Home > politics, Social Justice > Peace derived from truth

Peace derived from truth

As I type this, militarized police are assaulting Native American water protectors. The protectors’ offense? Standing against oil interests while fighting for water, for earth, and for their peoples’ land.

If you still confuse Washington Post, New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, Huffington Post and their kin for news providers, this is quite probably news to you. If you have seen anything about this, it’s likely been vague allusions to hostile protestors–or, in short, a skewed representation of reality which helps you avoid seeing the many ways the U.S. government favors corporations over breathing citizens.

This isn’t anomalous. It’s part of the same system that criminalizes acts that don’t even warrant charges in other countries, the better to have cheap prison labor available for U.S. corporations, and the same that conceals from you massive prison strikes protesting such labor system.

It’s part of the same system that tells its people, “We want a no-fly zone over Syria for humanitarian reasons,” all while failing to explain that creating a no-fly zone is an act of war–one, in this case, that could bring the U.S. and prominent Syrian ally Russia to nuclear conflict. While conveniently failing to mention that its hostilities toward Syria began when Syria rejected a U.S.-beneficial oil pipeline that would have run right through the middle of Syria, or its non-humanitarian destruction of Yemen, where it helps starve those not killed by its bombs. While definitely not mentioning its decades-long history of forcing brutal regime change, or the fact it’s effectively committing genocide by bombing seven Muslim countries.

For ages, I thought myself a “liberal,” a designation which now makes me cringe.

As I watched my liberal friends pointedly not notice that their womynpower-eff-yeah candidate has spent decades taking corporation protective actions that destroy lives of poor brown-skinned women, children, and families worldwide, I shed the horrific label “liberal,” which I now understand translates to “kinda well meaning person greatly averse to uncomfortable facts, especially around how their votes help kill people and destroy lives abroad.”

Hillary “We Came, We Saw, He Died” Clinton’s actions in the Middle East have destabilized it and helped hasten the deaths of at least hundreds of thousands of innocents. This isn’t a one-time thing, either, but an aggregation of her many separate acts around Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, for starters, all while her foundation took enormous sums of money from Middle Eastern tyrants to whom she approved record weapons sales. (It is in those allies’ names that we now bomb and starve innocent Yemeni.)

Clinton and her foundation’s actions played critical roles in absolute devastation in Haiti and Honduras.

Again, this is just a start. To detail it all would take more time and energy than I have.

And, you know what? It wouldn’t matter. Because we live in confirmation bias built echo chambers today, and Hillary voters appear especially determined never to emerge from theirs: “Welp, the news tells me it’s so and my friends on Facebook agree, so there you have it!”

Our Democratic president currently kills nine innocent people by drone for each actual target he hits. (He’s a swell guy, that one.)

All of this inspired me to buy this shirt.

I bought the shirt with another one. It’s one that may well blow your mind if you derive your newslike substance from one of the five conglomerates that now control U.S. media.

Why? Because it’s a WikiLeaks t-shirt.

(Did you know that WikiLeaks was nominated for six consecutive Nobel Peace Prizes? That it’s earned many journalism awards, and has a 100% accuracy record to date, despite what vague allegations by journalists wined and dined by Hillary’s folks assert? You didn’t? Imagine that.)

I’m no longer a liberal, because I yearn for peace that can only begin when my fellow Americans accept the discomfort of horrifying realities.

Based on how violently liberals around me respond to undiluted truth, I stand affirmed in my conviction that “if wars can be started by lies, peace can be started by truth.”


So please know that if you happened upon me and admonished me to vote the lesser of two evils, I’d inform you that I’ll vote for neither … but that I’d vote for Trump, the lesser evil by far, were I forced to choose between only the two atrocities.

  1. October 28, 2016 at 12:43 am

    Love the lies-truth conviction 🙂
    I think (from way across the pond) that lots of people see past any problematic things they hear or see about Hillary because they finally want a female president. I think a male candidate would be subjected to more scrutiny.. even if the news hides lots of truths. That and the idea that open-ludicrousy (sp??) is worse than hidden criminality…

    • October 28, 2016 at 7:15 am

      After reading Bill Ivey’s “uninformed and compliant citizenry” email, I decided I was done with safe spaces and anything that seems to give feeling and fact equivalence. There are a lot of facts I don’t yet know, but I’m seeking them aggressively, and will unapologetically disseminate those I do know! 🙂

      I think you’re spot on with your assessment about a female president. They’ll overlook any and every flaw–including slaughter of indigenous people and Muslims–as long as a woman’s in office. I would love to see a woman in office, of course, but I’d want that woman to protect all women … not just those who already have power. I’m still not sure whom I’ll cast my vote for, but it will one od either peace-promoting women Stein or LaRiva. (My concern with Stein is that she does currently–naively?– include a financial act of war in her platform. I think/hope she’ll correct it, but we’ll see!)

  2. October 28, 2016 at 12:47 am

    Also, do you know about survival international? They support campaigns by indigenous peoples.

  3. October 28, 2016 at 4:00 am

    Liberal vs. conservative; right vs. left; alt-right vs. alt-left; etc. etc. Labels are just boxes we and other stick us into to make things easier. The truth is that labels make things harder because I’ve yet to meet someone that 100% fits into the self-described “box”.

    Like the t-shirts by the way, showed my wife the one from Wikileaks and she was all-in 🙂

    • October 28, 2016 at 7:22 am

      Hear, hear about labels! I do think there’s some good in using them to help folks understand some generalities between groups. In my case, “(non-corporate) progressive” is the umbrella that helps someone understand my pattern of beliefs is not some weirdly aggreagated mish-mash but a worldview. I’m not bound to the word, but it can be a helpful tool!

      Both shirts are from WikiLeaks, actually. 🙂 For anyone being spoonfed the Russians narrative, I imagine it would be shocking to understand that WikiLeaks publishes to bring peace through transparency. The fact they’re being so attacked (with validity not credibly disputed) says everything about how much we need the transparency for peace.

  4. October 30, 2016 at 10:33 am

    I’m enjoying following along on this journey with you. Thank you for helping those who actually want to see the truth.

  1. October 28, 2016 at 5:52 am
  2. October 30, 2016 at 6:43 am

Please weigh in--kindly!

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: