Continuing our civil, thoughtful discussion about Jordan B. Peterson, the corruption of Identity Politics/Liberalism, and politicized economic theories from Marx to Pareto…

INSTALLMENT THE SECOND: With the arrival of “Doc,” our discussion of Identity Politics, corrupted Liberalism, and the monolithic, corporatized, “mainstream” media takes off!

Doc — I disagree that “the media” has predetermined narratives which are often false. Constructing “the media” as a monolithic unified entity gives us permission to complain about the things we don’t like, but it also simplifies the subject to an unbearable degree.

While I agree that the Telcom Act of 96 ushered in an era of increased corporate media control, I fail to see how “the media” is some kind of giant Death Star whose mission is to destroy progressive values.

In another way of looking at it, progressives have spectacularly failed to articulate, defend, and promote their values. The same kind of vitriol we hear about in identity politics also comes out in progressive politics in general. There is always the conspiratorial story about some hated group who is out to oppress us and destroy us out of some twisted immoral urge.

The “identity politics” we often kick down has a legitimate origin story as well. LGBTQ rights movements were not created simply so that leftists could sanctimoniously scold people, they emerged as genuine self-defense movements. Jordan Petersen doesn’t care about this, and therefore he hand waves away a trans person’s request to use a desired pronoun. To me, it’s plain that the people who cheer him on don’t really care about his smart phrases and rhetoric. They’re just pissed that trans people don’t know their place and they’re happy to see somebody kicking them back down. I’ve observed this in person, hearing JP weilded as a transphobic sledge hammer by a person for whom “cultural Marxism” might as well have been a band name.

Identity politics is not destroying America, it’s saving people who were previously abused and disrespected. “Identity politics” has become some kind of dirty word for a concept we previously referred to as “civil rights”. We seem to only identify and blame the victims when we disparage “identity politics”, but somehow the aggressors in identity politics remain invisible. For example, when suppressing the black vote in Georgia, that is identity politics being waged by mainly white people motivated by their white “identity”. However, only the victims, disenfranchised voters, are singled out and vilified for practicing “identity politics”.

I’d like to advocate for a repudiation of “identity politics” as some kind of problem that needs to be overcome. I also hope that “the media” is a monolithic concept we can try to let go of and maybe try to see it as an ecosystem or at least a food chain – corporate hegemony and all.

It’s helpful to visualize and describe our problems as systems rather than as conspiracies. We have complicated systemic problems which by the nature of their evolution are absolutely not just the fault of one or two evil overlords, but are participated in by most of us.

James O’Donnell III – Doc, I agree with much of what you’ve written, especially your views on Identity Politics and Jordan Peterson (while conceding that not everything he’s said/written is harmful). In other instances, I found myself disagreeing with you, but I’ll begin with the positive.


Like you, I think that ideally the term Identity Politics would be synonymous with “civil rights.” However, I do think that a perversion of ID Politics has generated a backlash that is damaging, making many, including JBP, want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Obviously, I think that would be a mistake.

I also agree that those who wish to denounce ID Politics in any form are misguided, and that the term needs to be reclaimed and redefined for the mainstream. As I see it, Identity Politics, in its purest form, is simply the sensible, self-preserving response of marginalized and vulnerable social groups struggling to reclaim their humanity in the eyes of the bigoted mainstream, and assert their equal rights in the face of a hostile, narrow-minded, white-male dominated (and white-supremacist) society.

That’s why I say it is “an ugly, off-putting bastardization of Identity Politics” that’s the problem, not Identity Politics itself.

The gross parody of ID Politics promoted by political parties and the corporate media is truly pernicious, IMO. This is the form of Identity Politics that has news programs consistently using black correspondents to anchor every story involving black Americans, even as they give short shrift to the grievances of the African-American community, generally (downplaying/censoring any talk of systemic, widespread racial profiling, the epidemic of racism in law enforcement, the New Jim Crow and modern slavery, environmental racism, the Southern Strategy, etc.). And the news programs do the same with other minority groups, when it comes to covering their issues: when they present a story that affects the Latinos, they trot out their Latino anchor, and so on.

Aside from the lousy journalism such a strategy offers, this practice undermines the principle that all moral, compassionate people have a stake in the just treatment of all other people, be they black, white, Asian, Muslim, homosexual, Jewish, labor leaders, peace activists, communists, or whatever.

The dangerous message the networks are reinforcing is that one has to belong to a certain minority group in order to be sensitive to injustices perpetrated against that group. And even that “sensitivity” is a farce. The anchors, afflicted by careerism and ignorance, offer nothing but a shallow parody of liberalism, while consistently and emphatically representing the views and interests of generally bigoted corporate executives and owners (almost all white males).

It’s not because these people are evil “Death Star” denizens, but because of basic self-interest. Today’s news corporations are humongous, monopolizing most news coverage any American sees (particularly since the Telecom Act has eliminated dozens of sizeable, minority-owned news outlets) — and their profit motives go well beyond “ratings.” Most of these media giants’ profits come from their many investments in the MIC, PhRMA, fossil fuel industry, etc. – as corporate interests have merged over the past few decades, as a handful of behemoths dominate most industries.

Ratings have become a secondary or even tertiary concern, coming after keeping the Corporatocracy profitable and peddling its chosen narratives… narratives that rarely, if ever, indict the powerful, no matter how great their crimes.

That’s not liberalism. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

In the political arena, the bastardization of Identity Politics tells us that, if we care about African-Americans we should vote for Cory Booker or Barack Obama or Kamala Harris — when in truth, there have been few worse enemies of African-Americans in the country’s modern history than these politicians. (As racist and profoundly uncaring as he was in office, it wasn’t George W. Bush who eviscerated welfare, exploded mass-incarceration, removed white-supremacist terror groups from the DHS watch list, or wiped out the post-Civil Rights Era economic gains of black households. Democratic presidents did those things, disproportionately devastating the African-American community.)

Using ethnicity and personal identity signifiers in such a cynical, exploitive way makes a mockery of Identity Politics and all the good it can do. It’s a corruption, and a systematic one. Identity Politics needs to be reclaimed by progressives and genuine liberals, unconcerned with corporate profits and official narratives.


Where I couldn’t disagree with you more, Doc, concerns your assertions about the media industry, which all Coke/Pepsi branding aside, I see as terrifyingly monolithic. I feel that your assertions are speculative, founded not in close observation, but in your faith in the health of our institutions, which I think is misplaced.

Understand that I have dedicated some 40-60 hours/week for over two decades now, to voraciously consuming as much good journalism as I can find, trying to get to the Truth, wherever I can find it; and applying the scientific method to my analysis, to make certain that I’m building an understanding of events based in fact, rather than searching for whatever reinforces my preconceived notions.

I’ve learned to regard everything the corporate media and politicians say with extreme skepticism, to investigate every claim, particularly when the war drums start beating.

As with any sound approach to education, the more I learned, the more I was able to intuit the truth, confirm that truth through research, and even predict outcomes, often years ahead of the rest of my society’s understanding. To give you an idea how far my questing has taken me, I started off as a typical, clueless mainstream American — only with an open and idealistic mind, ravenous for information. My embarrassing starting point: my first vote in a presidential election was for George H.W. Bush! (Only one of the worst proto-fascist presidents of the modern age, a genuine precursor of Trump, someone who paved the way for Trump’s ascent — not just by discrediting the establishment, which he did, but by practicing race-baiting, gay-bashing politics, because that’s what got his base revved up.)

Years later, when I started listening to Amy Goodman’s “DemocracyNow!” program, and first heard of the 1953 CIA coup in Iran, I was dubious: “Can this be true?” I asked myself. Indeed it was. My eyes only continued opening from that point forward, as I fell ever deeper into the rabbit hole of modern history and politics.

For several years, I religiously read most of the leading mainstream political magazines (including Newsweek, Time, The Economist, The Nation, and the New York Times Magazine). I chose mainstream sources, because I wanted to be able to cite the most credible news organizations when making my case to conservative friends and family. For over a decade, I read the news sections of the New York Times and Washington Post, front to back, printing out important stories and annotating them heavily, as if I were an aspiring lawyer desperate to pass the bar exam… of politics.

