How the Oligarchs Took America

How the Oligarchs Took America

www.globalresearch.ca

How the Oligarchs Took America by Andy Kroll
There is a war underway. I'm not talking about Washington’s bloody misadventures in Afghanistan and Iraq, but a war within our own borders. It’s a war fought on the airwaves, on television and radio and over the Internet, a war of words and images, of half-truth, innuendo, and raging lies. I'm talking about a political war, pitting liberals against conservatives, Democrats against Republicans.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This really explains how bad the inequalities between the wealthiest elite and the rest of America has gotten in the past 3 or 4 decades, and how this is corrupting our political system. Both major parties are owned by this elite, and have near endless amount of money to keep their stranglehold on power. The sheer amount of money increasing in election cycles, now in the billions and increasing each year is destroying our Democracy and insuring the same 2 parties that are both responsible for all the problems get to remain in power. Of course neither of these 2 parties will ever be motivated to end the corrupt policies under this current system, because they know that whenever they get thrown out they will just be back again in a couple years because they are the only other party that wins anything.

People need to realize that there are no rules, laws, it does not say anywhere that we have a "2-party system" this is a sham perpetuated by the elite owned media because it would be too inefficient and hard to buy off more then 2 parties.
These 2 top parties in America are all bad except for a few individuals in each party that stand up to the leadership like the Pauls and Kucinich.

www.globalresearch.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)

Part of the sham you are speaking of is brainwashing Americans to believe we have always lived in a "democracy". When in actuality, we have a "constututional republic". See quotes from Benjamin Franklin for confirmation of that.
But I'll give you one. "Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner."

Secondly, the reason for a "two party system" is not cost, but rather the perpetual tug of war that is believed in by the social evolutionists to eventually get us to where they want us to go by consent. It's called the "dialectic". Hegelian Dialectic, to be specific. If you've never studied it in depth, it will help in understanding that oligarchy you mentioned, and go way beyond that article you linked to.

Following the money is good, and helps to unmask many things. But you must remember that the oligarchy already own anything that needs to be owned for their system to work. Therefore, it costs them little if anything to maintain it. The rest is show.

Money is a scam, a ponzi scheme, and fiat at best. What we call money, is nothing but bank notes. Kind of like an IOU. It's worth whatever they say it's worth.

Just a few thoughts. Good post.

reply to post by Klassified


It is true about the Hegelian Dialectect, I bring it up sometimes but many don't seem to get it. I also use Alex Jones and David Icke's simpler explanations of the system, the false left right paradigm, and Problem, reaction, solution.

Hopefully as events play out more they will start to see it for what it is, they need more examples of it like why it is that way and how it is being done like with all the funding of both parties by the elite. Many unfortunatley don't see the consequences of this.

America used to be a mostly middle class nation where anyone willing to work could advance to the middle class eventually. Now it has turned into one where there is a growing super-elite oligarchy that is trying to push what is left of the middle class into poverty, and keep everyone in the lower classes from ever having hope of advancing.

This quote also explains it.
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
— Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

The levels and depth of the dialectic are not easy to grasp. The concept of problem-reaction-solution is the tip of the iceberg. It's more than just a modus operandi for these folks. It's a belief system, a means to an end. A "Brave New World" if you will. It's hard for people to grasp because it's foreign to the way the average person thinks.

It's hard to see the consequences of something, when you don't realize there's a problem to start with. But I hope you're right, and more people will begin to see the ownership of both sides of the argument. In DC, and elsewhere.

As to the middle class. Industrialization created the middle class. And now de-industrialization is killing it. Of course, you and I know this is intentional.

Good quote by Vladimir BTW.

reply to post by Unilluminist


IMHO the only reasons "America" has been taken over is 1. Lack of testicular fortitude, 2. allowing the numb, the dumb, and those lacking the responsibility of the gun, the privilege to be enfranchised (vote), 3. the process of socialization that facilitates 1 & 2.

It started with "Consent" and will end there should people of "America" ever figure that out.

