John Rachel

Life In Japan: Benten Shrine Ceremony

Posted on July 12, 2017 by johnrachel

I mentioned in I Love Japan Redux that my local village has quite a number of events and various excuses to get us all together in one place doing something, working or playing, sometimes both.

This past weekend was our annual Benten Shrine ceremony. In addition to every village having a community center, most also have a dedicated shrine. Ours honors Benten, the goddess of the arts, dance, music. That works for Masumi and I, in that she’s an accomplished pianist and opera singer, and I write pulp fiction.

Two weeks ago we cleaned up the area in preparation for today’s informal get-together — cleared a lot of undergrowth, removed weeds from the hedge rows, generally tidied up.

Then on Saturday, at 11 am sharp — Japanese are never late! — we assembled in the cluster of trees at the top of the hill where the shrine sits.

It’s nothing very spectacular, a modest but adequate shrine — we’ve gotten no complaints from Benten or any of the other Shinto deities.

A monk had traveled all the way from either Tokyo or Osaka to say prayers and conduct a short service. His sect is allied with water.

I guess because the Benten shrine is next to the water, and historically our section of town is sometimes threatened by flooding, his special blessings have direct relevance.

As he chanted incantations, waved special tree branches, and a prayer paddle, the rest of us stood, watched, listened, bowed several times. I have no idea what’s going on at these things. I just go with the flow. It’s all quite pleasant, solemn but not tense. Fortunately, I got no flashbacks to my Catholic experience growing up. Otherwise, a strait jacket would have been required.

Each family contributes snacks to the ceremony. The offerings sit on special wood stands every household owns, called a さんぼう — pronounced sanbou — and these stands are placed around the Buddha figure at the head of the shrine. Since the snacks are left in their bags, though さんぼう are small, each one holds a decent amount of cookies, candy, pastries, even cups of instant noodles and soups.

After the brief ceremony, we experienced the high point — especially for the kids — of the whole event. Once the ceremony conducted by the monk was complete, the さんぼう were removed from the altar and all of the contributions of edible treats were piled on a table. The kids lined up in front, adults behind them. Most had a plastic bag in hand and ready.

The treats were then thrown wildly to the attendees and everyone scrambled to catch and grab what they can. It’s sort of a Shinto Halloween without costumes.

Once all the treats had been given away, the adults were treated to shots of sake and strips of dried squid.

I know I know. You Westerners are thinking ‘Dried squid? Yuk!’ All I can say is it took me a while. At first some of the snacking here seems downright weird — as if jaw breakers, licorice, beef jerky, Pop Rocks and other crazy stuff we 外人 (gaijin) eat aren’t weird, right? — but I’ve developed a solid taste for most everything Japanese, after coming and going for ten years. The truth is that dried squid is actually rather delicious! It’s like salty rope. Salty rope? Doesn’t that put your salivary glands in overdrive just thinking about it?

The whole celebration took about an hour. Lots of smiles, good will, warm feelings.

I think it got Benten’s seal of approval.

Do I hear music?

Posted in Japan, Social Commentary, Spiritual, Travel | Tagged Benten, blessings, community, dried squid, Japan, sake, Sasayama, Shinto | Leave a comment

Candidate Contracts: Why Populist Candidates Will Want to Sign the Contract

Posted on June 30, 2017 by johnrachel

When a completely new idea comes around, predictably there is misunderstanding and apprehension. The more unique and original the idea, the greater is the reluctance to see it for what it is and recognize it’s potential. Call it the shock of the new.

Baffling as I find it — since I’m intimately familiar with the candidate contracts, including their legal implications and their implementation in an electoral setting — it’s come to my attention that some of those who would most benefit from and are least threatened by my game-changing proposal, have been beset with a bad case of the jitters, mostly knee-jerk fear-and-trembling associated with anything “legal” or related to “signing a contract”.

Of course and unfortunately, I refer to the populist/progressive candidates for whom the strategy was specifically designed — the good folks for whom it is the sole purpose of the strategy to faithfully serve, serve by getting them elected to office, empowered to act on and implement the enlightened progressive agenda now totally ignored by our current legislators, and be widely acclaimed as the saviors of our democracy.

This particular article is meant to clear any misconceptions and dispel related fears about the candidate contract strategy. I will be addressing the populist-progressive candidates themselves — the only ones worthy of the strategy, the only ones worthy in my opinion of holding public office.

So . . .

What kind of candidate would sign the candidate contract?

A candidate who wants to win the election in November 2018!

The solutions for every single one of the issues offered on the contract templates are supported by no less than 62% of American citizens. Most are in the high 70% range, some up in the 80% range. These are the things people want done. They’re sick of the excuses and delays. If they’re convinced a candidate can deliver on any of those items, they most certainly will vote for that candidate.

What kind of candidate would not sign this contract?

Establishment candidates — I call them centrist/neoliberal candidates — can’t and won’t sign the contract. While they don’t embrace the populist agenda of the contract, that’s not the main reason. They’d sign away their own grandmothers if they thought it would help their political careers. The main reason is that if they sign the contract, they will alienate their campaign donors — corporations, banks, Wall Street, the ruling elite — and lose the support of their major parties. Those two things have assured victory in the past. Why mess with a good thing? They’ll play it safe . . . and hopefully be sorry.

Having written off the establishment types who are in the pockets of the ruling elite, the rest of this goes out to you non-establishment, non-centrist, non-neoliberal candidates — you folks on the fringes, you guys who aren’t getting invited to the party, because you want to run a good, solid, transparent campaign, then go to Washington DC to represent the needs and desires of everyday Americans, not be lapdogs for the rich and powerful.

There are two extremely important things, right at the outset, to keep in mind here in appreciating why you as a candidate should sign this contract.

First, your strict legal obligations ONLY embrace what’s in the contract. Yes, the contract delineates your activities in relation to those issues listed. But in the entire range of other activities and legislation that you will deal with in office, you as a legislator will exercise your own discretion and judgment.

We of course assume that true to the intent and spirit of the contract, you will always defer to the majority wishes of your constituents, always doing your best to determine what your constituents want you to do, as their elected representative.

Second, you will determine what goes into the contract. We’re offering a valuable and powerful template, listing those causes which have the overwhelming popular approval of voters across the nation. But circumstances and conditions vary from district to district. If a particular issue is not relevant to your district, leave it off. An effective campaign is built around three to eight decisive wedge issues. You really only need one, but having a few more clearly adds punching power to your campaign. You will tailor this contract to the specific conditions and requirements of your campaign and your local district. Focus on those issues which are popular with your constituents but opposed in fact or by the voting record of your opponent. You want your contract to be about the stands on issues that set you apart, make you look good vis-a-vis your sellout opponent, that will get you elected — not make you or your campaign staff feel good, or your family and friends proud of you. Stay focused. Make this contract work for you. Having said that, we assume that you are a true progressive — not a faux progressive or a lip-service liberal — and therefore your final candidate contract will be consistent with the agenda reflected across the entire host of issued in the template offered here.

Now . . . here’s specifically why you as a populist/progressive candidate should sign the candidate contract.

It’s the right thing to do. Think about it. This is grass-roots democracy at its best. If you get elected, this represents a mandate from your voters. As a matter of fact, on the issues listed in the contract you signed, they are literally giving you your marching orders. Voters have decided what they want done, you are responding directly to their wishes. This is representative democracy in its purest form. You should be PROUD!
It offers clarity, certainty, credibility to voters. Campaigns are now fraught with garbage talk. Fluff. Nonsense. Major campaigns actually hire psychologists to put together strings of words which sound good and make people feel great. Campaign rhetoric has become a cheap form of manipulation. Campaign promises now mean nothing. Look at what you are offering. A legally-binding contract. No guesswork. No hot air. No feel good blather. The real thing. You really should be PROUD.
It gives you the ammunition you need to defeat your centrist/neoliberal opponents. When voters see what you’re offering, your opponents are frankly going to look very bad. While they’re hemming and hawing, you’ll be offering a real commitment on the issues that make a real difference. You have to keep pushing this out there. You’re on the side of the people, they’re on the side of . . . well, who knows? But it sure ain’t the side of the everyday citizen. If they were, they’d sign the contract. You should be very PROUD to display your signed candidate contract wherever you go!
It offers you protection from lobbyists, special interest groups, other wheel-and-deal legislators. Every freshman congressman says the same thing. They’re under constant assault. Everyone wants something, has something to trade, wants to make a deal. It’s a nightmare trying to keep focused on why you’re there, and keep reminding yourself of the people back home who are counting on you. Well, the contract is your Kevlar vest! It’s your bulletproof alibi. On the issues in that contract, there’s no room for wheeling or space for dealing. You’ve got the perfect excuse for blowing off all of the hired guns and Washington DC insiders who will try to seduce and manipulate you. Tell them: “I’ve got a contract with my voters! I have no choice.”
You have everything to gain, nothing to lose. Against the overwhelming piles of money and power of the establishment major party machinery, you will most likely lose this election unless you do something amazing. The contract is that something amazing. Will it put you at risk? Will you get sued? If you really really screw up and anger the majority of your constituents, they could organize a special referendum calling for a class action lawsuit. But in reality, will this happen? You tell me. How easy is it to get a majority of the voting public to do anything? Like vote for you? Be realistic. Yes, the possibility of a lawsuit adds enormous force to the contract. That’s why it’s there. To make people take you and the contract seriously. But if you’re a serious candidate, there’s no room here for diffidence. You should be secure in your commitment, confident of your mission, PROUD of yourself and what you stand for. What do you stand for? Just read the contract. It’s right there in black-and-white. Just do your job. Stay focused. Submit the legislation and do your best to support it. That’s all it takes. It’s what you’d be doing anyway, with or without the contract. The only risk you face is losing the election because you didn’t fight hard enough for what you believe in.

