Category Archives: Philosophy

19 June 2025

Americans are Ignorami

By Rick Ladd

Reclaiming the Hammer and Sickle: Symbolism, Struggle, and Systemic Illiteracy

In large part because of my activities in the antiwar and peace and justice movements shortly after I celebrated my 20th birthday, I began reading Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao, Castro, and Guevara, as well as Black authors and activists like Eldridge Cleaver, Malcolm X, and George Jackson, among others. I was especially fond of reading Lenin’s explanations and defense of the theories of Karl Marx and, to a lesser extent, Friedrich Engels. My interest wasn’t only in their political and economic theories, but also in their general philosophy, which is Dialectical Materialism. I’ve touched on this philosophy somewhat tangentially in some of my previous writings.

I’ve long been both dismayed and somewhat fascinated by the sheer ignorance of my fellow Americans when it comes to understanding what some very important terms and concepts actually represent. I am here referring to socialism, communism, capitalism, and dialectical materialism—perhaps a few other economic, political, and philosophical terms as well.

The hammer and sickle is one of the most enduring symbols of communism and socialist movements, representing the unity and solidarity of industrial workers (symbolized by the hammer) and agricultural laborers (symbolized by the sickle). While it gained prominence in the 20th century as an emblem of the Soviet Union, its roots and symbolism tie back to the broader communist ideas as envisioned by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

Theoretical Foundation: Marx and Engels

Marx and Engels, in works like The Communist Manifesto (1848), envisioned a society where the working class (proletariat) would overthrow the capitalist class (bourgeoisie) to establish a classless, stateless society. Central to this vision was the unification of all laborers—regardless of their specific trades or industries—against the exploitative structures of capitalism. The hammer and sickle perfectly encapsulate this ideal by bringing together two key groups of workers who were often divided in pre-industrial and industrial societies:

  • Industrial Workers (Hammer): Factory workers, craftsmen, and laborers—urban dwellers essential to the mechanized production processes of capitalist economies.
  • Agricultural Workers (Sickle): Peasants and farmers who toiled in rural areas, producing food and raw materials. Often marginalized and exploited under feudal and capitalist systems.

By combining these two tools, the hammer and sickle symbolized the unity of these distinct groups in their shared struggle for liberation and equality.

Historical Context of the Symbol

Although Marx and Engels themselves did not create or use the hammer and sickle as a symbol, their ideas inspired later revolutionary movements that adopted it. The symbol gained prominence with the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia (1917), when the Bolsheviks sought to unite industrial workers and peasants under the banner of communism. The hammer and sickle were officially adopted as part of the Soviet Union’s flag in 1923.

Significance to the Communist Movement

The hammer and sickle became a powerful visual representation of several core ideas in Marxist-inspired movements:

  • Worker Solidarity: It emphasized unity among all exploited classes to overthrow the capitalist system.
  • Class Struggle: It depicted the tools of labor, highlighting the centrality of workers and their productive power in shaping society.
  • Revolutionary Change: It called workers and peasants to action—to seize the means of production and build a socialist society.

Criticism and Evolution

In practice, the unity symbolized by the hammer and sickle was not always realized. Tensions between urban industrial workers and rural agricultural communities persisted in the Soviet Union and other communist nations. Moreover, the symbol became associated with authoritarian regimes, giving it a controversial legacy in modern times.

Still, the hammer and sickle remain potent emblems of worker solidarity and the Marxist vision of a classless society—despite how much interpretations of communism have evolved over time.

The American Context: Weaponized Ignorance

This, however, is where things get more complicated—and more infuriating.

In the American political lexicon, socialism has become a slur hurled without understanding, a catch-all bogeyman meant to stoke fear, not provoke thought. The hammer and sickle, meanwhile, has been reduced in the public imagination to little more than a sinister relic—stripped of context, stripped of nuance, and weaponized in the culture war by people whose understanding of history could fit neatly on the back of a fast-food receipt.

The fact is, most Americans have never seriously studied Marx or Engels—let alone Lenin or Mao—and wouldn’t recognize dialectical materialism if it organized their kitchen pantry and handed them a checklist. We are a people sold the myth that capitalism is not just the best economic system, but the only one consistent with freedom, democracy, and morality. Anything that questions this orthodoxy is treated as heresy, regardless of its intellectual rigor or empirical grounding.