Originally posted by Unilluminist

America used to be a mostly middle class nation where anyone willing to work could advance to the middle class eventually. Now it has turned into one where there is a growing super-elite oligarchy that is trying to push what is left of the middle class into poverty, and keep everyone in the lower classes from ever having hope of advancing.

Actually, you are partly correct there. It was in the recent past a mostly middle class nation where hard work could advance one the middle class. However, this wasn't always the case.

Back at the turn of the century America came close to being an Oligarchy like you describe. This was during the days of the "Robber Barrons". Really - they are not too much different from the super rich and big businesses of today.

Though shady business practices and a lack of government control they accumulated so much wealth and power that they were basically running the country.

How wealthy and powerful were they? Well one of them (JP Morgan) actually bailed the US government once and then he bailed out Wall Street a few years later!

The Man Who Bailed Out the US and Wall Street: Bailouts in 1895 and in 1907 Changed US Finance

Oddly the economy grew by leaps out bounds during some of this period. It is sometimes called the "Gilded Age". Of course, one of the main problems was that most of the money (and power) was going in the hands of a few.

There were many factors that led to their rise. One of them was the laissez faire method of regulation at the time (There basically wasn't any).

Sometimes the future looks a lot like the past.

reply to post by sakokrap


There is a lot more to it then that, there basically is a lot of treason going on by these oligarchs, they see themselves as citizens of the world and are American in name only, they are part of the global elite. Control of our mainstream media has left our population uninformed, foundations have destroyed our education system dumbing down the population, and all the garbage entertainment and sports keeps the ignorant masses distracted. This kind of stuff doesn't happen by accident, this has been especially happenning over the past century.

reply to post by Frogs


Those robber barons never went away, there scams were being exposed to much by the last of the real journalists of the time so they had to be less blatant about their activities. They bought up all the newspapers, then managed to convince everyone that creating the FED was the best way to keep the rober barons in control when in fact it gave them more control behind the scenes. They had to move slower over the past century and loosen their grip on things which allowed a middle class to develop again while they instead foccused their efforts outside the US.

It has actually gotten worse since then due to globalisation, there is even more loot to go around to support a much larger oligarchy. We still have all the super rich rober baron families of old, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Morgans, Warburgs, etc joined by the newer elites who are also enthusisatic supporters of the NWO like Gates, Buffet, all the internet billionares like the Google founders and others.

reply to post by Unilluminist


When you have there money they can buy mostly anyone. Its amazing how the media will just say anything to rationalise it probably as being good for people.

Its over and you know it, they have the system cooked.

Originally posted by Unilluminist
reply to post by sakokrap

 

There is a lot more to it then that,

While the details can fill volumes of books in series, I think those are all symptoms of those basic problems. Allow me to illustrate with your reply:

This kind of stuff doesn't happen by accident...
...treason going on by these oligarchs...

Great examples of problems arising from a lack of testicular fortitude, imo. You're mention conspiracy: a crime; treason, a capital crime against a body politic. In both examples, if there is no one with the balls to stand up to criminals, it is only logical that they will entrench and set up a syndicate/organization.

In the old west, men were hung dead by the neck for stealing a horse. Result: either tough/fast bandits, or low crime rates. In the new east (district of criminals), men are promoted for shooting a mother in the back of the head while holding a baby (read up on Horiuchi).

So, you're contending that there are criminals running amok, freely committing high crimes punishable by death... so what keep them doing what they're doing? A: lack of testicular fortitude.

Control of our mainstream media has left our population uninformed...
...they are part of the global elite...

These are great examples of allowing the numb, the dumb and those lacking responsibility for gun to vote. We see these examples of the voting public (those same people in the movie Idiocracy btw) hastily dialing the text # for their favorite Dancing With the Stars participant, but have no idea about Senate Report 93-549 admitting the suspension of the Constitution.

Those favorite moments on Jay Walking with Leno- the ones that crack you up and make you wonder wtf these people are- yeah those... those people are voting man.

They too believe the hype, and agree that there is such a thing as "the global elite."

destroyed our education system dumbing down the population,
garbage entertainment and sports keeps the ignorant masses distracted.

