Wake-up Call

Resist the Corporate State

Archive for the ‘Women’ Category

Bullying 2.0

leave a comment »

Burning_House

 

I just read a silly screed deploring Matt Taibbi (a great investigative journalist IMHO) for rude/crude behavior many years ago in Russia….

 

Let it be known, I find rude and crude generally acceptable as long as the door isn’t locked and no one is required to listen in order to keep their job. If we women want to be seen as equal, we have to be able to function in the whole wide world and attempts to edit it to conform to recent Puritanical views are (to me) just a new form of Bullying.

 

Some years ago I started seeing the Bully as the new American role model. Now I’m seeing it further advance in an onslaught against egalitarianism, free speech and diversity. The very folks we might expect to promote diversity often now complain about ‘micro-aggression’ and demand ‘safe space’ where no contrary opinion is allowed. Those fighting to protect women from assault and intimidation have been joined by a pay-back crowd who seek celebrity based on cheap shots with little justification.  American culture at the moment has the character of a mob, bent on witch-burning and bringing down the house.

 

There are many ‘reasons’ for feelings of rage, impotence and disappointment- but there is only one real point to make here:

We are in an era of murder-suicide. The house that will topple is our own. Have we really run out of any other remedies or love for each other?
Advertisements

Written by laudyms

December 18, 2017 at 9:27 am

Every seed free, every garden thriving!!

with one comment

VANDANA SHIVA on SUSTAINABILITY

Written by laudyms

March 15, 2015 at 8:56 am

Senator Elizabeth Warren Speech- fighting for working people

leave a comment »

Senator Elizabeth Warren addressed the AFL-CIO National Summit on Raising Wages Jan 7, 2014 in Washington, D.C.

GOP: Rapists’ Procreation Protection Platform

with 2 comments

Image

Republican Platform Panel Backs Blanket Ban on Abortion  Bloomberg News  08/22/12

Republican drafters of their party’s 2012 platform reaffirmed support for a constitutional amendment banning abortion that would allow no exception for terminating pregnancies caused by rape.

Written by laudyms

August 23, 2012 at 4:32 pm

US power grid tests approved without public consent (costs and consequences)

leave a comment »

By Rosalind Peterson

July 31, 2011

http://newswithviews.com/Peterson/rosalindA.htm

On June 27, 2011, CBS News reported: “…A yearlong experiment with America’s electric grid could mess up traffic lights, security systems and some computers and make plug-in clocks and appliances like programmable coffeemakers run up to 20 minutes fast…” [1]   CBS News also reported that:  “…Tom O’Brian, who heads the time and frequency division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, expects widespread (unspecified) effects…” [1].

The CBS report did not specify who approved this test.  This test will begin without public consent, substantial public notice or public debate in mid-July 2011 [1].  This test could disrupt so many businesses, state and local governments, and other government agencies, that it could quickly become a National Security nightmare and a massive public headache.

“A lot of people are going to have things break and they’re not going to know why,” said Demetrios Matsakis, head of the time service department at the U.S. Naval Observatory, one of two official timekeeping agencies in the federal government…This will be an interesting experiment to see how dependent our timekeeping is on the power grid, Matsakis said. [1-2].

According to CBS News, “…The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), runs the nation’s interlocking web of transmission lines and power plants and they will be conducting the tests…” [1, 3].  Will this company be liable for appliance replacement and other costs associated with these tests?

The disruptions from these tests may have the following consequences according to various news reports:

Read the rest of this entry »

The future is organic: But it’s more than organic!

with one comment

Why we can’t afford Industrial Agriculture

by Dr. E. Ann Clark
Published Jan 14 2010 by University of Guelph, Archived Mar 7 2011  Energy Bulletin

 

INTRODUCTION
Organic will be the conventional agriculture of the future, not because of wishful thinking or because it is the right thing to do, or because of some universal truth revealed from on high.

You don’t need to be a utopian to see the agricultural landscape of the future dominated by organic practitioners – whether in the city or in the country – if you stop to ask yourself …why are we not organic now?

How did we get to where we are now, and not just in farming but in the entire agri-food system?

How did we evolve an agri-food system so centered on specialization, consolidation, and globalization? What drove us to an agri-food system that reportedly consumes 19% of the national energy budget – but only 7 of the 19% are used on the farm, with the remaining 12% incurred by post-farmgate transport, processing, packaging, distribution, and meal preparation (Pimentel, 2006)? Is this all the result of Adam Smith’s invisible hand – an inevitable and inescapable result of the unfettered free market or other universal principle in action – or is there more to it?

This paper will present the argument that the future is organic because the design drivers that have shaped and molded the current agri-food system are changing, demanding a wholly new, and largely organic, approach to agriculture. Efforts to make the current model less bad – more sustainable – are counterproductive because they dilute and deflect the creative energy and commitment that are urgently needed to craft productive, ecologically sound systems driven by current solar energy (Pollan, 2008). Although time does not permit coverage, post-oil design drivers will also necessarily demand not just organics but novel agri-food systems emphasizing

  • local/decentralized food production, and
  • seasonal consumption expectations,
  • from minimally processed foods.
  • Evidence will be presented to show that organic is not enough, however. Ecological soundness[1] will require a de-emphasis on annual cropping coupled with re-integration of livestock, both to mimic the principles that sustain Nature and to dramatically reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Corporate Control? Not in These Communities

    with 4 comments

    Citizens of Mt. Shasta, California have developed an ordinance to keep corporations from extracting their water.

    Photo by Jill Clardy.

    Can local laws have a real effect on the power of giant corporations?

    by Allen D. Kanner       Feb 04, 2011          YESmagazine

    Mt. Shasta, a small northern California town of 3,500 residents nestled in the foothills of magnificent Mount Shasta, is taking on corporate power through an unusual process—democracy.

    The citizens of Mt. Shasta have developed an extraordinary ordinance, set to be voted on in the next special or general election, that would prohibit corporations such as Nestle and Coca-Cola from extracting water from the local aquifer. But this is only the beginning. The ordinance would also ban energy giant PG&E, and any other corporation, from regional cloud seeding, a process that disrupts weather patterns through the use of toxic chemicals such as silver iodide. More generally, it would refuse to recognize corporate personhood, explicitly place the rights of community and local government above the economic interests of multinational corporations, and recognize the rights of nature to exist, flourish, and evolve.

    Mt. Shasta is not alone. Rather, it is part of a (so far) quiet municipal movement making its way across the United States in which communities are directly defying corporate rule and affirming the sovereignty of local government.

    Since 1998, more than 125 municipalities have passed ordinances that explicitly put their citizens’ rights ahead of corporate interests, despite the existence of state and federal laws to the contrary. These communities have banned corporations from dumping toxic sludge, building factory farms, mining, and extracting water for bottling. Many have explicitly refused to recognize corporate personhood. Over a dozen townships in Pennsylvania, Maine, and New Hampshire have recognized the right of nature to exist and flourish (as Ecuador just did in its new national constitution). Four municipalities, including Halifax in Virginia, and Mahoney, Shrewsbury, and Packer in Pennsylvania, have passed laws imposing penalties on corporations for chemical trespass, the involuntary introduction of toxic chemicals into the human body.

    When the attorney general of Pennsylvania threatened to sue Packer Township for banning sewage sludge within its boundaries, six other Pennsylvania towns adopted similar ordinances.

    Read the rest of this entry »