The Democratic Party Platform Supports U.S. Imperialism

Questions for the audience:

Do all politicians of a political party agree to support the official party platform?

Are citizens who vote for political party politicians also supporting the party platform? If not supporting, are they validating it?

Is expressing disagreement with parts of the Democratic party platform, specifically foreign policies, while voting for Democratic party politicians simply a copout for excusing official support by a political party for U.S. imperialism and the accompanying wars, regime changes, sanctions, murder, mayhem and enormous national budgets?

Are foreign policies something that can be excused relative to the rest of the party platform? Should foreign policies be a deal breaker considering the significance to how this country is governed, the dangers and costs posed by U.S. imperialism and the illegality and immorality of actions taken under U.S. imperialism?

Consider. A democratic or republican party politician is elected under the official party platform. Over the past 30 years, Democratic and Republican representatives have voted in line with their respective party platforms 74% and 89% of the time, respectively. Over the last twenty years it's been even more pronounced, particularly when it comes to imperialism, national security, and anything Israel. There has basically been zero pushback by any of the duopoly politicians against their party's platforms when it comes to foreign policies

We know the Republican party is a warmonger, imperialist political party. Any politician that runs with the republican party also runs with the republican party platform which officially sanctions U.S. imperialism and the false narratives and lies that sustain it.

The same has to be said about the Democratic party. The Democratic party platform also officially sanctions U.S. imperialism and the accompanying lies and false narratives, i.e., propaganda, supporting it, which in turn supports the wars, sanctions, regime changes, and flat out bullying (seen Nikki Haley lately?) under the criminal class controlling the U.S. government. ALL politicians that run as a democrats also support the party platform, especially the "foreign policies".

Below is the Democratic party platform as it relates to U.S. foreign policies, i.e., imperialism and Empire. Those that vote for democratic party politicians are in effect supporting and/or validating this platform. It is full of the lies and false narratives that support U.S. imperialism, rampant militarism and the military industrial complex and omits the truth concerning the cornerstones of current U.S. imperialist ambitions. Key indicators are in bold.

To summarize, the primary lies, false narratives and omissions include the need to maintain the largest military BY FAR on the planet, highlighted by the incredible complaint against the sequester that slowed defense spending growth implemented under Obama, the only reason being the quest for world hegemony by force or the threat of force; the war OF terror which is based on the lies that terrorism is the most controlling element on the planet, that we need to spend trillions and amass a military empire to fight terrorism and the omission that 9/11 was a false flag attack with the purpose of justifying the war OF terror and the quest for the New American Century; the false narratives about ISIS and Al Qaeda and the omissions regarding the U.S. and allies creation and support for the very enemies the U.S. government pretends to fight; the lies about Iran being a leading state sponsor of terrorism and that it cannot be allowed to have A nuclear weapon while the United States has been approved by God him/herself to maintain the largest and most up to date stockpile of weapons of mass destruction on the planet; the lies about Russian aggression particularly concerning Ukraine and Syria and the absurd accusation about human rights when considering what's in this country's own house; the outright goal for regime change in Syria, a war started by democratic party president Obama; the incredible hypocrisy accusing North Korea of an "illegal nuclear and missile program" while painting that country as an existential threat and the omissions that the entire United States nuclear weapons program is illegal under international law and the U.S. constitution and that North Korea poses no threat at all and would negotiate if the U.S. government stopped it's provocations; and the continued lies and false narratives about cyber-security and spying against the American people and others creating an intrusive police state.

The U.S. has 291,000 troops stationed in 183 foreign countries, amounting to a global military occupation. It has deployed special operations troops on secret combat and training missions to 149 countries in 2017 alone. The stated goal of the democratic party, in concert with the republican party, is to maintain this military empire and it uses false narratives and lies to maintain the manufactured enemy list required to justify it's service to the military industrial complex, major corporations and banks, and the oligarchy/plutocracy controlling the U.S. government.

The entire platform reads like part of a George Orwell novel when compared to reality. War is Peace, Slavery is Freedom, Murder is Humanitarianism.

Support Our Troops and Keep Faith with Our Veterans

Democrats believe America must continue to have the strongest military in the world. Donald Trump has called our military “a disaster.” We reject that view of our brave men and women in serving in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard. They perform admirably while sacrificing immeasurably.

Defense Spending

We support a smart, predictable defense budget that meets the strategic challenges we face, not the arbitrary cuts that the Republican Congress enacted as part of sequestration. We must prioritize military readiness by making sure our Active, Reserve, and National Guard components remain the best trained and equipped in the world. We will seek a more agile and flexible force and rid the military of outdated Cold War-era systems.

We must end waste in the defense budget. We will audit the Pentagon, launch a high-level commission to review the role of defense contractors, and take greater action against those who have been involved in fraud. And we will ensure that the Department of Defense invests its budget wisely.