Ah... the wonderful process of socialization that keep the machines rolling, the eyes sullen, and the direct-deposit paychecks coming in...

I don't disagree with you that Oligarchs seem to have taken over "America" (forgive me, but even the use of the word "America" illustrates evidence of brainwashing, socialization, and a wholly symbolic Matrix world devoid of a Constitutional foundation). Totally.

But like trying to fix a cough (a symptom) without first fixing the cause... you're just busy spending resource, chasing your own tail, and likely getting a little drugged while at it.

I see a simple problem 1, 2, 3... with a simple solution. Nothing so much as a series of encyclopedias.

reply to post by Unilluminist

There is a lot more to it then that, there basically is a lot of treason going on by these oligarchs.... Control of our mainstream media has left our population uninformed, foundations have destroyed our education system dumbing down the population, .... This kind of stuff doesn't happen by accident, this has been especially happening over the past century.

You are so correct.

Nicole Johnson has a well researched article that starts with the formation of the Committee for Economic Development,(CED) in 1942 and details how the "CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. "

Dick Lamm, former Governor of Colorado continues the theme with Eight Steps To Destroy America with " An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'" The key is a loss of cultural identity. "History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures... Seymour Lipset put it this way: 'The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and [ragedy.' "

This is the one-two punch to America by the traitorous elite aided and abetted by the starry-eyed socialists, progressives and communists. Who bleat about multi-culturalism, the celebration of racial identity and diversity over unity. The Elite first damaged our own culture and then flood the country with foreigners encouraging them to NOT to become "Americans" but to to keep their own culture.

Europe of course is having the same problem - in spades.

reply to post by Frogs

Oddly the economy grew by leaps out bounds during some of this period. It is sometimes called the "Gilded Age". Of course, one of the main problems was that most of the money (and power) was going in the hands of a few.

There is an odd acceptance that the indoctrination, (primarily of public schools), of a leftist distinctly Marxist ideology is erudite and should be counted as knowledge. Too many students simply accept the tripe being shoved down their throats, and very, very, few have the courage or temerity to challenge this "conventional wisdom", and even fewer still seem to lack the clarity of perception to declare "the king is naked!", and even for those few who do, what should be clear is that a distinct and particular ideology has been touted by academia as king. Consider the perception that The Gilded Age was an era where only a few elite amassed wealth while the rest of the American public, i.e. labor, suffered in squalor and poverty.

However, even the article in Wikipedia, (a site that tends to embrace the "conventional wisdom"), has this to say about The Gilded Age:

The Gilded Age is most famous for the creation of a modern industrial economy. During the 1870s and 1880s, the U.S. economy grew at the fastest rate in its history, with real wages, wealth, GDP, and capital formation all increasing rapidly. A national transportation and communication network was created, the corporation became the dominant form of business organization, and a managerial revolution transformed business operations. By the beginning of the 20th century, per capita income and industrial production in the United States led the world.

Consider what Ballard C. Campbell writes in OAH Magazine of History, Vol. 13, No. 4, The Gilded Age (Summer, 1999), pp. 16-20, in an article titled; Understanding Economic Change in the Gilded Age:

"Students tend to dichotomize Gilded Age Society into a few fabulously wealthy industrialists and a mass of impoverished workers-a distorted image probably due in part to

"The Gilded Age conjures up images of "robber barons", corrupt politicians, and laissez faire government, and this is the second obstacle to learning Gilded Age economics. The stereotypes contain elements of truth, of course. Bold entrepreneurs did accumulate great fortunes, and politicians did cooperate with business people to block regulations. Yet historians can no longer let Charles Beard and Matthew Josephson monopolize the economic story of the era. Several generations of scholars have demonstrated that the plot was far more complex than these early "progressive" historians indicated. Nonetheless, the "robber barons" motif remains an entrenched stereotype about the period."

the periods nickname. While students have the general sense that the United States today is among the richest nations in the world, few know that the standard of living improved substantially for many Americans during the Gilded Age. Nor are they usually aware that the United States out produced all other nations on a per capita basis and in aggregate totals by the end of the nineteenth century."

www.jstor.org...

