اندیشمند بزرگترین احساسش عشق است و هر عملش با خرد

Tuesday, September 26, 2017

The Rise of the New McCarthyism


By Robert Parry
Source: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/26/the-rise-of-the-new-mccarthyism/

Make no mistake about it: the United States has entered an era of a New McCarthyism that blames nearly every political problem on Russia and has begun targeting American citizens who don’t go along with this New Cold War propaganda.

Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wisconsin, who led the “Red Scare” hearings of the 1950s.
A difference, however, from the McCarthyism of the 1950s is that this New McCarthyism has enlisted Democrats, liberals and even progressives in the cause because of their disgust with President Trump; the 1950s version was driven by Republicans and the Right with much of the Left on the receiving end, maligned by the likes of Sen. Joe McCarthy as “un-American” and as Communism’s “fellow travelers.”
The real winners in this New McCarthyism appear to be the neoconservatives who have leveraged the Democratic/liberal hatred of Trump to draw much of the Left into the political hysteria that sees the controversy over alleged Russian political “meddling” as an opportunity to “get Trump.”
Already, the neocons and their allies have exploited the anti-Russian frenzy to extract tens of millions of dollars more from the taxpayers for programs to “combat Russian propaganda,” i.e., funding of non-governmental organizations and “scholars” who target dissident Americans for challenging the justifications for this New Cold War.

US Provides Military Assistance to 73 Percent of World's Dictatorships

By Rich Whitney
September 25, 2017 
For decades, the American people have been repeatedly told by their government and corporate-run media that acts of war ordered by their president have been largely motivated by the need to counter acts of aggression or oppression by "evil dictators." We were told we had to invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator. We had to bomb Libya because Muammar Gaddafi was an evil dictator, bent on unleashing a "bloodbath" on his own people. Today, of course, we are told that we should support insurgents in Syria because Bashar al-Assad is an evil dictator, and we must repeatedly rattle our sabers at North Korea's Kim Jong-un and Russia's Vladimir Putin because they, too, are evil dictators.

This is part of the larger, usually unquestioned mainstream corporate media narrative that the US leads the "Western democracies" in a global struggle to combat terrorism and totalitarianism and promote democracy.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

How the UN Covers for US Aggression

By J.P. Sottile



President Trump opened his big United Nations week … and his famous mouth … with a predictable plug for one of his properties and some playful glad-handing with French President Emmanuel Macron. Trump also scolded the U.N.’s unwieldy scrum for “not living up to its potential.” He made a passing reference to the U.N.’s wasteful use of American money. And he called for “reform” of the much-maligned international forum.
It was a stolid prelude to what will no doubt be “must-see” TV when he speaks to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday about North Korea and Iran. And it was a far cry from the way America’s leading “America Firster” spent the campaign lamenting how unfair the U.N. is to the poor schlemiel we call Uncle Sam.
He is likely to use his speech to throw a little bit of that same red meat to his base, but his call for reform falls well short of what his supporters want … which is an abrupt end of U.S. involvement in the international body. They are motivated by a grab-bag of reasons that point to the U.N. being a threat to their guns, their bank accounts and their God-given freedom.

Trump's UN Speech Was Tailored For Americans That Were Born Yesterday

By Chris Rossini
September 19, 2017

Source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47842.htm

In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch.

Those were actual words spoken by President Trump today at the UN. If only it were possible to see the thoughts swirling through the minds of everyone listening.

The words "yeah right" most likely dominated at that moment.

If only the president's words were true. Instead, the U.S. government has been at constant war (both overt and covert) for an entire century. The globe is bursting with American military bases that are stationed around every corner.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

میرزاده عشقی

میرزاده عشقی (۱۲۷۳ همدان - ۱۳۰۳ تهرانشاعر، روزنامه‌نگار، نویسنده و نمایشنامه نویس دوران مشروطیّت و مدیر نشریه قرن بیستم بود؛ که در دوره نخست وزیری رضاخان، به دستور رئیس اداره تأمینات نظمیه (شهربانی) وقت، ترور شد. وی از جمله مهمترین شاعران عصر مشروطه به شمار می‌رود که از عناصر هویت ملی در جهت ایجاد انگیزه و آگاهی در توده مردم بهره گرفت.
میرزاده عشقی نام اصلیش «سید محمدرضا کردستانی» و فرزند «حاج سید ابوالقاسم کردستانی» بود و در تاریخ دوازدهم جمادی‌الآخر سال ۱۳۱۲ هجری قمری مطابق ۲۰ آذرماه ۱۲۷۳ خورشیدی و سال ۱۸۹۴ میلادی در همدان زاده شد. سالهای کودکی را در مکتب‌خانه‌های محلی و از سن هفت سالگی به بعد در آموزشگاه‌های «الفت» و «آلیانس» به تحصیل فارسی و فرانسه اشتغال داشته، پیش از آنکه گواهی نامه از این مدرسه دریافت کند در تجارتخانه یک بازرگان فرانسوی به شغل مترجمی پرداخته و به زبان فرانسه مسلط شد.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

شاهد بازی

چند سال پیش که این کتاب را خواندم اندوه سنگینی‌ تمام وجودم را فرا گرفت. دلیلش رفتار زشت و به غایت  تهوع آور پدران ما نبود، که البته در این مورد هیچگونه پوزشی پذیرفته نیست. ولی‌ به این دلیل که اشعاری که با آنها از نوجوانی انس گرفته بودم، و هر سطر آن اشعار باعث میشد که پندار شور انگیزی در ذهنم نقش ببندد، اکنون چهره ننگینی به خود گرفته بودند، و آن ادبیاتِ دلآرا را به صورتی‌ زشت و پلید میدیدم. به عنوان مثال در مرجع دیگری خواندم که این شعر لطیف حافظ که میگوید: نگار من که به مکتب نرفت و مشق ننوشت/ به غمزه مساله آموز سد مدرس شد، آن پنداری که من داشتم نبود، که چهرهٔ ناز و عشوه‌گر دختر زیبائی را که برای حافظ شراب میریخت، در ذهنم تصویر میکرد. دین سالاران البته معتقدند این شعر در مورد پیغمبر اسلام است، که هر چه را که زیباست به گردن این موجود هزار و چهارصد ساله می‌آویزند. این نگار غماز در واقع همان شاه شجاع خونخوار است که پدرش را میکُشد که جای او بنشیند‌ وروزها خون میمکد و چون حافظهٔ سرشاری دارد و اشعار بسیاری به فارسی و عربی‌ و ترکی‌ در ذهن دارد، شبها هم پیالهٔ حافظ است! 

Saturday, September 9, 2017

The Dangerous Decline of US Hegemony


The showdown with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a seminal event that can only end in one of two ways: a nuclear exchange or a reconfiguration of the international order.
While complacency is always unwarranted, the first seems increasingly unlikely. As no less a global strategist than Steven Bannon observed about the possibility of a pre-emptive U.S. strike: “There’s no military solution. Forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about. There’s no military solution here. They got us.”
This doesn’t mean that Donald Trump, Bannon’s ex-boss, couldn’t still do something rash. After all, this is a man who prides himself on being unpredictable in business negotiations, as historian William R. Polk, who worked for the Kennedy administration during the Cuban Missile Crisis, points out. So maybe Trump thinks it would be a swell idea to go a bit nuts on the DPRK.

How History Explains the Korean Crisis

By William R. Polk
Source:https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/05/on-the-brink-of-nuclear-war/


The U.S. and North Korea are on the brink of hostilities that if begun would almost certainly lead to a nuclear exchange. This is the expressed judgment of most competent observers. They differ over the causes of this confrontation and over the size, range and impact of the weapons that would be fired, but no one can doubt that even a “limited” nuclear exchange would have horrifying effects throughout much of the world including North America.

A Korean girl carries her brother on her back, trudging past a stalled M-26 tank, at Haengju, Korea., June 9, 1951. (U.S. military photo)

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Revolution and Counterrevolution, 1917–2017


The Russian Revolution of 1917 erupted on the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Karl Marx’s Capital. From the start, the October Revolution seemed both to confirm and contradict Marx’s analysis. He had envisioned a working-class-based socialist revolution breaking out in the developed capitalist countries of Western Europe. But the 1882 preface to the Communist Manifesto, written a year before his death, amended this by pointing to a revolution in Russia as a possible “signal for proletarian revolution in the West.”1 Yet although a worker-peasant revolution under Marxist leadership triumphed in Russia in 1917, Russia was still a largely underdeveloped country, and the revolutionary uprisings in Germany and Central Europe which followed were weak and easily extinguished.

In these circumstances, Soviet Russia, completely isolated, faced a massive counterrevolution, with all the major imperialist powers intervening on the side of the White Russian forces in the Civil War. “Socialism in one country,” the basic defensive posture of the USSR throughout its history, was thus to a large extent a geopolitical reality imposed on it from outside. This was evident beginning with the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, in which Russia was forced to give up much of the territory of the Tsarist Empire, followed soon after by the Treaty of Versailles, which sought to isolate it still further.