By Peter Fredson

After arduous examination of political and religious files of the past 20 years, I came to the conclusion that there was a conspiracy to demolish the Wall of Separation between Church and State. I see the effects of this conspiracy daily in the all-pervasive religiosity and militant neo-con corporatism of this nation.

Some people still refuse to see a conspiracy leading to the joining of government institutions with church organizations. They ignore the strategy voiced by George Grant, of Coral Ridge Ministries who states in The Changing of the Guard, Biblical Principles for Political Action:

“Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ—to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness.
But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice.
It is dominion we are after. Not just influence.
It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time.
It is dominion we are after.”
“World conquest. That’s what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less… Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land—of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. (pp. 50-51)”

Ostrich people, with their heads firmly in the sand, ignore seminal investigations like:

Who Is The Council For National Policy And What Are They Up To? And Why Don’t They Want You To Know?  by Jeremy Leaming and Rob Boston

The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party is a public information project from

EXPOSÉ: THE “CHRISTIAN” MAFIA: Where Those Who Now Run the U.S. Government Came From and Where They Are Taking Us, By Wayne Madsen. Look up:

I could point you at several hundred investigations on this subject, but you are all familiar with Google and can access the files for yourself, if you want to know about fundamentalist and political shenanigans leading up to the dismal state of the union today.

Although meetings of top evangelical executives were kept secret, we know their agenda, strategy and tactics. We have the names of several hundred leaders who committed to the strategy of attacking Church and State separation, such as: Rousas John Rushdoony, Paul Viguerie, Tim LaHaye, Don Wildmon, Pat Crouch, (founder of the Trinity Broadcast Network) and James Kennedy, head of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, Gary Bauer, Ralph Reed, Don Wildmon, James Dobson, Paul Weyrich, and the wierd Unification Church Moon. The movement soon tapped ambitious conservative politicians Newt Gingrich, Dennis Hastert, John Ashcroft, Tom DeLay, Dan Quayle, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. What they proposed is certainly what I would call a “conspiracy.” Look up any of these people and see how they are linked.

With 2004 polls showing the race either tied or with Democratic candidate John Kerry ahead in key “swing” states, the alert to Christian activists went out across the nation by e-mail and in the pulpits and they responded like the good sheep they are.

Millions of dollars exchanged hands in 2003-2004 to achieve Far Right goals. Millions of votes were promised and delivered by sharp shepherds of sheep-like Fundamentalists. Although we know that politicians have notoriously short memories, in the Far Right cause they delivered handsomely.

Critics fondly hope that the True Believers will cancel each other out. Although I have no crystal ball, or astrological tables to guide me, I have done intensive research into how this mess came about, and I worry that a Democracy might soon become a Corporate Theocracy. If you don’t, then perhaps you should worry. Of course, some of you may be perfectly happy to be totally Christianized and assured of your place in the Heavenly Halls, or to let Benny Hinn cure all of your ills. It is certainly comforting to have all problems solved with a “God did it” or a “God will punish sinners.” If so, have a nice life and send your earnings to Pat so he can buy another Ferrari or Lear Jet for the Glory of God.

I believe Bush and his lawyers led to the Abu Gharib torture and abuse scandal, and I believe that George Bush thinks he is above the law. I believe that the invasion of Iraq was not to combat terrorism but to seize oil reserves. I wonder at the objectivity of reporters at ignoring young Bush’s National Guard days and all the attempts of Congress to install Christian icons in public places.  I still wonder at the ability of the Far Right to impose a shallow smirking power-hungry prevaricator upon the world as a second junior Jesus, or a third-rate Julius Caesar.

No, I don’t believe the sky is falling but I am profoundly disappointed in the objectivity and education of the American public. Meanwhile we can expect civil rights abuses and the gradual diminishing of national prestige under growing deficits, attacks on the environment and social security, outsourcing, and corrupt faith-based initiatives from the secretive Bush administration in the next 3 years.

May Heaven give you what you deserve!


  1. Did you miss the people (loonies?) who run the National Prayer Breakfast?  Harper’s Jesus Plus Nothing.

    Christian Dominionists is the term for some of these.

    Glad you got the CNP links.

    Ivins, in her first book on Bush (not Bushwhacked) discusses the Christian Right takeover of the Texas Republican Party in 1994 well.

    Apparently Thomas Frank describes the takeover in Kansas in his book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”

    I, on the other hand, went to Israel to try and prove the Dead Sea Scrolls were from Jerusalem (Norman Golb’s theory, which I derived independently) in order to be confused for the anti-Christ (destroy all religions and you too can be confused for the anti-christ).

