tagged w/ Authoritarianism
-
But to “Femen” — a Ukrainian feminist movement with hundreds of members and thousands of supporters — such tactics are essential elements in their struggle to raise social consciousness as an increasingly authoritarian state attempts to silence them.But to “Femen” — a Ukrainian feminist movement with hundreds of... more
-
-
Fury is building over rolling nationwide blackouts triggered by the Obama administration's deliberate agenda to block the construction of new coal-fired plants, as local energy companies struggle to meet Americans' power demands amidst some of the coldest weather seen in decades.
- As we reported yesterday, four hospitals in Texas reacted furiously after they were hit with planned outages despite being promised they would be spared even as power to Super Bowl venues remains uninterrupted.
- Thousands in New Mexico have been left without natural gas as Gov. Susana Martinez on Thursday declared a state of emergency. "Due to statewide natural gas shortages, I have ordered all government agencies that do not provide essential services to shut down and all nonessential employees to stay home" on Friday, Martinez said after meeting with public safety personnel in Albuquerque," reports the Associated Press.
- Borderland residents have been asked to limit their use of natural gas as the Texas Gas Service asks that larger commercial facilities voluntarily close their doors to save supplies.
- People in Tucson have been asked to limit their use of hot water and moderate their thermostat levels to save on energy.
- Shortages of natural gas in San Diego County has forced utility companies to "cut or reduce the gas supplied to some of their largest commercial and industrial customers," reports North County Times.
- In El Paso, "Hundreds of thousands of electricity customers continue to face periodic blackouts, and nearly 900 gas customers still have no heat," reports the El Paso Times, with El Paso Electric resorting to using generators in a struggle to meet demand while still having to implement forced outages.Fury is building over rolling nationwide blackouts triggered by the Obama... more
-
-
The authoritarian regimes in Iran and China are playing a double game, when it comes to the unrest in the Middle East. Tehran and Beijing are doing their best to spin the protests in their favor, when they talk to the world. But at home, they’re pursuing a different strategy: trying to muzzle anything but the official line on the upheaval.
Commentators have been keen to liken the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia both to the 1979 revolution that brought the Iranian regime to power and the electoral protests of the Green Movement which tried to unseat it. Not surprisingly, the Iranian government has preferred to use the latter comparison.
Iran has sought to graft its own ideology and history onto the protests — as seems to be popular these days — painting the movements as the Egyptian version of the 1979 Iranian revolution that ushered in its theocracy. “Iran’s Islamic Revolution became a role model for the Egyptian nation. Without doubt the Egyptian dictator [President Hosni Mubarak] will share the same destiny as that of Iran’s dictator [Mohammad Reza Pahlavi],” the military affairs advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader told the semi-official Fars News Agency. Fars has pushed the supposed continuities further, playing up the claims of some Tunisian activists that they intend to form a group based on Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the political party cum terrorist group which acts as a proxy for Iran.
Iran’s enthusiasm for analogies between revolution and Egypt’s ends at 1979, though. Although it’s probably pleased to see an American-aligned rival regime go, Iran still seems a little nervous about giving its own reputedly Twitter-powered dissidents in the Green Movement too much inspiration from the anti-government protests in Egypt. Since Monday, Iranians’ access to outside political news from Yahoo, Google and Reuters, some of the few remaining such outlets available in Iran, has been cut off without explanation, though some anodyne entertainment news is still accessible.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/The authoritarian regimes in Iran and China are playing a double game, when it comes... more
-
-
By David P Shirk
Freedom is more than an ideal. It is a way of life that all who embrace it can live, and prosper under. Morally speaking, it is the only way to live if you wish to be in charge of your own life and all you produce. The more freedom you either abuse or give up, the more government grows to fill in the gap.
In short, government is like a fire. Contained and well supervised, it serves its keeper well. Yet people like fire, and all too often perceive its benefit not its danger – living in ignorance of its full capability when it is unleashed. They feel the warmth from it on a cold day, and use it to heat water, and cook. They know that most others use it as well in such small amounts that it is not something to be feared, but rather used for their benefit. Yet one day someone takes their eye off of it. A smoldering ember pops out of the fireplace and starts spreading. Eventually the entire house is consumed, and the owner left destitute. People know that governance of any sort could be for the good – as long as it remained in their control under their watchful eye, and doing only what it was told to do out of well thought out reason.
Such a form was held by a small town once. So the townspeople allowed it, and kept it small. Yet one day while they were not using it, they stepped away from it and allowed it to keep burning. Yet while they were away going about their business, the fire decided that it was not burning enough to make everyone warm and happy. So it spread.