Dialectical Materialism: Not a Manifesto, But a Method

Let’s be clear: dialectical materialism is not a manifesto—it is a method. A way of understanding the world not as a series of isolated events, but as a dynamic, interconnected whole; a recognition that history moves through contradiction, and that the driving force behind historical change is the conflict between classes, between ideas, between material conditions themselves. It is not “communism” as caricatured by reactionaries—it is a framework for grasping the engines of change that shape human societies.

The Real Threat to the Status Quo

And therein lies the real threat to the American status quo: not the hammer and sickle itself, but the idea that working people—whether factory machinists, field hands, or Uber drivers—might recognize their common interests. That they might see through the illusion that their suffering is individual, rather than systemic. That they might stop blaming immigrants, or the unemployed, or “welfare cheats,” and instead aim their righteous anger at the extractive systems that keep them exhausted, precarious, and obedient.

The Struggle Continues

We are long past the time for empty patriotism and red-scare hysteria. We need deep, structural critique rooted in historical knowledge and philosophical clarity. Not to idolize past revolutions, but to learn from them—critically, courageously, dialectically.

The hammer and sickle endures not because it’s fashionable, and certainly not because it’s flawless, but because the struggle it symbolizes has never truly ended. The tools have changed. The fields have changed. But the workers are still here. And the fight—for dignity, for justice, for liberation—remains.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economics, Education, Government & Civics, History, News & Politics, Personal, Philosophy, Politics, Systems Thinking

23 March 2025

Evolving with AI

By Rick Ladd

If Artificial Intelligence takes over in the future, and that seems to be what causes the most hand-wringing nowadays, wouldn’t it most likely follow that we will have evolved into cyborgs? Is there anything actually WRONG with that? Unlike Data, from Star Trek: The Next Generation, we’d almost certainly bring our emotions with us (unless evolution proves them to be detrimental to our long-term survival.) It can easily be argued that emotions, at least destructive ones, are not in our overall best interest, while positive ones are evolutionary assets.

When you think about it, doesn’t it seem strange, if not useless, to worry about our evolutionary path going forward? Artificial selection makes it clear we can at least guide that path, so it’s surely important to understand how we have evolved and then project those changes that may or may not require our attention. So thinking about where we’re headed is useful. My contention is that worrying about it is, well, a waste of time.

I have no doubt we will one day be a true spacefaring species; that is, if we don’t kill ourselves off first. That should require some hefty biological, psychological, and perhaps a dozen or so other aspects of the human being, changes in order to adapt.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Artificial Intelligence, Personal, Philosophy, Science, Technology

18 January 2025

You Say You Want a Revolution

By Rick Ladd

I posted the following on Threads and want to share it here as well. Nearly 60 years ago I fervently hoped to see love conquer hate. It fueled my activity in the antiwar and antiracist movement during the 60s and 70s. I am deeply disappointed to see the U.S. going backwards, yet I take some solace in the phrase “The darkest hour is just before the dawn.” Here’s what I wrote:

I was prepared, and preparing, for a revolution as far back as the late 60s. I was a young man, full of piss, vinegar, and righteous indignation over a war of aggression by my country; a war that had already claimed the life of my best friend. Through my antiwar activities I had become aware of many of the realities of the U.S. that had been hidden from me, especially rampant racism and sexism.

I’m aware many of my fellow citizens have a hard time realizing just how bad things have been in this country. Consider this, and I believe this is pretty much common knowledge: most of the land that comprises the U.S. was already inhabited when the Pilgrims arrived here. Much of the infrastructure of our country was built by slaves or indentured servants, virtually all of whom were kept in appalling living conditions. The fucking White House was built with slave labor. Meanwhile, white people were building generational wealth while systematically preventing POC from doing the same.

Ever hear of Angel Island, where we kept Chinese immigrants from 1910 to 1940? I’m sure you’ve heard of the Japanese detention camps used during WWII. My in-laws were detained at the one in Colorado (Amache) for two years. Many of my wife’s relatives lost everything during those years. The number of horrendous things done by white people to POC is disgusting and worthy of retribution, certainly of derision and disgust. So, why am I bringing all of this up?

Well, As I said, I was prepared decades ago for a revolution in this country. We have been in a class war as long as we’ve existed. However, I came to realize as a straight, white man it wasn’t up to me to decide when and how such an event should be prosecuted. I am somewhat privileged and don’t believe I have the moral authority to ask for the kinds of sacrifice such an endeavor would require.

