International Jewry is responsible for Dr. Jamaal Bowman, Ed. D.’s recent defeat in New York. The Hill:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) slammed American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) for pouring tens of millions into fellow Democratic New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s divisive primary race Wednesday after Bowman lost the primary to a more moderate Democrat.
Bowman, a second-term progressive, faced tough opposition from the pro-Israel political advocacy group AIPAC because of his criticism of the Israeli government.
Who else had superior ideals and blamed International Jewry for obstructions to their implementation? From The Women Who Flew for Hitler:
Over tea that afternoon, Hitler once again ‘leapt up in a fit of frenzy, with foam on his lips, and shouted that he would have revenge on all traitors’. Interrupted by a call from Berlin, he screamed orders ‘to shoot anyone and everyone’ before announcing, ‘I’m beginning to doubt whether the German people are worthy of my great ideals.’ [this was following the aristocratic assassination and military coup attempt against Germany’s democratically elected leader]
Blaming the war on Jewish incitement, and defeat on the betrayal of his officers, Hitler ended his last statement with the injunction that his successors should ‘above all else, uphold the racial laws in all their severity, and mercilessly resist the universal poisoner of all nations: international Jewry’. [from the bunker]
In one of the few parts of Porto that isn’t mobbed with tourists, maybe due to the outrageous-by-Portuguese-standards 24 euro entry price for the Serralves Foundation (mercifully free for the kids), I found the following artistic collaboration between Yayoi Kusama and Dr. Jamaal Bowman, Ed. D.:
Kusama is 95. It’s a shame that she wasn’t born in the U.S. or she could run for President.
Circling back to Dr. Jamaal Bowman, Ed. D., could the reason that progressive Democrats haven’t managed to take control of the entire U.S. be that Americans aren’t worthy of great ideals, e.g., stopping climate change, providing asylum to 8+ billion humans if they want it, ending homelessness, liberating Al-Quds and establishing a river-to-the-sea Palestinian state, a living wage for everyone who attempts to work, eliminating the acquisition of unnecessary wealth, etc.?
Your love of Hanna Reitsch is only eclipsed by her own love of her Gemeinsame Flugzeugführer- und Beobachterabzeichen in Gold mit Brillanten which she wore proudly all of her life!
Wait: “a living wage for everyone who attempts to work”
What is so wrong with this? Michael Hudson reminds us that the public policy of the United States for a very long time[1] was HIGH WAGES, in contrast to today’s “privatize profits; socialize losses” policy.
This policy has resulted in a) historically low fertility rates (it is very difficult to argue that a DYING OFF society is a healthy society) and a sustained campaign of POPULATION BOMBING, which RAISES COSTS of necessities like housing and LOWERS WAGES, especially when the bombers who are willing to work (only 2% in New York, but higher in Canada) are not even CONCERNED about the wages, because ESCAPING THEIR HELLHOLE COUNTRIES (i.e., the kind of countries that their people create) is sufficient motivation.
[1] https://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/A8E5DRTQQ27JEM93KHNH/full
However, this prosperity for the overall economy was not obtained by treating public enterprises like what today is called a profit center.
In one sense, this approach can be called “privatizing the profits and socializing the losses.” Advocating a mixed economy along these lines is part of the logic of industrial capitalism seeking to minimize private-sector production and employment costs in order to maximize profits. Basic social infrastructure is a subsidy to be supplied by the state.
Britain’s conservative prime minister Benjamin Disraeli (1874–1880) reflected this principle: “The health of the people is really the foundation upon which all their happiness and all their powers as a state depend.”4 He sponsored the Public Health Act of 1875, followed by the Sale of Food and Drugs Act and, the next year, the Education Act. The government would provide these services, not private employers or private monopoly seekers.
For a century, public investment helped the United States pursue an economy of high wages policy, providing education, food, and health standards to make its labor more productive and thus able to undersell low-wage pauper labor. The aim was to create positive feedback between rising wages and increasing labor productivity.
That process is in sharp contrast to today’s business plan of finance capitalism—to cut wages and also cut back long-term capital investment, research, and development while privatizing public infrastructure.