- The Facts:
Bernie Sanders, who espouses 'Democratic Socialism,' is one of the frontrunners for the Democratic Party nomination.
- Reflect On:
If the United States became more of a socialist country, would this actually impact, for better or worse, the real source of the problems America is facing?
Socialism seems to be the only thing that mainstream media wants to talk about when they interview Bernie Sanders: Are you a socialist? Will the United States be a socialist country under the Democratic party if Bernie Sanders is President?
Yes, in part, this is mainstream media’s way of trying to dumb-down the conversation for its viewers. To be clear, Bernie Sanders is not afraid to say he is a socialist, but in mainstream scrums he prefers to be specific about what he is in favor of: free national single-payer healthcare, free post-secondary education, and a higher minimum wage. But to look into whether Sanders is truly a socialist, and whether it actually matters, let’s start by defining and distinguishing between socialism and capitalism in order to gain clarity on the ideological context that Sanders is dealing with in the United States.
This Investopedia article helps provide context:
Capitalism and socialism are the two primary economic systems used to understand the world and the way economies work. Their distinctions are many, but perhaps the fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism lies in the scope of government intervention in the economy. The capitalist economic model relies on free market conditions to drive innovation and wealth creation and regulate corporate behavior; this liberalization of market forces allows for the freedom of choice, resulting in either success or failure. The socialist-based economy incorporates elements of centralized economic planning, utilized to ensure conformity and to encourage equality of opportunity and economic outcome.
In a capitalist economy, property and businesses are owned and controlled by individuals. The production and prices of goods and services are determined by how in demand they are and how difficult they are to produce. Theoretically, this dynamic drives companies to make the best products they can as cheaply as they can, meaning that consumers can choose the best and cheapest products,. Business owners should be driven to find more efficient ways of producing quality goods quickly and cheaply.
This emphasis on efficiency takes priority over equality, which is of little concern to the capitalist system. The argument is that inequality is the driving force that encourages innovation, which then pushes economic development. In a capitalist economy, the state does not directly employ the workforce. This can lead to unemployment during times of economic recession.
In a socialist economy, the state owns and controls the major means of production. In some socialist economic models, worker cooperatives have primacy over production. Other socialist economic models allow individual ownership of enterprise and property, albeit with high taxes and stringent government controls.
The primary concern of the socialist model, in contrast, is an equitable redistribution of wealth and resources from the rich to the poor, out of fairness and to ensure “an even playing field” in opportunity and outcome. To achieve this, the state intervenes in the labor market. In fact, in a socialist economy, the state is the primary employer. During times of economic hardship, the socialist state can order hiring, so there is full employment even if workers are not performing tasks that are particularly in demand from the market.
In reality, most countries and their economies fall in-between these two extremes. Some countries incorporate both the private sector system of capitalism and the public sector enterprise of socialism to overcome the disadvantages of both systems. These countries are referred to as having mixed economies. In these economies, the government intervenes to prevent any individual or company from having a monopolistic stance and undue concentration of economic power. Resources in these systems may be owned by both state and individuals.
The American Context
One could rightly say that socialism, not capitalism, was the first system brought to American soil by European colonists. When a group of early settlers arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1620, their plan was to establish collective property ownership. Their charter called for farmland to be worked communally and for the harvests to be shared. The results were frightening. Many settlers were unwilling to work hard for the common good, and then those who were doing their share lost their motivation to continue to ‘carry the load’ themselves. As a result, many fields were largely untilled and unplanted. Famine came as soon as they ate through their provisions. After famine came plague, and half the colony died.
In his memoirs, Plymouth governor William Bradford explained what happened next:
At length, after much debate of things, the Governor… gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves… And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end.
This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression. (source)
Not only did the colonists work much harder, but they were motivated to innovate. They traded with the Indigenous population and were eager to learn from them how to plant maize, squash and pumpkin and how to rotate these crops from year to year. This resulted in bountiful harvests. On the strength of this real-world experience, and other similar ones from surrounding colonies, the American identity of hard work and innovation was founded, having a significant impact not only on their thirst for independence, but on the content of the Constitution on which their Republic is based.
