The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-20-2014, 07:24 AM   #1
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default Inverted Totalitarianism Marches On!

The U.K.’s cherished public health service is in danger of being sold off to private corporations via a trade deal that would create a single market between the European Union and the United States and open future British governments to massive lawsuits in international courts should they attempt to reverse the decision.

The proposal is another example of a country’s elite selling out institutions that are necessary to the public welfare for the sake of maintaining and increasing its own wealth and power.

Embedded in a pact called the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the deal was being negotiated in Brussels last week.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartothegrou...rvice_20140719

For those who don't know of what I speak: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
In inverted totalitarianism, every natural resource and every living being is commodified and exploited to collapse and the citizenry are lulled and manipulated into surrendering their liberties and their participation in their government by excess consumerism and sensationalism.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-20-2014, 09:27 AM   #2
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
Don't piss off Manning.
 
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun's Avatar
 
Time to believe!

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Gensis Planet
Posts: 6,544

Adopt-a-Bronco:
C.J. Anderson
Default

You mean another fail socialist concept? Who the phukc saw this coming. I love that you guys keep getting suprised by this.
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 12:13 PM   #3
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateHoboW/Shotgun View Post
You mean another fail socialist concept? Who the phukc saw this coming. I love that you guys keep getting suprised by this.

Some people are stupid and some have stupidity thrust upon them. Which one are you?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 12:55 PM   #4
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
Don't piss off Manning.
 
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun's Avatar
 
Time to believe!

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Gensis Planet
Posts: 6,544

Adopt-a-Bronco:
C.J. Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post

Some people are stupid and some have stupidity thrust upon them. Which one are you?
. I'm not the one surprised.
UltimateHoboW/Shotgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 01:28 PM   #5
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,479

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Any confusion over TTIP appears mostly based upon Labour party politics and Union lobbying about exclusions.....or lack thereof.

European official commits to safeguarding NHS in EU-US trade deal
European commission negotiator allays fears about impact of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership on the NHS

Quote:
Healey said the commission letter should answer fears in the Labour movement about the threat to the NHS. Healey told the Guardian: "This letter confirms that the NHS can be fully exempted in any TTIP deal. Now it is for UK ministers and EU negotiators to make sure that the commitments the lead negotiator is making are put in place in full. This letter confirms that the biggest threat to the NHS is the Tories not TTIP."

The former minister spoke out after the European commission moved to allay fears about the impact of the trade deal on the NHS. Bercero wrote that:

• Bilateral agreements made by the EU exclude or contain specific reservations "for publicly funded health services".
He wrote: "This policy space means that member states do not need to provide access to their markets for foreign companies and even if they do
give access they can discriminate between foreign companies and EU / domestic ones."

• EU member states are entitled to maintain and adopt new measures to control access to their health service market by foreign suppliers.
"The EU does not intend to change its approach to health services in trade negotiations for TTIP."

• EU members states face no restrictions on "liberalising the health sector nor from deliberalising it". He wrote: "The EU does not intend to change its
approach to public procurement for health services in TTIP."

Bercero concluded: "We can already state with confidence that any ISDS provisions in TTIP could have no impact on the UK's sovereign right to make
changes to the NHS. I hope that this information clearly demonstrates that there is no reason for fear either for the NHS as it stands today, or for
changes to the NHS in future, as a result of TTIP."
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...-us-trade-deal
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 03:26 PM   #6
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

"The most significant effect will be felt in health, enabling US healthcare multinationals and Wall Street investors to sue the UK government in secret courts if it attempts to reverse privatisation. David Cameron can exempt the NHS from these trade negotiations. Unless the prime minister acts, bureaucrats in Brussels and Washington will make the sell-off of our NHS irreversible."

Healey said of the transatlantic deal: "Even on the most measured assessment it could be worth an extra £4bn a year to Britain's GDP."


This really doesn't inspire confidence for me. It sounds more like they're getting the privatization wedge under the door and promising not to start driving it in with a hammer. "Oh, we'll just tap it in a little. You'll see. It will be alright." I have no doubt that somebody down the road will be coming along with a big hammer. The same thing will happen in the fight to privatize SS in the U.S. It will come in little pieces.

I'm about half way through Sheldon Wolin's book, "Democracy, Inc." and he makes a convincing argument that a long game is being played here; a game that started shortly after WWII. There are no evil geniuses, tyrants and conspirators behind the game. That's one of the reasons it's "inverted" totalitarianism. It's simply the evolution of greed at work. Those who have use what they have to buy power. Then, they find it's never enough and they need more. Piece by piece, they divvy up the world.

Remember the Wall Streeters taunting the Occupy movement with champagne?

That's the ethos at work here: We know better than you what to do with the world. Just quiet down and enjoy it, because it's going to happen whether you like it or not.

