Supreme Court Colludes with Monsanto

 

 

 

 

 

Supreme Court Colludes with Monsanto It’s no surprise. Michael Parenti calls America’s High Court its “autocratic branch.” It’s notoriously pro-business. It’s longstanding. In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railway (1886), it granted corporations legal personhood. More recently, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes et al (June 2011), it denied longstanding sexual discrimination class action redress. It overruled a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision doing so. In AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (April 2011), it did so two months earlier. It blocked class action redress claiming fraud. The company’s wireless subsidiary charged sales tax on cellphones it advertised as free. Two California courts rules for plaintiffs. The High Court overruled them. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled for money power over democratic governance. One dollar = one vote. Corporations and PACs can spend all they want. Doing so more than ever lets them control US elections. Voters are effectively disenfranchised. They have no say whatever. Numerous other rulings show America’s High Court is supremely pro-business. The Roberts Court is more so than previous ones. Even The New York Times noticed. On May 4, it headlined “Corporations Find a Friend in the Supreme Court.” It rejected an anti-trust class action suit against Comcast. Subscribers sought to prove unfair competition and overcharges. Wrongdoing was dismissed 5 – 4. It didn’t surprise. It’s consistently pro-business. Doing so facilitates corporate empowerment, discriminatory practices, willful fraud, and products harming human health. Bowman v. Monsanto again showed where America’s High Court stands. Justice again was denied. Corporate interests alone matter. In 2007, Monsanto sued Vernon Bowman. He’s an Indiana farmer. At issue was alleged patent infringement. He bought mixed soybean seeds. He did so from a grain elevator. He planted them a second time. He supplemented them with soybeans bought from the same source. Monsanto’s licensing agreement forbids second plantings. It wants seeds sold used only once. It wants farmers to pay each time they plant. Bowman claimed no patent infringement. It expired on what he first bought. He supplemented with commodity soybeans. They’re usually used for feed. He said they naturally “self-replicate or sprout unless stored in a controlled manner.” In other words, he planted soybeans, not new seeds. He violated no law. Justice Elena Kagan delivered the court opinion. She didn’t surprise. She and other justices spurn judicial fairness. They do so in defense of privilege. She rejected what she called “that blame-the-bean defense.” Bowman had no chance. He was no match against Monsanto. He was ordered to pay nearly $85,000 in damages. He’s a small farmer. Doing so may bankrupt him. Longstanding agribusiness plans call for greater consolidation at the expense of small competitors. Bowman lost at the district, appellate and High Court levels. They ruled one way. They claimed patent exhaustion doesn’t permit farmers to replant seeds and harvest them without patent holder’s permission. Generic drug companies freely do it. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act permits it. Once patents expire, holders no longer have exclusive rights. In 2014, the last of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready US patents will expire. Monsanto’s supposed to lose exclusivity. At issue is will or won’t it happen? Expect Monsanto to press hard to keep it. Earlier it said it wants international regulatory Roundup Ready soybeans support until 2021. It’s unclear if other companies will be able to sell generic versions. Monsanto won’t make it easy to do so. On May 13, Food Democracy Now (FDN) denounced the Supreme Court ruling. Executive director Dave Murphy accused Washington of complicity in permitting the “corporate takeover of (America’s) food supply.” “Today,” he said, “the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the corporate takeover of our food supply, in a huge win for Monsanto, and a major loss for America’s farmers and consumers.” “Monsanto has long engaged in an effort to subvert family farmers that do not use their genetically-engineered seeds, and the Court has now handed corporations even more control over what our families eat.” “Currently, Food Democracy Now! is a co-plaintiff in a lawsuit in the District Court of Appeals, Organic Seed Associations et Al. v Monsanto to protect America’s farmers from unwanted contamination of their crops by Monsanto’s patented genetically-engineered plants.” “Our nation’s family farmers grow our food on farms where cross-pollination between organic, non-GMO crops and Monsanto’s genetically-engineered patented crops is regular and naturally-occurring process.” “The Court’s decision to give Monsanto the power to control the future harvest of America’s family farmers and our county’s food supply is deeply troubling, immoral and a very bad sign for the future of our nation’s food.” In March 2013, Obama signed the Monsanto Protection Act. It’s the Farmer Assurance Provision rider in HR 933: Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013. Monsanto lawyers wrote it. It permits circumventing judicial