As American’s we’ve learned to embrace the contradictions we face between the things we say, things we’ve said, and its effects on our actual moral stances that we claim to care about. We understand the difference, the necessary gap. By this point everyone of us has implicitly lied, signing a way a long sheet of paper after claiming to have read and understood the whole thing: knowing full well we could not understand its complex entrapping rhetoric had we the free time to read it. We don’t mind this. Many Anti-Rick Perry supporters say “he’ll never be elected! he wanted to seceed the nation!” thinking this self-contradicting statement will hurt both his public opinion polls and his chances of winning primary. It can be argued that if the Anti-Rick Perrian is a remaining Obama Progressive Left supporter that the same statements can be made concerning Obama’s own re-election campaign, and that’s the key. We’ve all learned to realize that ‘politicians are just like people too’ and maybe some of the things they’ve previously said are like old facebook statuses… people are dynamic right? When it comes to wanting to like a candidate we can interpret the self-contradictory logic as part of his human quality.
Earlier today Rick Perry stood firm by his recent open borders policy issue affirming that in-state tuition should be given to illegal aliens if they’ve been living in the in-district house for more than 3 years. Rather than relying on typical policy platform to announce his stance, he is demonstrative and outspoken in what he does or doesn’t veto. By allowing education to be included as part of an economic package, and to be separated from rights of citizenry sets a new tone. It still sticks to the survival of the fittest bottom dollar, think globalization, package but it removes its conservative protectionist policy. The controversy of Rick Perry lies in his disregard for social political values (mexicans/blacks/abortions/hpv’s) but he is very firm in his neoliberal economic policy and his open border policys, and he has been very consistent in his pursuit of global investment opportunities since as early as 2007. Why should texans be offended to have their jobs taken away by somebody willing to do it cheaper and more efficient when it was texans who voted in Rick Perry to allow for the open border policy’s in the first place? It was the open borders NAFTA policy that from 1992-1997 encouraged 35 million immigrants to move to the US as Mexico was unable to compete with cheap corn prices.
It SHOULD come as no surprise then, that the bilderberg group representative Rick Perry, continues on course. It is controversial in light of being found to be controversial, in that a lot of lower class and middle class Texans thought they had voted somebody in to office that would make it easier for Texan citizens to work over non-texan citizens, not more difficult. This is emblematic of the cognitive dissonance most Americans face facing globalization continuing to elect somebody opening us up internationally as long as he’d wear a belt buckle and jeans.
Another odd thing to face in the future will be the discouraging news of the tech industry. We hope that through dominating facebook and google, as Americans we might be able to use tech innovations like apple to make us dominate the international market place. Little do we realize how international these companies are, or are becoming and how little of an effect ultimately it will have on a broader source of income for a large group of social classes. We will say “so the tech industry happened, then why is unemployment at a steady 20 percent?” Looking at Rick Perry who praised austin’s previous tech boom, saying, why can nobody get a decent sandwich or afford bread milk or gas? Why is the rent still too damn why? As the world slips global only those at the top of the totem poll (3 percent) benefit, the rest of us slide our middle class ipad dreams into argentina-style standard of living.
It’s one thing to believe in Globalization, as in you believe it is a fact of reality that the market of social relations will inevitably lead to human progress, specification of tasks, the free market, survival of the fittest, and ultimately most beneficial for the entire world and you agree to books like “The World is Flat“.
It’s another thing to believe that you exist in a world full of people who believe in Globalism, and that the “action’ of “globalisizing” is having its effects, and people are starting to act think and do more along these lines, that things contingently could be another way even if they progress towards one world market as we speak, that history operates in cycles of power, and that CURRENTLY globalization is a phenemological reality because its an ideological domination, and not vice versa.
I believe I am existing in a world where the multi-national financial global movement is taking off, that previously it was pushed through the 1960s-1980’s through war, 1990’s softly through affleuncy and capitalism, 2001 + militaristically under the guise of pre-emption, and the fall of the housing market (the other reason for banks). I believe I cannot conceptually wrap its effects, as each country is in each of its own phases of accepting/rejecting the neoliberal global package and one can hardly surmise how every country in every instance relates to this global normativity.
