Obama shows his stripes

[Rootsie]

February 10th, 2007
from Rootsie

It’s appropriate that Barak Obama announced his presidential candidacy in the shadow of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln and Obama, 150 years apart, typify the delusional myths of which the U.S. is so fond.

What do schooldchildren learn about Lincoln? Why, he freed the slaves! What are they taught was the purpose of the American Civil War? Why, to end slavery, of course.

They are not taught that slavery was already done as a viable economic strategy. The Brits had already figured that out, and banned the trade in 1838. They are not taught that, despite or perhaps because of this fact, Lincoln was not much concerned with slavery at all, and that he, like most of his peers, considered blacks a hopelessly inferior and genetically servile species of human.

Schoolchildren are taught that Lincoln was a simple self-taught frontier lawyer. Well, kids, Abraham Lincoln was a prototype of the corporate shark, a lawyer for the railroads, in whose interests (among others) that catastrophic, ghastly, and yes, illegal war was conceived and fought. The issue was state sovereignty, and the Union victory made the country safe for eminent domain and other such, and created a top-heavy federal government wedded till death do us part to corporate interests.

Obama is actually being termed the ‘post-racial’ candidate. Post-racial. Yup folks, we have risen above all that race business; it’s a nasty thing of the past we don’t need to think about anymore. A black president...well, not really black: that’s the beauty of Obama. He’s not one of those scary black men: clean, not like Jesse or Al–his father is African, and thus did not transmit that pesky African-American anger to his kid, that particularly peculiarly American-engendered rage. Liberals are so so pleased to be able to support him without…well, fear. They are pleased as preening pussy-cats with a mouse’s tail hanging out of their mouths. ‘We’ are ‘ready’ for a black president, the pundits declare. He’s an ‘outsider’, a refreshing change from the status quo. He’s going to change how things are done.

Yeah right. Obama is Joe Lieberman’s protege, for heaven’s sake! Think AIPAC. Wake up, people. There is nothing refreshing or new about Obama. And even if there actually were, there’s mischief afoot. As ‘post-racial’ or ‘non-racial’ or ‘beyond racial’ as Obama might be, this great nation is absolutely not ‘past all that’, and the ones who ought to know know this very well. He’s unelectable. So is Hilary Clinton. So what’s the scam? Why has no high-profile Republican declared yet? Will our next prez be Jeb Bush? That’s my guess.

Lincoln, ‘the great uniter’ sent 600,000 men to their grisly deaths. If the issue were slaves, why did he wait three years before declaring them free? Americans’ capacity for self-delusion on the issue of race is boundless. Obama’s candidacy is just the latest permutation.

"Obama Ties ‘08 Bid to Lincoln’s Legacy"     http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070211/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008
“The life of a tall, gangly, self-made Springfield lawyer tells us that a different future is possible,” Obama said. “He tells us that there is power in words. He tells us that there is power in conviction. That beneath all the differences of race and region, faith and station, we are one people. He tells us that there is power in hope.”

Blah blah blah. I guess it’s fitting, the newest 'modern politician', beholden to the plutocrats, standing in the shadow of an old one.

[three_sixty]

What do schooldchildren learn about Lincoln? Why, he freed the slaves! What are they taught was the purpose of the American Civil War? Why, to end slavery, of course.

They are not taught that slavery was already done as a viable economic strategy. The Brits had already figured that out, and banned the trade in 1838. They are not taught that, despite or perhaps because of this fact, Lincoln was not much concerned with slavery at all, and that he, like most of his peers, considered blacks a hopelessly inferior and genetically servile species of human.

Schoolchildren are taught that Lincoln was a simple self-taught frontier lawyer. Well, kids, Abraham Lincoln was a prototype of the corporate shark, a lawyer for the railroads, in whose interests (among others) that catastrophic, ghastly, and yes, illegal war was conceived and fought. The issue was state sovereignty, and the Union victory made the country safe for eminent domain and other such, and created a top-heavy federal government wedded till death do us part to corporate interests.

* Very interesting. The legal status of a corporation as a "legal person" is based on usage of the 14th amendment which was supposedly created for the purpose of protecting the rights of former slaves.


"Still it wasn't until after the Civil War that economic conditions turned sharply in favor of the large corporation. These corporations, says Huston:

. . . killed the republican theory of the distribution of wealth and probably ended whatever was left of the political theory of republicanism as well. . . .[The] corporation brought about a new form of dependency. Instead of industry, frugality, and initiatives producing fruits, underlings in the corporate hierarchy had to be aware of style, manners, office politics, and choice of patrons -- very reminiscent of the Old Whig corruption in England at the time of the revolution -- what is today called "corporate culture."

Concludes Huston:

The rise of Big Business generated the most important transformation of American life that North America has ever experienced.

By the end of the last century the Supreme Court had declared corporations to be persons under the 14th Amendment, entitled to the same protections as human beings. As Morton Mintz pointed out in the National Law Journal, this 1888 case ignored the fact that "the only 'person' Congress had in mind when it adopted the 14th Amendment in 1866 was the newly freed slave." Justice Black observed in the 1930s that in the first fifty years following the adoption of the 14th Amendment, "less than one-half of 1 percent [of Supreme Court cases] invoked it in protection of the Negro race, and more than 50 percent asked that its benefits be extended to corporations." During this period the courts moved to limit democratic power in other ways as well. For example, the Supreme Court restricted the common law right of juries to nullify a wrongful law; other courts erected barriers against third parties such as banning fusion slates.

It was during this same time that the myth of competitive virtue sprouted, helping to justify one of the great rapacious periods of American business. It was a time when J.P. Morgan would come to own half the railroad mileage in the country -- the same J. P. Morgan who got his start during the Civil War by buying defective rifles for $3.50 each from an army arsenal and then selling them to a general in the field for $22 apiece. The founding principles of what we now proudly call the "American free market system" flowered in an era of enormous bribes, massive legislative corruption, and the creation of great anti-competitive cartels. It was a time when the government, in a precursor to industrial policy, gave two railroad companies 21 million acres of free land.

And it was also the time that American workers, who had once used commerce to free themselves from the economic and social straitjacket of the monarchy, found themselves servants of a new rigid hierarchy, that of the modern corporation."


"How states once
controlled corporations

The purposes for which every such corporation shall be established shall be distinctly and definitely specified in the articles of association, and it shall not be lawful for said corporation to appropriate its funds to any other purpose. -- State of Wisconsin, 1864

The charter or acts of association of every corporation hereafter created may be amendable or repealed at the will of the general assembly. -- State of Rhode Island, 1857

[Legislators shall] alter, revoke or annul any charter of a corporate hereafter conferred . . . whenever in their opinion it may be injurious to citizens of the community. -- State of Pennsylvania, constitutional amendment, 1857."
- source: http://prorev.com/corpsandus.htm

If state sovereignty was the real issue of the civil war - then one wonders if certain corporate interests were scheming even then for a more favorable condition for their existence. How well this fits the pattern so common today - corporate interests hiding behind humanitarian faces like trojan horses.