamental change. – ClubOfInfo
Read More »

31 January 2019

The "People's Vote" might have a people problem - here's why


Despite gaining support from visibly large crowds of people in the UK, the "People's Vote" campaign for a second Brexit referendum vote demonstrates serious problems engaging with the broader British public on social media.

Local chapter pages of the "People's Vote" movement based on Facebook have insignificant numbers of followers and unremarkable levels of engagement, with the only page with a significant following being a single page that makes heavy use of advertising, titled People's Vote UK. In the case of this page itself, more problems appear.

Looking to the page's posts and the responses is no useful way to assess how British people actually perceive its message, since these posts are likely to have been shared by pro-EU groups and individuals. However, the group does target ads to the general public, and here its claims of popular support begin to look dubious.

Negative comments are being left when the ads appear in people's news feeds


Most visitors to People's Vote UK social media pages are leaving positive comments, but the majority seems to shift to negative comments when the group tries to target the broader public with advertising through news feeds. The resulting barrage of negativity has an effect of drowning out the voices of exasperated EU supporters, who can't tell why they are suddenly faced with offensive comments.

This could be the work of trolls trying to demoralize the pro-EU movement in the UK. But, if so, why are such comments only flooding the page's content when the group tries to advertise to the public? One explanation is that the negative response to the People's Vote campaign actually originates with the campaign's own target audience - the British public.

What is described above hints that the poll data supposedly showing a shift in favor of the UK remaining in the European Union could be dodgy, and there are numerous ways such data could be seriously flawed.

"Leave" may simply have turned quiet and content in their victory, rather than actually losing supporters as the "Remain" camp is fond of claiming. When directly provoked by flooding their news feeds on Facebook they do appear to respond viciously as described above.

Data favoring "Remain" could be flawed because, as well as more eagerly taking part in polls, EU supporters never stopped campaigning. This creates the unrealistic sensation that they have more influence or power, or have now won the debate. Their desire to keep their cause alive through constant adverts, polls, petitions, columns, etc. is clear. The "Leave" campaign, in contrast, is undertaking no similar project to maintain public backing and isn't even watching the polls. Their sole position is that the debate is over and they already won.

So, even if polls and news stories supporting a people's vote do show an accurate cross-section of the population, these are a poor basis to predict a pro-EU victory in a second referendum. The anti-EU side has yet to counterattack or produce its own new slogans and talking points, as it is too busy in power. A decisive lead for pro-EU forces in the polls, while the other side is not campaigning, might become irrelevant as soon as the other side begins a counter-campaign if its plans are really contested.

Treat all this as speculation. Unfortunately, comments on Facebook ads are extremely difficult to capture or prove because Facebook withholds the data once ads go inactive and takes them out of the page's feed itself, allowing posts that receive negative responses to quickly be buried while the page only displays posts that received positive responses. However, you can easily view the comments for yourself if you catch the ads while they are running or see them in your news feed.

Don't take our word for it. Give it a go!


The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

6 September 2016

US must 'surrender its sovereignty to the world'

The Blog


The US talks of its responsibility to "lead the world" but has failed to let the world vote in its elections.


Writing for Dissident Voice and the Mont Order society website, L'Ordre criticized the US for its keenness to rule over foreigners without asking their permission by conducting a vote.

The US calls its global dominance "democracy" but denies foreigners the right to take part in its political process. Americans will have to first "surrender" their sovereignty to the rest of the world if they want to justify ruling the world, the post argues.

Slamming US hypocrisy and "cavalier" behavior regarding democracy, sovereignty and national security, the L'Ordre article demanded:
On the basis of the arguments given here, a call goes out for the United States to allow foreigners, especially those impoverished people living in US-occupied countries like Afghanistan, to register to vote as US citizens in the US election. The next President should not just be chosen by Americans, but by the billions of people whose lives it tries to govern without a democratic mandate.
The article reflects the intended position of the Mont Order to criticize the US and other western democracies for their role in starting wars and suppressing the political rights and destinies of others. It also singles out the US for being more dangerous than the small dictators and warlords it endlessly accuses of abusing human rights.

