How Obama's "Trade" Deals Are Designed To End Democracy

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Eric Zuesse, author of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010 and of Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics,

U.S. President Barack Obama has for years been negotiating with European and Asian nations — but excluding Russia and China, since he is aiming to defeat them in his war to extend the American empire (i.e, to extend the global control by America’s aristocracy) — three international ‘trade’ deals (TTP, TTIP, & TISA), each one of which contains a section (called ISDS) that would end important aspects of the sovereignty of each signatory nation, by setting up an international panel composed solely of corporate lawyers to serve as ‘arbitrators’ deciding cases brought before this panel to hear lawsuits by international corporations accusing a given signatory nation of violating that corporation’s ‘rights’ by its trying to legislate regulations that are prohibited under the ’trade’ agreement, such as by increasing the given nation’s penalties for fraud, or by lowering the amount of a given toxic substance that the nation allows in its foods, or by increasing the percentage of the nation’s energy that comes from renewable sources, or by penalizing corporations for hiring people to kill labor union organizers — i.e., by any regulatory change that benefits the public at the expense of the given corporations' profits. (No similar and countervailing power for nations to sue international corporations is included in this: the ‘rights’ of ‘investors’ — but really of only the top stockholders in international corporations — are placed higher than the rights of any signatory nation.)

This provision, whose full name is “Investor State Dispute Resolution” grants a one-sided benefit to the controlling stockholders in international corporations, by enabling them to bring these lawsuits to this panel of lawyers, whose careers will consist of their serving international corporations, sometimes as ‘arbitrators’ in these panels, and sometimes as lawyers who more-overtly represent one or more of those corporations, but also serving these corporations in other capacities, such as via being appointed by them to head a tax-exempt foundation to which international corporations ‘donate’ and so to turn what would otherwise be PR expenses into corporate tax-deductions. In other words: to be an ‘arbitrator’ on these panels can produce an extremely lucrative career.

These are in no way democratic legal proceedings; they’re the exact opposite, an international conquest of democracy, by international corporations. This “ISDS” sounds deceptively non-partisan, but it's really a grant to the controlling international investors giving them a 'right' against the taxpayers in each of the signatory nations, a ‘right’ to sue, essentially, those taxpayers; and ISDS includes no countervailing ‘right’ to those taxpayers, to sue those international corporations; it’s an entirely one-sided provision, and it even removes the authority of the democratically elected national government to adjudicate the matter. It even removes the appeals-court system: once a decision is reached by the ‘arbitrating’ panel, it is final, it cannot be appealed. And no nation may present a challenge to the constitutionality of the ‘arbitrators’ decision. These treaties, if signed, will override the signatory nation’s constitution, on those matters.

This idea started after World War II and the defeat of the fascist nations on the military battlefields, and it moved this great fascist-v.-democratic war to a different type of battlefield. It’s round 2 of WW II.

Unlike many wars, WW II was an ideological war. On the one side stood the Allies; on the other, the fascist powers. The first fascist leader, Italy's Benito Mussolini, said in November 1933 that his ideal was “corporatism” or “corporationism,” in which the state, or the national government, serves its corporations (see page 426 there):

"The corporation plays on the economic terrain just as the Grand Council and the militia play on the political terrain. Corporationism is disciplined economy, and from that comes control, because one cannot imagine a discipline without a director.

 

Corporationism is above socialism and above liberalism. A new synthesis is created. It is a symptomatic fact that the decadence of capitalism coincides with the decadence of socialism. All the Socialist parties of Europe are in fragments.

 

Evidently the two phenomena—I will not say conditions—present a point of view which is strictly logical: there is between them a historical parallel. Corporative economy arises at the historic moment when both the militant phenomena, capitalism and socialism, have already given all that they could give. From one and from the other we inherit what they have of vitality. …

 

There is no doubt that, given the general crisis of capitalism, corporative solutions can be applied anywhere."

After World War II, the ‘former’ Nazi, Prince Bernhard, took up the fascist (lower-case f, indicating the ideology, instead of Mussolini’s Fascist political party; Bernhard had belonged instead to Hitler’s Nazi Party) cudgel, when he created in 1954 his then-secret (and still secretive today) Bilderberg group, which brings together the leaders, and the advisers to the leaders, of international corporations, meeting annually or bi-annually, near the places where major national leaders or potential future leaders have pre-scheduled to congregate, such as this year’s G-7 meeting in Bavaria, so that even heads-of-state (and/or their aides) can quietly slip away unofficially to join nearby the Bilderbergs and communicate privately with them, to coordinate their collective international fascist endeavor (and decide which presidential candidates to fund), to institute a fascist world government that will possess a legal control higher than what’s possessed by any merely national government. Just as the anti-Russian, anti-Chinese, G-7 conference ended on 8 June 2015, the Bilderberg conference opened 15 miles away three days later (after a few days of vacation in the Bavarian Alps), and Britain’s Telegraph (as it does every year with extraordinary boldness for the Western press) issued the list of attendees, which included top advisors to many heads-of-state, plus major investors in ‘defense’ stocks, plus top propagandists against Russia (such as Anne Applebaum).

