The Hive Mentality

Wow, I get to cross reference Paul Krugman and Charles Stross in one blog post.  It’s a nerd’s delight!!  I also get to speak out on I why opted out of corporate life and married life despite the obvious financial benefits of both.  That would be the “Hive Mentality”.  I hated working in large corporations.  I gradually couldn’t stand my husband more and more because he wasn’t the sweet kid that I married who adored John Lennon and Science Fiction.  He is how I come to know writers like Charles Stross.   The ex turned into a soldier bee that I couldn’t stand to be around.  If you love your freedom and your identity more than money and power, you will die a slow, painful, agonizing spiritual death as a corporate minion.  They will get to you one way or another.

Stross talks about why our politics, our society, and our people are so frigging messed up these days.    He also looks at why we feel–like my neighbor Antwoine–like we vote people into office that come from various backgrounds and they invariably turn on us.  Tell me truthfully, when is the last time you felt like your vote did any good?

Stross argues that the “The rot set in back in the 19th century, when the US legal system began recognizing corporations as de facto people“.  I’ve actually had similar thoughts.  That and I believe the recent Supreme Court decision giving them Constitutional rights essentially assigns us all to a form of serfdom.  Here’s the quote that Krugman lifted from Stross’ blog  that caught my attention too.

Corporations do not share our priorities. They are hive organisms constructed out of teeming workers who join or leave the collective: those who participate within it subordinate their goals to that of the collective, which pursues the three corporate objectives of growth, profitability, and pain avoidance. (The sources of pain a corporate organism seeks to avoid are lawsuits, prosecution, and a drop in shareholder value.)

Corporations have a mean life expectancy of around 30 years, but are potentially immortal; they live only in the present, having little regard for past or (thanks to short term accounting regulations) the deep future: and they generally exhibit a sociopathic lack of empathy.

I do think that my exhusband’s 20 year stint as an investment officer at Mutual of Omaha turned him into something of a Pod Person.  He became part of that collective hive and its goals became his goals.    He would forget to replace the milk in the refrigerator for our two small children. This would force me into the minivan–yes I had a MAZDA minivan–with hungry, whiny  kids needing bundling up  and buckling where I would drive miles to replace it.  At they same time, he would risk life and limb to get to the Hive Collective Office that’s eaten most of historic, central Omaha in blizzards and 6 foot snow drifts.  What started out as my panicked young parent self, thinking, sheesh he could die doing that eventually became, wow, he could die, I’d get the life insurance, and I’d move me and my kids to London where I could get a doctorate from the London School of Economics and they’d attend pre-school with the future kings of England.  I might even wind up in Oxford with some nice Hugh Grant type tottie and a title.  You can see how he eventually got on the losing side of that what-if exercise.

Even worse, however, was being part of a Hive itself.  I thought–because that’s how every one thought in the 1980s–that being in my suited skirt, carrying a brief case, and being in a field surrounded with men that I would become the uberWoman role model and change the world.  (Yeah, you know how THAT worked out.) What I found was a situation akin to either being oppressed or being rewarded for being the oppressor.  I couldn’t take either.  In my years in a corporate Hive, and then later as a consultant in Dr. Deming’s methods  to some of the biggest of them (e.g. AT&T and Ford) and then state and government agencies, I found that corporations suppress innovation, data, and the human spirit in search of more power, more market, and more profit.  Believe me, between my consulting and Katrina experiences, I’d turn my life over to the US Air Force  or any set of government workers any day over ANY private corporation.   Hence, I totally agree with Stross on this final point.

We are now living in a global state that has been structured for the benefit of non-human entities with non-human goals. They have enormous media reach, which they use to distract attention from threats to their own survival. They also have an enormous ability to support litigation against public participation, except in the very limited circumstances where such action is forbidden. Individual atomized humans are thus either co-opted by these entities (you can live very nicely as a CEO or a politician, as long as you don’t bite the feeding hand) or steamrollered if they try to resist.

In short, we are living in the aftermath of an alien invasion.

My question to you is how do we humans defeat this particularly nasty form of aliens?

Note: I’ve been over to Memorandum where they’ve featured this post and I seem to be outnumbered among those bloggers who to a man don’t agree with Stross.  Typically enough of the naysayers, one is a corporate attorney, one is a Hayek fetishist, and then there’s  Krugman who blames greedy individuals like the Koch brothers.  Frankly, I wonder if my response is a from a mother/woman viewpoint unlike the others.  Go read them.  I don’t think corporations have contributed much.  I think individuals contributed much until their contributions become corporations themselves.  (i.e. G.E. isn’t the contributor to society; Thomas Alva Edison was)  OR maybe it is JUST me.


