Beru's Communism Omnibus Thread

[E_T]

Also the high ideals have been controlled by groups that only wanting for themselves.  Nothing man made is perfect, because not everyone is broad minded and unselfish. 

Real change requires major paradyne(sp) shifts in large population groups.  Not an easy thing...

[E_T]

Good riddance to bad rubbish...  can't wait for his brother to finally move out of his shadow...

And I have been of the opinion that the sanctions should have been lifted long ago.  The only way for the Cubans to really get up and work for change is to be fully exposed to what that change would bring them with the increase in trade...

[gwillybj]

Sounds like the Borg.

[Bearu]

Sounds like the Borg.

Where do you think the writers derived the source material for the concept? The precepts of Marxism decry the evils of the bourgeois family and the destruction of the proletariat family in the pursuit of the bourgeois family model. The current situation appears to support the concept because the number of single parent households, according to Gotea and Busuoic at the University of Brasov, appears to have risen from 9% in the 1960's to 26% in the 1990's in the United States of America (98). The majority of the single parent families appear in the lower income classes, and the single parent family holds a number of significant negative influences on the outcomes of the members. The children of the single parent households hold a lower educational attainment, higher levels of delinquency, and lower socioeconomic status as adults. The proposed system ensures the people of every class possess the necessary connections to produce the best possible child for the circumstances through the intervention of the joint family unit. The joint family unit ensures the people have the ability to discipline the child in a productive manner since the other members of the group would possess the ability to intervene in the development of the child through a response from the childcare expert of the group.

[Bearu]

History has taught us that humans are spectacularly bad at figuring out which grand, utopian plans are good and which are monstrous. We do not yet have Hari Seldon and his psychohistory, so for the foreseeable future (ha), we are stuck groping blindly for answers. My suggestion is to listen widely and discuss without attempting to persuade, and through that process slowly realize that your political ideology is probably hokum (just as mine is).

I believe you understand the true euphemism for the paper. The fiction writers can proselytize his or her beliefs, but the concern for the pragmatic aspects of social life remains a concrete consideration. The ability to read remains an essential component, but the current system remains an amalgamation of dissident parts where the major corporations influence the perception of society through the proliferation of non-governmental propaganda. The question remains on the ability to select from the choices of deception, activism, professionalism, or a truth. The position of apathy remains a component of the ill inside the current problem. The professionals often remain complicit in the delusions of society, and the majority of the social groups remain under the delusional thoughts. The only path left remains a passive activism where the people attempt to destroy the delusions of the professionals and to awaken the alternative perspectives in the population from the crass consumerism in the United States of America.

[Bearu]

The premise remains flawed for several reasons.

[Rusty Edge]

Here's one I've seen in a museum.

[Bearu]

The article remains a few years old, but the mainstream media never appears to comment on the issue.
https://www.rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/

It’s being branded by proponents as an attempt at transparency, but critics of a new law say the United States government just got the green-light to use propaganda made for foreign audiences on the American public.

Until earlier this month, a longstanding federal law made it illegal for the US Department of State to share domestically the internally-authored news stories sent to American-operated outlets broadcasting around the globe. All of that changed effective July 2, when the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) was given permission to let US households tune-in to hear the type of programming that has previously only been allowed in outside nations.

The BBG is the independent government agency that broadcasts Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and other networks created “to inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy" - and a new law now allows the agency to provide members of the American public with program materials originally meant to be disseminated abroad.

The Smith-Mundt Act has ensured for decades that government-made media intended for foreign audiences doesn’t end up on radio networks broadcast within the US. An amendment tagged onto the National Defense Authorization Act removed that prohibition this year, however, and as of earlier this month those news stories meant for nations abroad can now be heard easily by American ears.

Back in 1972, Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright equated those government stories with propaganda when he said they "should be given the opportunity to take their rightful place in the graveyard of Cold War relics.” A couple of current lawmakers were singing a different tune when they proposed the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 last year, though, which became official just two weeks ago.

When Reps. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA) introduced their changes last year, they said their bill would modify “a Cold War-era law that hampers diplomatic, defense and other agencies’ ability to communicate in the twenty-first century.” Amid much debate, however, their argument quickly became one that focused less on ensuring Uncle Sam has his say within the media and more on making sure a taxpayer-funded program became available to those footing the costs.

“Effective strategic communication and public diplomacy should be front-and-center as we work to roll back al-Qaeda’s and other violent extremists’ influence among disaffected populations,” Rep. Smith wrote in May 2012 in support of his bill. “An essential part of our efforts must be a coordinated, comprehensive, adequately resourced plan to counter their radical messages and undermine their recruitment abilities. To do this, Smith-Mundt must be updated to bolster our strategic communications and public diplomacy capacity on all fronts and mediums – especially online.”

But a Buzzfeed article published days later by late journalist Michael Hastings opened a can of worms on Smith and Thornberry, and the lawmakers were forced to quickly diffuse critics who said their bill made it so that the government could effectuate propaganda on its own public. On his part, Thornberry told Foreign Policy that the BuzzFeed article and the subsequent blowback was “one level of sloppiness on top of another,” caused by an uninformed Hastings story being hijacked by pundits from other publications who were all the more ignorant. “And once something sensational gets out there, it just spreads like wildfire," said Thornberry.

