The Off-Ramps Never Used

When you die, if there is a God, don’t ask him why he didn’t send help. Ask him why we didn’t accept it.

Remember this Huey Lewis song? I do. It brings back memories. Of what could have been, if only. If only there was a God, or another God.

I Want a New God. I’ve had more than enough of this Monotheistic Abrahamic Bastard most people worship who gave us THIS and calls it Free Will. There is no such thing.

I, you, we were born into a System by and for The Rich. We had no choice in the matter and no say. We were born slaves, effectively, to one degree or another. Slaves to this System we cannot persuade or alter.

I will be doing a blog post in the next week or two that conjures this New God — and what a God it will be. The Rich should beware. If enough people believe in it, maybe it will materialize as The Rich dematerialize and all those with Dark Hearts who seek to do harm and never hope and endeavor for a better World — a Heaven On Earth.

So, Kucinich was offered as an example of “off ramp”. That’s on the Dem side. The Dems only represent roughly 50% of the US population, if that. What “off ramp” was offered on the Reps side?

That line is a standard one for GOP politicians. They are only called to be instruments of God’s will when it involves regulation of sex and making school prayer return.

You’ve got Ron Paul from the right. He’s been pilloried in a manner similar to Kucinich. I got the impression he drew inspiration from the grangers.

>That line is a standard one for GOP politicians. They are only called to be instruments of God’s will when it involves regulation of sex and making school prayer return.

Especially anal sex with under-aged boys.

Thank you, Ian Welsh. The current state of world affairs did not have to get to this point. We let this crap happen. We keep electing and re-electing rabid dogs to represent us. These dogs will continue to take us down roads we’d best not travel. Remember that the next time you cast your ballots.
Here’s hoping that good sense will prevail across the pond.
But I’ll not hold my breath.

Not that different. The difference between FDR and current politicians is leadership. He was a politician and no saint by a long shot. But he had goals and wanted to call the shots. So he had agency. Since today’s liberals are all about posturing, someone like Trump comes along and fills the vacuum.

I think things in Britain probably aren’t bad enough to lead to the turnover of power. But if Corbyn ever gets to take power, he is likely to actually use power, unlike Miliband and the other schlubs.

Recriminations serve nothing. 4.5 is too low. The exponential rate the population continues to grow exponentially increases the end result. By the time shit really warms up we’re looking at eighty-five (85) perecent loss of upwards of twelve billion people.

Maybe those Y2K nuts were on to something afterall.

“People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you.” R.Ailes

Something tells me you won’t be seeing many of those kinds of people around here. (until Ian gets swooshy graphics, blonde bimbos, the occasional bombastic harasser…)

For what it’s worth: I’m voting Labour (on the strength of their manifesto). But there are not entirely stupid reasons to be hesitant. Give this a read: http://www.liliangreenwood.co.uk/lilian_s_speech_to_nottingham_south_labour_party_members

He has integrity, and his ideas are both sensible and popular in the UK, but he is manifestly incompetent, weak, and leads a divided PLP. That’s not to imply that May is competent—but she’s better at giving the appearance of competence.

Ian;
Like all men of integrity that means he won’t always tell you (WHAT YOU) want to hear…

That aside; nice thread; clearly stating, the world as it genuinely exists.

Ian, I’ll repeat it AGAIN, as you clearly didn’t understand the first time around.

Corbyn has consistently opposed controls over mass migration from the EU into Britain, which has put huge strain on our housing and public services, has massively increased competition for jobs and has been a contributing factor to the stagnating and declining wages for the low skilled working classes/lower middle classes in the UK.

Mass immigration on such a huge scale over a short period of time has also disrupted communities and contributed to a weakening of social cohesion.

Corbyn is on the wrong side of this argument.

You mention the issues that concern you but you also ignore other key issues, for example the Brexit negotiations and Corbyn’s track record of supporting IRA terrorists during the years of terrorism where hundreds of innocent Brits were blown up.

There are solid reasons why the electorate will NOT vote for Corbyn which you consistently ignore in your writings.

It is true that elements of Corbyn’s policies are popular and interestingly the Conservative Party is shifting to the Left (for example workers representative on boards, curbs on executive pay and restrictions of foreign takeovers). This shows the Corbyn effect already in operation with the Tories adopting elements of Miliband-lite centre-left economics.

I think you need to do further reading on the British elections.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/middle-may-how-the-prime-minister-is-discovering-a-new-centre-ground/

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/theresa-mays-conservative-manifesto-buries-dogmatic-thatcherism

@Peter

This is beyond ludicrous trying to portray Kucinich as the Godhead.

