Sunday, October 27, 2019

WOW! IS THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY DUMPING NEO-FASCIST MARK ZUCKERBERG? HE'S THE GUY THAT BANKROLLS THE DEMOCRATS' PARTY BASE THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY OF LA RAZA 'The Race'


Democrats Move Towards ‘Oligarchical Socialism,’ Says Forecaster Joel Kotkin



Left-wing progressives are embracing a political alliance with Silicon Valley oligarchs who would trap Americans in a cramped future without hope of upward mobility for themselves or their children, says a left-wing political analyst in California.

Under the headline “America is moving toward an oligarchical socialism,” Joel Kotkin writes:
Historically, liberals advocated helping the middle class achieve greater independence, notably by owning houses and starting companies. But the tech oligarchy — the people who run the five most capitalized firms on Wall Street — have a far less egalitarian vision. Greg Fehrenstein, who interviewed 147 digital company founders, says most believe that “an increasingly greater share of economic wealth will be generated by a smaller slice of very talented or original people. Everyone else will increasingly subsist on some combination of part-time entrepreneurial ’gig work‘ and government aid.”
Numerous oligarchs — Mark Zuckerberg, Pierre Omidyar, founder of eBay, Elon Musk and Sam Altman, founder of the Y Combinator — have embraced this vision including a “guaranteed wage,” usually $500 or a $1,000 monthly. Our new economic overlords are not typical anti-tax billionaires in the traditional mode; they see government spending as a means of keeping the populist pitchforks away. This may be the only politically sustainable way to expand “the gig economy,” which grew to 7 million workers this year, 26 percent above the year before.
Handouts, including housing subsidies, could guarantee for the next generation a future not of owned houses, but rented small, modest apartments. Unable to grow into property-owning adults, they will subsist while playing with their phones, video games and virtual reality in what Google calls “immersive computing.”
This plan, however, is being challenged by the return of populism and nationalism when President Donald Trump defeated the GOP’s corporatist candidates and the progressives’ candidate in 2016. In his 2017 inauguration, Trump declared:
For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs. And while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.
That all changes starting right here and right now because this moment is your moment, it belongs to you …
What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.
For several years, Kotkin has been dissecting the Democrats’ shift from working-class politics toward a tacit alliance with the billionaires in the new information-technology industries that are centralizing wealth and power through the United States. In 2013, for example, he argued that California’s politics were increasingly “feudal“:
As late as the 80s, California was democratic in a fundamental sense, a place for outsiders and, increasingly, immigrants—roughly 60 percent of the population was considered middle class. Now, instead of a land of opportunity, California has become increasingly feudal. According to recent census estimates, the state suffers some of the highest levels of inequality in the country. By some estimates, the state’s level of inequality compares with that of such global models as the Dominican Republic, Gambia, and the Republic of the Congo.
At the same time, the Golden State now suffers the highest level of poverty in the country—23.5 percent compared to 16 percent nationally—worse than long-term hard luck cases like Mississippi. It is also now home to roughly one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients, almost three times its proportion of the nation’s population.
Like medieval serfs, increasing numbers of Californians are downwardly mobile, and doing worse than their parents: native born Latinos actually have shorter lifespans than their parents, according to one recent report. Nor are things expected to get better any time soon. According to a recent Hoover Institution survey, most Californians expect their incomes to stagnate in the coming six months, a sense widely shared among the young, whites, Latinos, females, and the less educated.
Read Kotkin’s “oligarchal socialism” article here.
  
“Protecting citizens from industrial capitalism’s giant corporations? Where were the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight as the mortgage bubble blew up in 2008, nearly taking the whole financial system with it and producing the worst economic bust since the Great Depression, which even today has sunk the labor-force participation rate and hiked the suicide rate among working-class men and women to record levels?”

The Democrats' Unhinged Hearing With Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg

Matt Vespa
Matt Vespa
|
 @mvespa1
|
Posted: Oct 24, 2019 5:36 PM
  Share (373)   Tweet

The Democrats' Unhinged Hearing With Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg
Source: (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Without question, there is a bias among Big Tech. They’re all based in Silicon Valley, California. They’re unabashedly liberal, though they understand that there is a conservative audience that has money. Often times, conservatives go about combating this bias in embarrassing fashion, usually flubbing the messaging part especially. Yet, for all of the Right’s faults in combating social media bias, Democrats showed yesterday that they’re not really all that far behind in spewing their nonsense about Facebook. The social media giant is working on its own cryptocurrency—Libra—but that didn’t stop Democratic lawmakers from making total clowns of themselves over issues that have its roots in the 2016 election (via NYT):
Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook chief executive, traveled to Washington to defend a cryptocurrency project that has become the latest target of lawmakers frustrated with the social media giant.
He ended up answering a smorgasbord of questions on other issues on Wednesday, as members of the House Financial Services Committee took him to task for everything from political advertising and disinformation campaigns to work force diversity and child pornography.
Representative Maxine Waters, the Democratic committee chairwoman, set the tone of the hearing early. She grilled Mr. Zuckerberg on Facebook’s willingness to allow unfettered speech across the platform and its recent decision to avoid vetting political advertising.
“The impact of this will be a massive voter suppression effort. Your claim to promote freedom of speech does not ring true,” Ms. Waters said.
In recent months lawmakers have spared neither Facebook nor Mr. Zuckerberg. On Wednesday, that criticism became more than five hours of political theater, making it glaringly apparent just how skeptical of Facebook Congress has become through nearly three years of controversy.
Again, it’s funny how politics can produce strange bedfellows, especially since Facebook has drawn the ire of conservatives for bias—but the hearing Mark Zuckerberg had with these far-left loonies was quite ridiculous. How dare Zuckerberg hear opinions that are different from the Leninist ethos of America’s social media industry. How dare he have conservatives over to his house for dinner? From some of the reactions from Democrats, you’d think Zuckerberg was holding a Nazi rally in his house. Reason’s Robby Soave has more on this circus:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) attacked Zuckerberg for allowing misleading political ads to appear on Facebook, something that has increasingly irritated high-profile Democrats as of late—most notably regulation-obsessed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), who recently warned that "Facebook is actively helping Trump spread lies and misinformation. Facebook already helped elect Donald Trump once. They might do it again—and profit off of it."
"I'm not talking about spin, I'm talking about actual disinformation," said Ocasio-Cortez, as if these are two things that Facebook content moderators could both easily distinguish and police in a fair and unbiased way.
Zuckerberg responded that he believed "in a democracy, people should be able to see for themselves what politicians which they may or may not vote for are saying, and judge their character for themselves." Ocasio-Cortez then pivoted to interrogating him about his "ongoing dinner parties with far-right figures, some of whom advance the conspiracy theory that white supremacy is a hoax."
The idea that Facebook's misleading political ads are any more threatening to democracy than the hours of ideological, agenda-driven advocacy for one party or another that appear on television and the radio every day is a kind of moral panic. Social media is certainly the newer phenomenon, and that has made it the object of hatred for legislators who reflexively fear something they don't understand and can't control.
 Rep. Al Green (D-TX) asked the Facebook founder how many LGBT employees were working on Libra, which is an illegal question to ask upon hiring. Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH) accused Zuckerberg of racism…because, not enough black people are on Facebook. Soave hits it on the head. These clowns on the Hill don’t get the Internet or anything related to this business or its foundation. Remember the last time Mark was dragged up to the Hill where a lawmaker didn’t know that ads are how the company makes revenue. The late Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) described the internet as a series of tubes. It seems this shoddy grasp of what these guys do remains. 
Recommended
Field of Anonymous Trump Donors Getting Crowded
Debra J. Saunders
On a side note, don’t be fooled by the Democrats’ outrage over so-called problematic content that’s posted on the platform. The National Rifle Association and even Townhall’s content would fall under their category for what should be banned from Facebook. They want it to be a safe space for liberals. They want it to be an exclusive platform for progressive ideals. When things don’t go their way, the Left predictably gets on the total warpath. I’ve seen stories about how Zuckerberg was unprepared and humiliated by progressive women as if this man is some Proud Boy. Zuckerberg is still rich. He’s eons smarter than anyone on the Hill, and he’s already seen how this plays out. I’ll bet the mortgage on that. But the overall point again is that if you think some Facebook ads are a threat to the republic, I don’t know where to start other than finding the nearest psychiatrist or drug rehab center and offer you directions to those locations. The institutional integrity of the U.S. can be undone—irreparably—by a social media ad? It’s a pathetic narrative. I’m sure mark is fine, knowing that half the planet uses his product and the billions he’s made for himself in the meantime. All of this while quietly laughing at the morons who tried to checkmate him on the Hill. I’d never thought I’d be defending Zuckerberg, but yesterday’s hearing was beyond ridiculous. 
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)