The American Oligarchy
Money (Photo credit: 401(K) 2013)
One of my lasting lessons from political science is that every major society has a pyramid structure in regards to wealth and power. The United States is no exception to this distribution pattern. However, the United States is also supposed to be a democratic society—which seems rather inconsistent with the pyramid.
While the United States does have the mechanisms of democracy, such as voting, it might be wondered whether the United States is democratic or oligarchic (or plutocratic) in nature. While people might turn to how they feel about this matter, such feelings and related anecdotes do not provide proof. So, for example, a leftist who thinks the rich rule the country and who feels oppressed by the plutocracy does not prove her belief by appealing to her feelings or anecdotes about the rich. Likewise, a conservative who thinks that America is a great democracy and feels good about the rich does not prove her belief by appealing to her feelings or anecdotes about the rich.
What is needed is a proper study to determine how the system works. One rather obvious way to determine the degree of democracy is to compare the expressed preferences of citizens with the political results. If the political results generally correspond to the preferences of the majority, then this is a reasonable (but not infallible) indicator that the system is democratic. If the political results generally favor the minority that is rich and powerful while going against the preferences of the less wealthy majority, then this would be a reasonable (but not infallible) indicator that the system is oligarchic (or plutocratic). After all, to the degree that a system is democratic, the majority should have their preferences enacted into law and policy—even when this goes against the wishes of the rich. To the degree that the system is oligarchic, then the minority of elites should get their way—even when this goes against the preferences of the majority.
Recently, researchers at Princeton and Northwestern conducted just such a study: “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens” using data gathered from 1981 to 2002.
The researchers examined about 1,800 polices from that time and matched them against the preferences expressed by three classes: the average American (50th income percentile), the affluent American (the 90th percentile of income) and the large special interest groups.
The results are hardly surprising: “The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.”
As noted above, a truly democratic system should result in the preferences of the majority being expressed in policies and laws more often than not. However, “When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.” As such, this study would seem to provide strong evidence that the United States is an oligarchy (or plutocracy) rather than a democratic state.
It might be contended that this system is fine since, to use a misquote, what is the preference for GM is the preference for Americans. That is, it could be claimed that the elites and the majority of Americans have the same or similar preferences. However, the study found that the interests of the wealthy are not substantially correlated with the preferences of average citizens.” As such, the preferences of most Americans do not match the interests of the wealthy—but the wealthy generally get what they want.
One current example of this, which was not part of the study, is the fact that a very strong majority of Americans favor various gun control measures (such as universal background checks) yet bills that would make these measures into laws have failed. This provides a rather clear example of how the system works in general. Naturally, this example is merely an illustration—the statistical support is based in the 1,800 examined policies.
One possible objection is that the preferences of the majority are mistaken—that is, the majority wants things that are not in their best interest and what the elites want is what is actually best. For example, while most Americans might prefer stronger consumer protection laws when it comes to financial institutions, it could be claimed that they are in error. What is in their best interest is less consumer protection, which is what the financial elites want.
The obvious reply is that even if it were true that the majority is in error and the elites know best, this would arguing that the oligarchic system is better than a democratic system not that the system is not and oligarchic one.
Another possible objection is that the system is democratic in that people do vote for elected officials who then enact policies. Since the citizens can vote such officials out of office, they must be expressing the preferences of the citizens—despite the fact that policy and law consistently goes against the expressed preferences of the majority. This is to say that we have democratically created an oligarchy, so it is still a democracy (or at least a republic).
This objection is certainly interesting and raises a question about why people consistently re-elect people who consistently act contrary to their expressed preferences. One possibility is that the choices are very limited—you can vote for anyone you want, but a Democrat or Republican will almost certainly be elected. As such, the voters do get to vote, but they generally do not get real choices.
Another possibility is ignorance—people do not generally realize that what they get does not match what they claim to want. Such ignorance would put the moral blame partially on the citizens—they should be better informed. Then again, given the abysmal approval rating for congress it seems that people do realize this. This creates a rather odd scenario: people really hate congress, yet generally keep re-electing them over and over.