Needless to say, Americans have historically rejected socialist doctrines, and for similar reasons have vehemently rejected and fought against the influence of communism, which was seen by Marx as the logical endpoint of socialism. To be seen as a ‘socialist’ in American politics has long been a campaign-wrecker.
So Why Is Bernie Sanders Popular?
Note in the ‘Special Considerations’ section above that the economies of most countries fall between the ‘extremes’ of capitalism and socialism. That is because in its purest form, unbridled capitalism inevitably leads to an ever-increasing wealth disparity between the haves and the have-nots, while pure socialism, as in the above example, stifles motivation to work, learn and innovate. Both of these ideologies, in extremes, can lead to a complete disintegration of social and economic order.
The reason Sanders has gained popularity in recent years is that the United States is nearing the breaking point in terms of wealth disparity between the rich and the poor, with the middle class rapidly eroding. Bernie Sanders preaches a brand of socialism he calls ‘Democratic Socialism,’ in which he alleges ‘the people’ will control the means of production rather than the financial elite who are at the top end of the wage disparity.
Details about how this actually works are sketchy. Amid fears that socialism really centralizes the power within ‘Big Government,’ the Democratic Socialists of America website had this to say:
Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.
Of course, logic dictates that it would be very unwieldy and inefficient to have the country run by popular consensus, and that a massive and all-powerful bureaucracy within a centralized government would currently seem inevitable. While Sanders uses examples of different countries in the world considered to be socialist in nature, he hand-picks small and specific successes in certain countries, like universal healthcare or free education, but is not able to point to any particular country that has fully and successfully implemented ‘Democratic Socialism.’ Countries like Sweden, which is often used as an example, actually credit a return to some capitalistic principles to explain their return to economic viability in the past few decades. (source)
Why It Doesn’t Matter
Many of the ideals of socialism may be appealing, but as we saw in the Plymouth example, they are not easily implemented in the real world. In all likelihood, if Bernie Sanders is elected President and he maneuvers the United States into some kind of socialist country, he will only be shifting the power from private corporations and banks to a centralized industrial-governmental entity that controls the means of production, which would wield unprecedented power in the American economy. In practical terms, that means the corrupt global elite who bribed, threatened, and murdered their way into controlling the American economy will just start to shift roles and arrange to occupy the seats of this new power. In other words, the Deep State will still be in charge. And consolidating power within a large bureaucratic institution makes it much easier for that power to be insulated and maintained.
In addition, I believe Bernie Sanders is really a political hack who is only interested in getting a prime seat within the ruling class. Why do I say that? Simply by the fact that, after becoming aware that the 2016 Democratic Party nomination was literally stolen from him by Hillary Clinton and her full control over and illegal activities within the Democratic National Committee (a committee that is supposed to be neutral and impartially supportive of all candidates), he did not do what some of his more ardent supporters wanted him to do: disavow the DNC, lambaste Hillary Clinton, and perhaps even take her to court and run for the presidency as an independent. Instead, he remained quiet and eventually supported Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, just like someone who had been promised the moon to toe the party line. And in supporting Clinton and remaining with the Democratic Party, all signs indicate that he is aligned with the Deep State and will be prepared to do their bidding if he gets elected, whether he wants to call it ‘Democratic Socialism’ or anything else.
No, Bernie Sanders and his version of socialism are not the answers to the woes of American citizens. The matter at hand is not whether to choose capitalism or socialism, or even finding a way to strike the right balance between the two. The matter at hand is overcoming Deep State control and enslavement and restoring the power to the Constitution and the freedom of individuals that it protects. While Donald Trump could be accused of many things including engaging in crony capitalism, a growing number of people believe that the main reason he decided to run for President in the first place was to help an alliance of insiders take down the Deep State. If this turns out to be true, and they are successful, then this is where the resurrection of the United States of America, and perhaps even the world as a whole, will be found.