I am, however, ready to support an effort to free the working class from their servitude to the upper class. I believe capitalism has served whatever purpose it once had (moving us away from feudalism and slavery) and needs to be replaced by, at the very least, a form of democratic socialism. I don’t believe billionaires should be allowed to exist. Having that much money is immoral and should be illegal, IMO. All to say, I’m down with any attempt to upgrade this nation, by any means necessary. I prefer it to be peaceful, but people with far too much money are making that impossible.

Things most likely have to get a lot worse; some of the wealth has trickled down to us and too many of us are either comfortable or convinced wealth and privilege are just around the corner. I don’t believe we can continue along the path we’re following, and it’s not just maga or trump. Capitalism rewards greed and avarice. Money is god! Socialism, OTOH, at least attempts to put people first. That’s what I’d like to see. Who’s on board?

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economics, Government & Civics, News & Politics, Philosophy, Politics

31 March 2024

Deming and Rocketdyne

By Rick Ladd

Sometime in late January of 1987, almost one year to the day after the Space Shuttle Orbiter Challenger was destroyed as it ascended to orbit, I was assigned by the temp agency I was using at the time to begin work on the Space Shuttle Main Engine team at Rockwell International’s Rocketdyne Division in Woodland Hills, CA.

Prior to that fateful date I had, with one exception, never worked at a company with more than a dozen employees. My family’s wholesale food business, at its peak, was only my father, brother, me, and one employee and most of the numerous jobs I had held over the previous 20 years or so were similarly small.

Rocketdyne employed several thousand people, most of whom labored at our campuses in Woodland Hills and Canoga Park, CA. It was a division of Rockwell International, which employed over 100,000 people world-wide. It was a jarring transition to go from small (really small) businesses to a multi-national aerospace conglomerate. However, having been somewhat of a space-cadet, i.e. enthusiast most of my life, I was thrilled with the opportunity.

A year later on 1 February 1988, I was hired to work in Engineering Computing on the Flight Ops team – a position I would not have dared to dream of filling. Nevertheless, there I was helping our nation’s space program get back on track. It was truly a dream come true.

At the same time, I was becoming aware of the unique way in which large organizations conduct themselves. Some of it wasn’t pretty. I first encountered the business philosophy of W. Edwards Deming soon after I was officially hired as I was lucky enough to have a colleague who was a student of his. Deming had written a book (he wrote many) in which he laid out a fourteen-point explication of his concept of TQM (Total Quality Management).

I was enamored of his positions, as they coincided with my growing understanding how things worked in virtually any organization. I had long been someone who looked for and found ways in which to improve the processes and procedures of any organization I was involved with, and Deming’s philosophy made a great deal of sense to me.

At the same time, I was becoming increasingly aware of the reality that many companies, including Rocketdyne, were honoring those principles in their breach, not their adherence to them. As I was studying Deming’s 14 points I began to realize just how thoroughly many of the managers I encountered were oblivious to the virtues Deming laid out.

Somewhere around 1990 I decided to see if I could capture the differences between what Deming offered and how Rocketdyne was actually doing things. I captured Deming’s 14 points and then created Rocketdyne’s 14 counterpoints. I’ve kept them over the years and am here sharing my understanding with two screenshots of those differing points of view. Please keep in mind not all managers were as controlling as the worst of them. I was lucky to work under the supervision of several truly wonderful managers in my nearly quarter century of employment there. Regardless, I think my analysis was reasonable, even after over 34 years. You?

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Business, humor, Leadership, Personal, Philosophy, Space and Exploration, Systems Thinking, Work

23 January 2024

Half The Sky!

By Rick Ladd

Every man who denigrates the movie should be required to watch this as many times as necessary to get it through their thick, manscaped heads that we (men, that is) need to be supportive of women’s equality (and, I might add, bodily autonomy).

Women DO hold up (more than) half the sky. Why TF wouldn’t we want them by our side, not behind us? With us, as equals.

Let’s try matriarchy for a couple thousand years, MK? It’s only fair. I, for one, would welcome it. Women deserve it, IMO.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in History, News & Politics, Philosophy, Politics

22 January 2024

A Chatbot Experiment

By Rick Ladd

I thought I would give Google’ Bard AI assistant an authoring test drive. I’ve used it to do things like help me come up with tags and I just had it prepare me a packing list for a Hawaiian vacation, which we’re leaving on this coming Thursday. What follows is Bard’s response verbatim to my request for a 500 word blog post, which read: “Write a 500 word blog post on the following topic: Is Marxism still relevant? Evaluate the ongoing relevance of Marxist theory in the 21st century, considering globalization, technological advancements, and the changing nature of social class.“

Is Marxism Still Relevant in the 21st Century?