At least Kucinich had the decency to return the money contributors had given him for fighting for the public option and for saying he wouldn’t accept less. The other ‘bold progressives?’–eh, not so much.

And yeah, you have to wonder what happened on that Air Force One ride. Certainly Kucinich was pilloried by the professional left, including Markos (ironically, who had said *he* wouldn’t support a public-optionless bill too until he drank the Kool-Aid). Having a robust public option, or offering Medicare buy-in, would have gone a long way towards making the ACA work a lot better (if nothing else, there’d be at least two insurers in every state/region).

@Peter

A political drama queen was buttered up with the royal treatment by a more powerful political drama queen

Funny, how your refer to Kucinich and Obama as ‘drama queens’, given the example of the Age of Trump. That’s like comparing moons to a supernovae. And Führerprinzip? At least these didn’t seek loyalty oaths from their subordinates to them, personally.

Kucinich & Sanders, and a few others but very few admittedly, are Illusive Carrots for the agitated but still largely clueless and easily duped. Whether they’re witting to their role is irrelevant. It is their role and they perform, or performed, it well.

Kucinich was a succesful mayor. There were plenty of other more left wing candidates as well, like Jesse Jackson.

Stop making excuses. The consequences of idiots and fools thinking that people like Kucinich were a joke is going to be well over a billion dead people.

Nuh-uh. Surely the electorate must take some blame for this, I wouldn’t disagree — far from it. But guns-and-butter progressives have been digging themselves into a hole for a long time. They know that they face a particular kind of vested-interest media and a particular cultural mindset and a particular kind of human political cognition. On occasion they can blame it on other things, like Mulcair getting cornered by the burqa obsession. But most of the time they put up candidates who look like the opposite of government and double down on the Narcissism of Truth. They too must take a share of the blame for this.

I would echo Bruce with my addendum manufacturing *plausible* consent. I no longer believe it as Chomsky has it, especially since he can’t accept the application of that standard to analysis of his subsequent work, particularly as part of MIT. But the consent being manufactured is certainly plausible, as the idea in this post by our host reveals that it is plausible that “we’re” rejecting an off-ramp on offer.

I sympathize much as it relates to Corbyn, but look at how it is being so roundly framed. You cannot seriously suggest that despite his presence as party leader, that it was forever and quite loud “an unlikely victory”. He is on balance so heavily ridiculed in the press that it shouldn’t surprise anyone that it is plausible people are rejecting him. But are they really?

As to Kucinich: Please let us not forget — in case you were aware — that NBC Universal chose to deny him a place in the Vegas debate in January of ’08, still early in the primary process and the party did nothing to stop them. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards were all still to attend, but Kucinich — who’d been in every primary debate up to that point, some of them loaded with eight or nine candidates — was somehow suddenly reasoned to be too much.

Kucinich successfully got an injunction on the debate’s taking place without him, but the corporate press with nary a peep from putative democratic institutions it’s supposed to represent took it all the way to the state supreme court and kept him out.

Where is that off-ramp again?

@Stew

You’re parroting a snowflake interpretation of what Trump said when he talked with Comey. It appeared to me that he was asking if Comey could be loyal not demanding fealty from a position of power.

The snowflakes are clever little demons who used this ploy before when Trump asked ‘if’ the Russians or anyone else had Clintons missing emails they should release them. They translated that into Trump directing the Russians to hack the Clintonites and help him.

We’re talking about a bunch of people who believe that if you cut a foot off the top of a blanket and sew it to the bottom you’ll end up with a longer blanket.

Peter’s nuttery is useful because it is authentic. It reminds me of the distinction between those with real psychosis and those who imitate it for attention getting and other reasons. Someone aping psychosis will come swinging into the room on the chandeliers. Someone with true psychosis will come swinging into the room on chandeliers that aren’t there.

All you have to do is interpret my name. Tsisa Geya.

Here’s a hint: Cherokee

Full disclosure: 63 y.o. female

Mother and grandmother. 63 years old—fuck you.

It’s okay. you couldn’t have known. All the war crimes, all the U.S. military actions. It’s not Obama, it’s Trump.

I am very sick of all the bullshit.

He has integrity, and his ideas are both sensible and popular in the UK, but he is manifestly incompetent, weak, and leads a divided PLP. That’s not to imply that May is competent—but she’s better at giving the appearance of competence.

Yep. May is a wilful ignoramus and policy incompetent, but she’s good at politics and most importantly, she looks like government. She is a “government-shaped” entity.

@Hugh

You must have taken a few off-ramps that ended with brick walls to explain your addled thinking. There was no opportunity to move off of fossil fuels in the late ’70s they were much too expensive and low efficiency. In retrospect dropping them was the smart move so China could develop, build the factories and produce solar at a competitive price.

