Occupy Wall Street is gearing up for a long summer of protest to stop the assault on the democratic freedoms and the education system being brought on by the corporations and the privatization movement; and Fox News has reported this in passing by featuring them in there regular commentary “the good the bad and the ugly” referring to the movement as the “ugly.”
(This was originally posted on Open Salon July, 6, 2011)
You would think they could come up with better propaganda than that. Perhaps they think their audience has been saturated with so much of their propaganda that they’ve become accustomed to believing anything they’re told without question. Perhaps they’re relying on the other networks to provide enough coverage that will indoctrinate those that haven’t been so thoroughly fooled by Fox and then they can play each other off as the lesser of two evils.
If so how many times do they think the public will fall for the same scam over and over again?
They may be in for a rude awakening sooner than they would like.
This is part of a semi-regular update of some of the latest stories from the Occupy Wall Street web page for additional details see previous post’s introduction to series.
Occupy Wall Street is began a March from Philadelphia to New York City as I began writing this; the live stream is now on for those of you who are interested.
I won’t be able to go myself but best to luck for those who do make it.
Some of these stories are a couple weeks old but they hardly received much if any attention in the corporate press and it is virtually guaranteed that there are many more stories like these that they’re ignoring which is why we need to rely more on Alternative media outlets (long list of more reliable outlets) to get our news.
If our government was really fighting to defend democracy all over the world as they claim then it wouldn’t be necessary for all these protest to happen in the first place. Furthermore they wouldn’t have to suppress them or ignore them in the press; instead they could and should listen to their grievances and allow them representation within the government. The fact that they’ve been treating the democracy movement in this manner is overwhelming evidence that they aren’t supporters of democracy on top of much more evidence from other sources.
This is just one of many protests that are virtually ignored and then quickly forgotten by the corporate press. Others include a recent protest when Jamie Dimon was at a senate hearing and other environmental protest that were arrested during the BP hearings. In most cases the protestors are the ones that are thrown in jail, even if only briefly, while people like Jamie Dimon and Tony Hayward return to their lives in their mansions and yachts without doing much if anything to repair the damage they’ve done. This is true even through they do much more damage while the protesters are the actual victims. At the same time the corporate press is attempting to present candidates that truly represent the publics interest and protect the environment like Jill Stein (Blog with a closer look) as fringe candidates that don’t have a chance. According to the corporate press in order to be “viable” candidates have to collect an enormous amount of bribes thinly disguised as campaign contributions from the corporations and agree to ignore the will of the majority except when creating propaganda pretending to address their concerns. Fortunately there are many more people that are learning that the corporate press no longer has any credibility and these “fringe” may actually have a much better chance than the corporate press is letting on.
This propaganda can only work for so long and it may be much sooner than the Mass Media realizes that they sop fooling more than a small percentage of the public.
The demand for permits have become common place; they’ve also asked for them in Chicago and they have Charlotte has “given permission” for people to protest during the Democratic convention. These are just a handful of examples where the free speech of the majority is with permission only in many cases.
The point of the first amendment was supposed to be that we shouldn’t need permission to speak at all.
At least that is what many of us were taught in school!
Obviously that isn’t the case anymore, assuming it ever was; however while the speech for most of us is heavily regulated the Supreme court ahs indicated that the corporations have overwhelming amounts of protection when it comes to their speech and they can control the vast majority of the propaganda that is presented to the majority.
Campaign contributions are protected while real speech is regulated.
For all practical purposes the first amendment now provides more protection for bribes than speech!
We have more stories but first a word from our sponsor who should pay their advertising bill on time from now on!!
HHmmm I’m not sure what that was about but back to the stories about occupy Wall Street.
This health care debate would be a bad joke if it was remotely funny. Since it began neither party has been willing to address some of the biggest problems with the health insurance situation in this country. Health care in the USA is more than twice as expensive as in most if not all other developed countries and the quality is worse according to most reliable sources. We spend an enormous amount of money in this country on health care advertising, lobbying, campaign contributions from the health care industry and other bureaucratic expenses and allow the insurance companies to keep an enormous amount for profit.
This money has to come from somewhere and it does nothing for the health of this country.
It is passed on to the consumer of course without any of the representation that goes along with the lobbying expenses or campaign contributions.
One of the reasons the government doesn’t do many things well is because they’re collecting so much money from people that want the government to fail.
Other countries do a much better job providing health care for much less money and the only candidate that is promoting Single Payer is Jill Stein who the corporations don’t consider “viable” presumably because she hasn’t sold out to them.
The ability of the public to participate in the democratic process is directly related to the quality of the education system. In order to be able to make decisions about many important subjects people need to understand them and they need to have equal access to education, not one system for the rich and another for the poor.
Charter Schools are clearly another way of increasing the control the corporations have over the schools. They’ve also used advertising to attempt to do this. There has been an enormous amount of evidence to indicate that this is having a detrimental effect on the education of children some of which was indicated in Roy Fox’s study “Harvesting Minds.” This has also enabled the corporations to suppress education about issues that impact profits including the destruction of the environment and the ability of children to scrutinize advertising.
In addition to preventing the take over of the school system by corporations that control the Charter School systems we need to stop the reliance on property taxes to provide funding. This is clearly designed to make sure that the best schools are kept in the neighborhoods of the wealthy and that those without money don’t have much if any chance to get ahead.
The farther they can keep the decision making process from the public the more corruption they can get away with; this is why they want to promote this treaty that would enable them to claim that they have no choice when it comes to workers rights, environmental rights and many other rights.
The Obama administration that pretends to be standing up to the corporations when it suits their purposes has been trying to push this when no one has been watching and Romney clearly would like to do so as well if he thinks he can get away with it.
With an enormous amount of protest and solidarity in Mexico, Canada, the USA and around the world it will be much more difficult for the corporations to get away with this.
If you review most if not all of the major issues that impact the public when ever there is a conflict of interest between the best interest of the corporations and the majority of the public, which includes most issues that have any financial needs, the political system virtually always takes the side of the corporations with little or no regard for the majority. Instead the majority gets an enormous amount of propaganda and distractions or other manipulation tactics. This is clearly directly related to the enormous amount of campaign contributions the politicians collect from the corporations.
They don’t donate unless they believe they can get a return on their money.
That return has to come from somewhere and it is virtually always at the expense of the majority of the public.
They can only ignore the protest for so long without bringing everything to a standstill.
To do so would be even more destructive than to cooperate and allow major reforms; it is a matter of time before those in power realize they can’t ignore the will of the people in a society that pretends to be democratic if the people don’t submit to corporate tyranny.
Actually Alex it may be sooner than most people think that the public stops believing the claim that either of the two traditional parties is even trying to represent the public and they start looking elsewhere.
(For more information on Blog see Blog description and table of context for most older posts.)