jump to last post 1-1 of 1 discussions (64 posts)

Brussels is BURNING, why isn't it in the news?

  1. maxoxam41 profile image76
    maxoxam41posted 2 years ago

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … 9243932001
    Austerity measures against the people but in favor with big corporations. Cuts to the people and no tax for the corporations. What's next?

    1. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Maxo, this is quite a story, is there a reason something of this magnitude is kept under the radar by AMERICAN press? I can't imagine how 100k protest  anywhere does not rate the evening news. All the more reason to check to acquire your news from sources that are wide and varied and the truth is to be found in the midst of them all.

      1. maxoxam41 profile image76
        maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I guess they don't want to alarm us. They don't want to show that the European people are fighting their governments against policies that are implemented by corporations through their lobbying. For instance, the European Parliament is an American tool to sell the European people everything they oppose to GMO, participation in NATO's wars... Don't you think that it would encourage to do so?
        The people are obliterated and ousted from the executive seat.
        The US audiovisual landscape wants us to believe that revolutions are not occurring. Then what did happen in Spain, Portugal, France and now Belgium. People are fed up to be used and abused over and over by corrupt governments.
        I read about the Belgian uprising in an independent source globalresearch.ca. It is a source of REAL information.

    2. aguasilver profile image89
      aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      When the police and military powers are used to protect the state from the people, rather than the people from the state, then change will inevitably arise, because 'we the people' know that we want minimal intervention by the 'authorities' in our lives.

      Find a safe haven, secure your boundaries and sit it out while the revolution happens, at least do that if you are older and have a family.

      If you are of 'service age' get ready to serve, either serve the power elite in suppressing the people, or the people in stopping the power elite.

      There are probably no more than 5 million power elites ruling our lives.

      The choice will be how we stop them, historically the people eventually rise up and slaughter them, making way for a new generation of power elites to rise up and take control of the people again.

      Maybe this time we know enough about history to stop repeating it?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I confess I don't understand why people go on a rampage of destruction, destroying not only public owned properties but the property (and sometimes lives) of their neighbors and friends, all in the name of "protesting".  Nor do I understand why people then think that police trying to protect against that damage are considered as protecting the state from the people rather than protecting the people from the state.  It is, after all, the people destroying the cars, buildings and other things of other people.

        Can you help me here?  Why is it OK to go on a rampage of destruction and not OK to try and stop that rampage?

        1. aguasilver profile image89
          aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          You miss my point, I do not support the protesters, nor the police, I support the concept of dismissing the power elite and allowing a fresh start without their manipulation, and hopefully without the advent of a new power elite (political or corporate).

          I often wonder why we allow a small number of people (the power elite) to cause such mayhem and division, when there are 6 billion of us and probably less than 5 million of them worldwide.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            My apologies.

            Who would take their place?  The woman on TV that declared Obama was going to give her a new car?  The third generation welfare Mama, periodically popping out a new mouth that she can't feed?  One of the many that truly think government is an inexhaustible supply of money, just for them?

            1. Credence2 profile image86
              Credence2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              wilderness, I prefer your ghettostereotypes presonification any day to "power elite" that conservatives would put up on a pedestal  at the drop of a hat

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Actually, I do too.  I've only met one rich person in my life that I could like.

                But that doesn't mean that I think a third grade dropout, or a woman convinced the government can and will give her anything she wants is capable of running this nation.  It takes a lot more than simple ignorance to do that.

                1. aguasilver profile image89
                  aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Can you not conceive that you are surrounded by like minded individuals who, between our differing perspectives, are equal or superior to those who currently run things?

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Sadly, no.  That power corrupts need not be said - the only real answer may be to severely limit term limits and institute some kind of control over campaign spending and both carry their own dangers.  We can see this as the same scoundrels ruining the country are voted into power over and over...because of the freebies they can supply.  The nubes to congress never seem to last more than a few months or years before they join the scoundrel list.

                    For instance, one of the late campaign ads in my area was for a congressman that was touted as being good for my state because he brought in lots federal money for the state.  He got someone else to pay for the wants and needs of the citizens here, in other words, and that makes him a great politician that should be re-elected.  No, it makes him a liability to the country, but we don't care - our greed for more at someone else's expense is more important than growing the nation.  And he was re-elected (as always) because of our own greed.  Until we can eliminate that from the populace there is no reason to think that anyone can do any better than the crowd stealing us blind right now.  A new crowd will just do the same.

            2. aguasilver profile image89
              aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I'm afraid you are compounding the stereotypes presented by the power elite, buying the lie that there is a clear distinction between the (crafted and created) low class welfare breeder, from the (crafted and created) middle class pretentious and proud 'salt of the earth' conservative.

              Actually we are all equal, not in education nor environment, but in our humanity, and any discrepancies that exist between us are crafted and created by those who rule us.

              The horror is that once given a chance, the most balanced individual, will flee into the welcoming arms of the power elite, with mistaken belief that they are ascending the ladder of success and acceptance.

