RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Before Bernie Sanders: A 19th Century Populist's Run for the Presidency Print
Thursday, 26 November 2015 13:58

Excerpt: "We are nearing a serious crisis. If the present strained relations between wealth owners and wealth producers continue much longer they will ripen into frightful disaster. This universal discontent must be quickly interpreted and its causes removed. It is the country's imperative Call to Action, and cannot be longer disregarded with impunity."

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. (photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. (photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images)


Before Bernie Sanders: A 19th Century Populist's Run for the Presidency

By John Collins, In These Times

26 November 15

 

We are nearing a serious crisis. If the present strained relations between wealth owners and wealth producers continue much longer they will ripen into frightful disaster. This universal discontent must be quickly interpreted and its causes removed. It is the country’s imperative Call to Action, and cannot be longer disregarded with impunity.

o begins the preface to A Call to Action—the 1892 political manifesto by James Baird Weaver, the People's Party’s candidate for president that same year.

The “crisis” Weaver was referring to got its start 19 years earlier, when post-war inflation and wild financial speculation (particularly on the part of those trying to cash in on the seemingly ceiling-less railroad industry) resulted in the Panic of 1873, which triggered industrial capitalism’s first global depression. Employment and wages plummeted as American companies defaulted on $1 billion of debt. The collapse, which would be felt for decades, left many, including Weaver, vehemently opposed to monopolies and critical of banking industry policies.

As wars tend to do, the Civil War had lasted longer than either side anticipated. While the Union’s northern manufacturing infrastructure was vastly superior to the Confederacy’s agrarian, cotton-based economy, the economies of both the North and the South suffered greatly. Out of the necessity, both sides turned to the printing of unbacked paper money to fund the ongoing conflict. In 1862, for the first time in the nation’s history, Lincoln’s administration began issuing “greenbacks” fiat notes deriving their value not from a physical commodity, like gold or silver, but solely from government declaration and a regulated supply. Immediately following secession, the South also began circulating it’s own currency—Confederate dollars known as “greybacks.”

When the war was over, the government sought to curb inflation by retiring the notes and returning to the gold standard. The plan was to phase out greenbacks with the intention of making currency once again redeemable. Bankers, who understood that a return to the gold standard would mean the bonds they’d purchased at 50-cents on the dollar during the war could then be redeemed for 100 cents on the dollar at pre-war gold prices, loved the idea. But eliminating the difference between the dollar price of gold and its official value would require drastic deflationary measures.

In his acclaimed historical analysis of this period, The Populist Movement, Lawrence Goodwyn writes: “A return to hard money could only be accomplished in one of two ways—both quite harmful to a great number of Americans.” The first deflationary tack considered was taxes. Taxation would quickly drive prices down and the proceeds could be used to pay back bondholders, but it also risked crippling businesses and pushing unemployment, as Goodwyn observes, to “socially dangerous levels.” The second method involved achieving contraction by freezing the existing supply of money while the economy grew around it. This is what the government did. Goodwyn writes, “To the nation’s farmers, contraction was a mass tragedy which eventually led to the Populist revolt.”

For blacks and whites in the South, post-war agrarian life soon became synonymous with a new form of slavery. The crop-lein system—whereby the economically devastated farmers would obtain the food and supplies needed to work the land from creditors, to be paid back upon harvest—left millions in a perpetual cycle of humiliating poverty and never-ending debt.

Northern farmers also found themselves at the mercy of an increasingly powerful debt industry—exploited by excessive price fixing, hostile bankers and a monopolistic railroad. Ultimately it was the speculative failure of Jay Cooke and Company (the nation’s most prominent investment banking house) to finance the Northern Pacific Railway that provided the domestic catalyst for the 1873 collapse. The fallout affected everyone. “In fact,” Goodwyn writes, “at one time or another in the decade following the war, portions of every sector of the American population felt defrauded by bankers.”

What began with the cooperative-based Grange movement in 1866, continued to evolve and spread. New political parties emerged. In 1876, the Greenback Party was formed to advocate the end of a metal-backed currency and a return to more equitable “soft money” policies. Weaver joined the party and was elected to Congress in 1879 and first ran for president (as a Greenback) in 1880. Weaver was defeated handily and its members dispersed. But the appetite for a grassroots political movement—one that would regulate greed and return the government and the economy to the people—eventually culminated in 1891 in Omaha with the formation of the People’s Party (known as the Populists).