Only our discernment of the true source of the problems in America and throughout the world gives us the context to evaluate whether a move to become more of a socialist nation really matters. In the case of Bernie Sanders ever becoming President, corruption and control from the top would likely be left unchanged. As we continue to become aware that unelected powers have long enjoyed massive control over our social and economic fate, we become agents of change that will help bring down these forces, leading us to a much higher level of freedom and prosperity no matter where on the continuum between capitalism and socialism we decide to operate from.
WHAT?! Marineland Is Officially Exempt From Canada’s Ban On Whale & Dolphin Captivity
- The Facts:
Canada recently passed a bill that bans the capture and captivity of whales and dolphins. Marineland, a huge whale/dolphin entertainment park, has been exempted from the law that makes it illegal to do so.
- Reflect On:
What gives human beings the right to hold such majestic, innocent, benevolent and intelligent animals captive? What gives them the right to separate them from their families? Why do we treat other beings on Earth the way we do?
Animal captivity is extremely cruel and heartbreaking. Imagine what another intelligent, benevolent race would think if they came across our planet and observed what we do. My guess is that they’d be terrified to attempt to interact with us simply based on how we treat other sentient, benevolent beings on this planet.
Canada recently passed a legislation that completely bans keeping whales, dolphins and porpoises in captivity for entertainment, trade, possession, capture and breeding. The bill (S-203) is also known as the “Ending the Captivity of Whales and Dolphins Act,” and it was approved by the House of Commons after they voted in favour of the bill, which was first introduced in 2015.
The only time capture is permitted in Canada is for rescue purposes or, unfortunately, for scientific purposes.
According to Green Party Leader MP Elizabeth May, “Canadians have been clear, they want the cruel practice of keeping whales and dolphins in captivity to end… With the passage of Bill S-203, we have ensured that this will happen.”
More than 20 marine scientists and stakeholder organizations endorsed the bill, which quite frankly should have happened long ago. These beings, or any beings for that matter, do not belong in tanks where they are constantly suffering. These are extremely emotional, social, empathetic and brilliant beings. What we’ve done to them and continue to do to them is beyond horrid, to be blunt.
This bill was supposed to phase out this type of captivity in Canada, but that doesn’t seem to be the case, as Marineland Canada’s whales will remain at the park following the page of S-203. Already captive whales will remain in captivity, which means approximately 60 animals will live out their entire lives at Marineland and at the Vancouver Aquarium.
Canadian law now states that it’s a criminal offence, as it should be, to keep a cetacean in captivity, but it looks like Marineland Canada has been exempted from this. It does not seem, however, that they can bring more animals into the park, but they’ll more than likely begin breeding programs to keep their business going for as long as they can.
According to Marie Holer, a representative from Marineland Canada:
We’ve been working to evolve Marineland for over a year and have made many positive changes to the park, including the new educational presentation on marine mammals, the introduction of the Marineland Express and our Polar Splash pad that will open in July. Since opening day, we’ve seen our largest crowds in years and are thrilled that so many people support us in our work. We’re looking forward to enhancing our education, conservation and research focus in the short term to highlight our commitment to marine mammals.”
Is this truly a good step? As long as these animals are in captivity, there can be no care given to these animals. Why do we as human beings feel we can imprison animals like this is simply for entertainment? It feels heartbreaking, confusing, and makes deeply question the state of our connection to wildlife.
Have we really become that disconnected from life?
It’s not all bleak though! Things are obviously improving, and that’s become quite evident thanks to the vast amount of activism over the years that has finally resulted in the passing of the legislation mentioned in this article, but we still have a long way to go.
Remember, these animals have never really shown any type of aggression towards humans, except in captivity.
Why do human beings go to the circus? Why do they go to places like Marineland? Is it because human beings are terrible? No. It’s simply because many of us have been desensitized and have not quite questioned this in many ways. Which is OK! That’s part of the process. When it comes to animal captivity, mass marketing and scientific justifications have allowed our minds to be manipulated. They’ve made us think that animal captivity is okay, when clearly we would not like to be confined against our will, so why do it to others?