Solar is a great intermittent power source for about 7 hours a day so it may reduce the demand for some coal but it can’t replace the fossil fuels it depends on for the rest of the day and night. Wind power is still expensive and it is also intermittent.

Which Saudis are you wanting held accountable for 9/ll? The ones on the planes are dead and no one has produced any facts or evidence that our ally the House of Saud was involved.

@peter,
get real, pal. the cleaness of the operation with the maximal emo effect screams professional scripting. open your eyes. and don’t bother pissing on me to put up or shut up. countless other professionals have. hollyworld east/ west knows all about how effective a larger than life show is in bypassing cognition and fueling religion. hardened belief in imagined truths.

StewartM, I wrote that mass migration was a contributing factor for the stagnation and decline in real wages, not the only factor.

Of course, the bailout of the banks, technological change and globalisation are also big drivers as well. Pretending that mass migration hasn’t contributed was a big reason why the Leave campaign won the referendum and polls show that a majority of British people want managed migration into the UK, not a open door policy.

Until the Left gets this, they will never understand why they keep on losing elections. Ian Welsh is a good example of a smart thinker who has a massive blindspot on this issue.

Remember … This is the best of Trump, unemployment is low – because the elites do not wish to pay more.

Excellent retort, StewartM. It took you a little longer to realize all this about Trump than me, but at least you finally have. Good for you.

Now what? Joe Biden in 2020, that’s what. Oy Vey!!

Another great comment from Ché Pasa. It’s difficult to find this kind of brutal, but necessary, honesty anywhere, both on The Net and off it or outside of it.

@Peter

Don’t play the islamophobe card on me. The islamophobes conflate Shia Iran with Sunni ISIS when it’s our strategic partners and valued friends in KSA that fund and supply ISIS. Whether or not it’s House of Saud, they certainly turn a blind eye, wink, wink. The worst islamophobes give KSA a pass because they’re “the good ones.” Meaning they have money, status and oil.

Tomorrow, Monday, May 22, 2017 will be the last day to register to vote. Please do here https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

Re the Saudis, I wrote here in the past,

Osama bin Laden was something of a goof, but also a product of his times. He grew up in a very rich family with modest beginnings and amidst the glaring contradictions of a corrupt Saudi monarchy/dictatorship and radical Wahabism. The 1979 armed seizure of the Great Mosque in Mecca by radicals was a watershed event in Saudi history. Osama would have been 22 at the time. Priority One of the Saudi monarchy has always been the survival of the Saudi monarchy. So while the occupiers were mostly captured and executed, the monarchy did a deal with the imams behind the attack. They turned over the Saudi educational system to them. This has led to a couple generations now of anti-Western xenophobes. They also backed and/or turned a blind eye to jihad and private funding by Saudis of radical madrassas (and terrorism) as long as these activities took place outside the kingdom and did not come back to challenge the monarchy. Now even as this deal was being hammered out, the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan began and with it the mujahideen resistance which Osama joined.

During the first Gulf War, Osama rejected American involvement. He did not want an infidel army in the same country as the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. He favored instead a popular resistance, much as had been mounted in Afghanistan. The Saudi monarchy, on the other hand, had no problem in fighting Saddam Hussein or really anyone else to the last dead American, and besides the holy sites were hundreds of miles away. This led Osama to break with the Saudi government. His challenge to it and not 9/11 was his great sin in its eyes. And the American presence in the kingdom probably led to his desire to attack the US in the US. Now Osama was not the only one with these ideas. He existed in a milieu of such thoughts, and actions. The first Gulf War took place in August 1990 to February 1991. In 1993, the first bombing of the World Trade Center, that of the blind sheik, took place. And in 1996, the bombing of the military barracks in the Khobar Towers (with the likely backing of members of the Saudi royal family, hence the Saudi stonewalling of the investigation into it) occurred. This led to lowering the profile of US forces in the country (shipping them out to the desert) and their eventual removal (2003).

I can’t find a date for it, but despite all the warning signs and the effects of the Great Mosque deal, under Saudi pressure and the desire for American schools and businesses to turn a buck, visa requirements for Saudis travelling to the US were eased. In part, this was why 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. They were the ones who could get in, but they were also those who had been most radicalized at home. And too they were most likely to cause a split between the US and the KSA, and start the worldwide religious war between Islam and the West Osama wanted and which he thought, much like Afghanistan and his proposal for resistance to Saddam Hussein, he thought he could win. I should point out that while he was officially on the outs with the Saudi government, this did not keep him from getting both financial and unofficial support from both Saudis and other citizens and regimes in the Gulf. He was afterall out of the country, and as long as he stayed out, the Saudis didn’t much care what he did or against whom, as long as it was not against them. So officially they were against him. Privately, not so much.