Imagine the battle of Thermopylae would of been lost, crushing athenian democracy all over the world. Now, imagine existing in a world dominated by Persia, Would it be insane to imagine what Atheninan Democracy would look like? If you were an archaeologist would it worthwhile to look at the ruins of the athenian and roman empires like we do now with the incas, aztecs, and mayans, hoping to find a clue to their organizational structure looking for meaning and purpose? Would it be worthwhile to consider what an athenian democracy might look like “nowadays” even though, living in a persian world, we’d know not to attempt such a “barbarian method of governance”
The answer to these rhetorical questions is simple, and these questions end up looking rediculous… we emphatetically ought to yell “of course”. We imagine in a hitler run world that naturally, people would investigate capitalism and socialism and all of these other things,
The Hegenomical idea would be globalization, but the fact (like the hitlerian fact) would be neoliberal domination. We currently live in a world completely dominated by neoliberal economics and this as seen as a “univerisalization”
“”What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” –
So one can BELIEVE in this reality, but one may strive to choose to live and to create a new world beyond the scope of neoliberalism. The first step is seeing that this movement toward globailzation is not a “universal feature of human reasoning” that anyone or any culture would eventually grow to determine as the best practices, with enough time, but a set and style and method of running things that has and does tend to particularly benefit some people over others. Recognizing economic contingency is key, especially in recognizing how often we’ve transfered the value of things in the past.
“Both ’empire’ and ‘imperialism’ derive from ‘imperium’ a latin noun reffering to ‘power’ and ‘command’. After the long reign of Caesar August that marked the final demise of the Roman Republic in the early first century CE, imperium signified the Emperor’s ‘legal power to enforce the law’ a function he would routinely delegate to his chief military leaders and civil magistrates. Operating within a Hellenic cultural framework, the Roman inherited the Stoic conception that an empire was universal, in the sense of partaking of universal reason, and, therefore, valid for all societies. Hence, the concept of imperium implied a universal humanitarian mission of “Spreading civilization” to the rest of the World. Romans were convinced that only the complete conquest and civilization of all “barbarians” residing beyond the borders of the empire would ultimately lead to a harmonious union of the world’s peoples under Roman leadership, thus establishing peace, order, and justice on earth.”
“With the modern spread of liberal capitalist democracy and its professed ideals of freedom, equality, and national self-determination, ’empire’ aquired the rather undesirable connotation of political oppression and coercion–a charge most vehemently rejected by those powers that seem to deserve it the most. With the end of the colonial era after World War II, the world’s powers claimed to seek benign influence rather than domination. American and Soviet leaders eagler attempted to substantiate their assertion that their respective nations were not involved in an “imperialist” enterprise by pointing to the lack of what had always been seen as the hallmark of empire: direct or indirect political rule over formally annexed or incorporate external terrorities”
– Manfred Steger
“A free republic will never keep a standing army to execute its laws. It must depend upon the support of its citizens. But when a government is to receive its support from the aid of the citizens, it must be so constructed as to have the confidence, respect, and affection of the people.” Men who, upon the call of the magistrate, offer themselves to execute the laws, are influenced to do it either by affection to the government, or from fear; where a standing army is at hand to punish offenders, every man is actuated by the latter principle, and therefore, when the magistrate calls, will obey: but, where this is not the case, the government must rest for its support upon the confidence and respect which the people have for their government and laws.
The body of the people being attached, the government will always be sufficient to support and execute its laws, and to operate upon the fears of any faction which may be opposed to it, not only to prevent an opposition to the execution of the laws themselves, but also to compel the most of them to aid the magistrate; but the people will not be likely to have such confidence in their rulers, in a republic so extensive as the United States, as necessary for these purposes. The confidence which the people have in their rulers, in a free republic, arises from their knowing them, from their being responsible to them for their conduct, and from the power they have of displacing them when they misbehave: but in a republic of the extent of this continent, the people in general would be acquainted with very few of their rulers: the people at large would know little of their proceedings, and it would be extremely difficult to change them”
In light of the recent Debate that Ron Paul Won but neither the Media like New York Times, or La times give him any mention, it’s apparent that this has grown true. That the aristocracy is so strong that the majority can loudly scream something, but they end up controlling certain opinions, opinion polls, the way our emotions of discontent our represented, and the way the world sees America.
Objections to This Constitution of Government
“There is no Declaration of Rights, and the laws of the general government being paramount to the laws and constitution of the several States, the Declarations of Rights in the separate States are no security. Nor are the people secured even in the enjoyment of the benefit of the common law.
In the House of Representatives there is not the substance but the shadow only of representation; which can never produce proper information in the legislature, or inspire conficence in the people; the laws will therefore be generally made by men little concerned in, and unacquainted with their effects and consequences.