To make sure we get to the bottom of any unwarranted and unnecessary apprehensions about this powerful and decisive electoral strategy, let me just add a tad more really blunt straight-talk about this last item. A populist candidate has so much to gain with this, yet I’m sure it’s the fear of a lawsuit which is the source of almost all of the anxiety with this game-changing approach.

Do you realize how easy it is to fulfill the obligations of the contract? All you have to do is draft legislation, submit it to Congress through whatever procedure or established channel there is, then talk it up and vote for it if it comes up for vote. That’s it! Maybe it won’t get passed. Others might sabotage it. Congress might burn to the ground. The Earth might get hit by a meteor. But you’ve fulfilled the terms of the contract!

Let’s say you give it your best shot. But the bill you drafted gets hung up in committee. You’re still doing your job. You’re still fulfilling your obligations under the contract, as long as you keep trying to submit it for consideration and spread the good word about it. You will not get sued! If anything, you’ll might eventually be acclaimed as one of the few people in Congress with integrity and determination, and most of all, genuine loyalty to the voters who elected you to office. You might get on the cover of Time Magazine, but YOU WILL NOT GET SUED!

Now please pay attention. Because I’m talking to YOU! You dedicated progressives who want to do the right thing, who want to serve your country and work hard on behalf of the millions of good, decent, everyday Americans who right now are getting the shaft from a rigged system — our sold-to-the-highest-bidder democracy.

I’m talking to YOU! You populist candidates who are willing to buck the system, you who refuse to play by the anti-democratic rules dictated by our lapdog major political parties, parties which kowtow to the ruthless, self-serving ruling elite.

I’m talking to YOU! You candidates who truly want to make a difference . . .

Be bold! Be strong! Get a leg up on your opponent. Demand honesty and integrity. Demand transparency and accountability. Run a truly exemplary campaign in the best traditions of democracy. Be the solution to the mess our electoral system is in, not just a perpetuation of the problem. Help raise the bar and get rid of the crooks and liars. Stand up to the tyranny of the anti-democratic kleptocrats — the rich and powerful — who are destroying our system of self-government and looting our country of its future.

Sign the contract.

Win the election.

Then start thinking about what you want to say in your victory speech late in the evening on November 6, 2018.

Make us PROUD!

You can download the CFAR (Contract For American Renewal) template in the format of your choice using the following links, then get to work customizing it for your campaign, reflecting the constituent values and priorities of your particular district. Or you may choose to adopt the entire contract as it is:

House of Representatives – Word
House of Representatives – PDF
House of Representatives – Text

Senate – Word
Senate – PDF
Senate – Text

Posted in Democracy, Political Analysis, Revolution, Video Blog | Tagged 2018 election, candidate contracts, congress, democracy, electoral reform, plutocracy, ruling elite, Time Magazine | Leave a comment

Candidate Contracts: Weaponizing Populist Electoral Campaigns

Posted on June 28, 2017 by johnrachel

Here we go again. If you can handle my mid-Western whine, the above video offers a detailed explanation on how candidate contracts can be used to weaponize the electoral campaigns of populist candidates. The entire text of the presentation follows here:

In my last article, I talked about the ethical and political basis for introducing candidate contracts into our electoral process.

Now I want to address their practical application, specifically how the candidate contract becomes a powerful and decisive weapon on the raging battleground that our campaigns for public office have become.

Let me be absolutely clear at the outset. The candidate contract strategy can only be used to boost the effectiveness and accelerate the momentum of populist campaigns — those which reflect the priorities and values of a majority of American citizens — because the strategy is predicated on expressing the democratic will of that majority. Therefore, using the candidate contract for narrow, niche activism, or unpopular causes is a non-starter. In theory, candidate contracts can be drawn up for any reason, around any issue big or small. But they are only effective in attracting voter support if they reflect enormous popular support.

Having said that, making the candidate contract the centerpiece of a populist campaign can be decisive — it can win elections.

Here’s how.

It’s crucial to recognize, the candidate contract by embracing a number of pivotal populist policies, then requiring focused and unwavering dedication by whoever signs the contract to inaugurate those policies, is not intended to constrain or control the ‘good guy’ populist candidate. These items are the things he or she would do anyway if elected. In fact, within each district the ‘good guy’ populist candidates themselves each tailor the contract for their particular constituents, literally designing the contract he or she can and will deliver on.

While my template lists eleven issues where vast majorities of Americans want decisive action, I recommend, that based on a familiarity and understanding of each local voting jurisdiction, only those “wedge” issues unique to a particular district and the campaign taking place there, be included in the contract for that district. It’s hardly necessary or even productive to put an entire campaign platform in the contract. Less is more. Three to eight decisive issues is sufficient. Just enough to defeat the establishment opponents and assure victory.

For example, if the demographic is relatively older, Social Security and Medicare likely would be incorporated, whereas free college education may not be consequential enough to include. If the demographic is young and working class, most likely the $15 per hour minimum wage clause should be adopted. And so on.

The ‘good guy’ populist candidate must know where the voters stand, and fashion his or her candidate contract accordingly. Specifically, he or she is looking for those pivotal, high-visibility issues which have major voter support, but are not championed by the opposition candidates! If an incumbent has, for example, voted in Congress against an increase in the minimum wage, and there’s enormous support among low wage voters locally, that divergence is exactly what the populist candidate is targeting.

I can’t stress this enough . . .

The contract should identify those issues with popular local support which differentiate him or her from their opponents. The progressive candidate is on the side of the people, whereas the opponents — establishment/centrist/neoliberal candidates from either major party — are on the wrong side of these issues.

This now points us to how the candidate contract weaponizes the populist’s campaign.

The contract draws a massive, unmistakable line in the sand. The populist is on one side — the side of the people — and his or her opponents are on the other side. The populist candidate offers the voters something substantial, powerful, unprecedented, a guarantee in writing in the form of a legally-binding contract, declaring in no uncertain terms, what he or she will be doing from day one when arriving in Washington DC, for those same voters who voted them into office.

What can the establishment candidates put on the table? More vague promises, more empty rhetoric, more nice campaign slogans and pleasant sound bites?

Recognize this . . .

Establishment candidates cannot and will not sign the contract. Why? Because if they do, they will lose the fat checks from their deep-pocketed campaign donors — corporations, Wall Street, big banks, the ruling elite — and the corrupt pay-for-play major parties will withdraw their support as well. The major party campaign machine will be put to what they judge as better use supporting someone who knows how their bread gets buttered.

Thus, the establishment candidates effectively surrender to the populist candidate exactly what’s needed to put up a great fight and turn the tables. The candidate contract becomes a weapon of mass destruction which can be aimed at the opposition, to gain the advantage and turn the whole campaign on its head.

The candidate contract, used properly and relentlessly, destroys the message, credibility, viability of anyone who won’t sign on the dotted line.

Without any hesitation, it should be displayed proudly and prominently at every public event.

“Here it is, good people. My guarantee to you the voters. Look at this! This is not some wishy washy campaign promise. It’s a legally-binding contract, spelling out in precise detail what I’ll be doing for you, the voters, when I arrive in Washington DC. That’s my signature there at the bottom.”

The other side of that is at every public appearance, town hall meeting, press event, photo op, the establishment candidates should be confronted with their lack of courage, honesty, and commitment to voters. Using the candidate contracts, they should be called out by campaign and citizen activists who want real action, not posturing and prevarication.

I’m dead serious!

Vilify, demonize, discredit the establishment candidates for their disloyalty to the people. If they were serious about serving the vast majority of citizens, they’d sign on the dotted line. Not signing the contract means only one thing: They’re blowing smoke. All their nice-sounding speeches and wonderful TV ads are just more vaporous, hollow blather.

Let me offer three examples. Use your imagination and you’ll come up with many more.

Get the FightFor15 crowd at campaign rallies for the ‘bad guy’ candidate. Wave signs that say: Why won’t you sign the contract for the $15 minimum wage so I can afford to live?