And they too were not the only ones. That Osama could live quietly in Pakistan for ten years after 9/11 in the shadow of the Pakistani military only happened because of the tacit support of parts of Pakistan’s military and intelligence apparatus. You see we have this idea that Osama was World Enemy Number One after 9/11, but this was never really the case, and it certainly wasn’t the case for our supposed two greatest and closest “allies” in the GWOT, the KSA and Pakistan.

I would also note that the Second Gulf War/Invasion of Iraq was pushed by neocons to gain control of Iraqi oil, but also because they were looking for a place to install permanent US bases in the Middle East. Put bluntly, they thought that the KSA was too unstable and too undependable for this purpose. Oh yes, and the majority of foreign suicide bombers in Iraq during the American occupation were Saudis.

Demographically, the kingdom is a time bomb. In 1950, it had a population of 3.8 million. In 2050, it is expected to have a population of 40 million. This in a place with little water and lots of desert.

And then there is the obsession of Salman and son with Shia Islam which is in part real, if loony, and part cynical deflectionary tactics to keep attention off the kingdom’s problems. The US, and in particular Trump, is playing into this in its usual stupid fashion by letting itself get dragged into the Saudi war in Yemen, which is principally against the Shia Houthis, and by selling them lots of expensive weaponry, which you really don’t want to do to an absolute dictatorship, and extremely unstable one at that.

@Steve C

I may have misjudged your Islamophobic tendencies but your rant about madrassas, terrorists and Saudi salafists sounds like at least a Crusader identity.

All the reporting I have read on the Islamic State claims they are mostly self funded with maybe 5% coming from outside sources throughout the MENA. It’s believed that some part of that comes from individuals and groups of Saudis and the Saudi government has made progress in interdicting that flow. Perhaps they could do more but even the US can’t control all the illegal cash-flow in and out of our advanced country.

The Saudis may be more intent on stopping the IS and other group’s attacks within the kingdom ,which are a constant threat, than chasing money trails. Projecting the Saudi inability to completely stop this cash flow as tacit approval or support of the IS is twisted logic at best.

You’ll never see me describe the KSA as the ‘good ones’ but they are our allies and they are developing their own defenses and power projection relieving the US of that task.

different clue, you’re right. It was Nixon in response to the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo which was itself a response to US support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War.

And CAFE fuel standards were enacted in 1975. So also pre-Carter. Interestingly, in 1979, Carter moved to deregulate domestic oil prices which Nixon had placed price controls on. So another instance where Carter went for deregulation.

Thanks for correcting me and getting me to review my history.

“Solar is a great intermittent power source for about 7 hours a day so it may reduce the demand for some coal ”

How many years’ worth of coal do you think is left in the Earth? And once it’s gone, it’s gone forever. For EVER. Not to mention the small fact of pollution and global climate change.

Now if only someone would invent a way to store excess electricity…

How does it affect the appearance of the off-ramp of one’s candidacy when they have outlasted half the candidates in the field only to be banned from the subsequent televised Primary debates before the primary process even begins to heat up?

Sorry, Ian, I must demur.
Who is this “we” of which you speak?

You persist in believing USians live in some kind of representative republic or something
We. Do. Not.

Given the huge edifice of mass mind control media apparatus, the collusion of the two right wing parties pretending to have a democratic electoral contest, and the actual government apparatus being wholly and directly controlled by the billionaire class and their operatives, or transformed entirely into private/profit skimming operations, it’s a monumental feat for any authentic alternative politician to survive such a tsunami.

On the rare occasions that a rare politician emerges from this cauldron to public prominence, or even those who, while participating in the general farce, dare to take a principled stand on a SINGLE ISSUE; I don’t know, War? Corruption? Health Care? Labor rights?

They are destroyed by their own party.
Or marginalized, silenced, ridiculed, invisibled, yatgeyed, robbed, persecuted, maybe eliminated with prejudice.

Even the tepid Jimmy Carter, John Edwards, also Sanders, Paul (I know, he kind of deserved it) Wellstone, McKinnet, Grayson.

The list is longer than we know.
If you had said the elites failed to take the off-ramp…

Where is that off-ramp again?

@ cripes

Just curious…why did Wellstone deserve killing?

The idea that most people still want a “government-shaped entity” after the election of Donald Trump, and in reference to a country that elected Boris Johnson the mayor of its largest city, seems wrong.

