Under Capitalism, everything is for sale.

When US-made 'censorware' ends up in iron fists | csmonitor.com:
OAKLAND, CALIF. - During Burma's short-lived uprising late last month, young dissidents risked their lives to smuggle news of their peaceful protest to the outside world. They may have been up against Internet censorship software designed in America, if a connection found to exist in 2005 still holds.

Moreover, if a US firm wanted to sell Internet filters to Burma (Myanmar) today, despite several layers of economic sanctions against the government there, it would probably be legal to do so, say export lawyers.

Absence of federal regulation has allowed so-called censorware of at least four California companies to end up in the hands of foreign governments shown to block citizens' access to political, religious, and other websites.

The Capitalists' greatest value is profit. All other values are secondary and dispensable as long as the first value is obtained. Any social reality is acceptable as long that first value is materialized.

That is why they will sell the undertakers of capitalism the rope, and be too busy counting their profits to see the noose tied.

Technorati Tags: censorship

Here's why we won't have real health care reform:

As Democrats Criticize, Health Care Industry Donates - New York Times:
WASHINGTON, Oct.28 — In a reversal from past election cycles, Democratic candidates for president are outpacing Republicans in donations from the health care industry, even as the leading Democrats in the field offer proposals that have caused deep anxiety in some sectors of the industry, according to campaign finance records.

Hospitals, drug makers, doctors and insurers gave candidates in both parties more than $11 million in the first nine months of this year, according to an analysis done for The New York Times by the Center for Responsive Politics, an independent group that tracks campaign finance.

In all, the Democratic presidential candidates have raised about $6.5 million from the industry, compared with nearly $4.8 million for the Republican candidates. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has amassed the most of any candidate, despite her calls for broad changes to the health care system that could pose serious financial challenges to private insurers, drug companies and other sectors.

Is it any surprise that Clinton has received the most healthcare industry dollars? Remember Clinton's mandatory insurance plan?

Which half of the ruling class are you voting for in 2008?

Technorati Tags: 2008 elections, healthcare, insurance, corporate goverment

You have to wonder how something this retarded could get published.

Marx's erupting skin may have influenced writings
LONDON (Reuters) - Karl Marx, who complained of excruciating boils, actually suffered from a chronic skin disease with known psychological effects that may well have influenced his writings, a British expert said on Tuesday.

Sam Shuster, professor of dermatology at the University of East Anglia, believes the revolutionary thinker had hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) in which the apocrine sweat glands -- found mainly in the armpits and groin -- become blocked and inflamed.

"In addition to reducing his ability to work, which contributed to his depressing poverty, hidradenitis greatly reduced his self-esteem," said Shuster, who published his findings in the British Journal of Dermatology.

"This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing."(emphasis added)

While I wouldn't label myself a Marxist, Marx's works do have many valuable contributions. Supposing Shuster properly diagnosed Marx's condition based on letters, it's a rather large jump to move from dermatological ailment to specific philosophic positions.

Technorati Tags: dermatology, Karl Marx, Marxism, medicine, Sam Shuster

From Media Matters:

Citing new G.I. Joe movie, Glenn Beck warned of a possible "one-world-government nightmare"

But first, there's something else. We're being attacked someplace else in the cover of night, and if we lose this battle, we lose it all. Here's "The Point" tonight. G.I. Joe is the latest casualty in the war against the American way, and I know, I know, Glenn, it's just a toy, a little hunk of plastic, a cartoon. I know. And that makes it easy to dismiss this. But I believe that would be a huge mistake.

We cannot lose sight of the fact that G.I. Joe was a real guy and he is something more, as well. He's -- he is a symbol, and when you attack a symbol, you strike a blow against everything it represents.

I know. Glenn Beck proves he's an utter moron 365 days a year. This is no exception.

It's sad so many people can't differentiate between marketing and meaning.

See also: GI Joe: Just a Toy

Technorati Tags: capitalism, GI Joe, GI Joe movie, Glenn Beck

...and it turns out, they don't like it either!

Conservative Authors Sue Publisher

Five authors have sued the parent company of Regnery Publishing, a Washington imprint of conservative books, charging that the company deprives its writers of royalties by selling their books at a steep discount to book clubs and other organizations owned by the same parent company.

...

“It suddenly occurred to us that Regnery is making collectively jillions of dollars off of us and paying us a pittance.” He added: “Why is Regnery acting like a Marxist cartoon of a capitalist company?”

Priceless.

Technorati Tags: capitalism, Regnery

I'm not a businessman, so maybe that's why I don't understand this site's business scheme.

The founders of Abunga.com¹ believe that it is time for a wholesome marketplace where illicit materials are restricted and new product offerings are constantly monitored by both the company and its growing community of users that care about decency, hence empowering decency.

Abunga provides three levels of content filtering:

Internal Filter – We remove broad classifications of illicit materials by the information classifications set by the publisher. Currently, over 65,000 books are eliminated from our available inventory to protect your family.

Individual Customer Block - On any search, any Abunga customer member can click the block button and that particular book will never show up as an offering on their account.

Community Block – Abunga records your blocks and if a number of customers block the same product, Abunga will remove it from their offering. (About Abunga.com)

Their plan is generate profits by letting everyone permanently filter out books? In essence, they plan to specialize in not selling you stuff? So really, they're saying:

Internal Filter - There's tons of stuff we can't selll to you! Currently, over 65,000 books are for sale somewhere else! Try Amazon!

Individual Customer Block - Doubtful that our other users are doing a good enough job filtering your search results? Block it just for you! Find even less stuff with every search!

Community Block - If a undefined number of anonymous potential shoppers find a book particularly bothersome, we won't' sell you that either. Just sit back and watch your purchase choices dwindle.

Is it just me, or is this phenomenally retarded?

The result is, basically, a store that mostly sells Christian nonsense (redundant, I know). Why not just ignore the titles you don't want to see? Why are "families" so damn sensitive? What's the chance a search for a "family friendly" title is going to return an illicit suggestion? I buy a lot of books online and not once have I ever been presented with an illicit item on my searches. For example, I've searched for and purchased osteology books online and have never found results for books about "the wrong kind of bones" (i.e, hard dicks, we're not family friendly here). Maybe their software people just can't write a decent search engine?

Finally, is it really empowering to hide the title and tiny pictures of book covers from yourself?

I think someone is overstating the importance of their business.

To test this theory, I searched for some religious titles (e.g., the Bible, Purpose Driven Life) and then blocked them. It was pretty boring. In addition, it took much more work to find things that I might hate and block them than it did to not search for them at all. But wait! I can also view all of the books I've blocked, in case I've forgotten what's been offensive to me. But I thought I didn't want to see these titles again? Apparently they can't even protect me from the stuff I hate when I make an effort to tell them. What's the point of this endeavor then?

It's Dumb. Very dumb. I hope this business fails and everyone involved starves to death in an alley.

So they're not just dumb. They're also annoying. Thanks, Abunga.

[Update]: Here's link to a recent post at abunga's blog. They pat themselves on the back for not selling the Golden Compass²

[posted with ecto]³

Technorati Tags: Abunga, family friendly

It's May 1, which means it's International Workers' Day. Well, except in the US where workers' struggles are ignored in favor of Loyalty Day. Loyalty Day was specifically created to counter May Day. Combined with the US's anti-labor Labor Day celebrated in September, Loyalty Day allows good Americans the opportunity to avoid any untoward display of anarchist, communist, or socialist sentiment. It's an easy way to let the boss know you're one of the good workers and not the uppity, trouble-making kind that might need to be hung or beaten to death by security guards.

I suppose Loyalty Day isn't overly popular. Does anyone actually celebrate it? It was created in the same nationalist, anti-revolutionary spirit as the "under God" addition to the Pledge of Allegiance, and the transformation of the national motto to "In God We Trust" as opposed to E Pluribus Unum. Questioning the value of Loyalty Days and of pledges to god and country isn't terribly popular in the US. Americans, it seems, are content to celebrate their allegiance to State, God and Capital rather than their own liberty, or their own historic struggles for it.

