Archive for the ‘Anarchy Journal Constitutional’ Category

df_1

By @anarchyroll

What is journalism? What does it mean to be a journalist in 2016?

What is journalism in the era of media conglomeration? Has media conglomeration turned journalism as it was known in the 20th century into public relations for the 1%?

Is journalism;

  • What we see on local evening news? Sensationalized reporting of gun violence amongst those on the low-end of the economic ladder between sports, traffic, and weather.
  • What we read in newspapers and magazines between the advertisements, crossword
  • What we see on national news and cable news? Human interest pieces, celebrity gossip, and opinions given about politics, sports, and Hollywood all looped and edited to elicit emotion rather than thought or discourse.

Is journalism meant to report facts and information that affects large numbers of people based on the political, economic, and/or environmental the information will impact? Or is it just people writing/broadcasting what newspaper owners and trending topics dictate?

Journalism is about facts and information. It’s about exposing injustice to the public. It is about shining the light of truth into the dark corners of conspiracy and deceit.

Just because a small group of billionaires has bought all major news outlets (media conglomeration), doesn’t mean they have bought the facts and information that qualifies as news. Just because political parties receive large donations and cater to these media conglomerates, doesn’t mean they are immune from the facts and information they wish to keep secret from being reported to the public.

As was shown in the DNC Leaks, MSNBC was in direct contact with the Democratic National Committee about what to say and what not to say about Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. If MSNBC is a news station, and they are conspiring to turn the news into specifically crafted public relations, do they not deserve to have this conspiracy reported on? Is that not a news story?

When the news is owned by the people the news used to report on, so they don’t get reported on anymore, then the nature of gathering facts and information as well as reporting them must change. If the 1% would divest all holdings in all news reporting outlets, and all journalism was once again independently financed, what purpose would Wikileaks serve?

In a post print media conglomerate landscape, hactivism has evolved into journalism.

How much content have credible news outlets turned the DNC Leaks into? How many articles, pictures, videos, sound bites, polls, tweets, vines, snaps, and stories have been created because of what Wikileaks has done? The only ones who seem to think it’s wrong, are the people who have been exposed and their allies.

Mainstream media using the information provided by Wikileaks makes them complacent which makes what Wikileaks does with their hacking no longer any different from what a beat reporter did with their pen, paper, and access to newswires in the 20th century. Ten years ago Wikileaks may have been an underground, illegal, immoral, criminal, hacking networks of deviants, anarchists, and outsiders. In 2016, they are just another credible source alongside the Associated Press and Reuters. In 2016, Wikileaks is journalism.

 

download

By @anarchyroll

Suspected terrorists not being allowed to legally buy guns in America sounds like a no brainer. The type of legislation that is only a formality to pass because it is such common sense. What type of law-abiding citizen who exercises their right to bear arms for the purposes of hunting, stamp like collecting, and/or personal protection of property would object to such legislation?

Congressional legislation is rarely black and white or red and blue. The shades of gray, along with the devil, are in the details. In Congress, the devil and the details are earmarks, appropriations, and general language. Previous attempts to close the Terror Gap have stalled for all three of the aforementioned reasons.

There are so many mass shootings in America, it seems like something like the Terror  Gap would at least be used as a token gesture of good will. A way for the Congress to convince themselves and their varying constituents that they aren’t tone-deaf to the scare and suffering going on around the country at the hands of gun violence.

In the wake of the Pulse nightclub Orlando shooting, it is natural to assume that something needs to be done about guns in America. There are crazy, angry people everywhere in this world. In America however, those crazy, angry people just like the sane, happy people have consistent easy access to automatic weapons and military grade assault rifles.

Wishing for pie in the sky fantasy bills like a total ban on automatic weapons ie the Australia way, is not helpful. As far as America goes, file that under if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

Filibustering and staging sit ins to draw attentions to Congressional gridlock although well-intentioned, do nothing to move forward tangibly or pragmatically in a country where gun ownership is not going away anytime soon. We need cooperation and Congressional compromise literally  now more than ever at the most polarized political point since the Red Scare.

