person_outline



search

Letter from Lhasa, number 281. Carnevali defends Obama

Letter from Lhasa, number 281. Carnevali defends Obama

by Roberto Abraham Scaruffi

Carnevali, E., In difesa di Barack Obama, Gli eBook di MicroMega, Italy, September 2012.

(Carnevali 2012).

Emilio Carnevali

...An interesting ‘defence’ of Obama and also very useful about Italic stereotypes.

What in Italy is or was called blocked political system and consociativism, in the USA becomes a normal political system. In addition, in the USA there is such an influence of the militarist-police bloc and of the various industrial and financial interests on government, that it is really irrelevant who wins Presidential and other elections.

Generally, a US President does not control ‘his’ own formal majority, although Presidential powers be vast so the President can both act outside or against Congress and  try buying a majority for what he wish to do, if he really wish to do something. Another expression avoided about US politics and institutions is transformism. US parliamentary institutions are highly transformist.

All the countries of the Anglophone area have blocked political systems, and are consociative and tranformist. What does not weakens their high efficiency, apart from military expenses frequently disjoined from whatever rationality. It is the US case. The USA have not a Crown balancing private and myopic oligarchies.

A banal politological rule is that general elections are won on the centre. It is not really relevant where a US Presidential candidate come from. Biographies finally are literary creations. For getting massive financing for becoming one of the two credible candidates, he/she need to show to be buyable from the US financial, militarist and industrial oligarchies. If one is credibly buyable, one is in the couple of opposing candidates with pair probability to win elections.  

What was finally the policy difference between Obama and his Republican opponent? That Obama introduced his Obamacare. Nothing else. His foreign policies are neocons policies. His internal ones idem. He massively subsidised the banking system. It is everyday shown that a subsidised financing system go on with its traditional policies were producing bankruptcy. Careful policy makers could easily find different solutions than awarding predations or permitting bankruptcies would have damaged small savers and the whole economy. In addition, the US financial and banking system continues to be deregulated. Obama followed his usual way of doing formal declarations or general laws but without any real implementation. ...That from Guantanamo to finance.

Is Obamacare a real innovation? Obama extended the bases of the health system without changing its foundations. The interests of the pharmaceutical industries, generally against people health (they earn on diseases!) have not been touched. Perhaps they have been extended. The US health system already was very expensive, the most expensive of the world (relatively to the GDP). Obama extended it, without rethinking that human body should be something different from a pure pretext for making money.    

After Carter, the extremist US militarist-bloc feared that it could have another President not fully aligned to its bloody needs. Bill Clinton was a George H. W. Bush CIA and Reagan Presidency creation for avoiding such a danger. Clinton marginally contradicted some extremist militarist bloc aspirations and he was object of wide defamations although not removed from office. Basically, Bill Clinton remained the confidence man of the extremist militarist bloc and of its extremist Republican supporters. Republicans do not win elections because there are aligned with extremist militarism but because extremist militarism has become common ground of US rhetoric and it is masked behind other programs be them the apparent ‘less government’ of Republicans or the apparent social programs of Democrats. Once in office, such programmatic opposition does not really exist, because the main oligarchic interests determine the real policies are finally implemented.    

Such a Bill Clinton immediately appeared as the Obama guarantor, guarantor not in front of people but in front of militarist oligarchies. For becoming President, a candidate needs a lot of money. Popularity depends on the political advertising machine, not on a candidate’s qualities. The only quality really required to a candidate is to be adaptable, obedient. It is better if one is a good actor, although idiotic mind-controlled chaps as the last Bush showed it be not indispensable. They micro-chipped his mind and, with nazi-style, Hollywood-style, scenarios, despite he constantly appeared as lost, he was sold to idiotic masses.

The show about Guantanamo is exemplar. Obama officially ordered to close the concentration and torture camp but masked his desire not to close it behind a connected request of financing such a closure. The financing bill was rejected, as nearly everybody agreed to do. It was just a show. If he really wanted to close Guantanamo it would have been sufficient to follow the classic administrative way and to order to let it without prisoners and to change the Bush de facto legislation about concentration and torture camps. On the contrary, Obama reinforced such a legislation legalizing in same way Guantanamo, or making it less illegal that before. A Guantanamo concentration and torture camp without prisoners and without wardens did not need financing. It would have saved costs. Asking for a financing for closing it was the Obama mask for not closing it. Obama masked himself behind Congress.

As told, Obama legalized abuses and tortures, in addition to infinite detention without trial. He moved in the same directions about assassinations all around the world. The fact that he now sign one be one the assassination orders, with connected massacres (‘collateral damages’), makes more, not less, legal the assassination policies. He receives dossiers built from some dozen committees of various bureaucracies of the death machine and he signs. There is no contradictory and not even any real control. The USA (the UK too, and their clients) have a long history of persecutions, massacres, assassinations implemented only because bureaucracies need to justify their existence and extend their financing. Such is the US death machine. A good business, ...for someone.

Such policies, infinite detentions and Presidential assassinations, are implemented also against US citizens, so without any real legal right even for US nationals. The militarization of the US dictatorship is accomplished!     

Such is Obama. Those who believe, or simulate to believe, that faces change policies can be excited by the usual false opposition between the two main candidates. Reality is different. The two main candidates would not be such if they had whatever real reciprocal difference. None of them can give a personal print to concrete policies. They support them only with different faces and rhetoric. US Real governments are soviet structures. They work by committees which exalt the worst not the best of their members.

Obama cannot be better than Romney. Romney cannot be better than Obama.      

Carnevali, E., In difesa di Barack Obama, Gli eBook di MicroMega, Italy, September 2012. 

Pin It
Atualizado em: Qua 19 Set 2012

Deixe seu comentário
É preciso estar "logado".

Curtir no Facebook

Autores.com.br
Curitiba - PR

webmaster@number1.com.br

whatsapp  WhatsApp  (41) 99115-5222