Campbell continues with:

"The Gilded Age conjures up images of "robber barons", corrupt politicians, and laissez faire government, and this is the second obstacle to learning Gilded Age economics. The stereotypes contain elements of truth, of course. Bold entrepreneurs did accumulate great fortunes, and politicians did cooperate with business people to block regulations. Yet historians can no longer let Charles Beard and Matthew Josephson monopolize the economic story of the era. Several generations of scholars have demonstrated that the plot was far more complex than these early "progressive" historians indicated. Nonetheless, the "robber barons" motif remains an entrenched stereotype about the period."

The entrenchment that Campbell speaks of is a particular cultural, political and economic bias that grossly simplifies the reality of the Gilded Age. Further, the political involvement of the average American was for more engaged and active than it is today, and while National Geographic, in 2008, correctly predicted that the voter turnout would be at its highest since 1908, during the Gilded Age voter turnout was trending towards 70 to 80%:

Voters turned out in record numbers for each presidential election in the late nineteenth century, with voter turnout sometimes reaching 80 percent or greater. The intensity of the elections also helps explain why Congress passed so little significant legislation after the Reconstruction era: control of the House of Representatives constantly changed hands between the Democrats and the Republicans with each election, making a consensus on any major issue nearly impossible.

www.sparknotes.com...

Or, consider what Worth Robert Miller has to say on the subject in his article for The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan., 2002), pp. 49-67: The Lost World of Gilded Age Politics:

"Despite its superficial similarities with politics today-sex scandals, corporate influence, and partisan gridlock in Washington-the spirit and substance of Gilded Age politics was quite different from political discourse today. Politics was a national obsession to nineteenth century Americans. Partisanship was open and vigorous because common people believed the issues were important and political parties represented divergent viewpoints. Men, (and in a few places women), of every ethnic and racial background, and from every walk of life, overwhelmingly participated in America's democratic experiment."

www.jstor.org...

The actual historical significance of the Gilded Age is not as simple minded as a "worker-capitalist" dichotomy, nor are the issues we face today as simple minded as this as well.

I would argue the Oligarchs never took Amercia.

They founded this nation. A republic modeled on ancient Rome.
They set us on the path of Manifest Destiny.
They led us to conquer half of Mexico and stretch the nation from sea to shining sea.
They broke the backs of the plantation barons, industrialized the nation and consolidated federal authority.
They established the Continental Railroad and Telegraph lines.
They led us to victory against the Spanish Empire.
They manipulated the winners and losers of the Great War in our favor.
They brought America out of the Great Depression and World War 2 as a global empire.
They manipulated the USSR until it imploded, leaving us as a hyperpower.
They gave us the UN, NATO, the IMF, the Information Age, the Nuclear Age, the Pax Americana.

There are a gifted few from many of the leaders of the Amercian Revolution, to Cabot, Forbes, Astor, Clay Rockefeller, Hearst, Carnegie, Ford, Du Pont, Vanderbilt, Warburg, Morgan, etc.

Like the Roman Republic before, these are people who are essentially of the Ordo Senatorius. The Oligarchs, like the Roman Senators, have guided the Republic from the first shot fired in the Revolution to present day.

If it were not for them we would still be a dominion of the British Commonwealth, a subject of the British Crown or even a subject of the Papacy.

The issue in the Republic is the status, ignorance and happiness of the Plebeians.

The ignorance isn't without cause, primarily the public mythology taught about our nation's history. Much of it is about as true as Paul Bunyan. Americans on all sides fail to understand propaganda when they hear or read it. They assume various myths and legends are truth. The point of these stories is to give one a sense of pride, honor, and make better citizens. A problem arises when the Plebeians mistake myth with truth and make demands. Another problem is that Plebs would for the most part never embrace the truth.

In the actual world, the US Constitution was being subverted as soon as it was ratified. Its more or less served as a evolving guideline for politicians and judicial activists.

It has never existed in some form as if it was the immutable Law of Moses. That is pure myth and legend.

If anyone "took" America, it was those who turned the myths and legends of old into religion, brainwashing the people with libertarian and democratic utopian fantasies.

Make no mistake, the people who guide this country are not united in ideology, philosophy, or vision. This isn't what people would call "The Illuminati" or "NWO". There is conflict, factionalism, egos and fragmentation. There isn't any single secret council or club that determines the fate of the nation. Its far far more complex and chaotic than that.

reply to post by andy1033


Its never over, history shows corrupt empires and regimes always collapse. We just have to make sure it isn't so messy and there are more pieces to pick up when this one does.

reply to post by MikeboydUS

You make some good points here. And I'm content to leave them as is. But I would say that although there may be some amount of division among the rank and file politicians, An Oligarchy doesn't become such, if they can't agree on an end game, and how to get there. So at the top of the pyramid, there is no division.

reply to post by Klassified


Even among the Triumvirate of Rome, there was division.

Today's oligarchs are no different.

The human ego prevents alpha members of the species from any sort of herd mentality.

The only hive or herd minds, aka mobs, are among the peasants and workers. Especially when they loot and riot.

At least this has been the case throughout human history.

reply to post by sakokrap


Well we do have to do something, and there still are not enough of us awake, yet, all we can do is try to get better informed and to help others get informed for now.

I liken the scenario to a home invasion.

A group of armed men come crashing through your door as you're hammering away another reply on your keyboard while at ATS. They catch you by surprise, tie you up, and begin to search your belongings. You're cooperative, and they allow you to walk around and show them where you keep your stuff.

You get slapped around a little bit, but see these guys as opportunists and thieves, not as murderers so you cooperate, hoping to live through the night.

You're so cooperative that they decide to eat a meal. They open up your fridge and pull out their choices, have you cook it all up while drinking beer and watching a football game in your living room.

Now, we can use a flashback to reveal how they scoped out your house, surveilled your comings and goings, which one of them went to the store to buy the ammunition, ski masks and anonymous cell phones...

... but all of that isn't going to change the story... is it? Certainly, we can weave a tale of immense detail. To do so, while you're a captive at their mercy is evidence of cowardice. Your brain understands the facts: You are captive to an armed and dangerous criminal element, and they may well kill you if you stand up to them.

If crimes have been committed, then the response is very simple. Very logical. Very moral.

Convene the Juries
Try the Traitors
HANG the guilty.

Just takes a little bit of balls for a DA, for a Grand Jury, for a people to divest themselves from cognitive dissonance and address the horror of what has happened. To remove the Home Invaders without punishment, is to do so without the highest moral virtue: Justice.

reply to post by MikeboydUS

....Make no mistake, the people who guide this country are not united in ideology, philosophy, or vision. This isn't what people would call "The Illuminati" or "NWO". There is conflict, factionalism, egos and fragmentation. There isn't any single secret council or club that determines the fate of the nation. Its far far more complex and chaotic than that.....

Actually I think Dan Estulin's description probably comes the closest.

Bilderberg organization is dynamic, in that it changes with the times, absorbs and creates new parts while excreting the remains of the decaying parts. Members come and go, but the system itself has not changed. It is a self-perpetuating system, a virtual spider web of interlocked financial, political, economic and industry interests.

Now, Bilderberg isn´t a secret society. It is not an evil, all-seeing eye. There is no conspiracy even though a lot of people with their infantile fantasies see it as such. No group of people, and I don’t care how powerful they are, sit around the table in dark room, holding hands, staring at a crystal ball, planning the world´s future.

It´s a meeting of people who represent a certain ideology.

Not One World Government or New World Order as too many people mistakenly believe. Rather, the ideology is of a ONE WORLD COMPANY LIMITED....
publicintelligence.net...

It is stupid to deny the desire of some men to try to control the world. It is stupid to deny the fact that powerful families form dynasties that can exert control over more than one life time. And it is stupid to ignore the fact that men will band together to accomplish a common goal. The accumulation of power and wealth being the most common.

As I mentioned above the CED has functioned with single-minded purpose for over a half a century, since 1944, to accomplish its goal of destroying the independent farmer both here in the USA and world wide.

It is down right STUPID to think these people are not capable of long range planning and execution of said plans.