    While I was there I learned the “real secret” from an archaeology student.  “El” was a guy.  The Jews were “worshipping” a guy.

  2. You can imagine the conversations, no doubt, between the venerable old priest and the youngfries?

    Old Guy: El was great.  So great you should never speak his real name.
    Young Guy: Was he strong?
    Old Guy: No one was stronger. [Note: El would have united the tribes of the Jordan River Valley, an early military leader]
    Young Guy: Was he smart?
    Old Guy: Why, he knew more than anyone!
    [cough, cough, ack]
    [Old Guy dies]
    Young Guy: El was stronger than anything, and smarter than anyone.  I can’t deny that he was infinitely smart and strong.

  3. Josh: Thanks for the URL on The Fellowship.  Yes, I ran across it early in my investigations but only had space to cite a few foundations, think tanks and other organizations. The word “VAST” is appropriate, not “HALF-VAST” of sneering critics. I firmly believe that an informed citizenship is the foundation of our democracy, not Bible quotations.

  4. I believe that the invasion of Iraq was not to combat terrorism but to seize oil reserves.

    Peter, something else for your files. This story appeared yesterday on BBC Newsnight. The plan for regime change in Iraq dates from the earliest days of the Bush administration. There were actually two plans for the Iraqi oil. The first, drafted by the State Dept and Big Oil, would have nationalized the Iraqi oil fields. The other was the Pentagon’s neo-con’s plan to sell off (privatize) the oil fields.

    Any odds on seeing this story run in the US?

  5. Iv been saying exactly this for about 3+ years now only to be completely ignored.

    It is rather obvious this is precisely what these lunatics are up to, 2 Supreme court Justices step down in next few years and replaced with Fundy nutjobs and welcome to the DSA (Divided States of America) Christian theocracy.'sBody/TheMadnessOfGeorgeWBush.html

  6. Of course if these people get their wish and the world becomes a christian theocracy, then that will mean an end to wars, criminal governments and injustice right? No of course it won’t, because you will then have wars between the various factions within the christian denomination. With the rabid declaring themselves more righteous (ie more entitled to a bigger share of whatever it is they want) than others, and therefore justified in killing the lesser christians.

    I’d like to say these people scare me, I’d like to because well they really are scarey, but I can’t help laughing at them. Do they really think that their god needs them to go around killing people, and overthrowing governments in his name? On one hand they ramble on about how omniscient and omnipotent he is, then on the other hand they act like he’s incapable of establishing his world order without their help.

    I think I’d perhaps be a little more forgiving if I thought for an instant these people were sincere in their beliefs. All I see is a group of people who are justifying downright wicked behaviour by saying that they are ‘doing gods work’.

    By ‘these people’ I am refering to the dominionists, and fundamentalists, and all the others who feel they have some divine right to impose their will and or belief systems on other people by force.

  7. I’d just like you all to know that Canada would totally welcome you.
    …we’re pretty secular, but a more atheist population would be lovely.

  8. I never heard of a political compass, and the lionks on the page was dead. But I found one anyway, and I’m pleased with my score.

    Economic Left/Right: -7.50
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.67
    I’m in Dali Lama territory!!

  9. I would advise you not to talk about outsourcing as it has little to do with religion and it makes the person seem like a protectionist. Recall the program on CNN by this guy whom I just cannot remember his name at the moment where he has a “exporting America” section. Basically, I see him as dangerous to the country as fundamentalist. Basically he is playing people’s fear. Outsourcing helps reduce inflation, reduces costs, improve technology and allows one to have more public service. About a year or two ago, one state government in the midwest was seeking to contruct a public library along with other education facilities. The original plan was to partially outsource the project. But after complaints and protest, they decide the keep it in America leading to a multiple increase in costs that impacted the government’s ability to provide other services. On the positive side New York needed a power generation facility. But construction may not have been possible due to high cost. What was done is that they outsourced construction where most of the power generation facility was produced overseas and shipped in as pre-fabricated parts for assembly.

    Recall under Clinton and NAFTA? Media reported how huge number of jobs was lost south of the border but failed to mention the huge amount of jobs created in other areas. Note the coincidence between introduction of NAFTA and the economic boom years of the 1990s?

    The same can also be said about lumping social security with the issue of religion.

  10. PopTarts:  Your comments indicate that you feel outsourcing is good for the U.S. economy and that you don’t want social security lumped with the issue of religion. Perhaps you did not know that “privatization” of social security was first voiced in Dominionist messages to the Christian public, and has been advocated ever since. The Bush strategy to bankrupt Democracy for a Neo-con corporate theocracy has borne fruit. Religion is inextricably connected to political and economic organization. Ask Lt. Gen Boykin about it or access any of the Christian fronts and think tanks. You may not see any links between Christian leaders and corporate interests taking charge of government, or that the Republican party is firmly in the grip of Right Wing zealots, but I do.

  11. PopTart:
    Outsourcing is the most single greatest threat to the North American way of life. Terrorism pales in comparison to the very real destruction of our economy that Corporate America is doing to us.

    Outsourcing is a product Right Wing capitalistic greed, and has little concern for the average citizen. It benefits the shareholder and the CEO at the expense of everyone else.

    NAFTA is a joke, and always has been. Mexico is supposedly a “NAFTA Partner”, yet the major corporations still rape and pillage the workforce there with poverty level wages and sub-standard benefits. We are supposed to be on equal terms in a global economy, yet how many Mexicans can afford to buy the few remaining products that we produce? How many Mexicans take fancy vacations to your area, and go to your businesses?

    Everyone wants to build for the North American economy, yet no one seems interested in investing in it. These jobs you tout as products of NAFTA tend to be low paying service industry jobs, while good paying manufacturing jobs go overseas for a fraction of the labor costs.

    Our productivity and good wages created the economy we enjoy, it was self sustaining, and we exported abroad. Now the corporations that got fat on our success seek to reduce costs to compete with India, China, and most of Southern Asia. These people do not buy our products, nor do they go to our restaurants or partake of our services. But they push billions of dollars in goods on to our shores, where Wal-Mart sheep gladly scoop them up. No one cares where it’s made any more, everyone just wants it cheap.

    They don’t care that the people who make this stuff earn next to nothing, and work in immoral conditions. How many mine disasters have been on the news in the last week? How many from China?

    We buy Hyundai’s and Kia’s because they are a “good value” compared to domestic makes. But what happens when the local auto plant closes, along with the satellite supply plants, and people stop shopping and spending?

    It’s a vicious cycle, a downward spiral that is like a dog chasing its tail. And it’s just as stupid too. Everyone wants it cheaper, but everyone wants more money at the same time.

  12. I realize that the last post was a bit off the theme of the topic, so as an addition to the above I’ll add:

    The fact is that the same types that seek to cram religion and dogma down our throats are the same as those who seek to dominate every facet of our lives.

    The Christian Right is consumed by greed. Greed for power, greed for money, greed for control. And all in gods name.And like all those who oppress, they intend to cut the pillars of our society so that they alone can be the puppet masters.
    They strive to make us weak, so that they can dominate.

    The sad part is that the majority of mindless sheep are only too happy to oblidge.

  13. Wal-Mart sheep gladly scoop them up. No one cares where it’s made any more, everyone just wants it cheap

    *clears throat nervously*

    Wow.  Now being poor is evidence of a lack of social conscience?

    I don’t shop at Walmart because I like Walmart, I shop at Walmart because I can’t afford to spend a half a week’s salary on a new pair of pants.

  14. And with that we have the problem. Shopping at Wal-Mart has nothing to do with being poor, it has everything to do with being cheap.

    If good quality pants all cost $30 a pair and were all made in North America, we’d all buy them without question. The reciprocal nature of this would benfit everyone. As it had up to around 25 years ago. You can still find well priced jeans made in North America if you look. But most are too lazy to bother.

    But when you can buy pants at $10 a pair made in India or Bangladesh, suddenly the $30 pants seem like a bad deal and expensive. So then people lower the bar and chastise the $30 pants as expensive. The workers at the North American jean factory are laid off because no one wants thier “Expensive” jeans anymore. So then they don’t buy houses or cars. They don’t eat out or go to the movies. And in the end, the people who count on these purchases suffer, and fail to frequent the businesses of those who bought the $10 jeans.

    For what it’s worth, the expensive “All American” Tommy type jeans are practically all made in South Asia, so price is not a real indicator of origin. And don’t get me started on Nike.

    Simplistic, yes. But it is the essence of the situation that exists. I know this first hand, as I’m laid off from an automaker due to slow sales while cheap assholes drive thier Kias and Hyundias around and brag about the “value”.

    People can change the situation with their wallets, by not buying from companies that have no moral obligation the the communities they destroy when they set up shop and push everyone out of business.

    It’s disgusting.

  15. People can change the situation with their wallets, by not buying from companies that have no moral obligation the the communities they destroy when they set up shop and push everyone out of business.

    It’s disgusting

    Considering that you don’t know me, or my financial situation, I’d have to conclude that you’re simply talking out of your ass.  As you also don’t know where I live, or the availability of product where I live, you are, once again, talking out of your ass.

    I know this first hand, as I’m laid off from an automaker due to slow sales

    Hmmm.  As you’re now unemployed, I wonder how long it’ll be before your moral indignation takes a back seat to your need to feed yourself and your family.

    It’s easy to blame consumers for the problem, but when they don’t have work, don’t have income and aren’t eligible for social support services, what’s cheap is not them but your rhetoric. 

    I’m not a fan of outsourcing, and I’m not a fan of chains like Walmart.  I’m well aware of the impact that they have on local small businesses, and I’ve watched the documentaries and listened to the arguments on both sides.

    The political agenda in this country has been carving on the middle class for over two decades now, pushing more and more people into the ranks of the lower middle class, and downright lower class.

    But you’ve got the solution.  We should all just buy expensive American-made products, with money we don’t have, and everything’ll just be OK.

    You might as well suggest that we end world hunger by learning to sustain ourselves on air.

    I care about as much about your moral judgement on me as I do about the guy who judges me for wearing second hand clothes. 

    You can -both- bite me.

  16. Hmmm, I think I hit a nerve there. At least I didn’t resort to adolescent insults.

    So you don’t see the direct correlation between the rise in Asian imports and the fall of North American jobs. The two are so completely intertwined that they cannot be ignored. It’s the proverbial chicken and egg story. You choose to exasperate the problem by justifying your participation in it.

    As I stated, many North American products are priced competitively, while many Asian made “name brand” products are expensive. As a consumer we all have the option to do what’s best for our economy. So buying American doesn’t have to be expensive, but not buying American is costlier than anyone can imagine.

    I’m sorry if that bothers anyone, the truth does tend to hurt more than placation.

  17. Hmmm, I think I hit a nerve there. At least I didn’t resort to adolescent insults.

    Of course you hit a nerve.  You accused me of being immoral because my financial circumstances and geographical location limit my options. 

    Are you driving a hybrid vehicle?  You’re not?  Why not?  Don’t you love America?  Don’t you want us to have clean air?  Don’t you love your children?  What do you -mean- it’s too expensive?  If you were a -good- person you’d suck it up and ‘do the right thing.’

    Moral indignation is as cheap as the air it’s spewed on.  When I tell you to ‘bite me,’ you can dismiss it as adolescent if you wish, but you might be better served if you actually thought about the reason that I dismiss your position.

    It’s because your position is not well thought out.  It sucks.

    I notice you didn’t answer the question about how your own joblessness is going to affect your decisions.  Say, is there a Walmart near where you live?  Maybe you could get a job.  Or is it more moral, in your estimation, to take welfare?

    Does the person who has a choice between being unemployed, and making minimum wage at Walmart, commit some sort of moral wrong when they choose to take the job?  They’re supporting evil, aren’t they?

    By the same standard, slaves are evil, ‘cause they’re the root cause of the whole evil institution of slavery.  Shucks, if they’d just stop doing that whole ‘slave thang’ everthang’d just be fine!

    So you don’t see the direct correlation between the rise in Asian imports and the fall of North American jobs. The two are so completely intertwined that they cannot be ignored. It’s the proverbial chicken and egg story. You choose to exasperate the problem by justifying your participation in it.

    1.  The word is exacerbate.  Not exasperate.  I exacerbate the problem, and you exasperate me.

    2.  There is certainly a correlation between the two.  And I do see it.  To blame it on consumers is idiocy.  There is also a direct link between the fall in North American jobs and American companies’ decisions to outsource labor to foreign markets, so that they can maximize their profits, combined with American govt’s decisions to avoid ‘protectionist’ tariffs at all costs.  It’s not consumers making those decisons, it’s American companies and American government. 

    Between a lower-middle class consumer’s buying practices, and the decisions that are made on the corporate and governmental level, which do you think has a greater impact on the economy? 

    If you make the assertion that it’s the consumer that has the greatest impact, and the greater responsibility, then you’re going to have to explain why.  Justify your claim.

    If I buy a car from an American company, but all the parts were manufactured overseas, or the assembly work was done overseas, who’s responsible for the loss of American jobs? 

    If I buy a pair of Nikes, manufactured for pennies on the dollar, by foreign labor, am I helping the American economy by buying ‘American made?’

    If I buy Levis, made in China, am I helping America by buying American made?

    What are the brand names of American made clothing?  At what retail outlets are they available, and what is the average cost for, say, a pair of pants?

    I understand you’re upset that you lost your job.  But when you blame consumers, you’ve got the wrong end of the stick.  I’m not happy that we spend our tax dollars on wars instead of education.  But I don’t blame students for that decision.

    I’m sorry if that bothers anyone, the truth does tend to hurt more than placation

    Uh, I’m not hurt by your ‘truth,’ because you’re not even in the neighborhood of generally accurate, let alone true.

    I’m mildly offended, however, by your presumption and your disrespect.  I would not presume to make moral judgements about you without having a -great- deal more information than you have about me.

  18. I’m with nowiser on this one.

    My “American” Pontiac Grand Prix was built largely overseas. The engine, for starters, was built in Brazil. Over half the components used where built someplace other than the United States and recent models are currently built in Oshawa, Ontario. So is it more or less American than a Toyota Camry built in Kentucky? My Harbor Bay jeans are assembled in Mexico. Most of the PC components in my box are from Taiwan or other non-American places, even those bits that were developed by an “American” company.

    Not only is it difficult to tell an American product from a non-American one anymore, but reducing this argument to being an issue of consumers being “too cheap” to support American companies is simply shifting the blame. On those infrequent occasions that I eat out I tend to favor the smaller Mom and Pop restaurants over the big national chains because I want to support local business and the ones around here tend to have decent foods at decent prices. We have a WalMart locally and I’ve been known to visit it every now and then, but it’s hardly a chain I’m devoted to and we tend to shop at a number of stores wherever we can find the best deals on whatever we’re looking for.

    This becomes especially important now that I’m currently unemployed myself. If I can find American made products that are good quality and reasonably priced then I’ll buy them, but I’m not going to spend extra money for something that isn’t as good as a competing product produced elsewhere just because it’s made in America. Not only is that stupid, but I can’t afford to do that.

  19. A) Outsourcing:
    It is obviously bad for the people who lost their jobs but it is generally good for the economy as a whole.

    Example 1: Outsource to protect remaining jobs
    A widget may cost $10 to be produced in US but it only cost $1 to be produced in another country. Restricting production in leaving US may help save the widget industry in the US but for every other industry that requires widget it is an additional cost. And for US firms to compete not just domestically but internationally, one must ensure that they are not priced out of the market. So XYZ Widget Company may decide to shut its factory of 1000 workers in the US and move overseas but if company did not do so they would not be able to compete with other producers thus resulting in him not only losing the 1000 factory jobs but also the other 100 marketing and development jobs.

    Example 2: Outsource v Mechanised
    Alternatively, the company has to reduce its cost or it will go bankrupt and option X is to outsource 800 jobs where the savings would allow the company to keep 200 jobs back home. Option Y is to mechanised the entire factory such that 950 jobs is made redundant and only 50 workers are hired. I do not believe one would say that Option Y is better because no outsourcing was done.

    Recall how Bush initially tried to protect US steel industry only to result in lost of jobs in other industries that rely on steal and increase in prices.

    Its a two way street. Jobs may be outsourced out of US but jobs are also insourced into the US. ( The Us is generally the largest recepient of Foreign Direct Investment, except in 2003 where it was pushed into second place. So to claim there is no investment in the US is a false assumption. Also the claim by jkerluck that Mexico is somehow getting the bad stick of it is simply false because Mexico is one of the most trade dependant nations in the world and when the US had a recession from 2000/1 onwards growth the Mexico took a huge hit.

    When jkerluck rail about the “immoral conditions” of work overseas (as opposed to moral, do you mean they have to form prayer sessions before work?) his intentions are suspect because it seems to be driven more by self-interest, nothing wrong with self interest, except that it makes one less objective. Recall the Adidas factory that closed down in South Asia due to protests in the West, which resulted in workers losing their jobs and many female employees having to work in the sex industry as a result, yet the people who protest have no interest in the new situation.

    Example 3: What the liberal democrat economist says
    Now for a more “diplomatic” comment on the issue check out what Robert Reich, secretary of labor under Clinton have written.
    For some odd reason the above link is in its normal form is blacklisted. What the heck?
    Remember there is a difference between throwing up protectionist legal barriers that distort trade and prevent outsourcing and protecting US jobs through innovation, educationa and flexibility. The former harms the economy, the latter improves it.

    Let us examine what the liberal economist Paul Krugman and one of my fav economist, have to say on this. In case you are not too sure who he is, he was the person that called Bill O’Reilly a “quasi murderer” on national TV to his face.
    And a nice explanation on why putting up protectionist barriers to outsourcing may end up damaging the economy more than the worst case of outsourcing where there is no replacement jobs.

    B) Social Security:
    There are 3 things to take note before one goes into talks on social security
    1) Plan itself does not work:
    What is being introduced does not help solve the problem or is not a better plan than what is available currently.

    2) Intention of the people introducing reform is suspect:
    The people introducing the reform is using this as a smokescreen to further some nefarious agenda. But it does not mean that the reform would not result in a better system. Example: If fundamentalists suddenly believe that evolution should be taught in all schools, not just as a sub topic but as an entire course because they believe it is the route to political domination, one would not reject the proposal to teach evolution. The intention may be bad but the plan cannot be faulted.

    3) Misleading information on either the future problem or the plan:
    The information is wrong and thus criticism of such information does not really affect the question of whether is reform necessary or whether what is proposed is a better system. Paul Krugman is criticising Bush on this 3rd limb relating to misleading information rather than the actual plan itself.

    They are all distinct but sometimes when people disagree with one they mix everything up.

    When was privatization first voiced? Was it was voiced in the 1950s to 1960s? It should be noted that there are several countries with a form of privatised social security, some since the 1960s.

    Here is a relatively old document (1995) that examines social security type programs across the world.

    Basically, I do not believe that there is a perfect system, the only question to ask is based on one’s particular set of acceptable criteria, which system offers the best plan taking into account its advantageous with its disadvantageous and including the specific and distinct setup of the country involved.

    C) Corporation
    Actually, from my point of view, I always thought that one weakness of the Democrats is their corporate policy. I support the New Democrat (Clinton) position on trade and the economy but not the express position adopted by Kerry during the run up to election last year. I said express because I was not sure and probably will never be sure of whether what he said about outsourcing was campaign rhetoric or actual potential policy. Kerry’s comments on outsourcing during election spooked me very badly. If the Democrats can change their policy to a more robust business and corporate based one, then golly wow there will be no hesistation for supporting a party that protects both one’s paycheck and one’s social concerns. Remember a government that adopts a robust policy on the economy can help reduce cost and improve competitiveness of the workforce thereby reducing outsourcing and increasing insourcing without resorting to negative protectionist measures.

    1) Profits for the Corporation:
    A business could not careless whether one is fundamentalist or atheist. All they seek are policies that help them in their business. Let us examine the two most pro-business governments. Hong Kong and Singapore. While some of their social policies are conservative, it would be hard pressed to claim that they are in the grip of religious leaders as one minister remarked that the government is secular but it is certainly not atheistic, it is neutral and it has to be seen to be scrupulously neutral and even handed in handling of religious matters. And perhaps my favorite phrase of all was a Singapore’s minister response to a Christian priest who had said that the minister in question would face God’s punishment. The response was “I am a Hindu, not a Christian, therefore I am not frightened by Christian priests pronouncing an anathema or curse upon me instead of a benediction.”

    The reason for the link of corporate interest to christianity in the US is perhaps because the Democrats seem to be the party that supports environment and labor which is seemingly against the interest of business. But I believe it is possible for a party to support business, environment and labor. A restructuring and rebranding of labor/union, which at the current state in the US is pathetic (13%?) such that it becomes more pro-business in a positive sum game. That would not only increase number of supporters on the ground but also businesses since they know that cooperation comes only if the “proper” government is elected. And government subsidies (although I loath that word) for companies to adopt greener technology and environmental groups which recognise the interest of both sides and be willing to certify that companies are improving environmentally.

    My point is that businesses are like the little kid that runs to the person offering candy. And they do not care whether the person offering it happens to support one particular formulation of religion or another. And remember that some, actually many people, simply do not care or care enough about religion, abortion, or other social issues. What they are concerned about are simply material well-being of themselves.

    2) Material well being for the Individual:
    One example that I sometimes use and it may be a bit off, relates to the protest to outsourcing by some people (not saying it is you). These are people who may complain about poverty in third world and make some donation to some charity that helps provide for food or education in impoverished nations. But when the nation happens to get its affairs in order and start attracting jobs (outsourcing) that vastly improve the lives of the impoverished, these same people suddenly start to condemned those “evil” foreigners who are stealing US jobs. One do not blame them since it is their jobs but it shows that for many people, at the end of the day the focus is which party brings in the money. Democrats got part of that right by focusing on people who lost their jobs to outsourcing, although their response to it is suspect. Now all it has to do is to expand it to the rest of the people with material concerns.

    Just look at UK and the Labour Party which had been in opposition for years until they changed their economic policies to become more pro-business. And people in UK really like Gordon Brown, the person who is in charge of the pro business economic policies.

    D) The “conspiracy”
    Finally, I realise that some people have taken offence to the conspiracy and think that Peter is gone off. But it should be noted that a form of it, albeit much milder, was recently published in Newsweek, without the inflammatory “conspiracy” word:

    In fact it would seem that the tone of his articles change if one substitutes the word “conspiracy” which I admit is more attention grabing for “plan” which seems more laid back. Politicians seeking to entrench themselves, interest groups seeking to gain power, those are not conspiracy but totally expected even though one may be against the policies of some of these people. That is not a conspiracy, that is a fact and way of life. Only question is how you make use of it.

  20. I regret if anyone feels that I’ve implied that they are immoral people. given the nature of this site, it’s something we’ve all felt before. But I shall not stoop to personal attacks about general issues.

    Of course you are correct in the observation that the sole burden of blame does not rest on the consumer. Our governments refuse to do anything because of corporate special interest groups, who’s shareholders enjoy healthy profits as a result of offshored jobs. The WTO prevents us from applying tarrifs to equalize the cost of products on the market. But there’s nothing I personally can do to address these matters. But I can choose what to buy, and make a stand that way.

    It’s unfortunate that no one seems to feel that there is a personal obligation to sustaining ones own economy. Buying what your neighbor builds has been a founding principle for the last 150 years in North America. I can admit that perhaps the terminology might be harsh, but it’s frustrating to see people carry on oblivious to the destructive economic environment we live in. We are making China and South Asia economic super powers while emaciating our own economy. People have a belief that the North American economy is invincible, but it is far from it. As I stated earlier, it’s a downward spiral, one that offers short term gains for long term pain.

    The corporate notion is that the North American collar is “whitening”. Many believe that in several years blue collar jobs will be replaced with more executive style jobs. We’ll run the companies and design the products while those outside North American will build it for us. But it’s an unsustainable notion. No one can afford the education this requires, and corporations cannot employ everyone domestically in an administrative capacity.

    This situation is unique to North America. We have the financial capacity, and the buying power, yet we fail to recognize it. Korea and Japan on the other hand have fiercely loyal consumers. 99.5% of autos sold in Korea are built in Korea. 98% of cars sold in Japan are Japanese built. Tariffs play a part, and the WTO sits back and allows it. But consumer loyalty plays the larger role. They simply do not want American imports, save for media and cultural elements. The fact is that North American companies are forced to compete with these other nations not because they are on equal economic terms, but because consumers force it upon them. North American companies compete globally, but they do not often sell globally. They must fight countries that sell en-masse to every coner of the world, while we are limited to our own market. These workers in foreign countries simply cannot afford the products they produce. As I said, everyone wants to produce for the North American market.

    The consumer is the single largest economic force in North America. And the foundation of our economy is driven by manufacturing. Farming, Oil, Mining, Forestry, and other resource based industries all hinge on a healthy economy, and are interdependent. But everything hinges on the consumer. Businesses exist to produce for the consumer.

    For the record I drive a North American Built Ford Focus, its motor was built in Michigan and parts of that motor were built by myself. It was assembled in Michigan, and my purchase employed 20’000 people in various automotive sectors. I feel good about this. It was a conscious decision to buy this vehicle to support my company, my economy, and my industry. I label check my clothing, and my household goods, and buy North American whenever I can. I don’t just talk the talk; I walk the walk as well.

    I’m terribly sorry about the typo, word didn’t catch it.

    I can admit that the WTO places unfair demands on North American industry. By enforcing “fair trade” rules they allow countries with low standards of living, and lower safety standards to sell to those who will not stoop so low. The corporate excuse is often “These are jobs no one wants to do here”. Perhaps, but maybe it’s just that they are jobs no one will do for 2 dollars an hour.

    To deny that people work in dangerous conditions in third world countries is irresponsible. People die daily working to make the cheap products we consumers buy. Of course it’s self interest. I don’t like people suffering and dying to make products for us. I feel good not contributing to this.

    I’ve had friends go to Mexico on the behalf of charity groups like Habitat for Humanity. They’ve reported that outside of the major cities and outside of the resorts there is unimaginable poverty. They went to a town hall meeting held by an American employer in the area and asked why these people can’t be paid on the same level as their American counterparts. The response was that it would disrupt the economy of the area and cause problems for the people. So then they were asked why they then don’t invest the money into schools, hospitals and other services as compensation for the workers efforts. They had no answer because it all boils down to cheap labor, plain and simple.

  21. And as for my employment situation, I recieve a good sum from Ford, as well as an unemployment benefit for mthe government. I can feed my family, and still choose to buy domestically made goods. I paid into the unemployment that I recieve so I have no issue drawing from it.