Confront Global Threats

Democrats will protect our country. We will strengthen our homeland security, deal wisely and firmly with those who seek to imperil America or our partners, deter aggression, and promote peace. We will use all the tools of American power, especially diplomacy and development, to confront global threats and ensure war is the last resort.

Terrorism

We must defeat ISIS, al Qaeda, and their affiliates, and prevent other groups from emerging in their place. Democrats will continue to lead a broad coalition of allies and partners to destroy ISIS’ stronghold in Iraq and Syria. We will press those in the region, especially the Gulf countries and local forces on the ground, to carry their weight in prosecuting this fight. We will dismantle the global network of terror, which supplies terrorists with money, arms, and fighters, and stop them from recruiting and inspiring potential radicals. We will improve our intelligence capabilities, with appropriate safeguards here at home, and ensure that the intelligence community and law enforcement is prepared to deal effectively with the threats we face. We will harden our defenses as well as those of our partners against external and homegrown threats. We will secure the homeland, investing more resources to improve mass transit, aviation, infrastructure, and port security. And we will remain a resilient nation, always coming together to stand up to terror.

Democrats will seek an updated Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that is more precise about our efforts to defeat ISIS and that does not involve large-scale combat deployment of American troops.

As we prosecute the fight against terrorism, Democrats will repudiate vile tactics that would do us harm. We reject Donald Trump’s vilification of Muslims. It violates the religious freedom that is the bedrock of our country and feeds into ISIS’ nefarious narrative. It also alienates people and countries who are crucial to defeating terrorism; the vast majority of Muslims believe in a future of peace and tolerance. We reject Donald Trump’s suggestion that our military should engage in war crimes, like torturing prisoners or murdering civilian family members of suspected terrorists. These tactics run counter to American principles, undermine our moral standing, cost innocent lives, and endanger Americans. We also firmly reject Donald Trump’s willingness to mire tens of thousands of our combat troops in another misguided ground war in the Middle East, which would only further embolden ISIS. There is nothing smart or strong about such an approach.

Syria

The Syrian crisis is heartbreaking and dangerous, and its impact is threatening the region, Europe, and beyond. Donald Trump would inflame the conflict by alienating our allies, inexplicably allowing ISIS to expand in Syria, and potentially starting a wider war. This is a reckless approach. Democrats will instead root out ISIS and other terrorist groups and bring together the moderate Syrian opposition, international community, and our regional allies to reach a negotiated political transition that ends Assad’s rule. Given the immense scale of human suffering in Syria, it is also imperative that we lead the international community in providing greater humanitarian assistance to the civilian victims of war in Syria and Iraq, especially displaced refugees.

Afghanistan

In Afghanistan, we will work with the NATO-led coalition of partners to bolster the democratically-elected government as it assumes a primary role in tackling terrorism, forges a more secure future for the country, and safeguards advances, like securing women’s rights. Democrats will continue to push for an Afghan-led peace process and press both Afghanistan and Pakistan to deny terrorists sanctuary on either side of the border. We support President Obama’s decision to maintain a limited troop presence in Afghanistan into 2017 and ensure that Afghanistan never again serves as a haven for terrorists to plan and launch attacks on our homeland.

Iran

We support the nuclear agreement with Iran because, as it is vigorously enforced and implemented, it verifiably cuts off all of Iran’s pathways to a bomb without resorting to war. We reject Donald Trump’s view that we should have walked away from a deal that peacefully dismantles Iran’s nuclear program. We will continue the work of this administration to ensure that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon and will not hesitate to take military action if Iran races towards one.

Democrats will also address the detrimental role Iran plays in the region and will robustly enforce and, if necessary, strengthen non-nuclear sanctions. Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism. It violates the human rights of its population, denies the Holocaust, vows to eliminate Israel, and has its fingerprints on almost every conflict in the Middle East. Democrats will push back against Iran’s destabilizing activities including its support for terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, counter Iran’s ballistic missile program, bolster the capabilities of our Gulf partners, and ensure that Israel always has the ability to defend itself. Finally, Democrats recognize that the Iranian people seek a brighter future for their country and greater engagement with the international community. We will embrace opportunities for cultural, academic and other exchanges with the Iranian people.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/dispelling-the-iranian-terrorism-myth/5624776

North Korea

North Korea is perhaps the most repressive regime on the planet, run by a sadistic dictator. It has conducted several nuclear tests and is attempting to develop the capability to put a nuclear warhead on a long-range missile that could directly threaten the United States. The regime is also responsible for grave human rights abuses against the North Korean people. Yet Donald Trump praises North Korea’s dictator; threatens to abandon our treaty allies, Japan and South Korea; and encourages the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region. This approach is incoherent and rather than solving a global crisis, would create a new one. Democrats will protect America and our allies, press China to restrain North Korea, and sharpen the choices for Pyongyang to compel it to abandon its illegal nuclear and missile programs.