Full analysis: Let Foreigners Vote in the US Election


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

19 August 2016

South Africa's ANC is on the way out

The Blog


South Africa's African National Congress (ANC) party is on the way out, global social theorist Immanuel Wallerstein wrote on 15 August.


This can be told in the outcome of municipal elections, which show the ANC on the run. Marred by corruption scandals, the old party of the country's anti-apartheid struggle is losing support across a whole spectrum of ethnic and political elements in the country.

Wallerstein asks his readers rhetorically, "what next?" In addition to the above corruption scandal and the overall economic difficulty the country has run into, there is also "the fact that twenty years after the end of apartheid, no significant program of return of Blacks to land ownership has been enacted, and the ANC did not seem to seek to move forward on this issue".

One party that is pushing the land ownership issue, however, is the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) led by the controversial but charismatic Julius Malema. "The EFF performed better than expected" in recent municipal elections, Wallerstein points out, "obtaining more than 10% in several cities".

Malema's EFF uses a "combination of left language and xenophobic pressures" that "has been successful in several former Communist countries in East and Central Europe", and could also persuade many in South Africa.

Wallerstein concludes, "South Africa has now shifted from a democratic model that it has claimed to be, to being a center of internal turmoil of a sort that might be difficult to label as democratic".

The BRICS countries relied on South Africa's membership and wealth as as proof they "are truly concerned with Africa, the poorest continent", Wallerstein observes. BRICS could therefore be severely undermined as a bloc by South African economic setbacks.

Full analysis: South Africa's ANC is Slipping Away

A decline in South Africa's economic status could, in combination with Libya's destruction by NATO, seal Africa's fate as the continent of unrelenting poverty from its northernmost coasts to its southernmost cape.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

26 July 2016

DNC only ever intended Clinton to rule

The Blog


Extreme bias guided the Democratic National Convention (DNC) involvement in the campaigns of opposing Democratic candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.


WikiLeaks-released emails indicate that the leadership of the Democratic Party had already decided who must rule the country well ahead of any kind of democratic choice made by the people.

While the DNC is supposed to be impartial, it had instead sided wholly with Clinton and sought to derail Sanders' campaign from the beginning (as reported at TheHill), showing constant frustration with Sanders and trying to portray his campaign in a negative light at every opportunity. With the national elite managing to defeat Sanders and ganging up on Donald Trump, the US presidential election has descended even further into farce.

Apparently, only the bare minimum appearance of a farcical election is enough for the US regime to declare itself the most vibrant and successful democracy in the world.


The leaked emails are a substantial blow to the US regime's claims of being a "democracy", and even worse for the Democratic Party's claims of being democratic.

So offended are many of Sanders' supporters, that many have pledged to vote for Donald Trump in order to only bar the dangerous and bloodthirsty foreign policy hawk Clinton from power.


The Blog

Read More »

8 July 2016

Brexit will be "An Exit To Nowhere"

Ryan Calhoun


Elites will never be stripped of their privilege by the method of their ascension. The impoverished will never stop being robbed of their potential by handing it over to new elites. The decision by the majority of voting British citizens to leave the European Union has been seen as a mandate against unaccountable technocratic governors in the EU. Objections to this technocracy are not always pretty though. In place of a centralized system of control in Europe, those who voted to leave the EU wish for the tools of power to be shifted back to Britain.

No matter their intentions, and really no matter which side of the vote British citizens found themselves on, very little has changed for the control people have over their own lives. The nationalists wish to take back control of “their borders”. The economic isolationists want control of “their trade”. The Remain voters wish to sustain “their” unity with Europe. No matter the reason, the commonality here is one mass collective illusion. It is the illusion of democratic control and representation. Despite all evidence to the contrary people think this system exists in order to support them, and that a referendum is the best way to assert control.

Democracy has divested common people of control. It has made the individual’s decision making orders of magnitude from mattering. Your participation in the voting process is inconsequential. It may be one of the most inconsequential activities a normal person can engage in. But even if it wasn’t, even if the direction of your vote counted in the re-shuffling of the deck, it will never be you holding the cards. A resentment of technocracy has merely led to a reversion to an earlier model of false representation of your interests. The same institutions that will now decide the fate of borders and trade had previously negotiated away that control, and your opinion on it could not have mattered less.