I believe that we’re all born as extremely understanding beings, and that humans are a very empathetic race. I believe that our feelings and our ability to experience empathy are what makes us special. I also believe that these traits and characteristics left us for a while, but they are now returning and we are beginning to “think” from our hearts again.
This is why awareness regarding animal captivity has increased and will continue to increase around the globe until it is completely banned everywhere, or until people simply stop showing up to these places and providing them with profits.
Video: The Most Significant Leak About Extraterrestrial Craft Just Went Public
- The Facts:
A recently leaked document has exposed notes taken by legendary scientist Dr. Eric Davis during a meeting he had Admiral Thomas Ray Wilson, who was the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, regarding extraterrestrial space craft.
- Reflect On:
UFOs used to be a conspiracy, now they are quite mainstream and their existence is backed by tremendous amounts of evidence. The next question is, where are they from, and who made them? Will this information be suppressed too?
A quote I love to use in many of my articles comes from Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell. He said, “yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.” (source)
The thought that governments and/or rogue agencies around the world have been involved in taking down and even possibly revere engineering possible extraterrestrial craft is nothing new. Available to the public are statements from the highest ranking positions within government and the military, and there are also declassified documents that hint toward the same idea.
For example, former Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer once told the public that the protocol with regards to UFOs was to “shoot first and ask questions after.” Dr. David Clarke, an investigative journalist, reader and lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University in England who was also the curator for The National Archives UFO project from 2008–13 uncovered documents showing that the Royal Air Force was desperate to capture one of these UFOs and reverse engineer it. You can see those and read more about it here.
Most Significant Leak?
Check out our video segment on this new leak, or read more below.
More recently, what some are calling the most significant leak in UFO history has been made public – and it may be one of the strongest documents linking UFOs to extraterrestrials.
The document goes into detail about a meeting that was had between Dr. Eric Davis, and Vice Admiral Thomas Ray Wilson. Who is Eric Davis? He is a very well known scientist, and quite the legend. For many years he was a member of the National Institute for Discovery Sciences (NIDS)(Owned by Robert Bigelow), the Chief Science Officer of EarthTech Int’l, Inc. and the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin in Austin, Texas; and he is the Owner/Chief Executive/Chief Scientist of Warp Drive Metrics who consults and contracts for the Department of Defense. He is also an Adjunct Professor in the Early Universe, Cosmology and Strings Group at the Center for Astrophysics, Space Physics & Engineering Research at Baylor University in Waco, TX.
Admiral Thomas Ray Wilson was the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from July 1999 to July 2002, prior to that he was the Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The document is in the form of notes that were written by Davis after their meeting that took place in 2002, regarding a series of events that took place during the spring of 1997, when Wilson was Deputy Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Since the leak of this document, there has been no denial publicly by Davis regarding the authenticity of these documents, and the focal point of the document is about a meeting (and what happened after that meeting) that took place in 1997 between UFO researcher Dr. Steven Greer, Admiral Wilson, Dr. Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14 astronaut) and other high ranking individuals within the military. This meeting was spoken about by Dr. Greer and Dr. Mitchell nearly four years prior to the leak of these documents, so it’s all very interesting. In the episode, we actually play footage of Mitchell confirming and talking about this meeting as well as Greer.
The documents point towards a program that involves the crash retrieval of extraterrestrial craft, that are “not made of this earth, not made by man.”
You can view the entire document here.
if you missed the video embed above of myself and Joe Martino having a discussion about these documents in detail, you can watch it here.
“There is a serious possibility that we are being visited and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations.” – Lord Admiral Hill-Norton, Former Chief of Defence Staff, 5 Star Admiral of the Royal Navy, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee
The fact that we are not alone has huge implications from science to technology, to history and possible metaphysical/spiritual implications as well. It really opens up Pandora’s Box, and it is one out of many examples that are allowing us to see how humanity has been conditioned to think a certain way, limit our reality, despite all of the evidence, that conflicts with long held belief systems.
At the end of the day, the idea that there are other highly advanced, intelligent lifeforms in the universe, or multiverse, and possibly other dimensions that are and have been visiting our planet, and others, for a very long time is most likely just the very tip of the ice-berg.
This is not a new discovery. We have had this type of knowledge of UFOs and ETs for a very long time, culture and elites have simply suppressed this knowing.
British Home Secretary Has Signed Extradition Order To Send Julian Assange To US
- The Facts:
British home secretary Sajid Javid has signed the extradition order to send Julian Assange to the US. This now leaves the final decision to the courts. It's likely that the extradition decision process will take many months to decide in court.
- Reflect On:
Is this another step in harming the freedom of press? The freedom of revealing truth to citizens? Is this government overreach whereby they feel it's OK to pretend to the public that their knowledge of truth is not important?
The British home secretary, Sajid Javid, has just signed a request for Julian Assange to be extradited to the US where he faces an 18-count indictment, issued by the US Department of Justice, for charges linked to computer hacking and revealing government secrets in collaboration with Chelsea Manning, formerly Bradley Manning. The charges all fall under the Espionage Act.
“He’s rightly behind bars. There’s an extradition request from the US that is before the courts tomorrow but yesterday I signed the extradition order and certified it and that will be going in front of the courts tomorrow.” – Sayid Javid
Officially, Assange is accused of soliciting and publishing classified information and conspiring to hack into a government computer. “It is a decision ultimately for the courts, but there is a very important part of it for the home secretary and I want to see justice done at all times and we’ve got a legitimate extradition request, so I’ve signed it, but the final decision is now with the courts,” said Javid.
If you were to look entirely at the law, you might say “yes, technically if he did these things, there is a case to be made.” However, was Assange involved enough in this process to prosecute him? Did he do something that was a disservice to the people? Or did he do something that was a disservice to the powerful elite?
That is something for you to decide, ideally without the manipulative rhetoric from the powerful elite and the mainstream media they own. Attempts to suggest he threatens the patriotism of the US and the national security of the US might be something to observe as a clear sign of bait and switch: get upset at this, instead of looking at what he revealed about the powerful elite in the totality of the leaks he has put out.
Swedish courts had just recently rejected an extradition request for Assange to be sent back to Sweden for an alleged rape case dating back to 2010. Assange denies the accusation and has since the beginning. The decision out of Upsalla to deny his request was fueled by the claim that Assange did not need to be detained.
Assange is currently in jail for 50 weeks for skipping bail after he spent seven years in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He was recently too ill to appear at a hearing at Westminster magistrates court in relation to the US request. The hearing has been rescheduled for Friday, June 14th, 2019.
Thomas Garner, an extradition lawyer at Gherson Solicitors, said Javid’s certification of the request was “an important though merely procedural step” to start the extradition process.
“I would expect the court to set a preliminary timetable for the extradition process tomorrow,” he said. “It is likely to be many months before any hearing at the magistrates court and of course either side may then seek to appeal that decision in due course. Despite this, the Swedish authorities will be monitoring the process carefully as the further down the line the US proceedings get the harder it might become for the home secretary to give precedence to any competing request.”
From a systematic standpoint, this is a necessary procedural step in extraditing Assange to the US and it has been granted. It could have been blocked but Javid felt it was necessary for ‘justice to be served.’
As we can see, this is an example of a spot where someone could have stood up and said “no I don’t support this given what it does to protect the powerful elite and given what it does to journalism and the maintenance of secrecy.” Obviously, Javid would have faced much criticism if he had stood up, perhaps legal problems too, we were not able to confirm that, but we are seeing a system play entirely along with the power elite in this case.
In the video below, there is an important discussion on some of the ‘Qanon’ ideas in relation to Assange. My analysis on that is that it appears to be heavily misguided, but you decide for yourself.
10 Products Linked To Cancer That Are Hiding In Almost Every Home
Tons of conventional products today cause cancer, and they could be in your home! From shampoos to cleaning products, if...
These Plants Are Oxygen Bombs & They Clean The Air In Your Home
Everyone would love to have a fresh, clean living space to come home to each day, and while part of...