Opinion
Faced with possible and urgently needed health care reform, Republicans are becoming absolutely hysterical, screaming “socialism” every time an aspect of legislation appears to even mildly favor the people at the possible expense of industry.
Let’s put this in perspective: all forms of government bailouts, industry subsidies and corporate tax incentives, which by the way have always been equally endorsed by both parties although both are equally good at playing the blame game to fool the electorate, are for all intent and purpose socialism for the wealthy, what has also been called corporate welfare.
To heavily subsidize an industry with taxpayer money is a socialist policy, contradicting basic free-market principles. In true socialist nations, the government owns industry. In pseudo-socialist nations like the US as well as in fascist nations, industry owns the government. The end result is the same, which is that government and industry have a romantic love affair, and ordinary people get screwed.
The US government has always subsidized industry, in essence intervening heavily to favor and sustain unsustainable industries, such as industrial farms, and damaging or bankrupting others, such as small farmers.
This, obviously, invalidates all claims to the existence of an American free-market system. However it should be noted that the point here is not ideology, but profit. It is not about capitalism or socialism, but about the bottom line, as America is a highly pragmatic nation, not inclined to fight over concepts but over concrete results.
Profit at the very top is the name of the game, which is why there is no left in this nation, not even a center, but a “right” (Democrats) and “far right” (Republicans), because government of the people, by the people and for the people would be denounced as a radical leftist agenda and completely un-American if actually applied.
It is rather simple: in America, all policies that favor ordinary people are denounced as “socialist,” and all that favors the rich, even through blatantly socialist policies, is called “capitalism.”
We are told that we live under a free-market system. False. We are told that this is a form of representative government. Who is represented? Who benefits from the government anti free-market, socialist policies? The rich and powerful, such as Big Oil.
Who funds elections? The rich and powerful. Who controls government, who controls policies?
There is no need to come up with an elaborate conspiracy theory to plainly see that the crooks are in charge, and it requires a certain amount of naivety on the part of the public to still be disappointed by government, it takes a certain amount of denial to even give in to cynicism: would anyone become bitter learning that a thief steals, that a liar lies?
The American government is not worse than any other … as all governments are more or less corrupt. The problem is that it has more power than any other, and consequently has the ability to strongly influence world policies and global trends, such as subsidizing industries like oil that depend upon and lead to ever more wars and suffering, rather than subsidizing industries and technologies that would sustain peace.
According to the Women’s Environmental and Development Organization, the estimated funds needed to look after basic global human needs are as follow: to provide shelter, $21 billion; to eliminate starvation and malnutrition, $19 billion; to provide clean safe water, $10 billion; to eliminate nuclear weapons, $7 billion; to eliminate land mines, $4 billion; to eliminate illiteracy, $5 billion; to provide refugee relief, $5 billion; to stabilize population, $10.5 billion; to prevent erosion, $24 billion. Total estimated budget for human needs, $105.5 billion.
The actual global military spending comes to $900 billion … $900 billion spent to oppress, destroy, and kill with ever more efficacy, versus $105.5 billion to protect and sustain life. Is this such a difficult choice? Should we really keep calling subsidizing peace and harmony between nations a socialist agenda because it benefits ordinary people and the poor, and subsidizing conflict and war a capitalist agenda because it is extremely profitable to some industries and to the rich, while allowing for the expansion of governmental bureaucracies and powers, such as Homeland Security and the Patriot Act, and an ever more effective control of a populace made to live in fear?
Don’t be fooled by ideological labels … The only ideologies of the wealthy and powerful are power and money, by whatever means necessary. If you still believe in the relevance of political ideologies, you are believing in fairy tales.
Raphael Montoliu lives in Lakeport.
- Details
Nick solely wants to demean our efforts for his belief that our tribal issues should stay in a tribal forum that he and his leadership control. They do not want to reveal the way the Robinson Rancheria tribal leadership treats their constituents.
Nicholas Medina attempts to justify the evictions of issues that were prevalent for quite some time, and now in the light of disenrollment; have become key points of leverage in an attempt to rid us from their sight and mind.
They intend to neutralize our efforts that will prove their lack of adherence to federal regulations, federal funding agencies, The Indian Reorganization Act, Civil Rights Act (U.S. and Indian) and tribal constitutional laws.