Now those who had felt so disenfranchised hope to divest others of control, namely the immigrants they begrudgingly deal with now as neighbors. But the logic that denies the right to an open system of migration and residency for immigrants is also an attack on the freedom of natives. National borders advertised as “theirs”, as a tool of sovereignty for the people who call Britain home, is in fact the opposite. It is the tool of British elites. Those with the most political sway in Britain will now get to decide who citizens can communicate with, who they can employ, who they can live with, which countries they are permitted to travel to. It is also the tool of foreign elites, who will carve up trade agreements based on national boundaries rather than on the true will of the individuals. The right to a referendum on this matter is a right to a whispered suggestion in a sea of other whispered suggestions. Will these suggestions enhance your power? No. They merely change some terms of negotiations between the world’s most powerful economic and political interests.

The right to self-determine begins and ends with you. Any domestic ruler of yours telling you otherwise is selling your birthright back to you as a democratic privilege at 1/64,000,000th the value. If you wish to look for the true spirit of sovereign behavior and self-directed action look to your immigrant peers. Look to those who saw the conditions of their homeland they were told represented them, that defined them, that gave power to them. They left. They willed a better life for themselves regardless of borders. The European Union facilitates this behavior for those citizens of member nations, but it too is merely granting technocratic authorization on a matter they have no concern over. Those who cross borders legally and those who cross illegally have an equal moral right to self determination. The EU has acted inclusive of European travel and trade, but that same loathsome bureaucracy prevents you from networking with anyone unpermitted to cross its borders. While nationalist and federalist economic policies ensure the individual citizen’s disempowerment and impoverishment the same power structure is also trapping refugees into encampments rife with human rights violations. The EU is using its unjust and sweeping power to financially strong arm other nations into obedience with its migration policies. What of the sovereignty of people in these countries? Doctors Without Borders recently refused further funding from the EU in their efforts to ensure the health and safety of refugees, objecting to this form of bribery to aid human rights violations. Here is their grievance, from a press release:

“Last week the European Commission unveiled a new proposal to replicate the EU-Turkey logic across more than 16 countries in Africa and the Middle East. These deals would impose trade and development aid cuts on countries that do not stem migration to Europe or facilitate forcible returns, rewarding those that do. Among these potential partners are Somalia, Eritrea, Sudan and Afghanistan – four of the top ten refugee generating countries.”

Put aside your nationalism. Put aside your false hopes for democratic resolutions. These are false idols. These representatives of your identity you think you have chosen were decided for you by people you have never known, for reasons beyond your interests or understanding. It is time to not reject globalism, but to make it own up to the name. The power to communicate, to network and trade, to travel and connect has never been greater. It should be you that benefits and not some fraudulent system of representatives and delegates. Nations, federations, trading zones carved up by multinationals and political opportunists have grown stronger by keeping the world divided. The Leave Campaign merely shifted the balance. It is time to dismantle it. It is time to demand no less than full access to the social, economic, and technological capacities stolen from you and sold back to capitalist and democratic institutions which have no place in a truly global age. It has kept you down. It has kept the people of your nation and of Europe down. It has nearly destroyed regions of the world and created refugees out of people who wanted nothing more than their home and their communities to prosper as you do. Brexit is over. Let’s start talking about a true exit from this nightmare.

Originally published 28 June, Center for a Stateless Society

Read More »

5 July 2016

You should have mourned 4th of July

The Blog


The US has fallen short of what its founders fought for and has restored the oppression that was protested in the Declaration of Independence.


Today, Americans are subject to illegal searches of their vehicles and personal mail on an almost constant basis. Email may be read at will by the state. This kind of hostile warrantless surveillance, arguably, is the thing American colonists found most offensive and it encouraged them to take up arms against British colonial authorities.

One might have thought the type of lack of representation in the British Parliament might have been avoided by America's newfound liberty after it achieved independence. As it turned out, Americans got even less representation. At the moment, the narrow US "democratic" system is hardly capable of representation of the vast population at all.