Bilderbergers have always been opposed to the old ideal of an emerging global federalism of democracies to constitute an ultimate world government; they instead favor a dictatorial world government, imposed by (the controlling owners of) international corporations. The major international corporations are controlled by perhaps fewer than a hundred people around the world; and, the other billions of people, the mere citizens, will, in this plan, as realized under Obama’s ‘trade’ deals, be fined if a three-person panel of servants (the ‘arbitrators’) to that perhaps fewer than 100 people, rule to say that the given nation has violated the ‘rights’ of those ‘investors,’ and assesses the ‘fine’ against those taxpayers.

The first Bilderberg meeting was called together by Bernhard in a personal invitation which proposed that, “I think that a 'partnership for growth' is a fine idea. A good deal has been said but very little has been done about trade policy, and this would be a good place to start the partnership.” (Note the ‘Partnership’ in “Trans Pacific Partnership,” and in “Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership”; but TISA doesn’t use that term.)

Among the leading Americans at the first (and perhaps each of the subsequent) Bilderberg meetings, were Wall Streeters David Rockefeller and George Ball, both of whom subsequently lobbied the U.S. Congress heavily to replace national standards with international standards, something that would be an improvement if done within a democratic framework (which would thus have electoral accountability to the public, and be appealable and amendable), but they didn’t even mention any proposed framework, and virtually everyone at that time was simply assuming that nobody in ’the West’ would have any dictatorial framework in mind; everybody assumed that, after the defeat of the fascist nations, any emerging world government could only be democratic. This isn’t what Bilderbergers actually had in mind, however.

Matt Stoller, on 20 February 2014, bannered, “NAFTA Origins, Part Two: The Architects of Free Trade Really Did Want a World Government of Corporations,” and he reported, from his study of the Congressional Record, that:

After the Kennedy round [international-trade talks] ended [in 1967], liberal internationalists, including people like Chase CEO David Rockefeller and former Undersecretary of State George Ball, began pressing for reductions in non-tariff barriers, which they perceived as the next set of trade impediments to pull down. Ball was an architect of 1960s U.S. trade policy — he helped write the Trade Act of 1962, which set the stage for what eventually became the World Trade Organization.

 

But Ball’s idea behind getting rid of these barriers wasn’t about free trade, it was about reorganizing the world so that corporations could manage resources for “the benefit of mankind”. It was a weird utopian vision that you can hear today in the current United States Trade Representative Michael Froman’s speeches. …

 

In the opening statement [by Ball to Congress in 1967], before a legion of impressive Senators and Congressmen, Ball attacks the very notion of sovereignty. He goes after the idea that “business decisions” could be “frustrated by a multiplicity of different restrictions by relatively small nation states that are based on parochial considerations,” and lauds the multinational corporation as the most perfect structure devised for the benefit of mankind.

As for David Rockefeller, he wrote in the 1 February 1999 Newsweek an essay “Looking for New Leadership,” in which he stated (p. 41) the widely quoted (though the rest of the article is ignored): “In recent years, there's been a trend toward democracy and market economies. That has lessened the role of government, which is something business people tend to be in favor of. But the other side of the coin is that somebody has to take governments' place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it.” He meant there that international corporations should have supreme sovereignty, above that of any nation. He always emphasized what he proudly called “internationalism.” To him, like to Ball, governments — that is, national governments —  were the problem, and democracy is not the solution. The solution is, to exact the contrary: provide supreme sovereignty to international corporations, as an international authority higher than any democracy, or that any nation.

A two-minute video succinctly states the case for UK citizens against ISDS regarding Obama’s proposed TTIP or Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership with Europe, but the case equally applies for all citizens, regarding Obama’s TPP with Asia, and his TISA with all countries for “Services,” including financial services and the ‘rights' that international financial corporations such as banks have to transfer their billionaires’ gambling (‘investment’) losses onto the taxpayers (via megabank bailouts). Obama’s ‘trade’ deals will thus internationalize the system to bail out billionaires on their losses. Furthermore, (as that linked source on TISA explained): if TISA passes, then the United States, which is virtually the only industrialized country that hasn’t socialized the health-insurance function, would be prohibited from ever socializing it. (This, mind you, from the very same Barack Obama who, while he was running against Hillary Clinton in 2008 to win the Democratic Presidential nomination, told the AFL-CIO, “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare coverage.”

He didn’t just lie: he’s now fighting to make socialization of health insurance absolutely impossible in the United States. No wonder why as President, Obama’s White House argued to the Supreme Court that no state may limit lying in political campaigns — that lying in politics is Constitutionally protected ‘Free Speech.’ Obama sets the record for phoniness.) 