And while working as a security guard, apartment manager, and freelance graphic designer, I constantly had radio and TV news (from DemocracyNow! to CNN to Fox to PBS to NPR, etc.) playing in the background — recording the juiciest bits on my VCR, thousands of hours, all told. Before long, I’d filled hundreds of six- and eight-hour cassettes (nearly 50 devoted to the 2000 election cycle alone). Before long, I was taping over my movie collection, as I kept running out of tapes and had a limited budget. (I was saving money for grad school, then supporting my first wife as she worked toward her four-year veterinary degree program, and later saving money for our move to British Columbia.)


NEXT: Continuing my response to “Doc,” expounding further on the corruption of the liberal class and MSM!

Posted in General | Leave a comment

After Jordan B. Peterson’s most cretinous followers hurl ugly abuse my way, I luck into a civil, thoughtful discussion, re: JBP, the corruption of Identity Politics/Liberalism, and politicized economic theories, from Marx to the Pareto Distribution.

Hot damn, that was a good conversation!

So good, in fact, that I’ve decided to reproduce the bulk of it, the major substantive exchanges, in their entirety. I’ve opted to go this route for the simple reason that I can find few better examples of my case against modern “liberalism” and the shit-show that is the corporatized and nightmarishly illiberal American mainstream media (or MSM).

Rather than assuming the participants in this conversation would condone my bandying their names about on my website, I have anonymized their identities. So, without further ado, thanks again, “Boris,” “Lenny,” and “Doc,” for an outstanding conversation!


James Charles O’Donnell III (post on Boris’s page) — Helloha, Boris, and thank you for recommending Peter Coffin! I particularly enjoyed his analysis of the Jordan B. Patriarchy phenomenon.

Boris – I likes me a good analysis of rhetorical methods! Dang, that Peterson guy is creepy. If only he were a quarter as talented and creative as Dave Sim…

Maybe Doc and Lenny would like this video, too.

Lenny – Boris: um. This video gets a lot wrong about JP and his rise to prominence. I wouldn’t base my opinions about the JP phenomenon on this unless you don’t care about being misinformed.

Boris – I don’t know much about this JP guy beyond the fact that some folks find him mesmerizing. I read a random excerpt from a book of his, and thought it was well-written and interesting. In videos, though, he always seems to put me off.

What do you think Coffin gets wrong about why Peterson is so popular? Peterson has this predatory vibe to me: “you and I always knew there was something basically wrong with the world, but come here, kid, and I’ll let you in on the Big Secret”. A flim-flammer, like our era gobbles up. The scapegoating thing Coffin mentions seems on target as well.

Lenny – Boris: Right from the start the guy doesn’t understand the Channel 4 interview or why it was a flashpoint and defining moment in JPs ascent into the popular Zeitgeist. It was not that the interviewer was unprepared. It was that she had a predetermined narrative of JP, and when she couldn’t get him into that narrative things unraveled for her. ‘so what you believe’ For many, including the Intelectual Dark Web, and Youtubers this is the problem with Manistream Media. It includes producers who have guests on in order to push a predetermined narrative. That’s why that interview became important to JP’s ascent. Not just that JP owns the interviewer or even that she loses arguments on multiple levels. This video misses the point of the whole Channel 4 interview so it’s hard to believe any of it.

And this criticism that JP says a lot of stuff that doesn’t make the point to purposely obfuscate is ridiculous. He’s an academic. He takes a long time to say things because he tries to present actual proof, literary, science based, and theoretical to make his point. He likes to hear himself talk. That’s what professors do. It’s like he’s trying too hard to make him seem like the devil.

JP says a lot of interesting things as a lot of professors do. The reason he is big right now is that the left has abandoned a lot of people with social justice ideology. And not just Conservatives. Liberals too. Working class people. A lot of those people that voted for Trump. His book targeted young males bc right now many young men are flailing. But he has become a target because he is challenging leftist Marxist orthodoxy, Post modernism, and social justice ideology. And many on the left don’t know what to do about it.

There’s plenty to criticize him on. There’s lots of things he thinks that are complete theory but these take downs of him really don’t get to the the reason he or Trump have risen. Liberals still think Trump is a joke but he’s also the President. That’s serious, that’s not a joke and there’s a reason for it. There’s a whole swath of the left that are seeing the world they want it to be and not how it is. And that is bc many people live in liberal bubbles or they’re not really interested in the truth, just to be right.

James Charles O’Donnell III — Lenny: If I may chime in, I think you’re correct about the “liberal bubble” and the corruption of the media, with its predetermined (and often false) narratives. In my analysis, the institution has deteriorated quite badly since the Telecom Act of 1996, signed by that towering figure of right-wing accomplishment, Bill Clinton. Today’s corporate media, owned by a handful of right-wing billionaires (thanks to that law) does nothing but peddle conservative ideology while posturing as liberal… when it’s actually purely corporate, neoliberal and neoconservative in the extreme.

The corporate media offers us a parody of liberal values, wrapped in an ugly, off-putting bastardization of Identity Politics. This has had the effect of making right-leaning Americans hate/misunderstand traditional liberalism (tolerance, reason, education, idealism)… and that’s by design. A major feature of the modern American political landscape is that no mainstream media institution — not even NPR/PBS — comes close to faithfully representing traditional, respectable liberal values… or traditional, respectable conservative values, for that matter.

Today’s media exists to: 1) slander/ignore genuinely progressive ideals; 2) stoke class resentment (encouraging reactionary paranoia and hatred in “Red State” land); 3) hawk senseless, genocidal, and illegal wars; 4) boost the “trade” pacts that have decimated the middle class; and 5) divide Americans along religious and cultural flashpoints.

I also agree with you that the Channel 4 interviewer was out to “gotcha” Mr. Peterson, but I agree with Peter Coffin, too: she had simply failed to do her homework (she was arrogant, thinking he’d be an easy takedown). In addition to watching some Jordan B. Peterson videos, I’ve read some analysis of his written work, which had a fair amount that was positive to say about his message — as well as some well-articulated, well-founded (IMO) criticism.

So far as my own response to the philosophy that this self-styled guru is peddling, I confess it’s been profoundly negative. By the time I’d gotten to my third JBP video, I was running out of patience with the man and his followers. At least in YouTube comment sections, his fans seem openly misogynistic, very crude, and adolescent, on average… and Peterson himself seems subtly (if consistently) misogynistic, intellectually sophisticated, and occasionally adolescent (petty, defensive, dishonest, and hostile).

To be perfectly frank, I think Peterson’s message is a regressive, establishment-supporting, and ultimately dangerous one, brimming with victimhood and loathing. And I assure you that I began my exploration of the JBP phenomenon with an open mind, hoping and expecting to find a bright new voice on the scene.

(He’d come highly recommended by a terrific young friend I’d met through our Occupy Wall Street activism, back when President Obama was bailing out Wall Street on Main Street’s backs and ensuring decades of resentment from the working class, misdirected at liberalism — even though pretty-talking Obama governed like Bush/Cheney on steroids, like a radical-right Republican, by historical standards… complete with “Kill List” and the end of habeas corpus. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of corporate subservience that was the Obama presidency.)

Regardless, I wish that more of Peterson’s followers were as respectful and thoughtful as you seem to be. Only that’s not what I have found. Here’s the conversation I’ve been having with his followers on YouTube.

(I hope you can see beyond the vehemence of my initial comments. I pull no rhetorical punches, generally, and I was truly running out of patience, as I said earlier. But I sincerely hope you’ll be able to move past the invective and consider the substance of my criticism of the man… without feeling too defensive. Like I said, I agree with much of where you’re coming from. Jordan Peterson, not so much.)


NEXT: With the arrival of “Doc,” our discussion of Identity Politics and the monolithic, corporatized, “mainstream” media (MSM) takes off!

Posted in General | Leave a comment

CENSORED AGAIN: My YouTube conversation with Jordan Peterson sycophants…

Jordan Peterson DESTROYS British GQ Magazine Feminist” is the name the video’s curator has given this segment. It can be found here.

I’m posting this conversation on my website, because the curator of this page has apparently been deleting most of my comments and hacking the others into pieces, leaving only a fragment of my responses, usually cut off mid-sentence. This is how Jordan Peterson’s followers respond when someone criticizes their dipshit messiah.

James O’Donnell 1 day ago — Every time I hear Jordan Peterson talk, I get an even greater window into that tiny, defensive little, ugly mind. The man is well on his way toward redefining what it means to be a complete nitwit. And he’s pretty damn rude, too. (I’d be prepared to cut him some slack if he weren’t such an ass.)

Jame Jameson 1 day ago — Yet you seek him out. Like a dog to its master. Do you like abuse? Do you like being worthless. Does he make you feel worthless. You are a dog.

James O’Donnell 1 day ago — @Jame Jameson — You represent him so well. What I like is to have an open mind and give many voices a chance to represent themselves, so I can consider their perspectives… especially when those people have been recommended to me by a young, impressionable friend. I did. I gave Peterson that chance. What I found was an empty well with bile running down its walls. Pure poison.

Aaron accardo 1 day ago — James O’Donnell what’s so ugly about his mind? Tell us

James O’Donnell 16 hours ago — Thanks for the question, @Aaron accardo (much more respectful than the personal attacks of the previous clod). What’s so ugly about Peterson’s mind? To begin with, he seems to be always on the attack, even though he’s excellent at playing the victim. As he admitted to Joe Rogan, he has no patience with detractors and he handles criticism in a way that only discredits him. And his attacks are dishonest, mere tactics, not grounded in principle. His debate method is all about peppering the other person with nonsense, in order to keep them on the defensive and throw them off balance.

Furthermore, he’s a reactionary, defending the patriarchal, white-supremacist system — a neo-fascist order responsible for the deaths of millions of innocents and the ongoing destruction of the planet’s life-sustaining systems — against those bad old “feminists” (women who don’t fawn over him) and secular humanists pushing for tolerance and social justice, which his ilk views as a joke (TOLERANCE and JUSTICE, only the highest aspirations of the human heart!). And ultimately, he’s a pseudo-intellectual, tossing out phrases like “Jungian animus” in order to bamboozle his followers, when the only good advice he has — and he does have some — is as old as the mountains and simple as pie: Be good to yourself, surround yourself with people who build you up, rather than tear you down, etc.

Sorry, Mr. Peterson, oh great defender of all things schlongy, but MEN are empowered to say and do just about anything, in this world of ours… still. And the world that MEN have built — on the backs of women and slaves — is a DYING world of permanent war, environmental degradation, Nazi-like treatment of minorities, unprecedented global slavery, and rape culture (with hundreds of thousands of Harvey Weinsteins, Matt Lauers, Bill Cosbys, Bill Clintons, Bill O’Reillys and their like, who up until very recently felt they could get away with it forever… because their kind always has. Like the Wall Street lords of the universe who eviscerated our middle class (plundering especially the wealth of African-Americans, whom they targeted for the worst subprime loans, even when they qualified for prime); these men felt that they could prey on women and minorities forever… because that’s what our society has long tolerated. In this day and age, when social consciousness has been rising, Peterson represents a push-back by the filthy-corrupt old guard, in the name of masculinity… when that’s the very last thing we need. He’s not promoting strong, tolerant, courageous masculinity, but toxic, predatory, bigoted masculinity… which the world has had more than enough of.

On a personal note: I am not ashamed to be a man. My strong feminist wife is perfectly compatible with her principled, feminist, secular humanist husband… and the vast majority of people would kill to have a romance like ours. No shit. I am PROUD to be a man… like my father, a man who doesn’t serve other, morally corrupt men or the life-slaughtering systems they’ve built. I am a free-thinking activist, well aware of the fact that the 2016 electoral contest between Clinton and Trump was a contest between two reprehensible, racist demagogues, each corrupt to the core, in their own way… and that the differences between the two were ridiculously exaggerated by the corporate, “liberal” (far-right, neoconservative, neoliberal) media.

If you still feel that you’re not sure where I’m coming from, feel free to visit my website:

And again, I thank you for your courteously phrased question. Not calling me “a dog” is a much better way to start a conversation.

An Ro 14 hours ago – @Aaron accardo oh I don’t think he’s gonna answer that appropriately any time soon, this guy just wants to sound and feel more intelligent than the rest

James O’Donnell 12 hours ago (edited) — @An Ro — May I ask what you found inappropriate about my response?

J Rae 5 hours ago – @James O’Donnell Allow me to answer. It’s not exactly that your answer is “inappropriate” so much as full of vitriol. “Pure poison?” “An empty well with bile running down its walls?” It doesn’t sound as though Peterson disappoints you so much as he infuriates you – and anything that raises your ire that much deserves looking at.

You use a real name – I’ll grant you that – but otherwise, your contribution to the discussion is disappointing. Calling someone “a nitwit” or saying they’re “possessed of a defensive, ugly little mind,” is a fallacious argumentative strategy (a logical fallacy) known as an “ad hominem” attack. Where, instead of engaging in genuine discussion and making a legitimate point, someone (you, in this case), resorts to character assassination, or name-calling. It’s the equivalent of someone arguing with you making a valid point, to which you fire back, “Yeah? Well you’re fat!” In other words – disappointing.

Also? I doubt Peterson cares one whit whether you “cut him some slack.” He has a giant intellect – one which no doubt towers over both of ours – and while he isn’t warm & fuzzy with the interviewers (this one, in GQ’s own words is sent to “interrogate” Peterson), it’s interesting that you cut veritable swaths of slack to his opponents, who are the very definition of rude. So. If you have something actual to say from on-high, by all means, dismount your high horse and enlighten us – truly.

James O’Donnell 1 second ago — @J Rae — If you’ll reread my response to Aaron accardo, you’ll see that while I do reserve some well-deserved vitriol for Mr. Peterson (the petty little fraud and egomaniac), my case against him does not remotely rely on ad hominem attacks; I’ve actually offered a substantive critique of Peterson and the system he’s defending. That you do not acknowledge that fact shows that you’re no more honest than Peterson, and just as defensive and prone to go on the attack. That’s how easily threatened he and his sycophants are, completely unable to offer a principled, substantive defense of your positions. (You don’t even acknowledge that I conceded that some of his advice has validity, even if it is rather basic.) That you worship this pathetic, spiritually corrupt man and his “giant intellect” is only an indication that you are a blind follower. Go on feeling that he towers over you. You clearly enjoy that.

J Rae 3 hours ago – @James O’Donnell Given that I obviously haven’t read the other reply you refer to, how could I possibly “acknowledge” anything credible you may have said? I’m supposed to be psychic now too? Your response I replied to – the only one I saw – is full of ad hominem attacks, by anyone’s definition. Go back and re-read it with a more objective eye. Aside from being petty, calling someone a “nitwit” does nothing to move your argument ahead; that’s why it’s referred to as an ERROR in critical reasoning. What is your evidence that I worship Peterson? Because I say he has a giant intellect? Am I not allowed to respect someone without being accused of dumb, blind devotion? Surely there are people you respect highly (other than yourself, I mean) – how would you feel to be accused of worshipping them? In any case, ill have to look for your other comment because as with your first one, your reply to me still says basically nothing about why you actually dislike Peterson. Once again, no sign of intelligent life here folks!

J Rae 2 hours ago – @James O’Donnell well, I’ve looked and i can’t find the explanation you refer to. There’s 8 comments below your original one (9 counting this one) and only 2 are from you, and neither says much beyond this: gee, I really hate Peterson. Feel free to direct me to it, or to repost it’s contents. Until then, I have no recourse but to crown you the noble Lord of the Kingdom of Ad Hominem!

James O’Donnell 2 seconds ago — @J Rae — Actually, you’ve confirmed what I suspected about the curator of this page. He’s been hacking my comments to pieces or deleting them entirely. Sometimes, they’re there when I look for them, more often they are not, or 80% of my original comment has been hacked off… mid-sentence. (This marks my fifth comment, following my original statement — not my third.) Apparently, that’s how Peterson’s followers comport themselves when debating his worth: they censor and attack anyone who threatens their cardboard messiah, so incapable are they of defending the man on substance.

@J Rae — And now I have a question for you. Do you think it’s a coincidence that the comments here are so Nazi-like? Full of hate and misogyny, enamored of Van Damme-idolizing power and “curb stomping” triumphalism — romanticism of violence, especially directed at women, by this “black belt” cult leader. Here are just a few choice examples, besides referring to this perspicacious, strong journalist as a “toddler” and other ad hominem attacks on her person: “This chick looks like what a feminist looks like” and “Supercunt cuntface magoo and “This woman really needs to get laid” and “Jordan Peterson is guilty of 10 counts of gang-rape here.”

(What a guy!)

Does the type of person he attracts have nothing to do with Peterson, himself, or the vicious bile he spews? Why does he inspire such trashy followers, if his message is so positive and uplifting?

James O’Donnell 1 second ago — Since the curator of this page has apparently been deleting most of my comments and mangling the rest, I would direct any of Mr. Peterson’s followers — intellectually honest and morally courageous enough to hear the arguments of a critic of Mr. Peterson — to my website, where I have reproduced the conversation in its entirety:

James O’Donnell 1 minute ago (edited) — @J Rae — I truly appreciate your attempts to engage me in conversation, and I now understand the disadvantage you were at, only able to see a Straw Man version of my argument — only the ad hominem attacks — thanks to the censoring actions of the cowardly curator of this page. I invite you to view, at my website, the full conversation I’ve been trying to have with you:


Responding to this blog post, a very good friend asked me, “What makes this guy so appealing to some folks?” As it happens, I have a theory about the secret of Mr. Peterson’s “success” (if you can call it that — I mean, was Hitler a “successful” human being? I think most people would say he was not).

I think that Peterson’s appeal can be attributed, at least in part, to the reactionary conservative industry that’s been built around vilifying anything that smacks of “Political Correctness.”

With the corruption of the Politically Correct, yet totally regressive, corporate media, which represents the modern-day “liberal” class all too well (warmongering, right-wing, hypocritical, largely unmoored from traditional liberal values), the “liberal” media is perceived as an integral part of the tyranny that’s replaced our once semi-democratic republic.

That perception is largely accurate, and that’s what Peterson fans (and other so-called “deplorables”) are rationally rebelling against… which is a shame, because traditional liberal values — tolerance, compassion, reason — have been smeared and dragged down by their association, however bogus, with the faux-liberal despotism of the corporate establishment.

Even as the corporate establishment ignores our planet’s climate catastrophe and demonizes Muslims, blacks, genuine feminists, pacifists, activists, water protectors, etc., it projects a facade of liberalism.

That’s very dangerous, as liberal values have been conflated with neo-fascism. It’s an act on the establishment’s part, but an effective one… and liberalism is the scapegoat/target.

So, when the corporate media blatantly favored a radical neocon, Sec. Clinton, in 2016, it was favoring institutional racism (and ignoring Clinton’s ugly, Trump-like demagoguery and outright racism), neoconservatism, modern slavery, Wall Street predation, and other evils representing corporate conservatism at its most pure.

Such conduct degrades liberalism itself (which apparently no one recognizes or remembers anymore).

And the “deplorable” class, not being wholly stupid (however unsavvy and crude they are), knows that this establishment — which it confuses with TRUE LIBERALISM — is the enemy of us all, wiping out our middle class, tearing down the rule of law, normalizing slavery and perpetual, pointless wars…

So, these social/economic castaways, discarded and mocked as their livelihoods and families go down the drain, feel empowered when they rally around a pseudo-enemy of the establishment — charlatans like Peterson and Trump, who actually, ironically, represent the values of the establishment perfectly. They defend patriarchy, white supremacy, rape culture, and the anti-Muslim holocaust that’s ongoing.

Same deal with “Tommy Robinson,” about whom I blogged in March.

The cultish followers of Peterson, Trump, “Robinson,” and their ilk, think these opportunistic frauds are “rebels,” when they’re the exact opposite: venal, self-serving toadies to power.

ADDENDUM II: The conversation continues…

abandoned failer 1 hour ago — @James O’Donnell how are you to make such an assumption though? All i gathered from the above exchange is that neither of you agree that you are coming across to one another. Peterson is cool, he says whats right. I admit that i wasted a couple mins reading yr conversation, but i was at least expecting closure, like a typical moron. Dont even bother replying. Idc what you think

James O’Donnell 1 second ago — ​@abandoned failer — What assumption is that, Mr. Abandoned? If it’s about someone disappearing my posts, I’ve simply never had this problem commenting on YouTube before. Never. So SOMETHING messed up has been happening, as I’ve been debating with people who can’t even see 90% of the case I’ve been making — a case that keeps mysteriously getting 86′d or mangled. (I’d still like to know by whom, as it doesn’t seem random or accidental: i.e., how come the comments coming from those attacking me are unaffected?)

If you didn’t gather much from my exchange with the other Peterson minions, I have to assume you haven’t seen the full conversation. They haven’t. That’s why none of them has engaged me on the substance of my critique of Peterson and his followers; it doesn’t always exist on this page.

Here’s the actual conversation, in full, with no deletions or censorship:

STILL, good job working in a baseless, “he’s cool” plug for Peterson in your comment, without backing it up in any way. Just a bare assertion that “he says whats right,” with no support — as if it’s a revelation that you’re just another reflexive follower of this worthless, bile-spewing Pied Piper.

And if you’re not aware that “Don’t even bother replying. Idc what you think” is a cheap dodge, the coward’s way out, then you’re as dishonest as the woman-hating bozo you idolize.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

BOOK REVIEW (sort of): My contribution to the “Buffalo Books” discussion of Jenny Erpenbeck’s “Go, Went, Gone”

I’m enjoying our discussion, so far, and also the book, Erpenbeck’s excellent writing, the rich characters (especially Richard and Rashid), and the timeliness of the subject, with more refugees in the world than ever previously recorded.

Other highlights include Chapter 27, which for the first time gives us a chapter offering the perspective of someone other than Richard (Awad). It’s refreshing and useful to see how Richard and his curious quest are perceived by those whose lives he’s investigating and trying to help.

Another highlight for me, however difficult it was to get through, is the passage (Pp. 233-4) about the flaying and displaying of the corpse of Soliman, Freemason brother of Mozart, etc. I thought it very telling, very effective, and a shock of ice water in the face for any reader with illusions of Western “civilization.” As Gandhi famously replied when asked what he thought of Western Civilization, “I think it would be a good idea.” And Richard’s reflections on this gruesome defilement — with his hypothetical counterpoint about “Heinrich Schliemann dressed in a Spanish matador’s costume or a traditional Mongolian garment” displayed in the National Museum in Cairo — was sheer perfection, spot on and even humorous, illustrating how absurd, unscientific, and truly barbaric was the treatment of Soliman’s remains.

Still, I confess I find Richard a frustrating fellow. As mild mannered, generous, and well-meaning as he is, from the beginning of the novel he strikes me as all too typical of the West: insular to the point of ignorance of the outside world (and of the feelings of others around him, from his wife and his mistress to the refugees he’s getting to know); comfortable to the point of naivete/detachment; and ultimately, a bit obtuse, even several weeks into his project.

I like this assessment of our protagonist from Amber Ruth Paulen’s review of the novel:

“This is a man who thinks about his lover and dead wife in the same breath without seeming to feel any guilt. Richard is a wonderful and complex character, at once meticulous in his investigation of the refugees’ lives and stolidly distant from his emotions and people, which gives him room to grow.”

I’ll add that it’s heartening to see Richard confronting and breaking down the borders that have been constructed to keep human beings apart and struggling separately. His quest and actions are undoubtedly laudable.

But were it not for the fact that he’s a widower who has just retired/been retired (“shunted off into retirement” — P. 240), it’s hard to imagine Richard taking an interest in the plight of these refugees, let alone involving himself in their travails. In the early chapters of the book, it seemed to me that Richard is a bit preoccupied with death, and not just the corpse in the lake, but the prospect of his own death. Natural enough, I suppose, considering he’s reached some important endings in recent years, but still… without his fear of death would he be thus motivated to reach out to another part of his society?

He’s a little myopic. It’s telling that we don’t even learn his wife’s name until more than halfway through the novel (P. 155). It is also telling that Richard was oblivious to the fact that his mistress was seeing someone else and preparing to leave him.

I also find it irksome that Richard invents and persistently clings to the names he’s imposed upon the refugees he’s met: Apollo, Tristan, Hermes, the Thunderbolt Hurler, etc. But as his familiarity with their actual identities grows, he seems to leave this habit behind; Awad, Ithemba, Osarobo, Rufu, Rashid, and the others “become visible” and increasingly human in his eyes. It turns out that they do not experience the deaths of their friends, neighbors, and loved ones in a lesser way than we Westerners do (if anything, the opposite is true, as Westerners are encouraged to “shop” in the wake of tragedy and close ourselves off to the world of death and suffering that’s been created, in no small part, by our own governments and corporations). Richard discovers that his new acquaintances do not “mourn their dead less” (P. 169), and to his credit, he is ashamed that he ever believed such a thing, dehumanizing an entire continent of people.