The Populists viewed the rising influence of banks and corporations in the political process as an existential threat. Already a prominent figure on the national stage, Weaver was nominated as their candidate for President.

The preface of A Call to Action continues:

The sovereign right to regulate commerce among our magnificent union of States, and to control the instruments of commerce, the right to issue the currency and to determine the money supply for 63 million people and their posterity, have been leased to associated speculators. The brightest lights of the legal profession have been lured from their honorable relation to the people in the administration of justice, and through evolution in crime the corporation has taken the place of the pirate; and finally a bold and aggressive plutocracy has usurped the Government and is using it as a policeman to enforce its insolent decrees. It has filled the Senate with its adherents, it controls the popular branch of the National Legislature by cunningly filling the Speaker‘s chair with its representatives, and it has not hesitated to tamper with our Court of last resort. The public domain has been squandered, our coal fields bartered away, our forests denuded, our people impoverished, and we are attempting to build a prosperous commonwealth among people who are being robbed of their homes—a task as futile and impossible as it would be to attempt to cultivate a thrifty forest without soil to sustain it.

The corporation has been placed above the individual and an armed body of cruel mercenaries permitted, in times of public peril, to discharge police duties which clearly belong to the State. Wall Street has become the Western extension of Threadneedle and Lombard streets, and the wealthy classes of England and America have been brought into touch. …

The few haughty millionaires who are gathering up the riches of the new world, make use of certain instruments to accomplish their selfish purposes. The people are beginning to understand what these instrumentalities are, and are preparing to resist their destructive force. The purpose of this book is to make clear the great work which lies before us. It must be thorough and complete in order to be permanent. The magnitude of our task will appear as we advance in the struggle.

We have made no attack upon individuals, but have confined our criticisms to evil systems and baleful legislation. …

Improved methods of piracy and the evolution of greed

The elements of character which go to make up the highwayman are: physical courage, disregard of moral obligations, aversion to labor, a high estimate of the value of money, a low estimate of the value of human life, stolid indifference to human suffering and defiant disregard of the law. This type of person takes his life in his hand, lives on a war footing with society and looks upon Government simply as an organized police force and as his natural enemy. His only restraint is fear, and even this enhances his cruelty. Such characters infested human society at very early periods, becoming more numerous as society itself became lawless and anon diminishing as soon as tranquility returned and justice was rigidly administered among men. When such characters become numerous and confederate in large numbers they are called brigands. …

Doubtless the love of money—avarice—is the supreme, all-swaying passion of the highwayman. It is but natural that he should be universally feared, detested, and dealt with without mercy.

Robin Hood, the famous English outlaw and his accomplices, of the thirteenth century; Rob Roy, the Scotch robber of the seventeenth century, who, in order to avenge the loss of his lands, led the life of a marauder for many years; Fra Diavolo, the noted brigand of Italy, and Jesse James of our own period, though differing greatly in character, are among the noted robbers of the world. Some of them occasionally exhibited humane traits of character. …

Traditions of an occasional noble deed or sentiment may be found clinging to the biography of nearly all the great professional robbers of the world. Outraged nature seems to have made an effort to hide the nakedness of their crimes. …

Piracy was an organized industry in some parts of the world and ravaged commerce upon the high seas for more than two thousand years. …

This scourge did not abate until the feudal system was destroyed and respect for human rights restored; a striking illustration of that truth, ever uppermost in human history, that if a Government expects its subjects to be peaceful and law abiding it must first compel the wealthy and the powerful to refrain from depredating upon the weak and destitute. In no age of the world have the rights of either person or property been secure where the laws were so framed or administered as to permit idleness to plunder industry. Men will impatiently submit as long as there is hope of redress, but expiring hope always lights up her departure with the torch of revolution. …

Let us endeavor to briefly point out the exact period when the modern world became inoculated with the virus which is now threatening the destruction of free government and even civilization itself. …

But when piracy received its fatal blow at the close of the 16th century, it was immediately succeeded at the opening of the seventeenth by a still greater scourge, the corporation—a pirate in fact. Piracy and brigandage were lawless, but the corporation sprang into existence bearing a commission from the State, its creator, which authorized it to rob legally both by sea and by land.

