While i agree with most everything you say...........

I can't help feeling it would all be accomplished if the 'sheep' wanted it so.

They don't. They want to be sheep.

At 72yrs, i have given up all hope that people desire to be leaders and participate in a democracy. The burden seems to fall on the few to lead, who become arrogant, in the process.

That there is no potent 3rd party, that Assange is being tortured, Ukraine, etc, etc, belie the fact, that its not just propaganda, its inveterate passivity. I hope it changes.

Expand full comment

I agree with JM, there's nothing separating us and them except an accident of falling into a life circumstance that made us question things a little sooner. And none of us really knows what to do about it, right? When other people come to the same crisis point of recognizing it's all been a lie, what do we have to tell them? Instead of berating people for working their pointless jobs to try to have a little fucking joy and raise their kids to feel a little bit secure, shouldn't we be using our head start on reality to develop a plan?

Sorry to be taking out my impatience on you, bernard, but I'm sick of being the only one taking system change seriously--an anarchy of community economics, communications, information, governance, food production, energy, education, trade, etc etc. I don't think people are oblivious because they're not afraid or hopeless enough. They see no alternative. Isn't that our fault?

Expand full comment

Tereza, you don't have to apologize. I understand your impatience and shared it, once.

I do not believe, class, race, or financial status has much to do recognition of inequality. Witness Malcolm X, and so many others.

I certainly do not believe its my fault or responsibliltiy.

Last vote for a regular candidate, i cast, was McGovern. Anyone could have voted 3rd party as i did. Nader 4 times here, and then Stein. I even voted for Shirley Chisolm. Recognition of inequality and our imperial homicide forign policy isnt that difficult to understand if one CARED to take an interest, let alone a deep dive.

You can cut these arrogant, passive, bots, some slack i decline too.

Wasn't it at the end of Animal Farm, where the guy looks at the pigs. And then looks at the humans. And then looks at the pigs. And then looks at the humans again. And he can't tell the 'difference'. :)

Expand full comment

I'm glad you didn't take offense, bernard. I'm traveling with only coffee shop internet so I was wondering last night if I'd said what I meant to. Let me go back to your original statement, "I can't help feeling it would all be accomplished..." What is "it" exactly? What are the policies that would solve the problems? Your solution is the right person, who you think has the answers--McGovern, Nader, Stein, Chisolm. I wouldn't say that all four of those have a consistent platform. Wasn't Nader's last book something like The Super Rich Will Save Us?

In order to have a systemic approach to system change, you need to start with the goal--do you want a system with a few people at the top who take responsibility for everyone else or do you want a system that enables people to take responsibility for themselves? I go with the latter, which means no party candidate is going to change that. Then you develop all the possible alternatives to achieve it and figure out which one will make the biggest difference for the most people and take away the least amount of what's working for some. The system I talk about in my book enables all communities to own their labor and assets while inconveniencing a handful of bankers by taking away their ability to create money out of nothing.

As an animal husbandry gal, I don't disparage pigs but I think humans are okay too. People are doing the best they can within the constraints they have. We all want the same thing--a way to take care of the people and places that have been entrusted to us. If you think that voting for anyone, third party or two, is the magic bullet, I think that's just a difference of hogs vs. sheep vs. cows. It's not a plan.

Expand full comment

Hard to blame them: born, bred, educated... no! trained to be sheep, then lead into the fields fenced and closely managed by shepherds and sheepdogs (Bernie Sanders, the list is long). Thousands of years of development in control of the masses. It's the rare confluence of luck in so many areas that leads to any breakthrough either for an individual (just look at Caitlin's numbers vs. a sheepdog like Matt Taibbi) or a nation (It took WW1 to give rise to the Soviet Union, WW2 to give rise to the PRC, Vietnam). Even if they hear the bleating's at the slaughterhouse ramp, which one will leap the fence? https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1543456937756348416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Just watch the EU as USA sinks it, yet they follow on.

Expand full comment

Too, too true, Mr. Karpf.

Alas, I recognize that I am more sheep than activist; I have done more to keep this corrupt system going than to bend it to my will.


Expand full comment

I do have a certain amount of hope, although I won't be around to see it (I'm a decade younger than yourself). If we manage not to nuke ourselves or create a population-decimating plague the Singularity is coming, the blending of humanity and its technology. While some people believe that it's just a pipe dream or dystopian sci-fi it's actually pretty much an evolutionary inevitability, the evolution of Homo Sapiens (wise/thinking man) into Homo Technocrisis (technology-using man). It will happen slowly at first, but once a reasonable number of 'nodes' has been achieved there will be a melding of minds across the planet. I recommend the 'Nexus' trilogy by Ramez Naam for an illustration of how it will happen.

