The Elements of Oppression

reply to post by Radekus


I agree with a lot of what you state as well. That is why I stated

The important thing for our children to know is not to believe something just because the teacher tells them, research subjects and form their own opinion become a nation of free thinkers again

As far as not everyone wanting to achieve these higher levels of education I agree that is why we have colleges we pay for to specialize in a particular field. Setting a standard of intellect for a children is important even if they do believe they will not need it is not the point. By education the people TPTB empower the people and they do not want that. By allowing they to control what they teach our kids we are allowing them to be brainwashed. I have been homeschooling my child and my nephew for four years not (ages 5 and 7) my kid reads at the so called fifth grade level and does double digit addition and subtraction and my nephew is already getting in to the algebra on Kahn. I am not stating this to brag but to point out that any child is capable of advanced learning in the right atmosphere and provided with the correct methods of learning curiosity being the key. I have never felt trusting your child's education to people with an agenda whatever it may be. Encourage your children to ask the question Why? about everything and encourage them to learn on their own because that is the only way to learn the truth.

P.S. this discussion is really reminding me why I chose to take teaching my kids in to my own hands. People who say they have no time to do it my to guys do one hour in the morning and two hours at night on the days I work and two different two hours periods on my days off. They decide what they what to work on as long as the put in equal time in all subjects. I only instruct math, science and history because I feel that you learn you language skills reading about those subjects just as well and will write plenty about those subjects as well. Later on I will probably work on grammar, punctuation, ect. later on within their papers they will write.

Originally posted by Radekus

Originally posted by kro32

I understand the op point and I respect his view however I am debating his assumption that there is someone or some group who have a well thought out plan of action to oppress the American people which from my reading is the intent of his post. If i'm wrong than I have misread or misunderstood.

I believe there is no proof of grand schemes underway and although there are plenty of bad decisions made it does not mean that people are out to get you. People, as is the case here I believe, focus on all the negative and overlook any positive.

This is the point I'm debating. So it stands to reason that anyone who know's of schemes to oppress the people must also know who is behind it.

There definitely is a scheme in place, just look at the one sided aspect of education and mass media .
The Scheme is the spread of Liberal and Neo-Liberal theories and incorporating them as absolute truths in the post modern world. The reason for this is profit and power, pure and simple.

I've been through the public education system and going on my 9th year of college and I can say from experience there is no one-sided aspect of education. I have professors that are democratic and republican in their teaching along with christians and aethists and they all spew their point of view as if it's the only one.

I would argue that there is actually a lack of any cohesion in their teachings whatsoever as some praise things while others criticize them. There is certainly no majority of liberal theories and alot of professors simply lay out their lessons and let you judge for yourself.

This thread did not get the response I expected it to. I'm kind of disappointed in you guys.

I'm not impressed by your list & even find some of the ones listed as stereotypical "right wing bigotry"

If I were to add one, it would be the "Religiously Focused Nanny State", that makes being an adult impossible. No one is accountable for their own actions and we need our lives to be protected at any cost.

"You better wear your seat belt, or we'll fine the hell out of you.. because we care soooo much about you!"

Let us live, watch porn, drink liquor, do drugs - whatever we want. It's our lives, and "souls" so don't do me any favors.

I love how our lives are so "valuable" and life is so "precious", but there's always an "acceptable mortality rate" & we're always sending poor folks off to wars to die. It's so hypocritical in my opinion. Choose one or the other, don't use them both to your advantage.

reply to post by jessejamesxx


There are plenty of folks who go off to war who are not poor and we don't "send" them they volunteer.

Your generalizations are unbecoming.

reply to post by kro32


That's what you took from my whole post? Yes, it's a generalization. And yes, poor folks, (less than average income bracket) are the majority of who goes to die in war. Not to mention, the young guys that go to war are fresh out of school, without a career or job (I think 18 without a set career or money in the bank qualifies you for 'poor folk'), and yes, "send" might not be the greatest word, maybe "bribed" or "enticed with money/schooling etc" might work better.

You can argue semantics all you want, but I'm done - especially if you're going to troll me and ignore the entirety of my post. Thanks.

Originally posted by kro32

I've been through the public education system and going on my 9th year of college and I can say from experience there is no one-sided aspect of education. I have professors that are democratic and republican in their teaching along with christians and aethists and they all spew their point of view as if it's the only one.

Both republican and liberal politicians are Neo-Liberal in nature. Do you hear any of them praise protectionism or fair trade? What about your teachers? No, just open borders, free trade and the like. As for religion, it has nothing to do with Liberalism or Neo-Liberalism. What you are seeing in school are small debates and disagreements within the same dominant ideology.

Originally posted by jessejamesxx
This thread did not get the response I expected it to. I'm kind of disappointed in you guys.

I'm not impressed by your list & even find some of the ones listed as stereotypical "right wing bigotry"

So... care to argue your liberal point of view?

If I were to add one, it would be the "Religiously Focused Nanny State", that makes being an adult impossible. No one is accountable for their own actions and we need our lives to be protected at any cost.

"You better wear your seat belt, or we'll fine the hell out of you.. because we care soooo much about you!"

The nannyisms are just a pretext to tax you even more, someone has to pay for all those wars, besides, it's not like the money is going into infrastructure maintenance.

Let us live, watch porn, drink liquor, do drugs - whatever we want. It's our lives, and "souls" so don't do me any favors.

What favors are you talking about? "looks around"
AngryOne, did you offer him any favors?

I love how our lives are so "valuable" and life is so "precious", but there's always an "acceptable mortality rate" & we're always sending poor folks off to wars to die. It's so hypocritical in my opinion. Choose one or the other, don't use them both to your advantage.

Sounds like you just went on a tangent there rambling about liberal propaganda that is being used to justify your over taxation and over regulation, I share your point of view.

Yea, what you're demonstrating there is the paradox of Capitalism, Democrats are supposed to represent the liberal side of the Capitalist system, Republicans the Neo-Liberal side, both work together to keep you being a dependent and obedient worker and consumer. I'm really impressed at how they also use liberalism to hijack the socialist and communist movements, but that's another topic...

reply to post by AngryOne


Ill add to your list of the elements of oppression.

A STUPID APATHETIC POPULACE

Who actually arent oppressed, they beg people to "keep them safe" by removing their freedoms.

Originally posted by jessejamesxx Yes, it's a generalization. And yes, poor folks, (less than average income bracket) are the majority of who goes to die in war. Not to mention, the young guys that go to war are fresh out of school, without a career or job (I think 18 without a set career or money in the bank qualifies you for 'poor folk'), and yes, "send" might not be the greatest word, maybe "bribed" or "enticed with money/schooling etc" might work better.

You can argue semantics all you want, but I'm done - especially if you're going to troll me and ignore the entirety of my post. Thanks.

WOW! I have to say that you are almost 100% inicorrect in your assessment of who joins the Military and thier socio-ecomomic status.

W ho Bears the Burden? Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Recruits Before and After 9/11

According to this study Published on November 7, 2005 by Tim Kane, Ph.D. indicates that on average people who chose to join the all volenteer military are generally from the middle class and more educated than society at large.

It is clear to me that you have about zero clue what the military is about. Read the study and learn some facts...

Flipping goddamned hell, I must say that I'm really disappointed with the outcome of this thread. Then again, the OP is very "all over the place" by nature, thus making it kind of difficult to develop a particularly focused discussion. Admittedly, I was on the fence for a little while about whether or not I should even post it. But I just had to. These things must be said.

Materialsm and consumerism need to be noted.

As do a number of unexamined or rarely examined social norms.

Originally posted by Radekus
So... care to argue your liberal point of view?

I just think that quite a few of the listed items aren't tools of oppression, is all. I will also point out the biased nonsense that I first noticed in this thread.

Multiculturalism - While yes, they use race to divide and conquer, multiculturalism isn't the problem - it's instigated racism. What is the alternative to multiculturalism? Segregation? Mass deportation? Semantics, I know, but that's where I got confused.

Porn - Freedom of speech and expression for adults. Hardcore pornography is underground and out of view of the MSM for the most part. If it were a tool of oppression I think you would see it more often - when you're not specifically looking for it.

Abortion - Freedom to choose & freedom over our bodies. Children are a huge cause for continued poverty, and if anything, the need to breed and have a litter of children is a tool of oppression. A lot of religions want their followers to multiply quickly. If you can't convert people, hell, they'll have a new batch of tythers in 20 years this way. This isn't the 1800's where if you have a bunch of kids, they'll end up running the farm for you. Now a days, kids cost more than $250,000 and a lot of people can't afford them.

Psychology - I don't agree with this, and I don't agree with the following comment. Refer to the conservatively biased comment.

This includes an apparent ongoing attempt to normalize sexual perversion, particularly.......you know, I really don't want to get into that (not now, at least).

Taxation - while I agree that taxes are a tool of oppression, I don't agree with the wording of the following.

"Work your 40 hours a week, citizen - and then pay up! You've got ghetto trash to support and Zionist wars to fund!" Really, need I say more?

To add to your list:
The war on drugs - Doctors prescribe legal drugs all day long that are more harmful than some illegal drugs. Some illegal drugs have the potential to expand your mind and make you think about things from a different perspective. The ones that are legal, for the most part, shut you up and slow you down.

reply to post by jessejamesxx

Multiculturalism: Indeed, this is the problem. Just look around, man.

Porn: Forced on society in more ways than one; the fact that you don't see it everywhere you look is not relevant.

Abortion: Good lord, come on. Stop playing dumb.

Psychology: I stand by this one as well. Just think about it. And just what is the problem with the quote in question?

Taxation: Again, what's the problem with the quote, exactly?

reply to post by Radekus


Again, you have only stated more ways that we are inundated with control from the "elite" or those with more money than us. I agree with all of your statements about the church. I too was raised Roman Catholic and know better than most the power that religion holds over people. But the motive is still lacking. Some say it's for the purpose of power and money and control. But all of those things come with a HUGE price. Look at the state of the world's economy. Now all those mind controlled sheep will be jumping the fence. No matter how much preaching, drugging, social reformation, cultural expectaions are placed the people will not conform when faced with hunger, poverty, deprivation, fear, depression, and ultimately hate... I guess I am overly pessimistic about the state of the world but can you blame me?

Originally posted by wildoracle13
reply to post by Radekus

 

Again, you have only stated more ways that we are inundated with control from the "elite" or those with more money than us. I agree with all of your statements about the church. I too was raised Roman Catholic and know better than most the power that religion holds over people. But the motive is still lacking. Some say it's for the purpose of power and money and control. But all of those things come with a HUGE price. Look at the state of the world's economy. Now all those mind controlled sheep will be jumping the fence. No matter how much preaching, drugging, social reformation, cultural expectaions are placed the people will not conform when faced with hunger, poverty, deprivation, fear, depression, and ultimately hate... I guess I am overly pessimistic about the state of the world but can you blame me?

You seem to be unable to accept the fact that humans are inherently selfish.
Furthermore, that they know fully consciously the end effects of their direct or indirect actions.
Most people are driven by the idea of comfort, stability, others seek power and domination,
they don't care who gets the short end of the stick, locally or across the ocean.
Besides, the super rich in control have a multitude of personal philosophies that also
directly impact the choices that they make, they overly use justification;
The means justify the end kind of mentality.

What you have there is a conglomeration of multiple philosophies,
most based off of a deluded life perspective that only a very wealthy existence can provide.
I'd go on to say that they have a very schitzoid and self centered approach to life,
most probably because they have "knowledge" most people don't have,
this makes them feel superior, better, morally righteous, whatever.
You seem to believe that people are inherently decent, unfortunately that is not the case.
If I can't convince you, then there's always the belief that aliens run the whole show.

Originally posted by Partygirl
Materialsm and consumerism need to be noted.

As do a number of unexamined or rarely examined social norms.

Materialism and consumerism aren't the problem, without circus the plebs would revolt after all
The problem is that markets aren't properly regulated, as you can imagine,
market regulation is the total opposite of Neo-Liberalism.