Russia

Russia is engaging in destabilizing actions along its borders, violating Ukraine’s sovereignty and attempting to recreate spheres of influence that undermine American interests. It is also propping up the Assad regime in Syria, which is brutally attacking its own citizens. Donald Trump would overturn more than 50 years of American foreign policy by abandoning NATO partners—countries who help us fight terrorism every day—and embracing Russian President Vladimir Putin instead. We believe in strong alliances and will deter Russian aggression, build European resilience, and protect our NATO allies. We will make it clear to Putin that we are prepared to cooperate with him when it is in our interest—as we did on reducing nuclear stockpiles, ensuring Iran could not obtain a nuclear weapon, sanctioning North Korea, and resupplying our troops in Afghanistan—but we will not hesitate to stand up to Russian aggression. We will also continue to stand by the Russian people and push the government to respect the fundamental rights of its citizens.

Cybersecurity and Online Privacy

Democrats will protect our industry, infrastructure, and government from cyberattacks. We will strengthen our cybersecurity, seek to establish global norms in cyberspace, and impose consequences on those who violate the rules. We will do this while protecting the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. We will also ensure a coherent strategy across federal agencies by building on the Obama Administration’s Cybersecurity National Action Plan, especially the empowerment of a federal Chief Information Security Officer, the modernization of federal information technology, and upgrades to government-wide cybersecurity.

Democrats reject the false choice between privacy interests and keeping Americans safe. We need liberty and security, and each makes the other possible. We will protect the privacy and civil liberties of the American people—standing firm against the type of warrantless surveillance of American citizens that flourished during the Bush Administration. We support recent reforms to government bulk data collection programs so the government is not collecting and holding millions of files on innocent Americans.

We will support a national commission on digital security and encryption to bring together technology and public safety communities to address the needs of law enforcement, protect the privacy of Americans, assess how innovation might point to new policy approaches, and advance our larger national security and global competitiveness interests.

Non-Proliferation of Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Weapons

Democrats are committed to preventing the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and to eventually ridding the planet of these catastrophic weapons. We believe America will be safer in a world with fewer weapons of mass destruction. Donald Trump encourages the spread of nuclear weapons across Asia and the Middle East, which would weaken the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and he is unwilling to rule out using a nuclear weapon against ISIS.

Democrats want to reduce the number of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons around the world, as well as their means of delivery, while retaining a strong deterrent as long as others maintain nuclear strike capabilities. We will strengthen the NPT, push for the ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and stop the spread of loose nuclear material. Democrats will be informed by a new Nuclear Posture Review in determining continued ways to appropriately shape our nuclear deterrent, with the aim of reducing our reliance on nuclear weapons while meeting our national security obligations. Democrats will also seek new opportunities for further arms control and avoid taking steps that create incentives for the expansion of existing nuclear weapons programs. To this end, we will work to reduce excessive spending on nuclear weapons-related programs that are projected to cost $1 trillion over the next 30 years."

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Arrow's picture

Chapter and verse...
How to be a warmonger with a smiling face

up
0 users have voted.

I want a Pony!

@Arrow

... We will strengthen our cybersecurity, seek to establish global norms in cyberspace, and impose consequences on those who violate the rules. We will do this while protecting the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. ...

And they're only keeping those liberties/human rights, which Americans no longer are admitted to have permitted, in a safe place, where those nasty terrorists can't blow them up. It's all for your own good, and the police beatings will continue until all peaceful protesters and those Breathing While Black 'cut it out'.

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

snoopydawg's picture

Are citizens who vote for political party politicians also supporting the party platform? If not supporting, are they validating it?

In my oh so humble opinion. Absolutely. This was why I refused to vote for Obama's 2nd term and why there was no way in hell I'd vote for Her.

There is no war on terror and there never was. This war was started with one country, Afghanistan and it has now blossomed into 76 countries. This war of terrorism is going to go on for as long as the PTB wants it to. The war on terrorism was never about defeating the terrorists and it should be renamed The Wars for Profits.

Smedley had the right idea. Bring the troops home from everywhere and defend the coast out to 200 miles and we're done. Peace is easily attainable if we'd stop bombing countries and killing innocent civilians. This is why the 'terrorists' want us dead. Because of what this country has been doing since its creation. Stop doing this and start repairing the damage we've done and whola, peace.

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

WaterLily's picture

@snoopydawg Coincidentally just stumbled on this today, and had to share:

T.W.A.T.jpg

up
0 users have voted.
Daenerys's picture

@WaterLily about 13 years ago! Wow. And nothing has changed for the better since. Sad

up
0 users have voted.

