Personal View site logo
We don't want to confront the real issues, it's too painful. sounds familiar?
  • 42 Replies sorted by
  • ...from all of the posts, it's painfully obvious that most people have no idea what they're dealing with. It's not about whatever systems flaws are failing the country, nor about abstract economic theories, nor about what they say about them in the media. It's about that there's been a coup de'etat, and americans haven't a clue. Spend some time researching Russell Tice and Sibel Edmonds...and the fundamental conclusions of what they say.

    http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/tag/russ-tice/

  • Actually I think some of the problem shown by some of the comments is the seemingly ideological split between the 'Right' and 'Left', now I would describe myself as more leaning to right wing especially in free market economics. BUT the problem is there is no real left and right, it's all held captive to corporate cronyism. Now before you start trying to get rid of the evil corporations stop. they aren't the problem either, it's the scope and size of government that has allowed itself to be lobbied. There is no free market capitalism in the US (generally speaking) just like there is no real concern for the poor among the left or at least an understanding of the real issues affecting the country. The left think they can throw rich people's money at poor in wasteful program's and everything comes good, it's the ultimate ignorance. watching people on the left kiss the ass of people like Jamie Dimon and Ben Bernanke is almost too much to bear, when they are the source of much of the deeper poverty issues in America. It's an illusion to keep people fighting, it's an illusion just like the recent race trials, celebrity culture, obesity and a media that makes it hard to discern what is real.

    It may seem simplistic but I believe Ron Paul and his ideas were the only hope for the US, but look how quickly he was run out of town but left and right and the MSM. It's going to take a huge awakening in the US, which honestly I'm not sure your capable of. I think war is coming to the US before anything good starts to happen. Obama is in my opinion the worst kind of president in this season. He is by nature a community organiser, ie a trouble maker that uses underlying tensions to further their policies. I'm no Bush supporter either...

    One thing I would add to this article is that the issues in the US are not just the US problem, it's wider including Europe. The truth is Obama and the US is still the leader in terms of ideology. When was the last time you remembered what the Chinese leader said about current issues? Obama is the spokesperson of the world, which is why it's so scary...

    What America needs is a coming together, cause the masses are more similar to each other than the media portrays the nation. But no one wants that who is in power. And underneath a huge economic crisis is brewing that will knock the US for six. It's coming, and the masses have no clue...

    Don't we as media makers have the power to educate and inform? It's funny but without the craftsmen and craftswomen of media makers politicians, and those in power simply have handheld YouTube clips. We have the power, but I guess we are under the power of money and our 'leaders' more than people want to admit. Most Indie cinema I see is liberal wishwasy claptrap. No one wants to put forward an opinion in a movie that is against the status quo. We are in some sense as censored as China etc.

  • Sorry, but Saul is only asserting that corporate managers, in pursing class warfare against workers, are "Marxists" in a perverse sense -- that knowingly or not, they accept Marxist analysis of the class struggle (which they intend to win, contrary to Marx).

    This is not the same as saying that Marxist principles run society or large conglomerates.

  • From John Ralston Saul, A Doubter's Companion .........

    MARXIST The only serious functioning Marxists left in the West are the senior management of large, usually transnational corporations. The only serious Marxist thinkers are NEO-CONSERVATIVE.

    Marxism is primarily an analysis of how society works—or rather, how it must work. This dialectic is based upon the struggle of the classes and the battle of the unregulated market-place in which the strongest win. It is a market-place which cannot be tempered, according to Marx. It must and will run free and so function as a battleground between those who have power and those who don’t. The marketplace will seek to maximize profits even if this is to the disadvantage of most. Profits and power are the truth of the economic struggle and economic determinism will decide the social structure.

    Most functioning Marxists had stopped believing this sort of stuff by the end of the Second World War. They had come around to the ideology of stable bureaucratic management. In that they resembled the technocrats of Western governmental and corporate bureaucracies.

    But these Western corporate managers and their academic acolytes were in fact thrown into a state of confusion by the collapse of 1929. It seemed as if the pure capitalist analysis, of which they were the official inheritors, had failed. An unrestricted market-place had led not to ongoing growth and prosperity, but to total economic collapse. The ideology of a natural and general equilibrium produced by competition had been given its chance and had self-destructed for all to see and suffer the consequences.