@Not PAT

I don’t know how much coal is left accessible on earth but no one is warning us about peak coal so there must be plenty. There are ecological costs from any type of power source we use including solar where most of the actual costs are offshored in someone else pollution stream.

There is no practical or affordable grid sized storage for excess solar electricity. The schemes of hydrogen conversion and waterfall pumping require more power to operate than they produce. Batteries have improved dramatically but we don’t have a 500 mile, reasonably priced battery for EV’s yet that don’t catch on fire and explode occasionally.

“And we all know what happens to things that produce no profit in a Capitalist society, right?”

Right. If they are banks or stock markets or the rich who own them, they get bailed out by the Fed.

Re Kucinich/Sanders type politicians, it is important to realize that most politicians running against the Establishment are actually part of the Establishment. This is why they are with you until they aren’t. While Trump didn’t have the usual political pedigree, as a billionaire celebrity, he was, and has always been, very much a part of the Establishment. You only have to look at his personnel and policy choices so far to see how true this is.

I think if progressives want to be successful, they have to do several things they have failed to do in the past.

1. They have to be disciplined and organize. (They are beyond wretched at this.)
2. They need to learn how to listen to what people are telling them. (Ditto.)
3. A good message is fine, but they also need a vision. And they need to learn how to sell it. (Edwards’ Two Americas was a great message, but it wasn’t a vision. Sanders had good programs, but not much of a message, and no vision.)
4. They need to fight, and learn how and when to fight the Establishment and its media, turning weaknesses into strengths. (Trump was great at this. Sanders not at all.)
5. They need to learn this core principle: movement first, then party, then candidates.

If you have a strong movement with a good message, programs, and a coherent, relatable vision, you can run pretty much anyone anywhere in the country at any level of government from local school board to President, and not just win but realize your vision for the country.

@ tsisageya: I did search for your name as suggested but without success; I do agree that there are many on the sidelines pontificating without”real world” experience; and they have been manipulated into an Orwellian world that lacks respect for their fellow humans.

Your frustration is shared by many of us; but there are some hopeful signs on the banks of the river while all are focused on the turbulence flowing by.

@hugh,
“I think if “_________” want to be successful, they have to do several things one thing they have failed to do in the past. They need to learn this core principle: movement media first, then party media, then candidates media.

ailes was correct about the proletariat,

Today television news is watched more often than people read newspapers, than people listen to the radio, than people read or gather any other form of communication. The reason: People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you.

At Naked Capitalism, they file everything Elon Musk under The Bezzle.

@Hugh,

Thank you for the kind words. Its an easy memory-mistake to make. Carter was always considered to be the “energy conservation” President. Nixon was never considered “pro-conservation”.

He sought the 55mph speed limit as part of a response to the Energy Crisis set off by the Arab Oil Embargo. His experts showed him how keeping cars at or under 55mph would result in less gas being used per mile driven than letting those same cars go much faster than 55mph.

The logic was good fact-based logic. It is explained here in this article on the Low Tech Magazine website called The Age Of Speed: How To Reduce Global Fuel Consumption By 75 Percent. Here is the link.
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/09/speed-energy.html

Think of it! A Global Speed Limit. A ramp still there to be taken. But it won’t be. The money-harvesting Overclass has protected itself against effective democracy. The only way to get permission to take this or any other Off Ramp would be to round up and take into custody and physically exterminate every single member and supporter of the Global Overclasses who deny us all the Off Ramps so far. And the Global Overclasses are certainly well enough protected and guarded to prevent anyone from ever revolutionizing successfully enough to round up and exterminate the OverClass ( and pro-OverClass) persons who prevent us from having nice things.

The best that well-intended wannabe-world-savers can do is bear some measure of personal witness by living some form of visibly off-ramped personal life in full view of anyone who might be watching.

@hugh,
david foster wallace gave up hope when he accepted that society statistics were on the side of entertain me.

@ Peter: You missed the part about the battery packs also will be employed in power walls in conjunction with Solar City which is doing roof installations. The power walls are expected to last 4 days w/o full sunlight. The batteries are designed to be fully recycled in the same plant. The Tesla S will use the same power pack.

The Tesla gigafactory is actually designed as a machine to take in raw materials and produce finished product –which is as revolutionary a concept as Ford’s assembly line.

@Karen

I’ll agree that Tesla’s new plant is smart and innovative and is probably subsidized by the state. The power wall is another good product for the wealthy consumers who can afford these systems with tax breaks paid for by people who can’t afford them. This leisure class solar segment is growing even though the solar roof and solar wall cost as much as many people’s homes do.

The EPA states that the Tesla car produces a CO2 equivalent of 50% of a gasoline powered car which is a great improvement but it is not clean just less polluting.