Line up old people on the sidewalk in front of his campaign headquarters. Beautiful old folks in rockers, wheel chairs, leaning on aluminum walkers. Have them wearing t-shirts saying: Why won’t you sign the contract to protect my Social Security and Medicare? Make sure the local press and TV stations are there to cover the geriatric insurrection.

Have the Veterans For Peace and Code Pink at his campaign rallies. Hold up big banners: Why won’t you sign the contract to bring the troops home from Afghanistan? No more American soldiers in body bags!

Is this negative? Is this mean?

No, it’s not negative. And it’s not mean. It’s a public service. Voters need to know what they’re getting when they vote for someone. If that person won’t come clean, then we need to come clean for them. Not signing the contract is a BIG DEAL! It’s a BIG RED FLAG! Voters deserve to know.

Especially with incumbents, it’s absolutely our public duty to call them out on their false claims and excuses. They haven’t in the past demonstrated a basic understanding of their duties and responsibilities to their constituents. And judging from their refusal to sign a simple, straightforward contract — which reflects the will of majorities of citizens across the nation on issues that have now reached crisis levels — these establishment candidates will not in the future be working for the everyday people of this country. Instead they’ll be working for the Wall Street banks, the multinational corporations, the rich and powerful. Instead of passing the legislation to address the critical problems we face, they’ll be drumming up more campaign contributions for their next run for office.

The candidate contract allows honest, committed ‘good guy’ candidates who have integrity and are willing to answer directly to the good folks who elected them, to blow off the doors of calculated deception and treachery, and expose the corruption that has become endemic in American politics. Corruption which silences the voice of the people and locks everyday citizens out — individuals just like you and I — preventing us from participating in our democratic form of government.

At the same time, it opens other doors. And through those doors will walk representatives who represent, public servants who serve the public, determined, hard-working elected officials who will begin reinstating accountability, transparency and integrity, to a good system gone bad — a unique promise of self-rule by all citizens, corrupted and co-opted by the crushing anti-democratic forces of unlimited money in politics, and unchallenged power by an autocratic ruling elite.

It’s time we fight back. Candidate contracts are the weapon of choice.

[ As a footnote, let me add one highly encouraging recent development. Revolt Against Plutocracy is building an entire campaign around the candidate contract strategy which will constitute a major thrust in an effort between now and the 2018 election to challenge centrist/neoliberal candidates, and promote genuinely progressive/populist campaigns. The folks there integrated the candidate contracts, which they call CFARs — Contract For American Renewal — with what they call their leverage strategy. Keep a keen eye out for some significant electoral activism from this excellent organization, of which I’m now a board member and contributor. ]

Posted in Corporatism, Democracy, Political Analysis, Political Rant, Revolution, Video Blog | Tagged 2018 election, Afghanistan war, candidate contracts, congress, corporatism, democracy, electoral reform, Medicare, minimum wage, plutocracy, ruling elite, social security | Leave a comment

Candidate Contracts: A Democratic Renewal

Posted on June 22, 2017 by johnrachel

If you can handle my tinny, nasally mid-Western voice, the above video offers a detailed explanation on how candidate contracts take the guesswork out of voting, and moreover set a whole, new standard for electoral integrity in our country. Or you can just read the entire text of the presentation, which follows here:

The candidate contract idea is simple and straightforward.

The candidate contract takes the guesswork out of voting.

It sets a new standard for deciding where a candidate stands on crucial issues, how serious that candidate is about solving problems which are important to us voters, how serious that candidate is about representing his or her constituents. In fact, it sets down in writing what exactly that candidate will be doing when they arrive in Washington DC, right from Day One.

Every candidate says the right things. They always say what they think the voters want to hear, the things that will get them elected. Everyone understands this.

But talk is cheap. And after they get elected, when these folks arrive in our nation’s capital and get inside that DC bubble, amnesia sets in.

How do I know?

That’s simple. It’s so obvious anyone can see it. You just have to look.

Just consider a few of these items.

63% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $15.00 per hour.

That means more than 6 out of every 10 citizens want the minimum wage hiked to $15 per hour. Mind you the minimum livable wage in urban areas like New York, San Francisco, Boston is over $22 per hour. But $15 per hour would be a good start in the right direction. What is it now? It’s equivalent in today’s dollars to what it was in 1950! It’s a paltry $7.25 an hour. It hasn’t increased since July of 2009. That’s eight years ago!

75% of voters want fair trade agreements protecting jobs, workers, the environment. 75%! That’s a huge majority opposed to the trade bills which now give corporations enormous advantages, are responsible for exporting our jobs, destroying our unions, replacing good permanent employment with low wage temporary jobs. Is Congress listening? It doesn’t matter which party is in the Oval Office or even on Capitol Hill. We still get NAFTA, CAFTA, TTIP, WTO. Last year our pay-for-play legislators in the deep pockets of the multinational corporations fast-tracked TPP, the worst trade bill in history. These neoliberal lapdogs won’t quit until we’re all back to being hunter-gatherers!

76% of voters want a cut back on military spending. So what do we get next year? Trump proposes an increase of $56 billion in the official defense budget with members of Congress from both parties cheering him on like a bunch of snarling pit bulls.

76% of voters want the U.S. completely out of Afghanistan. We’ve been fighting that miserable pointless war for 16 years, folks! They promised to get U.S. troops out of the country by 2014. Now it’s 2017 and they’re putting more troops back in. We’re going to be there forever! For what? To waste another $600 billion dollars and have more of our best and brightest come back in body bags?

79% of voters want no reductions in Social Security. 70% support expanding it. 79% of voters want no reductions in Medicare. Here we have two of the most successful programs in our history, loved and supported by the people. Yet every new session of Congress, there’s talk about cutting benefits, raising eligibility age — slash slash slash. Or they talk about “privatizing” it, which is doublespeak for turning it over to Wall Street so they can gamble with the money we’ve put away all our lives. It’s truly a crime!

There are many more. So far I’ve just scratched the surface.

But there’s one last one I’ll mention that truly tells the story, that shows what a sad state of affairs our faltering democracy is in. Get this: 93% of Americans want GMO labeling. Mind you, they’re not saying GMOs must be banned. They’re just saying that the labels for our processed food should say whether the product contains GMO ingredients or not, so that a shopper can make an informed judgment about whether they want to buy it — a mother who wants to be prudent in planning the diet for her kids, a person who may have severe food allergies which requires them to pay attention to the ingredients on a label. 93%! That crosses all party lines, ideologies, religions, liberal, conservative, all ethnicities, visitors from outer space. 93%! And Congress won’t pass a bill requiring GMO labeling. That really says it all, doesn’t it?

Okay, we’ve got a range of different issues on the candidate contract we’ve prepared. They are the things millions and millions of Americans want done — huge majorities of U.S. citizens. As different as these items individually are, what do they all have in common? You’ve got it! NONE OF THIS GETS THROUGH OUR DEADBEAT CONGRESS! Well, I shouldn’t say they’re deadbeat, because they’re not. They are actually working hard to make sure none of these things gets passed, working hard not for you and I, but for their rich patrons, their deep-pocketed Wall Street donors, their Koch brothers and defense contractors, investment bankers and hedge fund buddies.

Like I said, candidates always say the right things. Take minimum wage: “I believe everyone deserves the right to make a decent living. This is the richest nation on earth. Every person deserves a good life.” Sound familiar? What’s he going to say? I think some folks should starve to death on slave wages? Of course not. But he used a lot of words to say nothing. The candidate contract makes it a simple but powerful yes or no question: Will you commit in writing to raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour or not? Yes or no.

So . . . all we’re saying to a candidate is this: “We love your TV ads, you’ve got a lovely family, your t-shirts and bumper stickers look great! But running this country is serious business. So from now on, we want it in writing, in black-and-white, in a legally-binding contract what you will be doing to serve us, the folks who are sending you to your cushy job in Washington DC. No ambiguity. No compromise. No equivocation. We want it spelled out as an ’employment contract’ and we are asking you to sign it. We’re not forcing you. It’s your choice. It’s a straightforward deal here. You sign the contract, you’ve got our vote. You don’t sign the contract, we’re looking for a candidate who has the integrity, courage, and responsibility to sign it. We’ll be voting for that person. Understand this: There’s no room for negotiation. This is final! That’s the way it works now.”

You see, professional politicians have gotten spoiled. They get so much attention, so much money, so many favors lavished on them once they get in office, they forget the most important single aspect of their job description: THEY WORK FOR US! We’re not casting votes for them to talk to lobbyists and rich campaign donors. We’re casting our votes to have them go to DC and work on behalf of us, the people, the everyday Americans that make up 99% of the population.

Please. Just read the contract. Everything in it is what at minimum 62% of us regular folks want done. On many items, it’s even greater. 75%. 78%. 80% and above. Right now those things aren’t getting done. Year after year, our elected officials ignore the will of the people, the very citizens who vote them into office. The candidate contract will make sure they start paying attention.

Here’s the simple truth. Here’s what’s happening on the ground in real time right now in America.