Karl Marx, the bearded revolutionary with a penchant for manifestos, left an indelible mark on history. His economic theories and philosophy of dialectical materialism ignited revolutions, shaped political landscapes, and inspired countless thinkers. But in the 21st century, with globalization, technological advancements, and shifting social dynamics, one can’t help but wonder: is Marxism still relevant?

The Spectre of Capitalism Haunts the World

Marx’s core critique of capitalism remains eerily relevant. He argued that capitalism inherently generates inequality, with the wealthy owning the means of production (factories, machines) and exploiting the labor of the working class for profit. Today, we see this play out in stark income gaps, wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, and precarious job markets that leave many struggling to make ends meet.

Globalization has further intensified these issues. Corporations can now exploit cheap labor in developing countries, further widening the gap between rich and poor. The 2008 financial crisis, triggered by reckless financial speculation, exposed the inherent instability of a system driven by the pursuit of profit at all costs.

Technology: Friend or Foe of the Proletariat?

Technological advancements, a cornerstone of the 21st century, present both challenges and opportunities for Marxist analysis. On the one hand, automation threatens to displace large swathes of the workforce, potentially exacerbating unemployment and inequality. On the other hand, technology can also be a tool for empowering workers. Communication platforms and social media enable workers to connect and organize across borders, potentially building solidarity and challenging corporate power.

However, the benefits of technology are not evenly distributed. Access to education and training is crucial for workers to adapt to changing technological landscapes, but these opportunities are often limited by socioeconomic factors. The digital divide can further marginalize vulnerable groups and exacerbate existing inequalities.

The Metamorphosis of Class

The nature of social class has also undergone significant transformations since Marx’s time. The traditional working class of factory laborers has shrunk, replaced by a more diverse and service-oriented workforce. This makes it harder to identify clear class divisions and build class solidarity.

Furthermore, identity politics have risen in prominence, with groups emphasizing shared experiences based on race, gender, or sexual orientation. While these movements are crucial for addressing specific forms of oppression, they can also complicate the traditional Marxist focus on class as the primary driver of social conflict.

Beyond the Manifesto: Rethinking Marxism for the 21st Century

So, is Marxism still relevant? The answer is not a simple yes or no. While some of Marx’s specific predictions haven’t materialized (like the inevitable proletarian revolution), his core critique of capitalism’s inherent inequalities remains as sharp as ever. However, to remain relevant in the 21st century, Marxism needs to adapt to the changing realities of globalization, technology, and the evolving nature of social class.

This could involve developing new strategies for worker organizing that leverage technology and social media. It could mean acknowledging the importance of identity politics while still recognizing the role of class in shaping broader social structures. Ultimately, a 21st-century Marxism should be flexible, adaptable, and open to incorporating new ideas and perspectives.

Marxism may not offer all the answers, but it provides a valuable framework for analyzing the power dynamics and inequalities inherent in our current economic system. By critically engaging with its core ideas and adapting them to the realities of the 21st century, we can build a more just and equitable future for all.

Remember, the conversation on Marxism’s relevance is far from over. This blog post is just a starting point. What are your thoughts? Do you think Marxism still has something to offer us today? Share your views in the comments below!

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Economics, Government & Civics, History, Philosophy, Politics, Systems Thinking, Writing/Editing

5 May 2023

I’m Counting On You

By Rick Ladd

Dear GenZ:

I need to tell you something. Although I’m a Boomer, I have a great deal of love and respect for your generation. One reason for this is because my wife and I became first-time, adoptive parents late in life and both our daughters are in your generation. They’re currently 19 and 21. But also because you embody the ideals and aspirations I had as a young man back in the sixties and seventies, when I was an anti-war and social justice activist.

In 1966, shortly after I graduated High School and when the war in Vietnam was heating up, with US troops heading toward an eventual commitment of half a million troops, I joined the US Navy, following in the footsteps of my father and thinking it was the right thing to do. I was medically discharged after only a month and 23 days, but that’s another story that has nothing to do with the point I’m making herein.

When the police rioted in Century City in the summer of 1967, and I was running a small snack shop in downtown L.A., I remember thinking that the police were probably right and dealt with the demonstrators appropriately. I was soon to discover just how mistaken I was. So began my transformation into an anti-war activist.

Without going into too much detail, I’ll just note that I spent about five years organizing, demonstrating/marching, and doing security for others who were protesting the war in Vietnam and racism and sexism in our society. It was pretty much full-time and I only worked to make enough money to allow me to survive while being an activist. My work culminated in a two-month trip in the Spring of 1973 to Cuba, as a guest of the Cuban Government, with the Venceremos Brigade. Shortly after my return I began law school. I was burned out and wanted to get on with my life, which I had neglected in favor of my activism.

I remained politically active to some degree, but not like I had been, especially since U.S. involvement in Vietnam had effectively ended in January of 1973. It was with great dismay that I realized my generation was not merely withdrawing from the activism the war had ignited, but was actively moving to political and economic conservatism. In 1976, the year I graduated with my J.D., Jackson Browne released his album “The Pretender”. The title song contained the following lyrics, which resonated deeply with me. The still do.

I want to know what became of the changes
We waited for love to bring
Were they only the fitful dreams
Of some greater awakening?

The Pretender – Jackson Browne

Just recently, as I was refreshing my memory about the lyrics and what he was saying, I came across a video where he explains a bit about the genesis and meaning of the song. In describing who the pretender is, he says, ” … it’s anybody that’s sort of lost sight of some of their dreams…and is going through the motions and trying to make a stab at a certain way of life that he sees other people succeeding at. So maybe it’s a lot of people of a certain generation who sort of embraced a very material lifestyle in place of dreams that they had that sort of disintegrated at some point.”

I don’t mean to imply, by the title I’ve chosen for this post, that it’s your generation’s responsibility to achieve what my generation so spectacularly (at least apparently) failed at, but rather my hope as I approach the end of my life to see a truly better society, a better world, and a rise in decency and mutual respect among the people of this planet. I’m hoping you will prove to be the generation that achieves that “greater awakening”.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Government & Civics, music, News & Politics, Personal, Philosophy, Poetry, Politics, Spiritual

27 April 2023

Test Driving Google’s AI, Bard

By Rick Ladd

In early 2009 I was privileged to spend a weekend with Dr. Russell Ackoff thanks to a friend and former colleague. I recall one incident where, while we were at Russ’s home, I mentioned my belief there was a similarity between the philosophy of dialectical materialism and the concept of systems thinking. As I recall, he was pretty upset with me for saying this. It’s stuck with me over the years.

Thanks to another friend on Facebook, I now have access to a set of AI tools, one of which is Google’s Bard. The other day, in an effort to test drive it, I proposed the following task and received the following reply:

Me:

Compare the philosophy of dialectical materialism as expressed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels to the concept of systems thinking as expressed by Russell Ackoff and others.

Bard:

Dialectical materialism

• Dialectical materialism is a materialist philosophy that emphasizes the role of conflict and change in history.

• It is based on the idea that the world is constantly changing and evolving, and that this change is driven by the conflict between opposing forces.

• These opposing forces can be social, economic, or political, and they can be found at all levels of society, from the individual to the global.

• Dialectical materialism is a dynamic and evolving philosophy that has been used to explain a wide range of historical events, from the French Revolution to the fall of the Soviet Union.

Systems thinking

• Systems thinking is a holistic approach to understanding the world that views it as a complex system of interacting parts.

• It is based on the idea that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and that it is impossible to understand any part of a system without understanding the system as a whole.

• Systems thinking has been used to understand a wide range of problems, from environmental degradation to economic inequality.

Comparison

• Both dialectical materialism and systems thinking are complex and sophisticated philosophies that have been used to understand the world in different ways.

• Dialectical materialism is more focused on the role of conflict and change in history, while systems thinking is more focused on the holistic nature of the world.

• Both philosophies have their strengths and weaknesses, and they can be used to complement each other.

For example:

• Dialectical materialism can be used to explain how conflict between social classes leads to social change, while systems thinking can be used to understand how the different parts of a society interact with each other.

• By combining these two approaches, we can gain a more complete understanding of the world and how it works.

Not quite as in-depth as I would have liked, but it does kind of jive with my understanding of the overlap of the two outlooks.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Education, Entertainment, Government & Civics, History, News & Politics, Personal, Philosophy, Politics, Systems Thinking

15 February 2023

Gym Jordan is an Idiot

By Rick Ladd

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

~ Sun Tsu

The Republican party consistently fails to understand the left and their political and economic philosophies. Here’s a perfect example of how wrong they get it; a tweet from Gym Jordan’s House Judiciary Committee.

Though I don’t believe there’s a monolithic set of beliefs on the left, there are many characteristics that are fairly well aligned, and what is so wrong about this tweet is how clueless it is in terms of what those on the left, from moderate Democrats to left-wing progressives, want for society. Think about how stupid these talking points are; how patently ridiculous they are when viewed alongside what is common knowledge about leftist thinking and aspirations.

For instance, those on the left have been fighting for decades to provide adequate, nutritious breakfasts to children and healthy, affordable meals to all. The idea that they would suggest skipping a meal to somehow counter rising costs of food is abject numbskullery. Given that it’s Gym Jordan who’s behind this stupidity, that does seems par for the course.

“Just get two jobs!” What the fuck are they talking about? People on the left have been champions of unions and fair working conditions for decades, if not centuries. The last thing they’re going to be wishing for the working class is that they work harder.

Lastly, the only people who have continuously suggested the age of retirement be moved up are Republicans. It’s their “kinder, gentler” method of removing Social Security entirely, which is their secret goal. They may complain—as they did during the latest State of the Union address—that’s not their position, but they’re liars. It’s something they’ve wanted since at least the Reagan administration.

The Republican party—at least the MAGA Republicans—have proven themselves to be the party of lying liars. They’ve completely given up on governance and have devolved into a bunch of whiny little bitches, devoid of solutions and providing nothing but phony gossip and innuendo instead of actual positions or viable proposals to improve our lives. They deserve nothing more than to be assigned to the trash heap of history, where it’s clear they are headed. We don’t even have to do anything to help them get there save to campaign and vote for their progressive adversaries. They are the architects of their own demise. The nation, and the world, will be far better off when they have finally disappeared.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Government & Civics, News & Politics, Personal, Philosophy, Politics

18 January 2023

Phony Patriots

By Rick Ladd

Let’s get something straight. There’s little love lost between me and the government. I don’t believe, despite being (ostensibly) a constitutional republic embodied in a democratic body politic, that we are in actuality a functioning democracy. Sure, we have elections, but I have a hard time believing most of the people who are able to run for office represent the majority of us. It takes too much money to wage a successful campaign, especially for a statewide or nationwide office.

According to Open Secrets, as of 2020 more than half of the members of the 116th Congress were millionaires and the median net worth of the entire House was a little over $1,000,000.00. Contrast that with the median household net worth of all Americans as of 2020 which, according to Census.gov, is a mere $140,800.00.

Keep in mind, that’s the median. That means half the population has even less wealth and, again according to Census.gov, the bottom 10% of American households have a negative net worth (-$1,450.00)! That 10% represents 33 million people. That’s an awful lot of people residing in the so-called wealthiest nation in the world who have a collective negative net worth.

This being the case, I find it hard to imagine virtually any politician being able to empathize with and understand the issues most Americans are faced with in living their lives. While there may be some local elected officials who aren’t reasonably well-off, I think it safe to say the majority, especially in the more populous states, are in at least the 75th percentile when it comes to income and net worth.

I’m pointing this out to make an argument for my not being an apologist or cheerleader for the ruling class of these United States of America. Add to that my years of experience in the peace & justice movement during the late sixties and early seventies, as well as my two-month trip to Cuba in 1973 as a guest of the Cuban government, and you might get the idea I’m not exactly enamored of the way our country is managed. Also, even though I “settled down” after my years of full-time activism, I’ve still remained a socialist and am supportive of progressive (if not revolutionary) ideas and action. Truth to tell, the only reason I’m not currently advocating for a socialist revolution in this country is because I’m a privileged white man and I don’t think it’s my place to suggest actions that may affect others far more adversely than they will affect me. I believe a revolution in this country would best be led by others than the likes of me.

Nevertheless, if forced to choose between what I would characterize as the regular order of how things are run and the kind of order people who support groups like this Armored Republic wants to equip so they can “honor Jesus” by arming themselves to the teeth to “defend” what they conceive of as “liberty”, I’ll take the former. I have no doubt these jerks are Christian white supremacists and their idea of freedom doesn’t include participation by people of color, members of the LGBTQ+ community, most women, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, etc.

These are the kind of people who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2001 and who support and defend Donald Trump. I want nothing to do with them or the kind of society they envision constructing to honor their “savior”.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Government & Civics, News & Politics, Personal, Philosophy, Politics