Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » Time for change » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Time for change's Journal
Posted by Time for change in General Discussion
Sat Jul 14th 2007, 09:31 AM
This post discusses the role of environmental crises in the disappearance of several past civilizations. The U.S. must play a lead role in helping to solve the current world wide environmental crises. To do so, we must bring democracy back to our
Contrary to the claims of many of our corporations, almost the whole U.S. Republican Party, and the uninformed, the current world-wide environmental crisis presents a grave threat to world civilization, everything we hold dear, and life itself.

Perhaps the most comprehensive explanation I’ve ever read about the world-wide environmental situation that now confronts us was written by Jared Diamond in “Collapse – How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed” (Chosen as “Best Book of the Year” by The Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, the San Francisco Chronicle and others). Diamond’s book describes the environmental causes of past and present failed societies, such as the collapse of the ancient Easter Island civilization, and compares them with other societies that have succeeded, in order to identify the causes of failed societies. The theme of his book can be summarized as:

Environmental crisis + failure of society to address it ==> societal collapse

Diamond’s reason for writing his book is to make the point that we humans have it within our power to either fail to address the problem, which will lead to world-wide catastrophe, or to avoid catastrophe by addressing the problem while we still can. In making this point, Diamond identifies eight environmental causes of the collapse of past societies, and he adds four more that are additionally relevant to our current world.

He defends the relevance of his analogies to the past in many ways. In doing so he notes two extreme and opposite points of view that attempt to minimize the relevancy of those analogies. One is the racist point of view that holds that past failed societies deserved their fate because of their inherent failings as people. The opposite and equally invalid point of view holds that “past indigenous peoples were gentle and ecologically wise stewards of their environment, intimately knew and respected Nature, innocently lived in a virtual Garden of Eden…”

Diamond identifies five general factors that contribute to the equation of whether or not societies succeed or fail in response to the environmental crises they face:
 Inadvertent environmental damage caused by the human inhabitants of a society
 Climate change (the natural type)
 Hostile neighbors
 Friendly trade partners (or allies)
 Society’s response to its environmental problems

The fifth factor is emphasized as the key, since it is the one that we humans have the most control over. The most striking example that Diamond presents to make that point is that of two Greenland societies who shared the same environment, where one thrived and the other became extinct because of different responses to their environmental problems.

Note that the title of this post identifies three related issues. The first two, which I describe in more detail below, comprise the major theme of Diamond’s book. The third one is my interpretation of how the current political situation relates to the issues that Diamond describes.

Diamond’s book is almost devoid of present day political content – as illustrated by the fact that George Bush is not mentioned once as a contributing cause to today’s environmental crisis. It’s not that he doesn’t recognize the importance of political factors to the state of our environment. He ends his book by giving an overview of our current situation and concluding that it can go either way, that he is “cautiously optimistic” that we will succeed in addressing our environmental problems, and that it all depends on whether or not we have the “political will” to do so. My saying that Diamond does not adequately address the salient political issues is in no way meant as a criticism of him or his book. One book can accomplish only so much. I’m sure that Diamond believed, and he is probably correct, that by maintaining a neutral stance to today’s political situation, the scientific aspects of his book would thereby be given more credence.


Some brief examples of failed societies

Most of Diamond’s book describes examples of how past or current civilizations have coped with environmental challenges, and how their coping mechanisms contributed to success or failure. Here are five examples of failure:

Easter Island
It is estimated that the first human settlement of Easter Island occurred around A.D. 900. The estimated maximum population was 6,000 to 30,000. Easter Island is perhaps best known for its huge stone statues, 887 which have been identified, weighing as much as 9,000 tons (including the base).

The primary reason for the demise of Easter Island society was deforestation, which was virtually complete somewhere between the start of the 15th and the 17th Century. Without trees a major source of wild food disappeared; fuel for warmth virtually disappeared; fish consumption substantially declined because of the absence of canoes; and agriculture was severely disrupted because of soil erosion. Easter Islanders had to turn to cannibalism to survive. Europeans, who began frequenting Easter Island at least by 1722, no doubt contributed to their final demise by spreading disease and kidnapping them. By 1872, only 111 Easter Islanders remained.

Diamond describes several natural adverse environmental conditions on Easter Island (such as relatively high latitude with consequent relatively low temperatures, lack of rainfall, low altitude, and geographically remote location that contributed to a paucity of volcanic ash fallout) that explain why that island became so extremely deforested, while so many other Polynesian islands did not.