The scourge within the United States

The framers of our Constitution and those who influenced early legislation in this country had been educated under the influence of British institutions. They had long been familiar with the accepted dogma that the power to create corporations was a prerogative of the crown. The transition was easy to that cognate fiction, that the power to create incorporated trade associations was a prerogative inherent in Government, without a regard to whether it was a monarchy or a republic. An error more fatal and unaccountable never enslaved the minds of a free people. It is as unphilosophic as it is vicious in consequences.

An incorporated trade association does not result from the operation of any law of nature nor from the exercise of any of the natural powers belonging to humanity. No number of men, in the absence of statutory authority, can confer upon themselves the powers and immunities of a corporation. They may associate in business as partners, but the death of one of the members, in the natural order of things, works a dissolution of the association. Each member of the firm is personally responsible, where company property cannot be found, for all the debts of the co-partnership. If then it be true that a corporation does not spring from any law of nature and cannot, in the absence of statute, be brought into being by agreement among individuals, whence is the boasted prerogative of the Crown or of the legislature to create a corporation derived? How can man confer upon the legislature a power, not even the germ of which exists within himself? By nature he has the right to trade, to associate and to organize Civil government; but he can never, in business affairs, span the chasm of death, escape individual responsibility, nor confer upon the legislature a power which he does not himself possess. The corporation, then, exists beyond the domain of nature, is in conflict with the limitations of human life, and is a remnant of usurpation and kingcraft which lingers in modern society to make war upon the individual and to eat up his substance. It exists by bold, daring usurpation and not of right.

The Government of the United States is one of enumerated powers. The Constitution does not even vaguely hint at the power of Congress to incorporate a trade association, or to grant a charter for such purpose. Driven from the field of expressed power, how can the authority of Congress be implied, when the individuals from whom the Government was derived have no such power to surrender and make no pretense even of doing so? The Declaration of Independence declares that governments derive their “just powers” from the consent of the governed. No other power could, of course, be so derived. But Congress, following the example of the British crown, entered upon the exercise of this usurpation at its first session under the Constitution. This shows how deeply the despotic current had eroded its way into every stratum of Anglo-Saxon life. It proves that even the grand men of the Revolution were not on their guard against some of the most dangerous foes of Free Government. They threw off the form of tyranny, declared for a republic and then allowed institutions which were of the very essence of despotism and which gave life and vigor to tyranny to remain. They declared “that all men were created equal” and, strange to say, proceeded at the very first session of Congress to pass laws to create inequalities and to give certain associations of individuals advantages with which they were never, either collectively or individually, endowed by the Creator. ...

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Should the Phrase 'Islamic Extremism' Be Used? It's Debatable Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36318"><span class="small">Jessica Taylor, NPR</span></a>   
Thursday, 26 November 2015 13:58

Taylor writes: "There's a big divide in how Republicans and Democrats are talking about terrorism - and it's one unlikely to be solved anytime soon."

Muslims in India protest against ISIS following the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris. (photo: Biswaranjan Rout/AP)
Muslims in India protest against ISIS following the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris. (photo: Biswaranjan Rout/AP)


Should the Phrase 'Islamic Extremism' Be Used? It's Debatable

By Jessica Taylor, NPR

26 November 15

 

here's a big divide in how Republicans and Democrats are talking about terrorism — and it's one unlikely to be solved anytime soon.

In the last Democratic debate, just a day after the terrorist attacks in Paris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to use the word "radical Islam" to classify terrorist cells such as ISIS, Boko Haram (which has pledged allegiance to ISIS) and others. Her two rivals, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, agreed.

"I don't think we're at war with Islam," Clinton said. "I don't think we're at war with all Muslims. I think we're at war with jihadists."

She pointed to another Republican — President George W. Bush — who similarly shied away from a rush to judgment on the Muslim faith in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. "This great nation of many religions understands, our war is not against Islam or against faith practiced by the Muslim people," Bush said back in 2002. "Our war is a war against evil."

They fear by using certain language it will de-legitimize their faith in general. Internally, where everyone is Muslim and people do know the difference, they have no problem using those terms."

Lorenzo Vidino, director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University's Center on Cyber & Homeland Security.

