The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 TeasersLarry Romanoff Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter

One new historical development that has been evolving over a few years and now brought into focus because of COVID-19, is the so-called “Spanish Flu” of 1918. Recurring reports and documentation are emerging to tell us that this ‘Greatest Pandemic in History’ was[1] not “Spanish”,[2] not “the flu” and,[3] not a natural occurrence but the result of human tinkering with vaccines. There surely is much more to emerge, but the accumulating evidence to date is too compelling to dismiss.

In simple terms, the emerging evidence supports postulations that the 1918 pandemic was caused by a misguided – and very experimental – Rockefeller Institute meningitis vaccination program which was initiated at Fort Riley by the US military, and spread to the world from there. This essay will attempt to briefly document the evidence that is available so far. There will of course be many objections to the content of this essay, not only from the ideologues and trolls, but from those in high places with vital body organs requiring protection.

First, there was never any justification for associating the 1918 pandemic with Spain. The pathogen did not originate in Spain, nor was Spain the hardest hit. The most commonly-accepted “official story” as related by our MSM is that all countries but Spain had initiated severe censorship (due to the war) and thus the facts of the pandemic freely circulated only in the Spanish media, and so it was “natural” to refer to this as the Spanish Flu. From this reasoning, since we all know the US has at least 125% freedom of speech and minus the same degree of censorship, we should rename COVID-19 “The American curse”. (This may yet happen, for other more valid reasons).

In any case, the documented evidence is increasingly voluminous – and increasingly solid – that this outbreak originated at Fort Riley, Kansas, in the US. Conspiracy theorists and historical revisionists cannot change this now.

The 1918 pandemic was quite possibly the worst the world had seen, certainly for centuries. It infected about 500 million people and killed at least 50 million worldwide. The current “official narrative” (again) is that it was caused by “an H1N1 virus that originated in birds” (which is not a ‘flu’ in any case), and its only tenuous connection with the US was that it was “first identified in the US in military personnel” in the spring of 1918. These claims appear to be false. In a 2008 report, the US NIH admitted that most of the deaths were not from ‘the flu’ nor from any bird virus but from a bacterial pneumonia.[1] The details of the studies corroborate this extensively, in which even Dr. Anthony Fauci says, “We agree completely that bacterial pneumonia played a major role in the mortality of the 1918 pandemic.”[2][3][4][5]. In fact, it is now stated that the reason modern medical technology was never able to identify the “killer influenza strain” from this pandemic was because influenza was not the killer. It might be obvious to us today because we know that influenza attacks the young, old and immunocompromised, while the “Spanish Flu” attacked healthy people in their prime – which is what a bacterial pneumonia does.

Again, the official narrative tells us that, due to troop movements because of the war, the pathogen was spread worldwide. But the current emerging thesis is that troop movements might have been irrelevant because Rockefeller, in their combined haste and hubris, “sent their experimental anti-meningococcal serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and many other countries, helping spread the epidemic worldwide.” It certainly appears to be the prime suspect, and we can understand the reluctance of today’s WHO and CDC to reveal this to the popular press. As Dr. Kevin Barry wrote:

It would be much more difficult to maintain the marketing mantra of “vaccines save lives” if a vaccine experiment originating in the United States . . . caused the deaths of 50-100 million people. (and) “The American Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and its experimental bacterial meningococcal vaccine may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19” is a far less effective sales slogan.[6]

The Smoking Gun

According to the 2008 National Institute of Health paper, bacterial pneumonia was the killer in a minimum of 92.7% of the 1918-19 autopsies reviewed. It is likely higher than 92.7%. The researchers looked at more than 9000 autopsies, and “there were no negative (bacterial) lung culture results.” “… In the 68 higher-quality autopsy series, in which the possibility of unreported negative cultures could be excluded, 92.7% of autopsy lung cultures were positive for ≥1 bacterium. … in one study of approximately 9000 subjects who were followed from clinical presentation with influenza to resolution or autopsy, researchers obtained, with sterile technique, cultures of either pneumococci or streptococci from 164 of 167 lung tissue samples.

“There were 89 pure cultures of pneumococci; 19 cultures from which only streptococci were recovered; 34 that yielded mixtures of pneumococci and/or streptococci; 22 that yielded a mixture of pneumococci, streptococci, and other organisms (prominently pneumococci and non-hemolytic streptococci); and 3 that yielded non-hemolytic streptococci alone. There were no negative lung culture results.”[2] Pneumococci or streptococci were found in “164 of (the) 167 lung tissue samples” autopsied. That is 98.2%. Bacteria was the killer[6]

“The 1918 and 1919 volumes of the Journal of the American Medicine Association include many articles on the cause, prevention, and treatment of influenza. Again and again, investigators wonder at the spotty presence of B. influenzae in the ill, note its presence in healthy individuals, and observe it in other infections such as measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and varicella (chickenpox). In one article, the authors write, “There seems to be no justification for the belief that the epidemic was due to the influenza bacillus, which is probably a secondary invader and bears about the same relation to the influenza cases as to respiratory infections of a different sort” (Lord 1919).[7]

This appears to be where the story begins:

Following an outbreak of epidemic meningitis at Camp Funston, Kansas, in October and November, 1917, a series of antimeningitis vaccinations was undertaken on volunteer subjects from the camp.[8] At that time, vaccinations (and perhaps much of medical science generally) were in their infancy, with very much unknown. In particular, Dr. Gates himself (see Note 8) notes that prior to this time, “meningococcus vaccines have not been extensively employed for prophylactic immunization, and only a few references are to be found in the literature that relate vaccination experiences.” He further relates that the few referenced cases experienced “very severe” reactions to the vaccines – which were entirely experimental.

In this case, the Rockefeller Institute, which seems to be where the experiments in opening this special compartment of Pandora’s Box originated, contrived an experimental vaccine and were understandably anxious to “see what happens”. It was apparently a rather crude anti-bacterial vaccine that was made in horses. I haven’t the medical competence to comment on the equine portion but others more knowledgeable have suggested this might not have been the best method. One enormous advantage of the war to Rockefeller was that the US Army ballooned from little more than 250,000 to 6,000,000 men, with the “Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research” now having an enormous pool of human guinea pigs to conduct vaccine experiments.

 

For much of my life I have been curious about the world, not so much wanting to know things as to understand them and, at various times I would attempt to satisfy that desire – usually by devouring every available book on the subject. I would read every book at the library that seemed useful and, since I traveled a lot at the time, I would visit every bookstore within reach in every city and buy every book that seemed to know things I didn’t know. I once had a library of many thousands of books.