Other than that, the massive amounts of statue construction, fueled by competition between clans, contributed greatly to resource depletion on Easter Island in two respects: the work required vast amounts of rope and wood products (ladders, sleds, levers, etc.), which led to the deforestation; and it also required huge additional amounts of food for the people who built the statues. In sum, a very fragile environment, combined with a culture that was characterized by massive consumption of vital resources, led to the demise of Easter Island society. In addition, its remoteness precluded the possibility of people emigrating to relieve population pressure.

The Anasazi
The Anasazi resided in current day Southwestern U.S., including parts of Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado. This area first became populated with humans around 11,000 B.C., though agricultural societies in that area did not arise until about A.D. 1. Anasazi civilization lasted from about A.D. 600 to 1200.

Their environment was very fragile, owing mainly to the lack of water and the related problem of deforestation, which was due to slow re-growth of trees because of the paucity of water. That environment could have supported a very thinly populated society, but as the population grew the environmental pressures rose. Most important, a larger population required more water, so water tables became depleted, resulting in a dangerous scarcity. Droughts periodically resulted in widespread starvation.

Chaco Canyon was the capital of Anasazi civilization. The Anasazi were a highly hierarchical society, such that a well fed elite living in luxury came to occupy Chaco Canyon, while the peasantry did all the work and produced the food that supported the elite. Diamond notes that “Chaco Canyon became a black hole into which goods were imported but from which nothing tangible was exported. Into Chaco Canyon came those tens of thousands of big trees for construction…”

The final blow was a drought in about A.D. 1130. Chaco Canyon became abandoned as many probably starved, people killed each other, and others fled the region. Diamond sums up what happened:

Over the course of six centuries the human population of Chaco Canyon grew, its demands on the environment grew, its environmental resources declined, and people came to be living increasingly close to the margin of what the environment could support. That was the ultimate cause of abandonment. The proximate cause, the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back, was the drought that finally pushed Chacoans over the edge; a drought that a society living at a lower population density could have survived… The initial conditions of abundant nearby trees, high groundwater levels… had disappeared.

Mayan civilization
The Maya were the most advanced civilization in pre-Columbian America, and the only one with extensive preserved writing. They occupied parts of Mesoamerica, which extended from present day central mid-Mexico to Honduras. The so-called Classic period of Mayan civilization began around A.D. 250. The Mayans were a highly hierarchical society. Diamond explains:

There was a tacitly understood quid pro quo: the reason why the peasants supported the luxurious lifestyle of the king and his court… and built his palaces was because he had made implicit big promises to the peasants… Kings got into trouble with their peasants if a drought came, because that was tantamount to the breaking of a royal promise.

Though the Mayan environment was much less fragile than the environment in which the Anasazi resided, the collapse of Mayan civilization has much in common with that of the Anasazi. Deforestation exacerbated water scarcity problems because of the role that trees have in maintaining the water cycle. Perpetual wars among the Mayan people also exerted a heavy toll. A severe drought starting in the early tenth century was the proximate cause of the fall of Mayan civilization, as between 90 to 99% of the former Mayan population disappeared. With regard to the Mayan response to its environmental crises, Diamond has this to say:

We have to wonder why the kings and nobles failed to solve these seemingly obvious problems undermining their society. Their attention was evidently focused on their short-term concerns of enriching themselves, waging wars, erecting monuments, competing with each other, and extracting enough food from the peasants to support all those activities. Like most leaders throughout human history, the Maya kings and nobles did not heed long term problems…

The Greenland Norse
While 99% of Greenland is uninhabitable, there are patches of it that are suitable for agriculture. A settlement from Norway was established in A.D. 984, which lasted approximately 500 years before completely dying out. The fate of the Greenland Norse is especially instructive because another society, the Inuit (Eskimos), who occupied Greenland before the Norse arrived, continue to live there today.

Greenland’s very cold climate, with very short summers, makes agriculture a precarious undertaking. But the Greenland Norse inherited a farming culture from Norway, and they stuck with it. Unlike the Inuit, they never learned to hunt whales, and they had a cultural taboo against eating fish. Thus, when their cows and sheep overgrazed their pastures, farming became an even more precarious undertaking, and lacking adequate alternative food sources, the Norse starved in the midst of plenty. Like many other medieval European Christians, the Greenland Norse scorned pagan non-European peoples and refused to learn from them. Furthermore, the Greenland Norse was a very hierarchical society. Diamond explains:

Power in Norse Greenland was concentrated at the top… They owned most of the land… and controlled the trade with Europe. They chose to devote much of that trade to importing goods that brought prestige to them: luxury goods for the wealthiest households, vestments and jewelry for the clergy, and bells and stained glass for the churches. Among the uses to which they allocated their few boats were… to acquire the luxury exports… with which to pay for those imports. Chiefs had two motives for running large sheep herds that could damage the land by overgrazing… independent farmers on overgrazed land were more likely to be forced into tenancy, and thereby to become a chief’s followers… Innovations could have threatened the power, prestige, and narrow interests of the chiefs…. Thus, Norse society’s structure created a conflict between the short term interests of those in power, and the long term interests of the society as a whole… Ultimately, though, the chiefs found themselves without followers. The last right that they obtained for themselves was the privilege of being the last to starve.

The Rwandan genocide
Rwanda and Burundi have long been Africa’s two most densely populated countries, and two of the most densely populated countries in the world.

The Rwandan genocide of 1994 was initiated following the shooting down of a plane that carried the Presidents of Rwanda and Burundi, killing everyone on board. Hutu extremists then immediately initiated a genocide that killed within six weeks about 800,000 Tutsi, which was about three quarters of the Tutsi population of Rwanda.

That genocide is usually portrayed as being due to ancient ethnic hatreds, fanned by opportunistic politicians. However, the fact that the Hutu and the Tutsi speak the same language, attended the same schools, lived together, worked together, and frequently inter-married, casts serious doubt on that idea.

Rather, one of the major reasons for the genocide was a densely populated country living on land that was barely adequate to support the population. Misery was widespread in Rwanda before the genocide, and chaos and killings were becoming the order of the day. In putting forth this cause of the Rwandan genocide, Diamond explains:

Any “explanation” of why a genocide happened can be misconstrued as “excusing it. However, regardless of whether we arrive at an over-simplified one-factor explanation or an excessively complex 73-factor explanation for a genocide doesn’t alter the personal responsibility of the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide… people recoil at any explanation, because they confuse explanations with excuses. But it is important that we understand the origins of the Rwandan genocide – not so that we can exonerate the killers, but so that we can use that knowledge to decrease the risk of such things happening again in Rwanda or elsewhere… Other factors did contribute… One should not misconstrue a role of population pressure among the Rwandan genocide’s causes to mean that population pressure automatically leads to genocide… Countries can be over-populated without descending into genocide…


Today’s World’s most serious environmental problems

In the last chapter of his book, Diamond lists the twelve most serious environmental problems that our world faces today. The first 8 were also common to ancient civilizations:

1. The destruction of natural habitats, especially forests, wetlands, coral reefs and the ocean bottom
Over half of the world’s original forests have been converted by humans to other uses, and at the present rate another quarter will be converted within the next half century. An even larger fraction of the world’s original wetlands have been converted, as have one third of its coral reefs.

2. Wild foods, especially seafood
About two billion people today, mostly poor, depend upon the oceans for protein. If wild fish populations were appropriately managed they could be maintained indefinitely. But instead they are exploited.

3. Genetic diversity
Diamond explains how the increasing loss of genetic diversity on our planet harms us in many different ways.

4. Soil erosion
Soil is being eroded on farmlands at about 10 to 40 times the rate at which it is being re-formed, and between 500 and 10,000 times the rate on forested land. Thus, between 20% and 80% of the world’s farmland has become severely damaged.

5. Loss of freshwater
Most of the world’s freshwater is already being used, and those that are not are mostly far from population centers. Freshwater from underground aquifers is being depleted faster than it can be replenished, and over a billion people lack access to safe drinking water.

6. Alien species
There are hundreds of examples of alien species crowding out or killing native populations of species, causing billions of dollars worth of damage.

7. Human population growth
There is disagreement as to whether the world’s population will ever stabilize before it causes massive world-wide catastrophe.

8. The environmental impact of the average person
The adverse environmental effects of large populations of humans are dependent not only on the number of humans but on the average impact per person. If all third world inhabitants adopted first world living standards, that would result in 12 times the current human environmental impact – which the earth cannot support.

Then there are 4 new environmental problems that are unique to today’s world:

9. Depletion of energy sources, especially oil, natural gas, and coal
The prevalent view is that current reserves of readily accessible oil and natural gas will last a few more decades.

10. Photosynthetic ceiling
I don’t understand this one, but Diamond says that there is a limit to the Earth’s capacity to use sunlight, and that by 1986 humans were already using about half of it. His conclusion is that by the middle of the 21st Century, “most energy fixed from sunlight will be used for human purposes, and little will be left over to support the growth of natural plant communities, such as natural forests.”

11. Air, soil, and water pollution from toxic chemicals
Many toxic chemicals persist in the environment for long periods of time, and cleanup costs of many polluted sites are measured in billions of dollars.

12. Global warming from greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and methane from animals
Both are rising at rates that are certain, if continued, to result in rising sea levels that cause catastrophic coastal flooding.


Sustainability

Of the twelve problems noted above, many of them exacerbate each other, thus producing a vicious cycle. Diamond summarizes our current situation:

Our world society is presently on a non-sustainable course, and any of our 12 problems of non-sustainability that we have just summarized would suffice to limit our lifestyle within the next several decades. They are like time bombs with fuses of less than 50 years…. Any of the dozen problems if unsolved would do us grave harm… If we solved 11 of the problems, but not the 12th, we would still be in trouble… We have to solve them all.

Thus, because we are rapidly advancing along this non-sustainable course, the world’s environmental problems will get resolved, in one way or another within the lifetime of the children and young adults alive today. The only question is whether they will become resolved in pleasant ways of our own choice, or in unpleasant ways not of our choice, such as warfare, genocide, starvation, disease epidemics, and collapses of societies. While all of those grim phenomena have been endemic to humanity throughout our history, their frequency increases with environmental degradation, population pressure, and the resulting poverty and political instability.


Parallels between ancient and current civilizations

There are those who say that consideration of the collapse of ancient civilizations has little relevance to today’s world. They claim that with today’s modern technology there is almost no limit to what we can achieve, and that we are far more intelligent than ancient civilizations. Diamond counters that argument by making several points:

There are far more people in today’s world and today’s civilizations than ancient societies had to cope with.

Our advanced technology not only has the potential to help us out of this crisis, but at least as likely, it has the potential to cause far more damage than what was available to ancient societies.

Just as in the past, political chaos and severe environmental problems go hand in hand. Diamond comments on the most obvious parallel between past and present:

In short, it is not a question open for debate whether the collapses of past societies have modern parallels and offer any lessons to us. That question is settled, because such collapses have actually been happening recently, and others appear to be imminent. Instead, the real question is how many more countries will undergo them.

And as for the impact of globalization:

The problems of all these environmentally devastated, overpopulated, distant countries become our own problems because of globalization… That’s why political instability anywhere in the world now affects us… Societies today are so interconnected that the risk we face is of a worldwide decline… We in the U.S. (or else just affluent people in the U.S.) can no longer get away with advancing our own self-interests, at the expense of the interests of others.

We need to realize… that there is no other island/other planet to which we can turn for help, or to which we can export our problems. Instead, we need to learn, as they did, to live within our means.


Reasons for hope

In the last few pages of his book, Diamond notes some reasons for hope, as a way of explaining why he is “cautiously optimistic” that we can solve our problems before it is too late to avoid catastrophe. I must say that I was somewhat disappointed with this part of the book – as I was hoping for more hope. His reasons for hope can be boiled down to the following:

 Some past societies have solved their environmental problems and survived.
 There is an increasing awareness of environmental problems in today’s world.
 We know a lot more today about the risks we face than ancient societies did.
 Our environmental problems are solvable if only we have the political will to solve them.
 Some countries are making progress – e.g. in forming the European Union, several nations have forfeited some sovereignty to work together to solve their common problems.

Diamond ends his book with his bottom line reason for writing it:

Thus, we have the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of distant peoples and past peoples. That’s an opportunity that no past society enjoyed to such a degree. My hope in writing this book has been that enough people will choose to profit from that opportunity to make a difference.


Why democracy is a crucial key to solving our environmental problems

It might seem that if democracy is a crucial key to solving the world’s environmental problems, then we should be in pretty good shape. After all, the world’s most powerful country is a “democracy”, and there are many more “democracies” in the world today than there have ever been.

Yet, not all is as it seems. The United States of America is a democracy today more in name than it is in fact. Our president may as well have declared himself king, and there has been far too little objection in our country to his gross abuse of power.

But our bottom line problem is not a problem of one or two men. Our underlying problem is that the underlying principle of democracy – one person, one vote – has been virtually destroyed in our country. The wealthy and powerful supply our voting machines, they insist on our using machines that count our votes in secret, and there is far too little protest about that; the wealthy and powerful own most of the sources from which Americans receive their news; and, with our system of legalized bribery, the wealthy and powerful in our country have a very disproportionate influence on our elections even without the assistance of their secret voting machines.

Although Diamond didn’t emphasize this as a general principle, many or most of his examples of failed societies were societies that were very hierarchical. In such societies a small proportion of the population tends to have control over a very disproportionate number of resources. In those types of societies, the rich and powerful often make decisions that benefit themselves to the great detriment of the vast majority of other people. Environmental degradation often means little to them, as long as it increases their wealth and power.

That is exactly what is happening in the United States of America today, with terrible consequences for the rest of the world. The rich and powerful have formed themselves into giant powerful corporations that have demanded and received all the rights of “persons”, with few or none of the responsibilities of ordinary persons. The result has been to substantially widen the gap between rich and poor and to give to the few the license to enrich themselves at the great expense of the many. And I fear that this situation could be fatal to the potential for us to solve our environmental problems.

The American people are concerned about our environment, and they very much want to take steps to solve it. I believe that they have enough political will that in a true democracy they would actually take the steps they need to take. But ordinary Americans today have limited political clout to make their voices heard on this and other matters of great importance to our nation and our world.

It is widely believe that the failure of the most powerful country in the world to participate in the world’s peacekeeping efforts following the 20th Century’s first Great War was largely responsible for the failure of those efforts and therefore sowed the seeds for the onset of the century’s second Great War. Now we have a situation where that same country, more powerful than ever (in the destructive sense), not only refuses to participate in the world-wide effort to solve our environmental crisis, but is actively hostile to it.

I think that of all our Senators, Barbara Boxer is the most on target on this issue. She was the only United States Senator to officially object to the sham of a presidential election that we had in 2004. And now, she is the only U.S. Senator who has dared to suggest that we need to remove the current cancer upon our nation. In particular, she has said (scroll up to top):

I've always said that you need to keep it (impeachment) on the table, and you need to look at these things, because now people are dying because of this administration. That's the truth. And they won't change course. They are ignoring the Congress. They keep signing these signing statements which mean that he's decided not to enforce the law. This is as close as we've ever come to a dictatorship. When you have a situation where Congress is stepped on, that means the American people are stepped on. So I don't think you can take anything off the table. Because in fact the Constitution doesn't permit us to take these things off the table.

The American people can’t leave it up to the good will of our rich and powerful elite and their corporations to solve our environmental problems. Nor should we allow two men who have no respect for democracy whatsoever to run our country. Democracy is all about challenging such outrages; democracy is about people throwing off the shackles of despotism; democracy is about people coming together to solve their problems.
Discuss (51 comments) | Recommend (58 votes)
A summary of my DU posts
Time for change


The good majority of my DU posts consist of one of six general subjects: The need to remove from office the current cancer upon our nation; election fraud; the tragedy of the Bush administration; my ideas on the liberal values that we all hope will some day replace the values that our current government runs on; historical events that I believe cast light upon our current situation; and other political ideas.


The need to remove Bush and Cheney from office

In 2006, John Conyers wrote a 198 page report, documented with 1,401 references, titled “The Constitution in Crisis – The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, Cover-ups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance”. The title of his report reflected the primary reasons why George Bush and Dick Cheney must be removed from office: They have made a mockery of our Constitution – the foundation for the rule of law in our nation – by consistently violating it. Our Constitution, if we can keep it in fact and not just in name, makes our nation much more than just a democracy. By providing protections for minorities and the powerless, our Constitution adds civility, humanity, and decency to what could otherwise be a barbaric nation – democratic or not.

Aside from the continuing damage that Bush and Cheney can do to our country in their remaining time in office, including their potential to involve us in ever expanding new wars, failing to remove from office the most lawless presidential administration in our history will set an awful precedent in our nation – a precedent for doing away with our Constitution. Providing in our Constitution a mechanism for impeachment and removal from office was of utmost priority to our Founding Fathers. As Thomas Jefferson once said, “When once a republic is corrupted there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles…”

Many arguments have been put forward against impeachment. This post answers those arguments. Some opponents of impeachment mistakenly advocate the view that the impeachment of public officials requires evidence of the commitment of an actual crime – and would not be justified by such things as gross violation of the public trust, corruption, negligence, or incompetence. Leaving aside the fact that such an interpretation would leave our nation subject to rule by people who would do great and possibly irreparable harm to it, the preponderance of evidence flatly contradicts that interpretation.