A third possibility is that there are many strong propaganda machines that are devoted to convincing people that the laws and policies are good. So, while people have a preference for one thing, they are persuaded to believe that what is in the interest of the oligarchy is what they should like. People might also be distracted by other matters—for example, people who oppose same-sex marriage will support politicians who oppose it, even if the politician also supports policies that are contrary to the voter’s economic interests. In this case, the moral failing is on the part of the deceivers—they are tricking citizens with deceit and corrupting democracy.
Another approach to objecting to the study is to raise questions about the methodology. One obvious question would be whether or not the 1,800 policies are properly representative of the political system. After all, if the researchers picked ones that favored the wealthy and ignored others that matched public preferences, then the study would be biased. As such, a key question is whether or not the sample used in the study is large enough and representative enough to adequately support the conclusion.
Another obvious question would be whether or not the study had the preferences of the people correct. After all, in order to properly claim that the laws and policies do not generally match the preferences of the majority, the claimed preferences would need to be the actual preferences of the majority.
Naturally, addressing these concerns would require examining the study carefully and objectively, rather than merely dismissing or accepting it based on how one feels about the matter. Some might also be tempted to dismiss the study based on mere ad homimen attacks on those conducting it. For example, one might fallaciously reject the study by simply claiming that those involved are biased liberal intellectuals who are trying to advance a leftist agenda. If this were true and the study were thus flawed, then the evidence would lie in the defects of the study—not in the feelings of those attacking with ad homimens.
A Philosopher's Blog 
A perfect example is the immigration bill. This is clearly not in the interest of low-wage American workers.
Mike honestly believes immigrants do jobs Americans won’t. He thinks an American guy would rather collect food stamps than work an $18 an hour construction job.
Look at what happened to Georgia when the state took steps to drive out illegals-the result was a shortage of people to pick the crops. Americans did not seem want those extremely low paying jobs. So, yeah, there are jobs that illegals will do that Americans generally do not want.
Americans probably want the $18/hour jobs, although illegals will do the jobs for even less. So, yeah, there are jobs Americans would want that are being given by employers who are willing to break the law and hire illegals.
The US has a deranged approach to illegals. For example, Florida has considered a bill to treat illegal college students as in-state students for tuition…which is saying “hey, we know you are breaking the law…we know right where you are…but we not only will not do anything, we’ll cut your tuition.” That is crazy. If we want to treat illegal students as citizens, then we need to change the laws so that illegal can have legal status. What is being done now is just accepting the breaking of laws. As I see it, if a law is not going to enforced, it should be eliminated or changed. Otherwise ignoring lawbreaking “degrades” the rule of law.
It wasn’t the low pay, it was the hard work. Americans did not want those back breaking jobs. Regarding immigration, the control on it were thrown out many years ago. This has invited animosity because as the ruling elite has shipped millions of jobs overseas they have also allowed millions to immigrate to this nation. Now native and immigrant compete for scarce jobs. This was done by design for many reasons. The ruling elite prefers the animosity, as it serves their purposes.
True-it would be a bit irrational to work a brutal job that would pay so little (less than government support, as some have pointed out). Illegals serve a critical economic role here: they pick crops for far less than Americans would, thus keeping food prices lower and profits higher. From a money standpoint is a winning situation for consumers and corporations.
Some corporations want cheap, illegal labor while the Republican party often uses xenophobia against illegals as a political tool. The Democrats like to use illegals as a political tool as well. So, the illegals are useful to both parties as a political pawn.
Yes Mike: excellent analysis–unusual for u, old bean. ZOG (which runs both Rep.s and Dem.s) wants to destroy the nation-state–as they’ve done so well in Europe, for example, Brussels, Belgium, for example being now 40% Muslim, encouraging civil strife, destruction of communities, etc., perfect pretext for the big-bro. police-state–which Magus, for one, worships and waters at the mouth to be integral part of so he can demonstrate his “goodness” and “wisdom,” going about telling folks what to do and why, as if people are children.
Further, w. the nation-states destroyed and Balkanized, people at one-another’s throats for rival religions and societies, u see then how easily Jews and other minorities, like homosexuals, can dominate–long as they have attack-dogs like magus so willingly and cheerfully working to enforce things–that is, UNTIL the people get wise and unite behind Christian TRUTH–then their little game is up, eh? Ho ho ho ho–it’s coming, too, don’t doubt–I only hope not too many folks have to die before it (the revolution) happens.