"The idea that the State Department could be so effective as to impact domestic politics is just silly,” Thornberry told Foreign Policy last year. “This gives Americans the chance to see what the State Department is saying to people all over the world,” he insisted.

Weighing in to Foreign Policy one year later, BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil said that the maneuver is nothing more than to show Americans how their money is being spent abroad. "Now Americans will be able to know more about what they are paying for with their tax dollars - greater transparency is a win-win for all involved," she said.

A view inside the BBG Middle East Broadcasting Networks newsroom. (Image from whitehouse.gov)

In the wake of others’ comments, though — and the actual text of the legislation itself — critics can’t help but suggest that the latest amendment courtesy of Smith and Thornberry have opened the door for the use of propaganda to persuade the American public at a time when the popularity of both Congress and the president are lower than what either would prefer.

Those opinions and others could change, of course, if the American government can infiltrate the radio waves and introduce news aimed at specific demographics that has previously only been pushed outside of the US. The statement from Smith and Thornberry last year suggested that the Cold War-era legislation previously prevented a Minneapolis, Minnesota-based radio station with a large Somali-American audience from broadcasting a piece produced by the BBG’s Voice of America that rebutted efforts from Somalia’s al- Shabaab extremist group to recruit members within the US.

“Even after the community was targeted for recruitment by al-Shabaab and other extremists, government lawyers refused the replay request, noting that Smith-Mundt tied their hands,” wrote the lawmakers.

"Somalis have three options for news" a former US government source with connections to the BBG told Foreign Policy. The source added that those three options are word of mouth, al-Shabaab or VOA Somalia.

"Those people can get al-Shabaab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn't get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia," the source said. "It was silly."

“Previously, the legislation had the effect of clouding and hiding this stuff," the source said. "Now we'll have a better sense: Gee some of this stuff is really good. Or gee some of this stuff is really bad. At least we'll know now."

According to a document from the Office of the Federal Register published this week by Cryptome, the Smith-Thornberry act “does not require or prompt the public to take any action; rather, it functions to relieve the prohibition that prevented the Agency from responding to requests for program materials from the US public, US media entities or other US organizations.”

“This rule benefits the public, media, and other organizations by allowing them to request and access BBG program materials, which previously could not be disseminated within the US,” it reads.

The rule applies only to media published by the State Department and does not involve any initiatives created or funded through the Pentagon.

[Bearu]

The video challenges the stereotypical attitudes of the population towards the Russian State Media with a comical video. The video remains several years old, but the information remains a relevant rejoinder against the continual assault from the American government about the propagandist nature of the source.
Warning: The video contains racial stereotypes and language some people may construe as an offensive concept.

(click to show/hide)

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQQwBfux9i0" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQQwBfux9i0</a>

[E_T]

Don't read Russian... 

[Bearu]

Warning: The following definition may contain offensive slang.

(click to show/hide)

The words on the front of the jar at the scene where she walks through the hallway translate approximately into beaver juice.

[Bearu]

What charaktermaske, character-masks, does the capitalistic society impose on you? Where does the line between the epistemic function of language and roles enter into the concept of reality? When, where, and how does the character-mask become you? The answer resides when the person cannot remove the character-mask and the person accepts the oppressive means of the bourgeoisie as the subjugation of his or her personality to the pursuance of the bourgeois goals in the social order instead of the individual goals. The bourgeoisie impose the character-masks of worker on every person in the capitalistic society who does not exist in the condition of social exclusion or the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie further forces the role of consumer onto every person in a capitalistic society regardless of his or her desires to the contrary. The path towards the truth of the issue, and towards the power of rationality and liberty from the oppressive forces of the bourgeoisie, requires the people to identify the restrictive character-masks in his or her life; which the bourgeoisie claims remains an essential component in the "proper" functioning inside the social domain. The character-masks of my life remain worker and consumer. Where and how do you reside in the theatrical production?

[E_T]

If this is a theatrical production, then it's likely a Divine Comedy....

[Bearu]

The meteoric rise of asset inequality, income inequality, and class stratification involves the creation of a new Gilded Age in the United States of America on the edge of the information revolution. The creation of the new emperors results in the depressed wages of the average worker while the corporate and financial elite produce an obscene wealth on the labour of the workers and the machines. The difference between the current gilded Age and the first Gilded Age involves the absence of unified political activity among the population. The first gilded age remains a period of intense worker revolt and dissension among the population while the contemporary period experiences a paucity of political activity among the population. The prominent question with the Second Gilded Era remains whether the people will either attempt to mitigate the impact of the event on the country or allow the enslavement of the population under the grasps of the political and financial elite. What actions do you believe represent the important task of the current era, and what actions do you believe the people can perform to mitigate the problem?

(Picture Source: New York Times)

[Bearu]

I read another economics article available for the public on the internet at the link below the paragraph. A concern of the public represents the ability to produce a coherent response against the insidious influences of the Democrats and the Republicans who espouse the glory of the gentile business people over the average worker in the celebration of profit. The corollary represents the reemergence of people like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller in the contemporary United States of America, and the promotion in the pseudo divine intervention of wealth as the penultimate reason for existence of the country. The prominent example includes the focus in the recent campaign on the "job creators" and the "benefactors" in the pursuit of a profit.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/05/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/