30 October 2015

US targets its own people instead of ISIS

The Blog

The US government is more concerned by its own people than foreign terrorist threats such as the so-called ISIL Takfiri terrorist group, the founder of We Are Change has alleged.

Luke Rudkowski, founder of the American grassroots alternative media team We Are Change, has lashed out attempts to label his organization an extremist group. In one video, he confronted mainstream media journalist Chris Matthews for using just such a description of his organization. The video shows a stumped Matthews refusing to answer questions about his slander of the media activist group, and trying to flee.

In a stunning analysis in a different video, Luke Rudkowski connected the mainstream media attack on his organization with the US Department of Justice's "pivot" away from foreign terror groups like ISIL towards its own people. Much of this attack, Luke says, will consist of misrepresenting progressive or nonpartisan groups who merely criticize the US government as "racist" and "bigots", as Matthews did in a televised broadcast mentioning We Are Change.

Fixated on what it sees as the internal threat of vigilant armed Americans and Americans exercising other Constitutional rights such as their free speech, elements of the US government would like to abandon the almost farcical few airstrikes the US carries out against ISIL. Their idea is to focus instead on targeting Americans, who are described as "domestic terrorists" in the regime's clouded language of murder and deceit.

Vowing never to stop his reporting, no matter what threats and intimidation come from the US federal government, Luke described the regime as "power-hungry parasites" and "insane". The final portion of the video called for viewers to counter the regime's lies by tuning in to his videos and other media.

The momentum of US efforts to censor criticism of the regime appears to be growing, and alternates between calls to prosecute Americans for speaking to shutting down foreign news broadcasters. A think tank led by US Senator John McCain recently called for alternative media channels like the RT network to be taken off the air in the US. While the think tank described its agenda as stopping "propaganda" from Russia's President Vladimir Putin, it must be seen in view of the larger pressure to censor all alternative media and criticism of the regime.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Kashmir annexation remembered

The Blog

Kashmiris observed "Black Day" recently, on October 27. Black Day remembers when Indian troops began their military occupation of Jammu and Kashmir on October 27 1947, in order to suppress the national aspirations of the people in the area.

When the Subcontinent was partitioned, Jammu & Kashmir was predominantly a Muslim majority area with a 78.9% Muslim population. Because it was a Muslim majority state and contiguous to Pakistan, Kashmir was expected to accede to Pakistan or possibly gain its own independence. However, British colonial authorities did not respect the rights of the Kashmiri people. Rather than partitioning the Subcontinent more carefully, they promptly abandoned it to ethnic and religious conflict.

Since India illegally annexed parts of it in 1947, the area of Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed successive revolts, violent crackdowns and extrajudicial killings by Indian forces against peaceful demonstrators, and large-scale attempts at ethnic cleansing by the Indian regime. India repeatedly excuses such atrocities by claiming to target terrorists. Many Muslims have been displaced from their homes by the Indian policy of using violence to alter the facts on the ground in the area, so they can portray their claim to Kashmir as legitimate.

India has failed to comply with UN Security Council resolutions on Kashmir. The area was intended to be demilitarized and subject to a popular referendum to determine its status under international law, but India has still failed to observe these steps to resolve the conflict and refuses to withdraw its forces.

It is worth noting that India suppresses the self-determination of numerous other communities within its proclaimed borders, where there are still active rebellions by religious and cultural communities who do not accept the Indian regime's legitimacy. It is possible that the central government refuses to accept Kashmiri self-determination on the grounds that it might then have to offer similar independence to other territories seeking independence.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

27 October 2015

US not a hegemonic power: Wallerstein

The Blog

Immanuel Wallerstein, leading sociologist and historian of the world-system who once labelled the US as the global "hegemon", believes the US has lost its crown.

Wallerstein's theory of the world-system posits that the world economy is divided between "core" and "periphery" countries, the former specializing in high-tech labor and the latter specializing more in resource extraction and manufacture of more basic products. This division of labor is seen by Wallerstein is the primary cause of continued poverty and powerlessness in the Global South. On top of this system, in Wallerstein's theory, the US was the "hegemon", as the British Empire was and the Netherlands was prior to them.

For Wallerstein to declare the US "not a hegemonic power", as he did in a recent commentary on October 15, is something that must be taken seriously. Something dramatic has happened to the United States and the reach of its political and military power.

We may compare the retreat of US power to the excesses it enjoyed in the past. As Wallerstein says, "it isn’t even the most powerful actor in this fragmented region". As US power plummets, the American regime is forced to work with regimes it had previously ignored or attacked with impunity.

Rather than being US-led, US policy towards Syria is increasingly pulled along by its weaker allies such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and no coherence exists in supposed US-led efforts in the region. To quote Wallerstein's own analysis of the unfolding strategic US defeat in Syria:
If we turn to Syria, “coherent” is the last adjective one can apply to U.S. policy. On the one hand, it has sought to form an international “coalition” of countries committed to defeating the still expanding Islamic State (IS, also Daesh or ISIL). The United States also is committed in theory to the destitution of Bashar al-Assad. What the United States does not wish to do is to commit troops to still another Middle Eastern civil war zone. Instead, the United States offers to fight IS with drones that will bomb IS units, without even having any troops on the ground that could guide the drones. The consequence, inevitably, is “collateral damage” that intensifies anti-American feelings in Syria.
If the single greatest proponent of a unified theory of world history describes the US as losing its leading political status in the world, we must begin to ask serious questions. Why has the US been defeated in Syria? Who did this, and now who will take America's place when the hawks are dead?

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Jurors in US are racially biased, govt-led

The Blog

The use of juries in trials is obviously intended to ensure a trial by one's peers, or by a fair representation of one's country. But what if the jurors are overwhelmingly white, in the trial of a Black man?

Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) think tank commentator Roderick Long slammed the use of jurors selected by government-appointed prosecutors as a way of ensuring biases and unfair trials rather than preventing them.

In a society as heterogeneous as the US, there is a constant risk of interference from racist prejudices in any search for justice. As Long emphasizes, "the government’s practice in many southern jurisdictions of excluding blacks from juries is especially troubling, and raises questions about the practice of peremptory challenge itself", when one considers how Black people have consistently been disproportionately targeted by US law enforcement.

Referencing the ideas of US abolitionist Lysander Spooner, Roderick Long advocates in his 22 October post that the solution is an autonomous legal system in the US, independent of the influence and control of government-appointed prosecutors. Trial by one's peers should be maintained as a function of civil society, therefore, instead of the state.

Further emphasis is placed on making juries perhaps more representative of the larger society, including representing views and ethnicities that government may not have been comfortable with.

An example of such reform may be to appoint jurors who hold an unfavorable view of law enforcers or who do not recognize the US regime's authority (who may in fact account for the majority of Americans). A further reform may be to ensure that the proportion of Black people appointed on any jury must be roughly analogous to their proportion in the state or neighborhood in question.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

23 October 2015

Straitjacket for murderer John McCain

The Blog

US Senator and Cold War-era criminal John McCain "should be in a straitjacket" rather than Congress.

That's the view of Mike Whitney, a conflict analyst writing at CounterPunch in a recent op-ed. The provocative op-ed appeared in the October 21 issue of the well-known investigative magazine, which once made its name by publishing unflattering pictures of Henry Kissinger from a conference in Brazil.

McCain is a particular target of ridicule by Whitney because of the way he now calls for the US to start using its air power aggressively against the Russians, interfering in the Russian airstrikes against terrorist groups backed by the US. Whitney characterized McCain's statements as a call for the Third World War, because such action by the US would entail US forces attacking Russian forces, and both sides possess nuclear-capable vessels and aircraft on call to aid on the battlefield.

What you need to know about Arizona Senator John McCain:
  • McCain has supported illegal wars that have murdered millions of people, including the 2003 aggression against Iraq and the aborted 2013 aggression against Syria.
  • These wars include the Vietnam War, in which McCain personally murdered civilians by dropping Agent Orange and napalm on their homes.
  • During the Vietnam War, McCain also bombed and murdered 134 US personnel in a deadly incident on the USS Forrestal.
  • McCain's father, an Admiral in the US Navy, covered up the Israeli attack that killed 34 US sailors on the USS Liberty, and also covered up his son's aforementioned murder of US military personnel.

It should be noted that McCain's suggestions on Syria are considered useless by US generals at this point, even though McCain has access to the same classified intelligence briefings as them. The US military leadership rejected targeting Syrian forces with its air power as too difficult in 2013. As a result, the US had opted for naval bombardment instead in the planned aggression. This aggression ultimately never occurred as Assad consented to dismantle his chemical weapons, under pressure from Russia.

So-called "war hero" McCain seems to have forgotten the military facts on the ground and is even more oblivious to the fact that the Russian Navy has blockaded US access to Syria from the Mediterranean. Considering this, Whitney's analysis sees no prospect of McCain's recommendations being adopted by the Pentagon.

However, as Whitney points out, McCain is also a supporter of the neoconservative policy goal of dismantling the Syrian Arab Republic into several warring regimes propped up by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others. The plan, which was articulated at publications and think tanks, refuses to countenance Syria regaining its territorial integrity.

The US has been increasingly panicked in recent days, disappointed as civilians return home to towns and villages secured by the Assad government, which still enjoys majority popular support. The US sees this progress as a threat to its goal of dismantling Syria, depopulating and returning the country to the Stone Age in order to serve Israel at the expense of the US's own security.

We reported earlier that Mike Whitney had predicted Russia would outmaneuver the US in Syria, which appears to have come true now. This was prior to the Russian airstrikes, which now appear to have made massive progress against ISIL and other terror groups. Considering the Russian successes, Whitney encourages Russian President Vladimir Putin to push on and ignore any US requests for dialogue, which only aim to delay restoring security to the country.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

TPP is big govt propping up big business

The Blog

Right-wing libertarians at the magazine Reason have a chauvinist, statist interpretation of what "free trade" means. They recognize it only in the expansion of US corporate hegemony and the enslavement of poor people.

