whatever you say…whatever you want to tell yourself…if you’re convinced, all
well and good...
On Sep 11, 2016, at 9:10 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81" for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I would not say that we are all complicit. This is what I was talking about
when I used the existing money economy as an example of objective conditions.
If you did not recognize the prevailing objective conditions you could not
function. If you did not acquire and spend money your own survival would be
in grave doubt. Recognizing and dealing with the prevailing objective
conditions is not complicity with them. What needs to be done is that while
we are dealing with the prevailing objective conditions we should be
organizing to change those conditions. We need to be a part of the labor
organizing effort and be building unions and agitating for a labor party and
whatever other organizational structures are necessary to overthrow the
existing order. That is not complicity with it. Complicity with the
prevailing objective reality and the existing order is found in campaigning
for bourgeois candidates, supporting the right of corporations to profits
from the labor of the majority, supporting the police forces that enforce
their laws and so forth. Simply conceding to what is necessary to continue
our existence until that order is finally overthrown is not being complicit
with it.
On 9/11/2016 12:58 PM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
well, let’s dig a little deeper…with all this us and them, with all this
talk of the ruling class as them, and so on…isn’t every one of us complicit
in keeping the ruling class in power and rolling in wealth? Every time
anyone eats at McDonald’s, KFC, Burger Death, shops at WalMart, uses Amazon,
buys any computer or electronic gadget, I don’t care if it’s Apple, IBM,
Samsung, goes to a casino, stays at a chain hotel, buys a car, uses whatever
to heat one’s home, buys anything manufactured by the big corporations, from
General Mills to General Motors, he/she is supporting the ruling class and
contributing to its stranglehold on the money, economic structure, political
landscape.
On Sep 11, 2016, at 12:18 AM, Richard Driscoll <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Miriam:
A very good analysis. I have searched for the dividing line between them
who has and them who has not.
I have yet to find the demarcation.
Richard
On 9/10/2016 7:05 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
This reminds me of the Tea Partyers who, when demonstrating against the
Affordable Care Act, kept yelling, "Don't let the government steal my
medicare!" or the lady who came here from Croatia 40 years ago and cleans
my apartment who reads Bill O'Reilly's books, whose retired husband is on
Medicare, who works part-time as a clerk for a public library, and who
tells
me regularly how much she mistrusts the government. Lots of rage and
finger
pointing and many definitions of just who the enemy is. It simplifies the
picture if one can point at a "they" and then blame them for what is
happening. But different working people have various definitions of whom
the
"them" is. And that ruling class? Is my son-in-law who owns a piece of a
company that distributes products to pharmacies and owns a 5 bedroom 2
storey house in the suburbs, a member of the ruling class? Is it the
corporations that sell military equipment? The financial institutions? The
military generals at the pentagon? The international corporations like
Apple? And how do you classify the employees of Google, the NSA, and the
other technology giants who use their technical expertise to control the
population? Where does "us" end and "they begin?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 7:51 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Attack on the Twin Towers
It is we and they. It is also not our government. It is their government.
It
is the government that they use to hold us down. By calling it our
government you are accepting a role in collaborating in your own
oppression.
Those who govern have little in common with those who are governed, but by
encouraging those who are governed to see their government as "our"
government they have a lot easier a time governing the governed.
On 9/10/2016 6:46 PM, Bob Hachey wrote:
Hi all,ways the cause of the attacks against us.
Truly fascinating discussion here. Like Carl, I don't believe I'm part
of the ruling class that has gotten us into this mess by it's greedy
ways and warlike tendencies.
But, like Miriam, I believe that, like it or not, we are all part of
this nation. Yes, many of us ehere on this list oppose our government
policies some of which helped to create the climate for the tragedy of
911. Some might argue that if we weren't actively opposing our
government, that we were part of the problem. That idea is stated best
in Bob Dylan's "the times they are a-changin. Basically, he says that
one should get out of the new road if you can't lend a hand. George W.
Bush echoed similar sentiments when he said you're either with us or
against us. IT is truly sad that the majority of Americans seem to go
along with current policies and can't see how our government is in many
There, that's a good compromise between "we" and "they". That is our
tgovernment. It is not we or they, but it is, more precisely, our
government.
Bob Hachey