“Look at what happened to Georgia when the state took steps to drive out illegals-the result was a shortage of people to pick the crops. Americans did not seem want those extremely low paying jobs.”
Mike–this is the point–the wages would have to rise if the crops were going to get picked. Supply and demand. A shortage of labor helps those at the bottom.
Exactly. For once, can the US government take care of Americans before the rest of the world?
What’s ur problem?–“US gov.” (ZOG) wants world dictatorship, didn’t u get the memo?–all justified in ur “good-evil” Pharisaism–why should they care about “Americans”? After all, ZOG has the Jews-media to make prop., and then dupes and collaborators like urself–didn’t u see how ZOG treats Americans at the Bundy ranch in Nevada, just a few days ago. That was u in the BLM uniform, eh magus?–willingly tasering American citizens, pt-ing weapons at them, marking-off “free-speech zones,” eh? Ho ho ho ho
Here u go magus: ck out this short, 4 min vid for how ur stinking police-state which u love to glorify treats American citizens, http://www.hobbspd.com/swat.html
dammit: that was wrong vid–here’s the right one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKzUeTDviqc
Shockingly, the free-market forces did not result in higher wages and picked crops. Rather, the crops ended up rotting, unpicked.
“Immediately after the laws were passed, farmers in both states complained that foreign workers who lived there had left and that the itinerant migrants who generally came through were staying away. American workers weren’t stepping forward to perform the back-breaking work immigrants had done for years, and crops were rotting in the fields because of a lack of laborers, they said.”
–Fox Latino
Mike: u lose on an obvious, easily discovered pt.: free market always works, necessarily, in accord w. science of economics (which is an a-priori science, according to the Austrian school of Ron Paul, for example). What happened is very simply the farmers FAILED to provide sufficient incentive (high enough wages) for the fruit to be gathered.
apollonian’s right on this; eventually the farmers would have to pay more, or they’d keep losing money. There is always a time period between stimulus and effect
Do you disagree with TJ that a market flooded with workers results in lower wages?
I hesitate to get into this as the subject has gotten so convoluted and full of conspiracy nonsense and Mike getting the facts right and wrong and general conclusions right and wrong, but as the subject of labor in Georgia is something I know a little about, let me see if I can clear up a few things. What is glaringly missing from what I’ve read here so far is welfare, both state sponsored and church and other sponsored. I’ve worked a “food pantry” in the GA hills a few times and what I saw was pitiful. People coming down out of the hills and being handed surplus food, no questions asked, no obligation to make the slightest effort. Every week I handed food to people whose cars were just as filthy every week. The same fast food and pizza boxes that were there from the week before and the week before that. Cigarette butts accumulating, etc. etc. Yes, there are Americans who would rather collect welfare and food stamps than work. I believe I linked an article here a couple months ago about the “white ghetto” of Kentucky.
As for people in north GA who do work, I’ve been amused by what I’ve experienced. I bought a slightly older cabin that has needed some work. Hired and electrician, a building contractor, plumbers, had the A/C replaced etc. Had problems getting people to show up on time or at all to provide estimates, etc. After hiring each of those involved, in discussion afterward found that every one of them had either come up from Atlanta or Florida. And the locals would all whine about city folk and/or Floridians taking “their” jobs. First and foremost, the jobs did not belong to them. The belonged to me. I needed the work done. I would gladly have hired whoever was willing to do the job. I usually don’t take a low bidder unless I have confidence in their references or past work, etc.
As for Mike’s article titled “American Oligarchy”, as I’ve said I don’t read his shiite for the same reason I don’t watch gay porn. But based on title alone, Mike has no idea what country he lives in. He has demonstrated time and time again that he has no understanding of economics and underlying much of that is a kind of innumeracy that blinds him to how things work, what the economic factors are, how big the problem space is, etc. etc. etc. But I repeat myself. Gone on too long and will leave it at that.
