The only two choices for the 2008 Presidential election: Nader vs Solzhenitsyn

I just came across this table on Ralph Nader's website and decided I would share it with you: (please click on image for a better view)



I want to stress here that I am *not* trying to convince anyone to vote for Nader. Not that I have anything against Nader, not at all - I like the man, its just that I think that voting legitimizes a system which cannot be reformed and which is illegitimate beyond imagination. No, all I am trying to illustrate with this table is a) that McCain=Obama=Clinton and that b) Nader is the only alternative, whether good or bad, to the Neocon War Party's two branches.

As I wrote many times in this blog, the choice between the two factions of the "Republicrat Party" is about as meaningful as the choice between (Kosher) Pepsi and (Kosher) Coke: no choice at all. Now that Kucinich, Paul and Gravel are officially out, the only person still running for the Presidency who does not fully endorse a messianic imperial view of the USA is Ralph Nader. By refusing to recognize the Democrats as a meaningful alternative to the Republicans Nader has already done his country a great service.

We now will see if Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel have the integrity and guts to do the only decent and logical thing (at least for somebody who belives that the system can be reformed from within): endorse Nader.

None of this will make any difference, however slight. The Neocons and the Israel Lobby have a firm grip on both factions of the War Party, they have already infiltrated the campaigns of Mc Cain, Clinton and, to a marginally lesser degree, Obama. Little will change with Dubya's long awaited departure from the White House besides Hillary and Obama providing some charm and intelligence, if not culture, to a post occupied by a Neanderthal-like President for the past eight years. A welcome change for sure, but not something substantial.

Clinton was elected as a "liberal" and he threw million of poor Americans (mostly kids) into the streets, Dubya was elected on a "modest" foreign policy only to start an orgy of Imperial wars. So what is the point of all this? Why spend millions every four years for a presidential campaign which has no relevance whatsoever for the future of the USA?

The real point is to conceal the nature of the *system* by instead focusing on personalities. The proverbial tree concealing the forest if you wish.

Americans are educated or, rather, brainwashed into believing that puppet #1 is dramatically different from puppet #2 and that the electoral circus actually has a meaning. By focusing all the public attention on the candidates the system's propaganda machine successfully distracts the American public from the real cause and nature of the political system ruling over it.

In this context one has to admit that Nader is part of the system no less than Hillary, Obama or Mc Cain: he provides the system with a safety valve and a thin veneer of democratic legitimacy. Still, his platform does serve to shed some light on the forces which really control it all. Hence my ambivalence about the idea of voting for him (a purely theoretical one, for sure, since I do not hold the Imperial citizenship, nor will I ever in the future).

If you have any faith left at all in the American democracy, then, by all means, vote Nader as any other vote is a vote against the American Republic (and for a Fascist Empire). If you, like myself, believe that the system cannot be reformed no matter what, then stay away from it. Limit yourself to an "internal exile" and follow Solzhenitsyn's advice to live not by the lies. This method brought down the Soviet Union and it will also eventually bring down the American Empire.

The only thing which can prevent a Fascist President in 2008

As I have written in a previous post, the "election" of an openly Fascist President in 2008 is almost certain. The USA already has an Imperial Presidency (the politically correct term for which is "unitary executive") and this trend will only get worse no matter which Neocon puppet gets elected in 2008. Only two candidate - Ron Paul and Mike Gravel - are real democrats (small "d"), and neither of them has any real hope of getting elected.

As Chalmer Johnson wrote in his recent book Nemesis, we are in all likelihood living the last days of the American Republic. I would submit that the day the Military Commissions Act was past by the Imperial Congress was the Constitutional Kristallnacht which marked the beginning of the end for democracy in the USA. To paraphrase Churchill, we are now already beyond the beginning of the end, though not quite at the end of the end yet. There remains one last thing which can prevent the USA from becoming a Fascist Empire: a Ron Paul - Mike Gravel ticket in 2008.

The American people overwhelmingly voted for the Democrats to stop the total calamity which the war in Iraq has turned into for the USA and what did they get in return? A so-called "surge" which is likely to bring the US troops in Iraq to around 200'000 by this Fall, and a Democratic leadership who told the Neocons in the White House that the Congress voluntarily renounces is constitutional right and obligation to decide whether the US will go to war against Iran or not. I cannot think of a bigger and more blatant betrayal of the will of the American people in the entire history of the USA.

As Chalmer Johnson puts it, the USA is now facing a crucial choice: either to persist in its efforts to become an Empire, or to accept the loss of this foolish and evil chimera and become a "normal" nation again. Not that there any chance at all for the US to become the Empire the Neocons want it to be - there is none. The real issue is whether this will happen as the result of a social awareness and choice of the US society or as the result of a Roman-style collapse impose by external forces.

The magnitude of this choice trumps all other issues. Nothing comes even close to being as important as this choice, not Social Security, not taxation, not environmental issues, not even civil liberties, even more so because the latter are directly linked to the Empire vs. Republic choice. For all its faults, the USA used to be a Republic whose internal structure was carefully crafted by Jefferson and the other founding fathers of the Republic.

Congress has clearly caved in to Neocon pressures, and so has the Supreme Court (though to a lesser degree), and the entire balance of power created by the Founding Fathers has now collapsed. From being, at least in theory, "of the people and for the people", it the US power structure has become of the Neocons and for the Neocons.

This represents nothing short of a complete loss of sovereignty of the American people over their country.

Those who realize and oppose this cannot be easily defined as liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. What is certain is that those who wish to live in an American Republic cannot have any more hopes to be represented by either Democrats or Republicans. A third force or, more accurately, a second force is desperately needed and only Ron Paul and Mike Gravel can create it.

It might be sound tactically for Ron Paul and Mike Gravel to use the label of their respective parties to try to speak up and educate the American people, but pretty soon both of them will get the boot from the Establishment (see the Pravda-like editorial in the Washington Post) demanding their elimination from the Presidential debates). When this happens they need to join forces and run on an independent anti-Imperial ticket together. Others from both sides of the political spectrum would join them (just imagine Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader standing together!). The entire peace movement could join forces with the constitutionalists and libertarians in a last ditch attempt not to promote some agenda, but to save the Republic!

Sure - this is admittedly a far-fetched solution but, as Sherlock Holmes liked to say, eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth or, in this case, the *only* option.

US conservatives and liberals would also do well to remember that the social issues on which they disagree with each other and not in the realm of the Presidency, but of Congress. It does not really matter whether a libertarian paleo-conservative like Ron Paul or a liberal like Mike Gravel sits in the White House for internal social programs. What matters is that the USA not turn into an empire externally and into a Fascist state internally. Only if these two conditions are met can the Left and the Right freely and democratically offer their respective political platforms to the American people to choose from.

Will Paul and Gravel agree to join forces together?

My guess is that this will only happen if the American people pressure them to do so, in fact demand that from them. Both Paul and Gravel are honest and dedicated people and both love their country and want to serve it. The American people need to tell that that this is what is needed from them. Any other hopes have now become futile.

Dissenting voices and delayed wars

Something very interesting is happening in the USA: two candidates for the next Presidential election (Ron Paul, R, and Mike Gravel, D) are running on an anti-war platfrom and they are speaking up in each debate (so far - soon they will be given the boot). They stand no chance whatsoever under the current political system. Just take a look the Washington Post's truly orwellian editorial complaining that "Too many candidates talking about too much" and which specifically singles out Ron Paul and Mike Gravel as "excess candidates". Presumably the Neocon editors of the Post would prefer a few, shall we say, "unanimous" candidates on the issues of the current wars (Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia) and the one to come (Iran).

Unlike the Establishment press, the free and independent media is mostly expressing interest or even outright admiration for Paul's and Gravel's courage. Some in the blogosphere are even suggesting that the two only anti-war candidates should drop their current party affiliations and join forces on an anti-war & civil liberties platform.

What is becoming increasingly clear that both Paul and Gravel and not so much trying to win the nomination of their parties as they are trying to use the devates to educate the American electorate on the true reasons behind today's crisis. And in this lies a huge opportunity.

Ever since the Democrats took control of both chambers of the Imperial Senate it has become clear that there is simply nothing to be expected from either faction of the "Republicrat Party". Besides, can anyone still tell these two Parties and their candidate apart?! With Republicans like Guliani and Democrats like Hillary it is clear that the USA is about to enter a very ugly phase of its history as the former will most certainly brutally crack down on internal dissent (Guliani is for all intends and purposes a genuine Fascist) while the latter will do whatever it is AIPAC demands from her. Throw in Obama with his assurances that he does not want to nuke anybody "right now" and McCaine singing "bomb, bomb, bomb - bomb, bomb Iran" and the picture is gloomy indeed: some "choice" given to the American people...

So why has the war with Iran not started yet?

First, it appears that there is a strong reaction of the "old Anglo" oil lobby against the Neocons and their plans for war. Simply put - the bosses of the likes of Baker or Brzezinski have too much to loose financially in such a folly and they have unleashed an strong anti-Neocon campaign involving such personalities as Jimmy Carter, General Odom, Scott Ritter, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, Michael Scheuer and many others. Second, there are persistent rumors of very strong opposition to these plans inside the US military brass. So that's two of the three most powerful lobbies in the USA (oil and military-industrial) opposing the war. Which leaves the Neocons alone in their designs of more war. That's the good news.

The bad news is that the Neocons don't care and that they are already firmly control all the Presidential candidates (except Paul and Gravel). They also have amnequally firm grip on the Imperial Senate and the corporate media. Which brings me to the role played by the free & independent media and the blogosphere as the sole and increasingly powerful, outlet for the anti-war movement to express its views: thanks to its very existence no matter which of the Neocons actually gets elected in 2008, the three pillars of power of the Establishment (the two factions of the war Party, the Imperial Senate, and the corporate media) will become even further discredited in the eyes of the American people once it becomes clear that there will be hell to pay for the Neocon's policies (what the CIA calls the "blowback effect") and that the only the free media consistently warned about that.

Alas, the Neocons have nothing more to loose politically and they are now looking at the very real possibility of facing various criminal indictment for war crimes, international aggression, perjury, obstruction of justice, espionage, fraud, civil rights violations, etc. It is thus clear that barring a miracle a war with Iran is still probably inevitable. The only good thing coming from that is that it will be the last war of the American Empire and that, as so many empires before, the USA will eventually become a "normal" nation (and the Neocons will be either in jail or hiding abroad). Sadly, the price to pay for this outcome in blood and money is likely to be staggering.