Just days after the 2001 attacks, he made similar remarks and even went to a mosque. But in the years since, the GOP has largely embraced terming threats from ISIS and other terrorist organizations as "radical Islam."

And Republican White House hopefuls were quick to react to Democrats' hesitancy last week. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio shot back the day after the Democratic debate that not using the phrase "radical Islam" or "Islamic state" would "be like saying we weren't at war with Nazis, because we were afraid to offend some Germans who may have been members of the Nazi Party but weren't violent themselves." A standard part of Texas Sen. Ted Cruz's stump speech is to criticize President Obama for being hesitant to use the term, as well. He calls him "an apologist for radical Islamic terrorists."

Obama has preferred the term "violent extremists," though he has referred to them as "jihadists," as have Clinton and other Democrats.

So Which Side Is Right?

Lorenzo Vidino, who directs the Program on Extremism at George Washington University's Center on Cyber & Homeland Security, said that there's a divide even in the Muslim world over how to refer to the dangerous terrorist groups. And while they may be OK labeling ISIS as Islamic extremists, having other people use the term can be a sensitive subject.

"People tend to be quite defensive about Islam," Vidino said. "They fear by using certain language it will de-legitimize their faith in general. Internally, where everyone is Muslim and people do know the difference, they have no problem using those terms."

Vidino explained that in Muslim countries, there's a perception that Westerners don't "appreciate the differences between Islam and Islamism."

Split Along Party Lines

That perception has certainly increased in the past year since ISIS emerged onto the scene, and concerns are now at their highest over terrorism since Sept. 11, 2001, in some cases.

"There's no question that in the summer of 2014 that the emergence of ISIS really affected people's attitudes in a lot of ways over concerns about Islamic extremism," said Carroll Doherty, director of political research at the Pew Research Center.

A Pew survey from September 2014 found that 6 in 10 people were "very concerned" about the rise of Islamic extremism. But they're sharply divided along party lines.

Among Republicans, 82 percent said they were concerned about Islamic extremism around the world, and 71 percent were concerned about its impact on the U.S.

Just 51 percent of Democrats shared concerns about its rise around the world, while 46 percent were very concerned about its impact in America.

Along with that concern, the partisan divides on how to deal with the threat from the Middle East have also widened. Democrats are less likely to support engagement, while Republicans want more action.

"There's a big division over whether or not to introduce ground troops," Doherty explained. "Democrats are deeply worried about becoming too involved in Iraq and Syria, and Republicans expressed the opposite concern."

But even within the countries where ISIS draws from, there's little respect for the terrorist group. Another Pew survey released last week showed disdain for ISIS among most Muslim countries.

Within those countries, Vidino said, Muslims will refer to the group as jihadists.

But there's another debate over how much ISIS actually draws from Islam.

"An overwhelming majority of Muslims oppose ISIS and its ideology," Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World at the Brookings Institution's Center for Middle East Policy, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed last week. "But that's not quite the same as saying that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam, when it very clearly has something to do with it. If you actually look at ISIS's approach to governance, it would be difficult — impossible, really — to conclude that it is just making things up as it goes along and then giving it an Islamic luster only after the fact."

Hamid continued, "I am a Muslim myself, and it's impossible for me to believe that a just God could ever sanction the behavior of groups like ISIS. ... What Islam should be and what Islam is actually understood to be by Muslims [including extremist Muslims] are very different things."

In American politics, any discussion of those differences gets quickly glazed over and put into partisan terms. The finger-pointing over the use of the term continued last week when the Democratic National Committee released an online ad saying GOP presidential candidates were "equating Islam, all Muslims, with terrorists" in using language like "radical Islamic terrorism."

"It's oversimplistic, and it's wrong," the ad continues, flashing to footage of George W. Bush defending the religion after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Ultimately, Vidino said, there may be no "right or wrong" that can be reached in trying to find a consensus term. Even the White House earlier this year tried to take religion out of the equation when it hosted its 'Summit on Countering Violent Extremism.' "

But even though the term Islam wasn't used, Vidino said, "everyone understands what kind of extremism we're talking about."

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Americans Become Disenchanted With Black Friday Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=34817"><span class="small">Cole Mellino, EcoWatch</span></a>   
Thursday, 26 November 2015 13:57

"REI made waves last month when it announced that it would be closing all of its 143 retail locations, headquarters and two distribution centers on both Thanksgiving and Black Friday."