At first all the people noticed was a small piece of wood missing from each one of their stacks. Upon further investigation, they found one less fortunate enjoying a warm fire in an alley. It turns out that the mayor’s assistant had taken that small bit of wood, and used it to warm the guy who was down on his luck. Some people thought this was wrong – after all, they had always been kind to this man – given him food, a place to sleep when the weather got too bad, and even firewood on days that were just chilly. Others thought that this was great – it saved them the time and effort of dealing with the guy, and at the relatively low cost of a small piece of wood.
The general consensus was that it was no big deal. So the next day, the people went about their business again. This time they come back, and another small piece of wood was gone again. They had expected this however, so they did not think anything of it. This went by for a week or so, and they soon became indifferent to it.
Then one day they returned and did not even think about the wood anymore. Yet upon entering their homes, some found their cabinets open, some said that the last of their flour was taken, and some their water supply lower than usual. It would have sounded like the whole town was imagining things had fewer people noticed. Once again they investigated, only this time they found that the town hall was warmly lit, and a dozen or so were eating a well set meal.
This caused a little more of a stir. The town’s people did not mind feeding a guy who was driven to poverty by a bad fall while working, but most of the others enjoying the food and the fire worked far less than the rest of them. They were impoverished not by an accident, but by the choices they made such as becoming a slave to the bottle or some other bit of nonsense. However the towns people grudgingly gave a little more way, seeing the situation as a distasteful act, but not one enough to get too ruffled over – after all, they still had work to do and their families to go to.
The overseer of the provided food and shelter reported later that night to the mayor. He saw his task as not only justified, but morally imperative to any righteous society. He told the mayor that the job was done, but that the townspeople were a little upset by the situation. The mayor asked his opinion, and he responded that the townsmen should be ashamed of themselves – after all, it was only taking their spares and making good use of them. The mayor thought about the matter and concluded that his assistant was correct. However he did not want the matter to get out of hand, so he kept the provided food, fire and temporary shelter as the new norm – not to be added to.
However a month passed, and winter was due to set in. As a result, the townspeople had stockpiled more wood on their property. Yet due to the ever diminishing weather, more wood was needed to provide heat for the less fortunate of the town. However the wood was taken nonetheless, with food in just about the same amount.
The brutal winter came and went, setting the stage for a very nasty town hall meeting in the early spring. For the most part, most had enough stored for the winter, and sat quiet. Yet there were a few families that the extra taken from them all season long, and that little bit made a world of difference. After spending the last few weeks of winter with a meager fire and little food, they ended up finding themselves in the town hall just to get warm again.
One father stood up, and as respectfully as he could, made it known how outrageous this whole thing was. He was immediately answered by the condescending public servant who retorted with comments like ‘How dare you claim to be in the right yet refuse to give to help the needy’. The father lost his composure at that point and yelled back at the official for always having a full belly and warm place to go from his hard work while his family who had earned it had to remain with less. The official smiled and pointed out that maybe so, but the father and his family were both at the town hall with ready food and warmth when they needed it. In the end, the father was exasperated, and once he completely lost his temper, was asked to leave.
Once he left no one else had anything to say. They felt for the father, but did not feel like being made out to look like an unreasonable idiot like he had been. So it was decided that the experiment was a success, and would become policy. Long story short, this went on for a generation. There were always complaints, but in the end nothing changed.
The next generation had a mayor just like the last. He felt mortified when he found that his official and those under him were not getting paid for gathering the wood and the food. So he implemented a small tax to see that they were compensated. The taxes went the same way as the wood and food had, and despite the complaints, turned into policy.
Yet another generation passed and there were still problems. Even worse was that the people had began taking the idea of ‘giving until it hurts’ as a way of life, and the way they used to live was long forgotten (save for the old timers who were labeled as mentally ill anyway). The new mayor seemed consistent in the eyes of the people so they listened to him – after all, they still lived, so what was the wor....
http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3824By David P Shirk
Freedom is more than an ideal. It is a way of life that all who... more
-
-
By David P Shirk
A third of the people seem to be indifferent to the laws and simply think of them as a mere annoyance. These people mostly accept the idea of laws as a necessary evil. Another third wholeheartedly support the laws, and constantly seek to make new ones to fit their idea of how the world should be. The last third are people who are sick of the restrictive laws as their daily lives continue to get more and more difficult to live in a legal manner. Depending on how observant and researched the people are typically determines which side they take.
An example of this is found in an act of legislation called the REAL ID ACT of 2005. Originally passed through congress as HR 418, it never made it past the Committee on the Judiciary. So it was merely scaled down, placed into the more popular HR 1268 under division II, and viola – it became the law.
