It is an astounding thing to me as I sit here in this period of history and realise that people in the United States are going to sit passively by and let us all be impoverished. Yet I ask myself what really is one to do? Some commentators think we the people should be hammering down doors demanding our money back from the banksters who held the government hostage. Take one as respectable as Alice Schroeder of Bloomberg's Financial Service, quoted in Mandelman's Monthly Museletter:
The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank.
Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein also reversed himself after having previously called Goldman’s greed “God’s work” and apologized earlier this month for having participated in things that were “clearly wrong.” Imagine what emotions must be billowing through the halls of Goldman Sachs to provoke the firm into an apology.
No, talk of Goldman and guns plays right into the way Wall- Streeters like to think of themselves. Even those who were bailed out believe they are tough, macho Clint Eastwoods of the financial frontier, protecting the fistful of dollars in one hand with the Glock in the other. The last thing they want is to be so reasonably paid that the peasants have no interest in lynching them.
And if the proles really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms. If nothing else, that pistol permit might go part way toward explaining why they won’t be standing outside with the rest of the crowd, broke and humiliated, saying, “Damn, I was on the wrong side of a trade with Goldman again.”
Henry Paulson, U.S. Treasury secretary during the bailout and a former Goldman Sachs CEO, let it slip during testimony to Congress last summer when he explained why it was so critical to bail out Goldman Sachs, and — oh yes — the other banks. People “were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system.”
The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm’s revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses.
Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein also reversed himself after having previously called Goldman’s greed “God’s work” and apologized earlier this month for having participated in things that were “clearly wrong.” Imagine what emotions must be billowing through the halls of Goldman Sachs to provoke the firm into an apology.
No, talk of Goldman and guns plays right into the way Wall- Streeters like to think of themselves. Even those who were bailed out believe they are tough, macho Clint Eastwoods of the financial frontier, protecting the fistful of dollars in one hand with the Glock in the other. The last thing they want is to be so reasonably paid that the peasants have no interest in lynching them.
And if the proles really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms. If nothing else, that pistol permit might go part way toward explaining why they won’t be standing outside with the rest of the crowd, broke and humiliated, saying, “Damn, I was on the wrong side of a trade with Goldman again.”
Henry Paulson, U.S. Treasury secretary during the bailout and a former Goldman Sachs CEO, let it slip during testimony to Congress last summer when he explained why it was so critical to bail out Goldman Sachs, and — oh yes — the other banks. People “were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system.”
The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm’s revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses.
And yet I ask myself, how exactly does one go about fomenting a revolution on the streets? Call me bourgeois but I have no idea exactly how to do that...Should i mount the Bonneville and ride to Wall Street and wave a red flag demanding the return of our cash and power to the people? Who exactly do these banksters think is going to come after them and engage in a running street battle with them? Is New York in 2010 about ready to resemble St Petersburg in 1917?
It is a curious thing to me how Americans have taken their lumps and failed to stand up and be the least bit annoyed in public with modern leadership. We find ourselves deprived of representative government by the interference of big business, we live daily with policies designed to loot our treasury and deprive us of jobs, health care and homes. we have no sense of security, no sense of our established place in the order of things, and yet we sit passively by and allow our country to be looted. How odd it is. I wonder what people alive today will tell future generations when they ask why our generation failed to act? In the 1960s we Baby Boomers acted in unison in opposition to the direct threat of the draft and war in Vietnam, but today we sit idly by and watch that heritage get looted without so much as a hiss of anger. I feel like I have an inkling of how ordinary people in Germany in the 1930s found themselves allowing the Nazis to take over their country. I guess it just kind of happened...you know? (Silent embarrassment ensues).
8 comments:
I am so solidly with you on several fronts.
My boss and I were talking of the same thing. It is almost time for an armed takeover.
One answer we can up with, short of the above, is to get more involved in grass roots movements. My goal would be to somehow shake people awake and get them off their apathy. Two or three individuals will never make change happen. You know what would happen to us acting alone. You're a police dispatcher, after all.
Like you, I wonder how a government for the people and by the people turned into a dictatorship.
