Emerging strategic logic of the new century understood otherwise?
* “Why should the socialism of buen vivir be considered a bio-socialism? What characterizes it identifies it and makes it unique from the socialism conceived of by the classics—Karl Marx, Frederick Engels and Lenin?
The socialism of buen vivir is a pact of coexistence made by the Ecuadorian people, which has been signed into the new Constitutional Document of 2008. In this constitution, what I have labeled the socialism of buen vivir or republican bio-socialism is made concrete. In simplified terms, the nucleus of classical socialism’s wager was the issue of redistribution, equality. Without a doubt equality has to continue being one of the pillars of the socialism of buen vivir. However, in my view, the leftist agenda that the Ecuadorian people outlined in Montecristi doesn’t just point towards the search for equality. Additional topics exist give it a special place within other current constitutional utopias. One of them is the change from anthropocentrism to biocentrism. What is important is not only human beings but life as a whole, which is constitutive element that guarantees the survival of human beings. We should remember that Ecuador is the only country in the world whose constitution guarantees the rights of nature. At the same time, this Constitution is republican in the sense that it recognizes differences but seeks equality and within the framework of the construction of a democracy that is not only representative but participative and deliberative, in which a citizen not only has rights, but also obligations and responsibilities in the political community.
It’s been almost three years since Joe Bageant, one of America’s most unique, populist political voices, passed away rather suddenly from cancer. During his life he kept company with American folk heroes such as Hunter S. Thompson, Timothy Leary, and Alan Ginsberg, bartended on the same Indian reservation that author Sherman Alexie grew up on, and in his spare time became one of the preeminent gonzo journalists of his generation. Pretty impressive for a guy who grew up dirt-poor in Winchester, West Virginia, dropped out of High School at sixteen to join the Navy, and never earned higher than a GED.
I did not know Joe personally, but through engaging with his writing felt like I did. I’m sure many admirers of his work feel the same way. I did however have the honor of having a thirty-minute phone conversation with him in August of 2010, approximately six months before he passed. He had forwarded me, a person he barely knew, his phone number after only a brief email exchange. He was spending some time in his Mexican bungalow at the time, and our conversation ranged from the evils of the mortgage industry to his terminally ill family dog. He even extended an invitation to spend some time with him down in Mexico after the New Year. Unfortunately that was not meant to be, but I still consider our conversation as one of the greatest gifts of my life. Not everyone has the opportunity to dialogue with their personal hero.
Interview with radio-host Alex Tsakiris. Alex is an entrepreneur and host of the popular podcast Skeptiko.
He’s an active investigator in the fields of consciousness, parapsychology, and near death experience research.
Unlike other radio hosts Alex regularly engages with Skeptical voices in an attempt to create a larger dialogue about these issues.
We are seeing it today, in the Ukraine, Syria, across Africa; more than two dozen instances have been cataloged. Highly organized armed groups, multiple nationalities, all drawn upon at need, ready for any mission, riot, revolution, subversion, terror attacks or assassinations.
Their actions are ruthless, their allegiances a matter of “conspiracy theory.” They never take credit, never issue manifestos, have no website.
Gladio operatives run entire nations, the Republic of Georgia certainly, Albania/Kosovo, in South America, Bolivia and Paraguay. There is always a political theme, though vague and ethereal, the signs are there, Western intelligence agencies, secret societies, manipulation of commodity markets, currencies and, above all sovereign debt.
The group is called “Gladio”, after the Latin term “gladius”, the short sword used in the Roman arena. Those who have heard of Operation Gladio have a vague notion of a NATO sponsored anti-communist program that, during the 1980s and 90s somehow “went wrong.” The version told the public is actually quite amusing.
Supposedly, Gladio was established after the war by SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers, Europe). Were one to assume the mysterious Gehlen Organization, CIA and Gladio were one in the same, same roots, same financing, same lack of accountability, one might be on a very strong footing.
What isn’t amusing is the fact that Gladio is still operating. When Anders Breivik, the worst mass murder in recent years, admitted to being a Gladio operative, few were surprised.
Springing ahead for daylight saving time may in fact be March Madness as numerous studies list detrimental effects of losing an hour’s sleep.
Preliminary Cost List Only:
Cost 01: Quantity and Quality of Sleep
Cost 02: Class and school performance
Cost 03: Traffic accidents
Cost 04: Heart attacks
Cost 05: Physical activity
Cost 06: Cyberloafing
Veteran’s Today: Ukraine and the Jewish Influence (Amidst the Fascist Criminals Displacing the Communist Criminals)
Veterans Today, 6 March 2014
There are competing narratives about what’s going on in the Ukraine and why, and it behooves us as citizens to expose ourselves to a range of these before forming our own deeper understanding of what’s happening there and what should be done about it. One-sided information and stories lead us to make unwise decisions, as the results of a number of America’s recent wars suggest. Having institutions – from good journalism to citizen deliberative councils – that do this for the society as whole would result in wiser policy and a better world.
The Ukrainian crisis provides a rich opportunity to consider the complexity of it (and similar situations) and to reflect on the often over-simplified narratives promoted by various sides and on the consequences of such narratives.
Most mainstream press I’ve seen in the U.S. covering the Ukraine crisis recently has focused on the impressive, determined, and seemingly successful popular revolt against a corrupt oligarch and on Russia’s invasion to counter the West-leaning thrust of that revolution on its borders. Although acknowledging the cultural diversity of the Ukraine, this coverage seldom gives due treatment to the roles played by hundreds of years of Russian involvement in, settlement in, and changing relationships with this region, especially Russia’s extensive military and economic involvement in Crimea and its nearby territory. There is also minimal coverage of the neo-Nazi groups and American government and business interests among the many forces involved in the revolution and its subsequent coup. Perhaps most ironically, journalists, pundits and public officials react with horror at Russia’s putting its proclaimed interests ahead of international law and norms while ignoring the long history of the same behavior on the part of the U.S. (to say nothing of previous empires).
There seem to be few angels in this crisis – and the activities and stories of those few are often being manipulated by partisan interests for their own purposes. It is understandable that such a situation has “sides” and that the partisans of those sides weave compelling stories out of selected facts (and usually some falsehoods and half-truths) to justify their positions. But to make wise policy decisions – as citizens and officials – we need to develop deeper-than-partisan understandings of what’s going on. Oversimplified partisan journalism does not help us in that. And when it leads to or justifies war and/or other harms, it is actively dangerous.
In the face of extremely rapid changes in both the situation in the Ukraine and in its media coverage, I think it is risky to attempt to summarize what’s going on and why. Although many people from many perspectives have tried to do so – some with the intention of enlightening us, others intending to recruit us to their favored positions – I will try to refrain here. I do not know enough, nor am I committed to the work of clarifying the endless nuances of the situation.
What I do offer here is some references to counter the one-sidedness of so much of what I’ve read in the U.S. mainstream media about this crisis. I do not assert that my references are truer or more relevant than other essays and reports. What I do suggest is that they offer information and perspectives that need to be taken seriously when making decisions about how to respond.
In his most recent Good Morning Geek post called Internet-Speak, Max Swisher discusses “…a new problem for modern people: We must all be bilingual and use the appropriate language depending on context. Teens in school must know how to talk online in lolspeak and the next day write a paper in diverse, formal English.”
Max introduces us to “Arrow,” a mythical person from the city of Hindrawyt in Indochinalumbilan. Arrow is a well-studied teenager, who has learned classic English prior to coming to the U.S. Once here, Arrow is faced with a new language. Max calls it “lolspeak” and we also know it as internet-speak.
Max brings up a number of points that got me thinking.