11.5.2009

no surprize

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 2.10 pm

demonizing_islam_by_latuff2.jpg

“a horrific outburst of violence”

~POTUS Barack Obama

“no shit cracka!..kind of like a WAR”

~citx

…a patsy?

9.12.2009

CHANGE

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 2.33 pm

obama-nope.gif

Via: whitehouse.gov:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release September 10, 2009

NOTICE
- – – – – – -
CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT

TO CERTAIN TERRORIST ATTACKS

Consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared on September 14, 2001, in Proclamation 7463, with respect to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.

Because the terrorist threat continues, the national emergency declared on September 14, 2001, and the powers and authorities adopted to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond September 14, 2009. Therefore, I am continuing in effect for an additional year the national emergency the former President declared on September 14, 2001, with respect to the terrorist threat.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
September 10, 2009.

Im guessing this is Barack responding to Charlie Sheen calling him out?

If they had thier shit tight..O-Bizzle would handle this more like Mike does Charlie in those Hanes ads

citx say-Dont he know they learn kids in school teh truth™ about 9/11?

9.8.2009

get the picture?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 6.56 am

Iowa public health officials have acknowledged the existence of a blank template entitled FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER in the case of a Novel Influenza A H1N1 pandemic. The official press release states, however, that there is no draft or text of  a “Quarantine Order” by the Iowa Department of Public Health.  

Reported by the Iowa Independent:


“A quarantine template created by the Iowa Department of Public Health and accessible through the Centers for Disease Control Web site should not be of great concern, according to a press release from health department officials. ‘IDPH wants to make it clear that Iowa has not issued any isolation and quarantine orders for novel influenza A (H1N1), and has no plans to issue any this fall,’ officials wrote in the press release. See Health officials: Iowa quarantine document not cause for concern, Iowa Independent, Sept 1, 2009‎


The IDPH suggests in this regard that the drafting of public health templates is a routine undertaking, while also confirming that ”in preparation for public health emergencies,” …“isolation and quarantine orders are only very rarely used in very specific situations.” (emphasis added).  

The last statement of the IDPH is notoriously ambiguous: If indeed isolation and quarantine orders are rarely used, why then was a template prepared which explicitly contemplates an ORDER pertaining to a QUARANTINE FACILITY? Moreover, the template was issued on May 1st, at the very outset of the H1N1 swine flu crisis in Mexico, barely two days after the WHO declared a level 5 pandemic advisory on April 29th.  

Are we playing on words?

The template already contains the essential features of a formal QUARANTINE ORDER, which suggests that quarantine procedures are contemplated within the Iowa Department of Public Health. The result of these procedures have led to the formulation of the blank template.  

The issue, therefore, is not whether a quarantine order has been activated. The issue is

1) the State of Iowa has contemplated a policy of “forced confinement”,

2) at some future date, in the next few months, the blank template entitled FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER could be activated with a view to actually implementing the quarantine precedures.   

Also of significance is the fact that this template entitled FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER has been endorsed by the Atlanta based Center for Disease Control (CDC), which has published the document on its website.The CDC is the main federal agency responsible for H1N1 pandemic preparedness in coordination with other governmental agencies including FEMA, Homeland Security, State and municipal governments, as well as in liaison with the WHO.    

There are two quarantine documents on the CDC’s website. The first refers to HOME QUARANTINE ORDER, the second to FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER. (pdf) 

Click to access the CDC page, which identifies both templates as CDC reference documents. Media reports pointed to “rumors swirling after a quarantine form was found by someone on the internet…” (See report on kimt.com, September 1, 2009)

We are not dealing with rumors. The FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER document posted on the website of the CDC, a federal government agency, envisages quite explicitly “forced confinement” in the case of the H1N1 swine flu: 


“The Department has determined that it is necessary to quarantine your movement to a specific facility to prevent further spread of this disease. The Department has determined that quarantine in your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable because [insert the reason home quarantine is not acceptable, the person violated a previously issued home quarantine order, the person does not have an appropriate home setting conducive to home quarantine, etc.] The Department is therefore ordering you to comply with the following provisions during the entire period of quarantine:


1. Terms of confinement. You are ordered to remain at the quarantine facility, _____________________ [insert name and address of facility], from ___________ to ____________ [insert dates of quarantine].