Dear Sir:
Talk of armed take-overs do nothing but expend rthe credibility of any movement before it can generate crucial momentum. In the case of Goldman Sachs, it is better for anyone looking to end their wholesale purchase of the government that they admit to arming themselves.
The reason why American's bend over and take it in the ass from Goldman Sachs and the elected officials (whores) they employ is because the average American is stupid. Really stupid.
The average really stupid American can tell you all about what was on The Biggest Loser, American Idol, or Dancing With The Fucking Stars, but they can't tell you what the amendments to the Constitions are, the difference between federal and state's rights, nor what their own rights are. Half of the average Americans I meet can barely read, have never read a classic, and have neve read a piece of legislation, nor understand how legislation is written.
They deserve to get fucked.
But the problem is that we are going to need these jerks to smarten up (not likely) and vote appropriately (even less likely). And the first step in doing this is to identify the real enemies of this country (special interests) and identify the elected whore (nearly all of them) that do their bidding.
Elected officials have learned one thing: give the jerks their stupid little distractions, and you can shove whatever you like up their asses.
Have a nice day...
Jack • reep • Toad
Twisted Roads
Well, if we could at least be a smarter at the voting booth... I mean even in local elections we're just so damn dumb! (What were the voters in Colorado Springs thinking???-- not thinking would be more accurate!)
In our house we talk about "the Revolution" that is sure to come (if people suffer enough). Key West has that little bit of history with that-- were you there during "The Secession"? I keep dreaming of moving down there and forming a little rebellion... of course with tourism the only industry, it could be a tough go pretty quickly. :)
I agree with Jack but probably wouldn't have put it in those words. It's hard to follow the "majority rules" philosophy when the majority is SO ignorant. The "majority" put us in this fix by electing GW twice! Have you seen the posters with a picture of GW saying "Miss me yet?" Just when you think he's gone for good he rears his ugly head!
Dear Komet:
I was one of the dedicated Republicans, that was so appalled by the performance of George Bush and the GOP, that I led the charge for Obama. I would have been better off voting for the shit my dog took this morning.
And so would you.
Obama has taken the Republican play book and rewritten it on a scale that defies human comprehension. Not one damn thing accomplished in his first year in office (with a super-majority in the House and Senate behind him), nine campaign promises broken, and not one damn thing on an agenda to indicate he has anything but contempt for the American people.
And anyone who is still blaming George Bush for Obama's first year of ineptitude with a super majority behind him should add their name to the growing list of dopes.
I have concluded that anyone still seeking to maintain a party affiliation — considering the performance of the new Democratic whores and the silence of the Republican turkey vultures — is probably as dumb as dog shit too.
When Obama raised his right hand, and took the oath as President, he effectively cast out the demons of George W. Bush. But Obama's hand wasn't on the bible. It was on Pandora's box, handed to him by Goldman Sachs, the fourth branch of the federal government.
I call it and write like I see it.
Fondest regards,
Jack • reep • Toad
Twisted Roads
Jack:
No matter what, it's all politics and whoever gets to Washington will be changed by it. They start out as hopeful (but I suppose egotistical too) and they are all hammered flat and helpless by the system. Bush got us in so deep it would be impossible for Obama to dig us out in one term and he'll probably only have one term but in our system we have to have a president and better he than the alternatives. Many liberals (like me) are disappointed in him but really, I don't know how much anyone could accomplish - we have such a mess and it's getting messier.
2/3 of us dumbasses can't even be bothered to vote in the non-presidential elections... We ought to be able to change this without pitchforks and guns, but with votes. Maybe we need pitchforks to get the 60+% of folks to vote... I wonder what they'd vote for-- perhaps change (ugh)...
Also, I don't really buy into the idea that previously the Goldman Sachs crowd was some form of unarmed pacifist group, that have recently begun arming themselves... maybe it was metaphorical description... I'm not good with metaphorical writing.
Dear Komet:
In my humble opinion, all Obama had to do to be immortalized forever was to stick to his most basic campaign promises, which woul;d have cost the American public next to nothing. He said he was going to change Washington. He said it would be different.
He said it would really be transparant.
And he lied. You know how you can tell when Obama is lying, he's usng a telepromter.
Fondest regards,
Jack • reep • Toad
Twisted Roads
Post a Comment