Closing the Terror Gap with a bill sans earmarks or strings tied to appropriations is only a first step, not a cure-all. A first step forward on the issue of guns is just what the doctor ordered for America right about now. Resistance to closing the Terror Gap puts law-abiding gun owners in a negative light. An insatiable desire to go take away all the guns casts progressives as nothing more than the yang to the yin of the redneck, gun clutching, bible-thumpers they claim to be better than through an ego centered in education as opposed to ideology.

A new normal of never-ending mass shootings in America is the time for pragmatism in terms of gun control. What can we do in this situation, at this time, to take a step forward as a nation and a species. Critical mass has been reached and we are long past the tipping point. Something most be done about guns in America.

To think things will change going forward based upon our current actions is insanity defined. There are simply too many guns freely available in the United States of America. Action must be taken. Whether that action is drastic or pragmatic, remains to be seen. But closing the Terror Gap is a first step that can be taken regardless of whether the next step is that of a baby or a giant. And the time to close the gap was yesterday. We need the easy choices like closing the Terror Gap behind us so that we can face the real hard choices like adults, with the kiddy pool decisions already behind us.

 

When was the last time something new was classified as a utility?

The internet being officially classified as a utility isn’t just another part of a disposable  news cycle. This is more than a current event. This is a piece of bonafied technological and human history.

The internet being classified in the same context as water, electrcity, gasoline, and the telephone is historic. Why? Because it changes many aspects of life for many many people forever. The direction the internet moves in, changes after this event. How? Because so many more people will have access to the internet. Regulation placed upon the price gouging Internet Service Providers will only help the have nots gain consistent access to the information super highway.

When things get bigger, they don’t stay the same. Evolution is inevitable just as change is the only constant.

Comcast, AT &T, Verizon and any/all ISPs have made their intentions clear with what they intend to do with the internet of the future, by the way they treat the technology AND the people dependent on the technology in the present. They want to tier and cap service while bleeding their dependent customer base for every nickel and dime they can. They have been doing this, are doing this, and will continue to do this until somebody stops them.

We have reached a tipping point where only an entity as big as the federal government can tell the ISPs that enough is enough, they’ve gone too far, it is time for regulation of pricing practices to democratize the technology for the masses  The masses need to internet not for the luxury of binge watching shows to waste their lives, but for the basics required in the 21st century to live their lives.


If people want to live and thrive in the modern world, internet use is required
. It’s no longer a consumer-good-luxury-item. That which was once done on paper is now done online. Applying for a job is done online. A job is needed to pay the bills, which is also done online. After one gets a job and pays their bills, if they have something left over and want to buy anything, researching that product or service is done online. Either purchasing the product or service or finding directions to a physical location to go do are both done online.

At one point in human history, consistent access to drinking water was a luxury. But then the standard of living evolved just as the human race did. Electricity and gasoline instead of fire? A thought inconceivable as a witch’s magic at one point in our past. But we raised the bar. Shelter capable of protecting people all but only the most extreme elements of nature was once thought to be reserved for large stone castles.

Body language to spoken word to written hyrogliphs to the printing press to the telegraph to the telephone to the fax machine to the world wide web and now the smartphone. Technology once thought to be science fiction dreams of the future are now everyday essentials. Humans have come from using rocks and sticks to make fire to harnessing super computers in the palm of our hand utilizing satellites from space on a second to second basis.

This wonderful technology has given human beings great power to influence ourselves and the world at large. With this great power comes great responsibility. Part of that responsibility is sharing the power with the masses. Access to this power is no longer a luxurious leg up on the competition but has evolved into the minimum requirement to get in the game.

This issue is destined for a decision from the Supreme Court. There is too much money at stake for district courts. The internet touches too many lives for appellete courts. History beckons that the Supreme Court of the United States decide the law of the land on the issue of internet access as a necessary utility or a luxury consumer good.

what-is-a-gmo

By @anarchyroll

Is GMO labeling important?

