I certainly disagree with your statement on Kathleen's article pertaining to "Empathy", and she didn't whine about some wealthy famous people, either, if either one of us read her article correctly.
Musk, in my opinion, is an egotist, monopolist, and oligarchic who uses his vast wealth in shaping his agenda. Plus, he is anti-union, meaning anti-worker, and along with the other greedsters like Bezos, Schultz from Starbucks, and the current CEO of Trader Joe's, are lobbying the SCOTUS to repeal the National Labor Relations Act which Congress and FDR passed in the mid 1930's to make it easier for workers to join or establish labor unions with contractual language for both labor and management to adhere to, which is anathema to the capitalist desire of insatiable greed.
Do people really need billions of dollars which they could never spend in several lifetimes, hoarding their loot like pack rats, when so much of it could be taxed, as it was in the 1950's and early 60's, and used for the good of society (non-military usage)? A lack of empathy for the less fortunate among us, I would say. Charles Dickens wrote about long ago. Read Oliver Twist, for starters. Read 'The Iron Heel' by the humanitarian/socialist, Jack London. Both of these writers had "empathy" for the common people which I believe Ms Wallace has, as well.
I apologize for not watching the comments closer--I definitely don't want to see pointless insults and bizarre agendas to shut down others. Multiple comments on a piece someone doesn't like is just odd frankly and gives one pause as to what the personal or otherwise agenda is. Giving the feedback, saying you have issues with a topic is normal....... but to feel so strongly angered by a piece that is asking that we send a bit of empathy the way of those who are ignored is a weird ass hill to die on. And to make every attempt to insult anyone engaging in discussion--well, who the hell knows why someone would do that. Constructive criticism and valid points are welcome but when I see 4chan level nonsense I'll just ban. It's my house and I won't tolerate guests being insulted. This is a freedom from instance-- not a freedom to issue. I think a lot of people don't understand that concept. Again, I'm really sorry for not keeping it friendlier here. And if it turns into wack-a-mole with the same offenders just changing up names, I'll just go ahead and shut down comments. I love hearing what others think but that doesn't mean you welcome people with muddy shoes on your carpet.
Excellent article as always. I just wanted to comment on homelessness, as there's a grain of truth to what Musk says. Many people living on the streets have no intention of contributing to society. Yes, they would like a home but they refuse to work or pay rent. Any money they get immediately goes to speed or alcohol or heroin, etc. All but one of the ten or so homeless people I've met in Kansas City fit this profile. Genuinely homeless people are victims of misfortune. Those for whom it's a lifestyle choice are better known as street people. But there's a complicating factor. The irony of Musk's statement is that mental illness can make it next to impossible to live responsibly. Many people who received inadequate emotional support in early childhood are unable to care for themselves, much less contribute to society. Attachment theory recognizes three kinds of "insecure attachment," anxious-preoccupied, avoidant and disorganized. It's the third kind that often results in homelessness and drug use. Yes, there are parasites at the bottom as well as the top, but many who might be written off as street people are really suffering from a deeper kind of misfortune than unemployment or medical bills.
Very many people living in nice houses with money in the bank have no intention of contributing to society and are quite obsessed with self gain. I'd venture they vastly outnumber the homeless and street people combined.
The article is rather poor, in that it relies upon a couple celebrity names to make it's tiring case, and as far as a read, it's a bummer. Beating on the recently come to mind rich & famous is lazy, and it presumes that a readership is all bound up in this type of person, which is kinda sad. What of, "Who the hell is James Woods?" What of, "What do you know what Musk does with his money & who the hell relies on Accuweather to estimate construction costs?"
What's the gold standard in shaming the uncaring? Given the 15 seconds reflection a comment on a substack merits, could it be: "A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People from Being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick" by J. Swift? Take a look at it, it's early 18th Century FUNNY.
The difference between Wallace & Swift is that Swift lures all readers into reading. Imagine if Swift had named his piece, "How to Help the Poor." Blah! No, he serves up a title as delicious as the recipe's for baked infant in the story he writes. He did invoke a celeb in Francis Bacon, that that's a food too, so it carries well in satire.
Kathleen, you zeroed in and exposed the dark side of America today, which is a lack of Empathy, especially among the super-rich. Your article spells it out completely, and should be read by as many people as possible for a better understanding of who we are or aren't, as a people.
Outstanding commentary, for sure!
Also, I know what Diane means about going to Gaza as the Palestinian Holocaust continues, unchallenged by so-called democracies who show no "empathy" towards the people being slaughtered, tortured, starved, and imprisoned by the Zionazis of Israel, who, after what they have been doing, can never complain about being mistreated by the Waffen SS and their allies during WW11.
I also like Tom High's comments on this article. I've been advocating a national, coordinated general strike by working people ever since Raygun Ronnie fired the PATCO air traffic controllers in the early 80's and became the darling of the capitalist fascists ever since.
It's probably easier to climb Mt Everest or for a camel to pass through the head of a needle than for establishing a genuine egalitarian society with true cooperation between countries, where war is banned globally, but so far, just a pipe dream by political romantics.
She didn't zero in on anything, she used two recently in-the-news celebs to whine in a tiring fashion about how we can target some famous people for abuse. Why for instance should Elon Musk, if he wanted to mortgage his whole wealth and blow the minds of his investors, want to rebuild a fantastically rich neighborhood? Why would not just buy it all and create a park? Or a launchpad?
The article was run of the mill without anything new to say or anything old said in a fresh manner. It's a certain kind of kumbaya that pops up a lot in Counterpunch.
My first response to James Woods: Well, didn't you have insurance? My second response: Try going to Gaza and spending a week or two in a tent in al-Mawasi, then you might be grateful that your house burning down was all that happened, asshole!
I wonder do you realize YOU empower Woods' supposed plight by paying attention to him ie if you did not first place him on a celeb pedestal, you could not then knock him off of it. Furthermore of course he had insurance and he'll probably do very well, but it won't get him back his personal items. Your treatment of this perfectly human detail is YOU lacking empathy! Irony!
1. I do not place Woods on a pedestal; I don't even think he's a great actor. 2. Why should I feel empathy for a rich actor who has publicly supported Israel's assault on Gaza? 3. What he and others like him have lost does not begin to compare to what the Palestinians have lost!
I empathize with your feelings but feel the need to point out that people who tune in to mainstream "news" need to realize that the empathy factor there is always on the side of the rich and powerful. Consequently, you get a skewed slant that does not represent most of the people. There are still real people among us who probably don't give two fried shits about James Woods or Laura Ingraham. Beyond that, the people and wildlife deserve some coverage but they won't get it where you're looking.
I agree with the concept here as far as you take it. However, as far as I can see in this piece you are strictly referring to the US. There is little empathy towards the US in the third world and developing nations. They have seen and been on the receiving end of US aggression. As a matter of geopolitical empathy, it's a matter of goes around comes around, and the developing world is waiting for the fall of the US which can't come soon enough as far as they are concerned.
I like Luigi. Any health CEO's salary of $10.5 million is attained by killing people. Brian Thompson got justice meted out to him. The courts are useless. The revolution may have to be bloody.
Thing is, his actions were not revolutionary, they were psychopathic, egotistic criminality. A revolutionary action lifts a cause to public awareness or coalesces human resources into something stronger than before. He did none of this, he just killed a guy to play with guns.
Invoking revolution as you do is about the cheapest thing that completely non-revolutionary people do.
Lee, your conclusion, or solution as you’ve stated it, is one many are arriving at. But due to the country effectively morphing into a police state and with the military being a threat to neighboring countries, allies and its own citizens, ideas to counter the authoritarian capitalistic imperialist forces will be hard to come by. A “V” for Vendetta super being would be a best option. Anyone?
I'm 100% certain that Revolution is our only solution. But how? If anyone reading this knows of any ideas about how we can do the Revolution, please let me know. Even if the idea is not "mainstream," even if it's a bit confusing, even if it's just a website with a doofus ranting about all of the ways to do the Revolution, please let me know. Because insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting Warpigs to listen...
Embarrassing to read this out of what I suspect to be an adult.
You start a revolution with many people doing endless courageous work against all odds, which I suspect by your replies below is not your forte' or you would not have to ask for ideas.
Lol. Keep reading the thread. It gets better. I have an incredible idea, actually, and yes, against all odds, it just might be courageous enough to work.
General strikes. That, and nonviolent civil disobedience. The only way out of this mess.
Once the ‘internal rot’ Kathleen notes has been displaced by an actual fear of losing their wealth, or their lives (see the French Revolution, or multiple CEO assassinations), then we might proceed to solutions.
Thanks for the reply and the link. I read the intro to the interview. Sortition sounds interesting and changing our banking system is necessary, but the intro doesn't appear to have anything to do with starting a Revolution, which is what I'm most interested in. I've watched many videos from the 'institute of new economic thinking' YouTube channel, and my opinion of the channel is that it's just a bunch of Soros funded propaganda and bullshit, with lot's of talk and very little (zero) actionable steps to take. Civil disobedience is very effective. However, if there is no mass movement, then we might as well just sit back and wait for a violent Revolution to begin. I don't condone any violence, but surely we can innovate our way out of this hellscape, yea? Surely, a peaceful Revolution is possible, right? So, I'll ask again, are there any actual ideas that appear to be a Peaceful Revolution in the making? I didn't read the interview, because I don't read interviews. If there is no journalist who can distill the interview into an article, then I'm not interested.