….


4. Legal authority. This order is issued pursuant to the legal authority contained at Iowa Code chapters 135, 139A and 641 Iowa Administrative Code chapter 1, a copy of which is labeled Attachment B and is attached to this order for your review. The Department shall comply with the principles for quarantine contained in subrule 1.9(3) of this attachment when issuing and implementing this order.


5. Ensuring compliance. In order to ensure that you strictly comply with this Quarantine Order the Department or persons authorized by the Department may regularly inspect the quarantine facility.


6. Violations of order. If you fail to comply with this Quarantine Order you may be ordered to be quarantined in a more restrictive facility. In addition, failure to comply with this order is a simple misdemeanor for which you may be arrested, fined, and imprisoned.”

This is an official document of the Iowa State government, which has also been endorsed by the Centre for Disease Control (CDC). If it were a preliminary or internal draft, it would not have been published by the CDC. The question is whether similar quarantine procedures are being replicated in other states across America.  


Author and economics professor Michel Chossudovsky is Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization, Montreal, He has taught at universities and academic institutions in North America, Western Europe, Latin America, Asia and the Pacific. He has also worked as a consultant on issues pertaining to public health and the economics of health for the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA),  the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). He has also acted as adviser to governments of developing countries. 



The full text of the controversial Iowa Template is indicated below: To access the pdf version of the Template on the CDC website, click FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER

BEFORE THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH



DIRECTED TO: [insert full name and address of subject of order]


[insert case #]


FACILITY QUARANTINE ORDER


The Iowa Department of Public Health (Department) has determined that you have had contact with a person with Novel Influenza A H1N1. Novel Influenza A H1N1 is a disease which is spread from person to person and is associated with fever (greater than 100.0 F), cough, sore throat, rhinorrhea (runny nose), nasal congestion, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. Novel Influenza A H1N1 presents a risk of serious harm to public health and if it spreads in the community severe public health consequences may result.


The Department has determined that it is necessary to quarantine your movement to a specific facility to prevent further spread of this disease. The Department has determined that quarantine in your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable because [insert the reason home quarantine is not acceptable, the person violated a previously issued home quarantine order, the person does not have an appropriate home setting conducive to home quarantine, etc.] The Department is therefore ordering you to comply with the following provisions during the entire period of quarantine:


1. Terms of confinement. You are ordered to remain at the quarantine facility, _____________________ [insert name and address of facility], from ___________ to ____________ [insert dates of quarantine].


2. Requirements during confinement. During the period of quarantine:

a. You must not leave the quarantine facility at any time unless you have received prior written authorization from the Department to do so.
b. You must not come into contact with anyone except the following persons:
(i) other persons who are also under similar quarantine order at the quarantine facility;
(ii) authorized healthcare providers and other staff at the quarantine facility;
(iii) authorized Department staff or other persons acting on behalf of the Department; and
(iv) such other persons as are authorized by the Department.
c. Your daily needs, including food, shelter, and medical care, will be provided for you during the period of quarantine at the quarantine facility. You should bring clothing, toiletries, and other personal items with you to the quarantine facility. You will have limited access to a telephone at the quarantine facility. You may bring your cell phone with you should you desire to have greater access to a means of communication.
d. You should inform your employer that you are under quarantine order and are not authorized to physically come to the work place, although you may work from the facility via electronic or other means if appropriate. You should be aware that Iowa law prohibits an employer from firing, demoting, or otherwise discriminating against an employee due to the compliance of an employee with a quarantine order issued by the Department. (Iowa Code Section 139A.13A)


3. Information about Novel Influenza A H1N1. You should review the information contained at Attachment A for information about Novel Influenza A H1N1. You should refer to information provided at the quarantine facility to address specific concerns and questions you have about Novel Influenza A H1N1. In order to find out more information about Novel Influenza A H1N1 and its symptoms and spread, you may also access the Department’s web-page at www.idph.state.ia.us. If you do not have access to the internet from the quarantine facility, you may contact the Department at 1-800-362-2736.