Voters are tired of slick campaign rhetoric and empty campaign promises. They’re fed up with a system that’s rigged.

They’re fed up with being left behind, forgotten by their elected officials.

They’re tired of everything getting done for Wall Street, the big banks, the corporations, the wealthy.

They’re fed up with nothing getting done for the PEOPLE — honest, hard-working everyday citizens.

Folks! We need to DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND!

No negotiation. No excuses. No mercy. No fear.

That’s exactly what the candidate contract does. It lets us know exactly who’s on our side and who isn’t.

Okay, one last point: People sometimes ask me, “What kind of candidate would sign such a contract?”

The answer to that is very simple: A candidate who wants to win the coming election. The contract spells out what the voters want by huge majorities. Voters are sick and tired of compromises. They want the job done and want it done right. Therefore, voters need to stand united and stand strong. Vote only for candidates who are on their side, who will work for them! And that being the case, the reason why a candidate should be running full speed with pen in hand to sign the contract is because they want to get elected and be sent to Washington DC to serve those who elected them honestly, faithfully, transparently.

Let me add some beautifully twisted logic to illustrate further why a candidate would want to sign this contract.

We all know there are some good people in politics, decent human beings who truly want to do the right thing. But politics is often more about power, money, twisting arms, bullying, than about doing what’s good for the people. So let’s say our candidate — who has signed the contract — arrives in Washington and right off the bat, there’s some lobbyist at his door. The lobbyist gives his pitch, the typical let’s-see-what-we-can-do-here, the usual I’ll-scratch-your-back-if-you’ll-scratch-my-back blah blah blah. He’s got some mega transnational corporation paying him big bucks to wax the slide with Congress and get some favorable legislation passed. Well, here’s the beauty of the contract: Our guy, the one who got elected because he signed on the dotted line with you the voters, can say: “Hey, I sure appreciate your coming in and talking to me about this. But here’s the deal. I’m under contract to my constituents. I have no room to negotiate, no room to trade or bargain on any of this. If I go against my constituents on this, I’ll be on the streets without this job, I’ll have to refund all my campaign contributions — and hey, the money is spent, how will I begin to do that? — and I’ll probably get my ass sued for more money than I’ll make in a lifetime. So even if I wanted to go along with what you’re proposing, I have no choice. I am legally-bound by contract to answer only to those who voted me into office. Thanks for stopping by. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”

See how this works? See why this introduces an unprecedented level of honesty, transparency, integrity, back into voting? Do you see why at least in terms of good, decent, honest politicians, we’re actually doing THEM a favor with this contract.

Okay, I’ve talked your ear off. Let me wrap this up.

Yes, the candidate contract is a new innovation. But it’s a necessary innovation. Before there were cars, we didn’t need traffic lights. Before big money and unprecedented concentration of wealth and power into the hands of a ruling elite, we didn’t need an enforceable contract with our elected officials. Times change and we need to change with it. Candidate contracts are the answer to the dismal state of our democracy.

Granted, we have a lot of work to do to repair the mess we’re in. But good work depends on good dependable workers. Let’s put some real public servants in office who will serve the public, not just the rich and powerful. Let’s put some representatives in Congress who will represent everyday Americans, not Wall Street banks, corporate CEOs, not the incomprehensibly rich. Let’s put some integrity back into our elections by electing only those with the integrity to sign on the dotted line, guaranteeing they will work for you in creating an America that works again for everyone.

Here is the link to look at the version of the candidate contract for a progressive running for the House of Representatives: Contract For American Renewal 2020.

If you’re interested in getting into the real details of an independent campaign using the candidate contract strategy — and it is an entire electoral strategy, not just a sheet of paper with some legalese — I recommend reading the two books which got me noticed by several progressive activist groups now adopting the candidate contract for future campaigns.

“Candidate Contracts: Taking Back Our Democracy” was published in June of 2015 and is available worldwide from all the usual suspects:

Amazon (Kindle) . . . amzn.to/1QJRiNZ
Amazon (Print) . . . amzn.to/1Cuq0du
Apple (iTunes) . . . apple.co/1BXnPcy
Barnes & Noble . . . bit.ly/1GpTTLq
Kobo (Indigo) . . . bit.ly/1OEI2xj
Smashwords . . . bit.ly/1B4DQCp
Direct from printer . . . bit.ly/1MGjDnN

“Fighting for the Democracy We Deserve” was published September 2015 and also is available both in every popular ebook format and as a deluxe paperback:

Amazon (Kindle) . . . amzn.to/1VMf2Ft
Amazon (Print) . . . amzn.to/1L9SdIC
Apple (iTunes) . . . apple.co/1JD1YAg
Barnes & Noble . . . bit.ly/1ZUJUpn
Kobo (Indigo) . . . bit.ly/1IX6rO4
Smashwords . . . bit.ly/22PXWLf
Direct from printer . . . bit.ly/1i7ISFM

Posted in Corporatism, Deconstruction, Democracy, Economics, Political Analysis, Revolution, Video Blog, War and Peace | Tagged 2018 election, Afghanistan war, congress, corporatism, defense budget, democracy, electoral reform, GMO labeling, House of Representatives, Medicare, minimum wage, oligarchy, plutocracy, ruling elite, Senate, social security | Leave a comment

No Contract No Vote

Posted on June 16, 2017 by johnrachel

Asking our current political leadership to reform itself is like expecting a rabid dog to seek out medical treatment and find a path to full rehabilitation.

It’s quite obvious our “professional politicians” are now infected and controlled by an anti-democratic brain-eating virus, are well-compensated, septic purveyors of raging, exponentially-spreading corporate tyranny and ruling class oppression. This is a tenacious systemic disease which the brilliant political theorist Sheldon Wolin — who unfortunately passed away in 2015 — called inverted totalitarianism.

Which means if anything is to get done on behalf of the everyday citizens of this country, it will have to be initiated, engineered, and advanced by “outsiders” — that would be you and I, working with future political office holders who have not so far been and will not ever be sucked into the slipstream of the neoliberal, rapacious capitalism-at-all-costs juggernaut.

We must particularly remain keenly aware of and rigorously vigilant against spoilers in our midst. For example, we shouldn’t for a single, inattentive moment think we can count on any of the pseudo-progressives who are now, with the Trumpenstein monster’s ball in full swing, capitalizing on their resurgent popularity on dance cards of the desperate. There’s no question, we’re in big trouble. Our democracy is in the middle of an existential crisis. That hardly suggests we should turn to those who have been participating in, have often been instrumental in engineering the mess, to see what their latest bright ideas are.

Time for some new blood! Some fresh thinking!

We especially must not be fooled or sidetracked by what has been appropriately dubbed the McResistance, those who would lead a false challenge and short-lived charge against the current order, then in the end just cave to more crippling, insidious compromises on behalf of the ruling elite. We might not want to admit it but we do know who they are. They include such political rock stars as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

How, then, do we know who to trust? How can we determine who is merely engaged in another round of the tomfoolery that has destroyed our democracy, buried the American Dream under mountains of jingoistic puffery and comic book exceptionalism, gutted the hopes of everyday Americans, keeping them from participating in the enormous potential and opportunities which our country is supposed to represent for all its citizens?

There are times when ‘bold and simple’ are better than ‘nuanced and complicated’.

Yet, there is always a temptation to make something bold and simple more tentative and complicated than it needs to be. However, there’s no need here for wishy-washy thinking, waffling, Aristotelian cogitation, or utopian daydreaming. So . . .

Let me be clear about the purpose of the candidate contract strategy.

This might sound insultingly simplistic to some but I’m going to say it anyway.

The purpose of the candidate contract strategy is to get the good guys elected and throw the bad guys out of office.

Period!

And since in my view most of the current legislators and certainly the president falls into the ‘bad guys’ category, most of them should and — if the strategy is successful — will be replaced by a whole new freshman class of ‘good guys’. Yes, I’m talking about . . .

Regime change in Washington DC!

REQUIRED DEFINITIONS:

While the candidate contract strategy is certainly applicable at all levels of government for any position chosen by electors, ‘elected’ and ‘office’ for my immediate purposes refers to federal openings — membership in the House, membership in the Senate, the President.

A ‘good guy’ is an elected official who is honest, transparent, and wholly responsible for representing the needs and priorities of those constituents who by majority vote have chosen him/her as their congressman or president.

A ‘bad guy’ is an elected official who does not consistently and unwaveringly represent the needs and priorities of his/her constituents, probably is beholden to or strongly influenced by campaign donors, corporate lobbyists, well-funded special interest groups, in a phrase, ‘the ruling class’ of this country.

Having said that, let’s get down to the nuts and bolts of how the candidate strategy works.

BASIC BUT CRITICAL Q & A:

Q. Who would want to sign such a candidate contract?

A. Any candidate running for office who wants to get elected.

Q. How can signing a candidate contract guarantee getting elected?

A. Of course, there are no absolute guarantees. At the same time, please refer to the title of this article. If a candidate does not sign the contract, we don’t vote for him or her. If a candidate does sign the contract, he or she deserves, thus will get our votes. Of course, this means voters must unite and take a firm stand. But why wouldn’t they? It’s in all of our best interests and the best interests of our country as a whole to be strong and take back our democracy.