Black Friday shoppers.  (photo: BGR)
Black Friday shoppers. (photo: BGR)


Americans Become Disenchanted With Black Friday

By Cole Mellino, EcoWatch

26 November 15

 

lack Friday is traditionally one of the biggest shopping days of the year, but this year there seems to be some backlash.

REI made waves last month when it announced that it would be closing all of its 143 retail locations, headquarters and two distribution centers on both Thanksgiving and Black Friday. All 12,000 full- and part-time employees will receive paid time off as the company encourages them to #OptOutside instead.

Your #BlackFriday options just got even better. @Mashable shows how states are making it easier to #OptOutside: https://t.co/MFaJbQtSxd

According to REI CEO Jerry Stritzke, the company made the decision to close on Black Friday because it wanted to be “authentic” to its brand. Many companies and organizations have publicly supported REI’s anti-Black Friday movement:

And now the states of California and Minnesota are making it even more affordable to do so. Save the Redwoods League was inspired by REI to sponsor free admission to 49 participating California redwood state parks on Black Friday, billing it as “the best bargain you’re going to find this Black Friday,” according to NBC Bay Area.

Minnesota’s Lt. Governor Tina Smith told The Minnesota Post that the state’s 76 state parks and recreation areas will be waived on Black Friday.

“Visiting these parks is a great way to spend time with family and loved ones, relieve stress and enjoy exercise in the great outdoors,” Smith said.

But is this what the majority of Americans truly want?

Research says yes. According to a report published by WalletHub earlier this month, more than half of those surveyed believe that shops should not open at all Thanksgiving Day. Bankrate, a personal finance organization, determined that 62 percent of consumers are cutting back on their Black Friday spending, according to Albuquerque Business Journal.

Despite the growing distaste for Black Friday, nearly 100 million people still plan to shop on the holiday, according to the National Retail Federation’s annual survey. About 85 to 90 million people turn out every year. Though the number of shoppers has been on a slight decline, as has overall spending, it’s not as if Black Friday will completely disappear any time soon. Americans are projected to drop some $50 million over the Black Friday weekend.

But the discontent for the shopping spree is hard to ignore.

“In recent years, both retailers and consumers have witnessed a backlash against encroaching Black Friday hours,” said JP Griffin Group. “For one, retailers are forced to offer unprofitable deals and pay employees for all those extra hours in order to compete with the box store next door and profits on Black Friday have been disappointing in recent years even as the economy is recovering. Beyond that, it seems most shoppers besides the diehard deal hunters are simply tired of the crowds and frenzied consumerism associated with Black Friday, and are opting to shop online.”

Yesterday, the hashtag #BlackFridayIn3Words was trending on Twitter, and let’s just say most users were not too thrilled about the so-called shopping holiday.

One of the original anti-Black Friday companies, Patagonia, ran this full-page ad in the New York Times discouraging consumers from spending money on Black Friday in 2011:

Though Patagonia doesn’t close its stores on Black Friday, they suggest customers sit out “Cyber Monday” on their website. And in 2013, it launched its Responsible Economy campaign, declaring that “growth is dead.” And for the past several years, the company has been focusing on its Worn Wear program, which evolved from the “Don’t Buy This Jacket” ad campaign.

As part of that effort, they run the largest garment repair factory in North America—with upwards of 30,000 repairs per year. They’ve also invested in Yerdle, a web startup that allows you to swap items via its app, and Beyond Surface Technologies, a Swiss start-up that’s developing high-quality, durable textiles based on natural raw materials.

These investments were both part of its $20 Million & Change venture fund that invests in companies making positive impacts on the environment. And they took their Worn Wear program on the road this past spring, driving a biodiesel-fueled, reclaimed wood camper around the country and teaching people how to repair their gear (Patagonia or other brands), so that they wouldn’t have to buy more stuff.