Writing on taxation, Thomas Knapp at the Garrison Center noted that fewer representatives exist for each US taxpayer than exist for each British taxpayer, despite "taxation without representation" being a major point of complaint by Americans against colonial authorities. In the US, there is one representative per 600,000. In the UK, one per 100,000.

On this, Knapp advised ahead of 4th of July celebrations, "America, it seems to me, has fallen far short of what she could have been had we actually secured our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and jealously guarded them to this day. Between the fireworks and grilling out, take a moment to shed a tear with me for what might have been and isn’t."


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

1 July 2016

Brexit can't affect freedom of movement

The Blog


Contrary to much hysteria in the media and stock market, Britain has not actually left the European Union.


It's not even clear how Britain will leave the EU or how long it will take. Many fear for freedom of movement of people after this referendum and UK withdrawal from the EU. However, the effect on freedom of movement will in fact be up to the negotiations between the UK and EU.

Students and workers traveling between the EU and the UK will not have their travel plans affected in any way even after Britain's total withdrawal from the EU. To quote a government research summary made available the day after the referendum:
... the UK and other European governments would likely favour a solution that protects the immigration rights of people already exercising their free movement rights, given the widespread disruption and administrative burden that retrospective changes could cause.
This means the British state is fully aware of the chaos that could be caused by halting the freedom of movement already being exercised by millions of people. All will remain in place, without being threatened by Britain's exit from the EU.

Britain's withdrawal from the EU may in fact open up more opportunities for migration by Commonwealth citizens. According to the government research summary, "gaining greater control over EEA immigration as a result of leaving the EU could (or should) lead to enhanced scope to prioritise Commonwealth immigration". This is similar to the enhanced scope to pursue trade with countries outside the European Union after leaving the EU.

While freedom of movement for existing residents was not a concern to Brexit campaigners, migration was a key issue, viewed as a source of social unrest and potential influx of terrorist agents from war-torn regions.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

21 June 2016

India's Zionist settler tactics in Kashmir

The Blog


A report printed in the magazine Voice of East points out the "aggressive policies of [the] government of India to change the demography of [the] state [of Kashmir]".


Altaf Hussain Wani, a human rights activist for the Indian-annexed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, is quoted stating, "People under foreign occupation have not only been deprived of their political rights but also social, cultural and economic rights".

The report termed India's foreign policy as being based on a "colonial mindset". Indeed, much of India's behavior has included colonial military occupation and suppression of the many minorities and different nations India claims to rule over. This scandal occurs while India portrays itself as a modernized democracy and consorts with western powers.

Poverty is used by India to inflict misery on the people it attempts to rule over. As the Voice of East report stated, "Indian-occupied Kashmir is one of the regions, where Indian state has failed to respect its international obligations to frame policies to eliminate poverty". India's policy has been to "grab the land of state subjects and render them landless" as the Indian regime works to re-engineer demographic balances to suit its power goals.

Evidence of India's re-engineering of the population to assert its power lies in the way "occupation forces have already occupied 1,000,000 of acres of [agricultural] land". In addition, India is "planning to construct colonies for retired Indian army persons [and] homeless Indians in Kashmir valley".

Occupying powers including Zionist Israel have a long history of building their colonies on occupied territories to change "facts on the ground" to justify their rule on so-called democratic grounds. When such efforts succeed, the result is often deemed to be genocide because it entailed destruction of the indigenous people.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

17 June 2016

Democracies kill with your tacit consent

The Blog


Most theories of government taught today suggest that by paying taxes and merely living in a country, a citizen gives tacit consent for the state to do whatever is needed, including for their "national security".


This argument is even extended to warfare and assassinations. "Democratically elected" politicians are more than capable of killing millions of innocent people in wars, and are likely to be even more arrogant about it, reminding us that they won democratic elections.