I'm guessing the European health care system is a test case before going after, and finally destroying, the American social safety net.

The neoliberal agenda keeps moving ahead. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=115853

Last edited by Rohirrim; 07-20-2014 at 03:43 PM..
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 04:11 PM   #7
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

The other part of Wolin's thesis is that we live in a "managed democracy." The government is "legitimated by an electoral process they control." Hard to argue against that thesis since Bush v Gore.

You could really see evidence for this when they polled Wall Street regarding their presidential preferences. If it was Jeb Bush/Hillary, they'd go Bush. If it was Paul/Hillary, they'd go Hillary. Their top two preferences were Bush and Hillary. In other words, party is meaningless.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 06:18 AM   #8
BroncsRule
Perennial Pro-bowler
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 983

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
The other part of Wolin's thesis is that we live in a "managed democracy." The government is "legitimated by an electoral process they control." Hard to argue against that thesis since Bush v Gore.

You could really see evidence for this when they polled Wall Street regarding their presidential preferences. If it was Jeb Bush/Hillary, they'd go Bush. If it was Paul/Hillary, they'd go Hillary. Their top two preferences were Bush and Hillary. In other words, party is meaningless.
Of course. Jeb & Hillary are both Corporatists. Rand Paul is not. If Rand were to actually gain any traction nationally, he would have to be dealt with.
BroncsRule is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 06:27 AM   #9
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncsRule View Post
Of course. Jeb & Hillary are both Corporatists. Rand Paul is not. If Rand were to actually gain any traction nationally, he would have to be dealt with.
Libertarianism is definitely not the cure for the inverted totalitarianism that Wolin is proposing. If it was, the Koch brothers sure as hell wouldn't be funding it.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 07:27 AM   #10
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,210

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
That's the ethos at work here: We know better than you what to do with the world. Just quiet down and enjoy it, because it's going to happen whether you like it or not.
They key you're once again missing. Whether you're talking Corporate leaders or Political leaders, the same ethos is at work.

For the same reason you support breaking up Corporate monopolies, you should be very skeptical of Federal ones.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 07:49 AM   #11
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
They key you're once again missing. Whether you're talking Corporate leaders or Political leaders, the same ethos is at work.

For the same reason you support breaking up Corporate monopolies, you should be very skeptical of Federal ones.
In a working democracy, the people are engaged and can vote their representatives in, and out of office. In corporate monopolies, only a very small segment of the corporate population, the board members, have that capacity.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 07:51 AM   #12
BroncsRule
Perennial Pro-bowler
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 983

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Please don't take the above as an endorsement of Rand Paul or Libertarianism.

The whole philosophy of how the world could take care of itself without government is just so incredibly naive, and would ultimately play into the hands of the Corporate Elite.

But Rand is earning his spurs as a Reformer, so if he were actually elected, he could cause problems. So if he ever gains any real traction, he will be dealt with.
BroncsRule is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 07:57 AM   #13
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncsRule View Post
Please don't take the above as an endorsement of Rand Paul or Libertarianism.

The whole philosophy of how the world could take care of itself without government is just so incredibly naive, and would ultimately play into the hands of the Corporate Elite.

But Rand is earning his spurs as a Reformer, so if he were actually elected, he could cause problems. So if he ever gains any real traction, he will be dealt with.
At its base, questions of governance and politics are the separate genius of mankind, which is why people like Plato, Socrates, etc. all the way up to Locke, Jefferson, etc. spent their lives pondering its questions.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 09:14 AM   #14
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,210

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
In a working democracy, the people are engaged and can vote their representatives in, and out of office. In corporate monopolies, only a very small segment of the corporate population, the board members, have that capacity.
Come now. This is as naive as saying "If you don't like what Comcast does, nobody's forcing you to buy from them! If you don't like Exxon's decisions, you can buy voting stock!"

The problem with both Comcast and the Federal Government is that they've grown so far beyond accountable to their average constituent.

Our current climate is structured so that when California is in a 51% governing coalition, they get intimately involved with how Wyoming lives day to day. And as soon as Texas finds it way back into the 51%, people in New York will get introduced to a whole new approach to certain things.

Not because of any real representative Democratic consent. But because federal supremacy leads to the either/or. When Democrats are the 51%, they have no reason to care about the 49. Just like Comcast doesn't have to care when they know you're not going anywhere, like it or not.

Believe it or not, the founders didn't want the Federal Government so intimately involved in the day-to-day for this reason. The States were meant to handle most of what the federal government is involved in today. Because, in the spirit of the representative Democracy you're talking about, they're much more aware of and accountable to the will of their people.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 11:33 AM   #15
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Come now. This is as naive as saying "If you don't like what Comcast does, nobody's forcing you to buy from them! If you don't like Exxon's decisions, you can buy voting stock!"