So how has this anti-growth strategy worked for Patagonia’s sales? Pretty darn well. Patagonia expects to gross about $600 million this year, according to the New Yorker. In fact, encouraging people to buy less has ironically spurred sales. Cynics will say Patagonia’s “buy less” is just a very effective marketing campaign. But the company has the environmentally- and socially-conscious cred to back it up. In addition to the aforementioned campaigns, it also “donates one percent of its revenue to environmental causes” and “co-founded the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, in which such companies as Target and Walmart pledged to lighten their environmental footprints,” according to Bloomberg.

atagonia isn’t alone in offering environmentally and socially responsible goods this Black Friday. Everlane, an online clothing company, will be giving all of the profits it makes from its Black Friday sales directly to the workers who make the T-shirts in the company’s L.A. factory. The company used to boycott Black Friday entirely, shutting down the website for the day. But Everlane CEO Michael Preysman said, “people just go somewhere else.” By staying open, but donating the profits, “it’s a way for us to be open and available for our customers while I think reinforcing the values that we stand for,” explained Preysman.

FastCoExist reported:

The company hopes to raise $100,000 through its Black Friday Fund to create a new wellness program for factory workers, offering on-site health care, free food and English classes. For food, instead of offering free lunches like you might find at Google and recognizing that workers tend to bring lunches from home, they’ll offer free groceries instead.

In 2014, the first time they tested the Black Friday program, they raised money for the silk factory that they work with in Hangzhou, China, and bought solar panels for the workers’ on-campus apartments. “Every year, we come up with a different initiative and see how we can push the boundaries,” Preysman said.

Companies like REI, Patagonia and Everlane are at the forefront of this eco-conscious consumerism trend that is encouraging people to rethink their shopping habits on Black Friday and beyond.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Nuclear Reactors Make ISIS an Apocalyptic Threat Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=6004"><span class="small">Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Thursday, 26 November 2015 13:57

Wasserman writes: "As you read this, a terror attack has put atomic reactors in Ukraine at the brink of another Chernobyl-scale apocalypse."

Harvey Wasserman. (photo: rosencomet.com)
Harvey Wasserman. (photo: rosencomet.com)


Nuclear Reactors Make ISIS an Apocalyptic Threat

By Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News

26 November 15

 

s you read this, a terror attack has put atomic reactors in Ukraine at the brink of another Chernobyl-scale apocalypse.

Transmission lines have been blown up. Power to at least two major nuclear power stations has been “dangerously” cut. Without emergency backup, those nukes could lose coolant to their radioactive cores and spent fuel pools. They could then melt or explode, as at Fukushima.

Yet amidst endless “all-fear-all-the-time” reporting on ISIS, the corporate media has remained shockingly silent on this potential catastrophe.

Nor has it faced the most critical step needed to protect our planet in a time of terror: shutting all atomic reactors.

The world’s 430-plus licensed commercial nuclear plants give terrorists like ISIS the power at any time to inflict a radioactive Apocalypse that could kill millions, destroy huge parts of the Earth and devastate the global economy.

Fallout from Chernobyl’s 1986 disaster has killed more than a million people.

Cancer rates among children and others near Fukushima are soaring.

Americans downwind from Three Mile Island died in droves.

Major scientific studies in Germany and elsewhere link soaring cancer and other human death rates to nearby reactor emissions even without an accident.

The 1966 melt-down at Fermi I, near Detroit, cost at least $100 million. Three Mile Island’s 1979 melt-down converted a $900 million asset into a $2 billion liability. Chernobyl has cost Ukraine, Belarus and the former Soviet Union at least $500 billion. Fukushima wiped out a $60 billion asset and may cost Japan trillions, permanently crippling its economy.

All imposing inestimable damage to the global ecology. The radioactive carbon and raw heat reactors emit unbalance our weather, irradiate the oceans, create waste that cannot be managed.

The ability of ISIS and other terrorists to cause more such catastrophes is unquestioned and escalating.

Despite ISIS’s bloody warning in Paris, all commercial reactors are still at risk.

They are crumbling on their own. The shield building at Ohio’s Davis-Besse is literally disintegrating.

Diablo Canyon is surrounded by a dozen California fault lines.

Fort Calhoun in Nebraska has been flooded.

Earthquakes have damaged Ohio’s Perry and North Anna, in Virginia.

And official reports on the 9/11 attacks on New York’s World Trade Center confirm that Al Quaeda also considered targeting atomic reactors.

Had they hit Indian Point, 45 miles north of the twin towers, millions of Americans would now be dead. Trillions in property damage would have decimated the nation’s economy. Billions of acres would be contaminated, along with countless lakes, rivers and much of the Atlantic Ocean.