So far as Richard’s naivete/detachment from the outside world:

When Richard goes for a walk with his friends, “chubby Thomas” shares what he knows about the situation in Niger (p. 147) and concludes with, “And the only government that tried to kick out the French was quickly deposed in a coup. By God knows who.”

Apparently, none of them can imagine who could’ve been responsible… for the coup that ousted the government that “…tried to kick out the French.”

Is it possible that Richard and his friends are unfamiliar with the appallingly long list of nations that have tried to be independent of Western control, only to have their leaders deposed in coups orchestrated by the West (particularly the U.S.)? Just a short list of the democratically elected leaders deposed in such coups would include Mohammed Mossadegh, Patrice Lumumba, Jacobo Arbenz, Ngo Dinh Diem, Salvador Allende — and more recently, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Manuel Zelaya, Mohamed Morsi, Victor Yanukovych, and Dilma Rousseff. And such a list omits the long list of failed coups attempted by the West, including the CIA’s failed assassination attempt on French President Charles de Gualle in 1961, the Bush administration’s failed/immediately reversed 2002 coup in Venezuela, and the Obama administration’s failed regime-change operation in Syria.

When Richard imagines the impossible “To-do” lists of a few of his new refugee friends (p. 204), he seems to have little or no comprehension of the external realities involved. Even if they could achieve such improbable victories from within their own countries, such victories would surely be reversed, posthaste, by implacable Western powers. New governments that don’t tolerate child labor or corruption would be replaced as quickly as the reformist government in Niger that Thomas spoke of… by “God knows who.”

Later (p. 241), Richard wonders if “these long years of peacetime” — with the German citizens “at so great a distance from the wars of others” — have made it possible for the German people to condone such terrible violence against anyone threatening to disrupt their “untroubled circumstances,” anyone threatening to disrupt “the end of history” (in other words, threatening the current balance of power). The violence of the German authorities is so jarring to Richard that he concludes “…it almost looks like war.”

(That’s because it is a war. The violence he’s witnessing is directly connected to the war that the West has brought to the Islamic world… the war to remove Saddam from power, Qaddafi from power, Bashar al-Assad from power, Hamas from power, Hezbollah from power, the Iranians from power… Apparently, Richard is completely ignorant of the neoconservatives’ war to redraw the map of the Middle East in the interest of Western hegemony… once again.)

Elsewhere (p. 167), Richard asks himself “But what war have people now just been through?” This is infuriating. Richard doesn’t seem to possess any awareness that this global war is one in which his country is deeply involved, and that the individuals who launched this war (such as former CIA Director James Woolsey) have explicitly stated that the Global War on Terror is, in fact, the Fourth World War, the Third being the Cold War (with both WWIII and WWIV having resulted in millions of lives lost, from Iran to Guatemala to Korea to Vietnam to Indonesia to Iraq to Palestine to Lebanon to Somalia to Egypt to Libya to Syria to Yemen and beyond).

In a chilling passage, present-day Germany’s xenophobic and cruel attitude toward the refugees reminds him of the Nazis’ treatment of Jews and other victims of the Third Reich (p. 209). I think the comparison is apt, so it’s not exactly reassuring to learn that Richard is grateful to have “just as little idea as anyone else what’s in store” for the coming year (p. 207).

A final observation about Richard’s naivete:

Amidst wonderful epiphanies, like borders “create” opponents and the police aren’t looking out for poor people’s interests, Richard speculates (p. 211) that if the police were so inclined, they’d be out to arrest the bank managers who “embezzle so many billions.”

Following the wholesale collapse of the financial system in 2008, this silly notion about embezzling bank managers seems remarkably naive. Bank managers, who actually work for a living, didn’t have anything to do with the meltdown of the financialized economy. Those responsible for the crash occupied positions far above the pay grade of the managerial class… and I thought most people knew that (maybe I’m the one who’s being naive).

As a mature, highly educated, privileged “elite” (in his own words), Richard ought to know that he’s light years from the reality. The meltdown was a massive, global event, and many terrific books have been written on the subject, as well as some outstanding documentaries and at least one brilliant film, “The Big Short.” The well-documented history tells us that Wall Street executives, the heads of the ratings agencies, and top government regulators — including the congressional leadership and a series of U.S. presidents — built a system that was designed to collapse and subsequently extort tens of trillions (not “billions”) from governments the world over.

And that’s exactly what happened, thanks to governments and agencies captured and literally staffed by the institutionally racist and misogynistic, rapaciously predatory, “Vampire Squid”-captained industry: a wholly corrupt industry that was allowed to manage the minutest details of its own bailout.

The botched bailout was not only unthinkably cruel and morally grotesque, it resulted in horrendous consequences for our country… and the world, beginning with the U.K. and Europe. And it went a long way toward creating the political environment that would make viable the candidacies of cartoonishly villainous demagogues like Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and Jair Bolsonaro.

The botched handling of the bailout explains why millions of Americans were illegally “robo-signed” out of their homes, especially African-Americans, who were deliberately targeted by the industry for the worst sub-prime loans, even when they qualified for prime, in a practice known as “reverse redlining.” That’s how African-American households had their post-Civil Rights Era economic gains wiped out in President Obama’s first term (per the Pew Research Center). The elite criminals responsible for defrauding millions of people and scores of polities (municipalities, counties, states, and entire nations; and pension funds, etc.) are the ones the authorities never came for, but rather bailed out to the tune of not “so many billions,” but trillions of dollars, euros, etc., transferring the pain to whole economies across the Western world, disproportionately affecting the most vulnerable and discriminated-against populations, especially in the United States.

Finally, with regard to Richard’s obtuseness:

When Richard learns that the protesters on the roof are without drinking water (p. 229), he immediately abandons hope, thinking, they “can’t (even) drop a plastic bottle” (into the ocean water, as on the refugee ships). Oh, well…

As I read, I couldn’t help thinking, If that were your child on that roof you’d think harder on the subject, friend Richard! You’d be filling plastic bottles with water and getting some of the healthier young men to hurl those bottles up to the roof — if not from the ground, then from a floor with a balcony. Or at least shout up to the protesters to melt the snow and drink the water… the roof is covered in snow! For God’s sake, man, they’re dying! Think of something!

When Osarobo asks Richard if he has any work for him (p. 236), he responds that he doesn’t and reverts to his piano lesson. Later, he concludes that there is a potential livelihood for Osarobo involving the keyboard he’s purchased for him… but he hasn’t reached that conclusion yet — and in any case, that’s not what the desperate younger man requested of him. It’s a painful exchange, because the refugees rarely ask anything of Richard, even after his generosity has been established. I found it heartbreaking that Richard failed to come up with something for Osarobo to do to earn a few euros… and gave up trying rather quickly. No leaves to rake, I’m out of ideas. (No walk to shovel either? No spare, obsolete items to drag up from the basement and donate to charity? Nothing? No calling the neighbors to see if they have an odd job or two — or ten? Work for more than one of his new friends might be available, who knows?)

It’s occurred to me more than once that these gracious, self-sacrificing, downtrodden refugees are probably, in large part, just being polite to the peculiar old German fellow, going to his house to read Dante, play the piano, etc., simply because he’s asked them to. Not necessarily because they place a high value on these activities… at least, not initially.

As much as he does on their behalf, which is admittedly a great deal, I couldn’t help but agonize over the actions that Richard does not take. As he becomes familiar with not just the devastatingly sad (Tristan-evoking) personal stories of these men — but also with the cruel, impossible legal situation that the “iron law(s)” of Europe have put them in, binding them in scores of “conceptually flawed construction(s)” (p. 220) — I wanted to whisper into his ear, “Richard, write a damn letter to the editor, won’t you?” He’s a highly respected, retired Professor Emeritus, and I think his letter would be published… and conceivably have great impact. I had this thought fairly early on in the book, and when poor Richard ends up suffering through the internet bilge of “DontCare” (p. 167) and various ugly, xenophobic newspaper editorials, I knew that he’d missed a bet.