The problem with both Comcast and the Federal Government is that they've grown so far beyond accountable to their average constituent.

Our current climate is structured so that when California is in a 51% governing coalition, they get intimately involved with how Wyoming lives day to day. And as soon as Texas finds it way back into the 51%, people in New York will get introduced to a whole new approach to certain things.

Not because of any real representative Democratic consent. But because federal supremacy leads to the either/or. When Democrats are the 51%, they have no reason to care about the 49. Just like Comcast doesn't have to care when they know you're not going anywhere, like it or not.

Believe it or not, the founders didn't want the Federal Government so intimately involved in the day-to-day for this reason. The States were meant to handle most of what the federal government is involved in today. Because, in the spirit of the representative Democracy you're talking about, they're much more aware of and accountable to the will of their people.
Except Wolin's thesis is that the federal government is doing what corporations tell it to do. When you attack the federal government, you're attacking the glove, not the hand that moves it. I'll repost this line from the OP: In inverted totalitarianism, every natural resource and every living being is commodified and exploited to collapse and the citizenry are lulled and manipulated into surrendering their liberties and their participation in their government by excess consumerism and sensationalism.

Interesting, that in the other thread I posted, one Silicon Valley wizard waxes poetic over the idea that soon "...everybody will be their own brand." Each individual will be responsible for their rating and reputation which will determine their value, ie. as a commodity.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2014, 02:03 PM   #16
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,210

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Except Wolin's thesis is that the federal government is doing what corporations tell it to do. When you attack the federal government, you're attacking the glove, not the hand that moves it.
No offense, but this shares the same logical shortcoming I've been talking about.

A corporation is just a group of people acting in their own interest. Not really functionally any different than the government itself.

Corporations are one hand. Government is another. Sometimes they work together (for good or bad) Sometimes they fight against each other. Either will subvert the individual at any time it serves their purposes.

A quick glance at the NSA is all you need to see to know it's true.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2014, 06:14 AM   #17
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Politics, if we take politics to mean the shaping and discussion of issues, concerns and laws that foster the common good, is no longer the business of our traditional political institutions. These institutions, including the two major political parties, the courts and the press, are not democratic. They are used to crush any vestiges of civic life that calls, as a traditional democracy does, on its citizens to share among all its members the benefits, sacrifices and risks of a nation. They offer only the facade of politics, along with elaborate, choreographed spectacles filled with skillfully manufactured emotion and devoid of real political content. We have devolved into what Alexis de Tocqueville feared—“democratic despotism.”

The squabbles among the power elites, rampant militarism and the disease of imperialism, along with a mindless nationalism that characterizes all public debate, have turned officially sanctioned politics into a carnival act.

Pundits and news celebrities on the airwaves engage in fevered speculation about whether the wife of a former president will run for office—and this after the mediocre son of another president spent eight years in the White House. This is not politics. It is gossip. Opinion polls, the staple of what serves as political reporting, are not politics. They are forms of social control. The use of billions of dollars to fund election campaigns and pay lobbyists to author legislation is not politics. It is legalized bribery. The insistence that austerity and economic rationality, rather than the welfare of the citizenry, be the primary concerns of the government is not politics. It is the death of civic virtue. The government’s system of wholesale surveillance and the militarization of police forces, along with the psychosis of permanent war and state-orchestrated fear of terrorism, are not politics. They are about eradicating civil liberties and justifying endless war and state violence. The chatter about death panels, abortion, gay rights, guns and undocumented children crossing the border is not politics. It is manipulation by the power elites of emotion, hate and fear to divert us from seeing our own powerlessness.

“Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country,” Edward Bernays observed in his 1928 book, “Propaganda.” “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”
Politics in the hands of the corporate state is anti-politics. It is designed to denigrate and destroy the values that make a liberal democracy and political participation possible. It is a cynical form of mass control. Corporate money has replaced the vote. Dissent is silenced or ignored. Political parties are Punch and Judy shows funded by corporate puppeteers. Universities, once the epicenter of social change, are corporate headquarters, flush with corporate money, government contracts and foundation grants. The commercial press, whose primary task is attracting advertising dollars, has become an arm of the entertainment industry. It offers news as vaudeville.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...round_20140907
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2014, 09:54 AM   #18
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,197
Default

Strange how Ro can cite this yet flip in the very next thread into a booster for US foreign policy.

It's too weird for words...
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2014, 11:44 AM   #19
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,975

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Strange how Ro can cite this yet flip in the very next thread into a booster for US foreign policy.

It's too weird for words...
Your take on Putin, as on most things, is wrong.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:57 PM.


Denver Broncos