Politicians like Tony Blair and George W. Bush viewed themselves as "legitimate" rulers, and viewed others like Saddam Hussein as "illegitimate". Nevertheless, their actions arguably killed more innocent people than the Iraqi dictator. Their crimes are rendered even more offensive by the fact they would like to cite "democracy" as an argument for shifting the blame away from their own bloody and arbitrary hands onto their people.

Writing at the Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) on 10 June, Tommy Raskin counters the view that voters really approve of the actions of even a "democratic" government. He states, "many citizens do not vote for government action but are forced to facilitate it nonetheless. Citizens who endorse losing candidates, for example, still have political obligations. So do the millions of citizens who choose not to vote".

Noting that when the state does something good, it is merely a gift, because it goes out to people who never requested it or specifically donated funds for it but were instead taxed, Raskin concludes that "Simply living under a democratic government does not count as requesting government action". While Raskin's article does not specifically address the bloody conflicts and genocidal actions by western democracies, the anti-statist's comments are useful in uncoupling the people from their rulers when it comes to understanding who should be held accountable.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

31 May 2016

Brexit "beneficial" to trade: committee

The Blog


According to a British Parliamentary committee report, leaving the European Union could actually put Britain at certain economic advantages.


Various media have pointed out the battle of often inaccurate "claims and counter-claims made by both the leave and remain sides", as Treasury Select Committee Chairman Andrew Tyrie MP termed them.

The video below from 38 Degrees shows the endless trading of truths, half-truths and exaggerations by the two campaigns over the future of Britain and the EU.


Tyrie acknowledged, "the Committee confined itself to looking at economic costs and benefits. But this is only part of the story. For some, other issues are more important. As the founder of Leave.eu put it, for him: "this isn't about pounds and pence, it's about democracy"."

The "In" campaign tends to prey on economic fears. Head of Labour's "In" campaign Alan Johnson MP stated, "The economic evidence isn’t so much piling up as becoming a landslide: leaving Europe would hurt Britain’s economy." Anti-democratic war criminal Tony Blair said just holding the EU membership referendum itself is an "enormous economic problem".

However, there are actually strong arguments that leaving Europe would be economically wise and put Britain on a path to restoring its much-depleted international influence and wealth.

Britain outside the EU could enjoy what Tyrie called "potential beneficial opportunities". As the report stated, "high-quality trade agreements with countries like China, India and the United States" may become increasingly possible to sign after the United Kingdom is no longer constrained by EU regulations and dedication to the European market.

It is certain that there would be a major international realignment if Britain was outside the European Union. Whether Britain will become closer to the American regime or be pushed further away from it towards friendlier relations with emerging economies such as China is not clear.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

US regime "corporate rule" to continue

The Blog


With the final contest for the seat of United States President likely to be fought out between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the outcome will only be more continuous "corporate rule" by a hideous regime driven by endless greed.


This is the picture drawn by Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) writer Kevin Carson. Immanuel Wallerstein holds a similar position on electoral politics, viewing it as unavailing as any means of transforming the world-system.

Other political writers similarly diagnose the US "democratic" political system to be fake, much as its press freedom is a fraud and any meaningful criticisms of the regime's barbarism and war crimes are continuously redacted from newspaper and television by government cronies. The revolving door between all US corporations, "NGOs" and government departments makes them essentially fronts for the regime in Washington.

As concluded by Carson at the end of a clever analysis authored on 28 May:
...on all the issues most fundamental to keeping us from having [human-friendly economy of small-scale]  — the transportation subsidies, intellectual property,” the global Empire and permanent warfare state — the two parties are almost indistinguishable. I don’t know — one party may give us a form of corporate rule that’s somewhat more bearable than the other. But either way it will be corporate rule, without a doubt.
Predicting none other than a continuation of endless war and the subsidizing of greedy corporations by the US regime no matter who wins the White House, Carson states of the Democratic and Republican parties respectively, "American politics isn’t divided between a Party of Working People and a Party of Big Business. It’s always been divided between two Parties of Business that serve two somewhat different but overlapping segments of the capitalist class."


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

22 April 2016

Rep Press shames Clinton's dishonesty

The Blog


Amidst the heat of battle between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, Representative Press urges Democratic voters to choose Sanders over the "dishonest" Clinton.