    A good thirty-five years passed before the corporate leaders were able to erase from their own memory and from that of the public this failure. They then rediscovered with a virginal ideologic enthusiasm the virtues of the unregulated market

    This time they were supported by an intellectually sophisticated explanation for the dialectic provided by a group of economists centred at the CHICAGO SCHOOL. They were able to dispense with the idea that public institutions could achieve social stability, protect the weak or encourage a wider distribution of wealth. Their new argument would have made Marx proud. It was not that they did not wish to help the weak or promote fairness. It was the natural rules of the market-place—the dialectic—which made the class struggle inevitable.

    The only disagreement between the Neo-conservatives and Marx is over who wins the battle in the end. This is a small detail. Far more important is their agreement that society must function as a wide-open struggle.

    Some people are surprised that Marxism should have reemerged on the Right. However, ideas, once launched, become public property. And they often reappear in several disguises before discovering their true form.

  • The benefit they receive from pushing Marxist and socialist agendas

    And those agendas are what, exactly? Crony capitalism is not Marxism or socialism, much as you want to equate the two.

    I don't see anyone in the media talking about lowering tax rates.

    You mean except for Fox, CNBC, all Rupert Murdoch-own newspapers and thousands of hours of week of Talk Radio? The real issue is, why do the rich in the U.S. pay so much less than in other industrial democracies, particularly at times of high deficits, and why do so many profitable corporations pay zero taxes? How much coverage of those issues do you find media in outlets owned by "Marxist" conglomerates like Viacom, GE, Comcast, and Sinclair Broadcasting?

    Blaming everything you don't like on the "left", which is powerless in the U.S., doesn't advance the argument.

  • So the corporate conglomerates, including General Electric and Comcast, are promoting "far-left" and Marxist propaganda, against their own interests?

    Correct. But it's not against their interest. It's a common mistake to think of corporations as free-market or capitalist. It's Coroprate-Statism. The benefit they receive from pushing Marxist and socialist agendas is that when/if the country ever became fully socialized, they would integrate with the state and their place of power and wealth would be solidified as one of the socialist "elites"... instead of having to compete. Corporations don't really like competition. I mean, hell, look at Canon! Do you think they would ever improve anything if competition didn't force them? What if Canon was not simply a corporation... but part of the state? See their benefit? They go from a corporation that has to compete and turn a profit... to a production entity of the state that can use force and sell whatever they like. The more state-integration they have, the less competition they face. Research and Development is expensive... regulation against your competitors is cheap.

    Same thing with the 1%ers. Why do they want people to hate capitalism? Well, because the 1% is actually more fluid than the media leads us to believe. If the US became fully socialized... the 1% would become a PERMANENT group of elites. A complete oligarchy. What, you think they would give up their wealth and join the rest? haha nope. This is why the elites call the pushers of these agendas "useful idiots".

    -- but if you think these outlets are left-wing on matters of taxation and foreign policy

    I don't see anyone in the media talking about lowering tax rates. In fact, right-wing movements like the Tea Party are CONSTANTLY being mocked by everyone. Where exactly are these examples of right-wing tax policy in the media? ...and more specifically POPULAR media, that the current generations are actually watching?

    But, yea, you do have an argument with right-wing foreign policies. That's partly true. Although, this is only made possible with our insane tax system and regulations. They simply don't have the financial power for imperialism otherwise. You vote for wealth-redistribution? What do they do? Take 30% from everyone, give back 3% in "social programs", and use the rest to invade countries. Oldest rick in the book.

  • @bwhitz

    What media are you watching? Everything in the media is far-left and culturally-marxist (in intention)

    So the corporate conglomerates, including General Electric and Comcast, are promoting "far-left" and Marxist propaganda, against their own interests?

    It's true that media personalities tend to be liberals on social issues, for obvious reasons -- rich comfortable people don't want Christian fundamentalists telling them what they can and can't do in their bedrooms -- but if you think these outlets are left-wing on matters of taxation and foreign policy, you're either living in a fantasy world or have no idea what the words "leftist" or "Marxist" mean.

  • Well I am blind to your experience and can only speak on my own, but as someone in college right now, there's no liberal conspiracy or over-saturation of liberals. I see and hear as many conservatives (if anything, they're more outspoken too) as I do liberals. And don't get me started on the all too common accusation of conservatives saying everything's marxist this, socialist that, communist plot... etc... You're overreacting to facets of our society that are not new.

