Tag Archives: Censorship

Modern Lefties Are Neither Left Nor Liberal

by

In the interest of preserving words whose meanings are threatened by the Orwellian redefinition of everything, it becomes necessary to reevaluate one of the most glaring contradictions that daily confronts the mass of western society.

Namely, how can millions of people self-identify as “left” while supporting the very antithesis of lefty values through the promotion of endless wars for profit, unfettered surveillance and centralized censorship?

Furthermore, what does it actually mean to be “left-wing”?

The American Eagle stamped into coins and carved into courtrooms clutches 13 arrows in its right talon, symbolizing armed defense. Conversely, the eagle clutches an olive branch with 13 olives in its left talon, symbolizing peace, diplomacy and reconciliation. By definition, identifying with the “right-wing” of this bird of prey signifies a “hawkish” pro-war stance and the “left-wing” signifies an anti-war position. This is why, historically speaking, the “left” stood for human rights and the pursuits championed by leftists were thus humanistic. In recent times this stance has become known as the “classical left”. In a similar way the word “liberal” extends as a branch from the ideals of “liberty.” If you don’t earnestly believe in liberty of the individual, you cannot call yourself liberal.

Why then are so-called “leftists” so bloodthirsty for military conflicts and international war? Biden’s apparently “liberal” administration provided billions upon billions of dollars and weapons to fund an endless and bloody quagmire in Ukraine while Maui survivors received a measly $700 in “relief” as corporate vultures flocked in to capitalize on their misery.

We live in an era when black Americans are jailed as “white supremacists” and political candidates are criminalized for holding different beliefs by people who call themselves “liberal”. How was such a large group of college-educated suburbanites ever persuaded to continuously support the very antithesis of their own purported beliefs?

As David Rubin articulated in his essay, Why I Left The Left, “Defending my liberal values has suddenly become a conservative position.” Rubin refers to the “regressive left” who falsely believe it somehow “progressive” to prohibit politically incorrect words or to ban speakers whose opinions you don’t agree with from participating in public forums:

“Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream that his children would be judged by their character and not their skin color was a liberal idea, but these days, it’s not a progressive ideal. …

“Today’s progressivism has become a faux-moral movement, hurling charges of racism, bigotry, xenophobia, homophobia, Islamophobia and a slew of other meaningless buzzwords at anyone they disagree with. The battle of ideas has been replaced by a battle of feelings, and outrage has replaced honesty. Diversity reigns supreme – as long as it’s not that pesky diversity of thought.

“This isn’t the recipe for a free society, it’s a recipe for authoritarianism.”

COEXIST OR DIE

As a matter of cultural normalcy, most “Libs” are the way they are because they were trained to be accepting of everything and everyone, however dysfunctional or harmful. Their instincts were gradually weaponized against them as they were encouraged to ignore obvious red flags in the name of compassion, tolerance and inclusion. But this perverted version of “liberalism” actually encourages an embrace of something called idiot compassion, a term coined by Tibetan teacher Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche. Greg Graber summarizes this concept aptly:

“Idiot Compassion takes place when during times of trying to display compassion to others we end up letting them walk all over us. This often happens when we try to avoid conflict. In these instances, we learn quickly that this is not compassion at all, because it actually increases suffering. Sometimes people need to be told they are wrong. There are even instances when people need to be given a hard time.”

Lori Gottlieb elaborates, “In idiot compassion, you avoid rocking the boat to spare people’s feelings, even though the boat needs rocking and your compassion ends up being more harmful than your honesty.” Idiot Compassion is not fueled by a desire to lessen suffering, but by the ego’s obsession with external approval.

Today’s so-called “liberals” also tend to conflate compassion with outright cowardice. When the impulse to “be accepting of everything” gets taken to unhealthy extremes, the lib program makes a litany of excuses. The “lib” continues to accept the unacceptable while pretending it’s normal because otherwise they’d have to something about it. This helps explain the pathological aversion to the news that’s so freakishly common among this demographic. It seems easier to ignore reality and live in delusion, but only to the naive mind. The experienced mind knows that ignorance is not bliss; it is only oblivion. Being unaware is only acceptable if you’ve never been confronted with the facts before (nescience). Conversely, being unaware of the facts makes you look stupid if you’ve been confronted with them and willfully chosen to ignore them (ignorance).

Today’s so-called “liberals” couldn’t be more contradictory. They spew blatantly racist hate speech in the name of so-called “anti-racism”. They employ the ruthlessly violent tactics of fascism in the name of “anti-fascism”. They foment intolerance toward the majority of Americans in the name of “tolerance”.

Most quintessential of all, so-called “lefties” exclude the majority of the population in the name of so-called “inclusivity”. The rainbow flag hung in the widows of Biden’s White House is a literal banner of exclusion. If you’re white, straight and/or hetero (i.e. most Americans), it’s not a fan of you.

Malcolm X understood the flip-flopping nature of modern leftists, famously saying, “The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative.”

It follows that the US military’s covert sabotage of the Nordstream Pipeline at the behest of the Biden Administration proves what little regard the Democratic Party has for the environment that they claim to care so much about. The Nordstream explosion caused the single largest emission of “greenhouse gasses” and represents the single most destructive act of international eco-terrorism in recorded history. But so-called “liberals” ignore this giant elephant in the room, favoring instead to sacrifice the poor and underclasses in the name of overpopulation and anthropogenic climate change absent any discussion about geoengineering or military emissions.

If “my body, my choice” is not a statement of bodily autonomy but only a political statement about abortion you’ve succumbed to Orwellian doublethink. The same goes for wearing masks that are demonstrably harmful and ineffective against sickness.

Some things should not be tolerated, and what determines those taboos should not be decided by The State in a society that’s supposed to be free. Many New Yorkers are beginning to understand why this is so as their “sanctuary cities” are overrun by swarms of invading illegals. The overwhelming burden on social services in blue cities has caused Democrats to suddenly turn against the very open border policies that only a year ago they insisted you’d have to be racist to oppose.

How Did The “Classical Left” Lose It’s Way?

In principal, the left is supposed to represent the voice of the underclass. Chris Hedges likewise argues that a functioning Liberal Class exists as an institutional check that made incremental reforms for the working class possible. He also clearly defines “classical liberalism”:

“Classical liberalism was formulated largely as a response to the dissolution of feudalism and church authoritarianism. It argued for non-interference or independence under the rule of law. … Classical liberalism has, the philosopher John Gray writes,

“four principle features, or perspectives, which give it a recognizable identity: it is individualist, in that it asserts the moral primacy of the person against any collectivity; egalitarian, in that it confers on all human beings the same basic moral status; universalist, affirming the moral unity of the species; and meliorist, in that it asserts the open-ended improvability, by use of critical reason, of human life.”

How did the left become today’s “establishment loyalists” rather than a group of principled individuals dedicated to the pursuit of justice and truth?

Hedges traces the Death of the Liberal Class to the First World War and illustrates how state and corporate power were consolidated over every aspect of western life. “With the rise of the corporate state,” he writes, the Liberal Class, “has been rendered impotent by its embrace of unfettered capitalism, the national security state, globalization, and staggering income inequalities.”

Following this birth of neo-Liberalism, politicians continue to speak in the “feel your pain” rhetoric feigned for the working class while simultaneously selling out to anonymous corporate forces. As the demented geriatric stumbling through his role as the American president amply proves, no one’s in charge whose face you can see. Hedges elaborates:

“The anemic liberal class continues to assert, despite ample evidence to the contrary, that human freedom and equality can be achieved through the charade of electoral politics and constitutional reform. It refuses to acknowledge the corporate domination of traditional democratic channels for ensuring broad participatory power. …

“The inability of the liberal class to acknowledge that corporations have wrested power from the hands of citizens, that the Constitution and its guarantees of personal liberty have become irrelevant, and that the phrase consent of the governed is meaningless, has left it speaking and acting in ways that no longer correspond to reality.”

Journalist Matt Taibbi traced the transformation of what he calls “former liberals” into their modern expression back to the year 1972 when lefties mourned the defeat of George McGovern to Richard Nixon. He says that during the 2016 presidential campaign season he observed the Democratic Party publicly lamenting McGovern’s loss as proof that the ends always justify the means. Since winning became more important than ideology, the Party made a show of tossing notions of idealism aside.

This brings us to the “left’s” inability to peacefully debate and disagree with other viewpoints. Their minds are made up already. They are certain that anyone questioning the orthodox narrative is automatically a bigot, or a racist, or “extreme right wing” especially if those are the behavioral characteristics intrinsic to their own character. Such intractability reveals a great deal, including a lack of sophistication and an absence of intellectual acumen. Their fanatic embrace of censorship reveals authoritarian beliefs, not liberal values. Likewise the ugly insults spewed against heretics of the corporate order stand as revealing projections of their own inner filth.

Marshall Rosenberg’s Nonviolent Communication “language of life” has proven to be, in practice, little more than a carefully camouflaged dictatorial control of communication by fragile hysterics who feebly pretend that the Cancel Culture is fundamentally concerned with civility and manners. The same went for pronoun enforcement. This demographic cannot cope with the fundamental differences between facts and feelings.

Emotional statements are opinions, evidence-based statements are facts, and facts don’t give a damn how you feel about them. But that doesn’t stop modern liberals from contorting themselves into paralyzed pretzels through the mental gymnastics of corporate anti-logic. Like the ironic disconnect that emerged within environmentalists who can’t identify plant species but sure know how to whine about carbon. They forgot that a classical liberal would punch up at the powerful people and organizations that daily undermine everyone’s health. Instead, these “leftists” routinely waste their limited political energy by attacking ordinary people with little money, power or influence.

“The liberal class found it was more prudent to engage in empty moral posturing than confront the power elite,” Hedges writes. “They busied themselves with the boutique activism of political correctness.” Chris continues:

“Liberals, who claim to support the working class, vote for candidates who glibly defend NAFTA and increased globalization. Liberals, who claim to want an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, continue to back a party that funds and expands these wars. Liberals, who say they are the champions of basic civil liberties, do not challenge politicians who take these liberties from them.”

Thus the manufactured “climate crisis” happening before us has become an engineered class war masquerading as an ecological movement. It’s leaders are hypocrites who expend more fossil fuel volume in one private jet trip than most Americans burn in an entire year. The evangelical priests of the corporate climate movement buy multi-million dollar beachfront properties that would ostensibly be underwater if any of the things they tell us about rising sea levels were true. To add insult to injury, their proposed “solutions” to the crisis always involve further gouging poor people who can’t afford access to energy in the first place.

It is said that tyranny is the deliberate removal of nuance. Today this is true in the sense that any utterance critical of the imposed status quo is automatically branded by the orthodox cultural priesthood as disinformation linked to MAGA extremism and therefore Trump and therefore Russia (all of which are assumed to be irrevocably evil). Why even have a conversation with this “basket of deplorables” if not to try to change them?

So what do we call this segment of the population? Those who uncritically repeat mainstream media lies at all of their acquaintances and unquestioningly repeat the pro-war propaganda spewed by the Party and its media? The smug automaton who mindlessly parrots corporate talking points on masks, mandates, lockdowns and jabs? The intolerant bigots who repeat harmful lies fed to them by criminals? The myopic morons who give standing ovations to Nazi SS officers of Hitler’s Third Reich in the halls of parliamentary democracy?

Authoritarian leftists are so common they’re almost cliché. Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Lenin, etc. Today’s so-called “leftists”are no exception. They don’t believe in democracy, as evidenced by their allegiance to unelected bureaucracies like NATO, the UN, WHO, CDC and WEF. Instead, they tend to kneel at the feet of rogue military agencies like the CIA, FBI, NSA, ICE and DIA. This is why Barack Obama’s apparently “liberal” Administration repealed Habius Corpus and in turn removed due process for any protester or dissident (who could now be arrested by military personnel or even assassinated), all justified by rebranding political opponents of the globalist agenda as “terrorist” threats.

THINK FOR YOURSELF

If you’ve fallen for this divide-and-conquer psyop you’re not alone and it’s not too late to get off the backwards ride. Everyone who succumbs to The Crowd unwittingly submits to an explicit form of hypnosis, or “mass formation psychosis.” Gustav Le Bon elaborates on the inherent and inevitable barbarism of The Crowd:

“Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian—that is, a creature acting by instinct. … “It is for these reasons that juries are seen to deliver verdicts of which each individual juror would disapprove, that parliamentary assemblies adopt laws and measures of which each of their members would disapprove in his own person. Taken separately, the men of the Convention were enlightened citizens of peaceful habits. United in a crowd, they did not hesitate to give their adhesion to the most savage proposals, to guillotine individuals most clearly innocent, and, contrary to their interests, to renounce their inviolability and to decimate themselves.”

To get off the ride ultimately requires the genuine courage to acknowledge your own vulnerability and weakness (human) and admit to yourself and to others that you were wrong. But to transcend requires an admission of fallibility; an admission of imperfection. Admit it first to yourself and then to everyone else. You’ll be glad you did.

Next, put aside the notion that people who hold different views, opinions and perspectives than you are the enemy and need to be corrected for the betterment of humanity. That’s just entrenching division, and precisely what our unelected masters want us to continue doing. We must quit rushing to take sides in contrived arguments that are deliberately rigged to sow division among those who ought to be working together. On this point, Chris Hedges asserts that the divide in America is not between Republican and Democrat, but rather that, “It is a divide between the corporate state and the citizen.”

For those genuinely interested in embracing classical liberalism, these are some of the philosophical dilemmas that must be pondered with sincerity. It means seriously considering whether our actions, speech and thoughts have lead us toward harmony or away from it.

If you live in America, please remember that you’re allowed to utter sentences that are factually incorrect, and you’re allowed to make honest mistakes and you’re allowed to learn from them. You’re allowed to insult people. You’re allowed to make people feel uncomfortable. You have the right to offend. It’s the only way to ensure an honest conversation among equals. By contrast, censoring and canceling everyone arbitrarily ensures that we can never have an open conversation between equals based on truth, facts, logic, reason or common sense. Conflict is necessary to prevent bloodshed. Unresolved conflict leads to violence. A riot in the street is ultimately the language of the unheard.

Should those who are on the fence fail to recognize how their compassion and empathy have been weaponized against them through the sophisticated emotional manipulation of modern propagandists, they will be led unwittingly into the jaws of a war they’re not prepared to fight and impoverish the entire world in doing so.

The Limousine Liberals with the wealth and resources to survive what is coming are also themselves dangerously out of touch with reality beyond their feeble attempts to impose their will over it. For those sincerely interested in enduring the upcoming hardships, it seems extremely foolish to follow the increasingly dangerous delusions of this demographic.

The hardest part of getting off the ride is admitting that you were wrong and that you could be fooled. It seems that many people would rather die than admit they’ve been deceived. If you have, don’t feel too bad about being duped by very sophisticated predatory interests because they’re skilled in what they do and have successfully fooled a great many for a very long time. But you cannot fool all of the people all of the time, and the truth cannot stay hidden forever. The ongoing corporate cavalcade of bullshit stories based on lies will expire eventually, as it always does, and those who stood for truth in times of universal deceit are usually vindicated in the long run. Above all, no matter how far you have walked down the wrong path, turn around!

TPP: A Totalitarian Trojan Horse

by

0

pigglywiggly

The trip is fraught with paradox, and life is too ironic to be fully understood.

Lord Acton asserted nearly two centuries ago that “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority.”

While I find this observation to be apt, it is decidedly incomplete. It’s not only that absolute power corrupts absolutely, but also that positions of high authority have an overwhelming propensity to attract the corruptible. Sociopaths driven to dominate are motivated by a seething ambition that the rest of us simply cannot identify with.

In the 1960’s, Alan Watts discerned that:

“…nobody is more frightened of anybody else than a tyrant. He sits with his back to the wall, and his guards on either side of him, and he has you face downwards on the ground because you can’t use weapons that way. When you come into his presence, you don’t stand up and face him, because you might attack, and he has reason to fear that you might because he’s ruling you all. And the man who rules you all is the biggest crook in the bunch. Because he’s the one who succeeded in crime. The other people are pushed aside because they — the criminals, the people we lock up in jail — are simply the people who didn’t make it. So naturally, the real boss sits with his back to the wall and his henchmen on either side of him.”

Thus we can begin to conjure the philosophical reasons for the problems of the world that Socrates and Aristotle debated over two-thousand years ago: Why is it that our governing institutions are plagued with corruption to the point that fraud, depravity and exploitation seem not to be bugs of the system, but programs inherent within the system itself? Why is the emergence of ethical and benevolent leaders so incredibly rare?

Part of the problem stems from the fact that the greedy typically stop at nothing in their ruthless pursuit of power, while the wise avoid it altogether. The truly wise recognize this world for the illusion that it is, and cultivate that which is truly important for the nourishment of their soul, and material wealth and physical power simply don’t fit into that perspective. So the wise retain an extreme aversion to the pursuit of power because wisdom is inherently without greed; meanwhile, the greedy gravitate upward into positions of power and bring into being a plethora of problems because greed is inherently without wisdom.

With the internet age catapulting the evolution of human culture and ideas into today’s intimidating exponential acceleration, the possibility finally exists for the last vestiges of the old paradigm to finally fall away, including their manifestations which include parasitism, dominance, morality, war and predation. As professor Robert Solomon observes, the emergent paradigm has the possibility of a human society predicated upon the edicts of truth, loyalty, justice and freedom.

I would respectfully suggest that for this new paradigm to materialize as more than mere philosophical musings on the blogosphere, and become a concrete reality that can be seen and touched in the physical world, that the wise must change their paradigm as well, and pursue the throne for the benefit of all beings. Until that happens, the greedy, for whom wealth and power are endless pursuits, will take ever more power, resources, and wealth, and impoverish the rest of the world until they are forced by an extinction event or a mass revolution to cease their looting of the planet. The addictions of wealth, possessions and power are like salt water – the more one partakes of them, the thirstier they become – trying to fill the inner void with these unskillful means inexorably expands the void. And right now, the biggest imperial expansion in written human history is underway.

It’s called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and if you’re unfamiliar with it you might want to start asking yourself why you’ve never heard of it. Because behind those seven syllables of banality, those three innocent words, is a cleverly disguised iron fist of biblical proportions.

For many who have heard of it, the Trans-Pacific-Partnership has been sold by the Associated Press and Reuters as nothing more than a casual business deal as boring as it is innocuous. A cleverly orchestrated smokescreen of financial jargon and obfuscating legalese is drawn to calm the masses and appease the public who are wooed to complacency on the promise that the TPP has nothing to do with us.

 

Meanwhile, a steady campaign of apocalyptic headlines is pumped into our consciousness to distract us from the biggest corporate power grab ever, as the emergency headlines of confederate flags, ISIS attacks in Paris, and the unadulterated puerility of Donald Trump are beamed into the consciousness of the nation. Thus few have heard of the TPP or are familiar with how its passage promises to usher in a state of fascist dictatorship the scope and magnitude of which have never been witnessed on planet Earth before.

613_cartoon_distraction_hurwitt_large

While we’re meant to think that this so-called “trade deal” is solely concerned with the mutual lowering of tariffs, it’s really a corporate ownership agreement that will change every facet of our lives. The TPP will change our laws in favor of a global legal system that caters to corporations and which is presided over by corporate lobbyists. The allowance of corporations to sue governments for impeding on their projected profits by means of secret trade tribunals is perhaps one of the most diabolical effects of the TPP. If a country has any kind of regulations on industry intended to protect environmental or social health, the corporation can sue the country for a loss of projected profits, as Philip Morris did against Uruguay last year for the country’s tobacco regulations. But under the TPP, we can expect this kind of lawsuit to become commonplace. As former Secretary of Labor under Clinton Robert Reich wrote earlier this year:

“The TPP also gives global corporations an international tribunal of private attorneys, outside any nation’s legal system, who can order compensation for any ‘unjust expropriation’ of foreign assets.”

As Joyce Nelson of Live Leak expains:

“Now the TransPacific Partnership – which is being called “NAFTA on steroids” – would award Big Pharma and other multinationals even more corporate “rights” in more countries, including the controversial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism by which they can sue signatory governments for regulatory changes that affect their profits.

“As the Canadian website rabble.ca notes: ‘The Canadian government is currently being sued through NAFTA by Eli Lilly, an American pharmaceutical company, for invalidating the firm’s patent extensions on two mental health drugs. A Canadian Federal Court decided in 2010 that the patent extensions had not delivered the promised benefits and the drugs should therefore be opened up to generic competition. Generic drugs significantly reduce the cost for end users, but Eli Lilly cried foul and launched an ISDS claim against the government, demanding US$500 million in compensation for lost profits. The case is still in progress, but regardless of the outcome we can expect the TPP to lead to similar ISDS disputes. Powerful multinational pharmaceutical companies will use any available means to cling to over-priced drug monopolies. Greater intellectual property protections in the TPP will give these companies an even stronger quasi-legal basis to sue governments and crowd out generic [drug] competition.’”

Following the recent publication of the TPP’s 30 chapters, Ralph Nader, referring to the TPP as “the most brazen corporate power grab in American history,” explained the trade tribunals in more detail to journalist Chris Hedges:

“It allows corporations to bypass our three branches of government to impose enforceable sanctions by secret tribunals. These tribunals can declare our labor, consumer and environmental protections [to be] unlawful, non-tariff barriers subject to fines for noncompliance. The TPP establishes a transnational, autocratic system of enforceable governance in defiance of our domestic laws…The TPP removes legislative authority from Congress and the White House on a range of issues. Judicial power is often surrendered to three-person trade tribunals in which only corporations are permitted to sue. Workers, environmental and advocacy groups and labor unions are blocked from seeking redress in the proposed tribunals. The rights of corporations become sacrosanct. The rights of citizens are abolished.”

And attorney Kevin Zeese of Popular Resistance told Hedges:

“The TPP creates a web of corporate laws that will dominate the global economy. It is a global corporate coup d’état. Corporations will become more powerful than countries. Corporations will force democratic systems to serve their interests. Civil courts around the world will be replaced with corporate courts or so-called trade tribunals. This is a massive expansion that builds on the worst of NAFTA rather than what Barack Obama promised, which was to get rid of the worst aspects of NAFTA.”

This trade deal could make any form of dissent or protest illegal, since any open act of defiance can be construed as an impediment to a corporation’s “projected earnings” and is therefore eligible for lawsuit under the ISDS provisions. But that isn’t the only way in which protesting the New World Order may become impossible with this new system of law.

Recognizing how the free flow of information threatens corporate hegemony, the TPP also promises to censor and control the internet, something the corporations failed to accomplish with all of their previous internet control bill attempts, illustrating how determined these people are to never accept “no” for an answer regardless of how much resistance they encounter from the people. When they pushed SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) the internet community rallied together and shouted “No!” Then they pushed PIPA (Protect IP Act) which failed due to popular resistance. Then they created CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act) and the internet community shut them down again. Then they pushed ACTA down our throats (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) and again, the reaction was no different. Legislative attempts to shackle the free flow of information have failed because the internet community has consistently stood up and denounced internet control. But as long as the same corrupt bureaucrats who cooked up these schemes remain in power they will they will never stop their attempts to censor the internet, and the TPP provides them the legal loophole they need to bypass our parliamentary process altogether, effectively nullifying whatever popular resistance emerges as a result.  As the Guardian’s Evan Greer reported earlier this month:

“TPP even prescribes a mechanism for that censorship to occur. A section that can best be described as “Zombie-Sopa”, due to its similarity to the failed Stop Online Piracy Act, would require internet service providers (ISPs) to play “copyright cops” and create systems for hastily taking down internet content upon a copyright holder’s request, even without a court order.”

Many ISPs such as Charter Communications are already playing the role of “copyright cops,” spying on their users activities and enabling armies of lawyers and lobbyists to threaten to sue their customers whenever the potential to monetize copyright infringement presents itself. Now the TPP codifies this borderline criminal activity into law at the expense of every internet user, and in-turn threatens to abolish free speech through a clever alteration of conceived copyright rules, as Greer also explains:

“One provision demands that TPP member countries enforce copyright terms 70 years after the death of the creator. This will keep an immeasurable amount of information, art and creativity locked away from the public domain for decades longer than necessary, and allow for governments and corporations to abuse copyright laws and censor content at will, since so much of what’s online will be subject to copyright for decades.”

In short, the TPP is a complete power grab nightmare that is so much worse than anyone could have predicted; a veritable wish-list for corporations tired of playing by the rules, sick of adhering to environmental standards, and no longer willing to tolerate the ridicule for their slave-labor practices around the world. Of all the corporate threats to humanity, the TPP constitutes the most egregious menace yet conceived, and it will transform our world into a totalitarian travesty devoid of any constitutional protections or basic human rights.

Chris Hedges summarizes how the TPP will change our world inside out:

“Wages will decline. Working conditions will deteriorate. Unemployment will rise. Our few remaining rights will be revoked. The assault on the ecosystem will be accelerated. Banks and global speculation will be beyond oversight or control. Food safety standards and regulations will be jettisoned. Public services ranging from Medicare and Medicaid to the post office and public education will be abolished or dramatically slashed and taken over by for-profit corporations. Prices for basic commodities, including pharmaceuticals, will skyrocket. Social assistance programs will be drastically scaled back or terminated. And countries that have public health care systems, such as Canada and Australia, that are in the agreement will probably see their public health systems collapse under corporate assault. Corporations will be empowered to hold a wide variety of patents, including over plants and animals, turning basic necessities and the natural world into marketable products. And, just to make sure corporations extract every pound of flesh, any public law interpreted by corporations as impeding projected profit, even a law designed to protect the environment or consumers, will be subject to challenge in an entity called the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) section. The ISDS, bolstered and expanded under the TPP, will see corporations paid massive sums in compensation from offending governments for impeding their “right” to further swell their bank accounts. Corporate profit effectively will replace the common good.

“The TPP is part of a triad of trade agreements that includes the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). TiSA, by calling for the privatization of all public services, is a mortal threat to the viability of the U.S. Postal Service, public education and other government-run enterprises and utilities; together these operations make up 80 percent of the U.S. economy. The TTIP and TiSA are still in the negotiation phase. They will follow on the heels of the TPP and are likely to go before Congress in 2017.

“These three agreements solidify the creeping corporate coup d’état along with the final evisceration of national sovereignty. Citizens will be forced to give up control of their destiny and will be stripped of the ability to protect themselves from corporate predators, safeguard the ecosystem and find redress and justice in our now anemic and often dysfunctional democratic institutions. The agreements—filled with jargon, convoluted technical, trade and financial terms, legalese, fine print and obtuse phrasing—can be summed up in two words: corporate enslavement.”

I implore whoever is reading this to not give in to the phenomenon of learned helplessness that the system has beaten into all of us, perpetuating the myth that there is nothing we can do about this.  we need to shatter this presumption, because like the elephant who learns over time through classical conditioning that being tied to a tiny twig in the ground constitutes unconditional immobility, these limitations exist solely in our imagination. It’s obvious to us that a seven-ton elephant is more than capable of freeing itself from a flimsy twig, but the elephant, having been tied to a tree at an early age, was conditioned from infancy not to question its human authorities. Nevertheless, the limitation is a figment of the imagination, and so it goes with societal obedience to the established oligarchical regime. If the people ever wake up to the power of the swarm, it could spark a global big-bang movement capable of changing the course of history away from tyranny’s predictability.

And don’t fall into the mental trap that the buck stops with the parliamentary circus of our congressional representatives; even if most of them weren’t payed off by the corporations that fund their campaigns, they couldn’t do anything about this even if they wanted to, because of fast-track authority enables President Obama to sign the agreement before Congress even has a chance to debate it.  Hedges continues:

“The TPP, because of fast track, bypasses the normal legislative process of public discussion and consideration by congressional committees. The House and the Senate, which have to vote on the TPP bill within 90 days of when it is sent to Congress, are prohibited by the fast-track provision from adding floor amendments or holding more than 20 hours of floor debate. Congress cannot raise concerns about the effects of the TPP on the environment. It can only vote yes or no. It is powerless to modify or change one word.”

However we conceive the world creates the reality we see around us, but the first step is getting informed. So whatever you do, don’t give into the learned helplessness that suggests there’s nothing you can do about any of this, because that’s the television talking. When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. There is still time to stop the TPP/NWO, but if it passes, resistance to it will define daily life for those of us who simply cannot accept the annihilation of the indomitable human spirit.  If you don’t do something, you are complicit in whatever happens.

Openly opposing and preventing the TPP are just the beginning, however. If our previous experiences with internet control bills tell us anything, it’s that our owners will never take “no” for an answer. Even if we can somehow prevent the TPP’s passage, the oligarchs will draft another document that will be negotiated in secret and they will not stop until they have successfully dominated every square inch of every continent, every penny of every dollar, every action of every body, and every thought in every mind. The time has come for an explicit rejection of every system, product and personality contributing to the paradigm that is destroying the planet and every life upon it.

Gabrielle Lafayette is a journalist, writer, and executive producer for the Outer Limits Radio Show.
Catch the cloudcast at mixcloud.com/outerlimitsradioshow
Check out the more frequently updated tumblr page at outerlimitsradioshow.tumblr.com
Contact the research team at outerlimitsradioshow@fastmail.fm