Unexamined and rarely examined social norms should be viewed,
the problem with them is that in order to get a proper conclusion one would have to perform
sociological experimentation in controlled environments, this is the only method by which
one can ascertain the best process that suits society in a positive manner,
in other words, the creation of better cultural norms. As you can imagine you'd have
the Ethic's commission in uproar, along with a tactical unit burning down the village
you'd perform the experiment in, Waco style, under pretext of disbanding a harmful cult.
So, in the end, unless you're running a totalitarian regime with the military might of China
(to protect you from your own people as well as from the rest of the world),
you will not be able to perform these experiments,
and hence, never fully grasp the truest cultural normalization.
So in a sense, you're stuck discussing point of view at this point between the dominant culture
and individualistic perspectives, guess who wins out in the end?

Originally posted by jessejamesxx

I just think that quite a few of the listed items aren't tools of oppression, is all.

They are a representation of Capitalist culture, in other words, the dominant ideology,
in other words, the owners of modes of production. So yes, in Marxist terminology,
these are methods of oppression.
By the way, unknown to most people, Marx was primarily a Sociologist.

I will also point out the biased nonsense that I first noticed in this thread.

Multiculturalism - While yes, they use race to divide and conquer, multiculturalism isn't the problem - it's instigated racism. What is the alternative to multiculturalism? Segregation? Mass deportation? Semantics, I know, but that's where I got confused.

I agree with your reasoning in the sense that the OP didn't address the aspect of multiculturalism in a
sufficient fashion.

There is no problem with multiculturalism beyond the fact that people
from different background will tend to group together, this can cause social tensions.
Keep in mind that locals will always view immigrants as trespassers and
regard them with caution, sometimes even blaming them when hard
economic times arise. It's just how it is.
Only after a few generations will the descendants
begin to intermix with locals and adapt to the dominant culture.

The problem here is rampant immigration, not multiculturalism. If immigration is based on a
format where the locals are a majority, the minorities will eventually integrate,
of course social awareness and tolerance would have to be instituted
as to prevent prejudice and violence between the two. Once integration occurs,
there is no more social tension. Now, the issue here is rampant immigration,
what this does is create multiple dominant cultures within one country,
if you want a recipe for disaster in the form of Yugoslavia you got it.

Porn - Freedom of speech and expression for adults. Hardcore pornography is underground and out of view of the MSM for the most part. If it were a tool of oppression I think you would see it more often - when you're not specifically looking for it.

Again, the issue here is not necessarily pornography per say,
I would rather call it sexualization of society.
I find it hilarious when I looked in the newspaper the other day,
the top of the page had hot bikini models
with provocative poses while looking sexy towards the camera,
on the bottom of the page you had an article,
it went along the lines of wondering why there were more
and more perverts and rapists in society.
If you want an oxymoron you got one.
This is the type of subliminal garbage I'm talking about.
Lest we not forget MTV, sexual tolerance, sexual parades and art,
sexualized advertisements and the like,
couple this with a sociological trend of society of developing more
and more Anomie and you have what you have.
People who are limited by society's paradoxical messages will end up going crazy.
They develop serious interpersonal problems, not to mention weird sexual fetishes.
Hence the hardcore pornography, and other types,
only serve as a consequence to what I have just described.
Pornography exists to capitalize on society's needs, which in this case is loneliness,
not lack of sex as most people are led to believe by mass media.

To all reading this: Feel free to look up certain terms I'm using on Wikipedia,
don't be shy to acquire knowledge and understanding of the things I speak about.

Abortion - Freedom to choose & freedom over our bodies. Children are a huge cause for continued poverty, and if anything, the need to breed and have a litter of children is a tool of oppression. A lot of religions want their followers to multiply quickly. If you can't convert people, hell, they'll have a new batch of tythers in 20 years this way. This isn't the 1800's where if you have a bunch of kids, they'll end up running the farm for you. Now a days, kids cost more than $250,000 and a lot of people can't afford them.

Yet another example of why I stay off the abortion topic, in modern world one cannot be
judgmental of someone's decisions, there are reasons for undertaken actions,
what you have stated is but one.
I don't want to go into the socio-economic aspect of it, you did a fine job in a short paragraph.

Taxation - while I agree that taxes are a tool of oppression, I don't agree with the wording of the following.

