caucus99percent

free-range politics, organic community

I was surprised to see this in the WashPost.

Like so many abuses committed by large corporations, you don't hear or read much about arbitrary banning by on-line auction and selling sites. Like many vile deeds that don't hit home until they hit home.

But if you are investing your time and money hoping to grow a revenue stream or earn a livelihood using on-line auction sites you should educate yourself about the likely fate of your business should your account become the victim of a witch hunt.

Corporatocracy (/ˌkɔːrpərəˈtɒkrəsi/, from corporate and Greek: -κρατία, romanized: -kratía, lit. 'domination by', short form corpocracy, is a recent term used to refer to an economic and political system controlled by corporations or corporate interests. It is most often used as a term to describe the economic situation in the United States.

Or as Bernhard at MoA puts it:  ‘Ukraine Election – Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution’, July 22, 2019, moonofalabama.org

He begins with a fairly concise version of the Western-orchestrated revolution in 2014 in which Victor Yanukovitch failed to sign the EU Association deal that would bind Ukraine not only to the West, but to NATO.  Russia had countered with a better deal:

“It offered billions in investments and long term loans. Much of Ukraine’s industry depends on Russia and Russian gas was offered to the Ukraine for less than the international market price. Yanukovych, who originally wanted to sign the EU association, had no choice but to refuse it, and to take the much better deal Russia offered.”

If you're like me, you've taken a lot of flack for not following in line during recent political campaigns. The bad news is that we're gonna catch hell again this time. The good news is that we're not alone. We've got good company. So, please, take heart.

Ralph Nader ran for president four times, but most people only remember when he ran against Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000. As the Green Party nominee Nader got nearly 3 million votes, 97,421 of them in Florida — a pivotal state where, after a contentious recount and a Supreme Court decision, Bush beat Gore by 537 votes. Democrats excoriated Nader, calling him a spoiler. He lost many friends. Even Public Citizen, the advocacy group he founded in 1971, distanced itself from him. Nader has no regrets about running and has remained steadfast in his belief that democracy requires multiparty elections: it is not good enough to have people cast votes for the candidate they find less distasteful than the other one.

Before that election, Nader was among the most trusted people in the U.S. To some he was known as Saint Ralph. A ubiquitous consumer advocate, he’d gained a reputation for being a vigilant citizen. His coworkers remember the copious amount of mail that poured into his D.C. office: letters from fans and admirers; desperate pleas for help. Someone sent the driveshaft from a car, asking if it was defective; someone else sent a box of dry ice containing one of his lungs. Deemed cancerous, it had been surgically removed, and the man wondered if the operation had been necessary. But all that was forgotten.

Consider this letter to the editor:

It was difficult to read David Barsamian’s interview with Ralph Nader, not because of what was said but because of who said it. Though I agree with Nader, I couldn’t help but remember that he was instrumental in helping George W. Bush get elected president: had Nader not been on the
ballot in Florida, Al Gore would have won the state, taken office, and most likely never ordered the invasion of Iraq. Gore would also have led in the battle against climate change. Yet Nader states he has no regrets. I take this to mean that, knowing what we know now, he would have run anyway. Rather than put a presidential spoiler on the ballot every four years, a viable third party should focus on
local or statewide elections. Unfortunately we saw key states go to Donald Trump in 2016 because of a third-party candidate. I wonder how a man who says the things Nader says can support third-party politics upending elections.

A second subscriber echoes the sentiment:

I am impressed with Ralph Nader’s lifelong service to society, but as someone who sees climate change as a top priority, I find his good work pales in comparison to the harm he caused
in the 2000 presidential election. Two points are undeniable: he had no chance of winning the election, and in a razor-thin race between a Texas oilman and one of the first major-party politicians to recognize the urgency of climate change, Nader swung the election to the former. This set the planet back considerably, which will cause the death and displacement of millions of people
and the loss of thousands of species. I appreciate Nader’s work on auto safety and many other things, but on balance, his reckless foray into presidential politics makes him an unmitigated disaster for humanity.

Read Nader's response below the fold.

The Dems may be right on this issue morally, but politically they are getting killed on it.

A CBS News/YouGov poll of New Hampshire came out today with Tulsi in 6th place with 2%. My understanding is that this *is* a qualifying poll, so she just needs 3 more such polls by Aug. 28 to make the polling requirements.

Biden 27%
Sanders 20%
Warren 18%
Harris 12%
Buttigieg 7%
Gabbard 2%
O'Rourke 2%
Everyone else 1% or below

The thing that bugs me about modern Identity Politics is how it leads to an intellectual cul-de-sac. It does this by isolating groups from one another. People select an identity rather than forming their own identity.
Pro-ID people also ignore the basic fact that the ruling elite have always maintained their power by dividing the lower classes over cultural issues, racial identity being the most used cultural issue.