Instead of resolving our tribal disputes, he would much rather argue his points of interest, to avoid touching on the real problem that led to where we are now: the June 14, 2008k election, and Oct. 25, 2008, general council meeting.
He has argued those “moot” points before and does not want to touch on subjects that question their integrity, would reveal their intention to gerrymander tribal elections, and uncover all actions of their goal to disenfranchise membership for higher profits to their selves and few supporting parties.
“A land use fee” is what he is referring to when describing tenants' “failure to pay rent”, and is what Nicholas Medina, Tracey Avila (tribal chair, “failure to pay rent” tenant since 2000), and Judy Anderson (appointed housing chair, “failure to pay rent” tenant since 2000 as well) had heavily opposed prior to 2006. They had convinced numerous members to not pay “land use fees” and promised membership they would wipe the slate clean once in power, of course because their slate was in the red as well. Now that it can be used as a tool to rid of people, why not.
Nicholas failed to mention that the Robinson Rancheria Housing Commission is a five-member board, comprised predominantly of his immediate family relatives: Judy Anderson (his mother), Deborah Anderson (sister of Judy, Nick’s aunt), Audrey Gutierrez (Judy’s niece, Nick's close cousin) and Michelle Monlo (Judy’s niece, Nick's close cousin). There is one non-immediate relative committee member, but any opposition would put that person in a position to be dealt with one way or another. Take into consideration the multiple Robinson employees, customers, members and sister Pomo tribal members who have been banned, beat up, demoted, disenrolled, or fired for opposition or even speculative opposition.
The same is true of the enrollment committee, election committee, and gaming commission; they are a cabinet of related individuals who carry out the same agenda that Nicholas and Tracey pursue. They know if they follow along they will reap the benefits of that same agenda. Is this nepotism or not? How can an individual tribal member receive fairness and due process from this totalitarian state ruled by the scheme of Nicholas Medina and Tracey Avila’s autocratic leadership?
They do not accept those who do not follow the status quo and their group think mentality of the “sovereignty cloak.” This belief is that they can do as they wish without any repercussions from any higher echelon, outside authority or entity. With our tax dollars, this group continues to mismanage, waste and utilize federal dollars to their tribal political advantage with the “sovereignty cloak” mindset. They are ruining it for Native Americans as a whole. Nicholas and his colleagues are using bully tactics to avoid facing innocent people who have done nothing but oppose them and pursue a transparent leadership that will not rule in a despotic manner
Medina utilizes common analogies of property management topics to grasp support of Lake County landlords, tenants, and potential homebuyers. This is an attempt to shed light off of our issues, and give a façade of “just leadership” trying to conduct everyday business. He also attempts to brand opposing members, tenants and protesters as tribal members who are taking advantage of “tribal assets.” If that is not the pot calling the kettle black, I do not know what is.
Robinson Rancheria is what it is because of their actions, and we are simply tired of allowing it to be unnoticed. To clean up their impetuous past decisions, they utilize people that have poor ethical and moral standards to assist them in solely controlling the tribe as a kleptocracy. For the rest of the membership to receive any of the so called “interfered revenues,” we are to just be satisfied with whatever the leadership blesses us with, or accept quid pro quo offerings.
These issues are simply derivative results of the June 14, 2008, election, and despite Medina's belief of it being a “moot point,” the Robinson Rancheria Members and anyone else who does not obtain a special interest can read right through their ploys and justifications.
In essence this group of individuals is the neo-Indian scout; diminishing cultural tribes into oblivion for short-term gain.
It is quite interesting Nick, how you contradict yourself by requesting qualities such as “thorough and accurate reporting” and “investigating the facts of a situation” from the editor. You and your colleagues have consistently neglected those specific qualities on all issues that include the June 14, 2008, election, disenrollment proceedings, housing allocations, California Tribal TANF (CTTP) directives and many other haphazard actions you have taken to maintain control of this tribe.
Eddie J. Crandell is de facto chairman of Robinson Rancheria after being elected last year. However, the tribe's election committee decertified the election, allowing Avila to remain in power. Crandell lives in Nice.
- Details
- Written by: Eddie J. Crandell
How to resolve AdBlock issue?