Others claim that we don’t have enough evidence to proceed with impeachment. I argue here that the current evidence for impeachment is so abundant, arguing that we need more sets the impeachment bar at an absurdly high level.

Others argue we don’t have the votes for impeachment – which implies that we must not bring individuals to trial until we have counted the votes, rather the using the trial to get the votes. Such an argument ignores the likelihood that votes will accumulate as Americans watch the impeachment trial and become intensely exposed for the first time to the many outrageous crimes of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And it also ignores the fact that Senators who refuse to vote for conviction will probably be putting their seats in jeopardy.

But perhaps the most urgent reason for moving to impeach Bush and Cheney as soon as possible is that their continuing refusal to be bound by the laws and the Constitution of our nation raises the spectacle that they may be planning a coup d’etat. Why else would they go to such lengths to destroy our Constitution and the rule of law in our nation? We must preempt them by moving as quickly as possible on this.


Election fraud

The DU apparently was born as a result of the 2000 November-December election fraud that began the long nightmare that is the George W. Bush administration.

I went to bed on Election Day 2000, shortly after Bush was announced as our new President, feeling as if the end of world civilization was near at hand. My wife woke me up a couple hours later to tell me the good news that the announcement of Bush’s Presidency had been temporarily cancelled. Thus began a period of 36 days that I followed more intensely than any other news event of my life – ending in the infamous and disastrous Supreme Court decision that marked the beginning of our long road to dictatorship.

My son (EOTE) joined DU in January 2001, a few days after it began, but I did not, for reasons that now escape me. I did, however, do a lot of writing about the 2000 election, including a desperate plea to my Maryland Senators, to please demand a real recount of the 2000 Florida vote. And I also contributed an article to DU on that subject, in my son’s name (I did not use my own name because I was a federal employee and I was afraid that I could get into trouble for writing such an article), in the spring of 2001.

The fraudulent 2004 Presidential election is what brought me into DU. I had worked as a volunteer in the Kerry/Edwards campaign, I had followed the presidential polls obsessively, and by Election Day 2004 I was about as confident as I could be that John Kerry would be our next President. Thus, the reported results of that election were both profoundly disappointing and difficult for me to believe, as they were for the great majority of DUers.

I immediately began an effort to acquire as many election statistics as I could, in a feverish and desperate attempt to prove that the election was a fraud, which I hoped would aid in its overturning. In late November I had my son post an analysis that I did of the discrepancy between the exit polls and the official election results (Note: My son supplied the title, which I feel is too strong, which you can see if you read the article). And finding that it was awkward to have my son post my articles, I joined DU a few days later.

Since then I have posted dozens of election fraud related threads, a small number of the most important of which I have included in my journal.

In particular, I have come to believe that the main mechanism by which the 2004 election was stolen was the massive and illegal targeted purging of Democratic voters in Ohio, especially in Cleveland. This thread contains a great amount of evidence to support that contention.

In addition, I believe that there is good evidence that says that large numbers of votes in Cuyahoga County were deleted by its central tabulator, as explained in this thread, which also discusses an early 2006 partial audit of Cuyahoga County. And, I think that the death of Raymond Lemme, who while investigating Clint Curtis’ sworn allegations of vote switching computer programs, was found dead in a Georgia hotel room, just a couple weeks after telling Curtis that he had traced the corruption “all the way to the top”, is extremely suspicious to say the least. Here is my explanation of the controversy over the discrepancy between the 2004 exit polls and the official 2004 vote count. And here is a summary of several reasons I have written about for believing that the 2004 election was stolen.

Finally, here are my ideas for preventing another stolen election in 2006 and 2008.


The tragedy of the Bush administration

The fake war on terrorism

I believe that a crucial requirement for a good understanding of the Bush administration’s actions since September 11, 2001, is the realization that its “War on Terrorism” is nothing but a colossal fake. Only with that realization do numerous Bush administration characteristics and actions make sense, including: Its disinterest in Osama bin Laden; its great urge to rush into a war with Iraq at any cost; its utter contempt for international law and the rest of the world; its succession of no-bid contracts for its wealthy friends; its lavish tax cuts for the wealthiest of our citizens and corporations during ‘time of war’; the Dubai port deals; and, its attempt to turn our democracy into a dictatorship.

With that in mind, I wrote in this post about the main reasons why I believe that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9-11 attacks. There are many reasons why I believe that now, but the initial and still most important reason is the utter failure of our military, the mightiest military that the world has ever known, despite repeated warnings and more than ample time on 9-11 itself, to protect its own capital city.