I’m completely with you on the “life at the bottom” people. A lot of people I know and respect disagree with my belief that we are declining. But I think we’re declining in a different way than many people. Most who disagree with me look at the people they work with and say they’re doing fine. And they are. But the lower class have changed. They no longer want to be middle class. They have no idea how to order their lives and are enabled by intellectuals.
One year or even two mandatory service in the military. I’m all for it at this point. Yes, some will still fail, but even the failures will take with them something useful. Germany does it, Israel does it. You can still have a free society and require service to keep that society working well.
Agree. Lots of people would rather spend their time fishing than working.
TJ, some of the people I’m talking about are too lazy to fish. But when given that no one has any faith in their ability to work or to find work and there are no expectations on them to do any more for themselves, if nothing changes in their lives, how will anything ever change?
As to this “oligarchy” thing. Not looking for a definitive yes/no, but I would like a probability score. I suspect (and putting this at 60% myself) that what is behind Mike’s resentment of rich people and his hinting at conspiracy/oligarchy themed posts, is a fundamental antisemitism. Thoughts?
Are there just too many alpha males in philosophy departments?
The AAUP chapter condemned administrators as acting without regard for faculty members’ rights to due process after receiving a report from a site-visit panel of the American Philosophical Association’s Committee on the Status of Women. The panel determined that Boulder’s philosophy department “maintains an environment with unacceptable sexual harassment, inappropriate sexualized unprofessional behavior, and divisive uncivil behavior.” It noted that there had been 15 complaints to the university about philosophers there regarding sexual harassment or unprofessional sexualized behavior but that the department had done little to deal with the problems.
In response, administrators in January removed the chairman of the philosophy department and suspended graduate-student admission to the program.
Boulder’s reaction to the allegations was unprecedented, according to longtime philosophy professors and women in the field who have been complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination for years. But shortly after the campus announced it had suspended graduate admissions, female philosophy professors at Boulder warned that the university’s actions had damaged the department’s reputation by leading outsiders to believe that all male philosophers on the campus were harassers.
http://chronicle.com/article/U-of-Colorado-Violated/146071/
“Not looking for a definitive yes/no, but I would like a probability score. I suspect (and putting this at 60% myself) that what is behind Mike’s resentment of rich people and his hinting at conspiracy/oligarchy themed posts, is a fundamental antisemitism. Thoughts?”
I think it is mainly that Mike confuses economic freedom with the law of the jungle.
This is too precious. Seems the oligarchs may actually work for the government:
Regulators make more than bankers, WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304311204579507512375765276?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304311204579507512375765276.html
You dodged the question, TJ. Or do I take that answer as being 0%?
As for philosophers at Boulder, etc. Simply creating their own raison d’être. It’s philosophy, everything is justified except that with which one disagrees.
0%. That is not the way Mike rolls.
Antisemitism?–Why, It’s Mere Obedience To God
WTP: didn’t u know anti-semitism is simply obedience to God? All humanity is anti-semitic–even some Jews (or former Jews, anyway), like St. Paul are anti-semitic. Jesus Christ himself (TRUTH, in accord w. Gosp. JOHN 14:6) was an anti-semite (anti-lies, as Gosp. JOHN 8:44).
And u Jews urselves understand perfectly we gentiles MUST be anti-semitic, as u Jews always assure urselves.
Christianity (worship of TRUTH TRUTH TRUTH above all/any other precept) is anti-Semitism, though most of those who call themselves “Christian” cringe to admitting it, such confusion and mysticism has over-taken the religion, as well as the entire culture in “Decline of the West,” by Oswald Spengler.
As for Mike: he’s far too PC savvy to even get into the issue; at most he’ll go along w. whatever party-line is current. Don’t doubt Mike has a neat thing going, getting paid good money for playing w. the students’ minds and persuading them it’s “good” thing to preach “good-evil” Pharisaism, hence then a Kantian, subjectivistic view of reality.
Mike would only be culpable if he continued w. such falsehood as saying dear Aristotle, master of those who know, believed in ethics as end in itself. “Eudamonia” (roughly, happiness) is the end, ethics is mere means for Aristotle, ethics simply logic btwn ends and means.
And don’t get me wrong, WTP: I mean “anti-semitism” in the way u Jews understand it–anti-Jew–NOT anti-Arab, for example.