As one example, I was at one time fascinated with gemstones and pearls – for no good reason that I can recall, but I followed my pattern and read and bought everything I could find. Certainly, I acquired knowledge during that process. I can easily detect flaws in a cut stone or a string of natural pearls and I am competent to challenge Tiffany on the tepid color of what they sell as emeralds. Still, in the real world I am an amateur, perhaps knowing a bit more than an average layman, but of little or no consequence to anyone in the field. Again, it wasn’t so much a search for knowledge as a quest for understanding. I wasn’t so much looking to know everything as to “understand” the world of gemstones and pearls. Nevertheless, the process served its purpose and would qualify as research.

But there is a pitfall here. When we are researching the natural world, we are mostly in a context of fact. The sciences, geography, the physical and material manifestations of nature, are largely if not often entirely factual. They don’t lie to us. There is little room for bias or opinion in what happens when we drop a bowling ball or in questions of the formation and growth of crystals or pearls. Thus, reading books written by experts or professionals can teach us all we want to know and give us all the understanding we desire.

However, things change when we enter the world of man, or at least that part affected by man, because we are no longer dealing with factual manifestations of nature but have entered a world of interpretation and opinion, perhaps as many different of these as there are men to express them. And now, the traditional method of research to acquire knowledge will fail us because we are no longer being taught but indoctrinated.

As an easy example, we can consider the book “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” by William Shirer, published in 1960 by Simon & Schuster in the US, the winner of awards and promoted to the ends of the earth like few books in the history of publishing. There may be few people of at least two generations who haven’t read this book, and for many it may be the only book they have ever read on the subject.

The problem is that we were not reading a book on the history of Germany and the Wars; we were instead reading an instruction manual of 1,249 pages telling us what William Shirer wanted us to think about Germany and the Wars. And that is not the same thing. Shirer’s book is biased at best, with a story line scaffolding unrelated to Germany. It isn’t quite a fairy tale because it does contain many facts, but it also twists many facts, omits many others of great consequence, weaves threads that barely exist into thick carpets, states idle opinion as fact, and interprets all of it to fit the pre-determined story line. It was Shirer who propagated the now-ridiculed idea that the Germans used Jewish fat to make soap, and he was almost entirely responsible for the delusion (obtained from Wiesenthal) that the Nazis claimed the Germans were a “Master Race”, a claim he must have known was a complete lie. In some ways, it is closer to a work of fiction than to factual history and Shirer closer to a snake-oil salesman than an author.

This is not unique to Shirer. Every history book is guilty of these accusations to some degree, and virtually all interpretations are clouded by ideology or preference or simply personal belief. They needn’t be deliberately dishonest to contain these flaws; being written by a human is often sufficient. If we consider Carroll Quigley’s tome “Tragedy and Hope”, we find the same issues. I have great respect for Quigley, and I would say that 75% of that book is accurate and valuable. But the remaining 25% is almost as bad as Shirer. It seemed to me that when directly addressing the issues of Germany and the Wars, an automatic pilot assumed control of Quigley’s mind and inserted a framework of “Germany bad” into which all facts now required insertion. Similarly, Noam Chomsky, another individual with my respect, and who has written much of great value to humanity, also has great blind spots.

I have read many books that resemble a Master’s or Ph.D. thesis in that they are simply a survey of the available literature, telling us what many others have written on that subject, but in many cases contributing little to the store of knowledge or understanding. This wouldn’t be so bad if all the disputed elements were included along with many of the so-called ‘conspiracy theories’ but this process is proscribed by the institutions. Thus, in a search for truth in history, these are the worst places to begin.

There is another complicating factor in that we humans often have a tendency to believe that if we know something, we know everything. We needn’t look very far to find a writer of one good article to suddenly believe he can write with authority on any topic. It works in reverse too, in that we too easily believe that if a person knows much on one subject, they must be an expert on everything. It is both ludicrous and painful to watch a news anchor sincerely requesting the opinion of a Steve Jobs on the Amazon rain forest – simply on the basis of the man having designed a cool mobile phone. And what does a 16 year-old Greta what’s-her-name know about anything?

What do we do now? If I am a beginner and want to learn about the history of Germany, where do I turn? Every accepted history book on the subject will have multiple serious flaws and I am in no position to know what they are or where they lie. Worse, if I read one book on any historical topic, Shirer’s Third Reich, for example, I may be colored forever by what I first read and it may prove exceedingly difficult to change my mind later in spite of discovering irrefutable evidence that contradicts my early-formed opinions and beliefs. I have no way to defend myself.

Fortunately, my interest in history was oblique rather than frontal, and I accidentally acquired much of my early education not from reading all the accepted and politically-correct textbooks, but from browsing second and third-tier websites, reading brief articles – especially those with reader comments, and similar sources. Eventually I’d seen enough of that and began doing independent research on small specific topics that interested me – such as the possibility of prior knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack, my interest awakened from the persistent references to that prior knowledge indeed existing at the highest levels but not communicated to Pearl Harbor. None of this information appeared anywhere in respected history texts, and probably not in disrespected ones either, yet it has proven to be true.

I followed this developed pattern from that point onward, deliberately avoiding the accepted textbooks on a subject of my interest and instead pursuing other sources first. I will admit quickly that many, or even most, of those sources are at least partially if not entirely rubbish, items written by flakes, conspiracy theorists, amateurs, the uneducated, the great unwashed, the simple-minded and others similar. As well, much of it, and especially including reader comments, consists of deliberate misinformation. But not all, and in this simple fact lies a great salvation.

 
• Category: History • Tags: American Media, World War II 

Waves, Ripples and Surges

Let’s examine the normal pattern for an outbreak of a typical infectious disease. According to the US CDC:[1]

“A common-source outbreak is one in which a group of persons are all exposed to an infectious agent or a toxin from the same source. If the number of cases during an epidemic were plotted over time, the resulting graph . . . would typically have a steep upslope and a more gradual downslope (a so-called “log-normal distribution”). A propagated outbreak results from transmission from one person to another [usually] by direct person-to-person contact . . .” Propagated outbreaks typically exhibit several peaks one or two weeks apart, the epidemic normally dying out after several of these generations.

“Some epidemics have features of both common-source epidemics and propagated epidemics. The pattern of a common-source outbreak followed by secondary person-to-person spread is not uncommon.” The CDC states these also can produce several generations or peaks during the following few weeks. But in all of these instances of natural infectious agent outbreaks, the spread and timing follow essentially the same typical pattern, perhaps elongated but still with close timing of the peaks. Here are three graphs from the CDC to illustrate. You can see clearly that we have a rise (rapid if single-source, slow if propagated or mixed), then a peak, a gradual tapering-off, and a cessation.

The Dreaded “Second Wave”

While the literature on this point is confusing from a multiplicity of factors, there is no evidence to support the assertion of a natural “second wave” for infections. An epidemic or pandemic manifests itself by starting slowly, increasing exponentially, peaking, then slowly tapering off and disappearing. There may be isolated infections popping up later, but they don’t start a new epidemic. One of the major unexplained curiosities with COVID-19 is that from early on in the process the US mass media were fervently preparing us for a ‘second wave’. To enhance the plausibility of their tale, they linked it to the natural emergence of influenza that normally occurs when the weather turns cold in the Autumn and Winter, but that was deliberately misleading, a patently dishonest ‘guilt by association’ for the majority who don’t think. Let’s remember this is not a flu virus; this is a SARS virus, a different strain to be sure, but it wasn’t originally called SARS-CoV-2 for nothing, and there was no reason to expect it to behave like, or act in concert with, the common flu. And in fact, all nations experienced their COVID-19 outbreaks in March or April and, long prior to the outbreak of cold weather, the virus had already peaked and tapered in many countries to the point where it had died out or nearly so.

When researching other recent epidemics or pandemics such as the 1968 H3N2 or the 2009 H1N1, we find no evidence of any ‘second waves’. The 2009 H1N1 was typical, though prolonged, lasting from April 2009 to February 2010, but it peaked in May or June and slowly tapered until year-end. Others are similar. Here are a few examples of typical distribution patterns. The virus’ tail in China is truncated due to the strong containment measures implemented; the spike is from a data update since not all infections had yet been collated. You can see that China had reached the end, Saudi Arabia and Bolivia nearly there, India and Argentina tailing off. All graphs are courtesy of Worldometer. (The ‘Spanish flu’ of 1918 was an anomaly. See note (1) in the End Notes.)

Western Europe

Note that there are no ‘normal distribution’ cases for Western Europe, where every nation was hit with a “second wave”. Switzerland, Spain, the UK, and many others went sharply from essentially zero to 20,000 or 30,000 new infections per day, a pattern lacking any historical or epidemiological explanation. It almost seemed that someone hadn’t done their job properly the first time, and returned to try again. Let’s look at some examples.

Turning to Eastern Europe

Little Latvia is typical of many countries. The initial outbreak in March was so small as to be almost invisible, then tapered off and died. There were a few scattered infections, but nothing to cause a resurgence. Then suddenly and inexplicably a huge explosion at the beginning of October . Almost all of Eastern Europe followed this pattern with Russia and Belarus being two notable exceptions. Let’s look at Russia:

I watched Russia very closely from early in 2020. For about two months, infections were stable at only a few hundred per day. Russia had implemented many containment measures and it began to appear that the virus would be a non-event. Then suddenly an explosion in April with new infections quickly rising to more than 10,000 per day, and occurring simultaneously in almost every area of the country. It was painful watching Russia for four months attempting to lower the daily infection rate below 5,000, but finally 4,900, 4,800, and it appeared the tail was nearing, then suddenly another explosive jump to nearly 30,000, again simultaneously in all regions, and still increasing. There is no infection that manifests in this manner without human assistance.

Still with Russia, the country experienced high infections but a comparatively low death rate, to the dismay of many in the West, so much so that Reuters published an astonishingly-stupid article titled “Experts Want to Know Why Coronavirus Hasn’t Killed More Russians”.[2] “Tasteless” and “deplorable” were two of the kinder adjectives used on Reuters in the instant public backlash, so they amended it to “Experts question why coronavirus hasn’t killed more Russians”, but no improvement in public censure so a third incarnation, “Experts Question Russian Data on Covid-19 Death Toll”. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg joined in to support Reuters by stating that Russia was “spreading . . . disinformation . . . trying to change the world order”. “Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova drily observed in a Facebook post that a ‘world order’ in which it’s considered acceptable to lament why a virus didn’t kill more Russian people could probably use a change.” Helen Buyniski covered this in a charming article in RT; I recommend you read it.[3]

Turkey

Then we have the strange case of Turkey. New daily infections had been at around 1,000, followed by a quick increase to around 5,000, then suddenly exploding to 30,000 – in one day – and increasing. As with Russia, there is no known natural pathogen outbreak that manifests itself in such a manner. This is just a thought, but if I wanted to punish someone for buying and activating Russian S-400 missiles, this might be a good method.

The Blessed Triumvirate

It is further worthy of note that while most nations received only a second wave, the US, Japan and South Korea were blessed with a third wave, apparently having been given Most-Favored-Nation status by COVID-19. (I copied this term from an article in Counterpunch by Paul Street.[4])

Another Curious “Two Waves” Manifestation

 
• Category: Ideology, Science • Tags: Conspiracy Theories, Coronavirus, Disease 

Social changes come in many forms, some of which we might not immediately recognise or identify as such. Some kinds of social changes are natural, generally manifesting themselves slowly and occurring over long periods of time, normally without upheaval or societal distress. Other kinds are consciously contrived by persons with an agenda, these appearing suddenly and evolving much more quickly, often with considerable social upset and distress, at least in some quarters.

The easiest way to identify normal evolutionary social change from the contrived kind is that with natural social change there is no noise. We do not have the mass media beating the drums in support of the new order and, if the change attracts their attention at all, the media most often rail against it in favor of protecting the status quo. Newspaper owners and editors argued strongly against the abolition of slavery, of child labor, of giving women the vote, for example.

By contrast, the social changes contrived by our NWO masters-of-the-universe-to-be, are always noisy, their media compatriots leading the charge with well-prepared psycho-babble designed to eliminate our natural resistance to change, to shame us into new ways of thinking, and generally to extort our compliance. To assist in the public propagandising, vocabulary is re-assigned new meanings and connotations which serve to disguise the anti-social purpose of the changes. Resistance becomes not only increasingly futile but personally dangerous, because resistors are early on identified as ‘the enemy’ who, unlike a social tradition, are personally identifiable and can thus be targeted. In this latter category we have items such as the alphabet soup of (negative) sexual perversions now categorised as (neutral) “preferences”, and the campaign to legalise marijuana (and soon, hard drugs as well), both led by our media with the volume turned to ‘maximum’.

It should be noted that with many of these agenda-contrived changes, morality and values are either discarded or, like the vocabulary, re-assigned new values. Consider in this light the issue of homosexuality. For at least the past 80 years, the sexual molestation of young boys by older men was considered a reprehensible crime leaving personal devastation in its wake, claims of its negataive effects supported by enormous volumes of medical and other evidence. And even today, young athletes are still pursuing in civil courts retribution for such molestation committed by coaches and others while the police are still laying criminal charges against those responsible. And it isn’t only sports venues; the Catholic Church is being bankrupted in many dioceses for its long covert approval of the practice and its vast support of the perpetrators.