Abuse of the human rights of prisoners for no apparent purpose

To me, the most sickening and disgraceful aspect of the Bush administration’s “War on Terrorism” is its complete lack of concern for human rights, demonstrated among other ways by the indefinite confinement, without trial or even bringing of charges, of thousands of prisoners of war, and its frequent use of torture. I have discussed this issue in several OPs, starting with this one. Here I describe the issue as seen through the eyes of a U.S. Army Muslim Chaplain who had ministerial responsibilities for hundreds of our prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, who witnessed the severe and daily abuse of his charges over a period of several months, and who eventually was imprisoned himself when it was felt that he was making too many waves over what he had seen. Here is my summary of what the great journalist Seymour Hersh had to say on this subject, based on his numerous high level sources. Jimmy Carter felt so strongly about this issue that he broke the unwritten rule against ex-Presidents criticizing sitting Presidents, with one of the most scathing attacks on this policy that I have ever seen. And Senator Richard Durbin was the victim of continued public verbal abuse from the right for daring to make public how our government was treating its prisoners.

Lying us into war

It is evident to most informed people that one of the biggest motivations for Bush's "War on Terror" was to provide a justification for the invasion of Iraq. Seymour Hersh’s excellent account of how the Bush administration manipulated and twisted intelligence in order justify a preemptive war against Iraq is a must read for anyone who still supports this administration and thinks that the Iraq war was necessary. And as for Bush's excuse that we are now fighting that war for the benefit of the Iraqi people, Democrats should start talking about how the Iraqi people actually feel about us being in their country.

Just how bad are Bush and his cronies and how much danger do they pose to American democracy?

George w. Bush and his administration and fellow travellers in today's Republican Party are about as bad as they come. They are anti-science ignoramuses. They are chicken hawks. They have no consciences. They are torturers. They are cowards. They are evil. And I doubt that there are any moral boundaries beyond which they will not go to get their way.

I think that in the interest of preserving our democracy, we should be aware of the similarities between the Bush administration and Hitler’s Nazis (which I wrote about even before the revelations about Bush’s warantless wiretapping), and understand that if we aren’t vigilant, yes it CAN happen here too.


Moral values that separate us from today’s Republicans

It makes me so mad to hear people ridicule what they consider to be “liberal values” and compare them unfavorably to the wonderful moral values of George W. Bush and his Republicans friends. In the vast majority of cases these people don’t even have a vague idea about what liberal values really are. They have simply been conditioned by our corporate media over several years or decades to believe that liberals encourage irresponsibility, are ‘soft’ on national defense and ‘law and order’, and are wild spenders. These ridiculous myths about liberals have in turn encouraged the Democratic Party to disavow the liberal label and in some cases to veer way to the right. I submit that, rather than running away from the liberal label we should be proud of it, and we should challenge those that seek to disparage it. And to further make this point I posted a tribute to several historical and current political leaders who have been unafraid to speak out loudly for what they believe in, and I suggested an answer to those Republican morons who accuse liberals of hating America.

Let's take a look at some of the specific moral values that separate Democrats from Republicans:

Republicans like to pretend that they're more moral than us because they're more "religious"

Many of those who disparage liberals are fundamentalist Christians who repeatedly invoke the name of Jesus Christ, and who believe that the superiority of their moral values to those of liberals and Democrats is proven by their repeated references to Jesus. Don’t these people understand that Jesus was a liberal, whose moral values were much closer to those of the Democratic Party than to those of the Republican Party, with whom they align themselves and vote for? Isn't it an astounding paradox that the Republican Party has usurped for their own purposes one of the most liberal religious leaders in world history, while at the same time showing nothing but contempt for liberals and liberal principles?

The movement for privatization of government functions

One of the biggest threats to our democracy is the privatization movement. In the name of “freedom” and “self-reliance”, the leaders of this movement advocate the freedom of powerful corporations to destroy our environment and to run our elections, our schools, our social safety net programs, and our prison system, as well as every other program which has long been considered a legitimate function of government. The fact that government is elected by the people to serve public functions, whereas the purpose of private corporations is to make profits for their investors, is either totally lost on these people, or else they simply feel that the above mentioned programs should be run for profit rather than for service.

Al Gore alluded to this issue in his great film, "An Inconvenient Truth", where he discussed the unholy alliance between government, private industry, and the press, whereby a corrupt government, in exchange for legal bribes from the industries they are supposed to control, propagates false information and policies that are favorable to those industries instead of the public that they are elected to serve. I discuss my own personal experience with that unholy alliance, where the FDA withdrew an about to be published scientific article I had written, under pressure from a manufacturer who stood to be economically hurt by the information in that article.

The need for a free and independent press

Another great threat to our democracy is the ownership of our country’s news media by a very small group of wealthy individuals who have strong ties to the Republican Party, and whose motivation in providing “news” is to maintain satisfaction with the status quo, rather than to report what is important and true. Two prime examples of corporate media shills and pseudo-journalists who pretend to be real journalists are Chris Matthews and Tim Russert. Bill Moyers explains how this situation threatens to destroy our democracy, and how this came about through the dismantling of rules and regulations which were meant to prevent the monopolization of our news. And Robert Parry explains why he started his web site to help combat the misinformation we get from our corporate media.

Health care

Liberals, and most other decent people, believe that people should be entitled to decent health care. That is why, prior to the "pro-life" administration of George W. Bush, infant mortality rate in the United States had been steadily declining for several decades. But shortly into the Bush administration, due to the starving of women and infant health programs for federal funds, infant mortality rate began a steady rise. Nor do Republicans care much about veterans' health, as indicated by the rejecting of this much needed veteran's health bill in the U.S. Senate by virtually a strict party line vote.

An enquiring mind

One of the many tricks that our corporate media uses to squelch alternative viewpoints is to label anyone who substantially disagrees with their “correct” version of the news as “conspiracy theorists”. Well, I have news for them. The views of us “conspiracy theorists” are usually much more closely aligned with reality than is most of the trash that we hear from the corporate news media these days, such as the stories about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, which were used to justify our illegal preemptive invasion of that country. We “conspiracy theorists” believe that it is not only the right of American citizens to challenge the corporate news media story lines, but it is our responsibility as well, as good citizens who care about our country.

The dignity of all human beings

Perhaps the most important value held by liberals is a belief in the dignity of all human beings – hence the 19th century movement by liberals to abolish slavery. Here is one of my favorite stories on that subject.

A summary

And here is a post where I talk about all the major values that separate Democrats from Republicans.


Historical events that help us understand our present

Though there is little doubt that George W. Bush is by far the worst president we’ve ever had, our past history is at least partly responsible for preparing the way for this tragedy. The history of our nation is full of examples of failures to live up to our ideals. In addition to our long history of slavery and our near extermination of the Native American population of our present day country, we began a long history of overseas imperialism beginning in the late 19th Century. The long standing history of extreme hostility to socialism by the elites of our country has been responsible for much of this imperialism, as well as domestic repression against labor unions and others who would speak out against the status quo. The usurpation by our Executive Branch of the war making powers given to Congress by our Founding Fathers did not originate with George W. Bush. And the attitudes fostered by our long history of slavery are still with us today, especially in the areas of our country where slavery thrived for so long.

Today, as the transgressions of George Bush and Dick Cheney threaten the existence of our nation as we know it, we would do well to recall how the German nation was led into tyranny more than six decades ago. The parallels between Hitler’s war on terror and George Bush’s war on terror are extraordinarily striking in my opinion. And the better able we are to recognize the danger, the more likely we are to take steps to prevent a similar fate.


Political ideas

Republicans have 3 great advantages in elections against Democrats, whereas the only advantage that the Democratic Party has is that its policies are meant to serve all Americans, rather than just the select few. In addition to electoral fraud and huge sums of money donated to the GOP by their corporate masters as legalized bribery, Democrats have to contend with a multitude of news media whores.

But those advantages are not sufficient for a Party that has nothing of value to offer to our country. So, when we suggest investigation of their corrupt deeds they call us conspiracy theorists. When we suggest policies such as making basic affordable health care available to all Americans they accuse us of class warfare. And when we criticize the rampant corruption at the highest levels of government they accuse us of "hating America". And when none of that works they try to scare us by telling us that if we don't give them unlimited power over us we risk being killed by terrorists.

If there was ever a presidential administration that needed to be impeached, this is it. Grass roots efforts are under way to accomplish this, and we can all help. Our Democratic leaders need to seriously consider and talk about this. And they must be united and avoid inter-party warfare.
Profile Information
Time for change
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
DU Donor DU Donor
8793 posts
Member since Thu Dec 2nd 2004
Silver Spring, MD, US
Male
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.