A New New Deal

 It's another 4:30 wake-up for me. Still not working but trying not to go completely to seed. I got out and walked for a good two hours yesterday after watching my hockey and curling. It was a spectacular day for my sporting clubs, so I thought it'd be fitting to go out and do something, ANYTHING I could that even resembles sport in Covid Korea. Walking. That's about it right now. After getting home with some fresh veggies I made a salad. Then got an email from the job I'm hoping for, so it was a great day! I guess that's why I am up so early today. Two great days in a row is too much to hope for. But count my blessings. I'm not working so I can take a nap if I want. And I most likely will.

Waking up at 4:30 is good for one thing, however. For some reason I do some of my best thinking, and blogging, at that hour. It's often the thinking that keeps me from getting back to sleep and inspires me to drag my arse out of the warm bed and to the computer. Today it was my opinion of the current signs of the times that make me feel like we are in the midst of what I would call a second depression. Maybe a not-so-great depression or a Covid depression. I say this not only because of the struggles of some businesses and most people, but also because of the prevailing feelings and emotions that job/business losses, prolonged social distancing and being deprived of normal activities can lead to. In other words, it's not just the economy that's depressed, but a lot of people are too. 

Now I'm speaking of regular business and small business, which we are constantly told, is the backbone of our economy, not the big boys. They're thriving in the Covid depression because their competition is disappearing drawing them ever-nearer to the monopolies they all crave to be. 

If you continue the video from whence the above clip is derived, you'll see some scary examples of huge businesses getting bigger through consolidation, which is a euphemism for sucking up the competition. The pandemic has only accelerated this phenomenon. From 10 large airlines in 2000 to 4 today. Rental cars - three companies. Beer - 70% controlled by two companies. And you can check this all by searching on the one and only search engine that anyone really uses: Bing. Bing, the best way to Google something. I love that joke. lol

Kroger is one of the best examples of the cold-hearted capitalism that has defined the huge corporations in these times of crisis. They would rather close stores down in Seattle and California than give 2-5 dollar an hour hazard pay to their workers. They know that their workers don't have huge nest eggs they have saved for rainy days. So treat them like the livestock they are. 

Maybe never before have the consumers and workers who have made EVERY rich person rich, been shown so clearly the inhumanity with which those rich people regard us. Nor have their political representatives been clearer in their support for their inhumanity. 

This seems biased. The Rupublican'ts don't care a lick about the people that they claim to be about helping: the common man, which is who the Covid relief bill is going to help. Yet tax relief for the rich is as popular as ever because of this myth that has nourished the GOP lo, so many years, this statement of faith backed by not one drop, let alone a trickle of evidence that equates to the party's version of speaking in tongues. Words like Reaganomics, horse and sparrow theory, trickle down economics, the "free market," "supply-side economics" spring from idealistic memory and faith in their sources rather than contemplation and healthy skepticism, and travel directly to party phraseology with virtually no interlocutor. And if you try to introduce the facts, as the guy pictured above, Robert Reich, has repeatedly tried to do through pictures, videos, books, speeches and political advice, you will realize how deep and unassailable the faith really is. No matter how thorough or modern the study, it will be doubted.

But to remain as un-biased as I can, and so as NOT to blindly trust the source of info like the last two links I have provided for you and believe without questioning, the very thing I have criticized about the Republicans, what are the Democrats and their supporters up to? Before I get to that, it would seem if one does one's historical, economical, ethical and egalitarian studies, times were best right after the war. As the Pink Floyd song asks, "What happened to the post-war dream?" 

In that song, the question, "Oh Maggie, Maggie what did we do?" is posed, but it could be "Oh Ronnie," if sung by an American, and maybe "Oh Brian," for us Canadians. 

The 50's and 60's were largely liberal and largely prosperous for all three nations. We partied for two decades and if you measure on almost any scale, these were the best of times for all three countries. Then the 70's brought "stagflation" and we started wondering if we should be partying so much. And that was the opening these three needed to ooze through. Deregulation, privatization, tax reduction for the rich/tax hikes for others, reign in spending... you get the idea. 

Maude Barlow, a prominent opponent of Mr. Mulroney's free-trade agenda and the conservative revolution personified by Mr. Reagan, said the benefits of those policies were not worth the price paid by the poor, the middle class and the environment.

"It was the triumvirate of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Brian Mulroney that brought the neo-liberal agenda to the industrialized world," Ms. Barlow said.