WTP: u shouldn’t fool urself as to what u Jews are–CRIMINALS who happily and cheerfully conduct war (literally) against the rest of humanity which u Jews call “gentiles”–it’s ok and even virtuous to murder gentiles, according to ur rabbis and ur Talmud, Talmud being definitive document of Judaism = Pharisaism.
And of course u Jews will lie about ur anti-gentilism, LIES being integral part of ur religion, WAR against humanity, human reason, truth, etc. Ck RevisionistReview.blogspot.com and Come-and-hear.com for definitive expo on Judaism/Talmudism.
Briefly then, Jews take control of the corrupt society in Spenglerian “Decline of the West” as Jews are foremost, most-organized, most-connected, and tightly-knit criminal gang overseeing then all the rest of the criminal network which controls society, this control beginning w. the capstone instrument, US Federal Reserve Bank (“Fed”) COUNTERFEITING scam, which Jews have always controlled, as they plainly control now.
According to Jew, Bernard Lazare (“Antisemitism,” 1896), Jews have essentially controlled banking in the West since the 14th cent. Rothschilds established definitive control after Napoleonic wars, practically everyone agrees.
So u see WTP, Jews merely have to be understood in the large, determinist, hence CYCLIC scheme of things, according to Spengler’s magisterial “Decline of the West.” Jews are the liquidators, the grave-diggers of the corrupt, decadent, society–observe Israel and AIPAC in total control of things, the proverbial “tail” wagging the disease-ridden dog of Western society, eh?
U’re about to spring ur buddy, Jonathan Pollard, now, eh? Ho ho ho ho–and ur lap-dog, “magus” here doesn’t say diddly though he yelps about a hero like Snowden who, for one thing, spilled the beans about NSA giving Israel all the hard data without so much as picking through it to taking out sensitive things for interests of USA, USA now practically nothing but the “golem” of Jews.
Look at all the world’s billionaires, WTP, they’re all either Jews, over a third of them, but all, nonetheless, serving Jew interests, with no exceptions–MOSSAD will simply assassinate all/any who are deemed enemies, and the Jews-media will cover it all up, eh?–ho ho ho.
Look at the laws of the Europeans and practically all others too, w. perhaps only some exceptions still in the Muzlim world, which u’re busy at work upon, exterminating those who don’t cooperate w. ZOG, whence criticism of ur holohoax lies (see Codoh.com and Ihr.org for expo) will get jail-terms and stiff fines.
Think about it, WTP: if we gentiles could only successfully nuke Israel, and then remove u Jews (like, “permanently,” u know?) and ur suck-along accomplices, like “magus” and other neo-cons and “Judeo-Christian” (JC–see Whtt.org and TruthTellers.org for expo on JCs) traitors, the world would be at peace–for a good, long time, wouldn’t it?–before another group of mixed-race monstrosities rose-up and declared they were “chosen” by God to exterminate all other humans inevitably arose.
But I acknowledge u Jew monsters actually do the work of God, WTP–u’re the maggots who cash-in on gentile depravity and corruption like any other disease–like Typhus, or leprosy, or plague. U Jews couldn’t exist without sinful and corrupt gentiles, like ur buddy, “magus,” for example, to assist u and actually nurture u along, these gentiles at first ur masters, perhaps, but being not nearly as well-organized as u Jews, eventually, as we see now, just ur craven, cowardly, Pharisaic suck-alongs and henchmen.
“Antisemitism”?–isn’t it mere natural reaction/reciprocation for Jew anti-genitilism?
Zero percent TJ? Really? Hell, I wouldn’t even rate myself that low. Have you ever noticed Mike refute racism on this blog? Every once in a while a bigoted troll drops by making derogatory comments about blacks, women, latinos, and Mike speaks up. Yet blatant, jew-hate is spewed here on a regular basis. Not just insults, etc. but flat out calls for Jews to be rounded up, killed, and generally regarded as sub human, yet not a peep from Dr. MLB. On top of that the constant veiled references to a cabal of wealthy people who control the economy. You don’t find that just a little..hmmm…intriguing?