This shit is bananas.

dervish's picture

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

Big Al's picture

U.S. special forces are actively committing war crimes in Yemen. So not only is the U.S. backing and aiding Saudi Arabia in it's illegal war in Yemen, but it's also directly waging war in Yemen with the same enemy they blame 9/11 on and that they created in Al Qaeda, 16 years on with no end in sight.

http://nprillinois.org/post/us-raid-killed-yemeni-civilians-villagers-sa...

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

UN Security Council will discuss Iran after US calls to back anti-govt protests

"The UN must speak out,” Haley said at a news conference. “In the days ahead, we will be calling for an emergency session both here in New York and at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. We must not be silent. The people of Iran are crying out for freedom.”

Nothing like the pot calling the kettle black, is there?

ACLU Attorneys Name Cops Accused of Violating Civil Rights on Inauguration Day

So it's always struck me as ironic that the U.S. Attorney's Office charged nearly 200 people for dressing identically and covering their faces and alleged that that was part of a conspiracy, while police officers were also wearing uniforms that looked identical and, in many cases, covering their faces.

Remember when Obama and Hillary were telling us that we people in Egypt had a right to protest and something about not arresting journalists? Gee, what was happening here at home at the time?

Hopefully someone will show Nikki this video tomorrow at the UN meeting. T-Hee, nothing like a dose of hypocrisy.

(edited)

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

Big Al's picture

@snoopydawg Like super hypocrisy or hypocrisy infinity? That fucking Haley is a piece of work isn't she. Wow. Where the hell did she come from?

Sure looks like they're doing the Iran thing now. Remember imperialist (it must be said) Wes Clark's revelation of that memo of seven countries in five years, "finishing up with Iran"? Whoever got elected Iran was on the table. This is not good.
With an election coming up, there should be some hard questions to those running for office. And anyone antiwar should be calling for an antiwar movement ASAP.

up
0 users have voted.
WaterLily's picture

@Big Al Damned if I know, but apparently it didn't matter to 96 of 100 Senators.

96 out of 100. And of course, that blowhard Leahy was one of them. Say what you want about Sanders, at least he was a "nay."

Anyway, these numbers bolster your argument AFAIC.

up
0 users have voted.
WaterLily's picture

@Big Al Is there a way to lobby the League of Women Voters to seize back control of the presidential debates? Or has that ship sailed been torpedoed and sunk?

up
0 users have voted.

@WaterLily

Well, they refused to perpetuate a fraud upon the American people back then, so I suspect that control would first have to be exerted over the parties and government, (including Homeland Security, controllers of electoral infrastructure,) which would involve a take-over (preferably by the replacement of corrupt politicians with real public servants than by violent revolution,) of the existing parties/government, since they nobble 3rd parties and have done so even more thoroughly and longer than they have progressive candidates.

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Big Al's picture

@snoopydawg it occurred to me those at that level, like Haley, know they're lying but they seem to have convinced themselves that these false narratives and lies are actually true. They are so good at lying they can't be that good as actors, there has to be an element of belief in what they're saying. I guess that would be a sign of sociopathy, where they really believe what they're saying.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Big Al

Haley knows that she is lying but she seems to have convinced herself that these false narratives and lies are actually true.

She knows damn well she is lying. Period. So did Her and Obama in this video. Everyone who says this type of thing know they are lying and their actions will lead to massive civilian deaths. The republicans know that the tax bill and cuts to social programs will see people die because of them, just as Hatch knew that there would be plenty of money to fund children's health care if he doesn't passed the tax bill. I just cannot wrap my mind around how someone could take the actions anyway. Sociopathic is a good word to describe people who do these things.

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

Pluto's Republic's picture

@snoopydawg

https://www.mintpressnews.com/birth-insurgency-us-israeli-secret-deal-ma...

I thought of you.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Pluto's Republic

From a link in your article about the secret deal between McMasters and his Israeli counterpart.

Much of the focus is likely to be on planning and making joint speeches about how “aggressive” Iran is being, and how super ready for war the US and Israel are, though naturally there is always a risk that any such joint operations grow from another layer of bureaucracy into launching a war outright.

How many times have we seen this play? Libya and Syria are the most recent times. Good thing he received the Nobel Peace prize, eh?

This is from the article on the security council meeting that Haley is asking for. It's good to see Russia calling us out on our own hypocrisy.

Earlier, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova ridiculed Haley's calls to stand up for human rights in Iran, reminding Washington of its own record of cracking down on protests.


“There is no doubt that the US delegation to the UN has something to sell tell the world,” Zakharova said in a Facebook post. "Haley can, for example, share the US experience of putting down protests, tell [the Security Council] about the mass arrests and crackdown against the Occupy Wall Street movement or about the 'clean-up operation' in Fergusson.”

I can send him the video if he'd like some evidence of our hypocrisy. Smile

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

Pluto's Republic's picture

@snoopydawg

It's taken a long time to realize that seeing patterns is an uncommon ability.

