Where we go from here

Where we go from here, is Bernie Sanders’ recent book. For those who know him and follow his campaign he is not offering any new ideas in his book. Generally, he has about ten vey different and important items in his agenda which he evaluates in various shapes and forms. It is hard to believe candidates promises any longer since we have experienced every candidate promising his or her way into the White House, and as soon as the election is secured, leaves people behind. This has been experienced with both parties, and of course both Democrat and Republican parties are so strong and entrenched into American politics that it is almost impossible for any other party to move up close to them. For instance, we had Obama, the most intelligent persons to occupy the house in comparison to his successor, and who was considered different from very beginning, because of his race. He stupefied people, making liberals believe that he was one of them and from a different crowd. This was proven wrong, as his imperialistic agenda was stronger than any of his predecessors. Of course, it is dangerous to enter the race and win with the support of millionaires and then turn back on them, as they have the means which would destroy anyone fantasizing such idea. Would Jill Stein receive the same enthusiastic followers as Sanders if she ran on Democratic ticket instead of Green; we would not know? One point that keeps Sanders away from other candidates in this regard is that he does not accept large contributions. His past stands on issues would of course be another indication that he does not follow status quo. This point definitely contributes to his popularity and that may make it hard for the establishment to do to him again, what they did in 2016. Many of his views however are very much like the status quo, regarding Russia and Korea and China, and with all his criticisms about the system, he believes in Western Democracy. Considering that he has taken wrong stance in many issues, one has to be careful not to mistake him with someone from the left of political spectrum, no matter that he calls himself a socialist. All said, his book is valuable to read as he expands on his ideas and describes each one in detail.

Bernie’s ideas have become commonplace in other candidates’ platforms, notions which were impossible for a political candidate to enunciate five years ago. Now that Sanders is a candidate again, there is a line of progressives (or so called) nominating themselves for the race. This may bring more people to the poll, and on the other hand it may disfranchise some hard-core royalists to other candidates. Explanation of Bernie’s ideas in this book are clear, and one can grasp a better idea of his agenda in detail. He starts his book by talking about his campaign of three years ago, which is primarily around his issues, and with a drop of witticism here and there: “After all, the 13 million Americans who voted for our campaign did not do so because of my good looks, my hair, or my charming personality. Well, maybe a few of them voted for my hair, P.13”.

He continues speaking about his campaign in the first chapter of the book and about those who contributed to his campaign, specifically: “Black, white, Latino, Asian American, Native American, gay, and straight- they embodied what must become the future of American politics. Anyone looking at our supporters could see in a moment that they were not the traditional Democratic politicians who attend conventions. They were not superdelegates. They were not political insiders. They were not wealthy. They were not governors or members of Congress. They were not well connected or movers and shakers in their own states. And they weren’t cynical, P.20”.

There is no question that Sanders believes in a capitalist system, a system that distributes wealth more equally than the current system, a system which has created an astonishing gap between the haves and have nots. He makes examples of the politics of the rich, as the money can determine the fate of any political or legislative action: “Despite the fact that California is regarded as one of the most liberal states in the country, not one statewide democratic leader was prepared to stand up and take on the drug companies… In other words, when it came to taking on the pharmaceutical industry, the political class virtually disappeared. In order to defeat Proposition 61, the prescription drug industry showed us what political power was all about. They also showed us the endless supply of money they have to protect their interests over the needs of the American people. Unbelievably, in one state and on one ballot initiative, they spent $131 million to make sure Proposition 61 failed… When I talk about a rigged economic system that benefits the rich, and a corrupt political system that benefits the powerful, the campaign to defeat Proposition 61 in California tell you everything you need to know, P.46”. One should of course be reminded that although Sanders’ rhetoric is to the point and there is no ambiguity about them, when he calls himself a socialist, he means that many of the industries that directly deal with human issues, such as medical industry, should be operated by the government, as it is the case in most countries of the world.

One of the successes of Bernie lies in his manner of propaganda. He has realized the mode of communication by young people in the 21^st century, and he has been using such media to his advantage: “… we have since made social media central to the efforts of our office… Our most watched video features a brilliant Canadian doctor, Danielle Martin, responding to distortions about her country’s health care being told by Republican senator Richard Burr during a Senate hearing. That video received more than 30 million views, P.75”. As a result, internet is filled with his town-hall meetings and other presentations. Interestingly enough, Sanders does not look handsome, well groomed, or a good speaker even. But, when he speaks, honesty flows from his mouth with each word, and people watching politicians, especially our current president, can easily tell the difference between an honest man and a crook.

