Glenn Beck’s False Flag

Glenn Beck’s False Flag

I have spent some time critiquing Glenn Beck.  His lapses in judgment.   His lapses in logic.  His lapses in humanity.  His lapses in balance.  His lapses in justice.  What I haven’t said often enough is that he has some ideas that are almost right on target.  Why have I not said this?  Is it my lack of balance? My left leaning bias? Do I not want to give ammunition to the far right?  Well, yes and no.  It really boils down to corporatism. But what is it?  My point of view on corporatism is that it is not a right or left issue, it is about the big swallowing the small. So Glenn is half right. And, no, it is not because he is half-wit, quite the contrary.  He knows it is big uncontrolled government not regulating big uncontrolled business that is the problem, but he also knows that on his network, and in his tax bracket, that he is best off not to mention the second half of the equation. He also knows, as do we all, that the solutions, on both sides are the pharmacon of civilization, both the poison and the cure.  The right dosage in the right set-and-setting for the pharmacon is all important.

Now I love a conspiracy just as much as Glenn Beck does, though I tend to see them from the opposite side of the aisle, I love them nonetheless.  I love the pull of the Elmer Gantry’s of the world. I love to look toward whatever and however the morning and the evening star might save us, but in the end as I am brought down the aisle to be saved with the crowd, I am usually more comfortable questioning the savior than blindly following them over the cliff of good intentions.

You may say that I am cynical thinking that every potential solution sounds like a Just So story to be doubted, but we all want to believe, and to do so unquestioningly means we will be sucked into the collective as quickly as we can be assimilated. If you have The Answer, then you are not only to be doubted, but you must be put to the utmost public scrutiny.  To do less is suicide; mentally, physically and spiritually.

The pull of corporatism as defined by the left and the right is strong.  It is stronger than the left wants to hear.  Big business requires big government to both foster it and control it.  Everyone wants to name the disease; we know the symptoms, but not the cause.  Everyone appears to think that naming is understanding and wants to give a prescription to the now named disease, but no one knows the dosage for the pharmacon, nor the proper set-and-setting.   God help us. If you ask those in the middle of road, they’ll tell you it’s all in your head.  While those in the wings will point at each other saying just look at what has been done. We are poisoned or we are cured.  So go ahead and appeal to common sense, but whose common sense?

So how is it that Glenn Beck flies a false flag?  It is easy to see that  for twice the money (to cover his losses), Glenn Beck could have an epiphany, flip the script and move to MSNBC to harangue on the abuses of big business.  Explaining the epiphany alone could carry him a few seasons.  He is a diversion of the first order.  He will tell his new (and many of the old) listeners just what they expected all along. They want to believe. Until the big tent burns and Sister Sarah dies, then he will join the more cynical among us in tears as he carries out the body.  This time the tears may be real.

8 responses to this post.

  1. There are indeed significant ideological differences between the left and right, differences that need to get worked out, BUT … Most of our differences would take care of themselves if we focused on the things which we agree.

    I’m talking about “We the People” here, not the 2 monopoly political parties. Partisanship only gets in the way. Partisanship causes the “right” to support economically destructive policies like NAFTA, and the “left” to bolster Big Business via regulation. It’s corporate lackeys who write the regulations which do nothing but grant government favored corporations monopoly status. But I digress.

    If people could look at it all for what it is, corporatism, instead of the “left v. right” nonsense, they’d all wake up and realize that we’re all getting screwed!

    The first step in ending all this, of course, is ending ALL corporate subsidies. Period. The second step is to restrict political contributions to individuals only. And most importantly, we have to end the Fed.

    The 2 parties will never agree to these things, but then again, they’re bought and paid for. But this is something both the “left” and “right” among “We the People” should be able to agree on, and push for accordingly. What do you think?


  2. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by pjredd and others said: @TikkunOlam Glenn Beck’s False Flag #corporatism […]


  3. I think we agree for the most part. I think the model set by the organic farmers might be something the far left and the far right could use as a bridge. I use organic farmers as a model because they represent the ideals of both extremes and could serve as a safe space from which to move toward a rapprochement.


    • Do we need a model? Why not just “End Corporate Welfare!”

      My thought is that we don’t need to agree on everything to join together in one (big) common cause. Why should a struggling family fork over their hard-earned money to subsidize GE, GM or the banks? Why should a small struggling business be forced to hand over their hard-earned dollars to Monsanto, Pfizer, or Boeing?

      We may disagree on a lot of issues, but we can agree on this basic principle, right? Ending corporate welfare shouldn’t offend “the ideals of both extremes,” or even the middle for that matter. We can all side with the people being looted against the looters without a model, can’t we?

      Even the slogan works. The “left” hates corporate and the “right” hates welfare. 😯


      • We need a model because we need a safe space to meet in the middle without all the buzzwords and issues that inflame both sides. Small, local, sustainable appears to be ideas everyone can agree on, and something the corporate welfare recipients have “bought into” in their propaganda.

        So by using this bridge, we have grounds to start a conversation without arguing about who is sitting on which side of the table. We have different world-views, different languages almost. So without a more neutral language with which to discuss the issues, we will end up with more meat grinder legislation with Philadelphia lawyer loopholes for the rich.

        If we agree on this, then we could suggest a loophole-less 10% flat tax, for example, by way of the issue of why broccoli costs more per pound than meat.

  4. Nothing wrong with a little cynical thinking with politics and pundits are involved. Indeed, the whole subject of reasoned doubting is both logical and cynical in certain ways. The oracle of all things cynical notes:

    Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they are convinced beyond doubt that they are right.
    — Laurens van der Post

    But don’t take that as “The Answer” either ;->


  5. What about trying these Fascists for treason? NDAA, assassination of Americans by vote of a secret cabal is an act of war on the people. That alone is enough to charge them with Treason according to the Constitution isn’t it? I’m no lawyer if I were I would have filed for the indictments long ago. When you indict everyone behind NDAA and those other bills and acts that would force them to stand in a Court and plead, right? The burden of proof would shift on those charged to prove their innocence. We could freeze their finances, pull passports, suspend any bills acts they had a hand in. Their associations with Wall Street and insider trading would prove their treason alone. They set all of this in motion either through ignorance or by design and the way I heard it was “ignorance of the Law is no excuse”. Can someone explain why they all can’t be charged with Treason?


    • I think working for a total transformation of the political and economic would be more effective. The reason being that all government indictments will serve to do is to point fingers for other equally corrupt people to hide behind and continue to cost the taxpayer money.

      Consider how poorly it works “breaking up” monopolies that can hide behind interlocking boards of directories that can pay off the current crop of government officials. Putting the government in jail doesn’t stop the cause. Maybe putting the corporate heads in jail under RICO might work as you get their money out of politics.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: