US Serially Violates Its Own Constitution

The US was founded by joint stock companies committed to advancing the interests of property at all costs, including genocide and slavery.
ap_120120051947.jpg.jpe
Yep, and people seem pretty comfortable with that genocide.
 
The problem isn’t capitalism. Capitalism is by far the best economic method to create wealth and spread it among the masses.

The problem with the world is lack or morals and ethics, the problem is so many don’t believe in God.
Capitalism demands private ownership of the means of production. That mean less than one percent of society decides what to produce, where to produce it, when to produce it, and how to distribute any surplus; how does that spread wealth to the masses?
 
Well duh, that is globalism. They want to destroy the middle class and empower the elites.

You are just figuring this out?
You haven't figured out how the US is driving this dynamic? Follow the money.

Exceptionism in U.S. Empire | MR Online

"A recent case in point is that of Chinese business magnate Ma Yun, known in the West as Jack Ma. Ma was planning to expand his monopolistic business empire whereupon he criticized Chinese regulators.

"The Chinese government stepped in, broke up Ma’s Ant Group and laid heavy fines on Ma’s rapacious business interests causing Ma to keep a low profile afterwards.

"China is a nation state that has demonstrated that it will not allow 1%-ers to undermine the domestic national good. This speaks to the threat that China poses to U.S. elitists.

"China has ended extreme poverty and is focused on creating a xiaokang (moderately prosperous) society, not a state wherein the billionaires can plunder the national wealth. Moreover, contrary to the U.S., China also touts multipolarity, peace, and win-win trade relations."
 
The same thought crossed my mind immediately after I posted this thread; however, I wonder how many Americans have ever considered this definition of "national interest?"

"American Exception questions the notion of the United States as a democracy, as the state does not serve the masses, rather it serves the interests of the 'elites'” what politicians call the national interest."

Exceptionism in U.S. Empire | MR Online

I was basically told to define “American interests” as “nations in which American corporations own substantial property or investments”.

For example, the Gulf War, was fought to protect the property of American oil companies in Qatar, from being seized by Iraq.

But Bill Clinton initially refused to go into Bosnian or meddle in the genocide that was going on there, because there were no “American interests” in Bosnia. As a former Soviet union satellite, Americans own no property in the country. Americans only went in as part of the UN force, and they got out quickly.
 
Capitalism demands private ownership of the means of production. That mean less than one percent of society decides what to produce, where to produce it, when to produce it, and how to distribute any surplus; how does that spread wealth to the masses?
Where do you get this monkey math from?
 
aaron_good_exception.jpg

Aaron Good argues US foreign policy operates independently of which party controls government and raises the question who profits?

"uffice it to state that the U.S. Guardian Elite are very much of and for the overworld of private wealth.

"Since the end of World War II, the U.S. Guardian Elite have functioned most decisively as executors of dark power.


— Aaron Good, American Exception, p 107"

"The author identifies the U.S. as exceptionist in that it serially violates its own constitution.

"The United Nations Charter forbids warmaking and covert operations, and since the United States government has ratified the UN Charter it is legally applicable as per the U.S. Constitution.

"Thus, the launching of wars and CIA cloak-and-dagger missions are in contravention of the U.S. Constitution, adducing the exceptionism of the U.S."

Exceptionism in U.S. Empire | MR Online
You mean like the Potatohead Administration weaponizing the Federal government to deprive Americans of their Constitutional Liberties?
 
I was basically told to define “American interests” as “nations in which American corporations own substantial property or investments”.

For example, the Gulf War, was fought to protect the property of American oil companies in Qatar, from being seized by Iraq.

But Bill Clinton initially refused to go into Bosnian or meddle in the genocide that was going on there, because there were no “American interests” in Bosnia. As a former Soviet union satellite, Americans own no property in the country. Americans only went in as part of the UN force, and they got out quickly.
There seems to be a debate between those who believe corporations follow the flag and those who think the flag follows US corporations.

When US elites proclaim full-spectrum dominance over the entire globe, perhaps it doesn't matter?

I wasn't aware Saddam threatened Qatar's oil, and I thought Clinton's destruction of Yugoslavia had more to do with advancing the neoliberal order in Europe.

On the NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia, Noam Chomsky interviewed by Danilo Mandic

"This is from Strobe Talbott who was in charge of the…he ran the Pentagon/State Department intelligence Joint Committee on the diplomacy during the whole affair including the bombing, so that’s very top of Clinton administration; he just wrote the forward to a book by his Director of Communications, John Norris, and in the forward he says if you really want to understand what the thinking was of the top of Clinton administration this is the book you should read and take a look on John Norris’s book and what he says is that the real purpose of the war had nothing to do with concern for Kosovar Albanians.

"It was because Serbia was not carrying out the required social and economic reforms, meaning it was the last corner of Europe which had not subordinated itself to the US-run neoliberal programs, so therefore it had to be eliminated.

"That’s from the highest level."
 
"No writer has rendered these lives (the poor) more vividly than George Orwell in The Road to Wigan Pier and Down and Out in Paris and London. In these two remarkable books,

"Orwell addresses the very question that haunts discussions of poverty today-what is it like to be poor?

"The foremost virtue of these books is their insistent, compelling reporting of poverty from the inside.

"His reports of the outward effects of poverty-the decrepitude, the discomfort, the filth-are simultaneously gripping and repellent.

"But it is his account of poverty's effect on the soul, effects observed from personal experience coupled with keen self-knowledge, that makes Orwell unique.

"Orwell was also a master prose stylist, and his writing-vigorous, evocative, and utterly devoid of sentimentality-captures with masterly economy the psychological truth of poverty."

Orwell's Poor and Ours
 
Perhaps younger Americans see capitalism more clearly than earlier generations?

Political views of Generation Z - Wikipedia.

"Generation Z views socialism more positively than previous generations, especially in the United States.

"In a 2018 Gallup poll, 51% of Americans aged 18 to 29—young Millennials and older Gen Z—have a positive view of socialism, compared to 45% having a positive view of capitalism."
Socialism Is an Oligarchic Hostile Takeover of the Capitalist Oligarchy

Both these alternatives from the ruling class's universities exclude the 99%. Instead, let the employees own equal shares and vote on salaries according to who will contribute most to their dividends. Prevent the outside plutocracy from buying shares by ending the stock market.
 
After WW 2 the workload decreased as the income increased. Those working in all of our post war manufacturing did quite well. The 1970's saw the decline of many manufacturing ways here. The government and monopoly employment rose up in a huge way Privileged employment is any that the salaries and benefits are higher even with people who are not very good.
Slavish College Education Put Inferior People in Superior Positions
 
"No writer has rendered these lives (the poor) more vividly than George Orwell in The Road to Wigan Pier and Down and Out in Paris and London. In these two remarkable books,

"Orwell addresses the very question that haunts discussions of poverty today-what is it like to be poor?

"The foremost virtue of these books is their insistent, compelling reporting of poverty from the inside.

"His reports of the outward effects of poverty-the decrepitude, the discomfort, the filth-are simultaneously gripping and repellent.

"But it is his account of poverty's effect on the soul, effects observed from personal experience coupled with keen self-knowledge, that makes Orwell unique.

"Orwell was also a master prose stylist, and his writing-vigorous, evocative, and utterly devoid of sentimentality-captures with masterly economy the psychological truth of poverty."

Orwell's Poor and Ours
We Are Born in the Dugout, and Those Born on Third Base Make Us Believe We've Been Benched
 
There was a time when we fought for independence and justice ie revolutionary war, civil. Now, our war machine needs to be fighting at all times, around the world. Mcdonnel, northrupp, lockheed, boeing.................lol, even pfizer, wonder what kind of weapon they have?,...... is moving up that ladder.
Let Them Be Their Own Fortune Cookies

If we forced the Asian nations threatened by China to defend themselves, our weapons merchants would make even more money selling to them. And the American taxpayer would no longer have to pay for the defense of rich gutless foreign parasites.
 
The reign of the more or less intelligent sociopaths has been continuous throughout history. Morals, religion, ideology and human empathy mean nothing to them, except as attributes to be exploited.
The Road to Perdition Is Patrician

Hereditary power is always ignored as a destructive factor. That means it controls all criticisms and makes them irrelevant.
 

Forum List

Back
Top