It's a language that few speak.

up
0 users have voted.
hecate's picture

your initial questions, about whether party politicians, and voters, are expected to support the party platform:

For a good long while there, the national party platform was drafted first, and the presidential candidate chosen at the convention was then expected to support it. So, generally, were the candidates seeking lesser offices under that party's banner.

That changed first with Woody, and then with FDR, when the candidate became a sort of mystical semi-divine being, who could not be bound by words not inscribed by his own holy hand. The lesser candidates grew to give the platform the back of their own, grubbier, hands, too.

In recent decades, in both parties, platform-work has just been the blow they lay out in the back rooms for "party activists" who like to get wired on the politics. No one with any real power feels duty-bound to abide by whatever the people all in the nose candy might come up with.

John Boehner: "I have not seen the platform. But from every indication that I’ve heard I don’t see any major changes in this platform from what we have had in the past. And if it were up to me I would have the platform on one sheet of paper. Have you ever met anybody who read the party platform? I’ve not met ever anybody."

Grover Norquist: “Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. We don’t need a president to tell us what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We just need a president to sign this stuff.”

Norquist should be happy, today. Because that's what he has. A hand to sign the paper. That there is no higher brain functioning in the cranium connected to the hand, that matters not a whit. Platform? They don't need no stinking platform. They just need a hand. Dems; too.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCoKGgED5IE]

up
0 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

@hecate And great song, got me to chuckle. Ya, platforms are what they are, but with the excerpts I quoted above, they match with democratic party and duopoly reality. It's the voters that need to understand that.

They sure got a lower functioning cranium with (tiny) hands now don't they.

up
0 users have voted.
hecate's picture

@Big Al
used to be someone over at Daily Kos who was always in the handwringing about how the Dems were not adhering to the platform. The person could not understand that this was not 1888 anymore.

The fact that in recent decades the Republicans have sought to placate their more noisome fringier folk on the right with platform-work, while the trump's brain 7 words.jpegDemocrats have herded their feistier leftier people into the platform-playpen—that does make it pretty depressing that the 2016 Democratic document is as saber-rattling as it is.

The Americans are making a test. They are seeing whether it is possible to have a president who does not have a brain in his head, but instead an ant-hill.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@hecate

Question is why haven't they tried doing it for the past couple of decades? The democrats held all 3 branches of government right after Obama was elected and he had a huge mandate. Did they try passing any of that legislation then? Especially reining in Wall Street after the economic crisis. Obama could have broken up the banks or passed legislation to help main stream Americans,or....
In fact that looks a lot like what Bernie was offering and Her laughed at him for doing so. The kos kids were right. That was the most progressive platform, evah! But don't give up hope just yet. Once the democrats take back congress they will start working on that right away. I know because a lot of people are saying this.

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

hecate's picture

@snoopydawg
made a boner when they drafted their 2012 platform. They neglected to mention god. The eyes of the Republicans, they spouted blood.

Then the Democrats came out with their own, and suddenly platforms mattered again. Turns out while Republicans had used the word “God” 12 times in their platform, the Democrats hadn’t invoked Him once.

This omission, Republicans thundered, simply underscored the Democrats’ determination to eject God from the public square.

This was seen as proof positive of the Muslim Kenyanism of the Obamaoids. They had decreed that if Allah could not be referenced in the platform, there should be no gods in there at all. This is True News. It was in all the tubes.

up
0 users have voted.
Pricknick's picture

Does BA stand for bad assed or bad attitude?
You say you want a revolution? I do.
I'm too old to create but I will follow. I'm also very versatile at building guillotines and pillories.
Keep me in mind.
Luv

up
0 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

Pluto's Republic's picture

They don't really exist as much more than kabuki. They are very good at fooling the people into believing they are participating in government. People saw things they were never supposed to see in 2016, but that is expected to wash away with time.

Coincidently, a few months ago the Swiss finally solved the riddle of who's been running the US for the past 100 years. Their solution penetrated the kabuki and entirely satisfied my curiosity. Tied up all the loose ends, so to speak. Political parties do not set the agenda for the nation's international murder and mayhem. Their platform is as meaningless as the primaries in terms of the war agenda.

It's just as we suspected all along.

See what you think:

Largely unbeknownst to the general public, many media executives and top journalists of almost all major US news outlets have long been members of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Established in 1921 as a private, bipartisan organization to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities”, the CFR and its close to 5000 elite members have for decades shaped U.S. foreign policy and public discourse about it. As one Council member famously explained, the goal has indeed been to establish an “empire”, albeit a “benevolent” one.

Based on official membership rosters, the following illustration for the first time depicts the extensive media network of the CFR and its two main international affiliate organizations: the Bilderberg Group (covering mainly the U.S. and Europe) and the Trilateral Commission (covering North America, Europe and East Asia), both established by Council leaders to foster elite cooperation at the international level.