I also felt that Richard should have engaged his very good friends, Jorg and Monika, when he first realized that the couple is afflicted with some bigoted, ignorant notions (p. 196). He should have lovingly and patiently, without condescension or judgment, tried to bring his lifelong friends up to speed; after all, his own sensitivity to such matters was only recently awakened. And that’s what friends do, right? But the reader is given no indication that Richard ever made the attempt. It seems that his difficulties with empathy have prevailed again. In fact, it seems that Jorg and Monika rather precipitously plummet from the status of near, dear friends, to personae non gratae, to be called only in the case of a medical emergency, in Jorg’s case, consulted for his professional advice only. Richard apparently has scrapped decades of friendship, as he now sees Jorg and his wife as human scum.

Too easy. Too unfortunate. Too… Richard. Perhaps there was a teachable moment in there, somewhere, you dear, sweet, womanizing weirdo. And, after all, who are you to judge? For that matter, who am I? We’re all off in some way, so speak to the better angels of people’s natures, especially your friends and loved ones, and hope that they’re charitable enough to do the same for you, when your time comes!

[To offer just one example, I had a good friend and co-worker -- in Redlands, way back when -- who would frequently break out with homophobic claptrap. I called him out on it every time and eventually clobbered him with a few spontaneous lectures, as I am wont to do... whether folks wont to hear it, or not. Within a year, my friend and eventual roommate had not only stopped talking crap, he’d actually embarked on his first-ever homosexual relationship! When he told me about it, I just about fainted (but I certainly never mocked him, I was proud of the kid -- only I did think to myself, “It’s true what they say about extreme homophobes: “Methinks thou dost protest too much” indeed)! And on the general point, if I’d ditched out on every relationship with an American, liberal or conservative, who’d revealed bigoted ideas in my presence, I’d have very few friends in this country at all. And frankly, some of the most shocking garbage has come from Bay Area folks, self-identified liberals, including a few Johnston alums. Because such thinking is prevalent in this country, in my experience. If it were not, few people would have voted for either appallingly racist candidate in our most recent presidential election.]

In conclusion, I doff my hat to the author for making me go through all of these conniptions on behalf of her refugees. I’m sure that Richard’s failures are intended to make me feel this way… and that’s good writing. Not only is Richard frustrating, he’s completely believable, and that’s an accomplishment in itself. Furthermore, Erpenbeck has created something special and urgently needed, when it comes to presenting a moving, authentic portrayal of the experiences of these modern victims of war… not so different from victims of wars past (millions of Jews killed in the last Holocaust, millions of Muslims, and counting, in the current one, which appears to have no end in sight).

And honestly, I love Richard and want to hug him and praise him every bit as much as I want to shake him and teach him. The poor, human slob, with his frailties and flaws (cheating on his wife, drooling after the young Ethiopian teacher, privately carrying such hostility for his former colleagues…). And yet I admire the hell out of him for challenging himself and growing — something that few longtime adults do, it seems — whatever instigated his actions, be it fear of death/obsolescence, or whatever.

What Richard does and tries to do for these desperate and despairing men he’s come to know, especially Karon, is really extraordinary and wonderful. I wish the West had hundreds of millions more citizens like Richard… or more specifically, like post-retirement Richard. I’m not so sure that hundreds of millions of pre-retirement Richards would achieve the same effect. In fact, I seriously doubt it.

Because it’s not insignificant that Richard was such close friends with Jorg and Monika for so long — vacationing with them on many occasions and even talking politics (p. 233). Are we to believe that Jorg, who ultimately comes across as fairly monstrous in his prejudices (p. 232), never gave any indication of his deep-seeded bigotry previously? It’s safe to assume that Richard simply never noticed before he became more sensitive to these matters — a quite recent development in his life.

Once more, for the record, I love this novel… almost as much as I loved Viet Thanh Nguyen’s The Sympathizer, and that’s saying a great deal (amazing book, that).

The rewards of Go, Went, Gone are rich, including the frequent references to history, music, Shakespeare, Dante, and Ovid (!!!). If Richard has led an insular life — much of it behind a literal wall (good metaphor) — I readily concede that that life has been admirably filled with some of the best art (literature, music, etc.) ever created… and the way Richard has shared his knowledge has undoubtedly benefited countless lives.

The only element I’ve been missing is some sense that the author, if not Richard, is aware of the West’s (especially the U.S.’s) dominant, terrorizing, tyrannical role in the world — leading the way, in fact, to the global collapse of the rule of law and the faltering of the planet’s ecosystem.

Maybe Erpenbeck genuinely lacks this awareness, even as she demonstrates great empathy with the refugee victims of the current war.

Perhaps the wisdom that an activist friend from Ghana shared with me in 2008 applies as much to citizens of Europe as it does to Americans:

“Don’t believe your media or politicians — any of them — without skepticism. Look into the truth of things yourself. In Ghana, we benefit from the fact that we know that we are being heavily propagandized by our media and politicians. Most Americans seem not to know how much they’re being propagandized. That’s the disadvantage you’re at. You still don’t know the extent to which your institutions have been corrupted.”

Sadly, I think that my friend’s cautionary words apply today more than ever. We are divided. We are conquered. And the vast majority of beliefs that Americans hold about our politicians and institutions are completely baseless.

Our chances to turn this ship around… go, went… gone?

I certainly hope not.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Fascists need fall guys… and duopoly-only voters (shall we not call them dupes?)

This couple of minutes from Michael Moore’s flawed but important documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11″ has always broken my heart.

Soul-crushing, is it not?

Not only did the Democratic Party refuse to fight for the voting rights of thousands of African-Americans illegally removed from the voter rolls by Florida’s “Bush for President” co-chair, Katherine Harris (Jeb’s Secretary of State), the Democratic leadership would eventually join Bush/Cheney’s worst war crimes and their unprecedented assault on our own society and the rule of law.

Few today will recall the “Gang of Four” that, excluding the rest of the Congress, collaborated with the Bush White House on torture, unwarranted mass-surveillance, and other atrocities.

Two of “the Gang” were Democrats.

One of those Democrats is poised to resume her position as Speaker of the House this January, Representative Nancy “impeachment is off the table” Pelosi. (After all, you can’t impeach a president for crimes in which you, yourself, are complicit. That would be a sign of… integrity.)

After decades of Democratic silence with regard to the GOP’s Southern Strategy — after a Democratic president exploded mass-incarceration and slashed welfare (70% of which went to children) — I shouldn’t have been the least bit surprised. Because any careful examination of the historical record shows that post-JFK Democrats have far outstripped Republicans when it comes to accomplishing the far-right’s unfathomably cruel and colossally stupid agenda.

Nearly two decades ago, I had much to learn about “controlled opposition.” Feigned differences. Rhetorical “values.”

And even though over 300,000 registered Florida Democrats voted for George Bush in 2000, the Democratic establishment and our corporate media have managed to place the blame for Bush’s “victory” squarely on the shoulders of Ralph Nader and the Green Party.


In a testament to the efficacy of corporate propaganda, many otherwise intelligent Americans believe that unconscionable horseplop to this very day. They blame moral and intellectual paragon Nader and continue — even after the catastrophic, neo-fascism entrenching tenure of Barack Obama — supporting the other right-wing party of corporatized white supremacy, the neocon-infested, neo-McCarthyite, Wall Street Democrats.

What a nightmare.

Posted in General | Leave a comment


Yes on Prop. 10 (rent control) in CA!

No on Prop. 8 (reduces care for vulnerable patients) in CA!

Yes for Robert Daulton and Cullen Tiernan for Fremont City Council!

And so far as the U.S. Congress is concerned…

Unless you have an opportunity today to vote for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Barbara Lee, or Rep. Nina Turner, you should seriously consider casting a vote to Make America GREEN Again!!!

Seeing as the U.S. Congress is probably headed for a split-decision (Rs keep the Senate, Ds take the House, after spending the last two years inadvertently helping Trump by attacking him from his right), you could actually vote for someone, for a change, instead of being cowed by neo-fascists into voting against the slightly more terrifying (to you) of two patently monstrous, equally racist, warmongering evils — both responsible for the deaths of millions of innocents (mostly Arab Muslims) and the collapse of the rule of law… and the collapse of the planet’s ecosystem, ongoing as I type these words.

Conversely, you could vote your corporation-programmed conscience (unfazed by genocide/mass-incarceration/ecocide) and keep evil riding high.