decisions. If courts rule GMOs unsafe, Monsanto’s free to ignore them. So can the Secretary of Agriculture. He’s free to ignore food safety. He can let hazardous GMOs poison America’s food supply. Obama’s complicit with giant corporate interests. He’s their man in Washington. He’s beholden to monied interests. They own him. He’s waging global hot wars. He’s enforcing homeland tyranny. He lets Wall Street wage financial wars. He permits institutionalized fraud. He let BP get away with contaminating America’s Gulf. He has longstanding nuclear industry ties. He wants new US commercial reactor construction jump-started. He’s committing billions of dollars in loan guarantees to do so. He’s mindless of the risks. He’s waging war on human health and welfare. Polls show over 90% of America want GMO products and ingredients labeled. In 2007, candidate Obama promised to “let folks know when their food is genetically modified, because Americans have a right to know what they’re buying.” He lied. He’s a serial liar. He broke every major promise made. He supports Monsanto’s right to proliferate what harms human health. It’s no surprise. He’s waging global wars on humanity. It may not survive his onslaught. A Final Comment Throughout its history, Monsanto produced harmful products. Some eventually were banned. Its recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) increased milk production in cows. It caused painful mastitis, infections and reproductive problems. Large amounts of puss and blood were found in rBGH milk. Potential linkage to cancer was discovered. EU nations and Canada banned it. It’s still sold in America. Monsanto lobby power permits it. Monsanto’s polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) was extremely toxic. It caused cancer and other diseases. Many products contained it. It was dumped in rivers and streams nationwide. Harmful environmental damage followed. Concentrated areas created health crises. In 1976, Congress banned it. Monsanto’s DDT inspired Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring.” She exposed aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin, and other dangerously toxic chemicals She inspired environmental justice advocacy groups. America banned DDT. So did other countries. It’s still used in tropical countries. It’s done to control malaria. Monsanto’s legacy includes Agent Orange. It contains dioxin. It’s one of the most deadly substances known. It’s a potent carcinogenic human immune system suppressant. Minute amounts cause serious health problems and death. Exposure results in congenital disorders and birth defects. It causes cancer, type two diabetes, and numerous other diseases. Its widespread Southeast Asian use produced horrific consequences. Millions were affected. Many died. Living victims still suffer. Many Vietnam vets and US citizens in theater were affected. Proliferating hazardous GMOs may be worst of all. Widespread food contamination poses enormous threats. Sanctioning Monsanto’s use makes Washington complicit. People have a right to know what they’re eating. Failure to prohibit substances harming human health violates the Constitution’s “general welfare” clause. Article I, Section 8 states: “The Congress shall have power to….provide for (the) general welfare of the United States.” It means “We the People.” It includes everyone equitably. It means what never was, isn’t now, or won’t ever be under a system favoring privilege, not fairness. Washington’s corporate occupied territory. Profits matter more than human life and welfare. Bipartisan complicity ignores the “general welfare.” Things go from bad to worse. It’s longstanding. It’s the American way.   Photos from Argentina’s farms, documenting an agrochemical plague   American biotechnology has turned Argentina into the world’s third-largest soybean producer, but the chemicals powering the boom aren’t confined to soy and cotton and corn fields. They routinely contaminate homes and classrooms and drinking water. A growing chorus of doctors and scientists is warning that their uncontrolled use could be responsible for the increasing number of health problems turning up in hospitals across the South American nation. In the heart of Argentina’s soybean business, house-to-house surveys of 65,000 people in farming communities found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, as well as higher rates of hypothyroidism and chronic respiratory illnesses. Associated Press photographer Natacha Pisarenko spent months documenting the issue in farming communities across Argentina. Most provinces in Argentina forbid spraying pesticides and other agrochemicals next to homes and schools, with bans ranging in distance from 50 meters to as much as several kilometers from populated areas. The Associated Press found many cases of soybeans planted only a few feet from homes and schools, and of chemicals mixed and loaded onto tractors inside residential neighborhoods. In the last 20 years, agrochemical spraying has increased eightfold in Argentina- from 9 million gallons in 1990 to 84 million gallons today. Glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Round Up products, is used roughly eight to ten times more per acre than in the United States. Yet Argentina doesn’t apply national standards for farm chemicals, leaving rule-making to the provinces and enforcement to the municipalities. The result is a hodgepodge of widely ignored regulations that leave people dangerously exposed. 