Sometimes it's hard to believe there was ever a revolutionary spirit in the US.

We have not come to do the work of political parties, but we have come here in the cause of labour, in its own defence, to demand its own rights. -Eleanor Marx, Speech on the First May Day

The Marxists Internet Archive has a page of May Day links worth reading.

[Update: 5.1.2008 @ 1:23 PM]

Dockworkers Protest Iraq War - New York Times:


Thousands of dockworkers at West Coast ports stayed off the job on Thursday in what their union said was a call for an end to the war in Iraq.

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union said more than 25,000 members in 29 ports stayed off the job. The action came despite an order issued Wednesday by an arbitrator directing the union to tell its members to report for work as usual in response to a request from employers.

Cool.

Technorati Tags: anarchism, International Workers' Day, Marxism, May Day, work

Apparently the latest fad in right wing slurs is socialist.

“Earlier this week, we heard the world’s best salesman of socialism address the nation,” Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, said on Friday, referring, naturally, to a certain socialist in chief.

Former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas decried the creation of “socialist republics” in the United States. “Lenin and Stalin would love this stuff,” Mr. Huckabee said, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference here over the weekend, a kind of Woodstock for young conservatives.

“Socialism is something new for us to hit Obama over the head with,” said Joshua Bolin of Augusta, Ga., who founded a Web site, “Reagan.org,” which he calls a conservative analog to the liberal MoveOn.org.

It would be nice if this provided an actual discussion of what socialism is and what a socialist social organization might mean for the US. I doubt it will happen though. I also doubt that we'll see much of the Democratic faithful embrace socialist at a label the way they've re-embraced liberal.

The truth is, liberal and socialist are not synonymous. In discussion with my liberal associates, there is little interest in nationalization, worker control of the means of production or any support of a truly socialist transformation of society. Most people seem to be more than content to find ways to find ways to patch the existing system. For example, observe the repeated calls for shoring up the "middle class" during our current economic crisis as opposed to a discussion the working class. One of these terms obscures social relations and those between workers and owners, while aligning the interests of some workers with those of owners and against other members of working class. The ruling class likes it when fight amongst ourselves. It keeps us occupied.

Resistance to socialism seems to be founded mostly on misconceptions of what socialism is and can be. Coupled with this is willingness to associate socialism with autocratic regimes that self-identify as socialist or communist. It's interesting that many people are willing to recognize that politicians and governments are more than capable of disingenuously embracing the terminology of democracy, for example, as an ideology to legitimize their claims to power. Why is it that they are unable to make this distinction between rhetoric and political reality when it comes to socialism? Fear?

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. -Marx & Engels

Finally, I'm sure we'll eventually hear some on the right speak dismissively of class warfare if they haven't started this already. They never talk about class warfare when they're winning, when the capitalists are getting their way. It's not that there isn't an ongoing war or that class warfare is merely when workers air their grievances. It's just worth mentioning when they're making gains. But they're always at war with us. The operation of capitalism is, ultimately, always against the workers.

From the CPSUA mailing list:

Dear friends,

Communist Party National Chair, Sam Webb will be a featured guest on conservative host Glenn Beck’s show on Fox News tonight.

Beck has been running a series on the show called “Road to Socialism” which makes that claim that government programs for working people = big government = socialism. Did he make the same argument amount the corporate welfare and war spending that actually bloated the national debt? Didn’t think so.

Tune in at 5pm EST, Wednesday, March 5, 2009 March 4, 2009 and hear what Sam has to say.

Visit www.cpusa.org for updates.

This is probably the first (and last) time I'll ever claim something interesting might be happening on Glenn Beck's show. For the record: Glenn Beck is functionally retarded. Nevertheless, this might be worth watching.

I don't have cable so maybe I'll be able to find this online.

Update: The original announcement had the wrong date. Sam Webb is on tonight. Also, is anyone else a little disappointed that the Communist Party starts its emails with "Dear friends" instead of "Dear comrades?"

Why isn't Washington talking about single payer healthcare? Why isn't an option?

Here's where you can join up to help: Single Payer Action

Here's two good segments from Democracy Now! about single payer healthcare:

1. Burn Your Health Insurance Bill Day: New Group Advocates Direct Action to Demand Single-Payer System


2. Dr. Quentin Young, Longtime Obama Confidante and Physician to MLK, Criticizes Admin’s Rejection of Single-Payer Healthcare

The US needs single payer.

[Note: I signed up. I even used my real name. You can too.]

"Under these circumstances, it's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay. I mean, how do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?"

[From Obama tries to stop AIG bonuses: 'How do they justify this outrage?' - CNN.com]

Criminals acting like criminals. Imagine that.

Maybe it's time to start nationalizing companies that receive taxpayer funds. Why should we accept all of the risks in these bailouts and forego the benefits?

Just got this via email:

Out of the crisis: Building a new era of justice and peace

a speech by Sam Webb, National Chair of the Communist Party

LIVE streaming video
Saturday, March 21
9:30 am Eastern

This Saturday, March 21, Sam Webb, the national chairperson of the Communist Party USA, will deliver a speech titled, “Out of the crisis: Building a new era of justice and peace.” The speech will be streamed live via the web on the website www.cpusa.org

The speech is the opening address to the organization’s National Committee, which includes leading communists from around the country.

For press inquiries email communications@cpusa.org or call 646-437-5338

(Please forward widely)

Looks like the stream will be on the front page of their site.

Tell your friends.

A guy in Las Cruces, NM is flying a Nazi flag and an upside down US flag in protest of what he views as the US's shift toward communism.

Here are come quotes:

“It represents communism, the politicians don't care about the American people and it's the same way Adolf Hitler got started,” said Ken Triplett of the East Mesa.

...and...

It doesn't disgrace the veterans, it doesn't disgrace my flag, or nothing,” said Triplett. “It just says the American people need to wake up and understand that communism is going to be taking over.”

Triplett said the swastika flag is strictly a communist symbol and he's not racist in anyway.

Stupid. This guy can't even differentiate between communism, fascism, etc. This seems to be an endemic problem in this country. See, for example, the teabagger rallies, that clown Glenn Beck, etc.

Where's the evidence for communism or socialism here? Was there a revolution? What industries have been nationalized? Has private property been abolished? Has some legislation been passed ending wage labor?

I don't think so.

Bailing out banks and other corporations with taxpayer money isn't socialism. Nationalizing the entire banking system would be socialization. Providing a government funded insurance option isn't socialism. Nationalizing the entire health care industry, i.e., making all heath care workers employees of the state only, would be a step toward socialism.

Capitalism in the US is under no threat, sadly.

Anyone claiming otherwise is an idiot.

Sources: NM Independent Media and KFOXTV.com.

Well, this shouldn't be a surprise:

GOP senators declare war on Net neutrality (Rawstory.com)

Six Republican senators have introduced an amendment that would block the Federal Communications Commission from implementing its recently announced Net neutrality policy.

Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison introduced the amendment to an appropriations bill. It would prevent the FCC from getting funding for any initiative to uphold Net neutrality. According to The Hill, the co-sponsors are Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), Sen. John Thune (R-SD) and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).

The move appears to be an attempt to pre-empt the FCC's expected new policy to ensure that Internet service providers don't discriminate between different types of information on their networks.

This is a fine example of class warfare, a term that gets thrown around usually when any legislation or political position might marginally favor working people. But, class warfare is ubiquitous in our society and regularly unnoticed when it's the owning class, the capitalist class, that legislates in it's interests. In this case, we have a group of flunkies for corporations attempting to create regulation that mandates corporate financial interests are upheld despite the consequences for everyone else. Corporate control of communications for profit is more important, apparently, than either consumers' access to publicly owned frequencies and networks or access to bandwidth purchased by consumers. So much for the supposedly sacrosanct contract. Ever notice that it's always big business that sets the terms and is free to adjust at whim? Talk about an unequal relationship.