4. Legal authority. This order is issued pursuant to the legal authority contained at Iowa Code chapters 135, 139A and 641 Iowa Administrative Code chapter 1, a copy of which is labeled Attachment B and is attached to this order for your review. The Department shall comply with the principles for quarantine contained in subrule 1.9(3) of this attachment when issuing and implementing this order.


5. Ensuring compliance. In order to ensure that you strictly comply with this Quarantine Order the Department or persons authorized by the Department may regularly inspect the quarantine facility.


6. Violations of order. If you fail to comply with this Quarantine Order you may be ordered to be quarantined in a more restrictive facility. In addition, failure to comply with this order is a simple misdemeanor for which you may be arrested, fined, and imprisoned.

7. Your rights B appeal rights. While under quarantine you have the rights as described in subrule 1.9(8) of Attachment B. In addition, you have the right to appeal this order pursuant to subrule 1.9(7) of Attachment B.


(signed & dated)
DIRECTOR or MEDICAL DIRECTOR
IOWA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Lucas State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319



Attachments to this Order:
Attachment A — Facts About Novel Influenza A H1N1
Attachment B — 641 Iowa Administrative Code chapter 1


To access the second document click HOME QUARANTINE ORDER

9.7.2009

wow..seriously?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 8.10 pm

Diebold/Premier Election Systems is being purchased by Election Systems & Software (ES&S).

There will reportedly be a conference call among key people at the companies within the next couple hours.

ES&S attempted to consolidate the electronic voting industry in 1997 with a purchase of Business Records Corporation (BRC), but the purchase was blocked by the US Security and Exchange Commission on antitrust grounds, and the acquisition of BRC was split between ES&S and Sequoia Voting Systems.

An ES&S/Diebold-Premier acquisition would consolidate most U.S. voting systems under one privately held manufacturer.

Anti-Trust complaints are being prepared.

nick-anderson-evoting-leap-of-faith.gif

Press Release: ES&S Acquires Premier Election Solutions

Combined Company Will Provide Better Services to Customers and Voters

Omaha, NE — September 3, 2009 –Election Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S), a provider of voting solutions, announced today that it has acquired Premier Election Solutions, Inc. (PES).

The acquisition combines the strengths of both organizations and will result in better products and services for all customers and voters alike.

“For more than 40 years, ES&S has recognized the incredible responsibility it has to voters and election administrators,” said Aldo Tesi, president and CEO of ES&S. “This acquisition is an opportunity to continue fulfilling our company’s core mission of maintaining voter confidence, and enhancing the voting experience. We are committed to meeting current and future needs for voting system solutions and services and providing better solutions to our customers.”

As the two experienced companies go forward, the combination will allow them to serve jurisdictions more effectively. By continuing to innovate and create new voting systems, software and services, the companies will be able to meet the evolving needs of our customers.

The acquisition will also create a more efficient and effective operating model that will also provide a sustainable delivery platform for the election industry in the future.

“Premier has a proud heritage of providing voting solutions,” said Tesi, President and CEO of ES&S. “The combination of our two companies will enhance our performance and allow us to meet our customers’ needs even more effectively.”

“While combining these two companies will mean many positive changes, one thing won’t change,” said Tesi. “In everything we do, we will continue our focus on delivering high quality services and products for all of our customers. Moving forward, all of our customers will get the same great level of service they have come to expect.”

9.6.2009

twin towers fall AGAIN?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 8.44 am

bilde.jpg

lets forget about Osama Bin Laden..send the predator drones to Eugene,OR!

