Sunday, April 6, 2014
Sunday, March 30, 2014
Book review and interview with the author—Democracy: All That Matters by Steven Beller
By Steven Beller
Hodder & Stoughton
Paperback, 160 pages
February 12, 2014
$ 14.00
Steven Beller’s Democracy Matters is a concise, powerful punch of a book. The author both analyzes and defends democracy at a time when the forces of plutocracy have grown in the West to a level of strength not seen since before the Great Depression. Democracy always needs defenders, and Beller steps forth ably to answer the call. The book traces the history of democratic thought and practice, then defines democracy, in particular the kind of democracy he believes works best, as well as the challenges democracy faces in today’s environment.
Without the space constraints that limit a printed review, I’ll let Beller speak for himself as much as possible. He explores the tension between the notion of liberty/limited government often associated with John Locke, and the concept of equality/the common good deriving from the thought of Rousseau as follows (bear in mind he uses “liberal” in the broader, European sense, not as a synonym for left of center on the American political spectrum):
“What we now call democracy is a compromise between liberal ‘freedom’ and democratic ‘equality’ in the management and control of power…Neither freedom nor equality can ever be the universal principle of a society without the other — democracy lies in the field of tension between the two. The problem is…if personal freedom results in some having more political or social power than others, or in some having more economic power (money and capital) than others in the free marketplace then the political or economic inequality that results might also endanger the rights and power of those on the losing end of the equation. This is the danger to modern democracy of oligarchy (the rule of the few) and plutocracy (the rule of money).”
Beller suggests that our current systems of government in the West, largely defined by the principles of “liberal democracy,” will need to “transform into something closer to a ‘social democracy’ on the one hand and a ‘pluralist democracy’ on the other, combined.” Through compromise, he believes we will achieve this “transformation,” and that doing so will be “for the good of all, for ‘democracy’ remains our best hope of achieving that common good.”
For more on Beller’s discussion of democracy, including the text of my dialogue with the author, please follow me beyond the fold.
Book review and interview with the author—Democracy: All That Matters by Steven Beller
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Dr. Steven Greer - "Other Beings & Why They Are Here"
UFO Update – Featured videos:
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Steven Greer: The Truth About the End of NASA"s Shuttle Program
UFO Update – Featured videos:
Friday, September 13, 2013
Steven Greer locks audience in lecture hall; bars doors, nobody in or out.
Two other incidents where Greer has been known to employ body guards are at the recent Citizen Hearing on Disclosure and at the Barcelona Exopolitics summit in 2009. Then he also has that Emery Smith character follow him around with a gun. He was arrested for having a fire arm at the National UFO Congress a little while back. (UFO Congress is held on tribal land in Arizona). David Wilcock has apparently jumped on this sideshow bandwagon and has hired security guards to follow him around as well. But this might be the first time that Greer’s antics might have put other people at serious risk. Locking doors like that is a serious fire code violation not to mention holding somebody against their will which constitutes false imprisonment.
This is just unreal, are these guys just delusional paranoids who have created a cult following or are they just hucksters trying to make a lot of money?
William Describes a Bizarre Horror Show at a UFO Conference
Steven Greer locks audience in lecture hall; bars doors, nobody in or out.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly
Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.
The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense. 501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.
This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.
During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly
Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.
The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense. 501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.
This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.
During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly
Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.
The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense. 501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.
This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.
During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly
Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.
The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense. 501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.
This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.
During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.
Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Steven Miller: Acting IRS Commissioner Resigns Amid Scandal
During President Obama’s extremely brief press conference from the East Room of the White House today he informed the American people that Tresurary Secretary Jacob Lew asked for and received the resignation of acting IRS commissioner Steven Miller. Obama also called for increased safeguards and clearer laws in order to prevent these abuses of power from happening again. Obama will take questions at another press conference scheduled for tomorow. Miller’s resignation comes amid a week of scandals that have rocked the White House.
The Inspector General released its findings today, here are the highlights.
Steven Miller: Acting IRS Commissioner Resigns Amid Scandal