Overblog Follow this blog
Administration Create my blog
August 20 2017 1 20 /08 /August /2017 22:02
Not only in Vienna an admonishing-fire was burning for freedom of speech in 2017 ...
Viennese Fire in the Alps for freedom of expression

Since 1988 on every 2nd Saturday in August in the whole Alpine-region the initiative "Feuer in den Alpen" (Fire in the Alps) takes place. With admonishing-fires the organizers point on a specific issue, that's important to them.

It's a kind of fire-tradition as common in this part of the world.

 

The 7th Viennese admonishing-fire this year stands for freedom of expression.

"Freedom of expression?" many of you are going to ask for certain. But it is it, that especially since around ¾ of a year is quite severely threatened:

  • In Internet, specifically in social-networks and search-engines, more and more often links are withhold from the public under the cloak of "right to be forgotten", "fake-news" and "hate-speech".

  • Mass-surveillance, in the internet as well as at smartphone-activities, but also in public-spaces is increasing massively.
    The pretext of this measure is the "fight against terrorism", which for the rulers seems to dominate even over fundamental-rights.

  • Furthermore pressure on alternative-media and individuals publicly expression system-critical view is growing. And pressure can be applied on their credibility as well as on their economical foundations (i.e. on their advertising-customers).

 

It's to go without a saying, that certain persons, suspected serious crimes after judicial approval may even be strictly monitored and their privacy may be broken.

It's to go without a saying as well, that persons, who have committed defamation, libel or slander are held accountable.

 

... also in southern Italy attention was drawn on freedom of speech with an admonishing fire.
Southern-Italian alpine-fire for freedom of expression

However, it is completely incompatible with democracy, if "truth-ministries" or similar bodies decide, which opinions are permissible in public and which not. Because that's always highly subjective.

The founding fathers of democratic States for very good reasons have defined the scope of "Freedom of expression" very amply.

 

No individual is objective, everyone of us has his own interests and beliefs. And of course this is the same with authorities and companies & organisations working for the authorities.

Also the so called "fake-news-hunters" are highly subjective and have massive

 

The so-called Fake-News-hunters are subjective and have massive self-interests.

Also algorithms are often wrong and often make more than dubious decisions, which content they rank down or even delete.

 

Freedom of expression is an extremely important value!

The ignorance in terms of it vulnerability today is sadly big – also in the "sceptical-community".

I think, that this is because in the Western countries freedom of expression is something, what for decades is recognized as given and we can't imagine anything different.

 

And on the part of the media 2017 there sadly has been very little coverage of the Viennese "Feuer in den Alpen" as well.

"Freedom of speech" seems to be a very awkward topic.

But awkward or not – it's such an important issue, that we are going to continue addressing it and addressing it even more determined.

 

Just because freedom of expression is that crucial for democracy and freedom, we have to stand up for it.

 

And this every individual, each one of us can:

  • Standing up for it for example by discussing even controversial subjects frankly, but in a civilized manner.

  • Standing up for it by getting our information not only from the ubiquitous mainstream-media, but also from alternative-media. This widens our view of the world and it's also a contribution to diversity in the media-landscape.

I'm doing this and I hope many of you as well!

 

 

Additional links:

  • Official website of the whole event "Feuer in den Alpen", operated by the organisation CIPRA from Switzerland:
    http://www.feuerindenalpen.com/ (English information availlable)

  • Website of the organisers of the "Feuer in den Alpen" Vienna, the "Plattform Direkte Demokratie" (plattform direct-democracy) Wien
    http://demokratie-plattform.at (German website)

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment
April 15 2017 7 15 /04 /April /2017 20:05

An open letter to the President of the United States, Donald Trump:

 

Dear Mr. President Trump!

 

Early in the morning at 7th of April, you as President ordered to attack an airbase of the Syrian army with cruise-missiles type "Tomahawk".

 

Much is uncertain. But it is for certain that you wanted to send a signal. And it's certain, that you play with global-peace and risk a World-War-III.

 

The official reason for your attack-command was a serious poison-gas incident in the Syrian city of Chan Scheichun, in which dozens of people have been killed and hundreds have been injured. However to whom the gas belonged to and who used it, that was completely unclear 1 week ago and is still unclear today!

And that's exactly why this terrible incident has to be clarified as objectively as possible, the OPCW (Organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons) is best placed to do this in my eyes.

 

I can understand, that you have been profoundly touched by the pictures of the killed and injured people.

I can also understand that you are under tremendous pressure from the Neo-Cons and the military-industrial complex, which in principle always want the United States wage war.

And the domestic political pressure on you by protagonists such as John McCain or Lindsey Graham is very high.

 

Nevertheless your games with global-peace are totally out of question - whether they take place in Syria, North-Korea or elsewhere! And this not only for factual reasons – that a 3rd World-War you are currently risking were disastrous should be clear to every human being, which is capable of reasonable thinking. No, you prior to your presidential candidacy, during your presidential candidacy and also at the beginning of your presidency, countless times emphasised, that you are against military solutions and for deals, especially for reaching a deal with Russia.

 

That there will also be downsides in your Presidency, always was clear to me. One for me most is your contempt and criminalization of "Whistleblowers" such as Edward Snowden, a person which I personally consider a freedom-fighter and hero.

But I valued your victory over Hillary Clinton for 1 pivotal reason as positive: Because you wanted to advocate for peaceful solutions and dialogue with Russia.

 

Michael Lüders, at least in the German-speaking countries an outstanding Middle-East-Expert, excellently brings the situation in Syria on the point, especially the fact that:

  1. Currently it's still completely unclear who in Syria is responsible for the use of poison-gas on 04th April 2017 – and that it can only be unclear, since no investigation has taken place so far.
  2. We already know this situation from 2013, that Assad was held responsible for a poison-gas attack, for which with a probability bordering on certainty other forces were responsible – which was why Barack Obama had called off an attack on Syria.

 

 

And not enough with the actions in Syria:

After the dropping of the largest non-nuclear bomb in Afghanistan and the deployment of Troops ahead of North-Korea many people, also me, hear the alarm-bells ringing, because they fear a World-War.

 

Therefore, I appeal to you:

Remember your plans and promises from your election-campaign, return to the path of peace. Join forces with politicians (in the U.S., especially Rand Paul and Tulsi Gabbard), the media and, of course, with citizens of our mother-earth who also want to maintain peace.

 

Right now, just before Easter, the highest feast Christianity, you as Christian should do really everything, that we not only respect peace at Easter, but in addition to make our world a peaceful and better place - we only have this one!

 

With best regards from Austria,

Ulrich Lintl

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment
January 23 2017 2 23 /01 /January /2017 23:31

In a people-initiative Austrian people can show their discardment to TTIP, CETA and TISAToday on 23th January 2017, the people-initiatve (Volksbegehren) "against TTIP, CETA and TISA" is launched in Austria.
The 3 trans-atlantic "free trade agreements" for 2-3 years are under massive criticism from a myriad of sceptical organizations – and this to me absolutely justified.

 

It has been initiated by a group of SPÖ-politicians (Austrian social-democrats-party) from the federal-state of Lower-Austria. But even before the current initiative a massive front of opposition by several and very different political parties, trade-unions and other organizations was formed.
Even Frank Hensel, head of REWE-Österreich, the biggest food-retail-chain in Austria, has clearly positioned himself against TTIP.

 

Because among my English language blog's audience predominantly consist of non-Austrian people, which can not sign the petition, I am going to focus on explaining the situation here in my country in terms with the trans-atlantic free-trade-agreements.

 

Especially trans-national corporations and other big business in team with economically-liberal political-parties and other organizations are very much in favour of them.