1 In this April 16, 2013, photo, Felix San Roman walks on his property in Rawson, in Buenos Aires province, Argentina. San Roman says that when he complained about clouds of chemicals drifting into his yard, the sprayers beat him up, fracturing his spine and knocking out his teeth. "This is a small town where nobody confronts anyone, and the authorities look the other way," San Roman said. "All I want is for them to follow the existing law, which says you can't do this within 1,500 meters. Nobody follows this. How can you control it?" (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 2 In this Sept. 24, 2013, photo, a tractor known as a "mosquito" dusts a field near Parana, in the Entre Rios province, Argentina. Most provinces forbid spraying next to homes and schools, ranging in distance from 50 meters to as much as several kilometers from populated areas. But The Associated Press found many cases of soybeans planted only a few feet from homes and schools, and of chemicals mixed and loaded onto tractors inside residential neighborhoods. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 3 In this March 29, 2013, photo, former farmworker Fabian Tomasi, 47, shows the condition of his emaciated body as he stands inside his home in Basavilbaso, in Entre Rios province, Argentina. Tomasi’s job was to keep the crop dusters flying by quickly filling their tanks but he says he was never trained to handle pesticides. Now he is near death from polyneuropathy. "I prepared millions of liters of poison without any kind of protection, no gloves, masks or special clothing. I didn't know anything. I only learned later what it did to me, after contacting scientists," he said. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 4 In this April 1, 2013 photo, Aixa Cano, 5, who has hairy moles all over her body that doctors can't explain, sits on a stoop outside her home in Avia Terai, in Chaco province, Argentina. Although it’s nearly impossible to prove, doctors say Aixa’s birth defect may be linked to agrochemicals. In Chaco, children are four times more likely to be born with devastating birth defects since biotechnology dramatically expanded farming in Argentina. Chemicals routinely contaminate homes, classrooms and drinking water. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 5 In this May 2, 2013 photo, empty agrochemical containers including Monsanto's Round Up products lay discarded at a recycling center in Quimili, Santiago del Estero province, Argentina. Instead of a lighter chemical burden in Argentina, agrochemical spraying has increased eightfold, from 9 million gallons in 1990 to 84 million gallons today. Glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto's Round Up products, is used roughly eight to ten times more per acre than in the United States. Yet Argentina doesn’t apply national standards for farm chemicals, leaving rule-making to the provinces and enforcement to the municipalities. The result is a hodgepodge of widely ignored regulations that leave people dangerously exposed. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 6 In this April 1, 2013, photo, Silvia Alvarez leans against her red brick home while keeping an eye on her son, Ezequiel Moreno, who was born with hydrocephalus, in Gancedo, in Chaco province, Argentina. Alvarez blames continuous exposure to agrochemical spraying for two miscarriages and her son's health problems. Chaco provincial birth reports show that congenital defects quadrupled in the decade after genetically modified crops and their related agrochemicals arrived. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 7 In this March 31, 2013, photo, Erika, right, and her twin sister Macarena, who suffer from chronic respiratory illness, stand inside their home in Avia Terai, in Chaco province, Argentina. The twins' mother, Claudia Sariski, whose home has no running water, says she doesn't let her children drink from the discarded pesticide containers she keeps in her dusty backyard. But her chickens do, and she has no other water to wash the family's clothes with. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 8 In this Sept. 24, 2013, photo, a tractor used for spraying agrochemicals is reflected in a car's side view mirror on a road in Parana, in Entre Rios province, Argentina. Glyphosate represents two-thirds of all agrochemicals used in Argentina, but resistance to pesticides is forcing farmers to mix in other poisons such as 2,4,D, which the U.S. military used in "Agent Orange" to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War. (AP Photo/Natcha Pisarenko) # 9 In this May 31, 2013 photo, girls use slingshots next to a biotech soybean plantation in Avia Terai, in Chaco province, Argentina. The country's entire soybean crop and nearly all its corn and cotton have become genetically modified in the 17 years since St. Louis-based Monsanto Company promised huge yields with fewer pesticides using its patented seeds and chemicals. Instead, the agriculture ministry says agrochemical spraying has increased eightfold, from 9 million gallons in 1990 to 84 million gallons today. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 10 In this Sept. 24, 2013 photo, students play soccer during recess at a rural school near Concepcion del Uruguay, Entre Rios province, Argentina. Teachers say the farm that abuts their school yard has been illegally sprayed with pesticides, even during class time. In Entre Rios, teachers reported that sprayers failed to respect legally required 50 meter setbacks outside 18 schools, and doused 11 of them while students were in session. Five teachers have since filed police complaints. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 11 In this Sept. 25, 2013, photo, a protest sign directed to Argentine President Cristina Fernandez and Cordoba Province governor Jose Manuel de la Sota that reads in Spanish; "Stop looting and contaminating! Monsanto out of Cordoba and Argentina," is posted on a fence where Monsanto is building its largest seed production plant in Latin America in the town of Malvinas Argentinas, in Cordoba province, Argentina. The country's entire soybean crop and nearly all its corn and cotton have been genetically modified in the 17 years since St. Louis-based Monsanto Company promised huge yields with fewer pesticides using its patented seeds and chemicals. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 12 In this April 16, 2013, photo, activist Oscar Alfredo Di Vincensi talks on a cell phone inside his tent during his one-man hunger strike demanding that agrochemical spraying not be allowed within 1,000 meters of homes, in the main square of Alberti, in Buenos Aires province, Argentina. Earlier this year, Di Vincensi stood in a field waving a court order barring spraying within 1,000 meters of homes in his town of Alberti; a tractor driver doused him in pesticide. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 13 In this Sept. 25, 2013, photo, cattle are corralled near the town of Berabevu, in Santa Fe province, Argentina. As Argentine ranchers turn to higher-profit soybeans, formerly grass-fed cattle are fattened on corn and soy meal in feedlots. Argentina’s entire soy crop and nearly all its corn have become genetically modified in the 17 years since St. Louis-based Monsanto Company promised huge yields with fewer pesticides using its patented seeds and chemicals. Soy cultivation alone has tripled to 47 million acres, transforming a nation once known for its grass-fed cattle into the world's third largest soybean producer. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 14 In this March 31, 2013, photo, Erika, left, and her twin sister Macarena, who suffer from chronic respiratory illness, play in their backyard near recycled agrochemical containers filled with water that is used for flushing their toilet, feeding their chickens and washing their clothes, near the town of Avia Terai, in Chaco province, Argentina. The twins' mother, Claudia Sariski, whose home has no running water, says she doesn't let her children drink the water from the discarded pesticide containers. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 15 In this March 31, 2013, photo, Camila Veron, 2, born with multiple organ problems and severely disabled, stands outside her home in Avia Terai, in Chaco province, Argentina. Doctors told Camila's mother, Silvia Achaval that agrochemicals may be to blame. It's nearly impossible to prove that exposure to a specific chemical caused an individual's cancer or birth defect, but doctors say these cases merit a rigorous government investigation. "They told me that the water made this happen, because they spray a lot of poison here," said Achaval. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 16 In this  July 8, 2013 photo, Dr. Andres Carrasco, a molecular biologist at the University of Buenos Aires, pauses during an interview in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Carrasco found that injecting very low doses of glyphosate, a weed-killer, into embryos can change levels of retinoic acid, causing the same sort of spinal defects in frogs and chickens that doctors are increasingly registering in communities where farm chemicals are ubiquitous. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 17 In this May 3, 2013, photo, students stand outside their rural school in Pozo del Toba, in Santiago del Estero province, Argentina. Most Argentine provinces limit how close spraying can be done in populated areas, with setbacks ranging from as little as 50 meters to as much as several kilometers. But The Associated Press found many cases of soybeans planted only a few feet from homes and schools, and chemicals mixed and loaded onto tractors inside residential neighborhoods. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 18 In this Sept. 23, 2013, photo, empty pesticide containers ready for recycling are collected inside an enclosure by the farming business association in Gualeguaychu, in Entre Rios province, Argentina. Widely ignored Argentine health minister guidelines recommend perforating empty containers to prevent reuse by residents. The association says the containers will be recycled into plastic tubing. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 19 In this May 3, 2013, photo, students ride a motorbike past a field of biotech corn on their way to school in Pozo del Toba, Santiago del Estero province, Argentina. American biotechnology has turned Argentina into a commodities powerhouse, but the chemicals required aren’t confined to the fields, they routinely contaminate homes, classrooms and drinking water. Now a growing chorus of doctors and scientists is warning that uncontrolled spraying could be causing the health problems turning up in hospitals across the South American nation. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 20 In this Sept. 26, 2013, photo, Sofia Gatica participates in a protest to block trucks from entering the site where Monsanto Company is building its largest Latin American seed production plant, in the town of Malvinas Argentinas, in Cordoba province, Argentina. The country's entire soy crop and nearly all its corn and cotton have become genetically modified in the 17 years since the St. Louis-based company promised larger yields. Agrochemical spraying has increased eightfold. After Gatica's newborn died of kidney failure, she filed a complaint in Cordoba province that led last year to Argentina's first criminal convictions for illegal spraying. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 21 In this April 16, 2013 photo, soybeans ready for harvest are bathed in afternoon light near Rawson, in Buenos Aires province, Argentina. American biotechnology has turned Argentina into the world’s third-largest soybean producer, but the chemicals powering the boom aren’t confined to soy and cotton and corn fields. They routinely contaminate homes and classrooms and drinking water. A growing chorus of doctors and scientists is warning that their uncontrolled use could be responsible for the increasing number of health problems turning up in hospitals across the South American nation. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) # 22 In this March 9, 2013, photo, residents gather to speak with Dr. Damian Verzenassi on health concerns they have about agrochemicals in the main square of Alvear, in Santa Fe province, Argentina. In the heart of Argentina’s soybean business, house-to-house surveys of 65,000 people in farming communities found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, as well as higher rates of hypothyroidism and chronic respiratory illnesses. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko) #

The Day America Outlawed Democracy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Day America Outlawed Democracy One lesson of 9/11 is that the US imperial oligarchy no longer restricts itself to mass-murdering browned-skinned people at home and abroad. By blowing up the World Trade Center and killing almost 3,000 people, most of them white-skinned middle-class office workers, the masters of empire were sending a message: The elite has shifted gears and is now prepared to slaughter anyone, including white, middle-class Americans. 9/11 also ushered in the formal designation of the U.S. homeland as just another military occupation zone. On October 1st, 2002, the U.S. military created “NORCOM,” the US Northern Command, paralleling U.S. military commands in other global occupation zones. The time is past due for America to start connecting the dots regarding our political establishment. It has become increasingly clear that we’ve reached a political crisis in this country, but contrary to what we’re being led to believe, the major division in country is no longer between liberals and conservatives, but rather, the American people and those we’ve elected to represent us. Due to our political indifference, we’ve allowed the political establishment in this country to lavish upon themselves so many rewards, prerogatives, and political perks that they can no longer identify with the people they’re suppose to represent. They’ve become a class within themselves. Where they were once considered the trusted employees of the American people, they’ve now become a part of a new American aristocracy. Thus, they now identify much more closely with the rich and powerful – or those they’re supposed to be protecting us from – than they do the constituency they’re supposed to represent. So liberals and conservatives alike need to open their eyes. We need to recognize that we’re now facing a common foe that has morphed into something that has become a threat to us all. We must also realize that it is essential that we set our respective differences aside – at least temporarily – just long enough to address this common enemy to our way of life. While liberals and conservatives may disagree on their respective philosophy of governance, we must never confuse that philosophical disagreement with the belief that liberals are any less loyal as Americans, or that conservatives are any less sincere in their desire to make America a better place for us all. As different as the two groups are, in the final analysis, both liberals and conservatives want the very same thing – what is in the best interest of the American people. But that can no longer be said of our political establishment. Their current behavior has clearly demonstrated that their top priority entails feathering their own nests by protecting their true constituents – big business. They were better able to hide their alliance in the past, but the current geo-economic circumstance has forced them into the open. Thus, the political establishment is now forced to betray their true attitude toward the American people – an “ignorant worker class,” with a moral obligation to sacrifice both our families (in war), and wealth (in bailouts), for the personal comfort