Video Weekend 01-20-2018 (5 Videos & Commentaries)

… in 4 categories:

  1. The Money Monsters (hedge fund politics and more)
  2. Russia, Russia, Russia! (instilling some reality)
  3. Celebrity Politics (lets take off the blinders)
  4. Moving Forward (good strategy wins)


I. The Money Monsters

Money “Making” Money (in reality siphoning it away from those who earn it). The super-rich taking from the rich and turning our government into their puppet. A little explanation of index funds and the hedge fund scam, plus an additional little insight into the current tax “reform” gift to the rich:

(Note: if the video linked above gets deleted, you may search the Internet for the title: “Warren Buffett Wins $1 Million Bet That Hedge Funds Are a Rip-Off “)


How the Predatory Capitalists Crashed the World Economy. What’s sadly funny is that the makers of this documentary in 2011 still thought the mortgage banksters and Wall Street predators who with their self-enriching criminal gambles crashed the world economy and robbed millions of working people of their homes, jobs, and careers – in other words their chance at a tolerable life – were about to be held accountable:

(Note: if the video linked above gets deleted, you may search the Internet for the title: “The men who crashed the world“)


II. Russia, Russia, Russia!

Some real info about Russia:

(Note: if the video linked above gets deleted, you may search the Internet for the title: “American Journalist In Russia Tells Truth About RT“)

Note: 21:22 min in, a great point is made. Namely, if the Russian political elite had really wanted to boost Trump’s candidacy in 2016, all they would have had to do is publicize what they know about the Clinton’s uranium deal with them. No need for them to hack into the DNC’s emails to commit the oh so horrible “election hacking” of revealing important truths to the public. That was clearly done by others. Plus, the Russian political elite doesn’t care who’s in office in the U.S. because it won’t make a difference since ALL U.S. governments, R or D, have been hostile to them.


III. Celebrity Politics

For most people, politics has always been about particular personalities in politics. Not for me. I prefer to look at the big picture, find the faults, and design strategies to fix them. However, sometimes it is useful to review what the corporate politicians do to us and remove their false halos:

(Note: if the video linked above gets deleted, you may search the Internet for the title: “Obama Chose Wall St. Over Main St. – Thomas Frank on RAI (8/9) “)

Thomas Frank is someone with whom I don’t agree under the bottom line. He stays faithful to the treacherous “Democratic” Party, and he even endorsed Hillary if I recall correctly, an attitude which in my opinion misses the point that we will only go further down the drain if ALL the main parties (currently two) keep betraying the people, our country, and world to the robber billionaires because they can keep doing so as long as we keep playing into their hands.

It’s not some kind of impractical “purity” stance by me, when I insist we must create a new major party (or coalition of parties) to represent us. Rather, it’s an external pressure strategy combined with a fallback strategy. And it is also the simple reality on the ground, meaning it’s happenng and won’t just go away.

This strategy is not really in conflict with attempts to take over this duopoly party by flooding the base, either. In my opinion, it is a mistake to learn nothing from the past and continue to let any of the current two major parties get away with endless corruption and treason just because of many long years of habitual allegiance and unjustified trust in them. The time for such naiveté is over!

We are too close to the cliff now, to let corrupted politicians push us ever closer to it or – as has become ever more common in this century – sell us out at a rate that can only be described as a frantic fire-sale. We can’t expect different results by doing the same thing. We can’t expect the crooks in politics to go away if we give a pass to those crooks who rule a party we think we can take over. Taking over a party must include outing the crooks in it. And historically, it has always required massive pressure from outside the party, as well. Study up on what pressured FDR into going for the New Deal. Established political parties don’t change when the crooks running them feel assured that voters have nowhere else to go. Hillary and her machine were a blatant example of that attitude, as are Tom Perez and the lingering corporatist elite in the “Democratic” Party. They want their corporate money and figure we are helpless. Let’s prove them wrong!


IV. Moving Forward

Thoughts about breaking the corrupt party duopoly:

(Note: if the video linked above gets deleted, you may search the Internet for the title: “People’s Party Founder Nick Brana, Live! Paradise Or Oblivion!?”)

Great points:

  1. 57:15 min: “What’s the U.S. mission statement? ”
  2. 1:43:38: “People get so normalized into the way the world is that they have a hard time seeing what it could be. In a weird way, they believe that society is organized in a natural way. They believe that the way we are organized is the natural way to organize. … No, these were policy choices that people made to advantage themselves while disadvantaging others. And all these policy choices can be changed. ”

Election Integrity:

I really do wonder why so many Americans seem to be so sold on electronic voting or electronic vote counts, and that in the face of massive election fraud in our country, a good deal of which made possible because of our electronic voting and vote counting. In other countries, much greater election integrity exists because they count votes by hand at the polling stations in the public and with opposing party members double-checking (recounting) each others’ counts. Simple and solid. The only chance of tampering exists up-chain in the count reporting. As long as that is handled in a transparent way, there can be no tampering with the cast votes.

So, why does Nick Brana seem to like block chain voting which is toted as a means of more tamper-proof electronic voting? Maybe because the American public isn’t yet ready to ban electronic voting and vote counting like, for example, Europe has done? Maybe he is looking forward to greater citizen participation in decision making by letting us all vote on issues rather than leaving them to corruptible delegates? The latter is something I toy with. I just don’t yet know if it can be done in ways that (A) eliminate tampering and (B) maintain voter anonymity. It’s another thing to research in the future. One question in my mind: can block chain voting really be transparent?


