Moderátor: Komise předsedajících
Toto je veřejné fórum, které neprezentuje oficiální stanoviska
Diskutujte slušně a respektujte Pravidla internetového fóra
:Bývalý správce @PiratiJMK i @PiratePartyCZ, bývalý člen KK, bývalý člen.
Covid-19 Will Mark the End of Affluence Politics
The possibility of a global pandemic will reveal our inability to make and distribute the things people need—just in time for a presidential election.
Matt Stoller
February 25, 2020
Wired
Eric Kingsbury píše:Post-debate, my dad - Boomer born in 1950 - called me to ask why Sanders appeals to the young. He’s supporting Bloomberg or Pete after supporting Bernie in 2016 for reasons that pretty much boiled down to misogyny. While I don’t ‘Feel the Bern,’ here’s what I told him.
First, full disclosure, I’m an ‘older’ Millennial - born '88 - a white, college-educated guy and a Warren supporter. I was a tepid Hillary supporter in the 2016 primary and general but my sympathies have always been on the left. Still, I’m a New Deal liberal, not a Dem Socialist.
So, my Boomer father asks, "Why does Bernie have so much appeal?" Simply, the complete failure of previous generations to reckon with the crises they caused and perpetuated, have left young people very, very angry.
Just in the last 20 years, I’ve seen the people who were supposed to know what they were doing and do the right thing fail over and over again. Starting with the Supreme Court discrediting itself in the 2000 election and then intelligence failures leading to 9/11 and Iraq...
...and then Katrina and then the Financial Crisis and the housing crisis and the student debt crisis and now the election of and then acquittal of Donald Trump. There are many more crises and failures I could add in there, too.
And that’s ignoring rampant inequality, the continuation of policies that treat people of color as second class citizens, the war on voting rights and democracy more generally, and the refusal to even acknowledge the existential threat to humanity that is climate change.
People who were supposed to be the serious and sober experts - the elites - have failed again and again and now a large movement of people are in thrall of an ideology that pretty much boils down to a “fuck you” to the suggestion they listen to or compromise w/ those same elites.
Over the last forty years, there have been opportunities to address these issues - most of which are not partisan - with small ball or moderate solutions. They could have turned the ship of state 5 degrees at a time which, over decades, ends up being huge. But they didn’t.
And now we’re left in a place where young people are tired of waiting and believe we must make dramatic changes all at once because we didn’t make small tweaks over time. This is especially true with climate where the science suggests catastrophe w/o massive efforts.
Bernie’s “revolution” and, to a lesser extent, Warren’s appeal is mainly premised on exhaustion with the status quo that has failed to address crisis after crisis with even half-measures. Sanders has the additional appeal of being viewed as an outsider who is not a capitalist.
This is genuinely a crisis and I don’t think older people on the center-left or those in the DC-NYC elite have really grappled with how much of a role they’ve played in getting us here. Compromise is foundational to democracy and a large, angry constituency is turning against it.
There was thought that Trump’s election might wake people from their complacency but even the #Resistance is only pining for a return to ‘Good Old Days’ of the early Obama Administration, which still saw a failure to address so many of the structural issues plaguing America.
(And I say that as someone who agrees almost entirely with what the Obama Administration did from ‘09-’11. I can quibble with a few things, but there wasn’t much else the administration could have done with the system and Congress they had at the time.)
When people wonder why Biden’s candidacy of restoration doesn’t appeal, it makes sense. Same with Bloomberg and Pete, who both represent an ideology that pairs social liberalism with minor tweaks to the status quo. Democrats have been trying that for decades with little success.
Young people, specifically college-educated ones, are ready for a big change. It seems like the plurality of the Democratic Party is as well. Polls suggest otherwise for the nation as a whole. And people of color, long accustomed to only marginal improvements, seem skeptical.
And, regardless of the outcome of the election, this anger will continue to boil until these crises are addressed in significant ways. A sizable chunk of the Democratic electorate won’t accept half-measures. What that means the future of democracy or capitalism is hard to say.
With that in mind, the appeal of Sanders is understandable, maybe even reasonable. That's why he should probably be favored to win the Democratic nomination. And the sooner the rest of the party and the elite come to grips with what has inspired Sandersism, the better we'll be.
One thing I neglected to mention is explicitly was that some of this anger is driven by the failure to hold any elites accountable for all of their failures. Here’s Sanders going after just that dynamic:
I should also note that my father was very upset by all of this, tried to cut me off multiple times, and said “we don’t have to talk about this right now.” He’s pathologically conflict averse and, like much of his generation, refuses to see his role in any of this.Bernie Sanders píše:I welcome the hatred of the crooks who destroyed our economy.