Kevin Carson, writing at the antistatist think tank Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS), offered that characterization of so-called "free trade" as it was articulated in a recent op-ed found at Reason. The op-ed had praised the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as an accomplishment in free trade, and this was refuted in Carson's responding post at C4SS.

It is Orwellian to call the TPP "free trade", Carson argued. In actual fact, the TPP supports intellectual property (IP) which suppresses legitimate competition and innovation in order to privilege CEOs who ultimately needed no intellect in order to gain possession of such property:

"The draconian IP provisions of contemporary "free trade" treaties serve the interests of global corporations the same way high industrial tariffs served American corporations a century ago."

IP enables corporations to suppress commercial competition in poverty-stricken countries, where the poorest of the poor in the world are contracted to work as sweatshop laborers. Also in the retort to the Reason op-ed, Carson wrote that IP is:

"a form of protectionism that still gives them [corporate stakeholders] a monopoly over selling a particular product in a particular market - but operates at corporate boundaries rather than national ones"

The TPP, and the "free trade" it represents, are effectively then a shift from one (national corporate) protectionism to another (global corporate) protectionism.

Carson sums up his criticism of the TPP and other so-called free trade deals by pointing out the contradiction in the supposed anti-statism of right-wing libertarians. What they are arguing for is necessarily heavier state intervention in the economy. State subsidizing and protecting big business from competition is the object of all IP law, and such intervention has become the basis of most global corporate profit.

Corporations are leeching on the US state, only for right-wing libertarians at publications and bodies like Reason to portray their success as an example of free markets with zero state intervention. As such, Carson mocks, someone who thinks "free trade" agreements reduce the intervention of the state in the economy might as well believe in Santa Claus.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

20 October 2015

Antistatist think tank on Jeremy Corbyn

The Blog

How should left-wing antistatists and anarchists see Jeremy Corbyn, current Leader of the Opposition in the UK, who is considered "hard-left" in the media?

Looking at the Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) for commentary on Corbyn, you'll find only three articles mentioning his name right now. This is understandable, considering that Corbyn is a fairly new political animal for most people in the information media since his rise to leadership of the Labour Party.

Views at the the think tank, however, vary between quite enthusiastic support and expectations of severe disappointment to come if Corbyn doesn't turn out to be as radical as his supporters and detractors both claim him to be. The character of Jeremy Corbyn as someone who continually maintains his principles and fights for the public good against all the odds is not questioned, however, by either of these two competing viewpoints.

C4SS commentators Derek Wall and Kevin Carson both concurred that Jeremy Corbyn's success was a sign of progress. On 4 October, International Coordinator of the Green Party of England and Wales Derek Wall, who knows Jeremy Corbyn, wrote at C4SS that he was "amazed" by Corbyn's success, pointing out that Corbyn was far from a mainstream figure and was "more popular with Greens than his own party".

Also mentioning Corbyn in his response to Wall - which was not directly concerned with Jeremy Corbyn but with points of political theory - Carson gave the following commentary:
I see a great deal of promise in Corbyn’s distinction between state and social ownership — perhaps even some hope of a partial move back towards Colin Ward’s vision of public services organized around mutuals and friendly societies instead of government and corporate bureaucracies.
An earlier article published at C4SS, however, quotes another anarchist blog at length, questioning whether Corbyn will really change anything in Britain's political landscape. Blogger Pete James from Whatever-ism had predicted that Jeremy Corbyn would disappoint his supporters in the way Syriza had disappointed the Greek people after promising to defeat austerity.

The above skepticism mirrors a similar view advanced by leading American social scientist Immanuel Wallerstein, stating that elections have little impact on the world-system. Wallerstein also weighed in on the inherent weakness of national governments in challenging a historical social system like capitalism, which is ultimately how Greece was defeated by the interests of European and international bankers.

However, with the UK being a major financial player in the world-economy and linked integrally to the US, the threat from a Corbyn-ruled Britain to the capitalist historical system would be much more severe than anything from a peripheral European country like Greece. Wallerstein himself also described Corbyn's success as part of a global revival of the political left.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Transhumanist Party ineffective: Mont

The Blog

The Mont Order information media club now sees the Transhumanist Party in both the United States and Europe as ineffective.

Background: What is the Order?

At a Mont "Security Council" location on the deep web, a thread from top Mont advisers established a consensus among Mont transhumanists that the "Transhumanist Party" is ineffective. All the attention was focused on the party in the US, led by Transhumanist presidential candidate Zoltan Istvan.

The resulting Mont statement treated the European bloc as having the same problem and expressed a lack of confidence in it, too. This was the result of a member pointing out its lack of immediate electoral success, although this was a weaker point in the statement, considering the Transhumanist Parties have only existed for less than one year.

Overall, the tone of the Mont Order's statement on the Transhumanist Parties is tame, declaring only "no confidence" and expressing the view that there is a deficit in terms of knowledge, candidates, and overall representation of the transhumanist community in such parties.

Some key quotes from anonymous insiders at the thread are considered acceptable for public use and are as follow:

  • "The TP (Transhumanist Party) is out of control." - October 08, 2015, 09:08:14 PM
  • "Zoltan was just looking to boost traffic to his websites so the whole thing is just a stunt aiming to benefit one man... Transhumanist politics is a contradiction. If transhumanism is about fixing flaws in the human genome and the human brain, why would they need to engineer around people's prejudices and violence by building governments and constitutions? ... The reasons for the existence of these parties are not convincing." - October 09, 2015, 05:02:20 PM
  • "What bothers me is that the US right now wants a Third party candidate and we could have put a Transhumanist on the top of the pyramid. It is such a shame." - October 09, 2015, 09:31:47 PM
  • "I have no grudge against the people, only the organizations." - October 11, 2015, 05:54:43 PM

As shown, the entire concept of transhumanist political parties was also dissected and criticized to some extent in the Mont thread. Critics of the Transhumanist Party USA have stated that the party ignores the broad spectrum of the views held by transhumanists, which are difficult to fit into a single political category.

A petition already exists against Istvan, disavowing him for representing narrow interests and not effectively standing on behalf of the transhumanist community or its shared values. It has already been signed by some eminent transhumanists, including James Hughes, Amon Twyman, Natasha Vita-More, and others.

The Mont Order is an unofficial, unorganized group of news media bloggers and political activists based in multiple countries. Transhumanism, which has some Mont advocates, is a philosophy that predicts technology and medicine fundamentally changing humans as a species, potentially evolving into ageless and physically enhanced "posthuman" creatures.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

16 October 2015

US 'irrational actor' against other states

The Blog

International Relations (IR) theory demonstrates that the regime of the United States, including competing presidential candidates, are irrational and do not understand their own country's interests.

An essay has been spotted getting re-blogged at Fort Russ - a recently founded media criticism blog. It looks at differing IR approaches and ultimately concludes that the United States is more interested in protecting the national interests of the State of Israel than the United States. This analysis was originally published at the Center for Syncretic Studies (CSS), a small geopolitics think tank, and was authored by academic activist Joaquin Flores.

Syria was the main focus of the analysis, as Flores dissected how the US involvement in the conflict is harmful to the US's own national interests and exposed how the only possible beneficiary is Israel. For years, there has already been a respected view among scholars in the realist school of International Relations that Israel serves no valuable role in US strategy and is solely a liability. John Mearsheimer and Strephen Walt were the pioneers of such a thesis, and attracted much controversy by publishing it.

While offering no substantive benefit for US interests, the alliance with the apartheid regime in Israel and its goal of land-grabbing and occupation of Arab lands draws the US into a costly and pointless international scandal. It stains the image of the US among all the other countries of the Middle East - some of whom the US actually depends on for its energy supplies.

The US does not actually rely on Israel for anything and gains nothing by being allied to the Tel Aviv regime, making US actions to support Israel essentially suicidal. Flores notes how unusual this relationship is, stating, "lack of sovereign control over foreign policy is typically seen in the dependency model and is normal for weaker states subject to control by stronger states", yet the US is stronger than Israel and seems to be led around like a mule by this smaller state. The consequences of the US relationship with a small parasite state, which offers nothing to the US in return for US blood sacrifices in the region, could only entail the death of the US regime alongside Israel.

Flores' chilling analysis explained that the US is destined to defeat, because its supposedly hawkish global strategy constantly undermines US interests and causes devastating setbacks for US national security at every level. Selected key points from Flores' analysis:
Recent statements by US officials and candidates for office are indeed not only subjectively obnoxious but also objectively illegal by the standards of international law
...this [interventionist] posturing... would actually result in catastrophic defeat for the Empire in the Syrian theatre, if words were translated into actions... 
...US media attempts to paint Russia’s publicly stated aim [to protect the Assad regime] as if it is a conspiracy... But the Russian president... went on US television on NBC’s 60 minutes and – when directly asked by the interviewer – confirmed that indeed Russia is working to buttress the recognized government of Syria.  These actions are entirely consistent with international law...
...that the US undertakes its actions in contravention to international law and standing accords and agreements between states, it is also exceptional...
...rather than being viewed as problematic and evidence of a criminal system which stands outside... the international community... American exceptionalism is viewed as a providential right and an inherent good...
...The United States... is the single state that repeatedly confuses the basic concepts and terms in IR and international law – creating an incoherent mess out of meaning, language, and internationally accepted standards. It combines and mixes phrases and meanings, which produces a meandering and self-referential combination of ‘mumbo-jumbo’ which categorically can only be described as discoherence.  It switches its own internal and implied meanings and definitions for the consensus ones...
...‘legitimacy’ in US language only refers to its friends and partners, and vaguely though very inconsistently refers to concepts of democracy, freedom, and human rights.  It is confused and inconsistent...
...The United States uses international platforms to threaten other states and to communicate in this discoherent syntax to its own population.  But other states interpret their statements, indeed as threats, but ones which are not rational and instead based in this discoherence...
...acts as a Chauvinist, and irrational idealist state...
...the most dangerous, historically.  US policy in the middle-east is largely irrational... from either a realist or idealist perspective. From these perspectives, there is little basis for intervention if the US does not want to face serious set-backs in the global arena, or if it does not want to create a global conflict which it is projected to lose...
... its policies, whether rational or irrational, are not rooted in an idealism based in conceptions of peace, mutual respect, and stability – but rather in conceptions of domination, chauvinism, exceptionalism, and the fetishization of military solutions
... its self destruction will not be the result of trying to save the world, but as a result of trying to dominate it... Its motivations... will however have... a material consequence in the willingness of other states to aid the US in the aftermath of its self-immolation.
The abridged analysis makes the situation very clear. The United States is alone in promoting its radical ideology of US "exceptionalism" (the idea that the US is the most superior country in the world and the model for all other countries to follow) even though it talks of allies and partners.

The result is an "inherent bad faith model", whereby the US regime is only capable of reacting hostilely to initiatives by any other regime in the world. Even good progress or peaceful acts by other countries are dismissed as hostile subterfuge and scheming by the US leadership, who will only ever acknowledge the US as doing anything "good".

Such "good" (which will include lies, breaches of international law, and outright murder) is itself defined in the most chauvinist terms. It will encompass anything that promotes US leadership over the world.

The US regime's political leadership qualify as 'chauvinist irrational idealists' as the essay sttes. The US has become incapable of normal diplomatic relations with other states because its leadership can no longer communicate their intentions to other nations in any language other than threats and violence. They are currently speaking in what Flores calls "mumbo jumbo", whereby US leaders concoct their own deluded and twisted definitions of political terms such as "legitimacy" and "democracy", which no other countries understand.

The US threatens other countries with war if they do not obey edicts based on its unintelligible chauvinism and nonsense ideology, which is not recognized by other countries.

Not only does the handicapped US regime fail to communicate its intentions to other countries because of its confusing language, but it cannot even understand its own goals. Such is the effect of promiscuously mixing propaganda terms with diplomacy, and speaking to other nations in the language of one nation's own propaganda and ideological delusion.

In International Relations (IR) an irrational actor refers to a country that cannot be negotiated with because its actions cannot be understood by other actors, making it extremely dangerous and suspect. No-one can predict what it is going to do next. Often, in IR classrooms, the term also refers to apocalyptic terrorist groups including al-Qaeda and rogue states with an isolated, radical ideology. The term easily applies to a country isolating itself with beliefs in its own national superiority, like the US regime.

The regime's calculus of how to act is anchored in confused and dangerous chauvinism that only appeals within the regime and clashes with the international community, creating conflicts.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Bernie Sanders won Democrat debate?

The Blog

Bernie Sanders won the recent debate setting US Democratic Party candidates against each other, the trend in a poll conducted at teleSUR has shown.

While only a small number of votes had been cast at the alternate media platform so far at the time of this post's writing on 14 October 2015, they showed the American left's apparent champion Bernie Sanders winning.

Sanders clashed with Hillary Clinton on the issue of Syria, describing the conflict as a "quagmire in a quagmire" and comparing it with the disastrous 2003 Iraq War. In contrast Clinton argued for more US involvement in the Syrian conflict, including direct military involvement by US forces to salvage what has become an increasingly embarrassing failed war for the United States.

You can see the latest direction of the poll now, by casting your own vote at teleSUR

In the poll in question, Clinton was significantly behind Sanders, with the remaining candidates getting a pitiful level of approval in the single digits.

Bernie Sanders, who has called himself a socialist, is seen as the main progressive, alternative and anti-war candidate for the White House. However, some disagree, instead referring to him only as a new puppet of the same interest groups responsible for corrupting current President Barack Obama and turning him against the democratic interests he originally defended. Obama, for example, criticized corporate lobbyists before taking office. Later, he turned in favor of them.

Lincoln Chafee was the only Democratic candidate who strongly came out in support of Edward Snowden - the NSA contractor-turned whistleblower in exile in the Russian Federation, who exposed government mass surveillance. Chafee also has a strong progressive history of opposing neoconservative lobbyists, wars, and US support for Israel.

While Sanders is considered the premier anti-war candidate, he has increasingly caved in to warmongering against Russia, Iran and even Edward Snowden, even giving his approval for the drone program that enabled so much murder by the US regime. For this, he has been heavily criticized by anti-war publications as a deceiver whose rhetoric is as untrustworthy as Barack Obama's in 2008.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

13 October 2015

The Mont Order's unofficial conspiracy

The Blog

The Mont Order, a name well-known to conspiracy theorists (just search Google!) as some legendary and possibly ancient sect of intellectual and social engineers, today has no shortage of influence in the global information media.

According to its biography with the prominent alternative media outlet Dissident Voice, the Mont Order was once a unique society of students with an interest in religion. After its formal existence ended, it has been "continuing its campaigns through friendly organizations". And, rather than manifesting as an evident political group, it has amassed a membership consisting of already active organizations and individuals with the aim of bringing them success and security.

Evidence of Mont's continuing "campaigns" can be found in the writings of a number of bloggers and web-based publications right now. To this end, we have prepared a sample, from the micro-blogging website Twitter, of some of the recent blog posts from the Order's wise and diverse members. The posts illustrate the mutually supportive writing styles of differing members, and how they instinctively work towards the same anti-colonial and liberating goals across the world.