of the upper class. That accounts for why the Wall Street bailout sailed through congress like a hot knife through butter, with only perfunctory grumbling from congress for effect, while healthcare reform, the jobs bill, legislation to enhance veterans benefits, and any other legislation aimed at helping the average American has been met with fierce resistance. It’s no accident that the only Obama effort that’s being supported by the GOP is his initiative to go to war. The “party of no” eagerly says yes to that, regardless to the cost of (lower and middle class) lives and treasure; nor is it an accident that they completely ignore the fact that even after the useless waste of life and treasure, a victory means that Al Qaeda will simply move on to a different location. They don’t have a problem with any of that, because war enriches their constituency, the military/industrial complex. Neither is it an accident that the rule of law is simply being ignored regarding Bush and Cheney’s war crimes, in spite of the fact that it makes America less safe, or the fact that it led directly to the economic hardship currently being suffered by the America people. They don’t have a problem with because the political establishment is a class within itself, and it protects its own. That’s the one area of agreement that truly seems to be bipartisan. The reason for that, as I’ve mentioned in earlier columns, is the new world order is not only geopolitical, but economic in nature. “When the United States had a thriving industrial economy one class complimented the other. Labor was well paid and given the security of knowing that they had a job for life, so they had the confidence to purchased goods that the corporations produced. That allowed the companies that sold the goods to prosper to the benefit of the investor class.” But now that U.S. corporations have to compete globally with countries that are paying their workers pennies per day, the American middle class has become a prohibitively expensive liability to America’s ability to compete around the world. So now the U.S. government – both Republicans and Democrats – is in the process of addressing that issue by downgrading the standard of living of the American middle class. The idea of relegating the American people to second class status isn’t a new strain of thinking in American politics; it’s been around since this nation’s founding. It’s just that after being shot down during the constitutional convention in lieu of a more egalitarian form of government, previous adherents of this philosophy had the good sense to be more discreet in their efforts. As I’ve pointed out before, Alexander Hamilton, one of the founding fathers of the fiscal conservative philosophy, said the following: “All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and wellborn, the other the mass of the people…. The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in government. They will check the unsteadiness of the second, and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government.” (Debates of the Federalist Convention May 14-September 17, 1787). So the fact is, the reason that the political establishment is so willing to throw America under the bus is that the new world order has made it politically expedient to embrace Hamilton’s philosophy that lower and middle class Americans shouldn’t have a right to self-government in the first place. But since it would be problematic to try to formally take that right away through a constitutional amendment, it’s being taken away through legislative procedure and rulings through the Supreme Court. That’s what has led to the current disaffection by both liberals and conservatives toward government. The American people can sense their rights slipping away, but they have yet to come to terms with what is actually going on. They have yet to realize that congressional gridlock is a convenient way of denying them their rights. They have also yet to recognize that the majority in the senate is allowing the minority to abuse of the filibuster procedure because both parties are in collusion. The Republican filibuster provides cover for the Democratic majority for failing to enact, or greatly watering down, legislation being demanded by the people, but neither party wants to enact. Then on January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court delivered the final blow against the people. In order to insure against any repeat of the 2008 election where the people mounted a grassroots effort over the internet to usurp the power of corporations through campaign funding, the Supreme Court past what is essentially the modern version of Plessy v. Ferguson, taking away the rights of the people by saying that the American people and corporations are “separate but equal.” That ruling should serve as a red flag for both liberals and conservatives alike. In 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson was used to undermine the rights of Black people in this country. Now, the current ruling, Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee, is being used to undermine the rights of the middle class. The ruling stands as a perfect metaphor for Jim Crow. But this time it ushers in an era of a diminished American middle class, and the jackboots of the new world order, as it formally arrives at our front door.