If it wasn’t, the companies who put GMOs in our food wouldn’t be actively and expensively trying to stop legislation mandating GMO labeling in America.

GMO labeling is the norm in 64 other countries around the world, which includes pretty much all the other industrialized ones.

There can certainly be a case made for GMOs, you know, with all the starving people in the world who don’t care if the food they get to eat is organic or GMO as long as they get to eat and not die.

But for the large percentage of the population that can think and live above the survival plain, who want to know what they are putting in their body, why all the resistance if there is nothing wrong with GMOs?

Times have changed, people literally want to know how the sausage is made these days. In the 1900s, that wasn’t the case, then again neither was equal rights for women and minorities. Times have changed.

Times have changed so much in Europe, that GMO labeling is so passé that countries are moving into the banning stage. Scotland and Germany have recently announced GMO crop bans. Meanwhile in America, we’re hoping the state of Vermont can lead the way.

Vermont? Isn’t that Bernie Sanders‘ home state? Yes, yes it is. Bernie Sanders has long been a champion of labeling GMO ingredients in food.

The resistance from GMO creators to labeling legislation tells you all you need to know about this issue. That and Monsanto is one of the largest creators of GMOs. If there is nothing to hide, why are they spending hundreds of millinos of dollars to hide? If GMOs are safe, why are Germany and Scotland banning them?

How do we or they know GMOs are safe if there are no long term studies on humans who ingest and/or are exposed to them?

And remember that in America, people just want the right to know. The battle over banning GMOs in America is a half a decade at minimum away from starting. This battle is just about the right of consumers to know if the food they are buying for themselves and their children contains GMOs.

In general, those who not only wish to suppress information from the public and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to do so, can be classified as evil and on the wrong side of history. The GMO labeling issue/debate is no different.

cbw8utnw8a0cce

by @anarchyroll

After being an academic term for decades, white privilege has come in the mainstream spotlight of the American lexicon in recent months.

The Black Lives Matter movement that started in 2012 after the Trayvon Martin murder and subsequent acquittal of his murderer, gained greater attention during the Ferguson and Laquan McDonald race related murder protests of the past year.

Of the many points raised during the dialogue Black Lives Matter has rightfully forced the American population to have, is white privilege.

White people, who will even engage in a conversation on this topic, naturally take the route of denial of the existence of white privilege in general and/or that white privilege has not benefited them individually. Denial is a natural stance for white people to take, because to not just acknowledge, but to understand and empathize with the concept of white privilege involves a complete paradigm shift.

And paradigm shifting is very, very, very, very hard to do. Anyone who says otherwise has never really attempted to undergo a paradigm shift. To shift paradigm is to change the deepest of deeply ingrained habits of thought, perception, and action.

I personally first became aware of white privilege during my first real romantic relationship as an adult which was with an African American woman. Spending time with her in both public and private, talking with her family and friends, and between ourselves was a very eye opening time for me.

That time along with an active meditation practice makes denying white privilege impossible for me personally. Though it is at least understandable, how millions of white people living at or below the poverty line in America, could think that white privilege either doesn’t exist, or doesn’t exist for them. After all, if they had white privilege wouldn’t they be rich?

White privilege is a macro theory. White privilege is much bigger than one white person’s or one white community’s circumstances. It is culturally structural. In America, white privilege is akin to gravity; it is there at all times whether we think about it or not. Why? Because it is white Anglo-Saxons that settled in America and purged the country of it’s indigenous population. To the victor goes the spoils. White people have been enjoying the spoils of their genocide against Native Americans for over two centuries.

The Flint Water Crisis has lead to an American city being in an official state of emergency over two months and counting. The final cost of this tragedy has been estimated at $300 billion. How much is that compared to the 9/11 terrorist attacks?

599657-now-i-get-it-the-flint-water-crisis

It has come out that officials knew up to a year in advance that the citizens of Flint, Michigan were having poisonous water pumped into their pipes. They knew ahead of time and made sure to get certain people clean/safe drinking water while others were bathing and drinking toxic water? That’s criminal. At that scale, that’s terrorism.

Knowingly poisoning an entire city of people, didn’t that happen in Syria during their civil war? Lead tainted water versus a chlorine bomb, the difference is colored bubbles.

But instead of a coalition of nations going in with armies and targeted air strikes, the leaders in Flint get to testify in front of Congress in a modern day, toothless witch hunt. Public shaming means nothing compared to permanent damage done to the civilians of Flint who have long term exposure to toxic water.

The consequences and complete lack there of for the people responsible for the Flint Water Crisis is white privilege personified. They should already be in jail and should be awaiting to hear if they face a harsher punishment. But they are white and in office, so they face some negative public scrutiny and maybe a slap on the wrist down the line.

What if it came out that a group of minorities poisoned the water supply in a major American city? What would the reaction be? What consequences would they face? What actions and reactions would the public demand?

by @anarchyroll

One of the most oppressive governments in the world enacting a science fiction based methods for stopping crime and terrorism…what could go wrong?

The Minority Report was an alright movie because of how fantastical the concept of solving crimes before they happen is. Fantastical in a free society at least.

Don’t let the fact that it is the largest economy in the world fool you, China is not a free society. Their communist government has their fingers in everything. In the case of the electronic data of the citizens of China, the government prefers a hand on the throat instead of a finger on the pulse.

I wonder if this attempt to stop crime and terrorism before it happens is in any way correlated with the ideological purification campaign the government has admittedly been undergoing.

Intense cultural censorship, absolutely zero digital privacy, and an authoritarian government. People in America seem paranoid that Donald Trump, a benefactor of a free market society in a democracy is going to descend the country into a racist, fascist state. Yet, the country that owns over a trillion dollars of US debt, is enacting a reality on its citizenry beyond what George Orwell could have imagined.

An authoritarian regime using data mining to predict crime before it happens seems more troubling than a real estate mogul making it halfway through a democratic election process. There is so much going on in this world it is impossible for a person to put care and effort into all the news that’s fit to print.

But let us keep the proverbial eye out as technology and power continue to intersect with each other, so we don’t one day wake up blindfolded to a materialized science fiction dystopia.

Think that a Matrix movie like dystopia is pure fantasy? What exactly does this image remind you of?

 

mm@C4logo2ajclogo2

431-film-page-large

By @anarchyroll

If you can read this, then you’ve seen Deadpool already. The real question is, have you read reviews of the film in the internet blogsphere?!

Most people dont give a shit about movie reviews from credible sources, let alone from people on WordPress. But hey, the trailer is embedded below this half paragraph, and you know you want to see it again for the first time since you watched it five times in a row two weeks ago.

What can I say about this movie that the three shit stains who sat behind me in the theater didnt say every god damn time there was a quiet scene?! I’m sorry they CGI shadowed his dick in that naked fight scene Janet, but could you please shut the fuck up and stop crumpling your bag of popcorn every ten fucking seconds?!!

Where was I? Oh yeah, the movie review. Here we go; Maxim effort…

Synopsis; if you don’t have a stick, rod, gerbel, or crucifix up your ass you’re going to love it. Seeing this movie was easily the hardest I laughed since my mom died two months ago. Escapism never felt so sweet or so vulgar.

If you haven’t seen it, and like comic books, comic book movies, action movies, and/or dirty dark humor than this movie is for you.

If it were up to me, all comic book movies would be hard Rs. Why? Because fuck little kids that’s why! Aaannnnnnd that definitely didn’t come out right. But you know what I mean. I’m clearly making an amateur attempt to apply Deadpool’s style of humor and forth wall breaking to this movie review blog.