 

In contrast most of the parliamentary and non-parliamentary opposition-parties, trade-unions, NGOs, most of alternative media and even SMBs (small & midsize business) firmly reject TTIP, CETA and TISA.
Their main-point of criticism are the so called „arbitration courts“. In fact these are no courts – though they are called so – but rather meeting in between nominated corporate-lawyers, who are making highly questionable deals in back-rooms – under circumvention of the democratic-legislation and jurisprudence.
And this corporate arbitration-regime can sue states to billions of Euros fines, when they lack of profits due to higher social- or environmental-standards of a certain country.

 

I do fully agree to this enormous threat to our countries, our democracies and our freedom. And that's why I sign the initiative and do recommend all my fellow-Austrian to do so as well.

 

Although people-initiative's results in Austria are not binding – even not, if more than half of our citizens sign it – gaining many people's support were a strong and very important signal in the public debate at exactly this point of time.
Because as early as in February 2017 the EU-parliament wants to decide about the future of CETA. And many citizens announcing their disagreement with the establishments point of view would give a strong push forward to all forces opposition limitless corporatocracy and would open the door for a fair global trading-system.

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment
January 13 2017 6 13 /01 /January /2017 02:35

Donald Trump won really interesting and polaring US-presidental-elections 2016The US presidential-election 2016 is now several weeks ago, but just because of the disemotionalisation related to this fact a a sober look at it's result now is possible.

And – though resulted by the fact, that I didn't have time, created my articles English version – the publication at this date very well fit's to the whole inauguration-process of Donald Trump, which will be finalized in exactly 1 week with the official ceremony.

 

My and Dirk Müllers short-review just in advance:

I don't know whether Donald Trump's policy will be good, but in any case he is very much more in our favour than Hillary Clinton, due to the sole reason of her brutal global-politics.
 

As Donald Trump has repeatedly announced, the fight against ISIS is on top of his agenda and a changeover of power in Syria is no priority for him. In addition he wants to reach out to Vladmir Putin and find peaceful cooperation with Russia.

Thus, there is hope for a more peaceful world.

 

Hillary Clinton in these elections – completely in contrast to the euphemistic image that mainstream-media painted – was THE establishment-candidate. She is a main architect of the bloody wars in Libya and Syria and through her plan to shoot down Russian airplanes in Syria she had risked a direct war mit Russia there – which could have escalated to Word-War-3.

Short-summary Republicans & Demokrats election-campaigns

  • In contrast to previous elections, where with Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul 2 establishment-distant candidates dropped out pretty early in the primaries, in 2016 Bernie Sanders was in contention for nomination almost until the primarie's last round and Donald Trump even won and made the nomination as candidate at for the Republicans.

  • The pre-election campaign at the Republicans was eminently dirty.
    Finally Donald Trump clearly prevailed after a variety of personal below-the-beltline attacks between the party-internal rivals.

  • The situation at the Democrats for certain was not less dirty, but indeed different:
    Nomination for the presidential-race very quickly was a duel between favourite Hillary Clinton and underdog Bernie Sanders.
    And after a clear lead of Clinton at the beginning of the primaries, self-proclaimed Socialist Sanders always came closer to her in terms of convention-delegates and – only after several very dirty maneuvers from Hillary Clinton's environment and from the Democrats party-establishment – dropped out of the race.

  • Disembarking Bernie Sander later was one main-reason for Donald Trumps victory and Hillary Clintons defeat.
    Because Sanders supporters only partially voted for Clinton. Others however gave their vote Donald Trump, or voted for Jill Stein or, particularly like Susan Sarandon, even actively supported the Green-party's nominee.
    And other others stayed away from the election.

  • Not nominating Bernie Sanders in a twofold respect counter-productive.
    Not only that the party alienated so many of Sanders supporters, the Senator from Vermont generally would have had a good chance to win against Donald Trump in a general election.

Third-Parties, Independents and alternative-media

  • In contrast to the picture drawn by Establishment-media not only 2, but 31 (!) candidates, 29 of them candidates of the so-called "Third Parties" and independents ran for US-presidency.
    In case you shouldn't know: "Third Parties" are parties apart from the Republicans & Democrats. And through the highly unfair majority-election-system and through the media-landscape in the United States dominated by corporate media-juggernatus so far they unfortunately play only a minor-role.