Q. Why is the proposed contract in our best interests?

A. The contract as offered, subject naturally to minor adjustments which reflect the specific needs and priorities of each voting jurisdiction, embraces those things which by huge majorities everyday citizens want done and aren’t getting done. Poll after poll shows support for all of the items which are addressed in the contract of 62% or more of everyday American citizens. Most of the initiatives are supported by more than 3/4 of those polled. The people have spoken. The contract just takes their concerns and priorities and puts it in writing.

Q. Why should the voting public demand candidate contracts?

A. Because at least on key issues which are important to the voting public, they take the guesswork out of voting. There is no ambiguity, room for negotiation, or even margin for error. The contract stipulates in no uncertain terms what an elected official must and will do on those key issues from the day he or she arrives in Washington DC. Voters are fed up with hot air campaign rhetoric and broken promises. In one master stroke, the contract gets rid of the smoke and breaks the mirrors.

Before we go on, let’s look at the contract I’m offering. This is the comprehensive catch-all version, based on critical issue polling and Bernie Sanders’ campaign platform.

Now . . . back to the nuts-and-bolts.

The candidate contract or contracts are initially introduced to the electoral process — a campaign for public office — from two directions, eventually to meet in the middle.

CANDIDATE CONTRACTS FROM THE PEOPLE:

A citizens group or citizens groups representing certain constituent causes can and should put up a candidate contract which reflects issues of concern, then present them to those candidates running for office in their district.

For example, minimum wage workers in a congressional district should challenge anyone running to sign a contract boosting the federal minimum wage. There already are many “FightFor15” activist groups around the country. The appropriate candidate contract turns their pleas into a concrete demand — a forceful, decisive ultimatum. If a candidate signs such a contract, he or she gets not only the endorsement of the group, but the members of the activist group take it upon themselves — after all it’s in their best interests — to actively and enthusiastically campaign on behalf of that candidate, reinforcing his/her own official publicity and whatever media coverage can be generated.

Senior citizens groups may likewise prepare a candidate contract to protect Social Security and Medicare. The candidate who signs such a contract again gets the full support and backing of such senior citizens groups. They highlight the candidate’s loyalty to them in all of their newsletters, at their shuffleboard club meets, bingo contests. They wear t-shirts or put bumper stickers on their cars and golf carts: Future congressman Godfrey Goodman signed on the dotted line to protect SS and Medicare!

CANDIDATE CONTRACTS BY NON-ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATES:

At the other end of the equation, an independent or third-party candidate, or a candidate running as a dissident major party candidate, for example in a primary, would make the candidate contract central to his/her campaign. Based on research and polling in the local district, a contract which reflects the priorities of voters in that district would be drawn up, which highlights those key issues which have broad public support. Such a contract would look like the one above, making solid, unambiguous commitments on a range of popular, critical causes.

Now it’s important to understand, the establishment candidates may give lip-service to what’s in that contract or an appropriate variation of it. But the reality is, they will not sign it. They can’t! If they did, their major parties would abandon them, their campaign funding would dry up, they would be targeted — as Bernie Sanders was by the Democratic Party — for marginalization and defeat.

This makes the signed contract a huge public relations coup! It effectively gives the ‘good guy’ anti-establishment candidate the high ground, the right to legitimately say and be able to prove, he or she is on the side of the people. Putting the contract front and center in the campaign takes the guesswork out of the voting for the public. They can see in the starkest terms exactly where the candidates stand and who’s really on their side.

INTRODUCING HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY INTO THE GAME:

I don’t know how to say this gently or with Zen dispassion. So . . .

The candidate is not a magic wand. It’s a sledgehammer!

Signing the contract will not create some harmonic convergence of metaphysical forces which will usher people into the voting booth and make them vote for a candidate.

Signing the contract does, however, provide a powerful tool to beat up an opponent and discredit a ‘bad guy’ candidate in the eyes of the voters, while portraying in stark relief the candidate who does sign the contract, as an individual who has volunteered a bulletproof guarantee, if elected, of service to his constituents.

This is no trivial matter.

Right now, campaigning is a house of mirrors in a bank of fog. Words are chosen with a lawyer’s eye and a Madison Avenue ear. I’m not sure the candidates typically even know themselves where they stand on much of what’s important to the public. But if they do, they sure aren’t telling us in clear, unambiguous terms. Thus expectations and performance are secondary to image and appeal. The same shallow devices, cynical psychology, and stealthy methodologies, are used to “sell” a candidate as are used to sell any other products out there, from eyeliner to soda pop and fast food to automobiles and fantasy vacation cruises.

The candidate contract puts back front and center what a political campaign should be — but rarely is — all about, which is what exactly can we expect the candidate to do once he or she arrives in Washington DC.

Having the candidate contract be the new standard for electoral integrity, particularly having it arrive simultaneously from the two critical participants in the voting mechanism — the advocacy groups among the voting public and enlightened candidates themselves — means it reflects the best traditions of the democratic process.

It represents a long-lost level of honesty and transparency, reintroduced into the requisite and most basic communication that is the foundation of a robust democratic system — the vetting process for identifying and selecting elected representatives.

The voters can and must probe the candidate: “Where do stand on this?”

And the ‘good guy’ candidate gets to reply: “Glad you asked. Just read my contract with you, the voters. It’s all spelled out in black-and-white. And yes, that’s my signature at the bottom.”

If we as voters and those among us who aspire to be elected representatives turn our backs on this idea, during such divisive and perilous times, when we’re starting to hear the initial portents of a death rattle from our sick and dying democracy, we will deserve the brutally totalitarian, crassly authoritarian, wantonly fascistic debacle our government-by-the-corporate-ruling-elite is fast becoming.

The time is right for candidate contracts.

Unless you have a better idea . . .

Posted in Corporatism, Deconstruction, Democracy, Political Analysis, Political Rant, Revolution | Tagged Bernie Sanders, candidate contracts, capitalism, democracy, electoral reform, neoliberalism, plutocracy, ruling elite | Leave a comment

Life In Japan: I Love Japan Redux

Posted on June 12, 2017 by johnrachel

What were you doing on Sunday morning?

I can tell you what I was doing. I was enjoying what I consider to be one of the most charming aspects of living where I do in Japan.

Sasayama is a tiny, traditional, rural city that sprawls over a large area, having absorbed five other towns into it many years ago. There are about 50,000 people living within the city limits.

But Sasayama is split into a number of small villages. Ours is called Noma. Each village has its own shrine — ours honors Benten, the goddess of arts, literature, music, and dance, quite appropriate for my wife and I — its own community center — exactly what it sounds like, a center for holding a variety of community meetings, get-togethers, barbecues, and so on — its own sports team for the annual sports day competitions with other villages — a funny and endearing event which deserves its own separate article.

During good weather, meaning only excepting the brutal winter months, the village gets together once or twice a month to . . . are you ready? . . . clean up the neighborhood!

Actually, since folks here rarely litter, going around to pick up gum wrappers and empty soda cans is kind of a pointless task. So usually we do other much more useful things, like tend to the vast system of irrigation ditches and channels, cut weeds, clear excess bamboo and other unwanted wild growth.

Today’s job was working on a wall which always sprouts all sorts of destructive weeds and shrubs. While men with weed-whackers cleared the undergrowth from the surrounding area, the rest of us hacked away at what was growing on the wall. Note that we don’t take the easy way out — using carcinogenic Roundup — but just do it by hand. Chop chop!

Our work sessions last from 3 to 4 hours. After nearly two hours, we take a short break. The village provides rolls and tea, and we just lounge about and talk, resting up for the final assault on the day’s project.

After cleaning up the wall, everyone returned to the community center, potted flowers for beautifying the neighborhood — they are placed all along the major paths and lanes which wind through our village — and were given flowers and potting soil to take home for our own personal use.

Today’s work was fairly easy. Other times I’ve been up to my ankles in snake-infested, muddy water, or clearing thick brush which intrudes on the rice and soybean fields if left unchecked. But it’s always good exercise and overall a pleasant experience.

People here ask me if I did this sort of thing in America. That’s easy to answer. Never!

I think back on life in the U.S. spanning many decades and the lack of much community spirit, the obsession with privacy, and what would appear to be a pathological devotion to avoiding personal contact with all but the most familiar in one’s personal circles. There is a paranoia, a distrust, a suspicion that overshadows normal, natural social proclivities.

How sad!

People like to blame it on modernity, technology, industrialization, the new economy.

But Japan is about as modern and technologically advanced as any country in the world. People are consumers par excellence here. The shopping malls are always packed! Japan has unfortunately embraced the Western economic model as well. Certainly it’s not casino capitalism, but definitely a tamer version of it — look at its frightening debt to GDP ratio!