If I keep this up I’ll be able to afford that premium theme in no time. Then I’ll start raking in that internet cash. Yeah…

What am I writing again? That’s right a movie review. Because their definitely isn’t enough opinion based content about comic book movie quality on the internet.

It was great, not good, great and the sequel with Cable can’t come out soon enough.

Now, to the imortant question, where’s the chimichanga I ordered on GrubHub?!!

150125100442-bernie-sanders-780x439

by @anarchyroll

There is something about the genuine article that attracts and magnetizes people.

Deep down inside, we know when we are dealing with a human being who is the real thing, and one who is an imitation/impostor. Granted, that line of thinking exists in the same world as the concept that it’s a shame to let a sucker keep their money. But people tend to know the truth in the gut if they are not having their senses bombarded with fear based propaganda.

Ten, twenty, thirty years ago what would the general perception be of a socialist running for President of the United States? How would the public react? What would the polls say?

Twenty, thirty, forty years of the masses being nickeled and dimed as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer piled on top of $475 BILLION of taxpayer money as a reward to Wall Street for causing the second coming of the Great Depression…..and all of a sudden a socialist in the White House is less much less far out or radical than any Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle catch phrase.

The most successful Independent politician in United States history was Bernie Sanders ten years ago. A self identified Democratic Socialist, Sanders spent 16 years as a United States Congressman before being elected as a US Senator. People of a certain age would love to believe Ross Perot’s run in the 1992 election is the shining example of independent candidates making a splash, but Sanders has already erased all of Perot’s accomplishments outside of Dana Carvey’s SNL impression skits.

Sanders is the real thing, the genuine article. A very white male who was arrested during a 1960s civil rights protest. A socialist who says very loudly, very often that he is going to raise taxes. A leftist who makes not attempt to move to the middle regardless of how politically prudent it is to do so. A man who speaks openly of the NEED for revolution on the reg.

I personally know three people who hate Bernie Sanders and respect him at the same time. They all hate him because they are well off and know he’ll raise their taxes, they respect him because he’s authentic. Well guess what folks?

In the year 2016, in the United States of America, there are WAYYYYYY more legal voters who respect Bernie Sanders for being authentic than rich people who hate him because they know he’s going to raise their taxes.

That is why Bernie Sanders is a legit general election threat, not just a primary darling. That is why Bernie Sanders has NOT gone mainstream. Mainstream has gone Bernie Sanders.

 

By @anarchyroll
12/6/15

Do you know who Edward Snowden is? Probably.

Do you have an opinion on Edward Snowden? Definitely.

If there’s one thing that I have learned since Snowden popped his whistleblowing cherry, it’s that everyone has an opinion about him whether they know who he is or not. He is either a hero or a traitor. There is no in between or gray area for the masses for this man.

He is either the alpha patriot or the omega cyber terrorist. He either deserves to be given a medal or a noose around his neck.

The United States government on the record believes Edward Snowden to be a traitor who if ever captured will be tried as such. The United States and our allies are the good guys of the world. We protect the masses from the bad guys preemptively when possible, and defeat the bad guys by force when plausible.

Europe generally, and the European Union specifically have been an ally of America for quite some time. The Allied Powers of Word War II naturally comes to mind. One need not be up to the minute on international relations, politics, or events to know that Europe and America have a very positive and professional relationship regardless of specific country or state.
The European Union Parliament recently voted to give Edward Snowden asylum and to offer it to him with as little difficult as possible.

Can you imagine the EU doing this to someone the US government labeled a communist traitor during the Cold War

It’s not a radical example at all. Snowden is currently in Russia.

How can Snowden be a traitor of the highest level in the United States yet our greatest ally is now formally welcoming him with open arms? This was not a random, one off, toothless statement by some drunk politician. This was the equivalent of the United States Congress offering asylum to a man that a country like France had labeled a traitor.
Edward Snowden has become the very public face of a very private world. The world of big data, cyber crime, cyber warfare, and privacy in the digital world.

