Mediaboss Marketing

The absolutely outstanding article by Diana Mahabir-Wyatt in the Express of July 21 should be required reading for all those persons who are so quick to berate Venezuela because they are of the view that the problem in the country is caused by socialism. Ms Mahabir-Wyatt was careful to note the statement by the eminent professor that there are many countries which follow the socialist path but have succeeded in providing a very high standard of living for their people. The reason for this is the maturity of the society, that the citizenry expect and accept that the State apparatus will work to their benefit. There is little interference by outside forces, maybe because of the distance from the superpower. But no, that cannot be the reason, because they are strategically located to be of use to the USSR, and as a result would have been coveted as satellites. So it cannot be simply location. The only undeniable reason for socialism not to succeed is the lure of money. Socialism attempts to afford a more egalitarian division of the wealth of the country while maintaining the rights of the individual.

Read more:
Don't blame socialism for Venezuela's woes* - Trinidad & Tobago Express

Jeffrey A. Rendall | 7/26/2017

The air was so thick you could cut it with a knife on Monday afternoon as leading Democrat politicians ventured outside the Washington Beltway to a public park in nearby Berryville, Virginia (in Rep. Barbara Comstocks 10th District) to reveal their new agenda aimed at winning back at least some of the traditional Democrats who dumped the party to vote for Donald Trump and Republican congressional and Senate candidates last November.

The sight of men and women in suits and button down shirts must have appeared awful strange to those park visitors who werent aware ahead of time that a gaggle of ruling class Democrats would be showing up to try, once again, to rebrand themselves into the champions of the common man.

Seeing Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer (and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, et al.) pontificating outdoors in the intense glare of the Virginia summer would be humorous under most circumstances but on Monday it was absolutely side-splitting laughable not only because they were sweating like the common man in direct sunlight but also because what they were trying to pitch wasnt all that fresh and wouldnt be spared from overexposure no matter how many layers of sunscreen were applied.

In all, it was just the latest Democrat bash on American individualism and capitalism.

Susan Ferrechio of the Washington Examiner reported, The Better Deal agenda regurgitates many of the old Democratic ideas of raising the minimum wage, increasing spending on infrastructure and penalizing companies that move overseas.

But it also emphasizes breaking up big companies such as airlines and cable companies and goes after the pharmaceutical industry with a requirement that companies justify their prices to consumers who are struggling to pay for medication.

Old-fashioned capitalism has broken down to the detriment of consumers, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Monday...

Old-fashioned capitalism has broken down, Chuck? Nonsense. If anything, old-fashioned capitalism has been weighted down by tens of thousands of pages of the federal register and a collection of politicians from both parties who believe a laissez-faire economic system needs to be fixed or transformed rather than lightly monitored to ensure fairness and a level playing field for all participants in the marketplace.

The truth is, capitalism would work swimmingly if given the chance. Neither party especially Democrats would stoop to offering people the trust and opportunity to make their own economic choices. If you dont believe it, just look at Obamacare. The best health system in the world is collapsing because most or all of the capitalism has been removed from it.

We wont address the Republicans recent failures to deal with Obamacare in this space right now were focusing on the wretched Democrats and their hopeless party remake.

The Democrats attempt to rebrand themselves as heroes to the struggling isnt going to convince anyone with common sense or knowledge of history to give them another try. A snake periodically sheds its skin, but its still a snake. A chameleon lizard changes colors but its still a chameleon lizard. A Democrat can claim he or she is for middle class families and helping people improve their economic situations but at the core he or she is still... a socialist.

Lets not forget Hillary Clinton tried to heap the same better deal sell-job on Americans last year just as Pelosi, Schumer and Warren (et. al) did in Virginia a couple days ago and it turned people off. The problem is the Democrats just emerged from two terms of Obama, including a couple years of complete Democrat congressional control, and their better deal agenda didnt improve things for anyone.

The message might enjoy at least a token bit of credibility if it werent articulated by the same liberal leadership thats become the figurehead of the post-Obama Democrat Party. Is anyone seriously going to believe Schumer and Pelosi have changed their thinking on empowering Americans to succeed? Hardly. By all appearances Democrats are solely interested in restraining people who have ideas in order to secure goodies for their dedicated followers.

Theyre redistributionists of the highest order.