Lydia Polgreen píše:Former Goldman Sachs CEO and billionaire Lloyd Blankfein suggested he might choose Donald Trump over Bernie Sanders if the latter were to become the Democratic presidential nominee.
Ex-Goldman Sachs CEO: ‘I Might Find It Harder To Vote For Bernie Than For Trump’
Bolivia dismissed its October elections as fraudulent. Our research found no reason to suspect fraud.
As Bolivia gears up for a do-over election on May 3, the country remains in unrest following the Nov. 10 military-backed coup against incumbent President Evo Morales.
A quick recap: Morales claimed victory in October’s election, but the opposition protested about what it called electoral fraud. A Nov. 10 report from the Organization of American States (OAS) noted election irregularities, which “leads the technical audit team to question the integrity of the results of the election on October 20.” Police then joined the protests and Morales sought asylum in Mexico.
…
The media has largely reported the allegations of fraud as fact. And many commentators have justified the coup as a response to electoral fraud by MAS-IPSP. However, as specialists in election integrity, we find that the statistical evidence does not support the claim of fraud in Bolivia’s October election.
…
John Curiel, Jack R. Williams
February 27, 2020
The Washington Post
Veřejný proslov právního zástupce Kennedyho, shrnující problematiku a soudní při ohledně očkovacích vakcín: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMH6hfw ... e=youtu.be.The result of the lawsuit is that HHS had to finally and shockingly admit that it never, not even once [pozn. za posledních 30 let], submitted a single biennial report to Congress detailing the improvements in vaccine safety. This speaks volumes to the seriousness by which vaccine safety is treated at HHS and heightens the concern that HHS doesn’t have a clue as to the actual safety profile of the now 29 doses, and growing, of vaccines given by one year of age.
If HHS is not, as confirmed in Court this week, even fulfilling the simple task of filing a biennial report on vaccine safety improvements, there is little hope that HHS is actually tackling the much harder job of actually improving vaccine safety.
We went from the 3 vaccines that I had, to the 72 my kids had, and to the 75 that kids are going to get next year. And there are 273 new vaccines in the pipeline.
Since 2009, those four companies collectively have paid $35 billion dollars in criminal penalties and damages and fines for defrauding regulators, for falsifying science, for bribing doctors, for lying to the public, and for killing lots and lots of people.
They are exempt from safety testing their products. It is the only medical product. The reason is that it’s an artifact of the CDC’s legacy as the public health service, which was a quasi-military agency. The CDC took it over in the late 1970s. That’s why people at the CDC often have military rank, like the Surgeon General. The vaccine program was initiated as a national security defense against biological attack. Because of that they wanted to make sure we could get vaccines out to the public very quickly if Russia sent anthrax over here. They wanted to remove all the regulatory impediments that would prevent the quick deployment of that product.
So, they said, if we call it a medicine, all medicines have to be safety-tested under the law, double-blind placebo, and follow-up for five years. They said, we can’t do that. We’re going to call them something different. We’re going to call them “biologics.” And we’re going to make it so they don’t have to be tested at all. Not one of the 72 vaccines on the schedule mandated for our children, have been tested with a placebo. That means that nobody can scientifically tell you what the risk profile of that product is. Nobody can tell you that product is going to save more lives than it will take. There is no scientific basis whatsoever.
At the FDA, which is supposed to protect us against these products, receives 75% of its budget from the industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) receives 50% of its budget from pharma. The CDC is a pharmaceutical company. It has about $5 billion dollars a year that it buys and sells vaccines. And individuals within HHS who worked on those vaccines at taxpayer expense, if they worked on them, they’re allowed to get royalty payments Every vial of Gardasil that’s sold, there are people within HHS, high-level individuals, who are collecting $150,000 a year in royalties. HHS and NIH own part of that patent and are collecting money every year. These are not regulatory agencies. They are appendages of the industry.
And they’ve bought off the press. They put $25 billion dollars a year into advertising.
But do you know who the ultimate authority is? It’s the Institute of Medicine. That is why Congress named the Institute of Medicine to be the ultimate authority on vaccine safety. And do you know what the Institute of Medicine says? It says there are 150 diseases that they think are caused by vaccines, and the CDC has been directed to study them. They said that in 1994. CDC refused. They said it again in 1998. CDC refused. They said it again in 2011. They say it every year. This industry has been able to disable all of the institutions of our democracy that stand between a greedy corporation and a vulnerable child. There are more lobbyists than Congressmen and Senators combined.
Centrum pro kontrolu nemocí připustilo ve federálním soudním řízení, které nemá žádné vědecké studie na podporu svého tvrzení, že vakcíny podávané dětem nezpůsobují autismus.