              No, the folk who should take their place are those without rancor and who have seen through the deceptions that our 'rulers' place upon us, those who are not afraid that empowering others would diminish their own comforts and security, and in any case are prepared to suffer disadvantage, if required, in order to break the cycle of power elite rulers manipulating deceived people.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, we are all equal in humanity, but not in the ability to run a country.  And no, understanding how the elite has conned us does not automatically make the man in the street (you and I) competent to make the decisions the nation requires for survival and growth.  Rather, those very people are most likely to have already been conned by the second group; those that think the government is the answer, solution and bottomless pocketbook of everyone in the country.

              2. maxoxam41 profile image76
                maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I agree.

            3. maxoxam41 profile image76
              maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Inexhaustible money that comes from our pockets. We pay for their wars, their mistakes of judgment, their bailouts... Who is the stuffed turkey? The people or the elite?
              They want war against Russia and they overthrow Ukraine. They antagonize Russia using Ukraine as a catapult... and they will send the people to die for their interests.
              My only concern would be a retaliation. Because I am an UNWILLING participant.

          2. maxoxam41 profile image76
            maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I thought the more numerous we are, the more powerful but we tend to forget the ability to think therefore I am factor. If the mass is associated to sheep there must be a rationalization of the statement somehow. And to assert my thought, why would be the validation of the idiom "divide to conquer" if the unity and the number were not dangerous weapons.

        2. maxoxam41 profile image76
          maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The question should be why is it that forces that are paid with our dimes are antagonizing the people? It is common knowledge now, that the people that are vandalizing property (as the good American that you are, with his higher sense of materialism) are hooligans paid by the state to discredit crowds.
          But, again, who are you? If you are part of the elite, I understand your positioning. But if you are like most of the people, that is to say, you don't have the financial means to buy your congress why siding with your enemy? It is not because you are the epitome of good citizenry, meaning you would snitch on your neighbor at the first order given by your government, that your own government won't eradicate you from the surface of the earth because the aggregate production will be inferior to consumption...

      2. maxoxam41 profile image76
        maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Unfortunately history repeats itself. I don't remember once that the people were not used by the elite to favor their interests. Wars are thrown with the killing of innocents. How many of our sons died? How many of our sons killed innocent people? The rhetoric consisting of idolizing our soldiers as heroes is a lie. Why do they kill themselves? Don't, at a point, they realize that what they are doing is wrong?
        As for the elite, meanwhile, it is thriving, isn't it? The multi-faced Lernaean Hydra is still alive and kicking. It is causing troubles in Ukraine, China, Africa (installing military troops pretexting an ebola outbreak and "changing governments"), Canada (it is exporting our local and national terrorism)...

    3. cjhunsinger profile image71
      cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      This is absurd. Simply put Belgium is going broke, as it's public debt (welfare) is about 102% of it's GDP. Unemployment is between 9% and 20% depending on the age bracket.
      Political divisions fall into three main groups—Christian Democrats, Liberals, and Socialists. Belgium is a socialist state and as such is drowning in debt. People are upset because the government can no longer support them. This is socialism.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry, CJ, but that statement is unacceptable.  It would mean that socialism in the form practiced by many in the EU is unworkable; that the people cannot live indefinitely off the labors of someone else. 

        And THAT in turn means that the mob destruction, demanding more welfare, lower retirement, and in general less work from the people for their goodies is unrealistic, that the people can't have something for nothing.

        Completely unsatisfactory.  Find something else to say; something that says people CAN live off of someone else.  That Germany should support the rest of the EU maybe (although Germany is becoming more and more reluctant to give away the fruits of it's peoples labor).

        1. cjhunsinger profile image71
          cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          What!

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            sad  I'm very sorry, but it is true.  People's greed demands ever more for ever less, and when they can't get what they want they will destroy what others have out of anger and frustration that they can't force their government to take from the haves and give it to them.  Saying such things as "People are upset because the government can no longer support them. This is socialism." will make you persona non-gratis to all the socialists out there.  A terrible fate!

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              It is indeed true. Not since the uncontrolled Victorian era have we seen such a transfer of wealth from the workers to the wealthy. If they can't take what little you have off you then they destroy it anyway. Oh and just to defend themselves they accuse anybody who disagrees of being a socialist.

              People are not upset because the government can no longer support them but upset because governments have become tools of the capitalists and willing to sacrifice anybody who doesn't lie down and accept the supremacy of the corporations.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Hi John - wondered when you would show up.

                If you think people aren't mad because government can't support them go back and look at the link from the OP again.  The demands are higher pay for the same work, lower retirement age (whereupon government support is total) and more welfare.  There is no possibility of thinking any of that is anything but support from government and that they don't have it already is apparently a reason to destroy what their neighbors (not the corporations, not the rich fat cats and not the politicians) have.  Along with, of course, what belongs to the public as a whole and WILL be replaced out of the rioters pockets.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Don't forget that the Daily Fail is a right wing newspaper and as such anti EU, anti the working classes, and anti socialism.

                  The demands aren't for higher pay for the same work and lower retirement age and more welfare.