Despite that, they have kept alive some traditions which promote sense of community, and the shared responsibility of living in that community. They create opportunities to work together for the common good, get to know one another, and just enjoy other folks who happen to live in the same geographical setting. Like our clean up days!

What a powerful and rewarding ritual this is!

Another reason for me to say . . .

I love Japan!

Posted in Japan, Social Commentary, Spiritual | Tagged Benton shrine, community, flowers, Hyogo prefecture, Japan, Sasayama, Shinto, sports festival | 7 Comments

How do we confront abuse of power and restore democracy?

Posted on May 31, 2017 by johnrachel

People accuse me of being confrontational.

I say: Absolutely! Guilty as charged.

If your neighbors are throwing garbage over the fence into your yard, what do you do? Sit back and watch it pile up? Or . . . lean over the fence and demand that they stop?

That demand might begin as a calm, friendly but firm request. As your neighbors continue to dump their trash into your yard, it will become increasingly forceful and eventually take on the flavor of . . . guess what? . . . here it comes . . . a confrontation!

Our demands — based on rights and privileges guaranteed in writing in the Constitution — that our elected officials represent us and serve the interests of all American citizens, not just the rich and well-connected, have for decades been respectful, polite and measured.

The response we’ve gotten from those same elected officials has been more abuse of power and position, and the veritable destruction of representative democracy in America.

Time to get tough.

Time for confrontation!

How do we confront power? How do we specifically confront those officials we choose at the polls and gift with cushy jobs in Washington DC, which heighten their prestige, inflate their egos, and fatten their wallets?

My strategy is so simple, so obvious, so potentially effective, I am totally baffled why often people don’t get it.

Recognize . . .

We have been handed the most powerful instrument in the arsenal, the assumption being we’ll never get it together to use it. Of course, so far we haven’t effectively used it. But that doesn’t mean we can’t or won’t. It’s right there ready and waiting.

What is this weapon of choice?

It’s the illusion of democracy.

It’s the illusion that our voting makes a difference.

Granted . . .

Right now it doesn’t, because we’ve been playing by a set of rules that rigs the game. The fix has been in because, even though it is well within our power as citizens to do so, we haven’t successfully challenged those rules. We haven’t even tried.

In the most simple terms, right now we elect individuals to positions of power based on what often turns out to be hollow promises, campaign rhetoric which is highly flattering of the candidate, believable and appealing on the surface, thus sufficiently persuasive to win the trust of voters and get him or her elected.

Once elected, these individuals basically do what they’re told to do by their deep-pocketed benefactors, the rich and powerful elite who fund their campaigns, proffer tacit promises of highly lucrative rewards once they leave office — refer here to Obama’s $60 million book deal and $400,000 fee for making one speech to those he served so magnificently while in office — and shield them from any legitimate challenges by candidates who don’t faithfully dance to the beat laid down by the plutocracy — refer here to the blatant sabotage of Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign by the corporate stooges of the Democratic Party.

But . . .

This mockery of “representative democracy” still depends on us to go into the voting booth and like the brainwashed, gullible, trusting sheeple that we are, to cast our votes for these carefully groomed and coddled ruling class shills.

And that’s where we can change the rules.

We must stand united and be unshakeable in our resolve . . . but here’s how we do it.

We demand that any candidate running for federal office sign a legally-binding contract, listing a number of issues which must be addressed within 180 days of taking office.

Or . . .

We will not vote for them!

Rather, we will put up our own candidate, or find one from an independent or third-party, who will sign the contract! That person will get our full support during the campaign and our vote on election day.

Case closed!

The contract will be drawn up around those items where there is at least 62% agreement among the American public. Yes! There is that level of public consensus on a whole host of critical issues!

While this is not written in stone and should be adapted to the unique circumstances and needs of each local voting jurisdiction, here is what such a candidate contract looks like.

This changes the game alright, decisively putting voters in charge — at least on a number of key initiatives and policy decisions — of what comes out of Congress.

Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work? Government of the people, by the people, for the people? Representative democracy that truly represents the desires and priorities of the constituents?

It’s a shame that our system has become so corrupted by money and power games that we must resort to a legal document to get done what’s supposed to get done in the first place.

But that’s the way it’s worked out. We have no other choice now. We either take charge or suffer even more indignity and abuse at the hands of the ruling elite and their pay-for-play lackeys, the folks we send to Washington DC to do a job but who end up entirely ignoring the citizens they’re supposed to be working for — that would be you and I!

It’s simple. It’s straightforward. It’s powerful. It’s decisive.

Either candidates sign on the dotted line or we don’t vote for them.

Which means that we then turn to some good, decent, honest candidates who realize what their ultimate responsibility is, where their true loyalties lie, thus will sign the contract. We give them our unqualified support, both in the campaign and in the voting booth.

Using this simple, powerful device . . .

We’ll finally get a glimpse of what representative democracy really looks like.

“Candidate Contracts: Taking Back Our Democracy” was published in June of 2015 and is available worldwide from all the usual suspects:

“Fighting for the Democracy We Deserve” was published September 2015 and also is available both in every popular ebook format and as a deluxe paperback:

Posted in Corporatism, Deconstruction, Democracy, Economics, Food, Political Analysis, Political Rant, War and Peace | Tagged candidate contracts, constitution, democracy, electoral reform, general welfare, oligarchy, plutocracy, ruling elite | 6 Comments

Whack A Mole Activism

Posted on May 29, 2017 by johnrachel

Why is it in terms of progressive reform the country is going backwards?

Last time I checked, citizens were by very sizable majorities for practically all of the things progressive activists actively promote.

I’ve cited these statistics repeatedly but they’re worth looking at again:

75% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $12.50 per hour.
63% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $15.00 per hour.
75% of voters want fair trade agreements protecting jobs, workers, the environment.
76% of voters want a cut back on military spending.
76% of voters want the U.S. completely out of Afghanistan.
79% of voters want no reductions in Social Security, 70% support expanding it.
79% of voters want no reductions in Medicare.
80% of voters oppose the “Citizens United” U.S. Supreme Court decision.
68% of voters think taxes on the wealthy should be increased.
71% of voters support massive infrastructure renewal.
65% of voters want laws to combat climate change.
62% of voters want tuition free public colleges and universities.
74% of American voters are for ending oil industry subsidies.

We could probably add a few more to the list but this offers us the necessary perspective.

A great deal of energy and time by dedicated activists continues to be devoted to these and many other worthy causes: protecting a woman’s right to choose; respecting human rights, especially those of immigrants and vilified minorities like Muslims; protecting the quality of air and water, stopping the wanton destruction of the environment; reining in abuses in the workplace; reducing police violence; on and on, all initiatives reflecting the best values and instincts of people who believe America is for all Americans, not just a privileged few.

Yet, all of these are constantly under assault.

This should come as no shock. There has always been a tiny aristocratic elite in our nation which views itself — not hard-working everyday citizens — as the true engine of our wealth and greatness as a country. Reacting to both the reforms of the 1930s under FDR, and the hard-won gains in civil and human rights in the 1960s and 1970s, these elitists set about reversing these populist measures with a comprehensive, long-range strategy of taking over the governing institutions at all levels and in every branch of government, then subsequently imposing their own selfish, self-serving agenda on the rest of us.

What we see now is their spectacular success. The Republicans — who most thoroughly and with ideological purity represent the interests of this ruling elite, though over the past two-and-a-half decades or more, the Democrats have been scrambling to align themselves with the ruling class, abandoning their traditional base of union workers and other citizens of the lower and middle classes — now have the White House, both houses of Congress, a majority of the state legislatures. Even the majority of state governors are Republicans.

They have kicked our progressive asses good!

The reaction by our end of the political spectrum to this highly organized assault on the system of government, which we progressives and the majority of everyday people believe is supposed to serve the interests of all citizens, has been short-sighted and fragmented.

The end product of decades of what we failed to properly assess and address is what I call Whack A Mole activism.

Just like the amusement center Whack A Mole game — though we hardly find it amusing — we are constantly challenged to whack at one crisis, while others are poised to quickly follow. There’s always another crisis popping up somewhere else.

We haven’t even finished fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq, but now we have to fight another war in Syria. While we’re fueling the crisis in Syria, we start another one in the Ukraine. As if these weren’t enough, we’re getting ready to fight Russia, China, North Korea.

We stop the Keystone XL, but five more pipelines get backroom approval. We get ready to challenge them, the Arctic gets opened up again for more drilling. More offshore rigs start popping up everywhere. Leases are being handed out like Halloween candy to explore for gas in our National Parks. Our heads are spinning.

We see school lunch programs cut. Funding for the arts. Then women’s health centers get put on the chopping block. Before the paint on our protest signs dries for those, the police kill a bunch of unarmed black folks because . . . well, they’re black. What other reason do the police need these days?

Even a crisis that we think we whacked, gets new life and pops up again a short time later. Think about Net Neutrality. Think about the modest, completely inadequate and symbolic victories on behalf of fighting climate change with the timid and compromised gestures of the Obama administration, wiped out with the swipe of a pen by Trump. Look at banking and Wall Street regulations. Consumer protections. One step forward, four steps back.

The crises keep coming faster and faster and just keep piling up.

Let’s get real here. There’s no way we can win. Just like the slot machines in Las Vegas, this game is rigged. The house will always win. Who owns the house? They do!

They keep us scrambling. They keep us divided. They keep us distracted, in a constant state of panic, disoriented and exhausted by the sheer number of crises being created, we’re never able to mount a unified, comprehensive, coherent counterattack.

Whether you credit the ruling elite with the ingenuity to have intentionally crafted this constant state of frenzy and chaos, or whether it has just been a convenient and effective but purely chance by-product of their original program, the upshot is the same. We are being systematically crippled in our attempt to stop the juggernaut of regressive change.

What’s pathetic about all of this, beyond our continuing failure to make much difference and the clear prospects that we will only lose more of these battles as time goes on, is that there apparently is still this naive, completely clueless belief that by just appealing to those now in power, by just pointing out the virtues of our reasonable demands, by highlighting the goodness and justice and fairness and decency of our causes — yes by golly — they will actually listen to our heart-felt pleas, come around, and do the right thing!

Maybe we watched too many Disney movies growing up, eh?

Let’s not kid ourselves any longer. There is a class of ultra-wealthy people, a tiny elite minority who despise us, disdain democracy, believe themselves extraordinary, superior, and above the rules and considerations which apply to the rest of us slobbering inferiors. You can look at this psychologically, anthropologically, historically, sociologically, however you choose to analyze this phenomenon. The reality is that it has been a factor in recorded history as long as there has been recorded history.

A fundamental principle in an egalitarian democracy is that such inevitable aristocratic forces be kept in check. Look around. We have failed. Those aristocratic, authoritarian, elitist instincts which are always part of the DNA of a certain class of such patricians, are completely out of control in contemporary America. The commons is being plundered or acquired and hoarded, the “general welfare” is being ignored — even mocked — the notion of the American Dream has become a punch line for a comedy routine that’s played out on the stage of a country in a suicidal tailspin, a nation unraveling and apparently determined to now promote everything it once stood against: grotesque wealth inequality, plutocratic pillage, grotesque and anti-democratic militarism, foreign entanglements and imperial conquest, perpetual war, destruction of citizen privacy and constitutional protection.

Of course, if we point any of this out, or especially if we gather the courage to fight “them” and their self-serving agenda, we’ll be accused of being troublemakers, insurrectionists, anarchists, communists, traitors.

But never ever forget . . .

Regular folks like you and I did not and are not starting a class war. The simple truth is, we’re the victims of an ongoing class war started a long long time ago, a class war which just becomes more fierce and destructive with each passing day and each passed piece of legislation by our corrupt Congress. Make no mistake about it. We are in a war! It’s a battle for survival. The ruling class do not care if we live or die. Unpleasant as this may sound, these are the facts on the ground.

Sometimes I’m accused of being extreme. Excuse me? The rich and powerful have stolen our country, destroyed our democracy, are now putting the finishing touches on a new incarnation of feudalism, and I should be deferential and gracious, warm and amicable?

I should give a pass to the Koch brothers? Sure, they have families and friends, probably go to church every Sunday and sing All Hail the Power of Jesus’s Name, or another lovely hymn praising the God that so blessed them with gold bumpers on their new Rolls Royce. So what? Their psychopathic level of greed and diabolical destruction of the environment is incompatible with democracy, with common decency, with the values of our nation, and with the survival of the human race. THEY ARE THE ENEMY! Period!

As the enemy, they are not to be respected, trusted, certainly not hailed as exemplars of our way of life. They’re just like demented children beating an anthill with a baseball bat. We are the ants.

If as I say it’s true that we’re being played by the ruling class . . .

How then do we stop playing the Whack A Mole activism game?

There’s only one solution: We unplug it, take it out back, then take a sledgehammer to it.

We destroy the machine!

How does this translate to the struggle of everyday citizens to take back control of their country from an abusive and ruthless ruling class?

There’s a lot of room for interpretation here and history is replete with examples.

The obvious and most decisive way of “destroying the machine” is a bloody revolution.

Perhaps I am naive but I’m hoping we can avoid that. Considering both the enormous fire power of the federal authorities and the mind-numbing number of privately-owned guns, a revolution in the U.S. would be an unprecedented bloodbath.

Destroying the machine in my view is destroying the mechanism by which the ruling class now exclusively impose their will on our republic. That mechanism is “owning” those who we allegedly democratically elect as our legislators. The Achilles heel of that ownership are those owned. We stopped the ownership of our governing officials by replacing the owned with the unowned.

Almost everyone now sitting in Congress is directly responsible for or complicit with the control of our legislative bodies by the ruling class. They benefit from it. They go along with it. They are not going to change it.

Therefore we must change them. Either we change their behavior — a dubious prospect at this stage from what we’ve seen — or we “change” the them who hold those positions. We “unelect” those now in office and elect honest, accountable, responsive representatives to replace them.

That is why I’m calling for regime change in Congress in 2018. This to me is the positive, non-violent path to cutting deep into the system and excising the poison of corruption.

We must look at replacing at least 400 of the current sitting members in the House of Representatives, and the 33 senators up for election in 2018. This is certainly a drastic proposal. But sometimes you need to completely clean house and start from scratch.

Should we take them out back and take sledgehammers to them?

There are probably many in this country who are so frustrated and angry — or will be when they finally realize the level of corruption of our current elected officials — they might opt for such violent reprisals.

I myself say the most important thing is to get these criminals out of office before they do any more damage to the country. If you press me for how we should handle long histories of such political criminality, of abuse of public trust and the mockery they’ve made of our system of government, I will say that I can see a special tribunal being set up — along the lines of the Nuremberg war crimes trials — and our current congressmen being indicted. We could call it the American Crimes Against Democracy Court of Reconciliation.

Maybe there would be a new arcade game along those lines to help fund the proceedings.

The Whack A Politico activist game!

In my next two articles, I will get into the specifics of implementing my candidate contract strategy toward dramatic regime change in Congress via the 2018 election.

We can continue playing a pointless game toward a fruitless ending.

Or we can unite and change the game itself.

That’s the choice in 2018.

Posted in Deconstruction, Democracy, Political Analysis, Political Rant, War and Peace | Tagged candidate contracts, Citizens United, corporate welfare, defense budget, democracy, infrastructure renewal, Koch Brothers, Medicare, minimum wage, plutocracy, ruling class, social security, voting, war and peace, Whack A Mole | 1 Comment

Bird Dogging

Posted on May 27, 2017 by johnrachel

I’m always humbled when I find a gaping hole in my vocabulary.

The other day, someone in a political activist group suggested that it would be effective to ‘bird dog’ incumbents about a rather controversial issue we were discussing.

Mind you, I have made this tactic central to my electoral campaign strategy, integral to implementing my candidate contract plan of action. I just didn’t know the name for it.

See? Even the Google definition mentions bird dogging in a political context.

Yes . . . “dogged determination” . . . very cute.

That cute characterization is the polite, PC way of describing what I’m proposing.

As I presume will happen, my enlightened, progressive, honest and transparent people’s candidate has signed one or more contracts on issues that reflect the will of the majority of voters in the district where the contest is taking place. You can view the contract and the laundry list of progressive issues here, one that’s drafted for the House of Representatives.

But . . .

His opponents, whether newcomers or an incumbent, are establishment candidates, thus HAVE NOT SIGNED THE CONTRACT. I’ve explained elsewhere why they cannot and will not sign these contracts, but basically it boils down to their all but certain loss of campaign funding and major party machinery support. There are huge stakes at keeping at bay any significant populist reforms, specifically those in the progressive candidate contract. Keeping obedient establishment lackeys in office is essential for the status quo.

For simplicity sake, let’s say the contract in dispute is not the one listing the whole gamut of populist issues, but just one for raising the minimum wage. It would look like this.

Of course, raising the minimum wage is certainly the main focus in the battle for votes.

But the actual centerpiece of every element of the publicity campaign is the contract for raising the minimum wage. This is where the bird dogging comes in.

At every public rally, campaign event, fundraiser, town hall meeting, meet-the-candidate barbecue or hotdog eating contest — literally everywhere the establishment candidate(s) show up in public — there will be protesters wearing t-shirts, carrying signs, chanting:

Why won’t you sign the contract for raising the minimum wage?

Understand: ‘Why won’t you sign the contract for …’ is not a genial request for an answer. It’s an expression of outrage! It’s a condemnation! It’s saying: You are insulting us! We as voters are making a simple, fair, reasonable request. And you are defying the will of the people! It’s a rhetorical question challenging the empty rhetoric of the candidate.

Of course, every candidate, especially when speaking to younger folks who are most likely working for or just barely above the minimum wage, is going to discharge billowing gusts of smiley-face vapor about the “crisis in the availability of good jobs in this country”, and “all workers deserving a livable wage”. This always sounds nice but is really a lot of stinky poop, considering that the official rate hasn’t increased in seven years, and moreover, that adjusted for inflation the current $7.25 per hour is worth less than it was 50 years ago.

There’s only one way to take such patronizing oratory seriously, and that is to have him or her sign on the dotted line — put it in writing, in the form of a candidate contract.

The corollary to that is: The only way to boldly and loudly declare that such a candidate is NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY is by challenging them for NOT SIGNING the contract.

That’s how the candidate contract becomes a sledgehammer in a political campaign, a serious tool for exposing an establishment candidate’s hypocrisy and duplicity.

Why resort to harassment?

To be blunt about it, at least at first, any candidate which signs any version of the contract I’m proposing won’t have much choice. He or she will not have much in the way of funds, will not have the organizational support of a major party’s machinery, will be marginalized or entirely ignored by the mainstream media. Such an outsider campaign will have to get in the news by making news! By creating so much trouble and controversy, the media and anyone within any proximity can’t help but notice! Using street theater, outlandish stunts, sit-downs, sit-ins, blocking traffic, naked acrobatics . . . whatever! All to call attention to the fact that the slick, well-groomed, smooth-talking sack-of-hot-air opponent REFUSES to sign the contract.

Along those same lines, this is how the candidate contract works around big money. Yes, those establishment types will have huge campaign chests to run slick ads, to disseminate their carefully-worded and misleading messages. Those messages will always seem to be saying the right things. They’ve got the best spin doctors, PR and campaign consultants money can buy, massaging their images and words to a milky silky stream of lovely goo.

But voters are waking up. And people don’t like being manipulated and deceived.

As with our example, either a candidate is for or against raising the minimum wage. That being the case, if he or she is claiming to be with the voters on this particular issue, and the voters by a vast margin are for raising the minimum wage, why is it unreasonable to ask for a clear and unambiguous commitment in writing? After all, that’s what this candidate contract is — a clear and unambiguous commitment to raise the minimum wage.

If indeed it does turn out to be too much to ask a particular candidate, then it appears that WE’VE GOT A SERIOUS PROBLEM. And the problem is the candidate is blowing smoke! He or she is full of the brown stuff that comes out of the south end of a bull heading north!

Our democracy is sick. Our whole electoral system is diseased. This has largely because the professional political class of this country has discredited itself — and seems to be bent on continuing to discredit itself — every time one of them opens his or her mouth. We the voters didn’t bring on this crisis of trust. The political establishment did. By consistently and intentionally lying to everyday Americans and with almost a religious fervor breaking every campaign promise that might actually benefit the majority of American citizens.

Worst of all, any newcomers to this corrupt system have been vilified, marginalized and excluded, unless they are willing to play ball by the corrupt rules of ruling class obeisance. Bernie Sanders’s brilliant campaign was systematically undermined by the Democratic Party establishment. I surely don’t need to review here how the major parties in sinister, symbiotic collusion with the media openly mock and trivialize attempts by minor parties to introduce some integrity into the river of political filth the current system has become.

Yes, the duopoly of the two corporate parties has gotten control of just about everything having to do with electoral politics. But there’s one thing they haven’t been able to shut down completely. That’s word-of-mouth. That’s people talking to people. Which is why even the most powerful individuals can be brought down by the right scandal.

What’s more scandalous than lying to voters just to get their votes?

What’s more cynical, what’s more insulting, what’s more corrupt than refusing to stand up for what’s right and good for the majority of good, decent, hard-working citizens?

And since it’s every citizen’s right to know where a candidate really stands on issues that affect the everyday lives of everyday Americans; it’s every citizen’s right to be informed, and to be treated with candor and respect; it’s every citizen’s right to know with certainty who is on their side and who isn’t; sometimes we need to let that dog-bird, bird-dog, that hybrid-GMO-predator out of its cage, and proceed with “dogged determination”.

Let it be known . . .

You’re being put on notice, establishment Democrats and Republicans.

Just the right amount of bird dogging might make honest politicians out of you after all!

If not, then it’s really quite simple . . . you’ll be replaced.

By politicians with the integrity to sign the contract.

Woof woof chirp chirp!

“Candidate Contracts: Taking Back Our Democracy” was published in June of 2015 and is available worldwide from all the usual suspects:

“Fighting for the Democracy We Deserve” was published September 2015 and also is available both in every popular ebook format and as a deluxe paperback:

Posted in Deconstruction, Democracy, Political Analysis, Revolution | Tagged Bernie Sanders, bird dogging, candidate contracts, democracy, Democratic Party, mainstream media, oligarchy, Republican Party, ruling class | Leave a comment

Trump Makes Russian the Official Language of the U.S.

Posted on May 22, 2017 by johnrachel

In a surprise move that caught just about everyone flat-footed, President Donald Trump by executive order today made Russian the official language of the United States of America.

Trump came out of the box swinging. When a reporter yelled out a question to him on the 7th hole at the Trump International Golf Course, the president appeared very excited and wasn’t going to take any crap from anyone about his controversial decision.

“I promised jobs, didn’t I? Well, we’ve got a helluva lot of signs to replace. Also a lot of smart phones. The Russian alphabet is in . . . uh . . . acrylic. It’s a whole different deal from our alphabet. A whole different deal! But I tell ya, it’s great! Really really great! Gotta say, I can’t wait to start Tweeting in Russian!”

Of course, this announcement comes on the heels — just 48 hours — of another truly extraordinary development, that of Trump’s replacement of Nikki Haley with Alex Jones as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

With the efficiency that is becoming the hallmark of this administration, the transition was quick. Literally the following day, Ambassador Jones was seen sitting at a U.N. Security Council session with bottles of his highly-acclaimed Caveman nutritional supplement lined up in front of him, as he read a new U.S.-sponsored resolution proposing that UNESCO, under the auspices of NATO, administer Crimea as a newly-founded leper colony.

Right after Trump signed the executive order mandating the change in the U.S.’s official language, Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos was interviewed at a charter school volley ball meet she was attending in the Hamptons: “Well, it’s a challenge. But we’re making America great again. So we’ve got a handle on it. Some of my best friends are Russian. And hey! Have you ever had a Black Russian? Come on! Don’t give me that look! I’m not talking about sex. I mean the drink. It’s vodka and Kahlúa. Yum yum!” Asked about how this might impact her plans for retooling America’s educational institutions, she replied: “Obviously we need some native speakers fluent in Russian. But we’re on top of it. I was online just this morning and personally hired over forty excellent teachers, so no worries. I’d say we’ve got this covered.”

Among pundits, Rachel Maddow was first in line to lambast Trump’s game-changing maneuver. She called it a cheap Soviet-style stunt to sabotage the important work of Congress. Under the strict guidelines established by the directive, from now on, all of the business of government — including any calls for Trump’s impeachment — must be conducted in America’s new official language. Maddow looked into the camera and seething with contempt said, “He knows no one up on Capitol Hill knows any Russian. He and his KGB buddy Putin are behind this treachery . . . having a big laugh at the expense of the American people.”

Unfortunately, no one understood a word of her acrimonious rant. Since Trump’s order was already in effect, her entire show was overdubbed in Russian. No English sub-titles were made available.

What really prompted Trump’s bold, unprecedented move?

Of course, there’s much speculation. Hillary Clinton along with the DNC leadership posed under a huge banner that said: See? We Told You So! Because it wasn’t in Russian, they were promptly arrested and are now awaiting arraignment.

Perhaps more reliably, an unnamed source from within the president’s most private circles at Mar-a-Lago — rumor has it that it’s an African-American maid named Jemima — stated that Ivanka Trump had just received a Matryoshka doll from a friend in Russia and was carrying on about the gift: “Oh daddy! Isn’t this just adorable? I love everything about Russia!” President Trump reportedly then smiled, and looking dreamily at her breasts, proudly patted her on the butt and said: “That’s my girl!”

We thus conclude that as with the cruise missile attack on the Al Shayrat air base in Syria, Trump will do anything to keep his daughter happy. Having everyone in this great nation of ours speaking Russian from now on was just his gift to his precious little daughter.

Ivanka is a Russian name, isn’t it?

Posted in Fox News, Nihilism, Satire | Tagged Alex Jones, Betsy DeVos, humor, Ivanka Trump, official language, President Trump, Rachel Maddow, Russia, satire, UNESCO | 5 Comments

John Rachel

Life In Japan: Benten Shrine Ceremony

Candidate Contracts: Why Populist Candidates Will Want to Sign the Contract

No Contract No Vote

Life In Japan: I Love Japan Redux

How do we confront abuse of power and restore democracy?

Bird Dogging

Trump Makes Russian the Official Language of the U.S.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Meta

Statcounter Tracking

Wikipedia

Send a message!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Tags

Meta

Statcounter Tracking