8.30.2009

can you hear me now?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 4.00 pm

verizon-logo-470×310.jpg

8.28.2009

hollowman

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 5.08 pm

Teddy Kennedy’s disasters were vivid. His legislative triumphs, draped in this week’s obituaries with respectful homage, were far less colorful but they were actually devastating for the very constituencies – working people, organized labor – whose champion he claimed to be.

tedkennedy_19621.jpg

He had the most famous car accident in political history when he drove off a wooden bridge on Chappaquiddick Island in July 1969, saying later that he had failed in several attempts to dive down 10ft to rescue Mary Jo Kopechne, a former aide of his dead brother Robert. She was in the back seat and drowned.

Ted quit the scene and called in standby Kennedy speechwriters instead of the police, a misdemeanor which cost him a two-month suspended sentence and any chance of ever following his brother Jack into the White House.
He made only one overt bid for the presidency and that was a colorful disaster too. He challenged the Democratic incumbent, Jimmy Carter, then seeking re-election in 1980. After three years, the left in the Democratic Party was bitterly disappointed in Carter’s cautious centrism and Kennedy placed himself in the left’s vanguard, declaring in a famous speech that “sometimes a party must sail against the wind”.

In those days I was reporting on national politics for the Village Voice and Rolling Stone and covered Kennedy’s bid. It got off to a shaky start when Roger Mudd of NBC, a well-known political reporter and TV newscaster, asked Ted on prime time why he wanted to be president. The thirty seconds of silence that followed this easy lob didn’t help Kennedy’s chances.
The campaign plane shot backwards and forwards across America, seeking photo opportunities. On one typical morning we left Washington DC at 6am and headed for the rustbelt where Kennedy stood outside a shuttered Pittsburgh steel mill and pledged to get the steel industry back on its feet. We shot west to Nebraska so Kennedy could stand in front of a corn silo and swear allegiance to the cause – utterly doomed - of the small family farmer. Then we doubled back to New York so he could stand on a street corner in a slum neighborhood in the Bronx and promise a better deal for urban blacks and Hispanics.

bronx.jpg

I asked one of Kennedy’s campaign people why they didn’t simply equip a studio in Washington with the necessary backdrops – steel mill, silo, urban wasteland – but he said it wouldn’t be honest. As things were, the locations we flew to may have been genuine, but the campaign pledges were as dishonest as a studio backdrop, which is why Kennedy – bellowing out his speeches like a mammoth stuck in a swamp - sounded utterly fake.

By 1980 the die was cast. Disdaining the leftward option offered by George McGovern in 1972, the Democratic Party had thrown in its lot decisively with Wall Street, and the big players across the American corporate landscape. The labor unions and the other foot-soldier constituencies of the Party, would be flung rhetorical bouquets with decreasing fervor every four years.

Though the obituarists have glowingly evoked Kennedy’s 46-year stint in the US Senate and, as ‘the last liberal’, his mastery of the legislative process, they miss the all-important fact that it was out of Kennedy’s Senate office that came two momentous slabs of legislation that signalled the onset of the neo-liberal era: deregulation of trucking and aviation. They were a disaster for organized labor and the working conditions and pay of people in those industries.

The theorists of deregulation were Stephen Breyer who was Kennedy’s chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee and Alfred Kahn, out of Cornell. Prominent on Kennedy’s dereg team was David Boies. Breyer now sits on the US Supreme Court, an unswerving shill for the corporate sector.

In the mid to late 1970s these Kennedy rent-a-thinkers began to tout deregulation as the answer to low productivity and bureaucratic and corporate inertia. Famous at that time was a screed by Breyer, then a Harvard Law School professor, quantifying such things as environmental pollution in terms of assessable and fungible “risks” which could be bought and sold in the market place. (The Natural Resources Defense Council, adorned by Ted’s nephew, Robert Kennedy Jr., has long espoused this disastrous approach.)

