Letters from our readers
17 October 2009
Yup, liked that Barry. One thing though. This strategy by a fraction of the American elites is high risk. The impoverishment of the American working class by the continual devaluation of the dollar makes the decline in American state power visible to a domestic audience. There won’t be anyway to cover it up with the flag or religion. Anyone born at the end of the Second World War in Britain grew up with the continual devaluation of the Pound. This quickly became a symbol of a wider decline in Britain’s ‘Place in the World’. Neither corrupted unions nor the Democratic Party will be able square this circle of conflicting class interests. Thank you, keep going.
13 October 2009
Instead of the Nobel Prize for the present occupant of the White House, it would be much more inspiring to watch a contemporary version of the Nuremburg trials for its previous occupant and his associates. Now is an excellent time to re-read, or better, watch and listen to, Harold Pinter’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech from a few years ago. There is a good video of the complete speech on the Nobel Prize web site.
British Columbia, Canada
13 October 2009
Local unions, like municipal councils, are full of corruption. It is nice to see this kind of story published, as it exposes business-unionism for what it is.
14 October 2009
The outright criminality of these vampires in creating the financial crisis could not be clearer. In addition, they are being rewarded for their crimes! What will it take, in light of the blatant facts, to convince those who still support Obama and the Democrats to see reality and realize that they have been fooled again?
This article, along with the one yesterday about the debt-collection agencies and their assault on people who cannot afford to pay their bills due to job losses, portrays a system that appears to heartily wish its population to die just as long as the wealthy gusanos continue to rake in the profits—obscene amounts of money that they cannot possibly spend in one lifetime, but to which they cling like junkies to yet another needle full of dope.
This mental aberration—for indeed, the pursuit of profit at any cost seems to be a psychological disease—cannot be sustained without the implosion of society. Unless the working people come to the realization that these rapacious pigs must be stopped in their tracks before they spew their poisonous pus over the entire globe, a catastrophe of nearly unimaginable dimensions will blow the planet apart.
Where is sanity? Where is proportion? The lines of 50,000 or more people will appear in city after city before long. This is an explosion that will not be long in coming.
15 October 2009
David Walsh has done a good thing in exposing this “coalition of right-wingers and ‘feminist liberals’”—it’s about time someone did.
This strategy of attacking individuals has filtered down to the work place in recent years and is being used tactically to create tension in the workplace by women and men; that’s my experience.
Thomas Frank in his books What’s the Matter with Kansas and The Wrecking Crew described the “backlash” methods unleashed by the right-wingers in the 80s and 90s to attack “liberals”—or anyone who challenges their ideology.
The method is a kind of bait and switch, alternating between outbursts of indignation (to demonstrate their “authenticity”) followed by bitter complaints about their victimization.
These methods have been used by “liberal feminists” and their allies in the workplace for years—a cynical means of controlling the work environment and forcing undesirable workers out their jobs. The only difference in technique is replacing the word “liberal” with “misogynist” or “loser”.
I’ve worked as a federal employee, serving in departments that manage natural resources and wildlife. Almost all my supervisors have advanced degrees in their fields.
A personal testimony, if I may: A few years ago I had a minor dispute with my supervisor; at the time I was a volunteer, and she might have just asked me to resign—no problem.
Rather, she contacted one of the references listed on my resume and asked that individual if I was a “weirdo” or a “predator”, wanting to determine if I was “as nice a guy as [I] seemed to be”. When I asked her where she got the nerve to make such slanderous inquires she replied, “serial killers occur at the hightest rate among white males”—so she reasoned, cynically, that she had a right to “protect herself” by asking around. Needless to say, I am a white male. So what?
A few months later I was working for another female supervisor at a paid seasonal job (I worked for her a couple years before) and related the incident. Her only response in regard to the matter and the “serial killer” slur was: “Well, it’s true, isn’t it?”
Both of these people (and their allies at work) regard themselves as “self-made” and “empowered” and any man who objects to their behavior risks being accused of an inability to tolerate “strong women”.
These “tactics” are not thought up by individual people—it’s part of a larger strategy of tension that serves those who would divide men and women at the most important place they meet—on the job.
The message, as pointed out by David Walsh is: “Look what we did to someone like Polanski. What chance do you think you have?”
15 October 2009