WTP: never forget–Jews hate truth–truth is anti-Semitic, eh? Don’t like it?–go somewhere else, eh? Problem solved, eh? Ho ho ho ho ho
American Oligarchy–It’s Jews And Accomplices–Get A Clue
This was good, provocative essay by Mike. So it’s good to keep w. basics and look at history. Thus when we ck ancient accounts–as of the Greeks and Romans–we see certain things which are much confirmed fm later history, esp. American history.
Thus, as in case of those magnificent Romans, sinners though they were, we see the society of virtue begins w. agrarians–farmers–and they institute basic, simple republicanism, founded in equality. And this pattern is repeated as in case of original Boer settlers of S. Africa, the American settlers, including the Mayflower compact, etc.
And note these originator people are ALWAYS integrated and related for race and language–this is necessary as it requires such integration and unity in order to fight successfully. Later empires, developed fm the original societies, composed of diff. races can be integrated, BUT one notes they follow the basic pattern established by the founders, which were always of a single, particular race.
The problems then crop up for this basic governmental system as the society progresses and “succeeds,” which “success” always sows the seeds of eventual corruption and Spenglerian “Decline of the West.” Thus the Romans’ finest moment came in their desperate fight against Hannibal and the Carthaginians, and when the Romans prevailed–and became tremendously rich–that’s when their republican system declined and we observed the rise of the strong-man dictators, eventuating in Marius and Sulla, then Caesar and definitive fall of the Republic to the imperial Principate of Augustus.
And thus we observe the rise and fall of such empires and society–this is what needs be observed by astute observers. We Americans are particularly blessed, in one way at least, as we have a specific system–unfortunately definitively destroyed by the “Civil War”–founded upon explicit republicanism upon explicit observations fm previous hist., esp. by T. Jefferson and such as Madison in the Federalist Papers.
Note then, basically, the original objectivity-based culture becomes corrupted especially by Pharisaism/moralism–as we see in that generation preceding the American “Civil” war, including much more than just the slavery issue, as we see in the great “Nullification” crisis of 1830 when Pres. Jackson threatened to invade the state of S. Carolina over issue of states rights.
Thus through the basic corruption of the culture esp. through the interjection of Pharisaism/moralism, we see then the rise of the criminal class, esp. led by Jews, as we see today, which makes use of literal (legalized) COUNTERFEITING of the US Federal Reserve Bank (the “Fed”)–see RealityZone.com for expo on Fed fraud–by which the entire society is (a) captured most definitively, then (b) systematically destroyed as the Jews at the top see to the “immigration”/invasion of huge waves of foreigners and aliens, including even Muslims, and esp. then the destruction of the economy, sending the industrial & manufacturing plant overseas.
In all history we see this CYCLIC process of Spenglerian “Decline…” is practically irreversible–there’s no solution but perhaps for precipitating the inevitable “decline and fall,” the idea being for a part to break-off and institute a new, rejuvenated version–perhaps like the Byzantine off-shoot to the original Roman, though the Byzantines were/are certainly no inspiration to real republicanism.
Perhaps the closest thing to a great and true sort of “rejuvenation” was the original Christian revolution of St. Constantine the Great, though it didn’t last long as the native rationalism of Christianity did not thrive; rather mysticism taking-over inexorably, this mysticism prevailing till the High Middle Age and then Renaissance.
Regardless, the one sure thing we can agree upon for present American corruption is, aside fm the general criminal dominance, as of the Fed, is the hegemony of Jews and then esp. Israel, the quintessential “tail wagging the large dog,” using USA to mass-murder the enemies of Israel and also the larger Jew-dominated world empire. The great Christian revolution of St. Constantine is thus especially inspirational. Jew lies, subjectivism, and Pharisaism must be overthrown by Christian TRUTH and objectivity.
Well, what does “wealth-redistribution” have to do w. the discussion?–it may indeed have something to do w. it, but u don’t say what or how, and u don’t say what is relevance of this vid, AJ–typical of u.
After all, “wealth-redistribution” is dictatorship, dependent upon dictatorship, and everyone w. half-a-brain knows it.