Appealing to Clinton supporters to change their minds before it is too late, and not vote for the vicious neoconservative Clinton, political conflict reporter Tom Murphy at the YouTube channel Representative Press commented as follows.

Showing a video of Clinton laughing off Sanders when he accuses her of supporting destructive wars such as the US aggression in Iraq and Libya, the playlist description reads as follows:
Hillary Clinton has a track record of a being dishonest, disrespectful and arrogant politician who accepts money from powerful interests like Wall Street and sells out the working class by voting against legislation that would help us.
She gets paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches for the rich and powerful and then she does the bidding of the rich and powerful.
Representative Press is best known for candidly discussing the real motive of the 9/11 attacks against the United States using YouTube and other services - US support for the Zionist Israeli regime.

Watch the new playlist at YouTube to see Representative Press coverage of Clinton's history of deceit.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

5 April 2016

Arab Spring as a violent failure in Syria

The Blog


Reflecting on the Syrian Civil War, now in the final stages with defeat looming for all the armed factions except the Syrian government and the Kurds, Zena Chamas wrote about the fate of the so-called Arab Spring.


With the exception of Tunisia, the Arab Spring simply didn't really bring changes in the Arab world and can be considered a failure, the journalist noted in a recent post.

In Egypt, the result of the Arab Spring was the ousting of dictator Hosni Mubarak, but the joy lasted very shortly before the new ruler Mohammed Morsi began to suppress dissent, and was himself overthrown after popular demonstrations culminated in a coup. The new ruler, President Sisi, comes from the same clique of generals to which Mubarak belonged, establishing himself as a dictator and simply continuing Mubarak's legacy. In the end, Egypt showed that it simply lacks any democratic candidate to rule and is only capable of being the domain of one dictator or another.

Syria was an even worse failure, with "rebels" quickly degenerating into vicious terrorists eager to abduct and murder the very same western journalists who supported them when they first took up arms against Bashar al-Assad's so-called "tyranny". In reality, as Zena Chamas implies, the "revolution" in Syria was violent and abortive from the beginning, just as driven by a goal to force the Syrian people into submission as any dictatorship. The losers of the conflict, once again, are simply the common people, who lack any credible person to construct a democracy for them.

Left out of this analysis is Libya, which is possibly the worst failure of all, although US State Department head Hillary Clinton was obsessed with the carnage in the country as her greatest victory. Today, Libya is still in a civil war, largely thanks to Clinton and her hatred of Gaddafi, which came at great expense to the Libyan people in the end.

Also noted is the fact the Arab Spring was an American phrase in the first place. At all times, the US propped up fake uprisings and repeatedly tried to install Americans (exiles who had lived in America for decades) as the democratic representatives of the people of Syria, Libya and other countries.

As good as democracy can be in theory, it cannot be imposed on other societies by force or propped up by the CIA. It can never be upheld by the deceptive and blatantly fake democracy of the US.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

1 April 2016

Clinton to be "forced to resign" if elected

The Blog


Writing at OpEdNews recently, the Garrison Center's Thomas L. Knapp launched criticisms of US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.


Noting the scandal surrounding Clinton's use of a private email address while working as US Secretary of State, Knapp suggested it is possible Clinton will face prosecution even if she is elected as President. If winning the top job doesn't shield her from the sword of justice, she could be forced to resign shortly thereafter.

This is an example of how serious breaches of security - no matter how petty these seem for a name as big as Hillary Clinton's - should be taken into account by voters.

147 FBI agents are presently investigating Clinton's use of a private email address for state purposes. Prosecution is not off the table. In view of this, Knapp asks, "Do Democrats really want to go all in on Hillary Clinton’s narcissistic sense of self-entitlement, especially when it’s looking more and more likely that the next card the dealer turns up will be grand jury indictments?"

The scandal surrounding Clinton's emails cannot be underestimated, despite how dismissive she and her supporters have been of it. "Even if Clinton herself escapes prosecution, it’s worth remembering that Richard Nixon was never indicted either, but was forced to resign after several of his closest aides were", Knapp warns US voters in the post at the Garrison Center.