Another fine example of warfare against workers is the battle being waged over access to health care, where health care corporations and those duped into supporting their financial cause are adamantly working against relatively minor reforms they label as "socialism."

Why are these instances so rarely named as such? Sure people get worked up when either party--and it is a bipartisan problem--works to promote corporate interests, but why isn't this type of class warfare called out for what it is? Why do we accept our interests are always secondary to the capitalists'?

It's past time to turn the tables.

G20 security officials took responsibility Friday afternoon for a video that seemed to depict US troops 'kidnapping' a protester.

The military was not involved in the incident, but G20 security did acknowledge that "law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team" had detained a protester they said was believed to be vandalizing a store.

Video posted at YouTube shows onlookers calling out "what the fuck" and "what the fuck is wrong with you?" as people in camo uniforms haul a protester along by his collar, shove him into the back seat of a car, and rapidly drive off.

[From G20 cops dressed in camo 'snatch' protester | Raw Story]

Some songs stay relevant...

I saw Michael Moore's new film, Capitalism: A Love Story, on Friday night. I went to the 10 PM showing, which turned out to be a good choice. There was hardly anyone there. Who knows. Maybe attendance was low for all of the showings. Regardless, the fewer morons present, the better. It makes it easier to enjoy a movie when fewer people are there talking or letting their cellphones ring.

I thought the movie was pretty good, though it was a little scattershot in it's approach and loosely focused. My biggest complaint is that Moore never bothered to actually define capitalism. Rather, he assumes the audience knows what is meant by capitalism. Key concepts are included without definition as well, e.g., profit, profit motive. It seems to me that these definitions are crucial. Examples are present of various aspects of capitalism, but there's never a clear statement about the essential concepts. For example, Moore never tells us the difference between benefiting one's own labor and capitalist profit (expropriation of another's labor) that underlies the capitalist economic system. Furthermore, he never explicitly discusses capitalist profit generated by merely moving capital around. It seems to me that making these conceptual factors clear would be important. He does a fine job at showing how capitalists scam and screw people and gives examples of people on the receiving end of capitalism. But the actual mechanisms of how this screwing takes places are largely unspecified.

Also, I thought his juxtaposition of democracy with capitalism a little vague. Yes, workplace democracy is a fantastic idea, but he never reveals what worker-owned means of production and workplace democracy might mean social relations. He also never clearly presents why worker-owners and democratic, non-hierarchic workplaces are anti-capitalist. Maybe the was worried about people calling him an anarchist, communist or socialist?

In the end, the documentary illustrates why capitalism is bad, particularly the means by which the ruling class is able to mobilize the government against the majority of the country. This should come as no surprise to anyone though. The parts about dead peasant insurance and Citigroups's plutonomy documents are definitely angering. Of course, that's the goal: to get an emotional response from the audience. However, the lack of thoughtful analysis of capitalist social relations, development of crucial concepts, and a clear alternatives to capitalist social relations left me disappointed. I wasn't even expecting alternatives I agreed with, but just saying "let's have democracy" isn't enough.

Having said all of that, it is worth seeing. If anything the film should cause viewers to have an actual conversation about capitalism and its consequences. Of course, I saw this by myself so I really didn't hit the conversation part. Then again, most people who might see this movie are probably sympathetic with Moore's cause, so I'm not sure how much useful discussion might result anyway. Who knows. I'm a pessimist like that. I also have little hope for reformist policies that circulate through our political system (e.g., healthcare reform). Here we have a chance to literally break capitalist control of healthcare. Instead we'll likely receive a few regulation changes and a new legal obligation to purchase for-profit insurance. So much for change.

Anyway, go see it. Even if you don't like his politics, there's enough in there to at least make you think about what capitalism means for most of us.