The Senate have the power of altering all money bills, and of originating appropriations of money, and the salaries of the officers of their own appointment, in conjunction with the president of the United States, although they are not the representatives of the people or amenable to them.
These with their other great powers, viz.: their power in the appointment of ambassadors and all public officers, in making treaties, and in trying all impeachments, their influence upon and connection with the supreme Executive from these causes, their duration of office and their being a constantly existing body, almost continually sitting, joined with their being one complete branch of the legislature, will destroy any balance in the government, and enable them to accomplish what usurpations they please upon the rights and liberties of the people.
The Judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several States; thereby rendering law as tedious, intricate and expensive, and justice as unattainable, by a great part of the community, as in England, and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor.
The President of the United States has no Constitutional Council, a thing unknown in any safe and regular government. He will therefore be unsupported by proper information and advice, and will generally be directed by minions and favorites; or he will become a tool to the Senate–or a Council of State will grow out of the principal officers of the great departments; the worst and most dangerous of all ingredients for such a Council in a free country; From this fatal defect has arisen the improper power of the Senate in the appointment of public officers, and the alarming dependence and connection between that branch of the legislature and the supreme Executive.”
It sounds very Star Wars, or if you’ve seen avatar. But by giving the president no poltical power he is suspect to various “consultants” and bully pulpit advice. Would a triumphrate help in this aspect or not? 3 People at once is hard for people to think about, people like the trinity but they want to focus on either Jesus God or the Holy Spirit. Jesus Saves You Camps or Strict Presybertian Boring or Pentacostal Spirit Filled, we all choose one of the elements over the other. I wonder if we could have a system like neon evangelion “magi” 3 compotents at once http://en.gigazine.net/news/20081201_magi_system/
This is simultaneously both a demonstration of hemegony and the uselessness of information. There was a poll in 2000 in Business Week of over 1,024 interviews, over 70 percent favoring globalization, and recent polling backs up this information. In 2004 the University of Maryland commisioned a poll showing that slightly more than 50 percent of respondents saw globalization as a positive thing. It’s not surprising that at the same time large banks are preaching things like globally (recently the president of the Bank of America discussed taking money out of local investment and turning it into “global investment”), with advertisements from the Teda China convention center . More from the great Manfred Steger :
“The polling data presented in the BusinessWeek cover story reveal the existence of a remarkable cognitive dissonance between the American people’s normative orientation toward globalization and their personal experiences in the globalizing world. How can one explain that a sizeable majority of respondients are afraid fof the negative economic impact of globalization (open door policy) while at the same time deeming globalization to be a good thing? One obvious answer is ideology. Promarket visions of globalization have shaped a large part of American opinion, even if people’s daily experience reflect a less favoraable picture. For example, BusinessWeek article tells the harrowing story of a factory worker employed by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company in Dadsen, Alabama. Having lost his job after Goodyear shifted most of its tire production to low-wage jobs in Mexico and Brazil, the worker was only recently rehired by the same company for less money. Still, the article concludes this disturbing story by reaffirming the overall positive impact of economic globalization: “Polls have shown for years that a solid majority of Americans believe that open borders and free trade are good for the economy” – Manfred Steger
Yes, and repeating this statement over and over makes it true. Its nuts. America is in debt with magical money to IMF(an agency of the UN) since it dropped the gold standard in 1971 and the whole world based its global currency on the gold standarded dollar since the 1944 Bretton Woods Conference Agreement (united nations before there was any) made a global standard an aim (for banker).
Complaining about immigration but supporting open borders, free trade, and Rick Perry (an international Hawkist who fights for global presence) is like saying you vouch for internet security and safety but demand that the wifi hot spot be public and no computer can have any isolate protection! who can operate without paranoia if he is constantly looking for somebody new on the horizon, a stranger, to walk in eagerly, yet fight on behalf of trans national corporations that depend on this open border free trade agreements? More recent Polls require further investigation.
Starting Friday Central Austin will start using Dc10 Aircraft to fight off the Bastrop Wildfire’s using Fire Retardant Chemtrails. It will be interesting to note the simularities visually between these chemical droppings and the one we typically see. I hope someone will secure some footage. Otherwise, The fire has grown to 1400 homes and a wind has just blown into town.
It is harder to breath in Austin and we are being warned to stay indoors. It is growing semi-apocalyptic, but this is redudant to say at this point. Apocalypse Now