Click on this picture to see the full-sized view.
Then click again for a blow-up.

In a column entitled “Ruling Class Journalists”, former Washington Post senior editor and ombudsman Richard Harwood once described the Council and its members approvingly as “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”.

You can also see the report here.

up
0 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

@Pluto's Republic who said if elected she wouldn't have to go far to get her instructions.
I read this book a few years back which details the role and history of the CFR and the New World Order.

Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People by Servando Gonzalez

Btw, Tulsi Gabbard is a member.

http://www.newswithviewsstore.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_C...

up
0 users have voted.
Pluto's Republic's picture

@Big Al

Or, perhaps it was the People hiding knowledge from themselves, since there is nothing than can be done from inside the US to change anything.

The book you link does explore this, so you already had a sense of it. I'm not sure that spinning it as a psychological war is useful. I suppose it could feel like that given the disconnect between the media narrative and reality.

Things look transparent to me. But then, they always have. Which is largely a curse.

up
0 users have voted.

@Pluto's Republic "Then click again for a blow-up." Okie-dokie!

I guess this is another right wing site I never read before, because D-Heresy! Now, whenever I see Tulsi the thought bubble contains ... "window dressing". meh. Thanks a lot.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/1213-council-on-foreign-relations

The Future

The idea that Barack Obama became president from a “grass-roots” movement is illusory. American government policy continues to be largely dictated by the rich and the few. This is generally unknown to the public — not because it is a bizarre conspiracy theory, but because the same power elite who run our government, mega-banks, and multinational corporations also run the major media, as an inspection of the CFR membership roster would reveal.

Membership in the CFR, of course, is not an automatic condemnation. A few people are added as “window dressing” to give the group distinction and a veneer of diversity. An example is movie star Angelina Jolie. No one suspects Jolie knows much about foreign affairs or is a conspirator for world government. But within the CFR are hardcore globalists who, linked with their foreign counterparts through the Bilderbergers and Trilateral Commission, head the drive for one-world government.

Though numerically small (less than 1,000 members during the Kennedy years, less than 4,500 today), this organization has dominated every administration for over seven decades.

As long as the CFR controls our government, we can anticipate more of the same: diminishing national sovereignty; free flow of immigration (which confuses national identity and weakens national loyalties); increasing jobs losses through multinational trade agreements; further internationalization of law (Law of the Sea Treaty, Kyoto Protocol, World Court, global taxation, etc.); increasing loss of freedoms in a “surveillance society”; progressive organization of the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union; and ultimately, broader merger into a world government where all power will be concentrated in the hands of the elite.

Eternal vigilance continues to be the price of freedom.

Written by James Perloff Thursday, 23 July 2009

mmf

up
0 users have voted.
Pluto's Republic's picture

@eyo

I've seen the place, but never stayed. It's definitely right wing, but worth a look. Already I found news:

Former Representative and presidential candidate Michelle Bachman is considering a run for the Minnesota Senate... to take Al Franken's place.

Good grief. I forgot she ran for president. And the world thinks they have it bad with Trump. Little do they know....

[EDIT]

Oh wow. That link you posted is really interesting! These things were not on my radar in 2009. Yet it has been transparent for 70 years. They already knew what the future would look like. But they are in over their head, as well. Their one-trick-pony answer to everything is anti-communism. Along with greed is good and tax cuts.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

It's good to see this laid out like this. The Bilderberg group, the CFR and the Trilateral Commission (TLC) have been known about for some time, but many people call this type of thinking CT. The Rothschild family is also part of this group and they all have been working for a new world order. People in the Rothschild family are worth TRILLIONS, yet none of them are ever mentioned in the list of the richest people.

Remember during the Obama administration when a bunch of journalists were called to the WH for a meeting? Rachel was in the group and soon after her reporting changed. Besides a $7/year salary, what else came from joining the group?

It's still hard for me to understand how people can sell themselves out for any reason. Some of them have to believe that there is something waiting for them after this lifetime. Either way, I'd like to believe I couldn't give an order to kill anyone.

IMG_1715.JPG

(edited)

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

Pluto's Republic's picture

@snoopydawg

You see yourself as important and very worthwhile. The elite are there to assure you that you are. You impressed them. Your life now has significance and takes on real meaning. You see those who are carping as complainers. There will always be complainers. You see yourself as chosen; an insider. Any inner conflict you have, you tell yourself you will revisit later. But, you don't. The money is good. You can help people with it. Make the world a better place. You now have mentors in high places to guide you.

