Luntz Warns GOP on Occupy Wall Street, “Don’t Say Capitalism” Because Americans “Think Capitalism Is Immoral”

Frank Luntz, arguably the GOP’s top messaging strategist, said Wednesday:

I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death. They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.”

So just as he did with his infamous 2003 global warming warming memo —  which taught conservatives how to sound like they care about the issue while opposing all action — Luntz has some key advice for Republicans on how to pretend to care about regular people while continuing to screw them over.

Amazingly, “Yahoo News sat in on the session,” where Luntz went through his spin at the Republican Governor’s Association on “How can Republicans do a better job of talking about Occupy Wall Street?”

Here are key do’s and don’ts from Luntz:

  • Don’t say ‘capitalism.’
  • Don’t say that the government ‘taxes the rich.’ Instead, tell them that the government ‘takes from the rich.’
  • Republicans should forget about winning the battle over the ‘middle class.’ Call them ‘hardworking taxpayers.’
  • Don’t say ‘government spending.’ Call it ‘waste.’
  • Don’t ever say you’re willing to ‘compromise.’
  • The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: ‘I get it.’
  • Out: ‘Entrepreneur.’ In: ‘Job creator.’
  • “Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”
  • Don’t ever ask anyone you want them to ‘sacrifice.’
  • Always blame Washington.

Yes, and some in the media still try to apportion blame equally between Democrats and Republicans for the toxic state  of American politics.

George Orwell, in his famous 1946 essay, “Politics and the English Language,” wrote that

“In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.  Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Democrats do sometimes misuse the language and create euphemisms.  All politicians do.  But it is Luntz and his legion of conservative followers who have twisted the English language beyond recognition.  They are the true Orwellians.  The GOP parrot him as if they were reciting lessons in grammar school (see, for instance, Luntz’s memo, “The Language of Healthcare 2009,” which became the GOP playbook for attacking reform).

Is there any nonsense phrase that has been repeated to death this year more than “job creator” — in spite of the fact that for all of the wealth GOP policies have showered on the wealthy they didn’t actually create any net jobs under President Bush?

And yes, I put “Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming” into the list above even though it is from Luntz’s 2003 climate memo.  I included it because conservatives continue trying to blame “the left” for supposedly changing the name from “global warming” to “climate change” (see Debunking the dumbest denier myth: ‘Climate Change’ vs. ‘Global Warming’).  For the record, while I would normally be inclined to recommend progressives say the exact opposite of whatever Luntz recommends for conservatives, there is way too much conflicting analysis to suggest that one of those terms is somehow more effective than the other. Feel free to use both.

How powerful are Luntz’s memos in the energy/climate debate (he wrote one on energy in 2005)?  Just think how many people who want to sound like they care about the issue follow his advice and talk about breakthrough technology as the only answer — see Bush climate speech follows Luntz playbook: “Technology, technology, blah, blah, blah.” As Business Week noted at the time “what’s most striking about Bush’s Apr. 27 speech is how closely it follows the script written by Luntz earlier this year.”

Returning to Luntz’s Occupy Wall Street advice, his comments on capitalism are the most revealing and important for progressives. fact that Luntz  doesn’t like the word “capitalism” isn’t new.  It has long been on his “Republican Playbook” list of “words never to use” along with things like “drilling for oil.” Yes, GOP parrots are instructed to say “Exploring for energy” because “drilling for oil” paints a bad picture in people’s minds of “an old-fashioned oilrig that gushes up black goop.”  Go figure!

And so Luntz wrote back in 2005:

Capitalism reminds people of harsh economic competition that yields losers as well as winners. Conversely, the free market economy provides opportunity to all and allows everyone to succeed.

See how easy it is.  Simply change the words you use, and everybody wins.  Except, of course, 99% of the people have figured out that everybody doesn’t win when the game is rigged.

But I was certainly surprised Luntz admitted the following with the media present Wednesday:

“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death,” said Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist and one of the nation’s foremost experts on crafting the perfect political message. “They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism”….

1. Don’t say ‘capitalism.’

I’m trying to get that word removed and we’re replacing it with either ‘economic freedom’ or ‘free market,’ ” Luntz said. “The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we’re seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we’ve got a problem.”


So the public thinks capitalism is immoral.  The thing to understand about Luntz is he never makes such pronouncements without having done extensive polling and focus groups.

Capitalism is, in theory, amoral, but it has become immoral in practice because many of its most successful practitioners are immoral (like the Kochs) and because the 1% can buy influence with governments to rig the rules in their favor.

I certainly believe that our current form of capitalism will be humanity’s ruin if conservatives keep blocking any serious carbon price and carbon-mitigation effort (see “Is the global economy a Ponzi scheme?” and “The Other 99% of Us Can’t Buy Our Way Out of the Impending Global Ponzi Scheme Collapse“).

The fact that Luntz says the public thinks capitalism is immoral suggests that message is a powerful one, which is no doubt why Occupy Wall Street and the 99 percent are striking a chord with so many people.

How more blatant could Luntz be about his crass manipulation: “I’m trying to get that word removed.” Luntz is the embodiment of Orwell’s thought police.

In this case, I don’t think he can get conservatives to stop saying “capitalism,” since that is the altar many of them worship at.  In any case, progressives must not let Luntz win on this one.

Luntz’s manipulation knows no bounds:

7. The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: ‘I get it.’

“First off, here are three words for you all: ‘I get it.’ . . . ‘I get that you’re….  I get that you’ve seen inequality. I get that you want to fix the system.”

Then, he instructed, offer Republican solutions to the problem.


What Luntz and the conservatives figured out is that since the media are not acting as referees anymore, but mostly as play-by-play commentators or simply stenographers, politicians can say whatever they want and then do whatever they want.  So, sure, say you “get it” to the Occupy crowd and then keep pushing “solutions” like tax cuts for the rich job creators, that will only worsen income inequality.

Rather than decrying these tactics, it remains critical for progressives to learn that words matter.  I have written a great deal about rhetoric over the years — see “Why scientists aren’t more persuasive” — and do intend to publish my book on that subject next year.  So I’ll end with some old advice of Luntz’s:

There’s a simple rule: You say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and then again and again and again and again, and about the time that you’re absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time.

Capitalism.  Capitalism. Capitalism.  Capitalism.  Capitalism.  Capitalism.  Capitalism.  Capitalism. Capitalism.  Capitalism.

I think people are finally hearing it.

37 Responses to Luntz Warns GOP on Occupy Wall Street, “Don’t Say Capitalism” Because Americans “Think Capitalism Is Immoral”

  1. Thanks Joe, It might be that Luntz has some insight, and even he might appreciate a counter list:

    Don’t say capitalism. Say “carbon capitalism’

    Don’t say that the government ‘taxes the rich.’ Instead, tell them that our government ‘encourages and enables irresponsible wealth.’

    Don’t say ‘government spending.’ Call it ‘plundering the government with financial blackmail and useless wars.’

    Don’t ever say ‘compromise.’ Say “surrender” because self-destructive ideas should be defeated.

    Saying to an Occupier: ‘I get it.’ just makes it much easier for us to spot a simplistic, duplicitous snake.

    Out: ‘Entrepreneur.’ In: ‘Job creator.’ Another buzz word. Great. Now show me. Otherwise pay taxes on wealth that you have plundered.

    Say “Anthropogenic global warming and climate destabilization”
    Because everyone will suffer, and your party affiliation, ideology and wealth mean very little to a future of this “Anthropogenic global warming and climate destabilization”

    Finally there actually are some easy-to-blame villains:
    — Advertiser supported mass media,
    — Heavily funded PR campaigns by carbon fuel industry,
    — Ineffectual and corrupt politicians,
    — A wimpy federal government failing to protect citizens,
    — A supreme court that conferred human rights to corporations without demanding responsibility
    — Human weaknesses that falls prey to the momentum, self-delusion blocking the recognition of real danger and the shyness to demand change.

  2. This is vocal proof that the Occupation is working! The Occupy Movement is NECESSARY for our citizens to expose the corruption which Big Business has infected our Government with. Every single person occupying the streets and protesting Corporations is a hero and a patriot. I was compelled to lend a hand and create some new posters for the movement which you can download for free on my artist’s blog at

  3. Darryl Williams says:

    Speaking of schills, get a load of Margaret Wente’s latest column of garbage in the Globe and Mail. This is downright embarassing for a newspaper that claims to be Canada’s National Newspaper.