Soudní žaloba, podaná neziskovou informovanou sítí souhlasu , usilovala o to, aby CDC předložilo důkazy na podporu tvrzení na své oficiální internetové stránce, že „Vakcíny nevyvolávají autismus“.
Z tiskové zprávy společnosti ICAN:
CDC na svých webových stránkách tvrdí, že „Vakcíny nezpůsobují autismus“. Navzdory tomuto tvrzení studie zjistily, že mezi 40% a 70% rodičů s autistickým dítětem stále viní vakcíny za autismus jejich dítěte, obvykle poukazují na vakcíny podávané během prvních šesti měsíců života.
V létě roku 2019 ICAN předložil CDC žádost o svobodě informací (FOIA) o „Všechny studie, na které se CDC odvolává, když tvrdí, že vakcína DTaP nezpůsobuje autismus“.
I přes měsíce požadavků CDC nepodařilo v reakci na tyto žádosti FOIA vypracovat jedinou studii.
Společnost ICAN byla proto nucena žalovat CDC u federálního soudu, kde CDC nakonec v ustanovení podepsaném soudcem federálního soudu uznal, že nemá žádné studie na podporu toho, že žádná z těchto vakcín nezpůsobuje autismus.
Cuba leads global efforts against COVID-19 in spite of blockade
Countries from across the globe have asked Cuba for the Interferon Alpha 2B, a drug developed in Cuba proven to be an effective against COVID-19
A Cuban drug, known as the Interferon Alpha 2B, could save thousands of lives in the COVID-19 pandemic. The drug has been produced in China since January 25 and, so far, has managed to effectively cure more than 1,500 patients from the coronavirus. It is one of 30 drugs chosen by the Chinese National Health Commission to combat the respiratory disease.
The drug was first developed in 1986 by a team of researchers from the Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB) and has benefited thousands of Cuban patients since its introduction into the national health system. It has been used as a treatment for HIV-AIDS, Hepatitis B and C, Herpes zoster or Shingles, Dengue and different types of cancers. The medication increases the natural production of interferon in the human body and strengthens the immune system of patients, thus, is effective in treating the coronavirus disease.
The drug, developed in Cuba, is produced in China at the Changchun Heber Biological Technology, located in Jilin province, in a joint venture as part of an agreement between the two socialist countries in biotechnology.
It has prevented thousands of deaths in South Korea. Out of the 8,000 infected peoples, only 72 died. Germany has also bought these antivirals from the ChangHeber to fight the pandemic. Out of the 3,156 infected people, only 3 died.
After the effectiveness of the Cuban drug was known and popularized, the country has been flooded with purchase orders for Interferon Alpha 2B from across the globe. Several Latin American, Caribbean and European countries have requested medical aid from Cuba in order to fight the coronavirus outbreak.
…
Cuba has historically worked to help some of the world’s poorest countries with medical assistance. Under a humanitarian medical mission, founded more than 55 years ago in the aftermath of the Cuban revolution led by Commander Fidel Castro, Cuba has provided almost-free healthcare services in over 160 countries across the globe.
For the last couple of years, the administration of US president Donald Trump has been attacking Cuban doctors as a part of a historic US policy of strangling the Cuban economy in their attempt to bring down the revolutionary government in the country. The US has demanded its allies in the region to cancel their health cooperation agreements with the socialist country and this led to the expulsion of Cuban medical staff, including doctors, nurses and technicians, from several countries, such as Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Bolivia, where the right-wing regimes closely aligned with the US are in power.
Social movements, trade unions and progressive governments from Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa and the Middle East have condemned the US for tightening sanctions and increasing Cuba’s isolation, while warning that poor patients will be the biggest victims of these sanctions.
Tanya Wadhwa
March 16, 2020
People's Dispatch
Bývalý správce @PiratiJMK i @PiratePartyCZ, bývalý člen KK, bývalý člen.
Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories
Inequality in energy consumption, both direct and indirect, affects the distribution of benefits that result from energy use. Detailed measures of this inequality are required to ensure an equitable and just energy transition. Here we calculate final energy footprints; that is, the energy embodied in goods and services across income classes in 86 countries, both highly industrialized and developing. We analyse the energy intensity of goods and services used by different income groups, as well as their income elasticity of demand. We find that inequality in the distribution of energy footprints varies across different goods and services. Energy-intensive goods tend to be more elastic, leading to higher energy footprints of high-income individuals. Our results consequently expose large inequality in international energy footprints: the consumption share of the bottom half of the population is less than 20% of final energy footprints, which in turn is less than what the top 5% consume.
Oswald, Y., Owen, A. & Steinberger, J.K.
Nature Energy 5, 231–239 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0579-8