Under Title I of the law, it removed exclusive power from the Attorney General in regards to granting asylum, and granted joint power to the Secretary of Homeland Securi.......
http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3535
Image url:
http://blog.case.edu/james.chang/2007/07/29/real_id_pic.jpgBy David P Shirk
A third of the people seem to be indifferent to... more
-
-
MOUNT DORA — A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
"I'm not turning anybody away — that would be unethical," Dr. Jack Cassell, 56, a Mount Dora urologist and a registered Republican opposed to the health plan, told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. "But if they read the sign and turn the other way, so be it."
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-mount-dora-doctor-tells-patients-go-aw20100401,0,6040296,full.story
i don't think he likes the Health Care law......MOUNT DORA — A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad... more
-
-
cmdinc
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
This week a dinner lady at a village primary school was sacked for telling a child's parents that she was sorry their daughter had been attacked in the playground at school. Carol Hill had found seven-year-old Chloe David tied up by her wrists and ankles, surrounded by four boys, having been whipped with a skipping rope across her legs. Hill had rescued the child and taken the boys to the headteacher.
That night she bumped into the parents, who were friends of hers, and offered her sympathy. It instantly became clear that the parents had not been told the story by the school. Their daughter had arrived home traumatised and refusing to talk about what happened, with a note saying only that she had been "hurt in a skipping-rope incident". As soon as the school discovered that Hill had told the parents the truth, she was first suspended for several months, and then sacked by the governors for "breaching pupil confidentiality".
This is a new world, in which schools may effectively lie to parents about traumatic events affecting their children, and yet where the only offence committed is by a person who unwittingly breaks that official secrecy. It is no longer the proper role of adults, even those in a tiny village, where everyone knows everyone else, to discuss the behaviour of children. It is for the state to define who may speak and who must be silent.This week a dinner lady at a village primary school was sacked for telling a... more
-
-
mik661
-
added this
-
2 years ago
- |
-
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? How about if our troops kill a million innocent Iraqis and none of it is reported (no pictures, no video). Did it happen? What about if five billion people around the world decide to stop using banks and the present day financial infrastructure has to rely on corporate social welfare to survive, but they eventually fade away anyway. Did they ever really exist? I mean, the money we all have is our money. Even if it's in a bank, it's our money. Take the bank away and it's still our money. Banks are a mere illusion that charge fees for a show.
Suppose they gave a war and no one showed up? Suppose a lot of filmmakers (tired of playing Hollywood games) went out and made their own films, self-distributed them and banded together to help each other in what eventually became an alternate movie industry of and by real filmmakers instead of executive fat cats who do nothing but collect dust, money, and hookers. Suppose said fat cats disappeared from the movie scene altogether. Were they ever really there to begin with? I mean the filmmakers still make their movies with or without them.
What if people stopped using insurance companies altogether and got the government to be there for them in case of medical emergencies and accidents, just like the police and firefighters, and then no one would have to dole out 30% to insurance company administrators? Would those administrators have ever really existed?
If you were one of the million plus Iraqis who was killed, and who saw your family, friends, neighborhood, and country annihilated before your eyes, I think that would qualify as your rapture. By the same token, if you're a conservative authoritarian who lives by the rule of law and order and follows whatever the current law and order of the day has been determined to be by whoever is in charge, but then things suddenly turned on you and suddenly there was no law and order as you once knew it, there was no democracy or free market capitalism, and there was absolutely nothing you could do about it (What can you do? Drop a nuke on Wall Street?) - if all of that were the reality (which it is by the way) would that be your rapture?
The end is here.
[Keep posted on our projects and videos: Sign up at http://outinthestreet.ning.com.]If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? How... more
-
-
Despite Obama's Occidental, Columbia and Harvard pedigree, on economics he is totally devoted to and blinded by the Marxist propaganda he learned at those schools. Why? Because he studied at quintessential liberal academies where the lectures by his professors were less invitations to submit worthy opinions to the arena of ideas and more of an indoctrination factory.Despite Obama's Occidental, Columbia and Harvard pedigree, on economics he is... more
-
-
Today, however, South Africa may be the grim model of the future Western world, for events in America reveal trends chillingly similar to those that destroyed our country.Today, however, South Africa may be the grim model of the future Western world, for... more
-
-
We mourn the loss of Freedom, Democracy, and America's position in the world as it's leader. In place of all these, America has chosen SOCIALISM the "Destroyer of Nations". We mourn the loss of Freedom, Democracy, and America's position in the world as... more
-
-
By Wednesday morning it is quite possible that the United States turn dramatically towards socialism in the conduct of its economy, its politics, and its culture. If Barack Obama is elected President a collectivist, failed system will be expanded. I anticipate a very ugly struggle to regain the gift of the Founding Fathers bequeathed to us.By Wednesday morning it is quite possible that the United States turn dramatically... more
-
-
Americans will have not seen such arbitrary power used against them since the days of the Civil War when Lincoln put the Constitution in the bottom drawer of his desk and set about arresting anyone who opposed his policies to enforce the Union on southern States seeking secession. The moral issue was slavery. The Constitutional issue was states rights.Americans will have not seen such arbitrary power used against them since the days of... more
-
-
As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain's choice of running mate, President Bush has quietly moved to expand the reach of presidential power by ensuring that America remains in a state of permanent war.