Just follow Mont Unofficial (@montorder), for more posts updated automatically from all across the Mont Order society.

While the Mont Order still appears to lack a published ideology or program, or even a stated headquarters or country of operation, there are no limits to its reach across borders. Mont thinkers already contribute at several influential publications based in multiple countries, and have hinted repeatedly at a goal to enlarge this influence across the world to achieve a truly global network of civil society pressure and information.

Outside observers of Mont have little idea what the Mont Order aims to achieve, and its own members have confessed to not knowing what the group is for. Such uncertainty, while disorienting to outsiders, has not hindered the capability of members to help each other in the field of information media so far.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

"Brexit" may need to be prior to 2017

The Blog

The European Union is an "undemocratically corporatized leviathan" and a "proxy for the agendas of the Western Establishment".

This is the view of Steve Topple, breaking with the perspective of much of the proclaimed British political left. Captured in an op-ed at PoliticalSift on 9 October 2015, Topple advocates a strategic British exit ("Brexit") from the EU before 2017.

From the op-ed:
Everything else we now recognise – the EEC, free trade agreements, free movement of people, the ECB – have all been installed as nothing more than levers to further (and protect) the rise of globalised capitalism.
Topple quotes Robert Griffiths, who described the EU as a "monopoly capitalist United States of Europe", explaining that it has become an imperialist actor competing at an increasingly military and economic level with other powers. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which the EU and the US have been negotiating, is sure to undermine the rights of workers and the sovereignty of the public by enabling private firms to sue the public (i.e. their national government). Further criticism is aimed at the European Central Bank and the European Court of Auditors, both of them being corrupt as their members belong to the same financial and corporate special interest groups.

The op-ed warns us that in 2017, EU states are projected to lose their veto rights over key areas of legislation. The EU will become drastically more powerful, with a mere 55% approval for a law in the EU resulting in the implementation of the law, thereby potentially being forced down the throats of entire populations protesting such law. According to Topple, this means the surrender of popular self-determination.

Even more worrying is the fact that states will in that year become unable to withdraw from the EU, according to the EU's new rules, Topple argues. Countries will need, again, 55% approval by the other countries in order to withdraw, and their own people's demands are to be excluded from any say in the process.

UK Prime Minister David Cameron promised a referendum in late 2017, after the British people will have lost any sovereign right to withdraw from the EU, if Topple's analysis is solid. While the possibility of unilateral withdrawal would still exist, the EU's increasing federalization and calls to construct an army hint at a possible conflict in the event of such "separatism".

Rather than a pure chauvinist iteration of Britain demanded by rightists as the alternative to the EU, however, Topple advocates a "borderless, socialist union" based on majority citizen interests rather than minority financial interests.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

9 October 2015

Reason gets schooled by C4SS... again

The Blog

Anti-statist commentator and theorist Kevin Carson has once again gone after Reason for the magazine's dogmatic adherence to neoliberal ideology. This ideology plagues the publication's understandings of innovation and competition, conflating them with American chauvinism and the asinine claims to "intellectual property" advanced by corporations that lack any merit or intellect.

In an op-ed at Reason, writer Stephanie Slade appealed to the increasingly politicized 'people's Pope' Francis to "embrace capitalism" if he really wants to improve the lot of the world's poor. Commenting upon this in a response at the Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS), Carson ridicules Slade's assertion that “markets and globalization have lifted billions out of poverty and lessened global inequality”, correcting Slade that what exists is not a market but a system of global expropriation, conquest and chauvinism advanced by governments.

Carson contends that Slade is as ignorant of basic economic facts as she accuses the much-praised Pontifex. The global corporate economy is no free market, he points out. Rather, it is the end result of five hundred years of what Carson calls "colonialism, robbery and enslavement". This is perhaps a reference to the theory of the capitalist world-economy advanced by historical social scientist Immanuel Wallerstein, which sees the start of the conquest of the Americas by European armies as roughly the beginning of modern-day capitalism.

Far from being based upon freedom or real innovation, current "capitalism" is based instead on ruthless ownership and protection of property by gangs of thugs and brutal armed regimes masquerading as "democracies". No-one actually earned such property, and instead such ownership can solely be traced back to criminality, racism and class antagonism, Carson implies.

In Carson's own dramatic phrasing, we may understand the historic truth as follows:
Most of the minerals, farm land and petroleum reserves of the world continue to be held by the heirs and assigns of the original robbers — a giant, bleeding, arterial wound on the body of the global South that transnational corporations feast on like vampires. So global capitalism as we know it was founded on the violation of property rights. Talk of “inviolability” amounts to the robber saying “No more stealing, starting — NOW!”
Even supposing Pope Francis' ignorance of economics is fact, Carson concludes, an economics columnist like Stepahnie Slade at a publication as respected as Reason should know better than to recycle fallacies about intellectual property being somehow responsible for freedom. In reality, intellectual property is a form of protectionism, which does nothing more than slow down and prevent innovation.

If we assume that Slade is right about capitalism uplifting a billion from poverty, it remains a fact that it could be done faster if we had removed the suffocating and retarding enforcement of intellectual property laws by states.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Will synbio save us all from scarcity?