The two prongs of Kennedy’s deregulatory attack – later decorated with the political label “neo-liberalism” – were aimed at airlines and trucking, and Kennedy’s man, Alfred Kahn was duly installed by Jimmy Carter at the Civil Aeronautics Board to introduce the cleansing winds of competition into the industry. By and large, airline deregulation went down well with the press and, for a time, with the public, who rejoiced in the bargains offered by the small fry such as People’s Express, and by the big fry striking back. The few critics who said that within a few years the nation would be left with five or six airlines, oligopoly and higher fares, were mostly ignored.

No one ever really wrote about the terrible effects of trucking deregulation outside the left press. It was certainly the most ferocious anti-labor move of the 1970s, with Kennedy as the driving force. Some of Kennedy’s aides promptly reaped the fruits of their legislative labors, leaving the Hill to make money hand over fist trying to break unions on behalf of Frank Lorenzo, the Texan entrepreneur who ran the Texas Air Corporation and its properties, Continental Airlines and its subsidiary, Eastern.

Did Kennedy fight, might and main, against NAFTA? No. As Steve Early relates in his piece on this site today, he was for it and helped Clinton ratify the job-losing Agreement. Then he put his shoulder behind GATT, parent of the World Trade Agreement.

We also have Kennedy to thank for ‘No Child Left Behind’ – the nightmarish education act pushed through in concert with Bush Jr’s White House, that condemns children to a treadmill of endless tests contrived as “national standards”.

behind

And it was Kennedy who was the prime force behind the Hate Crimes Bill, aka the Matthew Shepard Act, by dint of which America is well on its way to making it illegal to say anything nasty about gays, Jews, blacks and women. “Hate speech,” far short of any direct incitement to violence, is on the edge of being criminalized, with the First Amendment going the way of the dodo.

The deadly attacks on the working class and on organized labor are Ted Kennedy’s true monument. But as much as his brothers Jack and Bobby he was adept at persuading the underdogs that he was on their side. If it hadn’t been for Kennedy, a lot more people would have health coverage . In 1971 Nixon, heading into his relection bid, put up the legislative ancestor of all recent Democratic proposals, but Kennedy shot it down, preferring to have this as his campaign plank sometime in the political future.

After reelection, Nixon did promote a health plan in his 1974 State of the Union speech, with a call for universal access to health insurance. He followed up with his Comprehensive Health Insurance Act on February 6, 1974. Nixon said his plan would build on existing employer-sponsored insurance plans and would provide government subsidies to the self-employed and small businesses to ensure universal access to health insurance. Kennedy went through the motions of cooperation, but in the end the AFL-CIO, with a covert nudge from Kennedy, killed the bill because Nixon was vanishing under the Watergate scandal and the Democrats did not want to hand the President and the Republicans one of their signature issues. Now the Republicans scream “socialism” at exactly what Nixon proposed and Kennedy killed off 38 years ago, in 1971.

To this day there are deluded souls who argue that Jack was going to pull US troops out of Vietnam and that is why he was killed; that Bobby, who worked for Roy Cohn and supervised a “Murder Inc” in the Caribbean, was really and truly on the side of the angels; that Ted was the mighty champion of the working people, even though he helped deliver them into the inferno of neoliberalism.

By his crucial endorsement last year he helped give them Obama too, now holidaying six miles from Chappaquiddick, on Martha’s Vineyard, another salesman for the inferno. But because his mishaps were so dramatic, few remember quite how toxic his political “triumphs” were for those who now foolishly mourn him as their lost leader.

by AC

8.26.2009

disturbing..

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 4.01 pm

somehow that our president has time to fuck around doing cameos on Steven Colbert’s show

colbert

joking around about the Iraq occupation is just tasteless..im sorry.