"Work your 40 hours a week, citizen - and then pay up! You've got ghetto trash to support and Zionist wars to fund!" Really, need I say more?

The issue is more complex than blaming Izrael for everything,
if given the chance to get rid of this "problem" another scapegoat would arise.
One must look at, and understand, the whole, not the parts.

To add to your list:
The war on drugs - Doctors prescribe legal drugs all day long that are more harmful than some illegal drugs. Some illegal drugs have the potential to expand your mind and make you think about things from a different perspective. The ones that are legal, for the most part, shut you up and slow you down.

... I met a handful of junkies, they're not doing so well...
Every see a recovering meth addict in University? I haven't.
The only drug I would legalize is cannabis, everything else would remain illegal.
Of course, natural supplements would have to be implemented, if you are referring
to hallucinogenics, such as '___' since it is naturally produced by your brain while you sleep.
It's what causes you to dream. No, you're not leaving your body via astral projection
and experiencing other plains of existence, you're tripping on drugs.
The ability to astral project is the ability to consciously trip on '___', nothing more.
I won't continue on this topic since it's against the rules.
As for big pharma companies shoving pills down people's throats, I'm in agreement,
half the time the pills don't pass any proper testing before being shipped unto the market.
Pills won't solve societal problems, society needs to change itself, only then will the problems stop.

They are a representation of Capitalist culture, in other words, the dominant ideology,
in other words, the owners of modes of production. So yes, in Marxist terminology,
these are methods of oppression.
By the way, unknown to most people, Marx was primarily a Sociologist.

–verb (used with object)
1. to burden with cruel or unjust impositions or restraints; subject to a burdensome or harsh exercise of authority or power: a people oppressed by totalitarianism.
2. to lie heavily upon (the mind, a person, etc.): Care and sorrow oppressed them.
3. to weigh down, as sleep or weariness does.

The funny thing about "oppression" is that it can be used in different ways, based on perspective. I do understand what you're saying, it just has less affect on me than the first version of the definition.

Again, the issue here is not necessarily pornography per say,
I would rather call it sexualization of society.
I find it hilarious when I looked in the newspaper the other day,
the top of the page had hot bikini models
with provocative poses while looking sexy towards the camera,
on the bottom of the page you had an article,
it went along the lines of wondering why there were more
and more perverts and rapists in society.
If you want an oxymoron you got one.
This is the type of subliminal garbage I'm talking about.
Lest we not forget MTV, sexual tolerance, sexual parades and art,
sexualized advertisements and the like,
couple this with a sociological trend of society of developing more
and more Anomie and you have what you have.
People who are limited by society's paradoxical messages will end up going crazy.
They develop serious interpersonal problems, not to mention weird sexual fetishes.
Hence the hardcore pornography, and other types,
only serve as a consequence to what I have just described.
Pornography exists to capitalize on society's needs, which in this case is loneliness,
not lack of sex as most people are led to believe by mass media.

To all reading this: Feel free to look up certain terms I'm using on Wikipedia,
don't be shy to acquire knowledge and understanding of the things I speak about.

I think the problem with sexuality in this country, is that it's demonized, suppressed, and appears to be the 'forbidden fruit'. There are countries that have topless girls on TV all day long. There are countries where nudity is just natural. Are statistics of sexual predators/sexual fetishes higher there than in America? I wouldn't think so.

If you want to know a true method of oppression, talk to a priest...or better yet, talk to a husband that is forced to wear a chastity belt (they exist). The lack of release (for the lack of better words), makes you completely docile.

Yet another example of why I stay off the abortion topic, in modern world one cannot be
judgmental of someone's decisions, there are reasons for undertaken actions,
what you have stated is but one.
I don't want to go into the socio-economic aspect of it, you did a fine job in a short paragraph.

I'm glad that we seem to agree on a lot of things.

The issue is more complex than blaming Izrael for everything,
if given the chance to get rid of this "problem" another scapegoat would arise.
One must look at, and understand, the whole, not the parts.

I was hinting at the 'ghetto trash' comment. On a different note: "We don't want to help pay for the ghetto trash when they're born.. but I'll be damned if you can legally stop the pregnancy!"

... I met a handful of junkies, they're not doing so well...
Every see a recovering meth addict in University? I haven't.
The only drug I would legalize is cannabis, everything else would remain illegal.
Of course, natural supplements would have to be implemented, if you are referring
to hallucinogenics, such as '___' since it is naturally produced by your brain while you sleep.
It's what causes you to dream. No, you're not leaving your body via astral projection
and experiencing other plains of existence, you're tripping on drugs.
The ability to astral project is the ability to consciously trip on '___', nothing more.
I won't continue on this topic since it's against the rules.
As for big pharma companies shoving pills down people's throats, I'm in agreement,
half the time the pills don't pass any proper testing before being shipped unto the market.
Pills won't solve societal problems, society needs to change itself, only then will the problems stop.

The war on drugs is the definition of oppression. Many people have been killed for smoking weed, or selling it. Cops bust in, and start firing.. often. I'm not advocating Meth or any drugs, but I'm also not advocating that the government can take your money or life, because they caught you using them. How does that even equate? "I found out you were using a mind altering substance in your own house.. that will be $10,000 please" I don't get it, really.

Remember all of the CIA involvement in coc aine and crack? What about the ATF and those guns? What about all of those banks that made it through the crisis by funding cartels with billions upon billions? They're running both sides of the show, and taking money on both sides.

Your original post reads like a manifesto of the far right.

reply to post by kro32

I understand the op point and I respect his view however I am debating his assumption that there is someone or some group who have a well thought out plan of action to oppress the American people which from my reading is the intent of his post. If i'm wrong than I have misread or misunderstood. I believe there is no proof of grand schemes underway....

Oh there is PLENTY of proof.

Henry Kissinger, in 1970 he said: "Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people."

If you want just one well researched article showing "a well thought out plan of action to oppress the American people" I suggest you read History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job By Nicole Johnson. www.opednews.com...

The END GAME for US farmers:
www.examiner.com...
www.activistpost.com...
www.forbes.com...

Collaborating articles are:
Shielding the Giants It is a MUST READ detailing the history of the cover-up of food borne diseases caused by the big corporations. www.whistleblower.org...

Senate Hearings
www.access.gpo.gov... Testimony by Mr. Stan Painter, Chairman, National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals:

www.fsis.usda.gov... Hearing where Stan Painter is called a LIAR by the government. (In a round about way of course)

WTO's agreement on Ag was ratified in 1995. The new INTERNATIONAL HACCP program was adopted in 1996 and by 1998 the incidence of food borne illness (CDC statistics) TRIPLED!

...As a result, the [food]inspector was no longer responsible for what was happening on the plant floor: that was left to company personnel. The new role of the inspector was to make sure that plant personnel were carrying out their duties in a manner consistent with the HACCP plan. [1996] In many cases this amounted to making sure that all of the paper work was in the proper order....” www.agpolicy.org...

Here is the cause of the food riots/starvation – POLITICS!

#1. 1995 Clinton appoints the VP of Cargill, Dan Amstutz as senior trade delegate. Amstutz writes the World Trade Organization Agreement on Ag. It got rid of tariffs protecting farmers and opened borders.

#2. Amstutz writes 1996 farm bill called Freedom to Farm (Freedom to Fail Act) that over produces very cheap grain. The law also change US grain reserve policy.

#3. Amstutz goes to work for Goldman Sachs.

#4. Gramm, head of the CFTC, helped firms such as Goldman Sachs gain influence over the commodity markets. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly. Wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent.

“....Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it “a silent mass murder”, entirely due to “man-made actions.” Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into “derivatives” that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in “food speculation” was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof....” www.independent.co.uk...

#5. In 2008 Monsanto and Cargill report record breaking profits. USDA reports “The cupboard is bare” we have no more grain reserves.

“...Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Bunge control the world’s grain trade. Chemical giant Monsanto controls three-fifths of seed production. Unsurprisingly, in the last quarter of 2007, even as the world food crisis was breaking, Archer Daniels Midland’s profits jumped 20%, Monsanto 45%, and Cargill 60%. Recent speculation with food commodities has created another dangerous “boom.” After buying up grains and grain futures, traders are hoarding, withholding stocks and further inflating prices....” www.globalissues.org...

In 2010 : Fmr. President Clinton Apologizes for Trade Policies that Destroyed Haitian Rice Farming – “We Made a Devil’s Bargain”

“...President Bill Clinton, now the UN Special Envoy to Haiti, publicly apologized last month for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported, subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient....” www.democracynow.org...

From Clinton's Mea Clupa, it is obvious that what was done was INTENTIONAL and he KNEW IT!

One of the most influential in creating the WTO is a little-publicized organization called the IPC-- the International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council, shortened to International Policy Council.

The IPC Chairman is Robert Thompson, former Assistant Secretary US Department of Agriculture and former Presidential economic adviser. Also included in the IPC are Bernard Auxenfans, Chief Operating Officer, Monsanto Global Agricultural Company and Past Chairman of Monsanto Europe S.A.; Allen Andreas of ADM/Toepfer; Andrew Burke of Bunge (US); Dale Hathaway former USDA official and head IFPRI (US).

Other IPC members include Heinz Imhof, chairman of Syngenta (CH); Rob Johnson of Cargill and USDA Agriculture Policy Advisory Council; Franz Fischler Former Commissioner for Agriculture, European Commission; Guy Legras (France) former EU Director General Agriculture; Donald Nelson of Kraft Foods (US); Joe O’Mara of USDA, Hiroshi Shiraiwa of Mitsui & Co Japan; Jim Starkey former Assistant US Trade Representative; Hans Joehr, Nestle’s head of agriculture; Jerry Steiner of Monsanto (US). Members Emeritus include Ann Veneman, former Bush Administration Secretary of Agriculture and former board member of Calgene, creator of the Flavr Savr genetically-modified tomato.

The IPC is controlled by US-based agribusiness giants which benefit from the rules they drafted for WTO trade. In Washington itself, the USDA no longer represents interests of small family farmers. It is the lobby of giant global agribusiness. The USDA is a revolving door for these private agribusiness giants to shape friendly policies. GMO policy is the most blatant example. www.globalresearch.ca...

And the Linch Pin that holds the whole "PLOT" together:

Dwayne Andreas worked for Cargill and then worked for Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADMC) becoming CEO in 1971. He is considered the TOP campaign donor in the USA.

“...Dwayne Orville Andreas (born 4 March 1918) is one of the most prominent political campaign donors[1] in the United States, having contributed millions of dollars to Democratic and Republican candidates alike....

In 1971 Andreas became Chief Executive Officer of ADM, and is credited with transforming the firm into an industrial powerhouse — so powerful that by 1996, ADM had been investigated for price-fixing and was assessed the largest antitrust fine in United States history: 100 million dollars....

Andreas commands much respect among Washington politicians for his largesse. As part of the investigations surrounding illegal campaign fundraising linked to the Watergate scandal, Andreas was charged with (but acquitted of) illegally contributing $100,000 to Hubert Humphrey's 1968 presidential campaign. In 1972 Andreas unlawfully contributed $25,000 to President Nixon's re-election campaign via Watergate burglar Bernard Barker. Other recipients of Andreas's "tithing" — as he puts it — have included George H. W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Michael Dukakis, Jesse Jackson, and Jack Kemp.


According to Mother Jones magazine:

“ During the 1992 election, Andreas gave more than $1.4 million in soft money and $345,000 to individual candidates, using multiple donors in his company and family members (including wife Inez) to circumvent contribution limits.”

Not all of Andreas's charity goes directly to politicians: in the 1990s he contributed $2.5 million to Florida public broadcasting network WXEL.....” en.wikipedia.org...

Interesting that it was two Florida Journalists who got their behinds handed to them for supporting independent farmers during the "Farm Wars" www.all-natural.com...

OTHER READING - International

smirkingchimp.com...
www.smirkingchimp.com...
www.smirkingchimp.com...


HARMONIZED LAW in the EU:
www.i-sis.org.uk...

HARMONIZED LAW in the Austraila:
This comment reminds me of the Keystone Cops. TOO bad the results are rancher suicides... First comment and Second comment

Background from Aussie Ranchers:

AGMATES: Why NLIS is a fraudulent rip off of Australian Livestock Producers.