And so forth.

up
0 users have voted.
Raggedy Ann's picture

@Pluto's Republic
I've been in this situation (I was a whistleblower) where I was offered to be an insider (thus muffling my whistle) but chose to be the complainer (staying the course to expose the corruption). You describe the insiders exactly as they are/the situation exactly as it is. It's toxic all around, but the insiders prevail.

up
0 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

@Pluto's Republic This statement would make a great greeting card, poster etc. and since it applies to just about anyone in a power position it would be perfect for giving to CEO's, politicians, msm reporters, celeb's etc.

up
0 users have voted.
Pricknick's picture

@snoopydawg
Many, including myself, have witnessed that cartoon you post.
Maybe unknown to you, is the fact that the authors name is cut from your copy.
Help please.
Thanks in advance.

up
0 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

Pluto's Republic's picture

@Pricknick

Does that help?

http://www.city-data.com/forum/members/cncracer-210615-albums-jokes-pic6...

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Pricknick

fixed. The one I had didn't have the name on it. Gone now

@Pluto's Republic

thank you

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

hecate's picture

@snoopydawg
tried to alert the people to the CFR Reality, but he was whipped and broken.

It was this fear that McCarthy might publicly connect the dots between communists and the globalists that sent the CFR brain trust into full panic mode and sealed the senator’s fate.

Then there was Gary Allen's None Care It Conspiracy, all the rage around the 1972 election. I still have my copy. Though the big bright colorful insert chart, tracing all the connections, seems to have fallen out over the years. Allen is all over the Rothschilds, the Trilaterals, the Bilderbergers, the Rockefellers, etc., and explains that the purpose of the CFR is to spread Red Bolshevism.

The C.F.R. has come to be known as "The Establishment," "the invisible government" and "the Rockefeller foreign office." This semi-secret organization unquestionably has become the most influential group in America.

Not only did members of the Council on Foreign Relations dominate the establishment of the U.N., but C.F.R. members were at the elbow of the American President at Teheran, Potsdam and Yalta—where hundreds of millions of human beings were delivered into the hands of Joseph Stalin, vastly extending the power of the International Communist Conspiracy.

In the Bolshevik Revolution we have some of the world's richest and most powerful men financing a movement which claims its very existence is based on the concept of stripping of their wealth men like the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Schiffs, Warburgs, Morgans, Harrimans, and Milners. But obviously these men have no fear of international Communism. It is only logical to assume that if they financed it and do not fear it, it must be because they control it.

We can only theorize on the manner in which Moscow is controlled from New York, London and Paris. Undoubtedly much of the control is economic, but certainly the international bankers have an enforcer arm within Russia to keep the Soviet leaders in line. The organization may be SMERSH, the international Communist murder organization described in testimony before Congressional Committees and by Ian Fleming in his James Bond books. For although the Bond novels were wildly imaginative, Fleming had been in British Navy intelligence, maintained excellent intelligence contacts around the world and was reputedly a keen student of the international conspiracy.

Today the C.F.R. remains active in working toward its final goal of a government over all the world—a government which the Insiders and their allies will control. The goal of the C.F.R. is simply to abolish the United States with its Constitutional guarantees of liberty. And they don't even try to hide it.

Someone seems to have loaded much of the book into a tube.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@hecate

I had forgotten about the Rockefellers. The Ford and Carnagie families were also involved with this. Bush 1 let the plan slip during one of the SOTU addresses when he spoke about the New World Order. Since then I have seen it mentioned a few more times, but again people think that it's just a conspiracy theory. Most CT's have a grain of truth in them and that is why people go so far to discredit them.

Thank you for the links.

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

snoopydawg's picture

@hecate

Today the C.F.R. remains active in working toward its final goal of a government over all the world—a government which the Insiders and their allies will control. The goal of the C.F.R. is simply to abolish the United States with its Constitutional guarantees of liberty.

They are very close to having enough states to do a constitutional convention and only need 6 more states to agree to one. This is what the Koch brothers have been working on if what I have been reading is correct. Maybe it's just one big group of happy f*ckers working on this together.

up
0 users have voted.

Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?

Strife Delivery's picture

That is the more hidden aspects of voting that seems to always be brushed under the rug.

When you vote for an individual, you vote for everything. Period.

All the more reason why I hate this purity-blaming bullshit.

"They agree with you 90% of the time"

1) No they don't, stop lying.
2) They stuff we disagree on is monumental and means I would have to agree on it.

Ballots have a checkbox: They either get the X or not.

Ballots don't have an itemized list, say a Likert scale. You don't get to go through all the positions and list what you like and don't like.

"I really like this person's take on the justice system, but I'm putting a big no on their environmental policy."

The candidate will never know your disagreements with them. All they care about is if they got the +1 vote or not.

up
0 users have voted.
WaterLily's picture

@Strife Delivery A massive boycott of the elections.

Not that we would effect any different outcome. But if we could at least be visible about it, at least we may wake more people up.

up
0 users have voted.