"Yes, it created wealth for some companies and some individuals, but the legacy has been the creation of a permanent underclass, a greater gap between rich and poor, an assault on social security and an undermining of public health care that continues to this day."

You can read about it in the following article. 

So while conservatives since the 80's have generally taken the above triumvirate's politics and skewed further right (and I DON'T mean "correct") with them, the liberal agenda has been moving to the left at about the same rate. Aside from the gap between rich and poor mentioned above, this has created the widest gap ever between political parties. To the point, illustrated best by the U.S., that there is no agreement between parties even on issues where there is philosophical equality. The Covid relief packages are a good example. I don't believe all Republicans are Krogeresque in their thinking. I know they want to help people who are suffering due to the pandemic. Well, maybe not all, but you can't tell me the whole party voted their conscience against Covid relief. They just voted against the other party.

This article points out how the Democrats are more "progressive" than ever. They're also becoming more popular than ever. This trend has come about in the last 30 years. During that time some politicians tried to foster some compromise between parties by appointing members from opposing parties to political positions, but the compromise has disappeared with the middle class. Economic, and emotional conditions are approaching the desperation of the 1930's and, hopefully without a world war, similar steps to bail our countries out of this dizzying tailspin need to be taken. We're starting to see signs of that. At least in the U.S. But Canada will hopefully follow their lead.  

Opening borders, taxing the rich and reparation payments to descendants of slaves are three examples of policies that are being suggested by the left trending liberals. They mention Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but I'd include AOC and maybe Kamala Harris as well. Very popular ideas like a 15 dollar minimum wage, universal health care, restoration of environmental protection, racial equality, (which was NOT part of the New Deal as you can read in the article below) job creation through government infrastructure projects and a national switch away from fossil fuels to cleaner energy in the Green New Deal... HEY! Have you heard the words, "New Deal" before? That's how FDR helped bail the US out of the Great Depression. He didn't save America single handedly. In fact I've read he didn't even really WANT to do the things he did. He was basically forced to do it by the people who were threatening an all-out general strike. 

Ever heard of the Winnipeg General Strike? Of course you haven't! Most Canadians haven't. The Little Guy only has power for short periods of time followed by much longer periods of powerlessness. So the media, most of which are controlled by the BIG Guy, makes it so battles won by the vanquished are harder to hear about. They don't want us to know how much power we have. 

Do you recall back to the beginning of the Covid layoffs and the first government relief packages, the cries of the conservatives and big business that their workers will become lazy and never want to work again? This is their greatest fear! As I've said before, we, the workers, have the employers by the balls, (remember the elephant tied to a tiny spike in the ground?) we just need to get pissed off enough to exercise our power and they're fucked! Well, we also need an economic situation, an EXTREME economic situation, in which money doesn't have total control over government, which allows radical change that actually HELPS the working classes to be implemented. They had both during the Great Depression, and we have both today. This article explains it more thoroughly, but this, I think, is what I just said: "There are special circumstances, however, when capital’s leverage over government is weakened. One of them is during deep economic crises: The threat of disinvestment by big business is no longer an effective weapon—there is already very low investment. It is in these situations when, according to Block, government officials have more leeway to effect extraordinary transformations of social policies in favor of the working class, assuming these officials are under the unbearable pressure of mass mobilizations and unruly unions. Such a concession becomes a major win for the working class. At the same time, the outcome has the effect of legitimizing the state in the eyes of the working masses, granting rights to a new section of workers and incorporating them into the state through institutional channels, effectively containing what used to be a rebellious movement."

I am on the side of Block in the above debate, but regardless of why FDR did what he did, the situation is similar today, in my opinion, and policies that help the working class are finally going to be passed again! I don't know that Biden really wanted to do much of what we have already seen happening, or wants to do what likely will continue during his term as president, I think he knows he HAS to. And, as I have blogged of, and as the previous quote states, the legitimization of politics is also at stake. The situation with Covid social distancing, job loss, economic upheaval, etc. is ripe for revolution. I think I'd prefer the revolution, but short of that, I think the new New Deal wave that has started, might be fun to ride for a while. Politicians are singing for their suppers, trying to keep their careers and the bogus, antiquated, crooked system that creates them. It's unfortunate that it takes disastrous consequences like stock market crashes and global pandemics for us to see politicians doing what they are supposed to do, but it's just further evidence of the futility of our political systems. Having said that, I think we are in for one of those short periods during which some good stuff happens for the REAL people of our countries. I hope it lasts for longer than I think it will... however,