Also worth considering is that, while this reckless use of a private email address may seem a minor infraction by someone as high up as Secretary of State when the offense is reported to the public, it is sufficient grounds to get any other civil servant sacked and barred from the job. Any government worker will tell you so.

Why should a presidential candidate be excluded from the penalties applied to other government workers or job candidates? Arguably, the most important job in the United States needs to exercise even harsher penalties against candidates than all the lower jobs in government departments - not let people off just because their name seems too big to be prosecuted.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

Govt cowers under benefits protest

The Blog


A London protest against homicidal Tory disability benefit reforms was silenced on the air, with absurd reasons being offered by UK state and corporate media, Steve Topple writes.


Accusing the government of acting like a vicious mob while protesters assembled peacefully, Topple noted the protest was nevertheless a "triumph".

In the account, which appears at the blog Mutterings from the Left, skepticism about Britain's supposed democratic system is expressed. "MP’s are permitted to shout, hurl insults, espouse lies and propaganda and generally behave like a braying mob in one part of Parliament", Topple writes, while at the same time the very voters these rulers get their mandate from are not allowed to stage a peaceful benefits protest using banners nearby.

Commenting on the disaster of Tory benefits reforms, which were cruel enough to be mentioned by Iain Duncan Smith as a reason for his recent resignation, facts are pointed out by Topple:
  • "1000s of individuals have died after being declared “fit for work”"
  • "countless more have committed suicide after being left destitute by sanctions"
  • "rough sleeping has doubled since 2010"
  • "500,000 more children are in poverty.""
  • "£30 a week cut to ESA"
  • "the chaos that is Universal Credit"
  • "unnecessary stress surrounding the move from DLA to PIP"
  • "800,000 people are set to lose out because of clandestine changes to the tax credit system"
  • "Independent Living Fund that was abolished last year"
  • "there are already two UN investigations into possible human rights breaches by this Government going on (due to their “benefits reforms”)"

Topple says the UK mainstream media is completely ignoring these facts and refusing the cover them, as well as the benefits protest.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

18 March 2016

What if US elections actually worked?

The Blog


In a recent short post, Garrison Center director Thomas Knapp suggests a way of revising US presidential elections so the outcome would be more satisfactory to voters.


Available at the Garrison Center and Medium, the post tempts readers with a better alternative to "one person, one vote" by asking:
What if you could vote for ALL the candidates you like, instead of just one, secure in the knowledge that your vote(s) would not be “wasted” on a loser, or “spoil” the chances of one of your preferred candidates, resulting in election of the “greater evil?”
That better alternative is Approval Voting, in which, "You vote for as few or as many candidates as you like. All the votes are counted. The candidate with the most votes wins. Yes, it’s really that simple." A US voter might, for example, be able to use three votes - one for your favorite independent who deserves a chance to win but is unlikely, the second for the best candidate in the party of your choosing, and a third for the candidate most likely to win in the party of your choosing.

Knapp justifies this kind of revision on the basis that most Americans end up voting for the lesser evil rather than the candidate their heart is really with. In the present US election race, many voters are likely to vote (e.g. for Hillary Clinton) more for a desire to keep Donald Trump out of power than because Clinton deserves power.

The widespread public view of Clinton is deeply negative due to her poor role as Secretary of State and track record of lying to to the public, but even she seems harmless compared to Trump in terms of her public statements. A sizable number of Americans polled have indicated that they may leave the United States if the divisive and bigoted Donald Trump is elected to power.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

26 February 2016

Democracy is fake, totally illegitimate

The Blog


Political scientist Robert Higgs has offered a compelling breakdown of why democracy is fake, and elected "representatives" are actually illegitimate.


In countries with millions of people with disparate interests, Higgs writes, representative democracy is a "practical impossibility". This casts serious doubt on the claims of western states that they are legitimate and that others, led by "dictators", are illegitimate.