Buried in a recent proposal by the Administration is a sentence that has received scant attention -- and was buried itself in the very newspaper that exposed it Saturday. It is an affirmation that the United States remains at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated organizations."
Part of a proposal for Guantanamo Bay legal detainees, the provision before Congress seeks to “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated to the slaughter of Americans.”
The New York Times page 8 placement of the article in its Saturday edition seems to downplay its importance. Such a re-affirmation of war carries broad legal implications that could imperil Americans' civil liberties and the rights of foreign nationals for decades to come. As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain's choice of running mate, President... more
-
-
What do they have in common?
if you take away a either of these men’s followers they’d just be two crazy maniacs screaming on the street. That is how they are no different from each other and not different from all of us. There are no Christs or AntiChrists, only followers. We all must choose which message we follow.
One had a message of hate.
One had a message of love.
It’s up to each of us to find every opportunity to choose love, and not just at the voting booth.
Do you honestly believe you’d have an easier time convincing Bush or his enablers to see the error of their ways than than those who were misled into voting for them? Do you doubt that every single Amercian who voted for and vigorously supported this man and his agenda was misled on some fundamental level by a figure of trusted authority: a priest, a parent, a friend, an ideology?
If you do, me thinkest you drinkest too much Koolaid.
The easiest way to take away a leader’s power is to empower their followers to be critical and think for themselves.
Be the change you want to see.
No further explanation for the evils of the world is necessary, but apparently the machine thinks differently. That said, allow me to explain. Obama and Bush are two sides of the same coin. This does not mean there isn’t a difference, it means that we must as a species recognize the power that we all possess. We live in a world of choice, whether we realize it or not. Every action will be taken deliberately, whether we are conscious of it or not. All of us arrived at their destinations by your own actions. The job of any concerned citizen is to raise awareness, to enlighten, not to scold or punish. This requires self-determination, and a profound ability to see that ALL of us are capable of both good and evil. Obama is as worthy of praise as Bush is worthy of forgiveness. Poverty for one is poverty for all. If we accept can Bush is merely a misguided, flawed and manipulated being that is no different from the rest of us, then we can truly begin to treat the wounds that are threatening our very existence as a species. Good night and good morning
This diary is an endorsement of no candidate.
It is an endorsement of our innate ability to question authority and demand control over our own lives.
No matter which institution you consider to be an intolerable nuisance upon your lives: religion, the press, your parents, corporations, your boss, popular culture, your best friend. What we all share is a strong desire to guide our own destinies. Some of us have been oppressed by government, some of us by the free market. None of us is wrong for being suspect of either.
We are all individuals. We all laugh at different things. We all cry at different things. No one has an exclusive authority on anything. We all have a say as to what’s funny, what’s sad, what’s outrageous, and what’s impeachable.
We all have to learn that when others disagree with us, especially when they do so openly, that it is merely an invitation to question our own assumptions and either defend or reject them. If you defend a failed assumption for too long, you will soon find yourself quite isolated.
Always demand that the world bend to your own will. If all of us demand freedom in our own lives, none of us shall be spared it in the world.
The dominant social consensus of our times insists that excessive self-interest is inherent in our nature and it must be restrained. I agree completely with this position. My primary complaint is that this restraint is applied with gross inequality when one compares the punitive measures taken against those in power with those who are not.
We should all be free to criticize any authority. Your voice is as important as your bosses’.
That is our shared cause and we can achieve it.
You bet your ass WE CAN.What do they have in common?
if you take away a either of these men’s... more
-
-
beedee
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
I think the danger of corporate structures is that too many of them shut out criticism from the people who do the actual work, many are organized as a series of mini-dictatorships. As an interactive designer/programmer in the advertising industry, I’ve been mostly tertiary to this decision making process, but I have on occasion seen how the authoritarian nature of corporate hierarchies can be harmful on a number of levels.
