Will we work for the resurrection of the importance of life itself, on this planet? And that human value ought to be determined by humans, within a sense of balance between all of the aspects of "opposite" that challenge sentient life?
Or will we allow ourselves to become de facto slaves, working the planet to death, as well as ourselves, for the increasing profit power of a few? And the indulgence in their own fantasies of "money can buy you anything." In this case, of course, thinking that this will also be survival, whatever comes.
The choice is still yours to make, but for how much longer I cannot say exactly, save to say that it cannot be a whole lot longer. Understanding as well that not choosing at all is a default choice for the status quo. A choice that will surely leave us with a planet without ice at the poles any more. And, as such, a planet without the same ability to do the circulation patterns, in the air, and the oceans, that life came to depend on over the last several hundred thousand, to a million years or so, of evolution.
The bottom line, though, is that, no matter what our views of each other may be, working people must never allow themselves to be working against each other. Because I mean, seriously? We're going to let ourselves go down bad, and at each other's throats (because that is what it'll come to, when things really start falling apart -- just as all of the dystopian fantasies have portrayed it will be, in the general sense)? Just because they say this is the way things are supposed to be? For their amusement, one might imagine, as well as their profit? Until they too realize, at last, that, no matter how high tech, and well stocked, your protective bubble is, it can't long survive a planet that no longer wants life as it was; and will either bake them out, or freeze them out, to prove it. Assuming, naturally, that the collapse itself doesn't bring them down.
Referenced article quick list:
1:Mike & The Mechanics - The living Years
2:Warren's message on corruption and corporations could reshape the 2020 Democratic primary
3:Stock market sell-off was due to a 'glitch,' says Trump
4:Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders oppose Pelosi-backed spending rules
5:White House meeting with Hill leaders ends with no progress on shutdown deal
[Referenced articles post note: The bottom line for Progressives, as well as for fed up Liberals, not to mention people on the Right who still value personal liberty, however, is a good deal different here. In that context is the question either side has to answer now: How do you think you are going to protect anything you value, working within a two party system that is at least as broken, and dysfunctional, as the economic system that corrupted it?
And the simple fact of the matter there is that you will never get what you want (true single payer. An absolute commitment to mobilizing the nation, mandatory national service, streamlining the Military etc.) by sticking with it; as in the stuff you'll need to do the heavy lifting it will take to both save us, and our ability to still have society, as well as save the planet. Let alone the free flow of information so that the individual has some semblance of a chance at "Informed Consent." Or that people could be allowed to congregate within the rules of their choosing, however offensive it might seem to some of the rest of us, as long as there was no direct harm to surrounding communities. And, as well, that the individual always has the ability to vote with their feet (and have the "Critical Social Logistics," means tested, public service utility to make that a reality).
No. Getting, at least some portion, of what either side wants now, is going to take a lot of negotiation, and compromise on both sides, so that a Grand Compromise, between the Right and the Left, can have a chance to come into being. And make no mistake. It will only be via a Grand Compromise that any change we might want to initiate, will have any chance of actually staying in effect long enough to do any lasting good. J.V.]
[Post Note: The Terrible Mr. T. has some good news for you, and some bad news.
The good news is that the big "Sell Off" was just a glitch. And he should know because he is so on top of the "Art of the Deal," after all.
The bad news is that he is the "Glitch" epicenter. And as such, all bets are off as to whether we will be at one type of war, or another (as in a much more damaging versions of the economic, resource, or military, confrontations that are brewing now, much more briskly), with at least one nation, before this year is out. And precisely because of his "great grasp" of things, as his own defense of his campaign's election shenanigans have so amply demonstrated.
Unfortunately, the very bad news might be in what kind of cornered animal he might become once House subpoenas, and Mueller's final reports, start setting up Constitutional crisis, after Constitutional crisis.
Has anyone considered the possibility that he might become so desperate as to do something to double down on his alleged selling out to Putin? Something like a very sneaky internal coup, from the top down, with Putin maybe getting to fly (on Presidential orders) in a bunch of extra, "special negotiators" for a Washington D.C. conference, supposedly for "better Russian, American relations," you see (or whatever else a clever imagination can come up with). Only these guys will be special infiltrators into key military, and DOJ positions, who will be perfect english speakers, and will have exactly the uniforms, and ID's, they need to look like the real thing. And if a sitting President tells somebody else in the government that they are what they appear to be, who might question it closely enough, before it was too late to keep them from doing a power grab that would have Putin in the catbird seat in Washington DC?
And if you think that's a bit too, over the top, conspiratorial wise, just consider that the Ukrainians won't let any Russian young men into their country now precisely because of what such pretend, valid nationals, fighting for what Putin wants, and not what the Ukrainians want, already did to break their country up.
J.V.]