  4. Ernest says:

    I think I’m developing an internal “spam filter” for “political-speak” based on the frequency of recurring words, phrases, mantras, talking points …
    I now cringe whenever I hear the phrase “job creator” or “job killing …”

  5. Theodore says:

    There are as many possible versions of capitalism as there are creative minds availble to dream them up. Would you claim that art was a bad thing after seeing one poorly drawn sketch?

  6. Colorado Bob says:

    This won’t make the Koch brothers happy: nearly two-thirds of moderate or liberal Republicans now believe there is solid evidence for global warming, according to a poll from the Pew research centre.

    That’s 22 points higher since 2009, the year the billionaire oil brothers first began pouring money into Tea Party groups working to discredit Barack Obama’s green agenda.

    The shift suggests that the Koch efforts to spread doubt about climate science may be backfiring.

  7. adelady says:

    Don’t know about one poorly drawn sketch.

    But if one of Frank Luntz’s acolytes was telling me this over-priced, incompetent, ugly artefact is the essence of what art is all about, I might go looking for something a bit better.

  8. Jeff Huggins says:

    Wow Is Right

    Great post, and great information. And Bravo also to the Yahoo News folks.

    It would be great, if possible, to get a complete — or as complete as possible — transcript of what Luntz said. It would also be great to learn about the session itself: how many people attended, who attended, and etc.

    Also, will anyone be keeping track of whether this is covered by any of the mainstream news outlets: The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, Fox (ha!), or etc.? In other words, will the large-scale corporate-ized, advertising-dependent, media cover the issue and engage in discussion about how the public apparently feels (at least according to Luntz) about the current ways in which we practice our present brand of capitalism — that is, that it’s ‘immoral’. Will these types of dialogues begin taking place in the news media? (Hopefully so.) Or, instead, will this whole revelation, so to speak, be ignored and buried by those media organizations that most folks watch?

    It seems to me that this incident and topic are important enough — indeed, very important — that someone or some organization should follow/track them to see whether they get covered, and how much.

    Also, can someone explain how Yahoo News got into such a session? I’d love to know. Were the organizers and Luntz that loose or open in this case, or did the Yahoo News person use a different credential, sneak in, pretend to be a Republican Governor, or etc.?

    Great coverage. Thanks for this.

    Be Well,


  9. H.C. says:

    I guess Republicans are comfortable having their language dictated by one man who is…who is he again?

    Too bad he can’t converse with anyone outside his bubble. No one is anti-capitalism, its absurd.

    The reason he probably doesn’t want to use the word Capitalism is because if we made a list of all the rules of capitalism these cats have broken, they’d be called out for what they are – Corporate socialists.

    No need to tarnish the word Capitalism, its what’s done in its name, like what’s done in the name of religion and shockingly, the Right seems to be on the side destroying trust in both.

  10. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    Chomsky observed years ago that when the pathocratic elite speak of ‘jobs’ they are thinking ‘profits’.

  11. Mario says:

    If anyone just read Capital they would understand that everything that is happening is a part of the system. It is “An economic theory based upon the historical relativity of every economic system, its strict limitation in time tactlessly reminds Messrs the capitalists, their hangers-on and their apologists that capitalism itself is a byproduct of history. It will perish in due course as it once was born. A new social form of economic organization will then take its place of the capitalist one: it will function according to other laws than those which govern the capitalist economy.” Ernest Mandel

  12. Peter Mizla says:

    Luntz has long been the agent provocateur in the republican party, with his clever propaganda. The American public bought it- that may be changing. The GOP dream of creating a rich group of plutocrats running the company has finally come to pass.

    Now there are cracks in The republican opposite Robin Hood capitalist nirvana- the middle class know has been screwed- and they are beginning to put blame where it belongs.

  13. perceptiventity says:

    Power Corruption and Lies – an album by – JoyDivision.
    But this thingisn’t lying anymore it is more like systematic subversion of consciousness. Mind Pathogens.

  14. denim says:

    When evil, greedy, sociopatic people control the means of production and employment, it makes little difference to the victims of it whether one calls it capitalism, fascism, or communism.

  15. TKPGH says:

    Luntz claims to have reversed his position on global warming, yet he doen’t act to reverse what he started. I guesss he’s afraid to bite the hand that feeds him, no matter who gets hurt.

    At last month’s KXL protest, I met a woman who attended the Heartland Institute’s summer conference. She told me that the Right is scared to death of the ocean adicification issue, since they can’t refute it. In my opinion, that’s where we need to hit them. It’s easier to prove and the consequenses of letting the oceans collapse are easy to get across to others.