  • Out of the mass of these alternative-candidates Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein definitely protrude.
    Candidates like Republican Evan McMullin and Darrell Castle of the "Constitution Party" have also played nationwide a certain role. Further candidates were however – no matter of their level of expertise and their concepts – only had some impact in certain Federal-States.

  • All of these candidates have in common that they have had almost no access to mainstream-media and it accordingly was extremely difficult for them to achieve the level of attention necessary for success.
    In 2016 things could have been totally different with a fair coverage of ALL candidates running in this elections: Because with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump the 2 so far most unpopular major-party-candidates ever ran for presidency.

  • Of course Donald Trump was the main-profiteer of alternative-media coverage, this was 1 reason for his electoral victory.
    But for the 2nd part also the third-party and independent-candidates benefited of this. Though this time that had not been reflected in the elections result yet, but it's even highly likely, that Americans stronger turn to new political-forces on the regional and local-level.

  • And I have to strike a blow for the election-days coverage by „Russia Today“ (RT) – to be precise of RT-Americas coverage in English language (as RT is a global & multilingual network).
    The Russian news-channel dedicated the first part of his big election-broadcast to the "Third Parties" including Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Ron Paul (former presidential-candidate for the Libertarians) and Ralph Nader (former presidential-candidate for the Greens).
    Co-host of the show and of Lindsay France was the Ex-Wrestler and Ex-Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura.

The Russian news channel has dedicated the first part of his major election broadcast the "Third Parties", including Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Ron Paul (former presidential candidate for the Libertarian) and Ralph Nader (former presidential candidate for the Green).

Co-host of the show, the Ex-Wrestler and Ex-Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura was.

Final Words

In contrast to my thoughts from 2012, this presidental-election it was not irrelevant who wins.

This in turn significantly relates to the fact, that in these primaries 2 establishment-sceptical candidates (at leas let's hope they are) were in the race for nomination almost until the very end. And 1of them not only managed to win nomination, but made it to the election-victory.
 

Time will show how serious Donald Trump's establishment-criticism really is and how much he is comitted to the interestets of the people (an not certain cliques inside the establishment). However to me he is definitely better than Hillary Clinton.

Nevertheless I had preferred one of the third-party-candidates over Trump.
 

Alternative media anyway proved it's positive potential. And that's exactly why it's on top of the Establishment's hit-list. Under the narrative „Fake News“ alternative-media is intented to be curbed.

That by no means must happen and I am going to make my contribution, strengthening alternative-media and make it better known.

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment
December 30 2015 4 30 /12 /December /2015 23:50

Who doesn't know Star Wars? It will not be more than a few people, solely the currently ongoing almost unbelievable public campaign makes it almost impossible, to miss at least some information about it.

 

I'm more a Star-Trek and Babylon-5 fan, however completely undogmatic. I like watching almost everything, that is good.
And I have to mention, that the Star-Wars-series is really good and deserves praise. I however find the hysteria around it totally excessive.

 

I am politically active, anti-ideological and really sceptical about all kinds of things. And within the politically-sceptical scene there are several fundamentalists, who reject sports and all kinds of entertainment. In their eyes these kinds of activities keep people off dealing with the serious and important issues.
On the other hand, there are the hedonistic hardcore-fans, totally keen for all kinds of consumption - in this case then of course of the Star-Wars universe. They watch every screen-material shot and buy every product offered. Finally they – at least partially – escape from real-life into this fictional-universes fantasy-world.

 

I strictly reject both extremes - as I almost always do this with extremes. But before I tell you how exactly I personally deal with star wars, I would like to go a bit further back to the story's deeper meaning and it's links to our real world.

What characterises Star-Wars

As in almost all epics the fight of "Good vs. Evil" is in the centre of the action. And Star-Wars-creator George Lucas frankly said that he uses also items of great historical literature, as almost all great exponents of the fictional & fantasy-genre did: John R. R. Tolkien with "Lord of the Rings", Frank Herbert in "Dune" or whether in the recent past J. Michael Straczynski in "Babylon 5" and Joanne K. Rowling at "Harry Potter".