The Blog

Synbio has been the focus of an op-ed at h+ Magazine, where it is praised as potentially carrying the salvation of humankind.

Synbio is a shorthand term for synthetic biology, which refers to a field of biology involved in sequencing synthetic genomes to create new species from scratch. It was largely developed by a team under J. Craig Venter, who also made the achievements of the Human Genome Project.

From the Harry J. Bentham-authored article:
Like our bodies, our planet is no longer a sufficient vehicle for human dreams and aspirations. The biology of the planet is too inefficient to support the current growth of the human population. We face the prospect of eventually perishing as a species if we cannot repair our species’ oft-omitted disagreements with nature over issues of sustainability, congenital illness and our refusal to submit to the cruelties of natural selection from which we evolved. 
Once we recognize that the current species are flawed, we will see that only by designing and introducing new species can suffering, poverty and the depletion of natural resources be stopped. Once we look at this option, we find already a perfect and ultimately moral solution to the threats of climate change, disease, overpopulation and the terrible scarcity giving rise to endless injustice and retaliatory terrorism. 
The perfect solution could only be brought to the world by a heroic worker in the fields of biotech and synthetic biology. Indeed, this revolution may already be possible today, but fear is sadly holding back the one who could make it happen.
The article blamed a culture driven by profit at the expense of human needs, for preventing solutions to scarcity, disease, suffering and resource-driven wars. In the conclusion, the piece warned that if scientists do not break free from the immense corporate and industrial pressures not to share their inventions more quickly with the global poor, "we will talk about direct action to break free the scientific gifts they refused to share".

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

6 October 2015

"Refugee crisis", anti-Syria propaganda

The Blog

The so-called refugee crisis affecting Europe, as Syrians flee the war zone created by Western states supporting a violent "transition" to fake democracy in their country, is not sudden or unexpected. As one columnist argues, it is deliberate and coordinated propaganda.

According to Steve Topple, writing at Middle East Monitor (MEM) at the very end of September, the supposed crisis may be "stage-managed" to justify more Western involvement in the Syrian Civil War. This involvement is ultimately aiming to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power, which the United States has been attempting to achieve since 2006.

In essence, Western countries have deliberately and maliciously created the refugee "problem" they are now swooping into action to solve. Facts show that only a fraction of the refugees are Syrian and that many others come from other regions affected by US-led Western wars to spread fake democracy in the Islamic world.

Western leaders have portrayed the cause of the refugee problem as ISIL (ISIS, Islamic State, Daesh), rather than Western support for terrorism in Syria, thus suggesting ISIL is their main target, but the real goal of all Western involvement in Syria is to remove the government of Bashar al-Assad. Topple refers to the Wikileaks document exposing how such 'regime change' was US policy throughout the entire crisis and even earlier in 2006.

While UK Prime Minister David Cameron has cried crocodile tears with his statements in the media for Aylan Kurdi (pictured), a Syrian refugee boy who washed up on European shores after drowning in an attempt to reach the continent, "megalomaniac" Turkish President Erdogan does nothing to help the refugees. Erdogan's main goal has instead been to enlarge his tiny "no-fly zone" in the north of Syria, which he sees as a great military conquest over Syria and the Kurds by Turkey.

Topple pointed out that the so-called "Friends of Syria", which includes the Erdogan regime, are cynical devotees of the war in Syria and have no compassion for the Syrian people, supplying nothing but weapons into the embattled country.

War has raged in Syria since Western governments started the Civil War in the country in 2011 to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power. Since that time, these governments have used every channel to lie about the existence of non-extremist armed militants fighting the government, while allowing weapon supplies to reach ISIL and other Takfiri extremists fighting Assad's forces.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

'No-fly zone' is dead and Assad will win

The Blog

Russia's intervention in Syria with airstrikes has been remarkably successful. Reacting to this, terrorist groups in Syria and their supporters in the United States government preach ineffective and self-defeating ways of retaliating using their already overused swords of terrorism and aggression.

Some commentators have been unable to resist the temptation to compare Russia's new intervention with its last major intervention in the Islamic world, Afghanistan. Insisting that Russia is a trapped occupying power, despite only using 50 planes stationed at a single airfield, these commentators fail to recognize an important fact. Russia has already won, achieving its goal of permanently preventing  a US-led no-fly zone to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power. Without being able to threaten Assad with a no-fly zone for fear of hitting the Russians, the West has no choice but to watch Assad take control of his country again, one city at a time.

What anti-Syria media pundits are doing is a remarkable case of turning defeat into victory by altering the parameters of victory. The war isn't about overthrowing Assad anymore but about kicking the Russians out. But this type of mission-creep is exactly what Russian President Putin intended the US and its extremist allies to fall into, thereby forcing them to pull back from any possible no-fly zone and come to accept that Assad will never be overthrown.

All talk of removing Assad or creating a no-fly zone against Assad's warplanes from Turkey has been eclipsed by Russia's actions, as the West instead goes into despair about how to deal with Putin in Syria. But such anti-Russian hysteria will hit a brick wall because it is still Assad's vast and powerful armies, not the smattering of Russian planes, who will continue to retake the country and kill who needs to be killed. Now, no-one can possibly stop them, least of all the US Air Force.

It has been almost half a decade since the West said Assad would fall from power, and Assad is still in power. How many decades, how many millions of deaths, are needed before the West accepts that Assad is not going anywhere and withdraws the support for terrorism?

At the faith website Beliefnet, the L'Ordre blog had the following mocking comments for the US's commitment to the quagmire of a "failed revolution" in Syria:
Considering that the US can’t give the rebels the weapons needed to shoot down Russian and Syrian warplanes without also giving ISIL the ability to shoot down airliners and Coalition jets, the incompetent US Coalition has now become a key part of the Russian plan in Syria. It is effectively blocking the US’s only option for confronting Russia’s new assistance to the Syrian government. 
Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre#ixzz3ndPz0aHx
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/lordre#1XPq11KFmXjbkgI0.99
The author remarked the US successful elimination of Assad's chemical weapons had proven worthless, as US aggression only provoked the nuclear-armed Russian Navy and Air Force to enter Syria and pose an even greater threat to US interests.

The blog also called on Russia and the United States to engage in bilateral talks to end the crisis in Syria, acknowledging that both nuclear-armed powers are now deeply involved in the conflict and must bring it to an end together. Any attempt to bring one another's planes down, the blog stated, must be avoided because of the risks of escalation.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

2 October 2015

Catholic Church should take on the NSA

The Blog

The L'Ordre blog based at the top world faith press source Beliefnet called on the Roman Catholic Church to strike back at the US government for its spying.

The Roman Catholic Church has secrets, such as what the L'Ordre blog called the "machinations of succession" within the Church. When the US National Security Agency (NSA) spied on such activities, it violated centuries of Catholic tradition and directly committed sacrilege within the property of the Church. This was the argument given in a recent post at Beliefnet.

Calling the NSA's spying against Pope Francis as "aggression at a diplomatic, military, political level", the blog said this should not go unanswered by the Vatican. The blog noted the great wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and suggested legal action would be the way to resolve the conflict. The NSA's offenses should be "challenged in the highest courts in the land", the blog argued.

In addition to this analysis, the blog characterized the "wall of separation" between church and state as failing because government has become too aggressive in its surveillance and meddling in civil society. While churches are shy to do anything that might be interpreted as political, the government has no hesitation about invading, offending and hurting churches on a daily basis.

The conclusion of the post said that the targeting of the Catholic Church proves  the US is not only going after Muslims, but will target any religious group it distrusts. It is setting a precedent that can and will violate the Constitution if it wants to monitor or incarcerate a religious sect.

What the US government has done by targeting religions and thwarting their privacy is one of many mounting blatant violations of its own Constitution.

The full post can be read and shared via social media at Beliefnet.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dissolve borders to help Syria refugees?

The Blog

The solution to the suffering and inhumane treatment of Syria's refugees fleeing into Europe is to dissolve the borders of nation-states, an anarchist writer argues.

In his short post published via the Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS), Dylan Delikta urged humanity to move beyond the "tyranny of borders". Delikta wrote, "Borders create feelings of animosity that cause people to turn their backs on fellow humans simply because they come from a different region and don’t share their customs".

Added to this, the anarchist accused Western states of "decades (arguably centuries)" spent promoting war, exclusion and poverty in poorer regions of the Middle East, giving rise to these refugee flows.

Blaming the ideology of the inviolability of nation-states for justifying the use of "humiliation, detainment or outright slaughter" of whole populations who don't look or sound like us, Delikta expressed longing for a civilization without borders and constraints on the flow of humans. Much of what Delikta argues is already established liberal thinking in the West, but government leaders refuse to apply this ideology of liberty and equality during times of political crisis. Instead, at times of crisis affecting their own security, Western leaders tend to abandon their high humanitarian rhetoric revert back to archaic Nineteenth Century thinking about national integrity and sovereignty.

Delikta's argument to dissolve the borders for the Syrian refugees is mainly an antistatist theoretical one rather than a humanitarian one, with the end goal of antistatists being the dissolution of all current regimes. In practice, however, border dissolution is spreading the Takfiri Islamist violence to other countries and increasing suffering on the ground, with Lebanon and Iraq being existing examples of this cross-border spread of terrorism.

Of grave concern to many Europeans is the threat of infiltration by Takfiri militants from Syria into Europe. Western powers have constantly insisted on heavy counter-terrorist screening of Syrians before giving any help to them within Syria but no such screening is used on thousands of refugees actually entering Europe.

The clubof.info Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner
Top 5:

Dissident Voice on Media

Subscribe for Email Updates:

Delivered by Email


Buying a Robot Army: are drones the future of defense?

This essay argues that there is a path to the replacement of armies with a national defense system consisting entirely of automated resp...


Follow by Email


Mont Order English Vol 1

Mont Order English Vol 2

Mont Order English Vol 3

D News

Steve Topple – Mr Topple


Mont Order Voices

Blog Archive

Follow Me on Twitter