The world is already almost completely fascistic. As I previously reported, it really, truly, is the case that the “World’s Richest 80 People Own Same Amount as World’s Bottom 50%.” And, furthermore, the only rigorous scientific study that has ever been done of the extent to which a recognized ‘democratic’ country actually is a democracy found that that nation definitely is not. The nation was the United States. The U.S. was discovered to be, and long to have been, a dictatorship, in which the people who are not in the richest 10% have no impact whatsoever on the nation’s policies. A brief video accurately summarized that study (by Gillens and Page) and explained why its findings are that way.

This 6-minute video is a crash course on political reality. That Gillens and Page study noted at the end, that, "Our findings also point toward the need to learn more about exactly which economic elites (the ‘merely affluent’? the top 1%? the top 0.01%?) have how much impact upon public policy.” However, the most detailed study of the flow of economic benefits and costs in the United States since 2000 has found that all of the economic benefits from ‘America’s economic recovery’ and ‘the end of the recession,’ etc., have gone only to the top 1%. (The ‘news’ media try to say it’s not ‘really’ so, but the finding is based on the most solid of all data, and that’s the most reliable way to calculate anything.) Another study, which I did, also based on the best available data, “The Top 1% of America’s Top 1%,” has shown that the reason for the immense power that’s within the top 10% is the soaring wealth-boost to only the top 0.01%, the very top end of the top end. Comparing the boost to incomes at America’s top 0.1% to that of the top 0.01%, one sees that most of the income of the top 0.1% is actually going to merely the top 0.01%, so that, as I summed it up, “the wealthiest of the billionaires are getting almost everything.” And, this is the situation even before the Bilderberg plan is fully in force. Obama’’s ‘trade’ deals wouldn’t just lock this in; they’d vastly increase the power, and also the wealth, of the perhaps 100 or fewer people who control the largest international corporations.

The fact that these ‘trade’ deals are being pushed right now, means that the people who are in power have concluded that, already, ‘the free world’ is so dictatorial, that the chances that their plan can now be imposed globally are about as good as is likely ever to be the case again. The time is ripe for them to establish a global corporate dictatorship. The political money this year will be flowing like never before.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
cherry picker's picture

We were all born to die.

For some of us it may be fightig this disease encroaching the dignity that is ours.

I would rather die on my feet than live a life on my knees.

Our esteemed leaders better read this carefully, it is a warning.

The Rolling Thunder's picture
The Rolling Thunder (not verified) cherry picker Jun 14, 2015 9:45 PM

Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job Ive had. Last Monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9 months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83 per hour. I work through this link... www.earnmore9.com

cherry picker's picture

Rolling Thunder, when the TPP is rammed through as we are pretty sure it will, you will have millions logging into earnmore9

cookie nookie's picture

The world is being consumed by oligarchs.  But whose fault is that?  You get who you vote for.

MonetaryApostate's picture

Do they have to suck on us like leeches craddle to the grave though???

I cannot wait till judgment day...  (Coming SOON!)

tarabel's picture

 

 

I got me one of them Alfa Romeos too. It looks great with the rest of my Matchbox collection.

TBT or not TBT's picture

What's with all this moaning about the end of democracy?   We are supposed to have a Republic.   Too much democracy drove it right off the rails, as democracy always will.   We the people voted ourselves goodies from the public treasury, growing its mission and scope and debt and corruption slowly and surely to it current grotesque form.   

Radical Marijuana's picture

TBT, your analysis is historically backwards. The fish rotted from the head. The monetary system has become like a totally metastasized cancer that is killing the society that it is growing in. However, it began more covertly, by the application of the methods of organized crime to the political processes, through bribery, intimidation, and assassination of those who could not be bribed or intimidated. Step by step, the successful politicians became puppets, voted for by enough of the masses of muppets.

The most crucial events in the destruction of the democratic republic's rule of law were when the public "money" supply was effectively privatized. After that was achieved, everything automatically became worse, faster. Meanwhile, for generation after generation, individuals adapted to be born inside of a system of debt slavery, where participation was rewarded (at least in the short-term, which may well during their entire life-time), while those who resisted, or did not participate at much, were punished or disadvantaged.

"Democracy" DIED when the public "money" supply was effectively PRIVATIZED. Everything else was merely more of the same, getting worse, faster, at an exponential rate. Of course, the problem NOW is that after more than a Century of America's mad self-destruction, as well as a few Centuries of the British Empire's mad self-destruction, while smaller minorities thereby became wealthier and more politically powerful, even a political miracle such as returning the public "money" supply to being under public control would be way too little, too late, and too trivial to matter much anymore, since the symbolic robberies done through governments enforcing frauds by privately controlled banks have already enabled almost everything worth robbing to already have been robbed.

It is totally BULLSHIT to state that: "Too much democracy drove it right off the rails, as democracy always will."

The REALITY has been the triumphant application of the methods of organized crime, primarily through the funding of politics, in order to reduce "democracy" to being nothing more than a cruel joke. Anyone who looks at the facts regarding the funding of politics, and the degree to which the public "money" supply has already been privatized, will recognize that "democracy" is already more than 99% DEAD.