Expand full comment

I'm right between you and bernard in age but what you're describing seems to me to be the Great Reset nightmare. Is that really what you're hoping for? My spiritual hunch is that we might well be one mind, no technology needed. But the same people, like Yuval, who are salivating over Homo Technocrisis (an apt name) are aligned with those who brought us the population decimating plague AND the nuke-flirting over Ukraine. It's all one plan.

Expand full comment

Either you lead or you participate.

Expand full comment

In practical terms, we must start with the recognition that 1) corporations are not persons, but creations of government, and do not have natural (for the religious, God-given) rights and 2) money is not speech, and society (government) may limit the amount of money that may be expended to promote speech.

Expand full comment

I agree with you. The Supreme Court should apply its reasoning for overturning Roe v Wade to overturning the rulings related to corporations are persons and money is free speech.

Expand full comment

"The idea of true information anarchy can be as frightening to the ego as the idea of total societal anarchy, because nobody being in control means there's nobody to stop it from going in a frightening direction. What if ideas I don't like gain popularity? What if people start thinking wrong thoughts and believing wrong beliefs? "

Caitlin, I think this is what our would-be controllers fear! And in my view this is why it is unlikely to manifest any time soon. But, radical though I may be, I don't think that this is what would actually happen. People could learn to communicate with each other across language divides and this may in turn lead to a reduction in paranoia and fear.

In my opinion it is the pathological desire of our manipulators to control that leads to "wrong" thoughts and beliefs.

Expand full comment

Nice idea, but how do you deal with the psychopaths and the congenitally stupid?

Expand full comment

I agree with everything CJ says about information freedom and concur on the illuminating world of psychedelics too.

Psychedelics never led to an audience with pan-dimensional Gods nor were they a transcendental meditation on the beauty of Indra's net.

Funnily enough, the psychedelics takeaway was basic and based: visceral preference for kindness over consumption and profound sense of "we ain't all that."

Expand full comment

That's why psychedelics are so scary to the establishment. What would become of capitalism if bourgeois attitudes and desire for endless acquisitions disappeared? I lost my desire for the unattainable in '79, the last time I dropped acid. I just didn't see the need for all the trappings of class consciousness. And I still wanted my bearing to be here on Earth instead of what's usually referred to as crazy. So poor I was and still am. I'm content, still an avid idealist but content nonetheless. Peace

Expand full comment

George Seldes clearly wrote 80 years ago "The facts are; a guide to falsehood and propaganda in the press and radio". History is sure reflecting page 2...

Thank you Caitlin for keeping the Spirit of Seldes alive.


Expand full comment

I appreciate the essay. Sad to say that it might jump too short. Journalism is not the solution anymore. The difference between an 'intellectual' and appointed expert and a power agent is zero. Everybody holding a 'position', with the respective privileges organizations grants as long as the recruit obeys its imperatives, and an agent of power, whether secret or public, academically buffered or supported by arms or any kind of organized empowerment.

All this functions along the imperatives of organized power to control the subjects of the implemented extraction process, along the monoculture of organization, no matter the differences between the resulting regimes, or the means applied, private or public. Even 'fascism' can be 'privatized', and science and (especially digital) technology are intrinsically totalitarian and intended to achieve ABSOLUTE and TOTAL CONTROL.

They are 'rule based forms of order', according to their own inner telos, without any regard to political power or external implementation regulations, intrinsically totalitarian from the start.

According to a certain Mr. Tegmark THE UNIVERSE IS A MATHEMATICAL OBJECT.

The prayermill Mantra about the neutrality of science with regard to its practical use is an unscientific lie, science itself does contradict in every of its self made epistemical statements about its own meaning and purpose.

And 'humanity' is an idea, not congruent with the sum of the biomass of the species homo, a cannibal predator and omnivore split in itself into the difference between predator and prey, and there is no credible utopia to end thus but (self-) extinction of the species.

The final results of any as yet unfinished project of modernity and enlightenment is the inescapable confrontation of the species homo with itself and the history of its development as the sublimation of its cannibalism.up to the free labour market as the basis for a thermodynamic machine sucking up whatever can be fed o to it across the elementary table and whatever lives until the fuel and lubricant run out.

That's all. No reason anywhere, all just a temporal extension of the contingent and aimless process of biochemistry on this planet (only) not controlled by any meaningful mechanism or rules outside its biochemical functioning according to the energy status of the planet/moon/sun-system open to the vacuum.

Any excess of imagined meanings just the fog over a swamp built overnight dissolving in the light of a sober view on it.

Any infusion of 'hope' is just another attempt of the 'intellectuals' to gather new follower masses for their own self sustain meint and self aggrandisment. That would be the minimum of self reflection for anybody who claims to be able to find and to hold an archimedan point outside the orbit of the semantic system of meanings the system produces as a function of its selfmaintenance. 💯 (c)

Expand full comment

Interesting article and comments. Certainly, I desire a more honest and transparent government. I also think integrity and compassion are sorely needed. Therefore, I must be those things I desire.

There is no democracy without an enlightened citizenry.

Expand full comment

Democracy is an enlightened citizenry, all the rest is just form and method of execution.

Expand full comment

Imagination a true democracy wherer boards of directors of all the news divisions of all major media corporations were selected randomly from the public at large, with the mandate to ensure that the public heard from policy advocates from across the political spectrum whether the owners and controlling officers (ceos etc.) liked it or not. Imagine further than they were backed by a government body also randomly selected from the public tasked to ensure authorized democratized media news division boards had the authority to oblige other parts of the media corporation (entertainment, sports etc.) or the conglomerate that owns/controls the media corporation to provide the funds and resources to ensure the public receives high quality, entertainingly presented yet genuinely informative and widely based information productions (tv, print, social media)? That’s the media system presented in books like The Democracy Manifesto. It’s the only practicable way of actually achieving the reforms Caitlin calls for but doesn’t say how they could happen.

Expand full comment

Psychedelics might do it, although I shudder at the possibilities of the inner worlds of some public officials. I would push for the democratic socialism format, an idea that predates neoliberal capitalism by eons, but was violently opposed by various kinds of elites and vested interests throughout the ages. Such a system would not end all social problems, and Marx never claimed it would, but it's a helluva good start.

Expand full comment

There’s a proverb I always liked:

“Where there is no vision, the people perish.”

If I had to take a stab at what the question of vision means today, it would be:

- Cancelling the fake giant funny money casino financial system which is all the oligarchy really has to control the economic sovereignty of nations in the West.

- Remind people that the oligarchy is not a nation or country, it’s a a small financial nexus, with an intelligence arm (the “Five Eyes”) and the brute muscle power of the US military and NATO.

- What the oligarchy fears most is a return to the Hamiltonian credit and Lincoln-style greenback system where nations no longer allow private merchant banking institutions to control their national credit institutions, and instead force those institutions to create legitimate national credit based on the creation of future-orientated multi-generational projects (rather than short term purely profit-based and speculative activities).

- people need to know what’s going on, and they need to know how nations and civilizations have gotten out of crises like this before, as Solon led Athens with a debt jubilee or as Hamilton did with the national bank and Lincoln with the Greenback and trans-continental railway system.

- If the funny money casino economy was cancelled (with a Glass-Steagall-style re-organization of the banking system), then it would be relatively easy to redirect the productive sectors of the economy towards a future orientated multi-generational program of economic reconstruction.

This is what the bad guys fear most.

They’re not that smart or that strong. They depend on dumb left vs. right Ben Shapiro vs. APC debates.

Expand full comment

As I was reading the post I was waiting for a punch line along the lines of it all being wishful thinking for the humanity as a whole. Unless it is well hidden there somewhere.

Expand full comment

One of your best pieces. I agree wholeheartedly. It's no coincidence that, as we move into the age of Aquarius, the old controllers are doubling down on censorship and misinformation.

For those who grew up in the church, it reminds me of one of the Bible's statements about the Antichrist; "He knows his time is short". This system knows its time is short. That's why it's desperately clamping down on info, and working as hard as possible to kill people off and turn us against one another.

And just like the Antichrist, this system knows it will lose. We can hasten that process by keeping a level head, learning to live and let live, and calling out every single act of injustice, lies, and malice this Beast System has to dish out.

Expand full comment

It all starts with Santa Claus, in my opinion. The lies. What a story they tell us, about a benevolent old man who knows everything about us and breaks into our homes every year to leave us gifts or lumps of coal, depending on our behaviour.

The other big lie is that it's necessary to forcefully breed, imprison, and kill animals for human consumption and entertainment. And that it's okay to do that.

All bullshit. And they build the rest of their lies on top of this very early programming, after we've already surrendered part of our brain and rational thinking to the dominant culture.

Break Free! Be Vegan !!! And tell Santa to go stuff himself.

Expand full comment

There's a proverb I like that goes as follows:

"Where there is no vision, humans thrive and flourish."

Think about it.

Expand full comment

the search and need for meaning and truth are innate to human consciousness.

Expand full comment

And what if that meaning is just to be rather than searching for meaning and truth and implementing visions? What if human consciousness is a trick? What if truth supersedes provability? The more we know the less we do?

Expand full comment

Like I've said before: OCCUPY SILICON VALLEY! Our one demand? Free speech, total and unversal. Yes, you can call it Information Anarchism if you like. I like it too.

Expand full comment