But the landscape appears to have changed suddenly to the point where two men can marry, become husband and wife, and adopt small boys, with absolutely no mention of the potential emotional damage to those same young victims. The effects on the child-victims have totally and entirely fallen below the media radar. So where is the truth? If the sexual use of small boys was psychologically devastating and a reprehensible crime 80 years ago, it must be the same today. If the practice were harmless, as seems to be what we are told today, then it was harmless also 80 years ago. But then why the vast medical evidence in opposition, and why the criminal and civil trials occurring regularly, along with the serious prison sentences meted out?

Only one side of this story can be true. If we were being told the truth in the past, then everyone is lying to us today. If what we are told today is the truth, then everyone has been lying to us for 80 years. But lies of this kind don’t put basketball coaches in prison and bankrupt dozens of Catholic churches. The logical conclusion is that we were being told the truth in the past and that our masters-to-be are perpetrating an enormous fraud on Western nations today. It would appropriate to ask who are these people and what is their purpose. How did we travel from the point where some acts considered deviations – such as pedophilia – have morphed into conditions where even political leaders celebrate their existence in public parades? Of course, it isn’t the specific act of child sexual molestation that is being celebrated, but this is precisely the problem in that the act is in large part inseparable from the fundamental condition, but this part of the story is being silenced, presumably on the grounds of ‘fake news’.

But with my statements, please understand I make no judgment or condemnation of other people or their conditions or preferences, but then neither do I participate in public parades to boast that I am a typical run-of-the-mill heterosexual. And I don’t participate in public sexual parades for two reasons. One is that the very idea is stupid and the second is that nobody would care. In this context, the power of the political pressure that can be created by the media is astonishing. There are few government leaders with the character to avoid being used by private interests in such a shameful way, and even fewer with the courage to do so. The ‘gay pride’ movement, to my best knowledge entirely a Jewish initiative, has accumulated a power equivalent to supporting Israel: both are pre-requisites for re-election, and both involving an insignificant percentage of the population. You might care to think about that.

If you have been watching the media carefully, we have slowly been prepared not only for the praise of these new sexual ‘preferences’ so far listed, but also for the practice of incest – which will be next on the list. The relentless propaganda campaign in favor of casual abortions is part of this series of contrived social change – instigated by the same people and accompanied by a huge volume of incessant media noise.

There are other kinds of changes that, due to media conditioning, we tend to identify as political or financial, but that are very much social changes and usually with vast implications for society as a whole. Consider the matter of infrastructure privatisation, which we have been conditioned to look upon as purely a commercial concern, but which is in fact almost entirely social in its effects. You might care to read earlier articles I wrote on the evils of privatisation, to see some specifics on the effects of a society.[1][2][3]

In this category we find toll highways, airports, hospitals and medical care, prisons, electricity generation, pensions, driving licenses, education, and much more, all creating unpleasant social changes in addition to the financial implications. When Britain was pushed to privatise their public railways – with immense financial losses to the government and untold misery for the travelers, the procedure was re-categorised from ‘privatisation’ to ‘liberalisation’, suggesting that the railways had been hamstrung by their public owners and were now being set free, any kind of “freedom” being a universal value and thus cannot be challenged.

There are many others that fit more comfortably into what we might term ‘social change’, such as the animal-rights activists and various environmental groups. For many reasons, I have little sympathy for most of these people or the groups to which they belong. To begin, you might have noticed that in addition to the more or less sudden appearance of these groups, there is the inevitable accompanying media noise which is prima facie evidence of these movements having been contrived by persons behind the scenes with an agenda. Also, if you haven’t been sleeping, you may have noticed that these groups are all promoted and funded by people like George Soros and the usual group of suspects, and could not exist without such support and the media encouragement.

 

Good mental health was not a prerequisite for European settlers emigrating to the New World. We are fond of reminding ourselves that Australia was (and mostly still is) populated primarily with murderers, thieves and sexual perverts, but the immigrants to America were not noticeably better. Indeed, the inscription on the Statue of Liberty got the words more or less correct in referring to “the wretched refuse of your teeming shore”. While the Australians had their serial killers and muggers, the Europeans went one better with their Christian extremists who spent their weekdays burning witches and killing Indians, and their Sundays in church thanking God for the opportunity. The Australians have marginally improved their habits over the centuries while the Americans have not.

One of the more popular historical myths embedded in the American consciousness by the propaganda machine relates to the migration of settlers to the New World, the narrative detailing how hundreds of thousands of the virtuous oppressed flocked to the dockyards in a headlong rush for freedom and opportunity. There may indeed have been five or six such persons, but a much larger group was there to escape the hangman and jailer and an even larger selection were slave traders, hookers, and budding capitalist scam artists looking for greener pastures. When we add in the vast numbers hoping to escape justified persecution for their perverted witches-brew versions of Christianity, the first Americans were hardly role models for a new nation. The evidence is more clearly on the side of losers and misfits, criminals, religious whackos and opportunists than on the mythical oppressed. And, for the record, there is no evidence whatever of settlers emigrating to America in search of either “freedom” or “opportunity”, at least not within the current meaning of these words.

America is widely accepted, and indeed even prides itself, on being a deeply Christian country, with 65% or more of the population declaring religion important in their lives. This would be supported by history, since the major migrations to the New World consisted of a long list of flaky religious sects whose primary goal in emigration was the opportunity to build a society entirely based on those isolationist and extremist heresies. It is probably safe to say that Salem witchcraft was the seedbed in which the peculiarly American version of Christian theology sprouted and flourished, and which also served as a practical introduction to mass hysteria which would later be so usefully applied to the concepts of patriotism and democracy. The enduring echos of this religious ancestry have been highly influential in all of subsequent American history.

The Preamble to the American Declaration of Independence (“The most famous words in the English language”, if you’re American; just another Hello Kitty greeting card, if you’re not), states: “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all White Men were created superior and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, the most important of which is slavery”. In the recent history of the modern world, only two nations of people have so thoroughly embraced slavery as to have practiced it on an immense scale for hundreds of years: the Christians in America and the Dalai Lamas in Tibet. And only these two groups so cherished slavery in their hearts they fought a civil war over the right to maintain it. It is hardly a moral selling point that both sets of racist bigots lost the war and, while Mao cleaned up Tibet, the racism and bigotry persisted in America, often violently, for another 200 years and is still widely in evidence today. Christian virtue does not die easily.

Internationally, the American government and its leaders function with an absolute amorality, driven primarily by their commercial Darwinism, their law-of-the-jungle, might-makes-right philosophy. Yet individually most Americans accept all this as somehow being righteous and pleasing in the eyes of their god. The vast network of torture prisons, the numerous governments overthrown, the countless brutal dictatorships installed and supported, the commercial and military enslavement of so many populations, the 8 to 10 million civilians massacred, the constant meddling in the internal affairs of other nations, the so-frequent destabilisation of governments, the plundering of the resources of so many nations. All of these are excused, justified, forgiven, often praised, then quickly forgotten by these moral Christians. Americans may be comfortable with all this cognitive dissonance, but as Jiddu Krishnamurti aptly wrote, “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society”.

Hypocrisy has always been a prominent, if not quite endearing, feature of Americans, and especially of their government. It is Americans who preach democracy and freedom at home while installing brutal puppet dictators all over the world, who preach free trade at home while practicing savage mercantilistic protectionism abroad. It is Americans who espouse human rights at home while building the largest network of torture prisons in the history of the world. And of course, preaching that human life is precious at home while murdering millions in other nations in trumped-up wars of liberation. It is only Americans who moan about “the appalling loss of 5,000 American lives” in Iraq while killing one million Iraqis, half of whom were children. It is only the Americans who use the CIA, NED, USAID and the VOA to pay and prod individuals in other countries to create internal political dissent, then condemn a government for cracking down on “innocent dissidents”. Maybe one day Americans will lose their stomach for all this creation of worldwide instability and have another American revolution. And not before time.

Most Americans are only dimly aware of their own sordid past, a situation abetted by all the blank pages in the history books. The portions of US history contained in these pages have mostly been excised from the historical memory of Americans because they don’t fit the mythical narrative. Most Americans fervently believe their country was founded on God and Christian virtue, liberty, democracy, human rights and free trade, but when we dig beneath the propaganda and jingoism we discover the United States of America was founded on religious extremism, racism, slavery, genocide, a brutal imperialism and a virulently predatory strain of capitalism.

A significant number of these articles contain a capsule history of the United States of America with selections that will not be found in any history book, but that nevertheless consist of facts which are not in dispute. From this point forward, ideology and reality will be in constant conflict, presenting stark challenges to our uninformed beliefs.

 
• Category: History 

Few wars of recent history have been generated by politics or territorial ambitions. Almost all wars launched by the West in the earth’s modern history, including the US Civil War and both World Wars, have been bankers’ wars, incited, instigated and financed by the financial powers of Europe. Anatole France, the Nobel Prize-winning French novelist, once wrote, “You believe you are dying for the fatherland – you die for some industrialists.” We can be reminded here of General Smedley Butler, and his claims that wars were all about money, about forcibly opening the doors for capitalists and bankers to satiate their greed.

“I spent 33 years in the Marines, most of my time being a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. The general public shoulders the bill. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones, Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations. “War was largely a matter of money. Bankers lend money to foreign countries and when they cannot repay the President sends Marines to get it. I know – I’ve been in eleven of these expeditions.”

There is no shortage of examples of Western multinationals committing economic – and human – atrocities just for the sake of more profit. Do we forgive these atrocities because the perpetrators were white, democratic and believe in a free market? Listen to a few voices other than mine, on the topic of US government and corporate criminality. Thomas Friedman, writing in the New York Times: “The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist – McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas …” Philip Agee, a former CIA agent, published a book titled CIA Diary, in which he wrote, “American capitalism, based as it is on exploitation of the poor, with its fundamental motivation in personal greed, simply cannot survive without force.” John Maynard Keynes, perhaps the most influential economist in history, said, “Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all.”

William Greider wrote:

“The great multinationals are unwilling to face the moral and economic contradictions of their own behavior – producing in low-wage dictatorships and selling to high-wage democracies. Indeed, the striking quality about global enterprises is how easily free-market capitalism puts aside its supposed values in order to do business. The conditions of human freedom do not matter to them so long as the market demand is robust. The absence of freedom, if anything, lends order and efficiency to their operations.”

Richard Barnet, wrote in ‘Intervention and Revolution’: “The United States supports right-wing dictatorships in Latin America, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East … because these are the rulers who have tied their personal political destiny to the fortunes of the American corporations in their countries … Revolutionary or nationalist leaders have radically different political constituencies and interests. For them creating “a good investment climate” for the United States and developing their own country are fundamentally conflicting goals. Therefore, the United States has a strong economic interest in keeping such men from coming to power or arranging for their removal if they do.”

From an article in The Third World Traveler: “CEOs of most of the world’s largest corporations daily make decisions that destroy the lives of many other human beings. Only about 1 to 3 percent of us are sociopaths – people who don’t have normal human feelings and can easily go to sleep at night after having done horrific things. And of that 1 percent of sociopaths, there’s probably only a fraction of a percent with a college education. … Thus there is such a shortage of people who can run modern monopolistic, destructive corporations that stockholders have to pay millions to get them to work. And being sociopaths, they gladly take the money without any thought to its social consequences.”

Listen to Edward Herman:

“… the establishment can’t admit [that] it is human rights violations that make … countries attractive to business – so history has to be fudged, including denial of our support of regimes of terror and the practices that provide favorable climates of investment, and our destabilization of democracies that [don’t] meet [the] standard of service to the transnational corporation. Just as the United States trained Latin American military and police in methods of fighting against “populism” in their countries, by this means helping to produce a “favorable climate of investment” by bringing into power National Security States, so a large, well-trained, and ruthless police is needed in the home country as it pushes a right-wing agenda that is contrary to the interests of a vast majority. There is …a huge tacit conspiracy between the U.S. government, its agencies and its multinational corporations, on the one hand, and local business and military cliques in the Third World, on the other, to assume complete control of these countries and “develop” them on a joint venture basis. The military leaders of the Third World were carefully nurtured by the U.S. security establishment to serve as the “enforcers” of this joint venture partnership, and they have been duly supplied with machine guns and the latest data on methods of interrogation of subversives. The United States has given frequent and enthusiastic support to the overthrow of democracy in favor of “investor friendly” regimes.

The World Bank, IMF, and private banks have consistently lavished huge sums on terror regimes, following their displacement of democratic governments, and a number of quantitative studies have shown a systematic positive relationship between U.S. and IMF / World Bank aid to countries and their violations of human rights. The propaganda system allows the U.S. Ieadership to commit crimes without limit and with no suggestion of misbehavior or criminality; in fact, major war criminals like Henry Kissinger appear regularly on TV to comment on the crimes of the derivative butchers. Because of its power and global interests U.S. leaders have committed crimes as a matter of course and structural necessity. A strict application of international law would … have given every U.S. president of the past 50 years Nuremberg treatment.”

As I wrote earlier, the US has often sent its military to invade other nations on the pretext of defending democracy or ‘protecting American interests’, but in reality using the military to defend European capitalism by violently putting down strikes at multinational companies throughout Central and South America as well as in Asia, and including China. I produced a list of US military interventions with official reasons for each item, listing causes like “protecting American interests, suppress civilian general protest strike, battle civilians during anti-US protests, put down anti-American business protests, control anti-American civilians, war against civilians to protect dictator”. US President Coolidge orchestrated the overthrow of Guatemala’s government when it refused to grant yet more concessions to an international group that already controlled most of that nation. All of these and more were purely commercial endeavors, with a small handful of European bankers using the public power of the US military as a private tool to brutally enforce what was effectively slave labor by companies ostensibly American but often owned by these same European bankers.

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: American Military 

I provided in earlier articles some evidence of the fundamental criminality of American corporations, with only a brief introduction to the criminality of the US government and of Bernays’ ‘invisible people’ who control it from behind the scenes. This latter subject is too large to be adequately dealt with here, but later articles in this series will be devoted in part to the crimes committed domestically and internationally by the US government and its agencies. These comprise many astonishing events that are genuine and well-documented but that have been totally erased from the history books and from American public consciousness, and therefore have disappeared from the awareness of the world. It is time to bring them back into the open. This is important because American multi-national corporations (MNCs) are reading from the script written for them by the US government and its puppet-masters. For the present, I will provide a few details to make a point about the close links between the two sectors.

Several years ago, Jim Kouri reported an FBI study which stated:

“… character traits exhibited by serial killers or criminals may be observed in many within the political arena. They share the traits of psychopaths who are not sensitive to altruistic appeals, such as sympathy for their victims or remorse or guilt over their crimes. They possess the personality traits of lying, narcissism, selfishness, and vanity. These are the people to whom we have entrusted our fate. Is it any wonder that America is failing at home and world-wide?”

The important point is that those “within the political arena”, namely American Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Secretaries of State, Defense Secretaries, White House staff, and many Senators and Congressmen display many or most of the traits of criminal psychopaths and mass murderers. They could have included a great many corporate executives in that statement, and indeed the corporate arena is a primary source of the psychopaths necessary to populate the White House and Congress, the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce. The government of the United States of America has always been a criminal enterprise, ruled most often by thugs and genocidal psychopathic killers. As outrageous as that sounds to a Western ear, it fits all the facts and happens to be the defensible truth. Americans will of course want to profess outrage, and attribute such accusations to a vicious “anti-American” bias, but the statements are based on fact. Evidence of US government atrocities is not difficult to find.

Consider Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, respectively George Bush’s Secretary of Defense and Vice-President, two of the most savage and malignant humans that have ever cursed this earth. Rumsfeld was at one time the president of the Searle pharmaceutical company and Cheney the CEO of Halliburton oil well services. Where do you suppose these two pustulent stars of American political life acquired their talent as pathological killers? How do you imagine they were induced to conceive and build the largest network of torture facilities in the world’s history? Do you suppose they joined the US government and were so corrupted by the experience they became criminally insane? You know that didn’t happen. Rumsfeld and Cheney were psychopaths and mass killers long before they became kingpins of “the world’s greatest democracy”, and were prized by the government precisely because of these ‘talents’. They weren’t given high places in the US government in spite of their criminal tendencies, but because of those tendencies. From this one example of hundreds I could cite, you can begin to appreciate the sociopathic malignancy that permeates, and is shared by, both the American government corridors of power and those of the American MNCs.

I would add to this an insight gained from long exposure to the corporate world, that sociopathic tendencies increase in direct relationship to the steps on the corporate ladder. That is to say, the higher a man (or woman) rises in corporate rank and responsibility, the more pronounced are their anti-social, psychopathic and sociopathic characteristics. This is so true that promotion to the higher levels becomes increasingly impossible without these tendencies. And this means that in very large part the senior executives of large corporations are fundamentally pathological criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. This may appear a shocking statement to many readers, but it is a defensible truth.

Consider Steve Jobs, formerly of Apple. Put aside for a moment your Hello Kitty feelings for Steve the ‘innovative designer of the iphone’ and consider Steve ‘the greedy sociopath’. There are not many of us lacking empathy for the 1.5 million young people at Foxconn being paid peanuts for assembling iphones and living in a concentration camp environment where they experienced so much pressure they were committing suicide. That situation is a direct reflection of the personality and character of Steve Jobs, and it does you no good to delude yourself into believing otherwise. In my article on Nestlé’s baby milk marketing, I observed that, for the executives at Nestlé, it wasn’t their intention to kill babies but that they simply didn’t care if the babies died. It was precisely the same with Steve Jobs; he didn’t want those young people to kill themselves; he just didn’t care. You or I in that position would order Foxconn to back off the pressure and pay the workers an appropriate salary, an attitude stemming from basic humanity. Steve Jobs, with $200 billion sitting in a cash pile, plus billions in his personal bank account, did no such thing. He certainly knew of the situation and unquestionably had the power to change it by a simple command to the owners of Foxconn and an agreement to pay higher costs for the manufacture of his products. Steve Jobs made a deliberate choice to not do that. So did Tim Cook.

The executives of Nike, KFC, McDonald’s and many others, are the same. Those at Coca-Cola and Nestlé are worse. You have read of the pharma companies who are perhaps the worst of all. These latter are precisely as I described them above: fundamentally pathological criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. In the corridors of corporate power we will of course find some exceptions, but not many; most high-level corporate executives fit the psychopathic mold perfectly. They have no sympathy for their victims; they feel no guilt or remorse for their actions. They are morally bankrupt to the point where their only measure is money. This is why General Motors and Ford made decisions to not recall their automobiles but to let the customers die from faulty ignition switches and gas tanks; it was cheaper.

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: China 

US authorities have for decades become increasingly prepared for mass civil disturbances resulting from government and corporate attacks on American society. We can recall that in the early 1980s the Hidden State launched its open war on the middle class by the savage FED-induced recession and the unilateral revocation of the social contract that had existed since 1946. At that time, the US government had already anticipated widespread public unrest, fully expecting mass protests and riots, and had made preparations to deal with them in the form of internment camps. In a real sense, the government had prepared for another civil war.

Like most of the “Great Transformation”, it began during Reagan’s reign with what was called “Rex 84”, an abbreviation for Readiness Exercise 1984, a plan by the US government to detain large numbers of American citizens in case of civil unrest. This master plan involved the FBI, Department of Defense, the Emergency Measures group, the Secret Service, the CIA and altogether 34 government agencies.

It was presented as an exercise to test military assistance in civil defense in times of national emergency, but in fact the plan was anticipating civil disturbances, major demonstrations and labor strikes that would affect continuity of government. The anticipated civil unrest from the FED-induced financial crisis that devastated the middle class was considered “subversive”, REX-84 being an authorisation for the US military to implement government-controlled movements of civilian populations at both state and regional levels, the arrest of many segments of the American population, and the imposition of martial law.[1][2]

The Rex-84 program was created under the pretense of a possible mass exodus of illegal aliens attempting to cross into the US from Mexico, but when the program accidentally became public during the Iran-Contra Congressional hearings in 1987 it was revealed that it was in fact a secret federal government program

“to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be ‘national security threats’.”

This was part of a master contingency plan for which the FBI today has a primary list of more than 100,000 Americans, and a secondary list ten times larger, who are targeted to be rounded up as subversives, including labor leaders, scholars and public figures, the incarceration designed to isolate political dissidents and to contain civil unrest.
And these are prison camps, ringed with fences, barbed wire and armed guards, not places from which escape would be likely, and they were designed to hold Americans, not Mexicans.[3]
There is no question the US government is prepared for the possibility of widespread and uncontrollable domestic disorder. This program in place and building for years was encouraged by fears of a massive public uprising in the wake of the 2008 banking fraud.

US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said some years ago that concentration camps were a likely future reality for Americans and that the Supreme Court would not do anything about the tyranny should the executive branch think it necessary. He mentioned the World War II internment of Japanese in the US and said of these camps,

“you are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again”.[4][5]

In 2009, as the US financial crisis deepened and concern about public unrest was increasing, the US National Guard was posting job opportunities for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists” to work in “civilian internee camps” within the United States, and Halliburton [former] subsidiary KBR was seeking subcontractors to staff “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the US. Earlier, in 2006, KBR was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.”[6][7]

The US has for many years been dangerously close to a situation where, if the American people take to the streets in protest, these internments can be easily carried out. By 2004, there were more than 800 of these internment camps in the US, all empty, but all fully operational, staffed, and surrounded by full-time guards, ready to receive prisoners. I have seen photos. As well, many military bases are slated to be closed down and used as extra civilian prisons if the need arises, all intended for the internment of dissidents and others deemed “potentially harmful to the state”. Some camps can each hold 20,000 or more prisoners, a massive effort at civilian population control, and the program is still expanding. The US is very near the point today where political dissidents questioning the actions of their government will risk being rounded up and forced into these prison camps, essentially a government plan to forcibly suppress political dissent under the guise of rooting out domestic “terrorism”.

The US government defines many Americans as having become “pre-revolutionary” from their outrage at the 2008 government-approved housing collapse, with increasing concern that massive civil unrest would emerge from both the poverty-stricken lower classes and the eviscerated middle class, leading to what would become an internal civil war. This is the reason that the FBI and DHS increasingly focus their “anti-terror” apparatus on white middle-class Americans like the Occupy Wall Street protestors who were categorised as “low-level terrorists”.
In 2008, the Washington Post reported government plans to station many tens of thousands of troops inside the country for purposes referred to as “domestic security” in the light of massive civil unrest that would follow an economic collapse or serious financial crisis, perhaps stemming from 2008.
According to the government document,

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security”,

stating that the military may be needed to quell “purposeful domestic resistance”. To prepare for this quelling of resistance, the US has resorted to demonising its own citizens, a recent study funded by DHS conveniently identifying those Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority” and who exhibit signs of being “reverent of individual liberty”, and re-categorising them as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.[8][9][10]

The program is designed to “reduce and eliminate” all domestic resistance to the US government. “Crowd control agents” will be used for this purpose, and government agencies will be involved in “gathering information on dissidents” to identify all those who have either “threatened or are creating disturbances”. The US military produced a manual on what it termed “Civil Disturbance Operations” that outlines how military assets will be used to “help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order” in the event of mass riots and civil unrest. Military and other law-enforcement will be tasked with “breaking up unauthorized gatherings” and restoring order by

“presenting a show of force, establishing roadblocks, breaking up crowds, employing crowd control agents, and other operations as required”.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2020 Election, Civil War 

It is a strange thing that the foundation of P&G’s success as a consumer goods company began with a man who specialised in the intense (and fraudulent) manipulation of the public mind. To appreciate the full flavor of this, you might care to read the details in ‘The Anger Campaign Against China’.[1]

Edward Bernays was widely-promoted in the US as “the father of public relations”, but was instead the father of the most contemptible forms of propaganda deliberately meant to deceive entire nations of people. Bernays claimed,

“If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind” it will be possible “to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it”.

He called this scientific technique of opinion-molding the ‘engineering of consent’. Bernays’ contempt for humanity was legendary, stating that no member of the public “bewildered herd” ever had a wise idea about anything and that their thoughts needed to be controlled by superior men like him. He believed he could, through propaganda, totally infiltrate and control the minds of a nation and, in America at least, he certainly succeeded. He stated:

“So vast are the numbers of minds which can be regimented, and so tenacious are they when regimented, that [they produce] an irresistible pressure before which legislators, editors, and teachers are helpless.”

After using his psychiatric manipulation to push America into the first World War, Bernays turned his attention to the manipulation and control of public attitudes toward advertising and commerce, teaching corporations of the vast potential for sales and profits if they could condition emotional responses into the subconscious of the American population without the awareness of the people, and thus control the purchasing attitudes and habits of an entire nation. Bernays had set up shop on Madison Avenue in New York, and by the early 1920s was already doing for American products and branding what he had done for war marketing, that is to say, using propaganda to manipulate and control public perception, in this case to not only create millions of mindless American consumers but to fabricate and permanently instill in the American mind the myth of brands. Bernays quickly attracted more corporate clients than he could handle, with most large firms tripping over themselves to take advantage of the power of propaganda and mind control to loot the nation’s bank accounts with the hundreds of new products to be sold to the ‘bewildered herd’.

Bernays’ first corporate client was Proctor and Gamble (P&G), a company with which he had a relationship that lasted more than 30 years, and a client that wholeheartedly adopted his methods not only for marketing manipulation but eventually for recruiting and staff training as well.

P&G is an anomaly in the corporate world in some ways, one of which is their unusual marketing model that permits their products to enjoy a largely artificial demand driven by what is essentially propaganda supported by massive advertising spending. In terms of media expenditures, P&G has for many years been the biggest spender in the world, spending twice as much as the number two company, Unilever, and in many categories spending five times or more than its nearest rival. With disposable diapers, for instance, P&G spent in one recent year about $70 million on Pampers compared to about $10 million by Kimberly-Clark for Huggies. It is that huge advertising assault on consumers that props up demand which would otherwise not exist. Many P&G executives have in confidence confirmed my suspicion that the company’s sales would rapidly fall by perhaps 70% if the incessant media blitz were to cease. Of course, many firms use advertising to produce sales, but their sales are much nearer to what I term a natural demand level, and might not appreciably change with a reduction in advertising expenditures.

Their marketing of Pampers in China is an excellent example of P&G’s manipulation of societies to change existing values and perceptions to create fabricated markets for their products. Chinese mothers did not often use diapers, and preferred washable cloth diapers in any case, strongly resisting P&G’s marketing efforts for what was seen as an expensive, wasteful, and unnecessary product. P&G’s then-CEO, Robert McDonald In 2010:

“One of the things that interests me about China’s many markets … is observing Western consumer goods companies take a proven product from overseas and introduce it in an emerging market with no prior knowledge of the products’ use or existence. … I’m talking about taking a product and literally changing consumer behavior to create a market for it.”[2]

In that article, Forbes wrote that P&G conducted “some research to identify the qualities that might make a disposable diaper attractive in China”, but that statement is an enormous lie meant to disguise the essential truth. What P&G actually did was to conduct extensive psychological and psychiatric research in attempts to identify the hidden fears and weaknesses in Chinese mothers so as to prey on those. And they found what they needed: the mothers’ concern for their baby’s health and his longer-term development and success in life. P&G then first created a scenario based on claims that increased sleep would not only improve a baby’s health but would result in “improved cognitive development and academic achievement”, thereby presumably guaranteeing wealth and a successful career. The second step was to produce so-called “studies” with “scientific results” that appeared palpably fraudulent, with either fabricated or cherry-picked data, claiming that Chinese babies wearing Pampers fell asleep 30% faster than babies wearing cloth diapers, and further that their sleep while wearing Pampers would experience “50% Less Disruption”.[3]

To add to the appeal, P&G then attached the insinuation that the parents would also receive much more sleep thereby transforming the earning power of a lower-middle-class family. So, if your baby wears my diapers, not only will you obtain so much extra sleep that your income will magically double, but your baby will become so smart he will earn a Ph.D. from an elite university. As a mother, how can you refuse? P&G were very proud of themselves for this manipulation . In an internal P&G staff promotional video, one Pampers brand manager boasted about his psychological fraud, saying, “We really had to change the mindset and educate [Chinese mothers] that using a diaper is not about convenience for you – it’s about your baby’s development.”

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: China 

Just as with the quality of US education, most of what you are told about the superiority of the American medical system is just false propaganda and brand marketing. The US spends more than twice as much as any other Western nation on a health care system widely considered to be the most dysfunctional in the developed world and where, in spite of the doubled total costs, much of the population has no access to health care. Many studies have demonstrated that the US has an enormous number of preventable deaths each year solely due to the dysfunctional nature of its health care system. The most credible estimate was a study carried out by Harvard Medical School Professors Himmelstein and Woolhandler in 1997, which concluded that about 100,000 people died in the United States each year because of lack of needed care.[1][2][3] And statistics confirm that an additional 50,000 Americans die each year while waiting for critical treatment because they have no insurance.[4] But these numbers, large as they are, are trivial compared to those of the patients who die after being admitted to American hospitals. Read on.

In the United States today, life expectancy is 50th in the world – just above Albania, and infant mortality 46th in the world – worse than Slovenia, in all cases far below all developed nations and far below China as well. Of 17 high-income countries studied by the National Institutes of Health in 2013, the US had the highest prevalence of infant mortality, heart and lung disease, sexually transmitted infections, adolescent pregnancies, injuries, homicides, and disabilities. Together, these issues place the US at the bottom of the list for life expectancy. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] In 2000, the World Health Organization (WHO) performed an extensive study of health care systems in about 200 nations.[12][13] In that study, the US health care system was ranked as the highest in cost, 37th in overall performance, and 72nd by overall level of health. Another study by The Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States by far the lowest in quality of health care among all similar countries, and by far the most expensive. The Health Affairs journal performed a study in 2000, where it found that since 1970 all other nations had gained about six more years of life expectancy than did the US. According to the WHO and The Commonwealth Fund, the US spent more on health care per capita, and more on health care as percentage of its GDP, than any other nation in 2011, but ranked last in the quality of health care.

The root cause is a Right-Wing political conviction that government need not finance social needs which it claims are better looked after by the private sector, but the real reason is more commercial than ideological – the determination of a few wealthy industrialists to access the massive health care revenue stream. Due to extensive lobbying and virtual control by private-interest groups, the US government has largely abandoned medical services to the private sector, leaving corporations to provide society’s social needs on a profit-maximisation basis. There are of course huge conflicts of interest when private corporations driven primarily by profit and self-interest are responsible for the delivery of a fundamental social need. The two major manifestations of this capitalist approach are that (a) much of the medical services field in the US, including hospitals and medical offices, are operated as for-profit businesses rather than being part of the social infrastructure of the nation as they are in Canada and Europe, and (b) the involvement of insurance companies as profiteering middlemen. This is one of the factors exacerbating the nation’s increasing income disparity. The insertion of private profiteers into public services serves only to drain wealth from the general public and concentrate it into increasingly fewer hands rather than recycling it through the government and overall population.

 

This is why Americans today have no government-funded universal healthcare system, as well as the primary reason the US has thousands of private charities collecting money for every cause. There are some health benefits for retired people and for some of the very poor, but everyone else must purchase coverage from an insurance company, which costs American families nearly $25,000 per year and expected to increase to more than $35,000, while single individuals often pay $7,000, all for policies that fail to cover many illnesses or medical procedures, and in which both insurance coverage and payment of claims are often refused.

By contrast, families in Canada pay about $1,000 per year for a universal government-funded single-payer system with no insurance company involvement, that covers everyone and everything, with no underwriting and few treatments refused. The insurance companies and American capitalists constantly deride this type of system as immoral socialized medicine, and attack Canada for caring more about the people than corporate profits. The criticism notwithstanding, Canada has (or had) one of the finest and least expensive health care systems in the world, resulting from two decisions: (a) the system is a government-operated single-payer social service and (b) private enterprise and the insurance companies have been eliminated as profiteering middlemen. Canada made the right decision; the US did not.

Some Cost Examples

One American woman visited an emergency room complaining of abdominal pain, and spoke at great length with the attending physician about her symptoms and treatment options. Her condition was almost certainly a gall bladder problem, which indicated an ultrasound examination, but the hospital didn’t have a functioning ultrasound machine that day. The physician expressed doubt about the gall bladder and insisted the woman have a CT scan instead. As it happened, the problem was indeed the gall bladder and the woman received a bill from the hospital for $4,000 for the CT scan – which the insurance company then refused to pay on the grounds that this treatment was “not indicated by the circumstances”, and because the charge was outrageous, a CT scan being available at a public clinic down the street for only $250. The consensus was that the doctor, having no ultrasound machine, either misdiagnosed or deliberately misrepresented the woman’s condition so he could sell a CT scan for the hospital.

In another case, an American was charged $153,000 for a rattlesnake bite, $40,000 of this amount being the charge for 5 days in a hospital, and nearly $85,000 for the medication that cost the hospital less than $10,000.[14] Another American needed eye surgery which was quoted to him at about $2,500 in Germany where it was a common 30-min outpatient procedure. He instead had it done in the US at a total cost of $32,000.[15]

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: Health care 
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?