One of the ways to measure a candidate is by way of checking his background. We become interested in someone after hearing a speech or a debate, and put that person in certain category. In order to evaluate our judgment about that person, we should check his past and review his ideas and viewpoints in previous years at a minimum, especially on some important issues such as life and death matters: “As I made clear in my debates against her [Hillary Clinton], and in other opportunities over the years, I had as a young man strongly opposed the disastrous war in Vietnam, one of the worst foreign policy blunders in the history of our country. I had also spoken out against U.S. coups and invasions that overthrew democratically elected governments in Chile, Guatemala, the Congo, Brazil, Iran, and elsewhere, P.88”.

At the beginning of this century, United States with the leadership of big corporations, mostly military industrial complex, which had lost some business after the end of the cold war with Soviet Union, and with guidance of Bush, started wars in the Middle East. Bernie Sanders who was against these wars spoke to the house, and he quotes a part of his speech in the book: “I went to house floor and said, ‘Despite the fact that we are now aligned with such Middle Eastern governments as Syria, a terrorist dictatorship, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, feudalistic dictatorships, and Egypt, a one-party state that receives $7 billion in debt forgiveness to wage this war with us, I believe that in the long run, the action unleashed last night will go strongly against our interests in the Middle East…’ … In 2003, I did everything I could to prevent George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq- a war that Clinton supported… The first Iraq War did lay the groundwork for more wars to come… As part of our Cold War efforts, we overthrew the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953, and installed the Shah, a brutal dictator. This led to the Islamic Revolution, the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini, the taking of hostages at the U.S. embassy, and our current hostile relationship with Iran, P.89”. It is either lack of knowledge or his naivety to consider Iranian government an enemy of the U.S. The revolution was of course aided by the US, after the Shah’s useful period was expired and he was becoming dangerous with his egomaniac demeanor and his reach of the Soviet Union for economic cooperation. Current Iranian leadership, regardless of its rhetoric, has done everything to get close to the US and replace the Shah in his mission. However, America requires military posts and soldiers stationed there, and this is what Iranian leaders have not dared to accept yet. Considering lack of legitimacy of Iranian government among its people, throwing their “Death to America” chant openly, although they had aided the US in its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and had purchased weapons from their archenemy, Israel, will end very unpopular mullahs overnight.

Bernie asks some hypothetical questions after explaining one (out of several) of the well known American meddlings in other countries’ affairs: “In 1953, the United States, on behalf of Western oil interests, supported the overthrow of Mohammad Mossadegh, Iran’s elected prime minister, and the reinstallation of the shah of Iran, who led a corrupt, brutal, and unpopular government. In 1979, the shah was overthrown by revolutionaries led by Ayatollah Khomeini, and the Islamic Republic of Iran was created. What would Iran look like today if their democratic government had not been overthrown? What impact did that American-led coup have on the entire region? What consequences are we still living with today, P.101”. He continues on some other American Quos and regime change around the world, specially in American continent.

As soon as the Soviet Union was out of the picture, United State government with the leadership of Clinton, and then Bush, felt no threat in invading and destroying other countries. We should not forget Bush and Clinton’s support of the Russian premier Boris Yeltsin, the person who divided and destroyed Russia and ignited a war in most of the Eastern Europe. Of course, United States presidents aided the most corrupt sides in those wars. Then “More recently in Iraq, based on a similarly mistaken analysis of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s regime, the United States invaded and occupied a country in the heart of the Middle East. In doing so, we upended the regional order of the Middle East and unleashed forces across the region and the world that we will be dealing with for decades to come, P.102”. It is not a mistaken exploration, but an intentional and exaggerated analysis of other governments in order to topple those regimes. United States always needs an enemy in order to keep American populace confused and side tracked. Soviet Union is now replaced by Russia. Eastern European countries are replaced by some Middle Eastern countries that, although pretty corrupt and brutal such as the government of Iran, they don’t pay homage to the US demands. In fact, as mentioned earlier, the government in Iran loves to be a satellite of the US as the Shah was, but their rhetoric against America (no matter how phony) and their actions vis-à-vis the United States is preventing them from being an ally. We should not forget that Al-Qaida, Taliban, Isis, and all Islamic terrorists were created by the US government. Brzezinski distributing Islamic holly books among Taliban has been well watched on YouTube.

There are important places in the geography of he United States that is the responsibility of the government to protect. On the other hand, there are territories (or unimportant places) which are occupied by non-white people and the government should not spend its resources on those areas. Anyone going to East Oakland, East LA, and other such places can easily see cracked asphalt and run-down buildings and garbage all over and thick air to inhale. When there is natural disaster, depending on how valuable the area is, aid can be rushed or relaxed, or even stopped. After the September 11 event, it did not take the government long to rebuild the disaster area better than what it was before the disaster, since that was at the heart of the business community. On the other hand, we have natural disasters in unimportant places which are neglected by the government. What happened to Puerto Rico is a small example: “The truth of the matter is, however, that the economic and political crisis in Puerto Rico goes back a lot further than the devastation wrought by Hurricane Maria. It is about a long history of colonialism and exploitation that gets very little public attention, and which few people on the mainland know much about… I talked about how, over the last five years alone, more than 150 public schools had been shut down, and how the childhood poverty rate had shot up to 57 percent… In 2015, Puerto Rico owed over $70 billion and was paying, in some cases, a 34 percent interest rate on tax-exempt bonds that vulture capitalists purchased at 29 cents on the dollar, P.112”.

Someone once said for the public to know who owns them, politicians should wear jackets brandishing names of their sponsors, like Nascar drivers. It has been prophesied that the final stage of capitalism is monopoly. We witness that in many aspects of the economy, and sadly enough in media. Since the media is to make profit for the owners, and the owners are very few, those owners easily and logically take the side of the wealthy, in order to increase their profit: “To a very significant degree, corporate media sets the terms of our public discourse and what can and cannot be discussed- and what is ‘not important.’ As someone who is a frequent guest on mainstream television, I continue to be amazed by how far removed the corporate media is from the struggles of working families. I also never cease to be surprised by how corporate media intentionally avoids the dynamics of wealth and power that shape our nation… Today, the top on-tenth of 1 percent owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent, but I am never asked about the morality of that grotesque inequality, or how the incredible economic power of the few affects governmental decision making. That type of question is beyond the scope of what mainstream media finds acceptable, P.124”.

We keep hearing about the lowered unemployment rate, and the lowest rate for decades. What is not considered in calculating this unemployment rate is the number of people who have given up looking for a job, and therefore they are dropped from unemployment statistics. By erasing all the benefits any worker could receive in the past three decades, and considering low minimum wage rate, workers have to work two or three part-time jobs in order to afford paying high rent. No one of course cares to answer such questions that Bernie raises: “Meanwhile, tens of millions of families in this country are struggling to keep their heads above water economically and fail to see a reflection of their reality in the mainstream media. Why are so many people working longer hours for lower wages? Why are we the only major country on earth without guaranteed health care for all? Why are so many Americans living in extreme poverty? What is the impact of climate change on our planet? Why do we pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs? P.167”.

When campaigning, Donald Trump promised to stop all the wars. This was of course not the line a candidate should adopt as war is good for the economy and there has to be a perpetual enemy for America in order for the drum of war to be continually played. It did not take Trump long to change his words, as he has been under the scrutiny of Democrats, and he has been pushed to the corner from the first day in the office by his handlers. Under siege, he has learned how to be a good president: “How does it happen that there is almost no debate as to why we have determined that Saudi Arabia is the ‘good guy’ in that area while Iran is the ‘bad guy’? this was the position of the 2016 Democratic candidate for president, Hillary Clinton. This is the position of the Republican president, Donald Trump. Is it the right position? P.184”. Hopefully, Bernie will be our next president, and we should see how he can survive under the pressure of the deep state.

People who have felony, cannot vote in majority of states. What is better than keeping those who may vote for someone who would do something for the underclass and neglected majority in jail: “Today in America, more than 2 million people are in jail, disproportionately black, Latino, and Native Americans. That is a greater number of inmates than in any other country on earth… In the middle of 2016, there were 740,700 inmates in city and county jails. Over 65 percent of these inmates were ‘unconvicted.’ … Because a majority of them could not afford bail and were forced to remain imprisoned as they awaited trial. Nationally, nearly half of felony defenders cannot make bail, and they stay in jail until their case Is heard. The average length of a stay in jail for them is twenty- five days, but people can be held significantly longer awaiting trial, P.195”.

Bernie wraps up his quest in the last chapter by telling us where he thinks we go from here. He talks about his wishes and ideas for a presidential candidate and how he started a platform that sounded strange to many, but after it sunk in, other candidates picked up some of those ideas since they realized that a large majority of people were demanding sanders’ ideas. Then, he asks some basic questions: “Why, in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, do we have a massive level of income and wealth inequality? Why are millions of us forced to work two or three jobs because we earn starvation wages? Why, at a time of record-breaking profits, does the federal minimum wag remain an unlivable $7.25 per hour? Why do we continue to have trade policies that benefit the rich and large corporations at the expense of average workers? P.253”. We should remember these and other questions he has been bringing up and see how many candidates run their campaigns based on them. It is already happening with so many democrats on the left of the party. We will see how Sanders himself will succeed next year. Considering that every president has his own handlers, people who represent the deep state, when candidates move into the White House they have to change many of their ideas as president. Let us remember that from the time Abraham Lincoln was assassinated because of the emancipation, until the terror of JFK, and killing of Malcolm X, followed by Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy two months later, it is daring to ignore the deep state’s demands. The best example is our current president. One should listen to his speeches as a candidate and compare them to what he utters today. Of course everything he has always said have been wrapped in hate and racism, but pre and post White House speeches are sometimes in two opposite directions.