Ending Note: It takes me at least 100 hours a month to research and write for this site and work on my book. If you find any value in what I do, please consider becoming a patron and supporting this site with an automatic monthly donation of $1 or more. If you can’t afford this, then don’t, but please share my posts, tell folks about my online course offering, refer others to this site, refer me to paying outlets or companionable fellow blogs, partake in discussion, or contribute essays of your own. Or help my book get out there when it’s finished. Thanks. Only together can we change this world. 🙂

5 thoughts on “Video Weekend 01-20-2018 (5 Videos & Commentaries)

  1. Every time I see someone post a “I sure miss Obama” meme online I’m going to show them that video. And what’s wrong with going back to paper ballots? I know it’s not fool-proof but it at least gives a physical record of your vote and ti’s a bit trickier for them to mess with it.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Hi Dirk, I’m glad you enjoyed the video and American Mission Statement idea. In the short term, I agree that we should use paper balloting by the simple, proven methods that you talk about. Meanwhile technologies like blockchain enable more direct and decentralized forms of democracy that we should implement once they are secure, reliable and scalable to a national voting infrastructure.

    Representative democracy as a form of self-government creates corruptible vulnerabilities when it turns decision-making over from the public to a few hundred people in Washington and each state capitol. It allows government to be controlled by bribing those representatives, rather than bribing the public with policies that benefit them. It’s a design flaw that comes with limiting the number of decision-makers in a society. The fewer decision-makers (centralized), the easier the system is to control by those who have the means to bribe the representatives. The more decision-makers you have in a society (decentralized), the harder it is to bribe them all and the more their decisions reflect the interests of the society as a whole. When the number of decision-makers reaches the number of adults in the society, bribing them means bribing the public with the policies that best suit their needs. That’s how democracy should work.

    The public doesn’t have time to make every decision, but we can easily increase the granularity of the decisions they make, allowing them to decide broad policy strokes. For instance, the public could choose between different health care systems and different college accessibility systems with national referendums. Then politicians administer the decisions within the confines of the public’s choice (like single payer). There’s still room for corruption, but it’s been greatly reduced. Especially since the first policy the public would adopt is a ban on big money in politics.

    If blockchain voting could be perfected, we could vote between policies on our computers or phones. We could also vote more regularly than once every two years, once a month for example. Each policy alternative could be debated prior to the voting period, based on how consistent it is with our national mission statement of sustainably maximizing well being. The relevant data could be summarized on the voting website when you go to cast or research your vote. Public interest groups like the EFF could give their endorsement in the run up and could be displayed in an endorsements tab alongside each policy alternative, with statements explaining their endorsement, helping people identify which policies align with their beliefs. A grassroots fundraising model could be a criteria for inclusion among displayed public interest organizations. The public becomes the decision-makers and politicians become glorified administrators. We can progressively work our way down the granularity of decision made by the public this way.

    The nature of decision-making also changes once you’ve established a mission statement/purpose for our country. With a purpose of sustainably maximizing human well being, policy alternatives would be assessed on their scientific merits, using data from domestic and international social programs that allow us to more objectively determine which policies achieve our mission statement. Science replaces ideology as a decision-making method in government.

    Like health insurance companies that position themselves between you and access to health care, representatives are corruptible middlemen who have inserted themselves into the process of decision-making. They add a degree of separation between the public and policy decisions, creating an intermediary that elites exploit to misalign policy from public opinion and well being.

    For thousands of years the general trend in human civilization has been towards greater decentralization of political power and we shouldn’t stop at representative democracy. Just like the internet has decentralized the systems of information, it can also decentralize governance. With blockchain voting we can adjust the balance between what is decided by representatives versus what is decided by the public, further empowering the public and developing democracy to a higher state.

    Technology like agricultural tools, the printing press, the steam engine, and the internet enable new political, economic and social arrangements. It is the activist’s task in each generation to realize that potential for the betterment of humanity.

    Thanks for including us. I enjoy your writing!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Oh, this is great! Thanks, Nick! I have always wanted this site to be one where minds can meet to polish ideas that can take us from the Hell on Earth we have to the Heaven on Earth we could easily create. Someone of your caliber joining the conversation is a real boon! Also, many thanks for elaborating on the block chain voting idea which, frankly, is new to me and — in the above interview — was only mentioned in passing.

      Since my reply to your comment begs for the sharing of two relevant videos, and they cannot be embedded in the comments section, I will move the rest of my reply into a new article of today:

      I hope you receive a reply notification and have the time to check out the post. And I’d love to see you commenting (or submitting posts) with regularity. I don’t know if you are aware that on this site I have been following and promoting your work for a people’s party movement from the start. I think it is a great effort! 🙂

      Of my many supportive articles, this one was the most popular which got me invitations to post on other sites:

      I also recommended a people’s coalition to unite third parties and corporate-free candidates from all affiliations back in 2016 and dedicated an entire page of this site to it:

      Thanks, again, for your visit, Nick! And it’s a real honor to have you praise my writing. 🙂 I just wish more people would see it.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s