The screaming heads at CNN, Fox et. al. say this kind of Apocalyptic event is exactly what ISIS seeks. But they avoid the obvious connection to the world’s increasingly fragile reactors.

In Ukraine, Deputy Director Yuri Katchich of the Ukrenergo power company said the “emergency unloading” at the South Ukrainian and Zaporozhskaya nuclear sites forced by terror attacks on far-away power lines is “very dangerous.” We can only imagine the damage direct attacks on the reactors themselves might have done.

The 2011 earthquake and tsunami took out back-up generators at Fukushima, followed by three melt-downs and four explosions.

Tsunami-like flooding caused by busted dams upriver from at least three dozen U.S. reactors could replicate much of what happened at Fukushima.

There are 58 reactors in France, 99 in the U.S. If ISIS is as reckless and relentless as it seems, the safety of none of them can be guaranteed.

So as our governments, politicians and media scream for security, we must free ourselves from the nuclear curse.

We must also remember that ISIS grew out of an U.S. invasion of Iraq based largely on our corporate addiction to fossil fuels.

The obvious answer to this global nightmare is to speed the transition to a renewable energy world.

No terror group can ever cause an apocalypse by blowing up a solar panel.



Harvey Wasserman wrote SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH. His AMERICA AT THE BRINK OF REBIRTH: THE ORGANIC SPIRAL OF U.S. HISTORY will be published next year. EcoWatch is the publication of origin for this work.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Is There Room Under the Bed for All 320 Million of Us? Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=11104"><span class="small">Charles Pierce, Esquire</span></a>   
Thursday, 26 November 2015 08:00

Pierce writes: "Over the weekend, a woman and her daughter were shot to death in Des Moines. The local news reader said that Des Moines police 'were confident' that the murders were not part of any 'larger action.' Do we really have to be reassured that this unfortunately too-commonplace scenario in American life - something that simply is part of the price we have to pay for our Second Amendment freedoms - has nothing to do with terrorism?"

Firearms. (photo: Getty Images)
Firearms. (photo: Getty Images)


Is There Room Under the Bed for All 320 Million of Us?

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

26 November 15

 

Terrorism need not force its way into every discussion—there's enough to be afraid around here already.

ver the weekend, a woman and her daughter were shot to death in Des Moines. The chief suspect is the husband and father. One more domestic dispute gone to gunplay and murder because there was a firearm handy. I heard about it in the shuttle van on the way to the airport. The local news reader said that Des Moines police "were confident" that the murders were not part of any "larger action."

Damn, I thought, has it come to that? Do we really have to be reassured that this unfortunately too-commonplace scenario in American life—something that simply is part of the price we have to pay for our Second Amendment freedoms—has nothing to do with terrorism? Do journalists, even the ones who simply read copy for a living, feel obligated to provide that reassurance? Is there room under the bed for all 320 million of us?

I accept that things changed after 9/11. I take off my belt and shoes at the airport just like the next guy, unless, of course, I luck into the blessed TSA Pre-Check line, for which I regularly thank Big Government Jesus. But I don't accept, and I never have accepted, the fact that "everything" changed on that awful day, let alone a week ago in Paris. I don't think "Eeek! Terrorists!" should invade every institution of daily life in this country the way it has. I don't think local news stations have any business constantly running B-roll of Paris while the local "security consultant" waxes on about the old boogedy-boogedy. And I certainly don't need any more evidence that America is a gun-addled violent place, and that it became such quite on its own.

Also this weekend, there was a mass shooting at the Bunny Friend Playground in the Ninth Ward in New Orleans. Seventeen people were shot, none of them fatally, thank god. Here's some of what we know.

Witnesses saw a man with a silver-colored machine gun flee toward Louisa Street. Gunfire continued in the park after he left. It is the largest mass shooting in New Orleans since the Mother's Day second-line of 2013. Between then and now, the shootings that injured the most people took place on Bourbon Street, June 29, 2013, where 10 people were shot, one of whom died; and on Burgundy Street, August 10, 2014, where seven people were shot, two fatally.

?A "silver-colored machine gun."

In an American city.

Good thing the guy wasn't Syrian.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 Next > End >>

Page 2250 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN