Home | About | Donate

How The West Was Lost and Other Joys of Greedy Sociopathy


How The West Was Lost and Other Joys of Greedy Sociopathy

David Michael Green

So Britain is out.

Woo-hoo! Doesn’t that feel good?

Well, in fact, for some folks it does. In particular, if you’re an unempowered bloke, lacking much personal sense of agency, and you’ve watched your world get whittled down bit by bit over the last several decades, the sense of doing something, anything – the sheer joy of authoring some real wreckage – is tasty. And all the more so because of its rarity. It’s been so long since you got to poke some joker in the eye, who cares who it is or what comes next, eh? Just do it.


Well, as classist polemics goes, this one was pretty standard. More "stupid peasants" day after reactions from the professional class that is really going to be inconvenienced at having to get travel visas again.
What an awful sacrifice.


The explanations for the ramifications of high-tech., globalization, and enhanced Civil Rights are well-taken.

However, by using the generic term "you" which is also transferable to "we," the REAL players, that is to say, the limited number of persons who are actually making these decisions gets lost in the crowd:

"If you were in fact to do the latter, it might be because you were simply stupid as a society, and prone to bumbling policy choices. But another explanation would point to motivations that are far darker. What if you took these catastrophic steps because of the greed of already wealthy, already powerful individuals who saw opportunities to benefit at the expense of the suffering of hundreds of millions of others? What if, while technology and globalization and new workplace competition were already battering workers, you adopted adverse trade policies on top of that because the one percent got rich while the 99 percent got stiffed? What if you deregulated for the same reason? What if you shifted the tax burden around simply to satisfy the pure greed of the rich? What if you shredded labor movements to transfer wealth away from workers? What if you made education (and thus the opportunity for upward mobility) more expensive, so that the rich could save a few dollars in taxes? What if you privatized societal functions like education and criminal justice, so that profits could be made off of them by a small few?"

That "you" was not some naturally occurring phenomenon. It's the product of think tanks funded by billionaires, and academics hired at universities in quid pro quo arrangements with high dollar donors, and elected prostitutes who have put their personal career (and deference to those who fund it) ahead of the well-being of citizens and the nation, as a whole.

Terms like "you" and "we" are very deceptive since they HIDE the actual actors along with the genuine authors of the policies that have led to these disastrous outcomes.


You and the other forum Trump supporters can't stand having it pointed out that white males feel very displaced by all the recent changes and too many take their frustration out on women, Blacks, Latinos, Muslims, and Nature.

Bravo, Mr. Green for this accurate characterization:

"Or take Trump’s idiocy (please). Imagine you’re a good ol’ boy in ‘Bama, watching your football games at home on the big HD screen with 7.1 surround sound, nursing your case of Coors and scarfing up pizza and wings, sitting on the sofa underneath your framed Confederacy flag. The Donald has just deported 11 million undocumented workers from America and built his Great Wall. You shout “Hell yes!!” to your TV set and celebrate. And why shouldn’t you? Think of the new opportunities open to you. You can now take a shitty job picking grapes, washing dishes or cleaning toilets! And you can pay lots more for everything you buy, including dinner at Cracker Barrel (with its more expensive produce, dishwashers, warehouse workers and so on) and the mowing of your lawn. What a deal, hus? You go, Bubba!"

The above depiction in NO way suggests an affirmative vote for Hillary.

Deception works both sides of the political aisle!


I'm guessing that the spirited the sixties is dead and long forgotten. The good professor talks the good speech - the good lecture about the good fight ... oops... Let me rephrase that... Maybe it is not talk about the good fight but talk about the good hope?

Hope the good hope not fight the good fight?