  16. David Smith says:

    When does this become “conspiracy to commit fraud”? Where is the line?

  17. Daniel J. Andrews says:

    Hm. They see a problem and their fix is to change the words they use, not the problem?

    And deny their is a problem of course. But if faced with overwhelming evidence, admit their might be a problem but we can’t do much about it anyway (and it won’t be all that bad either). It works for more than just climate.

  18. Daniel J. Andrews says:

    *there*, not their.

  19. Mike Roddy says:

    Don’t worry, they’ve got it covered. There are acidification deniers on Dot Earth, saying that shellfish love all that acid.

  20. Paul Hoover says:

    I ask every climate change denier I meet the same question. What is the effect of increased concentrations of green house gases on the climate? I follow that question with ‘which natural events continuously introduce billions of tons of green houses gases into the atmosphere, year after year?’

    I ask every Free Market advocate to explain the difference between unregulated Capitalism and the Free Market.

    I may not have the intellectual prowess of some to effectively deconstruct the opposition but I get enjoyment listening to the convoluted reasoning in support of the position. I don’t understand many things so I ask questions of the opposition. They help me tremendously except as they defend the indefensible but the paint is still wet and the corner is small.

  21. Leif says:

    As we move forward, I feel that the intrinsic problem with Capitalism and Corporations is their shortsightedness. Only looking at the bottom line and manipulating society to enhance, both fair and foul, that outcome. Couple that with the fact that society has neglected to put a value upon the commons and only value what can be extracted from that to be worthy of concern. All of which leads directly to our present condition and plight. IMO, the solution is simple. Place a value on the commons and charge the offenders for the destruction there of. If I throw a paper cup out the car window I can be fined $100. I do not do it. EXXON,, pollute the commons to the tune of billions of tons of pollutants and makes tax free, subsidized profits. They do it and love it and do everything in their power to perpetuate the status quot. Big surprise?

    $100/oz. might be enough to cover the worst of it. It works for me. (It will not bring back species however, guess those will just have to be chalked up to experience and hope for the best.

  22. BA says:

    I recommend reading Naomi Kline’s recent article in The Nation, Capitalism vs. The Climate, which I think helps one understand the mind set Luntz represents. Last time I checked you can read it online.

    Words matter? How about Climate Crash and Methane Meltdown?

  23. Raul M. says:

    they might be worried that people may too easily see that they do “get it” and then that and that and that and the other thing too. Don’t know how to suggest modesty when the powers are equatable to the having and subsequent show of joy at such and then the advertising of being one of the got it all group.
    Maybe they are not ready to fully implement their exclusionary plan yet while still claiming to represent.

  24. Joan Savage says:

    Part of Frank Luntz’s message was to call the ‘middle class’ ‘hardworking taxpayers.’ It seems that the super-rich also think of themselves as ‘hardworking taxpayers’ who earned their wealth. Even the Koch brothers can point to how they expanded the business founded by their father.

    Newsweek has an article by Michael Gross “The Super-Rich Haven’t Reined in Their Excesses” which includes and extended quote from Cara David.

    “They hang around with the same type of people; there’s a global community of people who’ve made it to the same point,” says Cara David, the senior vice president who oversees American Express Publishing’s research. “They only want to be with their peers. It’s not flaunting it if you’re not offending anybody. But you’d have to be an idiot to walk around not caring. Fingers have been pointed at them. Even if they’re not hurting, they’ve changed. They got their money the hard way. Very few of the wealthy had it handed to them and they know people who’ve experienced hard times. So they’re consuming but they’re more careful and conscientious. They want to be able to say something is worth it. There has to be a justification.”

  25. Bill says:

    I saw Luntz on the Colbert Report – It was definitely insightful –—-corporations-are-people—-frank-luntz.
    The function of capitalism is to create profit and surplus. The way capitalism is structured (for most of its history) – nature is seen has having no inherent value. Value is only based on exchange. ‘Externalities’ (cost or benefit, not transmitted through prices) is built into the system. From the point of view of capitalism, it makes perfect sense to maximize the use of the tar sands oil, given an adequate return on investment. Why defend capitalism.

  26. Don’t say ‘capitalism’.

    I actually think Luntz is right in saying we shouldn’t use the word “capitalism”. But that’s just because I think the word is 5 syllables which is too long, and there’s a word which is shorter and better.