First and foremost, I’m quite simply someone who hates to do something that I find to be illogical or pointless, or the worst reason of all “because I say so”. Over the years, though, I’ve conditioned myself to know what battles to fight in order to maintain a career and “go along to get along”, but my battles usually consisted of merely having to “make the logo bigger”, change this button from blue to red, etc–nothing I’ve ever “gone to the mat” over.
But now that I’ve been on my own freelancing for the past year, this self-conditioning process looks more and more like collective insanity to me.
For instance, a old college friend of mine is now a data-analyst for a major pharmaceutical company. On many occasions he has casually explained how his job is essentially to participate in a highly sophisticated system of targeted payola aimed at getting doctors to prescribe his company’s drug. Never once does it occur to him that his drug may be less effective than his competitors and that it is (in my opinion, at least) fairly amoral for such an aggressive system of coercion of professional medical opinions to be implemented at all. Unfortunately, it’s all about his “team”, not the positive or negative effects of his job upon society.
Of course, I’ve been acutely aware of my personal relationship to authority figures and a keen observer others' ever since reading Bob Altemeyer’s long-term psychological study of authoritarian tendencies, The Authoritarians (link to a free pdf copy of the book in the comments). In a super-small nutshell, we all must struggle against our desire to grant certain authorities unquestionable fealty. Authority can be defined as just about anything, a parent, an idea, a religious leader, hell a can of soup. It’s been one of the most enlightening reads I’ve had in my ongoing struggle to understand our ongoing struggles, and everyone I’ve recommended to has tended to agree that the book changed the way they see their enemies and allegiances. Ironically, the book has become my authority on the value of questioning authority, especially of my own in-group and finding the most effective means of communicating with "outsiders".
So while I do agree with the fundamental critiques of the film “The Corporation”, I would not necessarily personify them as BEING insane, but rather they condition people to working against their own interest, often without ever realizing it. This is largely accomplished by the mere fact that most large corporations prevent honest and pointed criticism at the bottom from rising to the failing leadership at the top (something that most people would call democracy).
They seem to forget that unions exist merely to get the bosses to sit at a table listen. It's only their fevered egos that require us to amass such great numbers just to attain their presence, but usually not their respect. I don't know why this is, other than some people just didn't have the experiences necessary to understand the value of and invite criticism. When someone says you suck, just see it as an opportunity to either improve, or justify your actions when questioned. Don't just tell them to shut up.
Perhaps a good regulation would simply be for every employee to be required by law to read independent analysis of their corporation's behavior. I do believe that we can all only be expected rise to the level of our awareness. Unfortunately, many corporations take an active roll in propagandizing from within and to without.I think the danger of corporate structures is that too many of them shut out criticism... more
-
-
beedee
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
This is a personal question from me to the rest of the Current community. I'm hoping that you'll pay it forward.
Knowing what you know regarding the conduct of the men in charge of our government right now, is just a little part of you afraid to speak out publicly?
Do you hesitate from bringing it up when given an opportunity?
Is there at least a little part of you that is mortally afraid of what your government is capable of doing right now?
I am.
If you are, vote yes.
And share your fears. Because the only way these bastards win is through our silence.
Stay vocal. Stay vigilant.This is a personal question from me to the rest of the Current community. I'm... more
-
-
beedee
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
In a minimally rational world, this extraordinary passage, from the new book by Scott McClellan, would forever slay the single most ludicrous myth in our political culture: The "Liberal Media":
------------------------------------------------
"If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.
The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. . . . In this case, the "liberal media" didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."
------------------------------------------------
Just consider how remarkable that is. George Bush's own Press Secretary criticizes the American media for being "too deferential" to the Government. He lays the blame for Bush's ability to propagandize the nation on the media's uncritical dissemination of the Republican administration's falsehoods. And most notably of all, McClellan actually uses cynical scare quotes when invoking the phrase which, in conventional political discourse, is deemed the most unassailable truth of all: The Liberal Media.In a minimally rational world, this extraordinary passage, from the new book by Scott... more
-
-
beedee
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
From the interview:
"I think this will make Watergate look like child's play when it is fully investigated, not so much this case because certainly it's not about me. It's about restoring justice and protecting our democracy and, because this case shows the lengths to which those who are obsessed with power will go in order to gain power or retain power, it has attracted the attention of the national press."
Someone needs to explain to me how the story of Don Siegelman isn't a canary in the coal mine as far as the very existence of our democracy is concerned. I hope everybody who reads this story familiarizes themselves with the work of Naomi Wolf regarding the closing down of a free society, to be sure I'll post some links and videos below. As someone who's tirelessly researched the steps political groups take when approaching authoritarian control, I'm sure this story has Ms. Wolf's attention.
From the interview:
"I think this will make Watergate look like child's... more
-
-
beedee
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