Politicians are "inveterate liars" who prove democracy is fake


Higgs offered the following powerful analysis that should be seen by anyone with an interest in criticisms of democracy:
So, what possible intelligence can voters exercise in casting their ballots? They can vote in accordance with the appeal a particular candidate’s promises hold for them, but relying on candidates to carry out their promises would be childishly foolish. Anyone who pays the slightest attention to politics knows that politicians are inveterate liars; many would sooner lie than speak truthfully even if the truth did not thwart their purposes, because lying would be more congenial to their true, dishonest character. Thus, voters can do nothing more than throw ideological darts, casting their ballots for the candidate who makes the most appealing noises, has the handsomest face, or displays peacock-like the most fabulous partisan posturing.
Full analysis: The Hot-Air Barrier (Independent Institute)

Democracy is fake, and highly prone to start wars due to mass ignorance


Explaining that the promises of politicians are consistently broken, Higgs also wisely argues that elected politicians lie biggest when it comes to foreign policy. Citing that members of the public have some grasp of domestic affairs and are less prone to fall for lies on domestic issues, Higgs contrasts this with the fact there is "no practical limit to the enormousness" of the lies politicians can tell about foreign countries.

Politicians trying to start wars often have an easy time, Higgs points out, due to "the general public’s near-complete ignorance of foreign lands and the political, social, and economic conditions that prevail there". Thus, democracy is fake in its present form, and is used to legitimize the murder machine the west has become when dealing with oppressed countries.

Violent western governments repeatedly cite spreading their fake and insulting democracy as the reason they are going to war, even when the goal of their wars is to install dictators and put millions of people under the threat of arrest or torture.

Demo-skeptic chorus shouts out that our democracy is fake


Praising Higgs' analysis, antistatist writer Thomas Knapp said Higgs always "tells it exactly like it is" (KN@PPSTER).

L'Ordre: Democracy is fake

The Mont Order, to which Thomas Knapp is a friend, also acknowledges western democracy is fake in its code and encourages people observing the Mont Order code to have no faith in it. This view can be called demo-skeptic, a rarely used term denoting a simple lack of confidence in liberal democratic institutions and states.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

5 February 2016

Syria "peace deal" meaningless

The Blog


Present attempts to negotiate an end to the Syrian Civil War are part of a new effort by western countries to impose their will on Syria.


This was the opinion of Tony Cartalucci, addressing the future of the embattled Arab country at New Eastern Outlook on 22 January.

Syria has been fending off western "regime change" attempts for years, with the devastating attempted coup costing hundreds of thousands of lives and destroying the country's civil infrastructure. Around half the population of Syria has been displaced by the US attempt to impose its shallow ideas of "democracy" and "freedom" on the country by supporting terrorists and corrupt regional governments.

Cartalucci dismissed the current peace talks as a trick. The fake "opposition", made up of foreign thugs and US hit men trying to seize power over the dead bodies of the Syrian people in Damascus and Aleppo, is only negotiating because it is losing the war. Cartalucci believes the end of the war is near, and the west's only reason for talking is that its forces are being defeated:
As Syrian troops backed by Russian airpower move ever closer to the Turkish border in the north, thus cutting the lifelines feeding terrorists operating inside of Syria, and as Syrian forces cut off the Syrian-Jordanian border, the end of the war draws nearer.
Escalation has been one of the other options used by western powers in trying to forcefully impose a pro-western regime over the Syrian people. As Cartalucci writes, the west wants to change the tide of battle yet again in favor of terrorists and prevent a swift end to the war at this stage. It has "attempted to escalate the conflict, and also negotiate an end to it, attempting to leverage what remaining influence it has over the battle via its dwindling proxy forces and the [threat] of direct military intervention".

The increasing threat of direct involvement by the west to defeat Bashar al-Assad referenced above may be the recent attempts by the US to construct military bases inside Syria. A US base is reported to be under construction, in violation of international law and potentially bringing the trespassing US units into direct conflict with both the Syrian Arab Army and the Russian Aerospace Forces.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

Featured

Cops and MSM collude to smear Defend Our Juries as a violent mob

The corporate media and the Met Police have been spreading lies about peaceful protesters at the Defend Our Juries’ ‘Lift The Ban‘ action on...

Follow Me on Twitter