 

Characters in the medium-trilogy (episodes IV, V, and VI), created in the 1970s and 1980s, yet have been drawn quite bromidic: There "Good versus Evil" is largely black and white. However there are also laudable exceptions in the grey-area:
While the character Lando Calrissian has changed from dark-grey (rather evil) to white (good), especially the personality-profile of Darth Vader / Annakin Skywalker is excellent. The bright knight, that has fallen for the dark side of the force, helps it to rise, but finally destroys the evil, in the form of the Emperor.

 

Much more – because it's significantly more complex - I like the prequel-trilogy published from 1999 to 2005 (episodes I, II and III). The saga's 1st part is still less in my favour, in my opinion this is a typical introduction to the matter.
However in episode II and even more in part III a fascinating as well as a realistic-shocking image is drawn: The described transformation of a Democratic Republic into a dictatorial Empire has tremendous big similarities to the real world's development of today.

 

Already in the 2nd part, it comes to a national crisis, because the democratic Parliament is too divided to master a - artificially staged - crisis. For this reason dictatorial powers are transferred to the Chancellor. And as many people do in times of crisis, so also Annakin Skywalker sympathizes with the "strong man".

 

In the 3rd part the development to the dark side then continues in macrocosm as well as microcosm: The chancellors intelligent-vicious wire-pulling works out, he manages to destroy democracy and to make himself the ruler of a dictatorial Empire. By personal weaknesses and unfortunate circumstances the Jedi Knight Annakin Skywalker becomes Darth Vader, the dictatorial Emperor right-hand-man.

 

The historical Inspiration of George Lucas for Star Wars was Germany's transition from the “Weimar Republic” to the Nazi-regime. But that falls far too short in my eyes:
For me, it only takes little imagination, drawing parallels to ISIS (Islamic State), that at least has been connived by the West, it's terrorist-attacks and the associated, more and more anti-democratic course of our countries governments. Not only by me, but by more and more people the suspension of human-rights in France after the Paris terrorist-attacks is seen as the 1st step to the same kind of dark Empire as in star wars.

How I deal with Star-Wars

In general I'm a pragmatist as well as a movie-friend. I like the Star-Wars epics. Although mass and class often do contradict each other, the big, productions for the mass-market are mostly good. This is also true for the Star-Wars-series.
Good vs. evil will always remain interesting to mankind. Moreover, if it is visually so well staged, such as in the works of George Lucas.

 

So how to deal with Star Wars?
People have to participate in democracy and have to fight for their participation-right – and even more than for their right to party (considering to the "Beastie Boys" :-).
But of course you also need breaks from this struggle – and spending the breaks with this is smart kind of entertainment to me is fundamentally positive. But of course it must not degenerate into a fan-fanaticism and to escape reality.

 

The great schizophrenia of the hardcore-Star-Wars-fans is that they have fallen prey to a compulsive desire to shop respectively escaping into an illusory-world. An illusory-world, which has been turned from a Republic into a dictatorship.
To me it's not only important, but decisive putting up a partitioning-wall between reality and fiction.

 

The only thing which personally bothers me about Star-Wars most of all is the massive commercialization. If we bring to our mind that the previous 6 movies have earned a combined gross of 4.38 billion $ and the entire franchise 30.7 billion $ then the rightsholders business-desire is – politely said – commercially understandable. But I do absolutely not want to take part in this.

 

Since the point of culmination in 2002, when in the same year one of each episodes of Star-Wars, "Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter" premiered, I have a "movie-hype-trauma". And that has led me to an unconditional, short-term denial of consumption.
Therefore, I am not going to watch the current Star-Wars-trilogy in cinema and instead wait until it's aired in TV. In the meantime next to the 6 older franchise's movies there are also many other interesting films and television-series.

 

But when Star-Wars episodes VII, VIII and IX are broadcasted in TV, then I will be delighted watching them!
And I am persistently going to continue taking a stand for a positive, democratic world, and especially for a cooperation of people from all different political directions.

