The major problems with the IC video are: (1) it's a misleading story that misinforms viewers; and (2) the solution IC (and the Pentagon) is pushing -- US military intervention -- will make things much worse.
That doesn't mean that we shouldn't help. There are organizations like War Child and The Voice Project that are doing amazing work in Uganda and surrounding countries that, unlike IC, are transparent with their finances and actually spend the money they raise on the causes they claim to support (IC raised more than $15,000,000 the week the video was released -- only 35% of IC funds get used in Africa -- the rest is used for IC salaries, overhead and marketing material).
This may be the first neo[liberal/conservative] post I have ever seen on this website. To describe the belief that killing innocent people is never justified as "ridiculous" is... well... slightly to the right of John McCain.
I know the blogosphere is already mocking the weakness of this piece but are any mondoweiss bloggers going to add their 2 cents? If someone links to this piece, a first-time visitor following that link would probably assume this is a right-wing website.
Before you bring up "credibility issues", you should make sure the comment you're posting does not damage your credibility.
By claiming Paul subscribes the "rand/hayek/friedman school of political economy", you reveal that not only are you not familiar with Paul's views but that you're also not familiar with the views of Rand or Friedman.
Friedman was a member of the Chicago School (aka "monetarism" which shares its roots with Keynesianism) while Hayek and Paul are members of the Austrian School. If you're truly interested in the major and irreconcilable differences between the Austrian School and the Chicago School, see Milton Friedman Unraveled, written by Paul's mentor, Murray Rothbard (also a Jewish anarchist).
Adding Rand's cult of Objectivism into that weird conflation of incompatible philosophies makes even less sense.
If you want to point out the areas where Paul is wrong, there is plenty to point out (not as much as there is to point out with Rand and Friedman but still plenty). I have actually written quite a bit on the subject. But, if you're going to criticize, make sure you understand what you're criticizing. Otherwise, it could lead to "credibility issues". And while I certainly won't be voting for Paul (or anyone for that matter), there is no doubt that he is the only person on the left of the political spectrum running for president (including Obama).
Thanks, this ("FDR was a Communist") made me smile. Does your grandfather refer to anyone that does/did the bidding of Wall Street as a "communist" or just FDR?
Keith, I think you're misunderstanding my comment. I made no allusion to how capitalism functions in the real world (I certainly didn't see anything in your previous comment that would lead me to believe this is something on which we disagree). The only part of your comment I was addressing was your conflating capitalism with the free market as if they were the same or even similar.
For instance, capitalism requires the state to enforce intellectual "property" laws so that corporations can charge a 1000% markup on a product and pay the people who made it pennies. Capitalism also requires the state to monopolize (or grant a monopoly) on the medium of exchange. It's the power to loan money into existence that allows the corporate/political class to access and accumulate a disproportionate share of capital (at an artifically low rate). I could continue listing these aspects of capitalism but I'm sure you get the point. If you have these things, you don't have a free market. Take away these things (and the other state-granted privileges) and you no longer have capitalism.
All I'm saying is that the terms have totally different meanings and to use them otherwise is to use them exactly as the corporate/political class wants them used.
And it depends on how you interpret the invisible hand metaphor but I definitely believe in cooperation without coercion. That's not capitalism. Capitalism is the iron fist.
It appears you are conflating state-capitalism with freed-markets. A common mistake but a mistake nonetheless. State-capitalism (what you are calling "market capitalism") and freed markets are mutually exclusive... if you have one, you don't have the other.
It served [the] economic and social purposes of the ruling class and continues to do so. States have never been necessary. The internet just makes it that much more obvious (pdf - must read).
And he was also the host of Fear Factor on NBC.
Joe Rogan is also a big Ron Paul supporter (last time he was on Leno, he wore a Ron Paul shirt).
Here's a Rogan compilation on YouTube (some NSFW language).
Paul Ryan vs. Ayn Rand.
Also see this Einstein letter from April of 48.
Hi Sherri,
The major problems with the IC video are: (1) it's a misleading story that misinforms viewers; and (2) the solution IC (and the Pentagon) is pushing -- US military intervention -- will make things much worse.
That doesn't mean that we shouldn't help. There are organizations like War Child and The Voice Project that are doing amazing work in Uganda and surrounding countries that, unlike IC, are transparent with their finances and actually spend the money they raise on the causes they claim to support (IC raised more than $15,000,000 the week the video was released -- only 35% of IC funds get used in Africa -- the rest is used for IC salaries, overhead and marketing material).
Here are some recommended links...
Kony screening provokes anger in Uganda (aljazeera.com)
How Invisible Children's Kony 2012 Will Hurt - And How You Can Help - Central Africa (huffingtonpost.com)
KONY 2012, Invisible Children's Pro-AFRICOM and Museveni Propaganda (blackstarnews.com)
Kony 2012: growing outrage in Uganda over film (telegraph.co.uk)
Joseph Kony is not in Uganda (and other complicated things) (foreignpolicy.com)
Have Friends That Just Heard of Joseph Kony? (facebook.com)
All links via ICYMI (where I'm pretty sure that 2nd screen on the bottom of the cover graphic is mondoweiss.net).
This may be the first neo[liberal/conservative] post I have ever seen on this website. To describe the belief that killing innocent people is never justified as "ridiculous" is... well... slightly to the right of John McCain.
I know the blogosphere is already mocking the weakness of this piece but are any mondoweiss bloggers going to add their 2 cents? If someone links to this piece, a first-time visitor following that link would probably assume this is a right-wing website.
Before you bring up "credibility issues", you should make sure the comment you're posting does not damage your credibility.
By claiming Paul subscribes the "rand/hayek/friedman school of political economy", you reveal that not only are you not familiar with Paul's views but that you're also not familiar with the views of Rand or Friedman.
Friedman was a member of the Chicago School (aka "monetarism" which shares its roots with Keynesianism) while Hayek and Paul are members of the Austrian School. If you're truly interested in the major and irreconcilable differences between the Austrian School and the Chicago School, see Milton Friedman Unraveled, written by Paul's mentor, Murray Rothbard (also a Jewish anarchist).
Adding Rand's cult of Objectivism into that weird conflation of incompatible philosophies makes even less sense.
If you want to point out the areas where Paul is wrong, there is plenty to point out (not as much as there is to point out with Rand and Friedman but still plenty). I have actually written quite a bit on the subject. But, if you're going to criticize, make sure you understand what you're criticizing. Otherwise, it could lead to "credibility issues". And while I certainly won't be voting for Paul (or anyone for that matter), there is no doubt that he is the only person on the left of the political spectrum running for president (including Obama).
Also check out M1 on Lowkey's new track.
That's a lot of comments (at least a part-time job's worth).
Thanks, this ("FDR was a Communist") made me smile. Does your grandfather refer to anyone that does/did the bidding of Wall Street as a "communist" or just FDR?
Keith, I think you're misunderstanding my comment. I made no allusion to how capitalism functions in the real world (I certainly didn't see anything in your previous comment that would lead me to believe this is something on which we disagree). The only part of your comment I was addressing was your conflating capitalism with the free market as if they were the same or even similar.
For instance, capitalism requires the state to enforce intellectual "property" laws so that corporations can charge a 1000% markup on a product and pay the people who made it pennies. Capitalism also requires the state to monopolize (or grant a monopoly) on the medium of exchange. It's the power to loan money into existence that allows the corporate/political class to access and accumulate a disproportionate share of capital (at an artifically low rate). I could continue listing these aspects of capitalism but I'm sure you get the point. If you have these things, you don't have a free market. Take away these things (and the other state-granted privileges) and you no longer have capitalism.
All I'm saying is that the terms have totally different meanings and to use them otherwise is to use them exactly as the corporate/political class wants them used.
And it depends on how you interpret the invisible hand metaphor but I definitely believe in cooperation without coercion. That's not capitalism. Capitalism is the iron fist.
It appears you are conflating state-capitalism with freed-markets. A common mistake but a mistake nonetheless. State-capitalism (what you are calling "market capitalism") and freed markets are mutually exclusive... if you have one, you don't have the other.
This Einstein letter has probably been posted here before but it's the first time I've seen it.
This post (Stuxnet Authors Made Several Basic Errors) on Kaspersky Lab’s blog also makes it appear that hiding the worm wasn't a high priority.
It served [the] economic and social purposes of the ruling class and continues to do so. States have never been necessary. The internet just makes it that much more obvious (pdf - must read).
If you understand that no one is authorized to commit crimes, you are an anarchist. Embrace it.