"...even if AOC and Sanders (and now many other Democrats) push hard for these proposals, none of them will be delivered unless there is sweeping labor unrest and a credible threat to the system itself. Socialists and revolutionaries will play the lead role. The increasing number of strikes seems to be pointing to a new wave of labor unrest. The many decades of capitalist offensive with little or no response from organized labor have reduced workers’ rights to bare bones. Deprived of a public health care option and lacking childcare or paid sick leave, American workers are subordinated to market forces to the extreme: Imagine a cliff and a multitude being pushed by a behemoth, which is capital. It is no wonder that workers are standing up now. The level of contradictions in U.S. society has reached such a high level that the explosion this time will be big. Socialists of all stripes will play a leading role in it, and the political decisions we make today will shape our prospects for years to come.

The lessons from the New Deal are that environmental activists pushing for a Green New Deal and, in particular, labor organizers fighting for some sort of new workers’ bill of rights can’t rely on smart politicians. Only an independent workers’ mass movement will be able to force these kinds of concessions from the ruling class. The owners of capital won’t sacrifice a cent of their profits until they face the economic disruption that mass workers’ collective action can cause, and until they are legitimately scared of the threat of a working class that rises and reclaims what is theirs: the goods, the riches, the world."

The Heavy-Handed Right

 Although I have written an unposted blog entry, I haven't shared in a while. I've been trying to nail down gainful employment, a rather passive endeavor with so little of the good kind being available, and trying my best to enjoy my Covid-limited time off work by spending some of that time with friends. Well, the deadline was March 2 and, as yet, I have no gainful employment. So it's now time to change tack and more actively pursue online teaching as opposed to jobs at physical institutes I have been predominantly concentrating my job hunt on. The visa/payment situation may present some difficulties and the salary will undoubtedly be lower, but I'll likely get some results within a couple weeks to a month. Teaching online, even part time, for 6 months or so won't get me any closer to my financial goals, let alone retirement, but it will get me through the Covid period and hopefully come September, I'll be able to get a job at a school again and with any luck get back to teaching in person.

Before that, however, the world needs to deal with some of its major issues, not the least of which will be our major topic today, and what I am convinced has been the primary contributor to my current occupational futility, the Covid crisis. Well, to be more accurate, the major example will be related to the Covid crisis, but today's topic is something I've been noticing amongst people I like. I often in this blog have bashed, slagged, badmouthed, panned, rebuked, upbraided and criticized people I don't like, one in particular, but this time I'm going to criticize some people I'm going to call the heavy-handed right. I like the heavy-handed right because they are right. Not in the sense that their political leanings are to the right, rather in the sense that I have little doubt that they are right, correct, in their beliefs/statements/sentiments/campaigns. That being said, it is their heavy-handedness that I believe has come with increased support for their beliefs/statements/sentiments/campaigns, that I would like to bash, slag, badmouth, pan, rebuke, upbraid and/or criticize at this time. Not severely, cuz I'm on their side, but gently with a precautionary tale from history.

To use a bit of an off topic example of what I'm talking about, I saw a post from Robert Reich, a guy I greatly admire and respect, that said, well, here's what it said: 

This is something I've posted/warned about that I absolutely knew would be one of the bad things to come out of the recent election. I knew it was going to be used to try to legitimize a broken system. Reich, being a former politician, would never say this, so I will: there hasn't been a legitimate election in the US in his lifetime or mine. There is an endless supply of facts to support that suggestion, many of which you can find in the pages of his own books. I have sprinkled not a few of those facts within the pages of my blog as well. There are many who have availed themselves of these facts and do not trust the vote, politicians or the political system. I am among them. 

But he's right. There are Republicans who, whether they know any of the facts that bring the legitimacy of US politics or their latest election into serious question or not, are continuing a ludicrous, and already violent, campaign to get their Dorito Dicktator into power against what the wishes of the country might have been shown to be if they had been legitimately measured. We can't know for certain unless we trust the notoriously illegitimate election system, but most likely, these people are just douchebags refusing to admit the majority of their country is happy to wave bye-bye to Trump. So he's probably right. I think he is. But that is not what I question. I question the heavy handedness. What's to be done with these people? Remove them from office for supporting the despotic leader of their party, a guy notorious for firing people, particularly people who don't show loyalty? Your cause is gaining power, Bob, this is a good thing. But let's not get blinded by power and start punishing the opposition. This is not the way to win hearts and minds.