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in entertainment politics
write a comment
June 7 2015 1 07 /06 /June /2015 23:30

Graphics von Ulrich Lintl, based template from Wikimedia / The Wikileaks ChannelOn 6th June 2013 Edward Snowdens revelations about electronic mass-surveillance have been published – and have changed the world. Both the person Snowden as well as his revelations were already in 2013 highly controversial and are still today.

Why Edward Snowden is a hero for me

To me personally Snowden, as well as other important "whistleblowers" (informants), as Bradley (or Chelsea) Manning and Julian Assange (Wikileaks), is a hero. With his absolute willingness advocating for civil-rights and for freedom he has changed the world for the better.
But for that he has to pay a high price, can currently not return to his home-country USA because he has to assume a high sentence there and therefore he has to live in the Russian asylum. There however her seems to be quite fine.

That the US-American NSA with "PRISM" and its British counterpart GCHQ with "Tempora" – in conjunction primarily with US IT-companies and many Western States – monitor the global (!) data-traffic before Snowdens revelations has been deemed as conspiracy-theory. And mostly as "crude, right-wing" conspiracy-theory.

Important consequences of Snowden's revelations

Since then a lot has changed and most of it for the better:

  • After anonymous search-engine such as Ixquick or Duckduckgo already in 2012 (according to Google's aggravation of it's data policy) had seen a little "boom", as from mid-2013 their user-figures further spiralled up.
  • Countries outside the Western-block have waken up about the risks being surveilled by USA & Co and undertake great efforts to become as independent of Western hardware and software as possible.
    Especially Russia pursues ambitious, own projects in almost all areas of IT: Linux-distribution of its own, processor of its own, smartphone operating-system of its own (including suitable apps).
  • Authorities and politicians have come under enormous pressure, because they are suspected having conducted or at the very least tolerated mass-surveillance. Most of all cornered by surveillance-revelations has been the German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her political appendix. She is not only blamed for having promised a no-spy-agreement with the USA against her better judgement, she is also suspected of connivance for German BNDs (German federal intelligence) transmission of data to the USA.
  • The most recent, very positive development is the replacement of the very restrictive surveillance-law "Patriot Act" by the – at least for US citizens – significantly alleviated "Freedom Act".
    Despite persistent efforts of hard-liners to continue the monitoring of the mass – not least because of Edward Snowdens commitment – responsible forces have achieved a victory and have made at least 1 step into the right direction.
  • Also the film "Citizenfour", that primarily shows the crucial interviews from Edward Snowden in a Hong Kong hotel-room with Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and other about the US surveillance-activities, has found broad appreciation.
    Citizenfour has been awarded an Oscar as best documentary movie 2015.

Further opportunities & risks for freedom

Despite all the positive developments, there are still big threats and strong establishment-forces, who want to continue the curtailing of freedom – in terms of information-technology and beyond.

The failure of Patriot-Acts extension was scarce. And the establishment's propagandists see coming the "end of civilization" without mass-surveillance.
And they will reach some people, but more and more people see their personal freedom more and more restricted as the mainstream-media's credibility. A lot of credit they have already lost with their highly unilateral, Russia-hostile media-coverage of Ukraine.

But exactly this is an opportunity for alternative-media, that are persistently increasing their popularity.
And that among other things with Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul two outspoken objectors of surveillance are seeking candidacy for US-Presidency, is pleasing anyway, too.

Unfortunately there are also people, especially from the political left spectrum (at least in Europe), that undermine the united front of all, forces fighting against mass-surveillance and for civil-rights.

Final words

Thank you Edward Snowden!
We can only do justice to his sacrifice when we actively participate on the political-level, as well as we change our personal habits.
So, we should elect only such parties and candidates, that are advocating civil-rights.
And instead of using commercial IT-services we should use privacy-search-engines and in general open-source systems.