(unless you are going to go Lenny Bruce and get arrested..say by calling it an OCCUPATION)

fuck the “new media” presidency

TV=WMD

8.19.2009

a day that will live in infamy

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 9.41 am

exile_11.gif

8.18.2009

Obamas’ Afghanistan

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 4.13 pm

a-burqa-clad-afghan-woman-001.jpg

my glib use of this phrase is getting stale but it is TRUER than ever:
“American Taxpayer Dollars at Work”

8.5.2009

something stinks..

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 3.40 pm

bwater

8.1.2009

The Gift That Keeps On Giving.

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 6.25 pm

RELATED POST

If ever we needed evidence of the Cost of Empire, Floyd Norris’ scary chart of Durable Goods Production from the U.S. Economy is it.

0801-biz-webCHARTS

We have so hollowed out our industrial plant that the only thing we are now producing is weapons of war.
The great British Historian Arnold Toynbee’s theory about the decline of the Roman Empire has lessons for our current age.

The economy of the Empire was basically a Raubwirtschaft or plunder economy based on looting existing resources rather than producing anything new. The Empire relied on booty from conquered territories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern of tax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and onto a dole that required even more exactions upon those who could not escape taxation), or into dependency upon a landed elite exempt from taxation. With the cessation of tribute from conquered territories, the full cost of their military machine had to be borne by the citizenry.

This I know.
We cannot continue on this course of decline.
While many of the elite escape taxation with their brilliant tax shelter accountants,
the middle class are being asked to shoulder the economic burden of empire.

Militaryspending

Shortly after the election President Obama made it clear that the chokehold of the Military Industrial Complex over our economy was not going to change on his watch–”To ensure prosperity here at home and peace abroad, we all share the belief we have to maintain the strongest military on the planet.” After all, with 4% of the world’s people why shouldn’t we spend 45% of the world’s military spending?

US percentage

While Obama makes symbolic cuts in the Military budget, the House threw in 550 new earmarks into a $636 Billion Military Budget.
Lyndon Johnson thought we could have both Guns and Butter, but he was wrong.
Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were afraid to take on the Military Industrial Complex that the Republicans have always favored.
Eisenhower was right that continuing on this disastrous course is a form of generational theft.
According to Catherine Lutz the U.S. Military has 909 military facilities in 46 countries and territories.
This is truly insane.
We need to bring the personnel on these bases home
and start selling off the precious foreign real estate to help liquidate our massive debt.

I have only one question: Where is the national politician with the courage to say we no longer have to act as the unpaid policeman of the world?

citx say: Lifted Wholesale from here and HTML combed.

7.26.2009

UWZ

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 10.40 pm

wastelandmi.jpg

(urban wasteland zone)

7.24.2009

….absolutely nothing

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 11.41 am

wildfire1.jpg

what good is all the money and time we put into military culture?

7.19.2009

things that make you go Hmmmm…Pt.5

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 3.12 pm

143360main_cronkite_with_capsules.jpg

happy birthday moonbabies!

7.18.2009

a truth..EVEN LESS convenient.

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 7.19 am

Forget about shorter showers..

WOULD ANY SANE PERSON think dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler, or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday, or that chopping wood and carrying water would have gotten people out of Tsarist prisons, or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the Voting Rights Act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Then why now, with all the world at stake, do so many people retreat into these entirely personal “solutions”?

gas-mask-shower-head.jpg

Part of the problem is that we’ve been victims of a campaign of systematic misdirection. Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance. An Inconvenient Truth helped raise consciousness about global warming. But did you notice that all of the solutions presented had to do with personal consumption—changing light bulbs, inflating tires, driving half as much—and had nothing to do with shifting power away from corporations, or stopping the growth economy that is destroying the planet? Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide.

Or let’s talk water. We so often hear that the world is running out of water. People are dying from lack of water. Rivers are dewatered from lack of water. Because of this we need to take shorter showers. See the disconnect? Because I take showers, I’m responsible for drawing down aquifers? Well, no. More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry. The remaining 10 percent is split between municipalities and actual living breathing individual humans. Collectively, municipal golf courses use as much water as municipal human beings. People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.