For instance, you could vote for California’s own RussiaGating neo-McCarthyist, Adam Schiff, the neocons’ best pal, or NRA-owned Trump-booster, Jon Tester, in Montana, or Claire McCaskill in Missouri, who supports Trump “100 percent” when it comes to migrant refugees and his immigration policies (and has helped confirm the vast majority of his judges)… and don’t worry, they’re all big fans of fracking!!

You could vote for any of the other “liberal” or “Christian” frauds who simply do whatever the Koch Brothers, Saim Haban, and the CIA tell them to do (aka “democracy”).

Only here’s a hint: You can’t repudiate fascism by voting for its most ardent proponents. Repudiating the modern KKK is a moral imperative… but joining the party dominated by modern Nazis – the neocons and our amoral, genocidal intelligence agencies — is not how we “defeat” the right.

It’s how we capitulate to the furthest right extremists in our polity after unilaterally disarming, trading in our minds and souls for a four-year chip of righteous-feeling, utterly impotent, completely hypocritical (for Democrats) Trump Hate… after cheating the real left in a rigged primary.

It’s called playing into the fascists’ hands.


ADDENDUM (1:23PM Daylight Savings Time)

The best, for me, would be if everyone voted third party, if there was a complete and total, 100% repudiation of both the KKK-right (the GOP), and the neocon/neo-McCarthyite-right (the Democrats), which has been pushing WWIII on a bunch of baseless propaganda since before Trump was even inaugurated.

But I understand that tribalized mainstream Americans aren’t quite ready to reject neo-fascism, that they are still capable ONLY of choosing between two equally racist, equally genocidal brands of evil: one subtly, institutionally racist, and far more effectively so (the Ds); and one overtly racist and obviously dangerous, which also happens to expose our far-right, white-supremacist, and ultimately despotic political establishment for what it is and long has been (the nakedly fascist Rs).

In other words, it’s the party of mass-incarceration on steroids, which also helped Wall Street illegally plunder the post-Civil Rights Era gains of African-American households in 2009-10 — and which spread the Terror War to seven nations (the Muslim-butchering Ds)… vs. the wretched, ignorant misogynists of the party of overt racism and unalloyed Christian Dominionism (the Muslim-butchering Rs)…

One party kills hundreds of thousands of innocents, and everyone is up in arms. The other party, so insidious, kills hundreds of thousands of innocents (teeing up millions), and everyone is SILENT AS THE GRAVE.

It’s fucking eerie. And there’s the real danger.

How either vote-suppressing, massively racist, environment cratering, utterly corrupt party EVER gets anyone’s vote is a mystery to sane, moral people the world over.

Posted in General | Leave a comment


“There’s a big election coming up.”

“Yes, I heard.”

“An important opportunity to repudiate fascism, yes?”

“Definitely, but what makes you think everyone’s going to vote third party?”

“Fascism, stupid… what Trump and the Republicans are peddling.”

“Agreed. That’s Fascism Brand R, as in revolting, repugnant, racist, and reviled the world over… But then there’s Fascism Brand D, infiltrated top to bottom, these days, with Wall Street/PhRMA/Monsanto/fossil fuel lobby (corporate) courtesans, former Republicans, intelligence agents, and neocons pushing WWIII on a load of baseless propaganda. Fascism Brand D: the journalist/whistleblower-hunting party that took over every extreme right-wing/Heritage Foundation/PNAC position and made it policy while calling itself ‘liberal,’ because Republicans just weren’t up to the Herculean tasks of ending welfare (70% of which went to poor children, disproportionately black), passing NAFTA (devastating workers and the middle class), exploding mass-incarceration and The New Jim Crow… repealing Glass-Steagall and making it illegal to regulate derivatives (making the 2008 economic meltdown inevitable)… removing media ownership rules so a handful of Rupert Murdoch’s could control 90% of what every American sees, hears, and reads, including under the banner of “news”… bailing out Wall Street while decimating the middle class… legalizing torture, indefinite detention, drone assassination, police state surveillance, domestic propaganda. We’re talking about the neocon-dominatedMujaheddin 2.0-launching party responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrians… the OWS/free assembly-crushing, primary-rigging, vote-suppressing party that, in order to excuse a bungled election, revived the specter of McCarthyism, bringing the world to the brink of a HOT global war between superpowers, for the first time in generations… the party of the ICE-expanding, Border Patrol-swelling ‘Deporter in Chief’ (who separated thousands of children from their parents/legal guardians in his day, caging them as Trump has). We’re talking about the ‘We came, we saw, he died,’ Libya War party (the slave auctioneer’s and jihadi’s best friend party that expanded the GWOT to seven nations)… the party that helped Wall Street crooks erase the post-Civil Rights Era economic gains of African-American households… the party that gave lip service to climate change while freeing the polluters in deep ocean waters, the Gulf, the Arctic — all while making sure the Paris Agreement had no legally binding carbon emissions limits and polluters were given immunity… all while using the U.S. State Department to spread fracking throughout the world, privatize water, and support the Pentagon’s missions. Fascism Brand D, the party that made a Trump-like figure in the White House inevitable.”

“You and Dr. Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders and Susan Sarandon and Daniel Ellsberg and Jimmy Dore and Seymour Hersh and Chris Hedges and Caitlin Johnstone and Eva Bartlett and Glen Ford and Max Blumenthal and Medea Benjamin and Col. Ann Wright and Dr. Cornel West and Ray McGovern and Abby Martin and Ralph Nader and Vanessa Beeley and Julian Assange and Katie Halper and Aaron Mate and Rania Khalek and Briahna Joy Gray and David Swanson and Helen Buyniski and Jeremy Scahill and Eric Snowden and Glenn Greenwald and Noam Chomsky need to shut up for the rest of your lives and go away.”

“You know, I use to hear that kind of thing all the time from Republicans in the 1990s and early 2000s, back before they realized that the vast majority of the politicians they supported were bought and sold, without a principle to their name. You’ll get there. It will probably be too late, by then, to do much of anything useful with your nominally liberal impulses, in the post-petrodollar, post-empire, post-normal climate world… I only hope that me and mine (and you and yours) will have access to food, water, medicine, and shelter, in the dark days ahead, which the duopoly has condemned us to. Until then, keep ‘repudiating’ stuff.”

“I hate you. Stop talking forever.”

“Now you sound exactly like a 1990s-early 2000s Republican. At long last, a bipartisan consensus has been reached: the real enemy of the corporation-programmed duopoly voter is anyone remotely progressive.”

“Fuck off and die. I’m voting against the modern KKK and the rise of fascism.”

“I understand that, and I salute you. But you’re also voting for the party of the New Cold War… possibly a third World War. A neocon party, top to bottom, genocidally Islamophobic and maniacally Russophobic. A neo-McCarthyite, CIA-party that has risked the reputation of the American left on a conspiracy theory, with no public evidence yet offered… the party of modern Nazis.”

“I love David Frum, Rachel Maddow, Tom Friedman, Joy Ann Reid, the New York Times, the Washington Post, The Atlantic, Vox, The New Yorker, Daily Kos, Huffington, Bill Maher, Jimmy Kimmel, Seth Meyers, Mike Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, the Daily Beast, Max Boot, Bill Kristol, CNN, NPR…”

“I know you do.”

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Speak out against vote suppression today!

Here’s a worthy petition from Color of Change calling out GOP candidate Brian Kemp’s aggressive vote suppression tactics in Georgia, aimed primarily at African-Americans:

Please take a minute to follow the link and add your voice to those of myself and others condemning this practice.

Republicans, representing (now more than ever) the party of the Southern Strategy, have been perpetrating schemes to suppress the votes of POC for generations, and apparently Brian Kemp is keen to distinguish himself among these vote-suppressing jerks.

Apparently, he’s aiming for Katherine Harris territory… or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz territory.

- As Florida’s Secretary of State in 2000 (the “Bush for President!” co-chair who ran her state’s election), Ms. Harris intentionally disenfranchised thousands of legally registered black voters in order to give us “President” George W. Bush, who would turn out to be one of history’s most accomplished war criminals (the Democrats, of course, would join Bush not only in his appalling war crimes, which their next president would exceed, but also in telling those disenfranchised African-American Floridians to sit down and shut up, as documented in Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11″).

