Asdf

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:14:43 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:14:18 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:13:56 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:13:32 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:13:08 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:12:48 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:12:31 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:12:08 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:11:44 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:11:19 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:10:23 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:09:59 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:09:17 -0400

Photo

Tue, 07 May 2013 03:08:45 -0400

"One often hears that antiwar protests in the late sixties and early seventies were ultimately..."

Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:43:47 -0400

“

One often hears that antiwar protests in the late sixties and early seventies were ultimately failures, since they did not appreciably speed up the U.S. withdrawal from Indochina. But afterward, those controlling U.S. foreign policy were so anxious about being met with similar popular unrest—and even more, with unrest within the military itself, which was genuinely falling apart by the early seventies—that they refused to commit U.S. forces to any major ground conflict for almost thirty years. It took 9/11, an attack that led to thousands of civilian deaths on U.S. soil, to fully overcome the notorious “Vietnam syndrome”—and even then, the war planners made an almost obsessive effort to ensure the wars were effectively protest-proof. Propaganda was incessant, the media was brought on board, experts provided exact calculations on body bag counts (how many U.S. casualties it would take to stir mass opposition), and the rules of engagement were carefully written to keep the count below that.

The problem was that since those rules of engagement ensured that thousands of women, children, and old people would end up “collateral damage” in order to minimize deaths and injuries to U.S. soldiers, this meant that in Iraq and Afghanistan, intense hatred for the occupying forces would pretty much guarantee that the United States couldn’t obtain its military objectives. And remarkably, the war planners seemed to be aware of this. It didn’t matter. They considered it far more important to prevent effective opposition at home than to actually win the war. It’s as if American forces in Iraq were ultimately defeated by the ghost of Abbie Hoffman.

”

- A Practical Utopian’s Guide to the Coming Collapse - David Graeber

The Net - Lutz Dammbeck

Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:01:09 -0400

The Net - Lutz Dammbeck

"The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from..."

Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:39 -0500

“

The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war: “This way of settling differences is not just.” This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing, except a tragic death wish, to prevent us from reordering our priorities, so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

”

- Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence - Martin Luther King

Photo

Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:44:33 -0400

"Earth’s richest 1,000 individuals now control as much wealth as the poorest 2.5 billion people on..."

Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:15:04 -0400

“Earth’s richest 1,000 individuals now control as much wealth as the poorest 2.5 billion people on the planet.”

- http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/05

“Sometimes I get into conversations with commentators on...

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:32:00 -0400

“Sometimes I get into conversations with commentators on my essays, they’re like ‘how can you advocate degrowth when the third world masses need to be lifted out of poverty?’ Are we actually lifting them out of poverty or are we creating a new kind of poverty that is actually to our advantage, or at least to our supposed advantage? I always want to be careful – when we say so-and-so’s very poor, are we just projecting our own conception of wealth on to them and then improving them? Well you’re developing them, and we’re developed, it’s ‘Destination Us’. I just wanted to make that disclaimer.” - Interview with Charles Eisenstein