    As far as those who work at Wal-Mart, I’d rather see them working somewhere else, making better money. Before Wal-Mart, there used to be clothing shops, hardware stores, and grocery stores. Often they were locally owned, and sold local products. They also were often paid better than the larger chains. Many of these stores are gone now, leaving many in small communities no chioce but to buy from them.  I feel bad those without the option to shop elsewhere.

    And as far as American made… have to look closely anymore. Many American companies sell products made offshore. Chevy has a bunch of new vehicles that are made in Korea, and I’ll never buy them. GM is getting bad in terms of its foreign content. They complain about high pension and health care costs, yet the people who recieve these benefits built this country!!

    If your Levis are made in China and for the same money you can by a different brand made domesitically why wouldn’t you choose the domestic brand?
    Again, simplistic and hypothetical, but it addresses the core of the matter.


    Harsh version                  
    Soft Version

    Hitler was murderous               Hitler was over-enthusiastic
    Lincoln was killed by conspirators  
    Lincoln accidentally was terminated by planners.
    6,000,000 Jews were murdered.   
    Some Semites were sent to Heaven
    Social Security to be privatized     Corporation executives to joyously make billions
    The largest deficit in history         Corporation executives to joyously make billions
    Poor people can’t afford medicine  
    Corporation executives to joyously make billions
    Environmental disasters             Corporation executives to joyously make billions

  23. My last post may not have been readable.  Sorry. I’ll try again.

    Harsh version                   SOFT VERSION

    Hitler was murderous               HITLER WAS OVER-ENTHUSIASTIC
    Lincoln was killed by conspirators   LINCOLN ACCIDENTALLY WAS TERMINATED BY PLANNERS.
    6,000,000 Jews were murdered.    SOME SEMITES WERE SENT TO HEAVEN
    The largest deficit in history         CORPORATION EXECUTIVES TO JOYOUSLY MAKE BILLIONS
    Poor people can’t afford medicine   CORPORATION EXECUTIVES TO JOYOUSLY MAKE BILLIONS
    Environmental disasters             CORPORATION EXECUTIVES TO JOYOUSLY MAKE BILLIONS

  24. Just look at UK and the Labour Party which had been in opposition for years until they changed their economic policies to become more pro-business. And people in UK really like Gordon Brown, the person who is in charge of the pro business economic policies.

    Yeah thanks for saying how wonderful neo-neo-Reaganism is. The labour Party became electable when the right-wing stuff-the-workers press (headed up by Fox owning Newscorp) told us it was (i.e. when Bliar kissed Murdochs…feet). In ‘The rise of New Labour’ Robin Ramsay argues the Tory’s screwed it up in the 70’s, Labour got elected at the wrong time, and caught the blame.

    That Evil Bitch Thatcher got elected and told us we didn’t need manufacturing sector, we could all be in service- Where does the money come from that we buy these services with? If we buy a car that money the cash goes over seas. People from Seoul tend not to need ‘service’ in the UK (“The pizza will be about 16 hours ok?”)

    Then she sold our infrastructure. We now have a country that is ruled by Big Business, just not as bad as the U.S. Why else would they give the same sums to both candidate?

    Blair is a Tory in the wrong party. And his much hailed Public Private Partnership is a screw up. Big Business makes a fortune from delivering an inferior service.  Private business is always more expensive at providing public services than government business if they are managed equally well.

    Here’s the maths

    Cost + interest of loan to government

    is less than

    Cost plus interest on loan to Business (loans to governments get a better interest rate)+ Profit.

    Unfortuneatley the people who own the media outlets are business men, who want nothing more than an environment that profits can be maximised. They do not give a stuff about the workers why should they? the proles have virtually no power- every few years we get a chance to pick our favourite puppet. Political parties learn that to get votes they have to avoid the right wing jibes- if you look at the crap directed at the Lib Dems by papers you would think should be going after Bliar during the election it makes sense- attack the party not on board with the ‘privatise everything’ mantra, because they threaten payouts to shareholders.  Result: L-D are now drifting right.

    The tabloids complain at every percieved threat from Europe, while conveniently ignoring the fact that we are paying more for less with the PPP services. Most of these Europhobic stories are made up, or if you’re lucky, distortion and quoting out of context.  I dread the day some wily French politician takes revenge by demanding that the eating of Faeces be banned.  The ‘Sun’ will run big headlines ‘EAT GOOD BRITISH SHIT- show the Froggies what you thing of them and eat your crap!’




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.