For better or for worse, whether one agrees or disagrees with his method, Snowden has brought about as important a conversation that can be had in the digital age. One can be the biggest supporter of government surveillance while still admitting that Snowden has spurred a healthy debate on the issue.

Do we not have the right to at least know we are being watched and recorded every time we use our smartphone, tablet, laptop, desktop, and any other device that is connected to the internet? The fact is, most people, especially in America simply didn’t know or assume this before Snowden.

A whistleblower is different than a criminal. A whistleblower is different than a traitor. Is that not why the people behind the Pentagon Papers were not executed for treason?

It was very easy to paint Snowden as a traitor to America since he leaked government secrets to the public and has since taken barely secret residence in Russia. The EU formally offering him asylum turns the black and white into a very murky shade of gray.

Considering how many broadcast news stations have had in person interviews with Snowden since he received asylum in Russia indicates that he is not America’s most wanted. After recent terrorist attacks and mass shootings across America and its allies, it is clear that Snowden is not a terrorist even if one views him as a traitor.

If however, he has been formally offered asylum by America’s greatest and longest standing allies…how can he be a traitor?

mm@C4logo2

By @anarchyroll
11/29/15

All good things come to an end and nothing lasts forever…except diamonds of course.

Whether or not Spectre is the end of the Daniel Craig era proper, the spirit of change that Craig’s run as 007 has certainly passed. That much is made obvious by even a casual fan of the Bond franchise and/or someone who has seen all four films in Craig’s reign (Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Skyfall, Spectre).

The name of the film was in advance, a not so subtle signal to the return of the franchise’s glory days.

From Dave Batista’s character being a nod to Jaws, to the full fledged return of the Spectre organization, and its leader Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Whereas Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace forcefully took the franchise in a bold new direction, Spectre is a return to the classic Bond archetype better and for worse.

The prior Craig films would often give a twist and a tip of the cap to prior Bond iconography. Even at times seeming to poke fun at some of the archetypes the franchise created and leaned heavily upon over the course of the last half century. Spectre at times seemed like a parody of the franchise made by the franchise to set up the future of the franchise.

Both Bond girls become stereotypical Bond girls and do so rather quickly. Bond’s car and gadget(s) are presented in flippant manners. The reveal of Christopher Waltz’s character as Blofeld is done in a setting/location that is a composite of the most stereotypical Bond villain hideouts and locales.

One must wonder why they ever diverted the franchise off course if to only bring it right back on it after less than a handful of films. I liked the new direction the Craig films took. But Skyfall was more of a traditional Bond film, so there were really only two films that upended the franchise to chart a new modern course in the modern era of major motion pictures.

Die Another Day although not as bad as some remember, certainly jumped the shark with virtually every aspect of the Bond franchise. A reboot to some degree was warranted after the invisible car chase. But to come full circle and go right back to tongue and cheeky within ten years and four films of the gritty, edgy, more realistic 007 seems trite at best and lazy at worst.

I’m all about a return to the roots. Bring on the lazers, jetpacks, and sexual innuendo named women. Why not make the next film a tip of the cap to the Austin Powers? At times, that’s what Spectre felt like.

I never cared that the franchise was being upended and made grittier when the Craig era started. I cared that the money making franchise started making quality, stand alone, artistic films again. The previous films (Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Skyfall) had cinematography that rivaled any other film that came out that year. The mise en scené of almost every frame was great filmmaking. A quest to make art seemed to replace the thirst to make more money.

Spectre was indeed a return to the classic Bond archetype. For better and for worse.

Those classic Bond movies were made for popcorn entertainment and for making money. Perhaps the gears of the money making machine that is modern motion picture making finally chewed up and spit out the artistic spirit of the franchises’ modern era. Perhaps that has something to do with director Sam Mendes and star Daniel Craig both vehemently stating they don’t want to return to the franchise.

Perhaps what is old is simply new again.

If that is the case, where can I place a substantial monetary bet that the title of the next Bond film will have the word Gold somewhere in it?