                  The demands are for the same pay (not lower) the same retirement age (not two years later as proposed by business) and not more welfare but a maintenance at the same level, ie, no cuts in welfare.

                  BTW, the number of violent protesters was estimated at just a few hundred out of 100,000 and yet they get all the publicity!

                  To say that these few hundred folk represent the whole mass is as absurd as saying that I represent the beliefs of everybody on Hubpages.

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Don't know what "right wing" has to do with photos of burning cars...

                    Unfortunately, the government has supported the people for too long already; the retirement age must be raised in order to continue any at all (unless the money is taken from someone else).  And yes, the article was pretty clear that more welfare is being demanded.

                    I'm sure that there were only a relative handful.  But that's why large demonstrations are staged anyway; for the leaders to gain publicity and that is best done with violence.  Hard to believe that it isn't already in the planning when we see it nearly every time there is a mob "protesting" even though the suckers with the signs always seem to think that this time it won't happen.  They're being played, that's all - used for the purpose of creating violence the media will report.  Without it, the story is a paragraph on page 15; with it it's front page news with lots of pictures.  And we're supposed to believe it "just happens" against the desires of those setting the stage for exactly that?  I don't think so.

                2. maxoxam41 profile image76
                  maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Governments don't support people when will it be anchored in your brain? Everyday people protest, against GMOs, against trade agreements, fracking, nuclear proliferation... what did they have in return? I will end up believing that you are not part and parcel of your own society!

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You're losing me.  Do you mean that people go on a rampage of destruction while protesting because that gets the politicians attention?  Kind of what I said, isn't it - it happens because it is planned that way to get the media in.

                    But at the same time, were I that politician such destruction creates only disgust and the cause purportedly behind the protest gets lost.  Counter-productive, in other words.

      2. John Holden profile image61
        John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        What rot!

        Show me exactly where in any form of socialism it states that mass unemployment is necessary to maintain profits for corporations and that the unemployed must have even less to enable the wealthy to pay less tax?

        1. cjhunsinger profile image71
          cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I would agree, socialism is rot from the inside out.

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            What? You agree that you are talking rot and then back it up with more myths?

            Your only defence against something that is not socialism, is not caused by socialism and has no relationship at all to socialism is to call it socialism!

            1. cjhunsinger profile image71
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              John

              I think that you need to do some research, as you seem to speak from a point of absolute________. The Belgium government is proudly socialistic, as you will find here. "The Socialist Party of Belgium (PS) was created in 1885 with a mission of creating a fair and more humane society in which the general interest prevails over individualism. The core values of the PS are solidarity, brotherhood, equality, justice, and freedom. The current Belgian prime minister, Elio di Rupo, is the leader of the PS as the party holds the most seats in the Belgian legislature. The party’s strongholds are in Southern Belgium, where the lingua franca is French.
              I would be interested in your definition of socialism and how it is different than Communism, which is the other primary political force in Belgium. This division can be likened to the Catholic Church and Protestantism, my god is bigger than your god.
              If I am not mistaken the government, which is a monarchy controls the economy and, at last report the king is a socialist.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                The question that I asked and you avoided answering was "Show me exactly where in any form of socialism it states that mass unemployment is necessary to maintain profits for corporations and that the unemployed must have even less to enable the wealthy to pay less tax?"

                To move on to your latest flight of fancy.

                Since the 2014 elections the Belgium government is made up of three business friendly parties and the Christian Democrats. The prime minister of Belgium is not Elio di Rupo but Charles Michel, a Liberal (not a socialist).
                Kings by definition are apolitical but the idea that a king might be a socialist is ridiculous beyond belief and beyond any understanding of socialism in any form.

                I suggest that in future you avoid looking silly by doing some very basic research.

                1. HollieT profile image86
                  HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  John, I can't believe that you still have the stamina to talk logic, reason and facts to these people. Respect!

                  1. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I know, I just can't help it! smile

                2. maxoxam41 profile image76
                  maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Haven't you noticed yet that most of the people on this platform are uninformed?

                  1. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    People who admit to being uninformed are good! People who insist that they are right without even the most basic information are bad.

      3. maxoxam41 profile image76
        maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        And the US the EPITOME of democracy, capitalism is THRIVING? obviously NOT.
        However where is the relationship between my answer and your question? I was referring to the OMERTA reigning upon our audiovisual landscape...
        For your knowledge Belgium is socialistic.
        It is our VASSAL therefore it isn't a Russian SATELLITE and following that simple logic it applies capitalism thus the lamentable results of their economy.

    4. oceansnsunsets profile image86
      oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Because it might give people ideas in other countries, when they want/need to speak out and have no other recourse?  Sometimes, it can be good to not remind people of the power they have as the people.  In freedom loving countries, the people are in charge. 

      Its very strange it isn't in the news at all.  Or I haven't heard about it at least.

      1. maxoxam41 profile image76
        maxoxam41posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Indeed you are right.
        If you've never heard about doesn't it mean that our media hides it from us, and if they do so, what else do they do?

 
working