Further, contrast the Democrats gloomy anti-freedom and liberty message with that of candidate Trump last year. The Democrats relentlessly blast successful Americans (the rich) in order to lure the weak-minded and uninformed into supporting them. Trump attacked the unfairness of the system the elites stole from the people and the elites themselves to appeal to Americans displaced by decades of broken federal promises (like not enforcing the immigration laws and trade deals that sent their jobs overseas and using the political system to enrich themselves).

Democrats want more rules, more regulations and more federal bureaucrats looking over the shoulders of people doing business in order to dictate equity in the workplace. It wont succeed. Most Americans simply want to be left alone, not to be placed in the shackles of more central planning and command control located in the far off Capitol.

Understandably, Republicans were less than impressed by the Democrats display of America/capitalist-bashing.

Pete Kasperowicz of the Washington Examiner reported, Democrats announced their new Better Deal campaign, which will focus on helping average Americans instead of the rich and special interest groups.

But AshLee Strong, [Speaker Paul] Ryan's press secretary, noted that Republicans came out with the Better Way campaign last year.

Have you seen this creative, innovative, totally unique Better Deal messaging campaign ... the Democrats unveiled this morning for the 2018 cycle, she asked in an email that was interspersed with links to the GOP's Better Way website.

Instead of suggesting were seeing a fresh coat of paint on the same old Democrat socialist ideas, however, the Republican leadership seems to be taking offense at the minority partys ostensible stealing of their own marketing strategy.

Therein lies the problem the ideas themselves arent being attacked as much as the Republicans object to the Democrats perceptible plagiarism. The GOP has its own host of impotence issues, mostly having to do with the establishment party leadership not really standing for anything and a lasting image problem with the voters who rightly see that Republicans are great in the opposition but cant enact a conservative agenda once theyre handed the quill and ink to write up laws.

In the end it doesnt really matter whether either party calls their program a Better Deal or a Better Way if they wont assume the necessary political risks to actually pass laws or cut the budget or stand up for a set of principles beyond whatever it takes to win a majority or get them through the next election.

Both parties are capitalism bashers in their own specific ways. Where the free market is concerned, politicians want to tinker with the entire engine to fix a few bad spark plugs.

Its also to these politicians personal advantage to attack the very foundations of the American economic system. After all, theres always a reason why someone succeeds and others dont, and theyre more than happy to supply the cause. Its much easier to point the finger at someone else rather than taking responsibility for ones failures. Your gain is my loss; its the basis for their governing philosophy. Their reason for existence is to make the underachievers of the world feel empowered.

And just when the Democrats appeared to be taking responsibility for their poor electoral plight in recent times, they resort back to their old tricks again.

Tyler ONeil of PJ Media reported, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told The Washington Post that Democrats should blame themselves for losing last November, rather than pinning their defeat on former FBI Director James Comey or the Trump campaign's supposed collusion with Russia. In a tweet Monday morning, President Trump heartily agreed.

When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you don't blame other things Comey, Russia you blame yourself, Schumer told the Post. So what did we do wrong? People didn't know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.

After seeing Mondays press event with a group of them wilting from exposure to the blistering Virginia sun its not at all clear the Democrats stand for anything apart from what they did yesterday or last week or last month or last year.

Their underlying message is all the same and can be summed up as thus: We know more than you and the American people cant be trusted to make decisions on personal financial matters or handling their own money.

Chuck Schumers right: American capitalism does need a reexamination. But the Democrats shouldnt be surprised when the people demand more of it, not the warmed-over rebranded Better Deal theyre offering to move attention away from their latest ploy to foster socialism.

Link:
Outsiders vs. Insiders: Democrats' 'Better Deal' is socialism repackaged in naked populist form - ConservativeHQ

Michael Nigro/ZUMA Press/NewscomAre millennials increasingly anti-capitalist? That's the question Chicago public radio station WBEZ posed recently to me and The Nation's Sarah Leonard. (You can listen to the whole thing here.)

"The explosive popularity of Bernie Sanders in the U.S. and Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. among younger voters revealed millennials' desire for a new economic system," states the promo for the segment on WBEZ program Worldview. "It's no wonder, as millennials are likely to be economically worse off than their parents or grandparents, especially those who became job-seeking adults after the Great Recession of 2008."