Prof Green isnt the only one these days who never thinks like people once did when they bucked an entrenched system in the struggle for civil rights nor battled against the immense forces of war and the MIC to end the Vietnam conflict. Even in the face of corruption, greed, voter disenfranchisement and outright cheating and manipulation that we have seen where are the progressive pundits calling for protests and demonstrations in support of democracy and the reality of a free and fair election? Where? What has happened to us that we have become so weak that we simply accept what the powerful do to us including robbing us of our votes and a fair election? At least in Europe people still protest, they participate in their political lives beside just voting. They choose - for good or ill - they choose. They protest. They shut down coal plants with civil disobedience. They at least still choose. Here in America, our pundits hope for the best? Sheesh!

Hope the good hope is just not all that inspiring a choice of words as is fight the good fight. I guess our pundits don't think of fighting the good fight anymore but they should!


"white males feel very displaced" "White males" sounds a lot like we or you. I am a white male; do I have to feel displaced. Adding very before displaced does not further your argument.


"Let us hope – and strive – for the world sobering up, and fast. Trump-like figures are inevitable, but they only thrive when times are lousy, mainstream politicians are worthless (or worse, Bill, Hillary, Barack), and ludicrous ‘solutions’ thus seem to struggling voters like worth trying since they just might – you never know! – be better than the stagnant and fetid status quo."

So what does the author suggest? Shoot our selves in the right foot? Shoot ourselves in the left foot? Maybe he wants us to just give up and go along with the ever worsening status quo watching our TV's until our homes are again forclosed.

We have/had an opportunity to begin to turn things around with a leader who understands government and has a long career based on honesty and the social betterment of our society. In case you have forgotten, as MSM is trying to get all of us to do, his name is Bernie Sanders. I would suggest that everyone go to a real, down-to-earth pep talk by Tim Black on utube (Google tim black utube on bernie sanders). For anyone who understands what a good half time talk can do, don't miss this one.


Why not Clintonism - she's just as much a monster and she brings along a second monster to boot. Clintonism would have been better. They really typify the political ilk that suck the teats of the rich while dancing around in black nighties and getting head-jobs in the Oval office.


I noticed the writer left out "Nazi-sympathizing" Ukranians from his list.


Not all white males support Trump, but Trump's MAJORITY is white males.

And "we" is hardly an all-inclusive term especially when it takes what white males, in particular, deem as "thus and so" and wrongly applies that to all others. The rationale is that white males hold the majority of dominant positions (heads of banks, heads of the MIC, heads of corporations, heads of government--Obama being a token, ditto, Hillary, heads of academia, etc.) and therefore THEIR say becomes the law of the land... as if it applied equitably to all others.

I've made these points MANY times before.

One example is that heart disease studies done exclusively on men see results generalized to women. But the results don't fit women!

When I get into my Toyota or get on a plane, my neck is cranked perpetually forward (very uncomfortable) because the seat designs are based on tall (white) males.

Unfortunately, males like you can't see past your own image and likeness and therefore find no problem in the limited nature of these imposed metrics and standards.

And it's largely angry white men who identify with the rising right wing macho champions who take all of their collective angst and project it at Muslims, Latinos, Blacks, women, gays, and Goddess knows what else. (This trend is occurring in France, Hungary, Poland, Indonesia, U.K., and the U.S.)

The NRA has about 400,000 very loud white males who determine gun policy in this nation. And what's the result? A cult of death and a hidden phallic worship. Both George Carlan and Dr. Helen Caldicott ALSO see in weaponry, an extension of male penis firepower. That is what it is...


Poor example.

Sanders' mantra IS genuinely all-inclusive. He holds up a big tent that genuinely respects the people in Palestine and Muslims, in general. He respects the "Black Lives Matter" movement, and the impetus to raise wages across the board. He's an advocate of Latinos and women.

Trump, on the other hand, demonizes these groups.

The Nazis created the blueprint. When Germany suffered both a blow to its pride AND to its economy in the brutal aftermath of World War I, it created a scapegoat (Jews) upon which the collective angst of displaced workers and struggling families could be projected.

THAT is the level of sentiment being drummed up by Trump only this time, one of its targets is an alternative Semitic People.

Comparing the Sanders' camp to that of Trump or any other egotistical, infantile, right wing narcissistic zealot is like comparing vegetarians with dingdongs who eat at Burger King every day.


Once you realise that there is a swathe of people who basically live of writing - and I am not saying you don't realise this already - things look a bit different. There are a lot of views out here in idiotland and everyone is a potential market to these people. So their attempts to be revolutionary probably stop as soon as they walk away from the keyboard. Its like the early medicine men - the trick is simply to make the other believe you believe your own bullshit. The fact that it is bullshit is quite litterally academic!

More postively, I happily note a general increase in the critical skills of we, the idiots, in discerning the BS coming from those who are very comfortable shouting 'revolution' from their well-padded armchairs. No offence meant to Prof Green...


You give yourself away in the category of "idiot."

Since most of perception is projection-related, your view that the world is full of idiots makes sense.


These days we accept whatever we are given and act as if we have no alternative but to be resigned. We would never be able to create the sixties with this attitude of resignation. Prof Green is usually someone thatI very much enjoy reading but he like the other pundits seem to accept the rigged election as a fait accompli and never think twice about opposing it in reality but only in words. Do Americans have the right to protest or not?

Our punditry have become a status quo elite of professional progressives who do not lead themselves but write as if they do. A conference is fine but a protest march would be better. What happened to us? What kind of progressive pundit will accept the rigged game as a fact and immediately move on to what we should do after our choice loses. What they hell is that but compliance with power. It isn't truth to power it is compliance to power.


Nonsense. Anyone with a knowledge of history and will to look at things clearly knows that the entire EU experiment has been a bridge too far. It was fine when trade and markets were simplified by the original Common Market framework. It should have stopped there.
Certainly the bigots and xenophobes gravitated to the exit side. No question. But that doesn't make exit wrong. Total integration and de facto dictatorship by unelected by other Europeans, German autocratic technocrats was never going to be good for anyone but the German elite. Attempting to homogenize the myriad cultural differences of Europe was a wrong headed idea from the start. The single currency made disintegration inevitable as it was predicted from the start to cause terrible inequality among member nations. And that prediction proved 100% correct. Good riddance to a utopian experiment destined to fail.
Now, when the dust settles and the EU is finally dissolved, the nations of Europe can sit down a restore an old fashioned basic Common Market framework once again. Practice makes perfect.....


Nice try. A very nice try. We should all be so eloquent.


Deleted by author.


I quit reading at:

"post-war world order of (mostly) peace and prosperity." Just ask the Koreans, Vietnamese, Iranians, people of Central America, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Cuba, and Palestine, to name a few ...


Contrary to some posters, I didn't read your comment as in support of trump. Maybe you are, but that's not what I read here.

Thanks for pointing out the very unfair depiction of Russia, who has been a
more honorable and mature world player for many years than the spoiled entitled American .001% elites who wield the power here.

I think that in some ways what trump has said is more moderate than the repubs in power. I guarantee that trump at his worst is saying exactly what they themselves believe. At his best, as in suggesting maybe talking to the Russians is a better idea than bombing them, is most assuredly not. Interesting that as his campaign continues we will see him backing down on the more sensible droolings so from his mouth.

The brexit vote does symbolize for me a vote against the real "greedy sociopathy" of globalization with its attendant concentration of wealth at the top. And yes, I've enjoyed the ruling elite terrified chatter as they negate, neutralize, and vilify the vote and its supporters. They may just be the next target without the immigrants as shields against the impoverished lower classes.


Amen. He needs to read Glen Ford's words that I posted on another CD article the other day:

"This election cycle, many will try to rationalize and ennoble their debasement in Philadelphia by joining an “anti-fascist” crusade against Trump – attempting to juxtapose a fool’s gold casino caricature of a fascist with the actually existing, real thing: Hillary Clinton, the personification of imperial mega-murder and domestic mass Black incarceration; the queen of international chaos and would-be warden of the world’s biggest gulag. Clearly, most “progressives” don’t know what fascism looks like in the 21st century."