What about the people who may not even be Republicans, the MANY people who don't trust the fucked up American system of government? From gerrymandering to supercandidates to corporate interference to the electoral college to the brother of one candidate being the governor of the deciding state in the election and hugely influencing the attempted "recount" of votes there... there is very good reason to wonder why else something that should be so simple, one vote for one person, would be purposely skewed and discombobulated if it WEREN'T to fix the elections. Will it help to get rid of certain members of the US government ostensibly for doubting the outcome of an election we can all safely suspect to have been the usual bag of political tricks, sleight of hand and deception? This would be an awfully harsh precedent to set. It might even result in the opposite of what it is trying to accomplish.

Again, I believe the majority of Americans want Biden/Harris over Trump/Pence. In this way, Reich is right. I also have a demonstrable distaste for the crazies Reich is talking about. But sweeping statements like these are grouping clear-headed folks with the crazies. There are plenty of American citizens who have no more faith in this election than the ones before, some of which we all KNOW were illegitimate including the one that got Trump into office. There's a reason his statements of election rigging were so easily accepted. And shame on America for that! 

Some election doubters are Republican. Some would refuse to admit the legitimacy of the recent election. But they aren't supporting any "stop the steal" nonsense. Are they too helping to incite violence? Will they be punished too? This is the trend I'd like to point out in a tone of extreme caution today. 

Here's an interesting article. It's not long. Read it if you haven't exhausted your four free WSJ articles for the week. Or read this one if you don't want to sign up for the Wall Street Journal. Both articles talk about privileges and freedoms that are being granted to people who can prove they've received their Covid shots, and NOT being granted to people who haven't. When you get past how seemingly unfair this is to those at lower risk or who are just not vaccinated due to the greater needs of other people, you will come to those who are voluntarily avoiding the vaccinations. Many would call them "Anti-vaxxers," a term I have described as ignorantly dismissive a few times on this blog already and I will illustrate again in this post. 

At this time, I would say that the people getting the vaccinations against Covid 19 are right. They are doing what will most help the world... most likely. Their ethics and intelligence are what I currently side with. Those refusing are in the wrong. But are they wrong for not trusting this new, VERY new vaccine? Absolutely not. All vaccines have setbacks. And to dismiss them as ignorant without the facts could show your OWN ignorance. I'm not saying all vaccine refusers even know the facts, nor do all people who take them. What I would like to do is give you some facts here so that the people who believe God will protect them from Corona and Trump said we'll have herd immunity soon so it's gonna happen, don't get grouped with the people who conscientiously object to inoculation on the grounds of legitimate concerns about vaccine safety and ethics related to their creation, production and distribution.  

In order to achieve this, let's look at the history of the yellow fever vaccine. It's a vaccine that's been around for over 80 years, it's safe and almost everyone gets it once and is yellow fever-free for life. This is a vaccine "anti-vaxxers" might even get. But its history comes to bear on our current Covid 19 situation.

Like the examples in the articles above, certain privileges are given to people who can prove they've received their yellow fever shots, and not granted to those who cannot. Entry into some countries is an example though I don't know if it's a privilege to go to a country with yellow fever-sporting mosquitoes buzzing around. The vaccine is recommended for travel to high risk areas like parts of Africa and South America. About 15% of non-vaccinated people contract the virus and severe yellow fever develops. About half of people with severe yellow fever die within 7-10 days. So this is no joke. Frigging mosquitoes!

The name "Yellow Fever" comes from jaundice, a yellowing of the skin, which is one of the symptoms associated with yellow fever. It has noting to do with liking Asian girls. That's just terrible! And only a naughty blogger would even mention that. Let's move on. 

In 1951 Max Theiler won a Nobel Prize for making the yellow fever vaccine better, but it had been in use since 1938. At the close of the 1800's yellow fever was sometimes known as Yellow Jack because of yellow flags that contaminated ships in quarantine flew. It was a huge disruption to trade in this way. For this reason, a yellow fever vaccine would be valuable so there were a lot of investigators claiming to have found the bacteria responsible for yellow fever and the first "vaccines" were produced. Dr. George Sternberg, an investigator appointed by President Grover Cleveland to investigate the investigators, determined that the early "vaccines" were ill conceived and ineffective. So at the beginning of the 20th century there was no progress being made. Only fake vaccines being made by people who wanted the notoriety and money that would undoubtedly come from the discovery of a yellow fever vaccine. This, you will find with research, has been a problem with many vaccines. It happens in the early stages of a vaccine's history, which we are currently in with the Covid 19 vaccine. Not saying these vaccines are fake, just that it wouldn't be as surprising as you might think.

Fortunately for the world, at the beginning of the 20th century there were billionaires like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller who were trying to help the world with their money even though they had no obligation to do so! The Rockefeller Institute chose to make yellow fever a project of theirs. In 1918 a medical team was dispatched to Ecuador to research yellow fever there. The team included a young doctor named Hideyo Noguchi who had risen from extreme poverty in Japan to get a medical degree. 

Noguchi, the mustachioed guy in the middle, had done successful work with syphilis and venomous snakes, but he would represent another setback for the research on yellow fever, and in the end actually died from it. He was an interesting character being nominated for several Nobel Prizes, but never winning one due to criticism of his work as inaccurate and even a scandal over inoculating children with syphilis. His theory on yellow fever was that it was a bacteria, not a virus and he became increasingly secretive working mostly at night by himself, and in the end paranoid and sloppy with his research. He never doubted his theory even after it was proved wrong. He produced a yellow fever "vaccine" that went into extensive use in the US, Latin America and French African Colonies. He published "successful" results in 7,964 vaccinations, but his results couldn't be replicated. By 1926 distribution of his "vaccine" was quietly discontinued by the Rockefeller Foundation. Maverick doctors, another possible problem with vaccines.  

An early vaccine was produced after the virus was isolated and used for its production and WWII created a massive need for that vaccine. It still needed tweaking, but epidemics of yellow fever in North African war zones led to virtually all US troops receiving the vax from Jan. 1941-April 1942. 7 million doses were distributed at no charge by the Rockefeller Foundation. 

Unfortunately, 60-150 days after vaccination, 26,771 cases of jaundice were reported by US personnel and many more were unreported. Three of every 1000 of the soldiers who reported died. Most press kept this quiet due to wartime secrecy, but the Chicago Tribune noted that 20X as many soldiers had fallen victim to the vaccine than had been wounded in the war to that point. Not to mention the, whoops, hepatitis that came with it.

Then in 1962, avian leukosis virus was detected in the vaccine. Thousands or millions of people had been inoculated with potentially oncogenic viruses. Potentially disastrous, but luckily, 10 years later this issue was laid to rest with no evidence of excess cancer found in the vaccines. 

There have been other issues since including rising incidence of severe viscerotropic (internal organs) disease after vax mostly in the elderly and the introduction of other viruses such as dengue fever and Japanese B encephalitis using the yellow fever vax as a vehicle. So even LONG after its general use, there are problems. 

However, the benefits outweigh the risks. If a person were afraid to get the yellow fever vaccine for the reasons above, I'd understand, but it would be unreasonable given the long term safety and effectiveness the vaccine has shown. After 1962 that is...

But if a person were to refuse the Covid 19 vaccine, which is yet in its infancy and doesn't have such a safety and success record, I wouldn't be too harsh on them. Don't buy a video game until the glitches are worked out. Don't get hair replacement surgery until it stops looking like a corn field on your head. And don't get the vaccine until you are sure the bugs are worked out. Those bugs could actually be life-threatening. But you can be sure in the months and possibly years ahead, people who are thinking logically like this will be grouped in with morons who think they are being shot full of microbots that will record their every move and transmit the details of their private lives to George Soros' computer... or some such craziness. 

And let's not forget that there is no Rockefeller Institute footing the bill for these vaccines. Pfizer and other businesses are. So they are going to want to make a profit. There have been stories about these companies reigning in their greed and keeping prices reasonable, but I doubt that will happen. I doubt even more that a last-minute discovery of a possible danger in the vaccine would hold up the continued distribution. Just watch The Fugitive for another legitimate reason to be wary here.

I'm going to repeat, I am on the side of the people who are getting the vaccine and those who are endorsing the decision. But I hope, given the very good reasons why a person might refuse it, people will not be too harshly penalized for refusing the Covid 19 vaccine. I know those people could transmit the virus and endanger others. I know they could prolong the social distancing and mask-wearing and I will quietly hate them for that, but I can't heavy-handedly say they HAVE to get it or else. I don't think that is the right course of action and doing so just might accomplish the opposite of what is intended. I think the probable outcome of forcing every person in the world to get the Covid 19 vaccine would end the pandemic. This is why I think vaccine supporters are in the right. However, doing so would almost certainly create larger problems by strengthening the resolve of already militant believers in freedom limitations. Also... what if there are some as yet unknown but possibly disastrous side-effects of the vaccine? 

This will be interesting to follow...

Here's a cartoon from the 1920's. It's a bit heavy-handed, don't you think?