Or let’s talk energy. Kirkpatrick Sale summarized it well: “For the past 15 years the story has been the same every year: individual consumption—residential, by private car, and so on—is never more than about a quarter of all consumption; the vast majority is commercial, industrial, corporate, by agribusiness and government [he forgot military]. So, even if we all took up cycling and wood stoves it would have a negligible impact on energy use, global warming and atmospheric pollution.”

Or let’s talk waste. In 2005, per-capita municipal waste production (basically everything that’s put out at the curb) in the U.S. was about 1,660 pounds. Let’s say you’re a die-hard simple-living activist, and you reduce this to zero. You recycle everything. You bring cloth bags shopping. You fix your toaster. Your toes poke out of old tennis shoes. You’re not done yet, though. Since municipal waste includes not just residential waste, but also waste from government offices and businesses, you march to those offices, waste reduction pamphlets in hand, and convince them to cut down on their waste enough to eliminate your share of it. Uh, I’ve got some bad news. Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.

I want to be clear. I’m not saying we shouldn’t live simply. I live reasonably simply myself, but I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.

So how, then, and especially with all the world at stake, have we come to accept these utterly insufficient responses? I think part of it is that we’re in a double bind. A double bind is where you’re given multiple options, but no matter what option you choose, you lose, and withdrawal is not an option. At this point, it should be pretty easy to recognize that every action involving the industrial economy is destructive (and we shouldn’t pretend that solar photovoltaics, for example, exempt us from this: they still require mining and transportation infrastructures at every point in the production processes; the same can be said for every other so-called green technology). So if we choose option one—if we avidly participate in the industrial economy—we may in the short term think we win because we may accumulate wealth, the marker of “success” in this culture. But we lose, because in doing so we give up our empathy, our animal humanity. And we really lose because industrial civilization is killing the planet, which means everyone loses. If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries (like electricity) to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world—none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.

Besides being ineffective at causing the sorts of changes necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet, there are at least four other problems with perceiving simple living as a political act (as opposed to living simply because that’s what you want to do). The first is that it’s predicated on the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase. Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams, we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich as well as an extractive economic system, we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.

The second problem—and this is another big one—is that it incorrectly assigns blame to the individual (and most especially to individuals who are particularly powerless) instead of to those who actually wield power in this system and to the system itself. Kirkpatrick Sale again: “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”

The third problem is that it accepts capitalism’s redefinition of us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming. Citizens have a much wider range of available resistance tactics, including voting, not voting, running for office, pamphleting, boycotting, organizing, lobbying, protesting, and, when a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have the right to alter or abolish it.

The fourth problem is that the endpoint of the logic behind simple living as a political act is suicide. If every act within an industrial economy is destructive, and if we want to stop this destruction, and if we are unwilling (or unable) to question (much less destroy) the intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures that cause every act within an industrial economy to be destructive, then we can easily come to believe that we will cause the least destruction possible if we are dead.

The good news is that there are other options. We can follow the examples of brave activists who lived through the difficult times I mentioned—Nazi Germany, Tsarist Russia, antebellum United States—who did far more than manifest a form of moral purity; they actively opposed the injustices that surrounded them. We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.

’nuff said

7.10.2009

Where Is My Vote?

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 2.22 pm

We all learn some version of it in Middle School..
the governing principles of our “democracy”…

checks.jpg

its all a lie.

7.6.2009

better off…

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 5.54 pm

might a been a GReat guy around the BBQ..

robert-mcnamara.jpg

but…

7.4.2009

another Farce of July

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 9.04 am

american_flag.jpg

BANG!

7.1.2009

a)pathetic nation

Filed under: General — citizen X @ 4.34 pm

cmckinney

black women..STILL doing the dirty work for lazy Americans!

who keeps YOUR conscience clean?

UPDATE

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress