{"id":365428,"date":"2018-06-14T20:34:59","date_gmt":"2018-06-14T19:34:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=365428"},"modified":"2018-06-14T20:34:59","modified_gmt":"2018-06-14T19:34:59","slug":"americas-public-are-foie-gras-ducks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/editorials\/americas-public-are-foie-gras-ducks\/","title":{"rendered":"America’s Public Are Foie-Gras Ducks"},"content":{"rendered":"

American Billionaires Farm This Public <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

By Feeding to the Voters the Politicians<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Any animal farm needs to feed, to its livestock, food that the farmer has selected, so as to fatten the animals in the way that the farmer wants, in order for him to serve his selected market \u2014 serve them what that market wants.<\/span><\/p>\n

Foie-gras ducks (and geese) are fed in order to produce foie gras \u2014 sickly enlarged bird-livers \u2014 which aristocrats traditionally have craved to eat. Many rich people eat this almost tasteless \u201cdelicacy\u201d<\/span><\/a>, as a status-symbol. By French law, foie gras is defined as the liver of a duck or goose fattened by force-feeding corn with a feeding tube<\/span><\/a>. The final weeks of the bird\u2019s life consist of nothing but these force-feedings, as the animal\u2019s only supply of food. That\u2019s the way to produce those highly valued, sickly enlarged, bird-livers. <\/span><\/p>\n

In the following video, the actress Kate Winslet explains and shows how this force-feeding is done (it\u2019s showing there a bird-analogue of what\u2019s done to America\u2019s voters):<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=DyOu-GVtgPQ<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Those ducks and geese need to be force-fed this food because the birds don\u2019t actually want to eat it \u2014 they\u2019re forced to \u2018eat\u2019 it; it\u2019s simply forced into their stomachs. That\u2019s not really eating of food, for nutriment or for health, and especially not for pleasure, like real<\/i> eating is. It is, instead, just the farmer’s forcing corn into the bird\u2019s stomach, regardless of what that victim wants, or needs, or can even tolerate. It\u2019s something that\u2019s done to<\/i> the bird, not by<\/i> the bird. So, although it\u2019s feeding, it\u2019s not actually<\/i> eating.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is the way that American elections increasingly are, for Americans \u2014 elections are increasingly something that\u2019s done to them, and less and less what they themselves do<\/i>.<\/span><\/p>\n

America\u2019s Democratic Party voters aren\u2019t as politically disaffected as are America\u2019s Republican Party voters, but both groups are reluctant to vote for the politicians whom the aristocracy is offering to them as constituting their final general-election options. And there are now a larger number of unaffiliated or \u201cindependent\u201d American voters than the voters of either Party \u2014 and America\u2019s independent voters are astronomically politically disaffected. This was shown on 26 October 2016, just before the U.S. election, when Britain\u2019s Guardian<\/i> bannered <\/span><\/p>\n

Most Americans do not feel represented by Democrats or Republicans \u2013 survey<\/i><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Poll finds Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump continue to face historically low favourability ratings, while pessimism about the country\u2019s direction has grown<\/i><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Participating in this poll had been (as shown on page 42 of the pollsters\u2019 full report) two thousand scientifically sampled American adults, 18 or older \u2014 including ones who hadn\u2019t even registered to vote (and so this was a scientific sampling of the total U.S. adult population, instead of only of registered voters, or only likely voters)<\/span><\/a> and consequently the most disillusioned voters who don\u2019t vote at all were included in this political poll, which is absolutely extraordinary \u2014 and it found, as the Guardian<\/i> summarized it, that: \u201cSixty-one per cent of survey respondents say neither political party reflects their opinions today, while 38% disagree. Nearly eight in 10 (77%) independents and a majority (54%) of Republicans took this position, while less than half (46%) of Democrats agree.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

So (to clarify that incompetent writing in the Guardian<\/i>): just before America\u2019s 2016 general election, 46% of Democrats were politically disaffected, 54% of Republicans were, and a whopping 77% of independents were; and 61% of all<\/i> Americans were. Fewer than 39% of Americans thought that the U.S. Government represented them. Not necessarily in words, but definitely<\/i> in reality: 61% of Americans thought they weren\u2019t living in a democracy \u2014 they thought that America is actually a dictatorship. A better headline for that news-report would therefore have been: \u201c61% of Americans Think They Live in a Dictatorship.\u201d It would have been shorter, clearer, and equally as true, as the Guardian<\/i>\u2019s headline.<\/span><\/p>\n

Since Democrats are the least<\/i>-displeased American voting-group, regarding the politicians that their aristocrats have selected for them and fed to them, let\u2019s focus on and consider here, in some detail, this least-displeased American voting-group, because they\u2019re the least<\/i> like any resistant (or \u201canti-Establishment\u201d) foie gras geese and ducks are; Democratic Party voters are far more passive than other Americans are, far more willingly accepting of what\u2019s being fed to them by the aristocracy.<\/span><\/p>\n

During the 2016 primaries-season, which are the contests within<\/i> each of America\u2019s parties, one candidate stood out above all others as being by far the most-preferred one by the American general electorate: Bernie Sanders<\/span><\/a>. He was Hillary Clinton\u2019s opponent in the Democratic Party primaries. Although all of the Democratic Party\u2019s billionaires were funding Ms. Clinton\u2019s campaign, the American public strongly preferred Mr. Sanders. <\/span>I<\/span>n the numerous one-on-one polled hypothetical choices versus any of the opposite Party\u2019s contending candidates, Sanders crushed each one of them<\/span><\/a> except John Kasich<\/span><\/a>, who, throughout the primaries, was the second-most preferred of all of the candidates of both Parties (and who performed far better than Trump did in the hypothetical match-ups against Clinton). But Kasich received almost as little financial backing from the billionaires as did Sanders; so, like Sanders, Kasich didn\u2019t receive his Party\u2019s nomination. In the hypothetical match-ups, Sanders beat Kasich by 3.3%, whereas Kasich beat Clinton by 7.4% \u2014 that spread between +3.3% and -7.4% is 10.8%, and provides a pretty reliable indication of what the Democratic National Committee threw away when rigging the primaries and vote-counts for Hillary Clinton to win the Party\u2019s nomination<\/span><\/a>. All of the DNC insiders knew that Sanders would be the stronger general-election candidate, no matter whom the Republican nominee would end up being; all of the polling showed it clearly, and they all read the polls voraciously. In all of this hypothetical polling<\/span><\/a>, Sanders beat Trump by 10.4%, whereas Clinton beat Trump by only 3.2%. That spread was 7.2% in favor of Sanders over Clinton, and that\u2019s a huge spread. However, the DNC cared lots more about satisfying its mega-donors, than about winning, when they picked Clinton to be the Party\u2019s nominee. Ms. Clinton\u2019s actual victory over Mr. Trump in the final election between those two nominees turned out to be by only 2.1% \u2014 close enough a spread so as to enable Trump to win in the Electoral College (which is all that counts), which counts not individual voters but a formula that represents both the states and the voters. Sanders would have beaten Trump in a landslide \u2014 far too big a victory-margin for the Electoral College to have been able to go the opposite way, such as did happen with Clinton (who was so stupid her campaign was a mess, definitely stupider<\/span><\/a> than Trump\u2019s<\/span><\/a>). This fact, of Sanders\u2019s clearly trouncing Trump, was also shown here<\/span><\/a> and here<\/span><\/a>. That\u2019s what the DNC threw away; but discard it they did, because their billionaires were strongly opposed to Sanders (and many of them might have donated even to Trump in order to defeat Sanders). <\/span><\/p>\n

Hillary Clinton received by far the biggest support from billionaires, of all of the 2016 candidates; Sanders received by far the least; and this is the reason why the Democratic Party, which Clinton and Barack Obama (two thoroughly billionaire-controlled politicians) effectively controlled, handed its nomination to Clinton. <\/span><\/p>\n

The poll that had been reported by Britain\u2019s Guardian,<\/i> is shown in fuller detail here<\/span><\/a>, documenting how loathed both of the two Parties\u2019 Presidential nominees were:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cBoth Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump continue to have historically low favorability ratings with fewer than half of the public viewing each candidate positively (41% vs. 33%, respectively). Clinton is viewed less favorably than the Democratic Party (49%), but Trump\u2019s low favorability rating is more consistent with the Republican Party\u2019s low favorability (36%).\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Of course, the Republican Party won everything, though its favorability-rating was the lowest. In no way was this outcome the result of democracy.<\/span><\/p>\n

The real action in American politics is in the primaries, and the billionaires know this. The primaries are the process where any candidate who wants to represent the public instead of the aristocracy, gets eliminated from further competition. That\u2019s the reason why the billionaires are especially concerned to win in their respective party\u2019s primaries \u2014 the first<\/i>-stage selection process \u2014 so that the general-election options will be only<\/i> candidates who are acceptable to the aristocracy. Then, if a particular billionaire doesn\u2019t like what his party has nominated, he can either back that candidate if acceptable, or else might back another party\u2019s nominee, who was selected by that other party\u2019s billionaires. In either case, the billionaires\u2019 class-interest will still be served, even though the given billionaire might philosophically disagree with the other party\u2019s candidate. It\u2019ll still be the same aristocracy ruling the country, even if a different segment of it.<\/span><\/p>\n

This means that, for the voters, the final choice doesn\u2019t include any<\/i> anti-aristocratic (or pro-democratic) option: it\u2019s instead between nominees all of whom represent some faction or another within the nation\u2019s aristocracy<\/i>.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s the situation amongst Democratic Party voters \u2014 these being the voters who are the least-disillusioned about their country\u2019s \u2018democracy\u2019. Apparently, no matter how much the Democratic Party lies to its voters, those voters are extremely reluctant to reject their Party\u2019s nominee. Even if their Party has stolen the nomination from them, and handed it to a nominee who ends up losing in the final contest, Democratic Party voters are still willing to back the Party that stole the nomination from them, for the weaker candidate, and that thereby handed the victory to a different party.<\/span><\/p>\n

But America\u2019s Republican voters, and especially America\u2019s independent or non-affiliated voters, are very much in the position of reluctant, or even highly resistant, foie gras ducks and geese (the ones who squawk and squirm more). Democratic Party voters are the most accepting of what they\u2019re being force-fed. That\u2019s why most of them remain as Democrats, even after their Party\u2019s having stolen the nomination and handed it to Clinton, and even after Clinton\u2019s subsequent choice for DNC Chair \u2014 and not Sanders\u2019s choice \u2014 becoming selected in 2017 by the DNC to run the Party in the 2018 mid-term elections. The fewer-than-a-thousand people (447, to be exact<\/span><\/a>) who are allowed to vote in DNC elections, are, as a group, thoroughly unrepentant, even though they had, to a large extent, made Trump President. (That last linked-to site, being mainstream, and thus necessarily controlled by the aristocracy, said that \u201cthe DNC\u2019s exact roster of current members doesn\u2019t appear to be easily available on its website\u201d<\/span><\/a>, but that was a lie, because the membership-list simply wasn\u2019t at all<\/i> available on its website \u2014 and it still is being kept a secret there<\/span><\/a>, which fact, of the DNC\u2019s secrecy about whom those 447 DNC members are, further displays the type of \u2018democracy\u2019<\/span><\/a> that America is, which fact, in turn, explains<\/i> the vast political disaffection in the United States, though Democratic voters especially accept this ongoing abuse of Democratic voters, by the DNC.) <\/span><\/p>\n

America\u2019s voters are foie gras birds, but some of these birds (the Republicans and especially independents) are more resisting than some others (Democrats) are.<\/span><\/p>\n

The way that America\u2019s billionaires farm this public is by feeding to the voters the politicians, without even considering the needs \u2014 much less the wants \u2014 of that public.<\/span><\/p>\n

And this is the reason why the only scientific study that has ever been done of whether a given country is a democracy or instead a dictatorship, which was a study that was done about the U.S., found that America is clearly a dictatorship, no democracy at all<\/span><\/a>. It found that whereas the very wealthy and well-connected do have very significant effect shaping America\u2019s laws, the public-at-large has virtually none: \u201cThe preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.\u201d Such a country isn\u2019t a democracy; it\u2019s an aristocracy \u2014 a nation where only the rich and well-connected have impact upon the government. America\u2019s public are foie gras ducks.<\/span><\/p>\n

And the situation in America is getting rapidly even worse: Amy Baker Benjamin’s \u201cThe Many Faces of Secrecy\u201d<\/span><\/a>, in William & Mary Policy Review<\/i>, 21 November 2017, is a path-breaking study of recent expansions of U.S. Governmental secrecy, and it concludes that: \u201cWe are confronting a systemic secrecy crisis. For various reasons and under cover of conflicting rationales, large swaths of policy-making have been placed beyond the review-and-reaction authority of the American people, to the detriment of even the most humble conceptions of transparency and democracy.\u201d Dictatorship depends upon government-secrecy, because it depends upon lies, and because lies depend upon hiding the key truths. For each lie, there are key truths that must<\/i> be hidden. <\/span><\/p>\n

Two of the U.S. aristocracy\u2019s leading magazines, Foreign Policy<\/i><\/span><\/a>, and the super-prestigious Foreign Affairs<\/i><\/span><\/a>, both recently headlined articles \u201cIs Democracy Dying?\u201d and neither magazine so much as even mentioned (nor linked to, either directly or indirectly) any of the studies \u2014 nor, really, referred to any of the realities \u2014 that have been mentioned here. This information is being blocked from reaching the public, blocked as much as the aristocracy can. The public are intended to supply the votes and the labor and the markets; and the way to get all three is to hide the truth, so that the lies can more readily be accepted, so that the aristocracy will remain in control \u2014 which they are determined to do, at all costs (especiallly all costs to the public). <\/span><\/p>\n

Globally, the most prominent example of a duck or goose who refuses to cooperate and who is willing to experience the worst possible punishments for resisting (in other words, is a person of supreme courage and integrity), is Julian Assange; and, on June 9th, the great investigative journalist John Pilger, at Consortium News, stated<\/span><\/a> the ugliness and depravity of the aristocracy, as displayed (and which the aristocracy does everything possible to hide) in that specific case:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a silence among many who call themselves left. The silence is Julian Assange. As every false accusation has fallen away, every bogus smear shown to be the work of political enemies, Julian stands vindicated as one who has exposed a system that threatens humanity. The Collateral Damage video, the war logs of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Cablegate revelations, the Venezuela revelations, the Podesta email revelations \u2026 these are just a few of the storms of raw truth that have blown through the capitals of rapacious power. The fakery of Russia-gate, the collusion of a corrupt media and the shame of a legal system that pursues truth-tellers, have not been able to hold back the raw truth of WikiLeaks revelations. They have not won, not yet, and they have not destroyed the man. Only the silence of good people will allow them to win. Julian Assange has never been more isolated. He needs your support and your voice. Now more than ever is the time to demand justice and free speech for Julian. Thank you.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

If civilization doesn\u2019t totally end from what that international network of thugs is doing, then human history will continue beyond the present generation, and the case of that lone and very courageously resistant bird, Julian Assange, will be a prominent part of it.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of<\/span> \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a><\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

American Billionaires Farm This Public By Feeding to the Voters the Politicians Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org Any animal farm needs to feed, to its livestock, food that the farmer has selected, so as to fatten the animals in the way that the farmer wants, in order for him to serve his selected market […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":365430,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[461,519],"tags":[115,30,32,96,3604,698,541,839,526,755],"class_list":{"0":"post-365428","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-editorials","8":"category-newswire","9":"tag-barack-obama","10":"tag-big-brother","11":"tag-cia","12":"tag-cover-up","13":"tag-donald-trump","14":"tag-hillary-clinton","15":"tag-media","16":"tag-news-media","17":"tag-propaganda","18":"tag-usa"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/365428","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=365428"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/365428\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":365431,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/365428\/revisions\/365431"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/365430"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=365428"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=365428"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=365428"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}