Mass movements don’t usually arise from ‘ideas’; rather, are sparked by incidents of repression/oppression overreach from forces protective of the status quo. There are many sparks that potentially portend the onset of revolutionary mass movements, only to lack the critical organizing infrastructure to allow the movement to flourish. The main thing is to be ready to provide whatever ‘piece of the puzzle’ skill set you can contribute once the spark ignites an actual movement, rather than just a moment of protest.
As to interviews, I have learned a lot from them over the course of my 70+ years, and many times prefer the actual words from an author or scholar to those of a journalist/interpreter/analyst. I couldn’t care less who funds what, though it’s always a good idea to filter info through a lens of propaganda, empire, and narrative awareness.
To 'couldn't care less who funds what' is to be oblivious as to why the banking system needs to change and why Revolution is the only solution. A movement to defund private banks is necessary for Peace (fuck the I.M.F.) and voting 3rd party is necessary for a peaceful Revolution. Otherwise, we'll just keep getting the same results, which are bipartisan Warpigs being funded by Corporations, billionaires and bankers. Ideas can change the World. An 'idea' of how to do the Revolution might actually create a Revolution, if enough people agree it's an idea worth trying. Organization and communication are crucial. Perhaps someone somewhere will create an app for peaceful Revolution? Wouldn't that be something...
I’m far from oblivious, about banking, the need for revolution, and any number of other public policy issues. Who funds what can be important, but is no guarantor of truth.
Who funds what is paramount, because elites use media and algorithms to obscure the truth and to confuse, to maintain the narrative and the division, for profit, and to prevent 'ideas' of any uprisings. I'm glad you believe there's a need for Revolution. You're not oblivious, but you should care more about who funds what.
I certainly disagree with your statement on Kathleen's article pertaining to "Empathy", and she didn't whine about some wealthy famous people, either, if either one of us read her article correctly.
Musk, in my opinion, is an egotist, monopolist, and oligarchic who uses his vast wealth in shaping his agenda. Plus, he is anti-union, meaning anti-worker, and along with the other greedsters like Bezos, Schultz from Starbucks, and the current CEO of Trader Joe's, are lobbying the SCOTUS to repeal the National Labor Relations Act which Congress and FDR passed in the mid 1930's to make it easier for workers to join or establish labor unions with contractual language for both labor and management to adhere to, which is anathema to the capitalist desire of insatiable greed.
Do people really need billions of dollars which they could never spend in several lifetimes, hoarding their loot like pack rats, when so much of it could be taxed, as it was in the 1950's and early 60's, and used for the good of society (non-military usage)? A lack of empathy for the less fortunate among us, I would say. Charles Dickens wrote about long ago. Read Oliver Twist, for starters. Read 'The Iron Heel' by the humanitarian/socialist, Jack London. Both of these writers had "empathy" for the common people which I believe Ms Wallace has, as well.
I apologize for not watching the comments closer--I definitely don't want to see pointless insults and bizarre agendas to shut down others. Multiple comments on a piece someone doesn't like is just odd frankly and gives one pause as to what the personal or otherwise agenda is. Giving the feedback, saying you have issues with a topic is normal....... but to feel so strongly angered by a piece that is asking that we send a bit of empathy the way of those who are ignored is a weird ass hill to die on. And to make every attempt to insult anyone engaging in discussion--well, who the hell knows why someone would do that. Constructive criticism and valid points are welcome but when I see 4chan level nonsense I'll just ban. It's my house and I won't tolerate guests being insulted. This is a freedom from instance-- not a freedom to issue. I think a lot of people don't understand that concept. Again, I'm really sorry for not keeping it friendlier here. And if it turns into wack-a-mole with the same offenders just changing up names, I'll just go ahead and shut down comments. I love hearing what others think but that doesn't mean you welcome people with muddy shoes on your carpet.
Good for you, Kathleen! Trolls are like bedbugs. Nobody wants them around and they are hard to eliminate.
Excellent article as always. I just wanted to comment on homelessness, as there's a grain of truth to what Musk says. Many people living on the streets have no intention of contributing to society. Yes, they would like a home but they refuse to work or pay rent. Any money they get immediately goes to speed or alcohol or heroin, etc. All but one of the ten or so homeless people I've met in Kansas City fit this profile. Genuinely homeless people are victims of misfortune. Those for whom it's a lifestyle choice are better known as street people. But there's a complicating factor. The irony of Musk's statement is that mental illness can make it next to impossible to live responsibly. Many people who received inadequate emotional support in early childhood are unable to care for themselves, much less contribute to society. Attachment theory recognizes three kinds of "insecure attachment," anxious-preoccupied, avoidant and disorganized. It's the third kind that often results in homelessness and drug use. Yes, there are parasites at the bottom as well as the top, but many who might be written off as street people are really suffering from a deeper kind of misfortune than unemployment or medical bills.
Very many people living in nice houses with money in the bank have no intention of contributing to society and are quite obsessed with self gain. I'd venture they vastly outnumber the homeless and street people combined.
The article is rather poor, in that it relies upon a couple celebrity names to make it's tiring case, and as far as a read, it's a bummer. Beating on the recently come to mind rich & famous is lazy, and it presumes that a readership is all bound up in this type of person, which is kinda sad. What of, "Who the hell is James Woods?" What of, "What do you know what Musk does with his money & who the hell relies on Accuweather to estimate construction costs?"
What's the gold standard in shaming the uncaring? Given the 15 seconds reflection a comment on a substack merits, could it be: "A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People from Being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick" by J. Swift? Take a look at it, it's early 18th Century FUNNY.
The difference between Wallace & Swift is that Swift lures all readers into reading. Imagine if Swift had named his piece, "How to Help the Poor." Blah! No, he serves up a title as delicious as the recipe's for baked infant in the story he writes. He did invoke a celeb in Francis Bacon, that that's a food too, so it carries well in satire.
Kathleen, you zeroed in and exposed the dark side of America today, which is a lack of Empathy, especially among the super-rich. Your article spells it out completely, and should be read by as many people as possible for a better understanding of who we are or aren't, as a people.
Outstanding commentary, for sure!
Also, I know what Diane means about going to Gaza as the Palestinian Holocaust continues, unchallenged by so-called democracies who show no "empathy" towards the people being slaughtered, tortured, starved, and imprisoned by the Zionazis of Israel, who, after what they have been doing, can never complain about being mistreated by the Waffen SS and their allies during WW11.
I also like Tom High's comments on this article. I've been advocating a national, coordinated general strike by working people ever since Raygun Ronnie fired the PATCO air traffic controllers in the early 80's and became the darling of the capitalist fascists ever since.
It's probably easier to climb Mt Everest or for a camel to pass through the head of a needle than for establishing a genuine egalitarian society with true cooperation between countries, where war is banned globally, but so far, just a pipe dream by political romantics.
She didn't zero in on anything, she used two recently in-the-news celebs to whine in a tiring fashion about how we can target some famous people for abuse. Why for instance should Elon Musk, if he wanted to mortgage his whole wealth and blow the minds of his investors, want to rebuild a fantastically rich neighborhood? Why would not just buy it all and create a park? Or a launchpad?
The article was run of the mill without anything new to say or anything old said in a fresh manner. It's a certain kind of kumbaya that pops up a lot in Counterpunch.
My first response to James Woods: Well, didn't you have insurance? My second response: Try going to Gaza and spending a week or two in a tent in al-Mawasi, then you might be grateful that your house burning down was all that happened, asshole!
I wonder do you realize YOU empower Woods' supposed plight by paying attention to him ie if you did not first place him on a celeb pedestal, you could not then knock him off of it. Furthermore of course he had insurance and he'll probably do very well, but it won't get him back his personal items. Your treatment of this perfectly human detail is YOU lacking empathy! Irony!
1. I do not place Woods on a pedestal; I don't even think he's a great actor. 2. Why should I feel empathy for a rich actor who has publicly supported Israel's assault on Gaza? 3. What he and others like him have lost does not begin to compare to what the Palestinians have lost!
Notice I first asked, "I wonder do you realize ...."
You clearly do not realize what you do (but you should). Thus your obtuse, off-beat reply. Thanks anyway.
I empathize with your feelings but feel the need to point out that people who tune in to mainstream "news" need to realize that the empathy factor there is always on the side of the rich and powerful. Consequently, you get a skewed slant that does not represent most of the people. There are still real people among us who probably don't give two fried shits about James Woods or Laura Ingraham. Beyond that, the people and wildlife deserve some coverage but they won't get it where you're looking.
I agree with the concept here as far as you take it. However, as far as I can see in this piece you are strictly referring to the US. There is little empathy towards the US in the third world and developing nations. They have seen and been on the receiving end of US aggression. As a matter of geopolitical empathy, it's a matter of goes around comes around, and the developing world is waiting for the fall of the US which can't come soon enough as far as they are concerned.
I like Luigi. Any health CEO's salary of $10.5 million is attained by killing people. Brian Thompson got justice meted out to him. The courts are useless. The revolution may have to be bloody.
Thanks, again, for words of wisdom, Kathleen.
Thing is, his actions were not revolutionary, they were psychopathic, egotistic criminality. A revolutionary action lifts a cause to public awareness or coalesces human resources into something stronger than before. He did none of this, he just killed a guy to play with guns.
Invoking revolution as you do is about the cheapest thing that completely non-revolutionary people do.
Lee, your conclusion, or solution as you’ve stated it, is one many are arriving at. But due to the country effectively morphing into a police state and with the military being a threat to neighboring countries, allies and its own citizens, ideas to counter the authoritarian capitalistic imperialist forces will be hard to come by. A “V” for Vendetta super being would be a best option. Anyone?
I'm 100% certain that Revolution is our only solution. But how? If anyone reading this knows of any ideas about how we can do the Revolution, please let me know. Even if the idea is not "mainstream," even if it's a bit confusing, even if it's just a website with a doofus ranting about all of the ways to do the Revolution, please let me know. Because insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting Warpigs to listen...
Embarrassing to read this out of what I suspect to be an adult.
You start a revolution with many people doing endless courageous work against all odds, which I suspect by your replies below is not your forte' or you would not have to ask for ideas.
Lol. Keep reading the thread. It gets better. I have an incredible idea, actually, and yes, against all odds, it just might be courageous enough to work.
General strikes. That, and nonviolent civil disobedience. The only way out of this mess.
Once the ‘internal rot’ Kathleen notes has been displaced by an actual fear of losing their wealth, or their lives (see the French Revolution, or multiple CEO assassinations), then we might proceed to solutions.
Here is one path, once the oligarchic paradigm has been displaced - https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-to-reclaim-americas-democracy-from-the-big-finance-oligarchy
Thanks for the reply and the link. I read the intro to the interview. Sortition sounds interesting and changing our banking system is necessary, but the intro doesn't appear to have anything to do with starting a Revolution, which is what I'm most interested in. I've watched many videos from the 'institute of new economic thinking' YouTube channel, and my opinion of the channel is that it's just a bunch of Soros funded propaganda and bullshit, with lot's of talk and very little (zero) actionable steps to take. Civil disobedience is very effective. However, if there is no mass movement, then we might as well just sit back and wait for a violent Revolution to begin. I don't condone any violence, but surely we can innovate our way out of this hellscape, yea? Surely, a peaceful Revolution is possible, right? So, I'll ask again, are there any actual ideas that appear to be a Peaceful Revolution in the making? I didn't read the interview, because I don't read interviews. If there is no journalist who can distill the interview into an article, then I'm not interested.
"I read the intro" lol. Well you've done your part, you may now slack off.
Mass movements don’t usually arise from ‘ideas’; rather, are sparked by incidents of repression/oppression overreach from forces protective of the status quo. There are many sparks that potentially portend the onset of revolutionary mass movements, only to lack the critical organizing infrastructure to allow the movement to flourish. The main thing is to be ready to provide whatever ‘piece of the puzzle’ skill set you can contribute once the spark ignites an actual movement, rather than just a moment of protest.
As to interviews, I have learned a lot from them over the course of my 70+ years, and many times prefer the actual words from an author or scholar to those of a journalist/interpreter/analyst. I couldn’t care less who funds what, though it’s always a good idea to filter info through a lens of propaganda, empire, and narrative awareness.
To 'couldn't care less who funds what' is to be oblivious as to why the banking system needs to change and why Revolution is the only solution. A movement to defund private banks is necessary for Peace (fuck the I.M.F.) and voting 3rd party is necessary for a peaceful Revolution. Otherwise, we'll just keep getting the same results, which are bipartisan Warpigs being funded by Corporations, billionaires and bankers. Ideas can change the World. An 'idea' of how to do the Revolution might actually create a Revolution, if enough people agree it's an idea worth trying. Organization and communication are crucial. Perhaps someone somewhere will create an app for peaceful Revolution? Wouldn't that be something...
I’m far from oblivious, about banking, the need for revolution, and any number of other public policy issues. Who funds what can be important, but is no guarantor of truth.
Who funds what is paramount, because elites use media and algorithms to obscure the truth and to confuse, to maintain the narrative and the division, for profit, and to prevent 'ideas' of any uprisings. I'm glad you believe there's a need for Revolution. You're not oblivious, but you should care more about who funds what.