This Saturday in Sisterhood: Elizabeth Edwards and TEDWomen

Wonk the Vote here. Hello everyone. Today is the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards, and I wanted to share a youtube I made in her memory (expand to full screen if you can):

The youtube above appears to work in firefox and internet explorer but not in chrome, so here is the original slideshow I put up earlier this week, just in case.

Elizabeth is a personal shero of mine. A smart, populist, liberal woman and tireless advocate for the least of these, with kind eyes and a warm smile that would light up the entire room wherever she went.

Connie Schultz, via slate’s Double X blog, on Wednesday wrote a moving piece paying homage to Elizabeth:

After Hillary Rodham Clinton, Elizabeth did the most to champion a new role for political wives. The year John Edwards ran for president in 2004, I was a 46-year-old newspaper columnist who had just married a congressman. I was stunned to find that some expected a political union to suck the brain out of a woman and render her incapable of independent thought.

When I took a leave of absence in 2006, during Sherrod’s successful race for the U.S. Senate, I used the templates set by Hillary and Elizabeth to figure out how I would campaign for him. They were their husbands’ partners, and they didn’t hide it. I’d been writing about policy throughout my career, and I had no interest in going suddenly blank during Q&A’s and saying, “Geez, I dunno, you’ll have to ask my husband about that.” Thanks to Hillary and Elizabeth, I had a road to follow. It wasn’t well-traveled, but it ran much closer to home than any other possible route.

I, like many, knew Elizabeth as: a fighter for human rights and for economic justice… a political wife who would not be relegated to second fiddle status or have her voice or the causes she believed in subsumed… and as a strong, resilient woman who weathered the loss of her firstborn, a terminal illness, and public betrayal. Others have had harsher words and judgments than I have had for the choices Elizabeth made during the course of John’s 2008 campaign. I have only ever had compassion for her. She faced the consequences of her choices, and she carried herself forward with far more dignity, grace, and candidness than I could imagine being capable of in her shoes.

Elizabeth was always too strong, too smart, and too substantive to let anyone or anything write her off and have the last word.

Even in death, she had the final say:

You all know that I have been sustained throughout my life by three saving graces – my family, my friends, and a faith in the power of resilience and hope. These graces have carried me through difficult times and they have brought more joy to the good times than I ever could have imagined. The days of our lives, for all of us, are numbered. We know that. And, yes, there are certainly times when we aren’t able to muster as much strength and patience as we would like. It’s called being human. But I have found that in the simple act of living with hope, and in the daily effort to have a positive impact in the world, the days I do have are made all the more meaningful and precious. And for that I am grateful. It isn’t possible to put into words the love and gratitude I feel to everyone who has and continues to support and inspire me every day. To you I simply say: you know.

With love,
Elizabeth ‬

Elizabeth will continue to be a role model for millions of women like myself. My heart goes out to all who loved and knew her personally and to all she loved, especially her children.

When Elizabeth released her goodbye message on facebook this past Monday, I noticed that under her “Likes” toward the top was a link to the following page: Can this poodle wearing a tinfoil hat get more fans than Glenn Beck?

Seeing that link made me smile as I wiped away the tears. Even until the end, she was fighting the good fight.

Knowing Elizabeth, she would wear the whacko-boro protests of her funeral as a badge of honor.

I am so sorry when anyone’s loved ones have to go through that nightmare in their time of mourning, though. I am reminded of a quote from Hillary:

“When people attack you, you always have to remember that a lot of what others say about you has a lot more to do about them than you.” – Hillary Rodham Clinton

Elizabeth Edwards was a woman who fought for the welfare and humanity of others. That her life’s dedication to doing so is cause for any group to spew their hate really speaks volumes about the absence of any humanity on their parts.

It also underscores the very quality that drew so many of us to her: Elizabeth was so much about the issues and what really mattered.

I will remember this April 2008 op-ed from her most of all, because her sheer brilliance was on display in it and when I read it at the time, I remember thinking to myself, as I often did when thinking of Elizabeth… “Damn, I wish she were president.”

From Elizabeth’s op-ed, lines which I thought were pure genius the very first time I read them:

But I am saying that every analysis that is shortened, every corner that is cut, moves us further away from the truth until what is left is the Cliffs Notes of the news, or what I call strobe-light journalism, in which the outlines are accurate enough but we cannot really see the whole picture.

Elizabeth’s closing words:

If voters want a vibrant, vigorous press, apparently we will have to demand it. Not by screaming out our windows as in the movie “Network” but by talking calmly, repeatedly, constantly in the ears of those in whom we have entrusted this enormous responsibility. Do your job, so we can — as voters — do ours.

We-the-people have been invisible to our leaders for so long, but we have never been invisible to people like Elizabeth Edwards. Thanks to Elizabeth’s public advocacy and writings, her invaluable voice will remain with us as we carry on the work from here. Rest in peace, Elizabeth. You are missed and loved.

Shifting gears, I would like to focus the rest of my roundup on TEDWomen, which was held this December 7th-8th in DC. Somehow I find a bit of solace in the fact that right as we lost Elizabeth, a conference on how women and girls are reshaping the future was taking place. I think she would have loved that. Hillary made a surprise visit to TEDWomen on the 8th and noted as much in her remarks. I can’t get the video to embed, but it is there at the link, and a must-watch for any Hillary fan. I have transcribed the first four minutes or so below:

Before I go too much further in talking about what we are doing in the government and what I would like to challenge you to join us in doing, I want to acknowledge the passing of Elizabeth Edwards, someone whom I have the greatest respect and admiration for. She lived with a fierce intelligence, a passion, a sense of purpose. She was not only devoted to family and friends but also to improving healthcare and finding a cure for cancer for once and for all… and she would have appreciated this event, where we are coming together to look for solutions. And, I want to express what so many people feel about the loss of Elizabeth–and that is we have lost a voice, and we have lost a very active blogger, who was willing to put herself on the line time and time again. I see women like that everywhere I go.

I just came back from Kyrgyzstan, where there is a woman president, who is not only the first female head of state or government in post-Soviet Union Central Asia, but she is presiding over the first parliamentary democracy in the entire region. The courage it takes for her is something that I draw courage from… or when I go to visit projects that women have carved out literally with their own hands in places like South Africa. I see in action that sense of resilience and commitment that can keep any of us–including me–going. I know so well that there are women as we speak in our own country and elsewhere who will never hear of this conference and certainly could not even imagine attending but who are living the kind of life experiences and involvements that bring us here.

So the United States has made empowering women and girls a cornerstone of our foreign policy, because women’s equality is not just a moral issue, it is not just a humanitarian issue, it is not just a fairness issue — it is a security issue, it is a prosperity issue, and it is a peace issue. And, therefore, when I talk about why we need to integrate women’s issues into discussions at the highest levels everywhere in the world, I’m not doing it just because I have a personal commitment or not just because President Obama cares about it, I’m doing it because it’s in the vital interest of the United States of America. Let women work and they drive economic growth across all sectors. Send a girl to school, even just for one year, and her income dramatically increases for life, and her children are more likely to survive, and her family more likely to be healthier for years to come. Give women equal rights and entire nations are more stable and secure. Deny women equal rights and the instability of nations is almost certain. The subjugation of women is therefore a threat to the common security of our world and to the national security of our country.

The entire TED clip of Hillary is 16 minutes long. Well worth the viewing.

Next up, Pereira & O’Dell‘s presentation at TEDWomen:

On December 7, 2010, a multimedia presentation for the International Museum of Women, created by Pereira & O’Dell, was shown at a TED conference in Washington, D.C. The audience was comprised of women philanthropists and visionary leaders. The first-ever TEDWomen, is a two-day conference taking place in December 7-8 that focuses on innovation and ideas by women and girls worldwide.

The video showcases vibrant images from the exhibition “Economica: Women and the Global Economy” and features beautiful design elements and the inspiring words and artwork that have been submitted by community members around the globe.

The International Museum of Women is a global institution that engages women worldwide through its vibrant, award-winning online exhibitions.

I highly recommend finding 10 minutes in your day to watch this next one in its entirety. Halla Tomasdottir: A feminine response to Iceland’s financial crash

Halla Tomasdottir managed to take her company Audur Capital through the eye of the financial storm in Iceland by applying 5 traditionally “feminine” values to financial services. At TEDWomen, she talks about these values and the importance of balance.

Tomasdottir’s bio on TED:

Speakers Halla Tomasdottir: Change agent, financial services

Halla Tomasdottir, co-founder of Audur Capital financial services, has been instrumental in rebuilding Iceland’s economy since its collapse in 2008. Her passion is releasing the incredible economic potential of women’s ways of doing business.

Why you should listen to her:

Halla Tomasdottir believes that women’s values are key to solving Iceland’s economic crisis. In 2007, Halla and her business partner, Kristin Petursdottir, co-founded Audur Capital to bring greater diversity, social responsibility, and “feminine values” to the financial services industry. These values include independence, risk awareness, straight talk, emotional capital, and profit with principles. And Audur’s approach appears to be working. The investment firm’s innovative offerings—such as the national green-tech investment fund they set up with pop icon and homegirl Björk—may just help save banking in Iceland.

Halla began her career in corporate America, working for heavyweights like M&M/Mars and Pepsi-Cola. Back home, she helped create a foundation and the executive education and women entrepreneurship programs at Reykjavik University. Halla later became managing director of the Iceland’s Chamber of Commerce; she left her post to start Audur. The company is named after an early Viking settler, Audur the Wise, whose moniker signifies wealth, happiness, and clear space.

“Halla Tomasdottir, an Icelandic fund manager and founder of Audur Capital, a wealth management firm in Reykjavik, is certain that if women had been at the helm of Iceland’s economy and its major banks, the country would not have been brought to its knees.”

The Daily Mail, March 28, 2009

Huffpo’s “Why TEDWomen?” Q&A with host Pat Mitchell, in advance of the conference, is also an interesting read if you get a chance. A brief teaser of Mitchell’s responses:

It’s important to understand that TED didn’t launch TEDWomen to segregate women attendees or speakers outside the main conference, nor as an alternative to putting forward a balanced speaker program at other events. As my TED colleague June Cohen has pointed out, this was already a priority for TED. The launch of TEDWomen marks an enthusiastic “yes/and,” not an “either/or.”

Okay, those are just a few highlights I chose. Be sure to check out the TEDWomen website for much more — lots of wonderful photos and information. Here is my favorite photo/quote from the entire event:

Sejal Hathi: I made it my mission to build a sisterhood of change-makers.

Sejal Hathi, founder of Girls Helping Girls, is just 19 years old.

“A sisterhood of change-makers.”

A young woman after my own heart.

Reading about TEDWomen, I was reminded of a quote that had a large hand in inspiring me to blog in the first place–

“There are some who question the reason for this conference. Let them listen to the voices of women in their homes, neighborhoods, and workplaces.” –Hillary Rodham Clinton, Beijing 1995

What are you reading and ruminating on this Saturday? Let the world listen! Have at it in the comments.

Cross-posted at Let Them Listen, Liberal Rapture, and Taylor Marsh.

Filibuster!

Well, I guess it’s going on long enough we need to open a live blog thread!!!

Senator Bernie Sanders has started a filibuster of the Obama/McConnell behind-closed-doors tax deal.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — a self-described democratic socialist — railed against the plan in a lengthy floor speech that he said “you [can] call … a filibuster.”

“You can call what i am doing today whatever you want, you it [sic] call it a filibuster, you can call it a very long speech … ,” read a message posted on Sanders’s Twitter account after he’d taken to the rostrum at 10:24 a.m.

“I’m not here to set any great records or to make a spectacle,” Sanders said at the top of his speech. “I am simply here today to take as long as I can to explain to the American people the fact that we have got to do a lot better than this agreement provides.”

CSPAN-2 is live streaming the Senate.

Right now, my Senator Mary Landrieu is up and appears to be aiding the effort.  She even has a nifty graph up about my state of Louisiana.

Sanders has called the plan  “virtually a Republican idea”.

Here are the CBO numbers on how much this tax plan will cost.  The number is $858 billion dollars.

The Obama-McConnell tax compromise will cost $858 billion over the next 10 years, according to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office.

In other words, the Republican-backed tax plan will cost more than the stimulus bill, which priced out at $787 billion.

For starters, extending all of the Bush tax cuts for two years will cost a total $675.2 billion over 10 years, according to a Dec. 3 Congressional Research Service study. Setting the estate tax at 35%, adding an exemption for estates under $5 million, knocking 2 percentage points off employees’ portion of the Social Security payroll tax, and the cost quickly goes up.

So, how does the U.S. pay the bill?

Twitter Update from CSPAN on the Live Coverage:

cspan CSPAN
Screen grabs from C-SPAN2 HD coverage of Bernie Sanders filibuster http://cs.pn/gveC51 & http://cs.pn/dFZNBq
From Brian Beutler in TPM:

It’s a filibuster as filibusters were originally intended — and, as such, makes a mockery of what the filibuster’s become: a gimmick that allows a minority of senators to quietly impose supermajority requirements on any piece of legislation.

Joined at different times by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Sanders has been decrying the Obama tax cut plan for bailing out the wealthiest people in America. “How can I get by on one house?” Sanders railed, sarcastically. “I need five houses, ten houses. I need three jet planes to take me all over the world! Sorry, American people. We’ve got the money, we’ve got the power.”


Thursday Reads

Good Morning!

If you’ve read some of my threads for some time, you know that I am fascinated by the right wing meme that Obama is some kind of Marxist or Socialist or secret Muslim when it is pretty clear that he is aligned with major corporations promoting monopoly.  It is very much in the interests of corporations promoting monopoly to convince people that their enemies are immigrant workers, Raj in Bangalore, or the poor minority family down the street that needs assistance.  It takes every one’s minds off the real issues and the true targets.

Even under Free Trade agreements, the government doesn’t have to provide tax incentives and deductions to corporations that make vertical production moves to poor countries feasible and profitable.  Even with assistance to the poor and elderly, that doesn’t mean that the government can’t provide good roads, translucence and oversight to the operations of markets, and ensure job conditions where every one is safe and can earn a working wage.  Large corporations and power interests thrive on selling the idea of a zero sum game or a pie that is only so big.   The U.S. pie is pretty big right now, although finite at any point in time. It grows with technology and better use of resources. The biggest pieces of the pie–our national income–are not going to Raj in Bangalore, the family needing assistance down the street, the elderly couple surviving on social security, or the immigrants who come to the United States looking for jobs in the worst of situations.  We are all in the same wobbly, leaky boat.  We exist in a boat with those who are trying to survive on wages that never keep up with costs and with continual  fear of job loss and illness that will cost everything.  The rich don’t really have that fear.  The anxiety of having to live with a car that’s more than a few years old or a less exotic vacation is not a real fear. It’s neuroses. Those folks don’t want us in their boats.  They want us all crammed into the wobbly, leaking boat feeling so insecure that we consider tossing our neighbor overboard to the sharks.

Okay, so it’s a reads link, and where am I going with this at a time when you’re still probably drinking your first cup of coffee?    My new issue of Vanity Fair came last night.  I got to thinking more and more about those people that want to egg us into tossing our neighbors to the sharks.

Now, I know all the issues people can have with Christopher Hitchens but despite these, his latest in VF is a must read.  Unfortunately, it’s not out there on line so you may have to find the print edition.  His latest diatribe is on the Tea Party and Glenn Beck raises the specter of an organization that has always represented some of the worst of the American conservative movement;  The John Birch Society. The JBS is so despicable that William F. Buckley Jr. spent a large amount of time trying to get them out of the Republican Party back in the day.  There is really very little left of the ‘intellectual’–if you can call it that–side of that conservative movement ushered in by Buckley and the JBS has moved back in to fill the void.  They do so in their worst form. This is typed in from my print edition of VF.

“So, Beck’s “9/12 Project” is canalizing old racist and clerical toxic-waste material that a healthy society had mostly flushed out of its system more than a generation ago, and injecting in right back in again.  Things that had hidden under stones are being dug up and re-released. And why?  So as to teach us a new about the dangers of “spending and deficits”?  It’s enough to make a cat laugh.  No, a whole new audience has been created, including many impressionable young people, for ideas that are viciously anti-democratic and a historical. The full effect of this will be felt farther down the road, where we will need it even less.

Hitchens spends quite some time going over some of the things that point to a resurgence of the JBS including the absolutely lunatic notion that Bill and Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Vince Foster’s death. You may recall that Hitchens is no fan of the Clintons.

Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin  and the Tea Party are the ideological descendants of Robert Welch who denounced President Eisenhower as a “dedicated, conscious agent” of Communism.  Now, we’re getting the same filth but it’s about President Obama.  They did try it with President Clinton but  it didn’t settle in then.  For some reason, it’s taking with President Obama.  There are racial dynamics at play here, there are the dynamics of his absentee sperm donor, and there are dynamics that make demagoguery more possible because of the bad economy.  My fear is that these people–as well as the nutjobs in ‘The Family’–would love to see things worsen because it would justify more and more of their fascist ways as well as hand them more profits. That we have a President that seems to play into their hands–while at the same time is used as a symbol of everything they feel is wrong with American–is just a cruel irony. These conversations and labels would go away if Obama would change parties.

So, the worst read to suggest today is one that Glenn Beck suggests and has made the top item at Amazon. You probably don’t need to read the book. But google some of the excerpts available in studies and on the web.  Hitchens calls this book a “demented screed”.   This is exactly why we must be aware of it and what it suggests.  The book is by W. Cleon Skousen and it is called The Five Thousand Year Leap. Skousen’s other book is called Naked Communism. His views were so radical and so out there, that the JBS  and many others kept him at a safe distance.  However, his theoretical based world view attracted Tim LaHaye in the 1980s.  He planted enough seeds that they’ve taken root and grown.  Skousen wrote things that were beyond inflammatory.  He too thought Eisenhower was a communist agent.

“In The Naked Communist, a lengthy primer published in 1958, Skousen enlivened a survey of the worldwide leftist threat with outlandish claims, writing that F.D.R.’s adviser Harry Hopkins had treasonously delivered to the Soviets a large supply of uranium, and that the Russians built the first Sputnik with plans stolen from the United States. A year before Richard Condon’s novel The Manchurian Candidate appeared, Skousen announced that the Communists were creating ‘a regimented breed of Pavlovian men whose minds could be triggered into immediate action by signals from their masters’ … A later book, The Naked Capitalist, decried the Ivy League Establishment, who, through the Federal Reserve, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Rockefeller Foundation, formed ‘the world’s secret power structure.’ The conspiracy had begun, Skousen wrote, when reformers like the wealthy banker Edward M. House, a close adviser to President Woodrow Wilson, helped put into place the Federal Reserve and the graduated income tax … In 1981, he produced The 5,000 Year Leap, a treatise that assembles selective quotations and groundless assertions to claim that the U.S. Constitution is rooted not in the Enlightenment but in the Bible, and that the framers believed in minimal central government.”

Sean Wilentz, Princeton University historian

Notice that a progressive income tax and the Federal Reserve are at the heart of his radical attacks. It is not the least coincidental that Beck recommends this book and the Tea Party voices these opinions.

[MABlue update: Hitchen’s article has now been uploaded. You can read it here.]

On a side note, that Princeton historian Sean Wilentz  wrote an article calling  George W. Bush  the “The Worst President in History’ for the Rolling Stone and was an outspoken Hillary supporter in 2008.  You can read the Rolling Stone article at Truth Out. But to our main point, Dr. Wilentz was featured in an npr story in October talking about the parallels between the extremism in the 1950s and Beck’s 9/12 movement. He sees the JBS as an active component.

Wilentz, who teaches at Princeton University, argues that the rhetoric expressed by both conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck and the Tea Party is nothing new — and is rooted in an extremist ideology that has been around since the Cold War, a view that the Republican Party is now embracing.

“I think what’s happening is the Republican Party is willing to chase after whatever it can to get the party back — to get power back,” he tells Fresh Air‘s Terry Gross. “This is what’s happening in the Republican Party, so instead of drawing lines, they’re jumping over fences to look like they’re in the good graces of these Tea Party types.”

Wilentz says Beck, who has emerged as a unifying figure and intellectual guide for the Tea Party movement, finds fodder for his Fox News Channel and syndicated radio shows in the ideas espoused by the John Birch Society, an ultraconservative political group founded in 1958 that, Wilentz writes, “became synonymous with right-wing extremism.

“It’s a version of history that demonizes the progressive era, particularly Woodrow Wilson,” Wilentz says. “It sees it as the beginning of America’s going down the road to totalitarianism, which ends in Beck’s version with Barack Obama.”

Particularly troublesome, Wilentz says, are the gross historical inaccuracies Beck makes on his Fox show, which now reaches more than 2 million people each day.

This interview also highlights some of the historical inaccuracies made by Beck on his show.  Much of what the movement does is rewrite history and Beck is a master of making it up as he goes along.  Most revisions are very frightening and many people actually believe them.  I’m going to reference the JBS example.  BTW, the John Birch Society is very much functional and has a presence on the web.  you can find them here.

On the John Birch Society

“The John Birch Society was founded in 1958 at a meeting in Indianapolis in which Robert Welch presided for a couple of days and read his manifesto of what’s going wrong [in America]. … The idea was the John Birch Society was going to influence local politics. They saw the country as having been taken over by the totalitarianists — by the communists. So they were going to try and undo that. And Welch says in the Blue Book, ‘You know, it hasn’t come to a military conflict quite yet. We don’t have to overthrow these guys with a violent revolution.’ So there’s still a possibility for political action. And that’s what the John Birch Society was devoted to: education and political action so that their people would get involved in local politics so the right people and the correct people would get elected to the school board, which was very important in deciding what kinds of books students would be reading in public schools. They wanted to make sure that the right kinds of people were running and getting elected. … Somewhere by the early ’60s, it was estimated that they had as many as 100,000 members around the country but many, many more sympathizers.”

On the John Birch Society and racism

“The John Birch Society wanted to have nothing to do with segregation, wanted nothing to do with any of that as an expression of white supremacy. However, they did oppose all of the civil rights laws because they saw it as an overleaning federal government taking control of people’s lives, of overstepping its boundaries. So they opposed all of that.”

Beck is the public voice and face of a movement to make the JBS and its horrible views palatable and there is no Bill Buckley to fight them in the Republican Party.  Many of the Republican Party are welcoming these folks which should give us all pause.  ABC’s The Note had an article on the participation by the JBS in 2010 as a co-sponsor of CPAC.  This is from February 19, 2010.

According to Ian Walters, a spokesman for CPAC, it’s the first time the John Birch Society has sponsored the conference.  That’s not surprising, considering that the Birch Society has long been considered wacky and extreme by conservative leaders.

William F. Buckley famously denounced the John Birch Society and its founder Robert Welch in the early 1960s as “idiotic” and “paranoid. ”  Buckley’s condemnation effectively banishing the group from the mainstream conservative movement.  Welch had called President Dwight D. Eisenhower a “conscious, dedicated agent of the communist conspiracy” and that the U.S. government was “under operational control of the Communist party.”  Buckley argued that such paranoid rantings had no place in the conservative movement or the Republican party.

However, Beck and others have brought them back like some kind of 1950s movie zombies.  Remember this group feels that civil right legislation is inspired by communism.  One of their first publications was a call to get the US out of the UN.  They also wants to abolish the income tax and the Federal Reserve.  Are any of these calls sounding remotely familiar to you?  Here’s more information from Source Watch. PublicEye.org also has some of the more outrageously antisemitic and racist views held by members of JBS.  When these things come to light, JBS purges their public faces, but the antisemitism and the racism remain.

These people are undoubtedly back in the Republican party and have sympathizers in the ranks of elected officials like Jon Kyl and Rand Paul.  Many of the things you read in the JBS list of goals are the things you hear from the lips of  Tea Party and Beck aficionados.  The roots of those nutty conversations about taking up arms and revolution are easy to find in the writings of Welsh and Skousen.  They are also heard daily on the Beck show and they are spouted at rallies by populist right wing icons like Huckabee and Palin. We should not be condemned to repeat this part of our past,  please.  You can only imagine how evil they are if Bill Buckley felt they were worth purging.

In more current news, if you’ve been watching MSNBC at all, you know that both Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann have taken on the Obama Tax compromise. Have all the MSNBC anchors lost that loving feeling?

Michael Bloomberg announced that he had no interest in running for President in 2012.  He did urge policy makers to take more centrist approaches.

This week we will undoubtedly have live links up following the votes on the Tax cuts/Unemployment extension, DADT, and the Dream Act.  The President is begging liberal democrats to ‘not topple the economy’ by rejecting his deal with McConnell. That alone should be an interesting kabuki today.

[MABlue’s picks?]
Democrats promised to alter the “Deal” before agreeing to it. I don’t know if they have done so, but I just saw this:
Democrats in Senate warming to tax deal

Senate leaders are planning to begin debate on a far-reaching tax package as soon as Thursday as rank-and-file Democrats warm to an agreement between the White House and Republicans to extend a host of expiring tax cuts and pump fresh cash into the economy.
Democrats were still angry Wednesday about what they viewed as President Obama’s capitulation to GOP demands to preserve tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, particularly a deal to exempt estates worth as much as $10 million from a revived inheritance tax. But lawmakers said the magnitude of the concessions Obama won came into sharper focus Wednesday as the White House highlighted independent forecasts predicting that the package could create as many as 2.2 million jobs next year.

What does that mean? They didn’t understand “The Deal” the first time around?

Are we about to execute an innocent man (again)? These type of stories are the main reason I’m (speaking for me only) against the death penalty.
Framed for Murder?

“California may be about to execute an innocent man.”

That’s the view of five federal judges in a case involving Kevin Cooper, a black man in California who faces lethal injection next year for supposedly murdering a white family. The judges argue compellingly that he was framed by police.

Mr. Cooper’s impending execution is so outrageous that it has produced a mutiny among these federal circuit court judges, distinguished jurists just one notch below the United States Supreme Court. But the judicial process has run out for Mr. Cooper. Now it’s up to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to decide whether to commute Mr. Cooper’s sentence before leaving office.

Is corruption more preponderant in Louisiana? Kat, what’s up with that?
Senate, for Just the 8th Time, Votes to Oust a Federal Judge

The Senate on Wednesday found Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Federal District Court in Louisiana guilty on four articles of impeachment and removed him from the bench, the first time the Senate has ousted a federal judge in more than two decades.

Judge Porteous, the eighth federal judge to be removed from office in this manner, was impeached by the House in March on four articles stemming from charges that he received cash and favors from lawyers who had dealings in his court, used a false name to elude creditors and intentionally misled the Senate during his confirmation proceedings.

Come join the conversation and share the information!!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

Late Night: A Spooky Tale

Those of us who remember the revelations of the Church Committee in the 1970s are at least somewhat familiar with the CIA’s Project MK ULTRA, a ghastly program that sponsored research on human subjects carried out by respected professors at prestigious universities.

Senator Edward Kennedy, 1977:

Some 2 years ago, the Senate Health Subcommittee heard chilling testimony about the human experimentation activities of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Deputy Director of the CIA revealed that over 30 universities and institutions were involved in an “extensive testing and experimentation” program which included covert drug tests on unwitting citizens “at all social levels, high and low, native Americans and foreign.” Several of these tests involved the administration of LSD to “unwitting subjects in social situations.”

One example is the CIA-sponsored work of famed personality psychologist Henry Murray at Harvard. Murray used Harvard students to carry out “research” in which he attempted to break down an individual’s defenses:

Henry Murray’s experiment was intended to measure how people react under stress. Murray subjected his unwitting students, including Kaczynski, to intensive interrogation — what Murray himself called “vehement, sweeping, and personally abusive” attacks, assaulting his subjects’ egos and most-cherished ideals and beliefs.

MK ULTRA researchers also famously dosed numerous people with LSD to see how they would react. Murray himself used LSD–he and Timothy Leary were on the Harvard psychology department faculty at the same time–and Murray may have administered the drug to his student subjects, one of whom was named Ted Kaczynski. That’s right, the man who later became the Unibomber.

Anyone who remembers this history could not be surprised by the collaboration of psychologists with the CIA in developing techniques of torture “enhanced interrogation” during the Bush years.

And now, all these years later, according to Raw Story,

A group of military veterans are suing to get the CIA to come clean about allegedly implanting remote control devices in their brains.

Whoa!

A 2009 lawsuit (.pdf) claimed that the CIA intended to design and test septal electrodes that would enable them to control human behavior. The lawsuit said that because the government never disclosed the risks, the subjects were not able to give informed consent.

Bruce Price, one plaintiff in the lawsuit, believes that MRI scans confirm that the CIA placed a device in his brain in 1966.

Recently, US Magistrate Judge James Larson ordered the CIA to:

produce records and testimony regarding the experiments conducted on thousands of soldiers from 1950 through 1975.

Dakinikat may be interested to know that much of this “research” was carried out at Tulane University.

According to the attorney for the Veterans, Gordon P. Erspamer:

papers filed in the case describe “electrical devices implanted in brain tissue with electrodes in various regions, including the hippocampus, the hypothalamus, the frontal lobe (via the septum), the cortex and various other places.”

Tulane claims they can’t produce any documents because they were lost during Hurricane Katrina.

This all sounds nuts, I know. But Jeff Stein, who writes the “Spy Talk” column at the Washington Post writes:

It’s not just science fiction — or the imaginings of the mentally ill.

In 1961, a top CIA scientist reported in an internal memo that “the feasibility of remote control of activities in several species of animals has been demonstrated…Special investigations and evaluations will be conducted toward the application of selected elements of these techniques to man,” according to “The CIA and the Search for the Manchurian Candidate,” a 1979 book by former State Department intelligence officer John Marks.

“[T]his cold-blooded project,” Marks wrote, “was designed … for the delivery of chemical and biological agents or for ‘executive action-type operations,’ according to a document. ‘Executive action’ was the CIA’s euphemism for assassination.”

The CIA pursued such experiments because it was convinced the Soviets were doing the same.

Spooky, huh?