- Harris’s counterpart, Ms. Wasserman-Schultz, was forced to resign as DNC Chair after it was revealed that she had used her office to help rig the 2016 Democratic Party presidential nomination for Sec. Clinton, in part through a massive voter disenfranchisement scheme targeting POC, students, and the poor… which would ultimately result in Donald Trump landing in the White House.

(Great job, Democrats. Brilliant. You brazenly cheat the left, resuscitated after decades of dormancy by an aging progressive — and demoralize your base, especially young people — in order to nominate the least popular candidate in party history… except on Wall Street and in neoconservative circles, where she is very popular. You elevate Trump, whom you view as “beatable.” You move even further to the right in order to win moderate Republican votes, after telling your base for the thousandth time to sit down and shut up, because you owe them nothing. Then you lose to Donald Trump.)

It’s pretty shameful, the myriad ways that millionaires and the privileged have labored to disenfranchise whole populations, communities that have been relentlessly targeted by our institutions since the country’s inception.

But the duopoly systematically disenfranchises vulnerable populations — Republicans in general elections and Democrats in their party’s primaries, which are systematically rigged for the most conservative, corporate-friendly candidates available (the Democratic Party being the establishment’s most effective firewall against the nation’s few remaining liberals).

I highly recommend the investigative reporting of Greg Palast, who mostly focuses on Republican vote suppression tactics, but does not let “Good Cop” off the hook.

But all whataboutism* aside, I hope that my friends will take the time to sign this petition.

* (because we are morally obligated, according to the “Blue No Matter Who” crowd, to denounce any whatabout-ist who mentions “our side” of the duopoly’s massive voter disenfranchisement, corruption, fracking/drilling, neoconservative butchery, spying on citizens, racism, water privatization, assassinations, torture, mass-incarceration on steroids, etc.)


A satirical addendum…


I was about to get really upset about blatant GOP suppression of African-American voters in Georgia, but then the whispers started (emanating from Kemp campaign headquarters and the media it controls) that this damning audio about their dirty election tactics wasn’t leaked at all — it was “HACKED BY THE RUSSKIES!”

Holy smokes, that’s a good diversion tactic (right up there with “Squirrel!” when dealing with any mob of Pavlovian mutts).

[Y’know, I can’t help but feel I’ve seen this story before... leaked communications of political operatives exposing a campaign built on racism, sexism, voter suppression, and dirty tricks galore, with supposedly neutral party officers and major media outlets working overtime to rig the election for a far-right, deeply corrupt candidate... who then goes on to LOSE the general election to an orange yeti. Quick, somebody mention Putin!]

From this point forward, even though no proof of the Russian “hack” has been made public — and even though there is proof that the “Russian hack” story was created out of whole cloth by the right-winger’s top campaign staff, John Podesta and Robby Mook, the day after they lost the election — I get to ignore everything that was revealed in the audio and all the most damning facts about my primary-rigging, massively racist, corrupt as hell candidate… because I am a Clintonite dumbfuck, aka, a run of the mill Democrat/Republican: a corporation-programmed “Blue/Red No Matter Who” reactionary conservative under the self-sparing illusion that I am a moral, decent Liberal/Christian — and not a racist, because I don’t use the “N” word and would’ve given Obama a third term, if possible.

Meanwhile, I’m largely unmoved by: a neverending, globe-destabilizing, U.S.-led world war that’s killed millions of Arab Muslims (a modern holocaust) under Trump’s three predecessors alone; systemic racism, mass-incarceration and modern slavery, the New Jim Crow; the Standing Rock Sioux and the people of Flint, MI (water rights); GITMO/the normalization of torture; police militarization and brutality; drone assassinations and state-sponsored terrorism (my country’s support for Nazis in Ukraine and al Qaeda in Syria); the effective repeal of habeas corpus along with the First, Fourth, and Eighth Amendments and Posse Comitatus; the repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act; the exaltation of corporations over nations through “trade” pacts; austerity and neoliberalism (the total capitulation of the institutional left to neo-fascism); the collapse of global resources and the ecosystem; the disappearance of 60% of the world’s wildlife over the last few decades; the utter corruption of our elections, campaign finance system, and government, at every level, by oligarchs who make Donald Trump look like Mother Fucking Theresa…

“Russia, Russia, Russia!”

Hooray for the ex-Soviet boogeyman who makes all of our own election-stealing, omnicidal capitalism, and monstrous crimes against humanity disappear!

, the day after the election was lost,
Posted in General | Leave a comment

Unlike Nader, most politicians make me want to RALPH!

Thank you, Chris Hedges, for acknowledging the great works of a great human being!

What American alive today has lived a better or more heroic life than Ralph Nader? Made more meaningful contributions to their society and the world? Stood up against evil and neo-fascist corruption more than Nader has?

The corporatists’ unyielding hatred of Ralph Nader, and their smearing of his name with nonsense, simply testify to how well this eminently rational and moral man has lived his life – and how very much he’s accomplished.

This is how you get “disappeared” off American media, blacklisted as if you never existed: You resist fascism, stand up for human rights, and fight for the truth, saving countless lives along the way.

You help your society begin to comprehend who its most grave enemies are, and you lead our struggle against the serially racist, mass-murdering, rule of law eviscerating, corporatist quislings calling themselves “Democrats” and “Republicans.”

(Though both parties serve identical paymasters and the same omnicidal agenda, the average Republican president does so far less competently than the average Democrat, who can actually speak in complete sentences, unlike his GOP counterpart. The Bushes, Trump, and Ronald Reagan represent the GOP perfectly: mentally non-robust, obviously venal, bumbling clods who impeded and discredited the neo-fascist regime rising in the U.S. – the same regime so competently advanced by the “successful” right-wing presidency of Bill Clinton; the very same neo-fascist regime that President Obama needlessly rescued when it was gasping its last foul breath after GWB had inadvertently totaled it… So competent, so polished, so tragic, these Democrats.)

If only Barack Obama had governed with even a fraction of Ralph Nader’s integrity, Main Street (and most African-American households) wouldn’t have been sacrificed on the altar of Wall Street fraud. The middle class would still be limping along, rather than utterly decimated. The neocon wars and assault on our civil liberties would not have been so dramatically expanded, leaving us no semblance of healthy, functioning democratic institutions.

And under that hypothetical, ethical President Obama, it’s fair to assume that the DNC would not have blatantly rigged its primary in 2016.

Trump wouldn’t be in the White House, and Bernie Sanders almost assuredly would be.

The world’s loss… simply because most of the American electorate doesn’t know how to stop voting for fascism’s most ardent proponents, Team Red and Team Blue.

Posted in General | Leave a comment

Calling Elizabeth Warren “Pocahantas” is racist, but then again, so is exploiting Native Americans to advance one’s career…

Science wins! Sen. Warren’s DNA proves that she has not lied about her Native American ancestry! Tests have revealed that someone indigenous was in the Warren Family mix, some 6-10 generations ago.


But that doesn’t change the way she has gone through life as a member of the privileged class, never facing discrimination on the basis of her racial heritage. It doesn’t change the fact that while she’s often touted her Native American identity, she has never been a part of that community — a community whose identity she has conveniently appropriated in order to raise her profile at Harvard and later in life (representing a cynical, culturally privileged way of burnishing the longtime Republican’s otherwise paper-thin liberal credentials).

In truth, Elizabeth Warren has never been an advocate for Native American interests and has not been a part of that community. She never stood with the Standing Rock Sioux as they put their bodies on the line in order to protect our nation’s drinkable water. And she’s backed conservative/corporatist politicians and policies that have devastated indigenous peoples and their resources.

Leaving the ugly, racist “Pocahantas” jeers of Trump and his ilk aside, here’s what an actual member of the Cherokee Nation has to say about Elizabeth Warren’s legitimacy on this subject:

“She was not a hero to me when she failed to foster a haven of support for Native students within Harvard University’s alienating Ivy League culture. She is not a hero for spending years awkwardly avoiding Native leaders. She is not a hero because, despite claiming to be the only Native woman in the U.S. Senate, she has done nothing to advance our rights.

“She is not from us. She does not represent us. She is not Cherokee.”

But don’t imagine that I don’t see the big picture: the important thing isn’t fair representation, potable water, and some measure of justice for Native Americans; the important thing is that DNA testing has made it possible for a warmongering, center-right fraud, Elizabeth Warren, to tell an obnoxious ape, Donald Trump, to STFU.

We can all sleep better tonight.

Posted in General | Leave a comment