Capitalism is not the problem
Most of them with few exceptions don’t know anything about how the Big Banks are tied to the MIC. Alas, the concept of the General Welfare is still not understood AT ALL. Bernie Sanders did a good job of corralling the thinking intellectuals on the left into Hillary ‘War Hawk’ Clinton’s slaughterhouse that countries like Haiti and Libya truly understand. Using abstractions like ‘Capitalism’, the left has been corralled into much, much worse by either well-meaning activists, or actual Imperial agents at the behest of the same bankers who got away with literally stealing entire countries’ money, lives and future, one after another after another over the last 120 years using the MIC to facilitate. For all the speculation about what is happening in Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Ukraine, what happened to Libya, for all those blaming today’s conflicts on religious differences or cultural conflicts, or the never-ending left and right ideological throw-down, friendship-ending, family-feud-starting arguments, I say all these are just distractions, because the bankers and MIC continue pillaging and killing without any resistance from you.
Trump, today’s lead political aberration, has yet to make the right moves, despite his stated intention of passing the Glass Steagall bank separation act. Americans, Canadians, Europeans, Africans, Middle-Easterners, most of Asia and South Americans have been held hostage to the international money-laundering frauds controlled centrally by the City of London, Wall Street, the IMF and the World Bank with the MIC as their front line of offence. Capitalism abstractionism blames all privately-owned businesses, when it is in fact the Private Banking Industry which is the controlling mechanism that drives our destructive imperial and criminal war economy. The City of London is the worlds headquarters for the Private Banking Industry and Wall Street is their subsidiary. These private bankers have taken something very personal from the vast swaths of American, Canadian, European, African, South American, Middle-Eastern, Asian, and the former Soviet Union’s citizens; almost every nation on the planet has been affected by these very specific assholes for the last 100 years.
If the U.S. were to institute bank separation now, the money, effort, and slavery to a criminal and war economy would effectively stop because the speculation of the City of London and Wall Street could no longer use YOUR hard work and savings to continue feeding their speculation and obscene profits. Resolution: Step #2. Once Glass Steagall were to be put into effect, say, through an EO by Trump, a National Bank would need to be re-instituted. Turn the abstractions into a proper form, Glass Steagall and National Banking, which begins the process of creating a new paradigm where narcissists get their just and proper treatment, where reciprocal relationships become the norm, not the exception.
With any luck, after Glass Steagall and a National Bank are reinstated, the United States government and other narcissist victims/suppliers might just go back to the One-Party Republic-style representation it was supposed to be.
Proponents of feminist care ethics, including Carol Gilligan and Nel Noddings stress that traditional moral theories, principles, practices, and policies are deficient to the degree they lack, ignore, trivialize, or demean values and virtues culturally associated with women. Women at Level Three display a kind of thinking that is fully and properly feminist. Care’s contested status calls for the development of a more robust feminist ethics of care that includes men as well as women; certainly, it does not call for the rejection of care. Partly in response to the summons for an improved feminist ethics of care, Nel Noddings has developed an ethics that valorizes the virtues and values traditionally linked to women. Proponents of these schools of feminist thought maintain that the destruction of all systems, structures, institutions, and practices that create or maintain invidious power differentials between men and women is the necessary prerequisite for the creation of gender equality.
Over the years, and largely as a result of incorporating many radical feminist ideas into their own theory and practice, Marxist/Socialist feminists have increasingly produced works like Juliet Mitchell’s Women’s Estate in which she argues that four socio-economic structures overdetermine women’s status; specifically, women’s role in production, reproduction, sexuality, and the socialization of children. Multicultural feminists affirm much of what other schools of feminist thought say about women’s status, but they fault them for not being fully attentive to the inseparability of structures and systems of gender, race, and class. Out of a women’s relational culture of caring and attentive love emerges the basis for a feminist ethic for the treatment of animals. Care-focused and status-focused feminist approaches to ethics do not impose a single normative standard on women. When a proponent of feminist ethics insists on highlighting women’s morality, she may simply be doing some remedial work-adding women’s moral experiences to a male-biased ethical tradition sorely in need of them.
According to Jaggar, all feminist approaces to ethics seek to articulate moral critiques of actions and practices that perpetuate women’s subordination; prescribe morally justifiable ways of resisting such actions and practices; envision morally desirable alternatives for such actions and practices; and take women’s moral experience seriously, though not uncritically. Although it is crucial for feminist ethicists to emphasize, for example, how a policy that benefits one group of women might at the same time harm another group of women, it is probably a mistake for feminist ethicists not to endorse policies able to serve the most important interests of the widest range of women.