"Democracy" NEVER existed much, and surely has become nothing more than a cruel joke for more than a Century in the USA. The various "trade treaties" are continuations of the ways that puppet politicians are legalizing treasons, while enough of the masses of muppets act like Zombie Sheeple. HOWEVER, that does NOT mean there is anything wrong with the abstract theory of a democratic republic operating through the rule of law. THE PROBLEM is that "We the People" were systematically brainwashed to believe in bullshit, by the best scientific brainwashing that money could buy.

The established systems and their controlled opposition are all run by the best available professional liars and immaculate hypocrites, which includes what has systematically happened to the schools and the mass media. The tragic trajectory is that the democratic republic's rule of law has already been more than 99% destroyed, while these various international trade treaties are merely mopping up consolidation of that.

The problem has NEVER been "democracy."

The problem has been FAKE "democracy,"

which depended upon FAKE "education."

An example of that kind of mistaken understanding of what is really happening was presented in the comment above by TBT. The ONLY actually existing systems operate according to the principles and methods of organized crime. The increasingly dismal failures of the vast majority of people to be able to understand that has been the driving cause for why the established systems were able to surround themselves with controlled opposition groups.

TBT's comment was a typical example of many others on Zero Hedge, who continue to get things backwards, or put the cart before the horse. A democratic government operating through the rule of law was supposed to limit the abuses of power by governments. However, bit by bit, the best organized gangs of criminals were able to capture control over the powers of governments, and thereby effectively privatize those powers. After the public "money" supply was privatized, it became easy to leverage that up and UP to assert more and more control over the schools systems, and the mass media, so that enough of the people could be fooled enough of the time ...

From a practical, personal point of view, agreeing with the biggest bullies' bullshit has always tended to be rewarded, and the people doing that got promoted. At the same time, those who did not agree with that bullshit tended to be punished, and their personal careers destroyed. For generation after generation, step by step, at a faster and faster rate, the democratic republic operating through the law, which had attempted to be given substance by the American constitution and bill of rights, was eroded and undermined. After the public "money" supply was privatized, there was NO MORE REAL DEMOCRACY.

We are watching internationalized systems based upon being able to enforce frauds, through interconnected and integrated systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, manifest in the forms of the sequence of treasonous trade treaties. However, as I previously outlined today in this article "Cornering The Earth" - How The Rothschilds "Controlled At Least One Third Of Global Wealth" Over 100 Years Ago, WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT A DE FACTO FAIT ACCOMPLI:

"Democracy" is already about 99% dead, especially since there is almost nothing but controlled opposition groups which are attempting to resist the international banksters and their buddies.

IF, and ONLY IF, enough people understood how and why human civilizations must necessarily operate according to the principles and methods of organized crime MIGHT it be possible to bring the established systems back into better balance. However, TBT's comments typically illustrated the grossly superficial misunderstanding of that, by presenting analysis of the situation which is so backwards to the actual historical mechanisms as to be absurd.

Ignatius's picture

The opposite of "democracy" (having a say) is dictatorship (being dictated to), NOT republicanism as a form of governance.

TPTB will fund endless amounts of propaganda against implementation of sensible democracy.

El Vaquero's picture

Just in case you haven't figured it out, government is both retarded and inevitable.  Democracy sucks balls.  Republicanism sucks balls.  But some kinds of government are worse than others.  Fascism and communism both suck Janet Reno's balls. 

Radical Marijuana's picture

YES, "government is both retarded and inevitable."

Meanwhile, we WISH governments were not going full retard.

Boondocker's picture

He summarized the problem with far fewer words and effectively got his message out...you, not so much.

Bendromeda Strain's picture

Quite so. The Radical Marijuana bemoans thusly:

However, bit by bit, the best organized gangs of criminals were able to capture control over the powers of governments, and thereby effectively privatize those powers. After the public "money" supply was privatized, it became easy to leverage that up and UP to assert more and more control over the schools systems, and the mass media, so that enough of the people could be fooled enough of the time.

As if this dissembling (prolly after listening to The Wall baked for the umpteenth time) would disguise the fact that Progressivism has been the most corrosive force on education. Take a look at your college campuses today and tell me that lines up with RMs diagnosis. A corporatist campus would more resemble the militarist academy of Starship Troopers I would think, and it would be ingrained at earlier ages. As it is now, only certain media and sporting events fetishize military patriotism. But hey man, don't bogart that joint, pass it over to me.

backwaterdogs's picture

But....what makes you think college campus, much less grade school thu high school doesnt reflect corporatism?  It seems to me to do so near perfectly.

The entire education system being one reinforce and reward conformity...which what corporations want.  It seems all of education incl and esp college is well controlled by corporations.

Sure...they allow afew token 'free thinking' concepts here and there...I think just to beguil people into thinking they are really going to 'college', that we live in a democacy(or republic for that matter) and they actually can affect change.

Typing on a tablet....dont down me for t y pos

BigJim's picture

Corporations and government are now two sides to the same oligarchic coin.

Don't get me wrong; it's possible to run an ethical corporation. But the corporations we're complaining about pull so many strings in 'our' governments that they pretty much are our governments.

Elliott Eldrich's picture

"A corporatist campus would more resemble the militarist academy of Starship Troopers I would think, and it would be ingrained at earlier ages."

Perhaps. However, it seems more likely that a corporatist campus would consist of good little consumers, who conform to a rigidly defined belief system that establishes the importance of making lots of money above all else. A hollow, vapid campus with little love of learning for learning's sake and little patience for those who ask too many questions, which instead offers only courses designed to make students useful to the corporate machine, while endlessly proclaiming how "progressive" and "free" they are as they're steered down narrow cattle chutes into various pointless and/or toxic occupations. All for the low, low price of decades of indentured servitude; such a deal!

BigJim's picture

RM, you're both right!

"Democracy" DIED when the public "money" supply was effectively PRIVATIZED.

No,  it's no accurate to say that. The money supply was actually more private when anyone could dig up PMs on private and have them accepted as money; ie, before 1933. Sure, you got less per ounce than an 'official' gold or silver coin, but that was just government exercising seignourage.

What's gone wrong is that government has cartelised money, not privatised it. If the money supply was genuinely 'private;, the system would collapse in weeks because what props it up is the fact the government demands its tribute (sorry, 'taxes') in it.

Take away that privilege and FRNs would have the same value tally sticks did after the creation of the Bank of England.

Radical Marijuana's picture

Yes, Big Jim, it may be more appropriate to describe the existing system as a "banking cartel." That is the way G. Edward Griffin refers to it.

Anyway, you were right to point out that without governments enforcing the frauds of making the public "money" supply out of nothing as debts, primarily by demanding payment of taxes using that form of legal tender, then that kind of fiat "money" would be an absurd joke.

One of the problems is the language that we have to use tends to automatically be misleading. What the words "money" and "dollar" used to mean has gradually been inverted and perverted, while the language used to talk about that gradually became more absurd bullshit, due frauds being enforced.

I always harp upon the longer term consequences of being able to enforce frauds never stopping those frauds from still being false. Being able to back up lies with violence works well in the short-term, but in the longer term becomes runaway criminal insanity.

We are living inside of a globalized pyramid scheme whose Great Boom is headed towards some Great Bust, of matching proportions, which are difficult to fully imagine! Globalized fascist plutocracy is globalized enforcement of frauds, which makes the ways that those frauds are still false become magnified to global sizes!

Nobody fully understands globalized electronic frauds, backed by atomic bombs. There was never anything in human history to compare that to ... I surely do not know any practical ways to resolve those problems, but neither do the international banksters!

Anusocracy's picture

I prefer freedom over what you believe.

Radical Marijuana's picture

"Freedom" can only be reconciled with the principle of the conservation of energy by asymptotically approaching an appreciation that the subtractions are never absolute, and therefore, the robberies are never finished.

"Freedom" emerges out of the ways that our perceptions of all relatively finite beings, including ourselves, are necessarily relative illusions, or lies. To the degree that we accept that we are separated from our environment, then that results in us not being "free."

In my view, most of the people who like to use the word "freedom" use that like a magical word, such as how most of those who pretend that they are party of some "Liberty Movement," and so on and so forth ...

Unless those who use the word "freedom" were to make enough of an effort to think in radically different ways that would enable them to reconcile their concept of "freedom" with the principle of the conservation of energy, then they are going nowhere (but backwards) and will continue to lose ground against the banksters, etc., who are advancing their agenda through systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, or enforced frauds, which agenda tends to take great leaps forward each time another international treaty is ratified.

The way to reconcile the concept of "freedom" with the principle of the conservation of energy is to appreciate the ways in which the philosophy of science made historical compromises with the biggest bullies' bullshit world view. There were many different aspects to that, however, one of the most abstract, and therefore, the most theoretically important, is that arbitrary minus signs were inserted into the entropy equations of thermodynamics and information theory, so that the meaning of the concept of entropy was inverted, so that perverted meaning could remain consistent with the biggest bullies' bullshit world view.

Overall, the biggest bullies (which currently happen more to be the international bankers than anybody else) have done their best to destroy "freedom" by doing everything possible to prevent people from understanding elementary philosophy or spirituality. The most basic ways that human being live by creating mental models of their world, with mental models of themselves within their mental models of their world, are as deliberately denied and disregarded as possible.

Again, the most abstract way that has manifested is through the basic conceptualization of time and space as being independent absolutes, whereas, advances through paradigm shifts in physical science have demonstrated that was wrong. Time and space are a continuum, that changes to accommodate the principle of the conservation of energy. The ways that energy is distributed in time and space is entropy. However, there too, the conceptualization of entropy was inverted.

"Freedom" can not win if that is seen as having to fight against the principle of the conservation of energy. Rather, what I am recommending could be seen as a creative synthesis of post-modernizing science with ancient mysticism, which is a renaissance of philosophy, enabling a rebirth of spirituality. Simultaneously, that is the only path forward whereby "freedom" can be reconciled with the principle of the conservation of energy, which the values related to "liberty" must do, if they are going to be given operation definitions that can be better implemented, rather than continue to merely be magical words, used in the context of transcendental poetry about political problems, which can never be actualized in any more realistic ways, as long as "freedom" is not reconsidered to become more consistent with the principle of the conservation of energy.

As soon as we SUBTRACT any living being from its environment, then to that degree it can NOT be "free." Therefore, it is by addressing the concept of SUBTRACTION that we may be able to change the ways that we consider the meaning of "freedom."

The currently established social pyramid systems are based on being able to back up lies with violence, in order to keep other people ignorant and afraid, so that they can be controlled and exploited. The biggest bullies' bullshit social stories are promoting false fundamental dichotomies, and their controlled opposition groups are promoting impossible ideals, based upon those reified dualities. As long as "freedom" can not be reconsidered in ways which will enable that idea to work through the issues with respect to the basic laws of thermodynamics and information theory, then that kind of old-fashioned understanding of "freedom" must continue to lose ground.

THE AGENDA OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES ADVANCES THE BANKSTERS' BULLSHIT WORLD VIEW. Old-fashioned ideas about "freedom" will continue to fail against that agenda, as they have been more and more failing for a long time ... The only ways that real freedoms could effectively be implemented would require series of intellectual scientific revolutions, in order to overcome the degree to which the banksters' bullshit stories have been able to so totally dominate the language that most people think with, and communicate through, which includes the use of words like "freedom" and "liberty," mostly as magical phrases, inside of transcendental poetry politics, that have no way to be reconciled with physical realities, because such ideas regarding "freedom" mostly make no efforts to reconcile themselves with mathematical physics, such as found in thermodynamics and information theory, etc. ...

In this recently republished article on Zero Hedge, TPP Explained (In Comic Book Cartoons), I thought that the most significant statement was this one, as quoted from Kahneman, on page 9:

The errors of a theory are rarely found in what asserts explicitly; they hide in what it ignores or tacitly assumes.

In my view, that especially applies those who believe in "freedom" and claim they support the "Liberty Movement." By and large, those people tend to deliberately ignore the principle of the conservation of energy, and tend to tacitly assume that they can continue to do that, while pretending that somehow their political rhetoric does not have to be connected to physical science.

We are more and more living in an oxymoronic scientific dictatorship, which is deliberately not scientific about itself, but rather, uses science and technology to become better at being dishonest and backing that up with violence. There is an abundance of the illusions of "rationality" which are actually becoming less and less "rational" due to those serving the interests of the banksters, and their covert agenda to control everyone else, by consolidating their globalized systems based upon governments enforcing the banksters' frauds, such as through more international treaties.

Therefore, again, I assert that we need series of intellectual scientific revolutions, to correct the enormous errors in the philosophy of science, which were due to the scientific enterprise being a social enterprise, that was driven to compromise with the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, similar to every other social enterprise, primarily due to the history of the funding of science, similar to how the funding of politics drove politics to become runaway vicious spirals of crazy corruption.

That series of intellectual scientific revolutions has a lot to say about reconsidering the meaning of "freedom," in ways which enable that to have more operational definitions, rather than continue to "free float" as a magical word, used in the context of some transcendental political poetry.

I prefer to think of "freedom" in radically different ways, rather than continue to think of "freedom" in old-fashioned ways, because I believe that is more likely to possibly lead to a more realistic "Liberty Movement" making progress, rather than always retreating before the advances of the banksters' bullshit agenda, such as being implemented by fast tracking international treaties.

suteibu's picture

RM...dude, where else do you write?  You come prepared. 

Quite amazing actually.

Radical Marijuana's picture

suteibu, I am registered as the "leader" of fringe political party in Canada, which appears on the election ballots as "Radical Marijuana."

The coincidences of history have directed me to end up doing that, because pot prohibition is the single simplest symbol and most extreme particular example of the ways that international treaties have driven the banksters' agenda. The history of the criminalization of cannabis cascaded through the effects of international treaties ... Political issues manifest fractal patterns.

suteibu's picture

Yeah, I went to your website.  You remind me of my freshman college roommate (looks only - he had a hard time finishing a sentence much less writing cogent arguments for or against anything).

Good luck with your efforts.  You certainly add more than your share to the discussions here.  Passion for something is a marvelous incentive.  You seem to have it in spades.

Radical Marijuana's picture

Thanks, suteibu!

By coincidence, while you were replying, I was watching this:

https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is?lang...

Do we see reality as it is?
suteibu's picture

Thanks for the link.  I will watch it tomorrow.

However, without classifying myself as religious, I am of the Buddha school of thought concerning the world in that, briefly, we create our "real" world according to our conditioning and beliefs.  The world, therefore, is both real and unreal and holding the potential for change.   I will be very interested in hearing the presentation.

BoPeople's picture
BoPeople (not verified) Jun 14, 2015 9:37 PM

The entity that we are supposed to believe is Obama, is not Obama. It is a demonic entity, just like the demonic entity that replaced Hitler. The real Hitler was killed during the Beer Hall Putsch.

Yes, demons are real. Yes, Satan is real.

We would all know the above is true if the Catholic Church, under Constantine, did not destroy all of the libraries and centers of learning.

FreeShitter's picture

Pretty much this. The world and the humans under it are facing a spiritual battle constantly. It's all in the Good Book. God always has the Final say.

reader2010's picture

Freedumb! 

the continental thinkers were absolutely right when they argued back in the 60s that the coming postmodern world is absolutely a nightmare for the human race, and not livable. 

NoWayJose's picture

The Democrats came out in force to vote against the TPP - because it turns control over to an unelected group that has the power to change US laws and regulations. Given the ineptitude of current Republican leaders, the only way that the Great Society and Entitlements could be dismantled would be that this unelected group changes US law!

AGuy's picture

" Given the ineptitude of current Republican leaders, the only way that the Great Society and Entitlements could be dismantled would be that this unelected group changes US law!"

I am pretty sure that the TPP does have anything to do with preventing socailism and entitlements. I think more about neutering the US economy (whats left of it),  Obamacare is just one path to the road to single payer healthcare. The advantage of single payer healthcare is that it permits the gov't to control people's health. Let's suppose your a libertiarn and need surgery. The TPTB can simply deny you access. Those that "adore" the gov't get free healthcare.

I very much doubt the TPP or any US law changes is going to last. The US, EU, and Asia are all insolvent and primed for a ecomonic crisis that lead to a political crisis.

suteibu's picture

"I very much doubt the TPP or any US law changes is going to last. The US, EU, and Asia are all insolvent and primed for a ecomonic crisis that lead to a political crisis."

I think you have it wrong.  The push to sign all of these regional "trade" deals is an effort to wrap everything up before the upcoming collapse.  Ignore the timing at your own peril.

Bemused Observer's picture

With the way things are today, just who do these free trade advocates think we'll be trading WITH? Can the American small-business widget-maker be confident in his ability to sell freely in global markets, or is that a privilege reserved only for those who can afford to exploit those markets for labor as well?

q99x2's picture

Yep. The US military has the right to defend America especially when its politicians have been taken over by foreign entities such as corporations and banks.

We will come rejoicing bringing in the thieves. Not a good time to be an oligarch.

NoDebt's picture

After the current push for a New World Order falls again to ashes, unfulfilled, as it has so many times before, you should realize they will pick themselves up and start once more from the day after their last 'Great Plan' failed.

Only the names will change.  The Plan never does.

 

Paveway IV's picture

"...The world is already almost completely fascistic..."

Hate to be the grammar Nazi, but I think the existing adjective fascist, works perfectly well there.

Lostinfortwalton's picture

Exactly, like the word "terroristic" in lieu of terrorist. You wouldn't say CIAistic or NSAistic would you? Grammar counts, even as we are marched to the gulag.

SgtShaftoe's picture

Nemesis is in the neighborhood and she's pretty fucking pissed:

CHALMERS JOHNSON: Nemesis was the ancient Greek goddess of revenge, the punisher of hubris and arrogance in human beings. You may recall she is the one that led Narcissus to the pond and showed him his reflection, and he dove in and drowned. I chose the title, because it seems to me that she’s present in our country right now, just waiting to make her — to carry out her divine mission.

By the subtitle, I really do mean it. This is not just hype to sell books — "The Last Days of the American Republic." I’m here concerned with a very real, concrete problem in political analysis, namely that the political system of the United States today, history tells us, is one of the most unstable combinations there is — that is, domestic democracy and foreign empire — that the choices are stark. A nation can be one or the other, a democracy or an imperialist, but it can’t be both. If it sticks to imperialism, it will, like the old Roman Republic, on which so much of our system was modeled, like the old Roman Republic, it will lose its democracy to a domestic dictatorship.

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/27/chalmers_johnson_nemesis_the_last_...

WTFUD's picture

HANG TIME!

Obama and the leaders of those countries who signed these PARTNERSHIP deals have committed TREASON, Name these COUNTRIES and their LEADERS and COMMENCE PROCEEDINGS TODAY.

fascismlover's picture

Please explain to me what exactly we are calling democracy now?  I read the gulag archipelago...seems like a panacea compared to now. 

Dre4dwolf's picture

We should do away with government in the forms of party systems.

And just have a service based government.

All citizens become decentralized politicians every citizen gets a voter ID card  that links to a database, the hottest topics are floated and voted on by the masses, laws are limited to 10 pages written in plain English.

Citizens file bills for submittal the system takes them in and floats them in the cloud where voters with proper ID gather to vote on them... if the bill is passed into law . . . taxes go up to fund it.

Likewise no law is safe, laws can be voted out just as quickly as they were voted in through the same process.

 

It would be the perfect govt.

No voting for politicians.

Only thing you vote for is laws, completely bypasses all need for elections/politicians. . .  and think about all the $$$$ we save by not having to employ useless govt officials.