That all makes for a tidy narrative, but it's one built on the flimsiest of evidence. The main data offered during the Worldview segment was a 2016 Harvard poll, in which 51 percent of 18- to 29-year-old respondents had an unfavorable view of capitalism. But as I pointed out at the time (and on the show), the same poll showed that an even greater number of young people59 percenthad an unfavorable view of socialism.

And while 42 percent of the millennials that Harvard surveyed had a positive view of capitalism, just 33 percent had a positive view of socialism.

In an array of other surveys from the past few years, millennial support for socialist and capitalist policies varies widely based on how poll questions are asked. For instance, socialism is much more popular than a government-managed economy, and a free-market economy is more popular than capitalism. And in policy-based polls, millennial economic preferences run the gamut. Yes, many support student-loan forgiveness programs and government-managed health care, but they also express strong support for entrepreneurship, dream of owning their own small businesses, and reject hypothetical government expansions when they come with personal tax hikes. In other words...they look a lot like Americans across the age spectrum.

Polls only tell part of the story, of course, but the part they do tell is not one of an increasingly socialist youth populace. That's probably important to keep in mind as the media coalesces on the Socialist Moment plot-line. Sure, the leftist podcast Chapo Trap House has a lot of fans, and more Twitter avatars now sport red roses (long a socialist symbol). But the subset of American young people poised to notice either of those things is infinitesimally smaller than those who aren't. These are the kinds of affectations and antiheroes that the media latch onto and elevate becauselike the Pepe the Frogtweeting alt-right accounts during the electionthey're very salient in online media and activism worlds. But it's a mistake to take that salience as indicative of actual numbers or influence.

So what about Bernie? Yes, young Americans vastly preferred the socialist-lite Vermont senator to Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, or any of the GOP-primary candidates. But their alternatives were Clinton, Trump, and the likes of Chris Christie and Jeb Bush. They are the most establishment of The Establishment, with the exception of Trumpwho, like Sanders, benefited from people's desperation to ditch this dynastic, cronyist electoral loop we seemed caught in. That Sanders secured so much millennial support doesn't necessarily equate to a full socialist embrace by these young folks, just that he was the best of exceedingly bad options.

To their credit, more committed and long-term leftists have managed to swing some of Bernie's millennial momentum into post-election momentum for leftist policies more broadly. And young people are certainlynow and at least throughout recent historymore receptive to redistributive economic policies and strict labor regulation. Perhaps the left can capture some of these tepid socialism supporters at the right moment to convert them for good, and this same discussion will look a lot different in a few years.

But I doubt it. Sandersand Trumpseem to me the 2016 heirs of the Hope and Change phenomenon, which propelled not just Barack Obama to 2008 victory but the rise of the Ron Paul movement. At its essence is the idea the system is fundamentally broken and only bold changes can begin to fix it. And the particulars of these bold changes seem to matter less than how convincing their messenger and the movement around them.

I was amazed talking to young people last year how many had been Paul and/or Obama fans in previous election cycles yet were now professing support for Sanders or Trump. The vast political gulfs between these candidates (especially on economic issues) didn't resonate as much as the areas and ways in which they promised reform.

Older folks and the extremely party-loyal tend to take this as youthful flakiness, a side-effect of unserious passions, hastily-conceived beliefs, or a juvenile contrarian streak. But perhaps a lot of younger Americansnot yet sold on the idea that it's one's civic duty to choose the lesser of two evils at election time, nor narcotized by years of show-pony partisanship into believing in vast differences between Democrats and Republicansare reacting rationally to the options presented to them. The good news for libertarians (and socialists) is that millennials are definitely dissatisfied with the centrist Republican-Democrat status quo. But as the 2016 election made clear, there's room for this dissatisfaction to go in all sorts of different and unexpected directions.

See original here:
Millennial Socialist Moment Mostly Media Hype - Reason (blog)

Catholic World News

July 24, 2017

The fourth-ranking member of Chinas Communist party said that it is important for the leadership of the Chinese Catholic Church to be firmly in the hands of those who love the nation and the religion.

Yu Zhengsheng made his remarks in a July 19 address in Beijing to the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, the body by which the government seeks to control the Church.

Interpretations of the teachings and dogmas should match the needs of Chinas development and the great traditional culture, he added, and proactively fit into the Chinese characteristics of a socialist society.

References:

Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

There are no comments yet for this item.