  • Yes, but only if you are assume people are watching everything and finding a balance in the middle. Nobody from my generation or below watches fox news or listens to talk radio... they like the news options that appeal to their ingrained left-leaning views (which they think are just "normal"). Anyone who has gone through the public eduction system in the last 20 year has been PUMPED FULL of Marxist dogma. It's all they teach. Especially at the universities. They graduates I talk to are like drones...

    We can't cope with reality because we've taught false ideals that contradict nature. And we can't get to the real solutions because everybody thinks everything is a "social construct".

  • @bwhitz I think the combination of Fox News, Talk Radio, and several print/online sources are more than enough balance for the "Leftist" media outlets. And these conservative outlets have their fair share of reach and audience.

  • Really, already cuing the talk about a "nation of war criminals"? Sheesh. The article made several good points, but is name-calling and America-bashing really called for?

  • What media are you watching? Everything in the media is far-left and culturally-marxist (in intention)... of course, they "say" otherwise to distract people... but it's quite obviously still far-left.

    I think the problem is that the media has had such a HUGE left-ward bias over the last few decades... that people believe it's now the center. Which is what they kind of want...

  • The divisiveness that's been created by immoderate points of view is, in my opinion, at the root of our nation's current state of "unhappiness".

    The "immoderate points of view", as represented in mainstream media, range from far right to center-right on economics and foreign policy, and from far right to barely liberal, on social questions like abortion or gay rights.

    The idea that if only center-right politicians like Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, etc., compromised with far right politicians like McConnell, Rubio or Cruz, and we'd be dandy, fills this reader with dread, at the outcome. Even Barney Sanders, a supposed "socialist" is no more than a moderate on most issues -- for example, you don't hear him proposing that we nationalize the banks, despite the fact that they'd be out of business tomorrow, without government guarantees.

    So until there's a full range of opinion at the table, any compromise is just going to further shaft ordinary people.

  • That article hits it right on the nose, although I don't know if America is experiencing "soaring" rates of depression and anxiety....we've always been a pretty stressed out nation, we're just more medicated nowadays. Yes, America is in a funk right now. So is the rest of the world. I would hesitate to say that the grass is indeed greener in some other part of the world. Happiness is what you make of it, it doesn't really matter where you are. As far as confronting painful issues in daily life is concerned, I do agree that Americans could do a better job of creating more coherent and civil discourse as we discuss the problems we face as a society and nation. I think we've gotten too comfortable, maybe even lazy, by letting the extreme left and right of politics, religion, and media do all the talking and thinking for us. The divisiveness that's been created by immoderate points of view is, in my opinion, at the root of our nation's current state of "unhappiness". America really is at its best when we unite as a nation. We need to get back to that, and not just at times of national crisis.

  • @jimmykorea...with you heart and soul . I've lived outside the usa almost half of my life...and I left 30 years ago. Americans think they're free, but truthfully know nothing of true freedom. They look at the travesties of poor countries lacking freedom but are completely blinded by their own faults. Now...finally .... 12 years after a modern steel structured 47 story building fell at freefall speed thru the path of greatest resistance into it's own footprint ....and 10 years after we invaded an innocent country, killed a million innocent people based on lies and falsehoods.....some americans are waking up....those who are being spied upon ...those whose banks and retirement accounts are being robbed....those living in their cars whose homes were repossessed ...those with phd's working part time at walmart ...if they're not in prison! And just as the zerohedge article states....america has the highest incarceration rate of the world. It puts more of it's citizens in prison per capita than russia and china combined ....and americans think they're free...not to mention now all of the prisons in america are inquisitions for profit so the banksters get you on both sides of the fence !

    And zerohedge is a great site...they're awake ...most americans would profit by reading every article they write ! Of course most won't. they're too busy constructing the edifices of lies they use to rationalize being a nation of war criminals. I would venture a guess that subconsciously...that's enough to make someone unhappy !

  • I think I was more thinking about the bigger picture of the article of where Americans are right now.

  • Oh, come on. Nothing is "soaring". It's just that people are encouraged to embrace fancy words for the usual complaints -- the anxieties anyone with a conscious mind is burdened with. Plus, giving these complaints fancy names and medicalizing them allows the health care industry to get reimbursement for "treatment" (usually, prescribing drugs).

    Besides, the authors of that article have no proof of "what actually drives happiness" or, for that matter, if anyone actually is happy. Or ever has been. In an article about what most Americans get wrong, they should have started with the notion of "happiness", which is a local myth.