If u had something relevant, poignant, and integral to the discussion, regarding the subject-matter of the vid, and then so indicated this, then it might cause people to want to look at ur vid, but u post vids as SUBSTITUTE for expo, AJ, as if u urself admit u’re not capable of putting it (relevant expo) briefly and simply into ur own words.
How many times have I explained this to u, AJ?–but, like a mule, u just continue doing same thing, u don’t care. That’s why & how people come to understand AJ really has nothing to say, but to pretend he does, he goes and posts vids, just cluttering up the page. But at least u don’t do too much of it, and people learn to just scroll past.
Here’s perfect example of CONSPIRACY, even if it doesn’t seem, at first, to some, to be THAT big a deal.
So Obongo goes and endorses a known and typical fraud regularly perpetrated by those dear Jews–regarding the fake “anti-Semitic leaflet” put-out in Ukraine.
Folks: as Thomas Paine (I believe) told us, gov. at best is mere lesser-of-evils, at its worst it’s like what we got now. See http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/obama-endorses-forgery/
Here’s a one-minute vid fm former Sup. ct. justice, Stevens–about how this scum would alter the US Const. if he could–and don’t forget, there’s a Const. convention coming: http://beforeitsnews.com/u-s-politics/2014/04/the-usa-is-on-the-brink-of-real-change-call-for-constitutional-convention-congress-required-by-law-to-act-2466280.html
Stevens ought to be beaten to death, for treason and subversion, I say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbg0jBJIZ6A
Wonder who/what is the power?–ck this: How AIPAC (Jews, who else?) actually rail-roaded a Congressman (Jim Traficant): http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/jim_traficant_exclusive_197.html
Here’s latest vid fm Traficant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_NMFXuUI94
Doubt USA is outright dictatorship, utterly lawless?–feast ur eyes on this document fm the IRS which ADMITS its own lawlessness–they’re just a bunch of criminals, AND THEY KNOW IT: http://www.sovereignman.com/tax/check-out-the-irss-stunning-admission-of-its-own-mafia-tactics-13381/
Who/what’s the power in USA?–observe Jews & suckalongs/accomplices getting ready to spring Pollard: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=16683
I mean, Magus pretends to be outraged at “espionage” and Snowden–wonder what he says about Pollard, eh? Ho ho ho ho ho
I was bored so I tried. My eyes are burning, but there’s a fundamental flaw in reasoning right here:
As noted above, a truly democratic system should result in the preferences of the majority being expressed in policies and laws more often than not.
This seems to presume that a truly democratic system would not have protections for minority individuals and their rights. A truly democratic system, unqualified, is mob rule. As with most studies and systems for that matter, garbage in garbage out.
http://soldiercitizen.wordpress.com/
Oops…
http://soldiercitizen.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/is-america-an-oligarchy/
Magus: ever the neo-con flunky, suck-up, retailer of lies and prop. ZOG did the chem-weapon attack in Syria few months ago and then tried to blame Assad–just now ZOG hired the snipers who murdered cops and protesters in Ukraine, after sponsoring the putsch, now threatening Russia for protecting its interests.
ZOG supported al Qaeda in Libya, now in Syria: http://thelastgreatstand.com/lgs/2014/04/27/confirmed-u-s-armed-al-qaeda-to-topple-libyas-gaddaffi/
Get it straight: ZOG isn’t merely an oligarchy–it’s been that since at least US Civil War–150 yrs–ZOG is psychopath satanist state, enemy of all mankind, behind genocidal AGENDA-21. But magus making chicken-feed fm his army pay considers he’ll go along w. all the lies and prop. for his interests as it makes him feel “good,” etc.–amazing.
Mike, do you buy into this exegesis?
Oh. My. Goodness….
Who ever said corporations aren’t powerful? But can they put me in jail? Have they killed millions, like Stalin? Or have they made virtually everything better?
I wonder how much money the MSNBC corporation makes a year? Does this irony fly over her head?
It has some plausibility-Orwell does present an allegorical model of the concentration of power and the betrayal of revolutionary ideals. This allegory can be applied broadly and does fit the United States (you can cast Obama and Hilary as the pigs, if you’d like).
However, Orwell did seem to have a specific intent in writing the work. So, much depends on what you consider to be the legitimate expansion of the allegory beyond the initial focus.