Visit link:
Leading Communist official says Chinese Catholicism should 'fit into' socialism - Catholic Culture

Aggressive capitalism is kicking the crap out of us, so we should see if we can start a public conversation about the need for an alternative political and social system.

It's shocking that capitalist businesses have become so dominant. They literally rule the world. In Canada, the low-profile Canadian Council of Chief Executives is all powerful when it comes to influencing government.

We can see the corporate greed all around us. Four out of 10 Canadians many of them earning around $11 an hour can't pay their bills but Canadian corporations are sitting on at least $630-billion in cash they're refusing to invest in the economy.

Unfortunately, even when many people know about the damage caused by capitalism, they're either not knowledgeable enough or too afraid to discuss alternative political ideas such as socialism.

Powerful people fearful of the threat of social upheaval have demonised the words socialism and communism, and this scares the hell out of many people.

Mainstream media are owned by corporations that seldom, if ever, report on alternative political systems.

People are fed up

Despite the lies and badgering that comes from corporations and the wealthy, people in several countries are fed up with traditional politics. They're fighting back against corporations and governments that are joined at the hip.

Those who supported the Brexit vote for Britain to leave the European Union and the millions who voted for Donald Trump are, among other things, anti-establishment. They feel they have been ignored and left behind.

It seems that many Canadians share the same views. Seventy-one per cent of people taking part in a large poll in June said they believed the same populism evident in the U.S. is on the rise in this country. Many of those interviewed were working class or poor.

Ekos pollster Frank Graves found that 70 per cent of those polled believe that almost all the economic growth over the past 20 years has ended up in the hands of the top one per cent.

Our political system works mainly for the handful of people who control the parties. Only 11 per cent of Canadians have been members of a political party in recent years. When it comes time to elect new leaders, the candidate who sells the most cheap memberships often wins.

Potential socialist vote

I believe there is such dissatisfaction with mainstream political parties that, if we adopted proportional representation and people felt their vote counted for something, thousands of Canadians would vote for a well-led socialist party.

I am not an authority on alternative political systems, but if a party wanted to give power back to Canadians it might:

So, is there a strong socialist party that is capable of advancing the cause?

Sadly, the answer is "No."

I've compiled a list of the socialist and communist groups I'm aware of in English-speaking Canada. (I'm not discussing socialism in Quebec as it is a big topic on its own. The province has had a number of fairly successful socialist parties over the years.)

NDP is not socialist

First, just to clarify, the NDP is not a socialist party. The NDP says it's a social democratic party, but it moved so far to the middle in the 2015 election that the Liberals were able to win the election with a few progressive promises.

There are three small groups trying to push the NDP to the left: The NDP Socialist Caucus, and Momentum, which says it is the NDP's left alternative to austerity, and Courage: A coalition of the independent left that says it wants to "put democracy back into the NDP".

Other groups include the Socialist Party of Canada, Socialist.ca (International Socialists), Socialist Alternative.ca, New Socialist and the Communist Party of Canada .

Once a bastion of socialism and communism, there still are many strong socialist adherents in labour, and a few small but effective groups across the country, such as Solidarity Halifax.

It's disappointing that not one of the few English-language groups has been successful in attracting more than a few dozen followers. They seem incapable of attracting new members.

It's particularly upsetting groups are doing poorly when there are opportunities out there that haven't existed for years.

Do weak groups damage socialism?

Some critics say the groups are more of a hindrance than a help when it comes to representing socialism to the community.

I'd like to see a couple of groups prove the critics wrong. If they really care about what they're doing, they should buy a new organizing manual and develop a new strategy.

Most important, they need to get out and speak to people in the language of everyday people not the jargon of socialism.

It would be great to see independent socialists now on the sidelines move into one or two of the groups and give them new life or if necessary take them over. Or, of course people can also start a new group.

Some folks could get together and create a place for discussion perhaps a closed Facebook page where ideas could be shared. The Bullet, an excellent Internet blog, is there to unite socialists.

While socialists don't have a chance in hell of getting their ideas into mainstream media, they should make a stronger effort to get onto alternative media sites.

In closing, I hope that my criticisms and pressure from other people reading this will put a fire under the butts of the socialist groups and encourage those hanging back to get involved.

Also on HuffPost:

Go here to read the rest:
We Need A Better Political System To Curb Aggressive Capitalism - Huffington Post Canada