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics internet
write a comment
April 21 2013 1 21 /04 /April /2013 21:20

On April 8th 2013 the first and so far only female British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher died at the age of 87 years.

thatcher-uli-png.png

Thatcher has been extremely polarizing already during her incumbency. That even dead she continues going to do so probably is historically unique.

 

Margaret Thatcher became leader of the British Conservative Party in 1975 and, after they have won the election in 1979, became first female Prime Minister.

 

What remains in memory of her reign is especially a radical, comprehensive privatization wave especially of public services, a tough stance on trade unions and the Falklands war she has waged against Argentina

The economy in her era has grown as much as unemployment has risen. The slogan of the 2/3-society (say: two-thirds society) has emerged, where 2/3 of the population actively participate in economic life and benefit, while the remaining 1/3 is allowed to exist.

 

A British blogger has put it, that Thatcher is responsible that he now goes in unpunctual, unclean and unsafe trains.

 

Despite all the legitimate criticism on a polarizing person, however personal blows below the belt line, as they have happened numerous after Thatcher's death, totally have to be rejected – especially if they are that violently as they have been.

 

Thatcher has cast out Satan with Beelzebub. It is likely that the Beelzebub of “privatomanic” economic liberalism has been the greater Devil as the Satan of the bureaucratic State socialism.

But even if these recipes were bad, so it clearly has to be stated, that things would not have gone further the way as they have gone until the 1970s, with a very large and very ineffective public sector.

 

And all those supporters of State dominance at essential, public services – to which I also count myself as one of them – must take one thing to heart:

Public services must be clearly defined and economically efficient - and of course deprived of party politics machinations.

 

And you absolutely have to mention that especially since Tony Blair has come into power in the 1990s even the Labour Party fully has jumped on the neoliberal train – but has positioned this kind of financial-elite-friendly policies as worker-friendly.

 

In this respect I, as someone who also is very skeptical towards Thatcher's policies, can fully concur to the “KPÖ-Steiermark's” (Communist Party of Styria) opinion, that "with Margaret Thatcher an – from today's point of view – unusual upright representative for the interests of banks and corporations has died".

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment
November 10 2012 7 10 /11 /November /2012 21:30

Obama against Romney - this has not been a choice but pure show. And the big winners of the United States presidential-election have had been certain long before election day: Goldman Sachs and the high-finance. 

http://grrrgraphics.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/obama_romney_vote_cartoon.jpg

 

Graphically it can’t be expressed any better than by Ben Garrison’s cartoon.

 

The so-called "third party candidates", the candidates who are neither Republicans nor Democrats, remain largely sidelined in the mass-medias coverage.

 

But it’s exactly them who introduce essential content into the election campaign and above that who are making politics in the sense of the people.

 

According to Wikipedia at total 417 persons have sought for the candidacy in the presidential election, most of them in vain.

 

Following 5 third-party presidential candidates have managed the candidacy in several States:

 

  • Gary Johnson - Libertarian Party
  • Jill Stone - Green Party
  • Virgil Good - Constitution Party
  • Rocky Anderson - Justice Party
  • Roseanne Barr (the well known actress) - Peace and Freedom Party

They have claimed for civil-rights, which have been trampled under foot by all Republican and Democratic Presidents in the last 30 years.

They have criticized the aggressive U.S. foreign policy, for example the support of jihadists in Syria.

And they have brought many more points into the debate, such as advocating for renewable energy or for a fair election-system.

 

It also has to be mentioned that even inside Republicans and Democrats there are capable people that have not achieved candidacy within their parties, for example Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich.


What in the United States - as well as in Austria and other countries – is needed most urgently is to change the election-system.

Not only this system in the US is completely antiquated, going back to the 18th century. You can spend almost unlimited money for the election campaign via back doors. That heavily favours the 2 major-parties establishment-candidates and marginalizes all other candidates already before starting.

 

But at any crisis there is also a chance.

And as one economic-crisis’ consequence things could come on the move, when either the election system will be changed or upright candidates – at least in Congress – will be elected more often even within the existing system.

Share this post

Repost 0
Published by critical-constructive - in politics
write a comment