@WaterLily

It used to be just the Repubs who benefited from a low turn-out, but now that the Dems 'don't need your votes' it's both. And now we've seen that both wings of the Corporate Vampire Two-Party Trap actively compete in voter suppression, where their paymasters interests are concerned.

http://mashable.com/2016/11/09/voting-poll-numbers/#WCrymxptOqqO

Nearly half of Americans didn't vote — not even for Harambe

By Kerry Flynn
Nov 09, 2016

...Turnout

Nearly half of eligible voters (231,556,622 people) did not vote in the 2016 presidential election, according to data of early turnout rates compiled by the United States Election Project and crunched by Josh Nelson. The full results may not be available until two weeks.

The early data found that of the U.S. population:

46.6% didn't vote

25.6% voted for Hillary Clinton

25.5% voted for Donald Trump

1.7% voted for Gary Johnson

It wasn't the lowest turnout in history, however. About 49 percent of eligible voters did not participate in the 1996 election, in which Democratic candidate Bill Clinton beat Republican candidate Bob Dole. ...

...As to the lack of participation in voting, it may not have been out of laziness or disdain. Tuesday was the first election since the 2013 Supreme Court ruling against the Voting Rights Act. The changes added new voter identification requirements. ...

... Matt Murphy @MattMurph24

Who knew closing over 800 polling stations would make a difference. #VotingRightsAct ...

Does anyone really still think that the corrupt leaders/donors of either corporate party actually care about high voting turn-out, or turn-out at all beyond the optics of plausibility for claimed wins? Or that not voting out of protest will make a party-changing statement any more than the lack of anything to vote for - and the results of voter suppression to stop those voting against whichever evil - did? Or that the corporate media will accurately cover, or the increasingly censored internet will permit discussion on, the reasoning behind this non-voting increase for the general public to even see?

They do not want people voting for Progs, and even apart from the obvious, my inclination would be to do what TPTB do not want, wherever feasible, rather than helpfully not even attempting to exercise one of the few rights remaining and of which they'd like to deprive citizens. That not-voting-out-of protest idea seems nowadays to actually be sort of similar to claims that further tax cuts for the wealthy will cause corporations to hire more people and pay better wages to workers, when it's never worked out like that before. And they'd typically rather use robots than pay humans at all, anyway, just as they'd rather not even have to fake elections and pretend to respect actual vote counts, since there are never repercussions or even sustained public protest for their being caught cheating, even when very obviously committed on a routine basis, as with unconstitutional voter suppression 'laws'.

The only thing that'd scare them, as far as I can tell, would be coordinated national action such as landslide, unconcealable voting for Progs only and a steadfast refusal among the population to accept suspect electoral results. Before the US Constitution gets re-written, with the concepts of democracy and long-ignored but Constitutionally guaranteed citizen/human rights left out, so that the electoral farce and all pretense of humanity can at long last be entirely abandoned at TPTB's leisure.

Fascism is what happens when unrestrained psychopaths control public policy, and we are all Disposables to them.

I suspect that the long-standing impediments to '3rd parties' and a Fair Voting system which would make every vote count need to be dissolved by the parties and governments going Indie from The Psychopaths That Be, who will not permit an actual democracy in America - or anywhere else in the world - as long as they/their political puppets act as their representatives against the public interest.

And as far as even the short-term survival of planetary life is concerned, time's running out, faster all of the time...

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Lookout's picture

kneeling at the alter of profit we are willing to kill one another, destroy the planet, and poison communities (especially those of color). As someone said above the two parties are theater. Both promote violence against the poorest among us. Even to the point of using depleted uranium which kills today, tomorrow, and centuries into the future. We are the terrorists.

up
0 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

Raggedy Ann's picture

@Lookout
while reading the article. WE are the terrorists. Period.

up
0 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

if voting mattered they'd outlaw it
or only let certain people vote
or count the votes themselves
or have a crisis
or some accidents
because divine plans
magic potions burning bushes
electrons and dark matter
or some such

up
0 users have voted.

bygorry

Politicians use bits of the platform as cover or justification for votes and whatnot, but mainly any paper a platform is printed on isn't even suitable for bathroom use: it's less than worthless.

Most voters don't read parties' platforms. Of those who do, few read it thoroughly or with a critical eye.

What matters more (although not much more) is individual politicians' position statements on issues. Even these are subject to Orwellian revision when it's convenient.

It's better to think of the two largest modern political parties more as vehicles for laundering campaign money than as associations of like-minded allies pursuing common political interests. They're not controlled by "the people" in any meaningful sense.

up
0 users have voted.
dervish's picture

@BayAreaLefty of where the priorities of the party hacks lie. If they were afraid of us, they would at least put out some mendacious left-wing platform that appears to throw us a bone. As it stands, they go straight-up hawkish in the platform, daring us to do anything about it.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

Big Al's picture

@dervish parts of platforms aren't worth much because they never act on their promises, but in the case of foreign policies, as illustrated in the essay, they're openly supporting imperialism and the homeland security police state and actually underplaying what they're really doing.

up
0 users have voted.