 Everyone would vote against tax increases, online seamlessly.... and govt would be kept in check economically, we would always have a govt we can afford.

 

 

Anusocracy's picture

Why do you think everyone needs or wants government?

Obviously you do, but why do you want to force it on everyone else?

Nolde Huruska's picture

Forget the cloud. Many of us will be voting from the rooftops.

Vidar's picture

We should do away with government (the state) completely. As long as some believe they can rule over others the same cycle will continue, until it ends in a war that will destroy civilization and really reset the system. Liberty or death has always been the only choice, for both individuals and humanity.

X_Weatherman's picture

Switzerland has a government that is pretty close to democratic.

WTFUD's picture

Clenching Your Cheeks in 3 Easy Stages
Clenching For Beginners
Intermediate Clenching
Advanced Clenching

You won't get fucked again or a money back guarantee.

Jack Burton's picture

All in all a very good post. The Real Powers of the Banking, Corporate and Military-Spy world are now ready to move. Take power absolutely, instead of fucking around at the corners. Puppets like Obama, Merkel, Bush, Clinton, EU leaders, all the western leaders, they are all open to giving absolute power to the people they take bribe money from. After all, who needs the middle man now? These are not trade deals, they are global governance deals.

Do you ever wonder why the West, just in the last couple years, has gone totally insane over Russia's existence? Well, Russia is not playing ball with the Western Corporate, Banker and Zionist leaders. So Russia must go.

Obama, will go down in history as the great black sell out. He wanted to be president only so they he could engineer the total power take over of Bankers, Militarists, Corporate CEOs, and the world's richest men. The new trade deals are global corporate dictatorship.

If you vote in an American election, you are a dupe. There is no election. All candidates are chosen by the elite for you before hand. No choice folks.

What can we do? Nothing. Public Education and the Media have done their work of the last 50 years! Brainwashed Americans still believe THEY rule at the ballot box. Enough said!

suteibu's picture

"These are not trade deals, they are global governance deals."

A lot of people read your comments.  I hope no one skips this one. 

suteibu's picture

The TPP has been a source of contention for several years now.  The uptake on it has been slow here although it has created quite a stir in some other member nations for some time.

The article is correct about the investor-state dispute section as I have been saying here in about every TPP article.  It is the nation killer but it is also the only glue that holds the whole shit-scam together.  Eliminate it and corporations will walk away and try a different approach.

That said, there are trillions of USD at stake for generations.  It is the culmination of years of corrupt efforts.  This thing will not go away simply because Obama is not given fast track authority.

MedicalQuack's picture

In it's infancy the Obamacare move had a lot of good things going and granted everything was not good but in the long run people are able to get care now with subsidies and you can argue both sides of that.  What the problem was is that the administration was not ready for the sharp shooting armies of quants that insurers had lined up and oh yes they have been there.  So the administration just folds as they control the money cards, not what we wanted to see.  I said way backin 2009 that this would happen as Sebelius was no contest for the insurers and they would dupe her to the end and they did.  I somewhat saw that coming before she ever stepped in office.

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2009/02/kathleen-sebelius-kansas-governor...

You want a single payer?  You are about to get it in the form of United Healthcare taking over as that entity.  Why do you think a one time Goldman Sachs banker and former United CEO subsidiary of Ingenix that everybody sued is now running Medicare.  That's right, it's what we have.  Either United is holding something over the government's head or the government is making him pay and fix everything he screwed up.   That man would be Andy Slavitt who is a whiz at modeling algorithms for profit.  Never mind the fact that we have the six degrees of Bob Rubin running HHS, Burwell was a former director of his.

Again the naive administration put together a model and had not a frigging clue on how they would be played and put the dumbest woman, Sebelius, they could find at the helm. United Healthcare stands to benefit of course with the trade agreement as they have their subsidiary company, ChinaGate which promotes Chinese drugs and devices infiltration all over the world, set and ready to go.

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2010/05/unitedhealth-subsidiary-ingenix.html

Our current head of Medicare bought them into the fold while he was CEO of Ingenix, the subsidiary of United which has since been renamed Optum.   Seriously, pay attention here with Humana on the "for sale" block with Goldman doing the work.  You see we have this little detail which has been very scantily covered in main media of the $70 billion in fraud that insurers bilked Medicare for and United and Humana have the biggest exposure as they have more Medicare Part D subscribers than anyone.  Goldman I assume would negotiate this out of the deal as far as expenditures, leave Humana with a money problem and in marches United to take over the licenses.  Very scary indeed.  They did it before with Health Net.

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2015/06/with-humana-up-for-sale-whats-impact-of.html

I have former CMS employees who write to me that are in absolute terror of United taking over as a single pay and they have a ton of inside information that leads me to believe that you need to watch this.  

 

suteibu's picture

Interesting, although I am not sure you are correct about Obama not having a clue.  He was put into office for a reason and naivete was not it.  I am convinced that Obama is a "true believer," the worst sort to hold any office.