    The word is “Greed”.

    You call it the “free market” or “economic freedom”.

    We call it “greed”, for that is what it is.

    We don’t need new-fangled phrases like “carbon capitalism”, “climate crash”, or “methane meltdown”. Are we to suppose that Modern English, a language that has an illustrious history of more than 4 centuries, is still not powerful enough to express what’s really a simple movement for economic and civil justice?

    Don’t say that the government ‘taxes the rich.’ Instead, tell them that the government ‘takes from the rich.’

    Don’t say ‘government spending.’ Call it ‘waste.’

    A government that takes from the 1% and uses the money for the good of the 99%.

    Is that not what a government is supposed to do? Serve the 99%?

    I say this again: behind the phrase “We are the 99%” is a powerful, simple message: that policies should be implemented to serve the 99%, not the 1%.

    Don’t ever say you’re willing to ‘compromise.’

    No, we don’t want politicians to “compromise”. We want politicians to serve the 99%. There, I cleared it up for you, Luntz.

    The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: ‘I get it.’

    Frank Luntz does not get it.

    Out: ‘Entrepreneur.’ In: ‘Job creator.’

    Actually I have no problem with entrepreneurs in general. It’s the pathological greedy ones I have a problem with.

    Can we just call them “fat cats” or “greedy pigs”, please?

    (Of course, we’ll have to be careful not to call the same person a cat and a pig at the same time. Mixed metaphors are bad.)

    Don’t ever ask anyone you want them to ‘sacrifice.’

    We, the 99%, want rich people to contribute their fair share to fixing the world. Stop asking for tax breaks. Stop asking for bailouts.

    Is this too much to ask for?

    — frank

  27. dick smith says:

    Klein’s article is a nice update of Orestes’s “Merchants of Doubt.”

    But, I have to disagree with Klein’s conclusion that to win the climate fight we have to do a frontal assault on free-market capitalism. That’s because, as Orestes points out, there’s not a single country in which the fossil-fuel/energy sector involves a true free market. They’re all quasi-public, heavily regulated and subsidized industries.

    Look at the bright side. All we have to do is overcome some overblown rhetoric about “free markets” that don’t really exist.

  28. M Tucker says:

    For goodness sakes…When I saw this last night all hope died that these freaks would ever do the right thing!

    THEY DON’T GET IT!!…and they never will as long as they have leaders like the Kock Bros and this freak Luntz.

    We want the system to be fair. We want the system to be equitable. CEO’s and management constantly get increases in compensation while those who actually do the work get nothing!

    Remember Scott Owen! What a magnificent and eloquent hero!! Our prayers are with you!

    The greatest words ever spoken in the past 10 years: MIC CHECK!

  29. EDpeak says:

    Frank: good point that it’s about the 1% paying their fair share not the nonsense about “punishing success” but I must disagree that it’s “greed”

    Saying “it’s not the fault of capitalism, it’s the fault of greed” is like saying, “it’s not thefault of Soviet Communism, it’s the fault of power-hungry people” There are always negative sides of human nature, be it greed or power-hunger etc…the real issue is what “system” or to use a less fancy term, what “game” or “rules” society runs by not just politically but economically.

    Human greed will never be zero..but we should not have an economic “game” where the “rules” encourage and reward greed, and rules which create “nice guys finish last” which means we need to change the system.

    It doesn’t matter if you want to call today’s system (which is not your “apple cart market” idea of what capitalism was with small artisans and farmers etc) ‘capitalism’ or ‘corporatism’ they are by now inseparable and it’s the system that must change no matter what name we give it.

    We don’t want rule by the 1% politically but also not economic rule by the 1% (more like 0.01%). How our economy works:

    Or flash animation of related idea:

    Or if anyone still likes to read(!??) these days, a short 1907 Pamphlet tells it with great humor (humour) and satire, “How the Miners Were Robbed”


  30. EDpeak says:

    “It’s not about ‘government spending.’ It’s about ‘waste.’ That’s what makes people angry.””

    Agreed: Increasing military spending from $400 billion to over $900 billion is a WASTE

    Agreed: Having the highest per capita prison rate, is a WASTE of human potential as well as of taxpayer money, especially since majority are there for victimless crimes of possessing cannabis etc.

    Agreed: Creating wars of choice based on lies is a WASTE of over a Trillion dollars while making our nation LESS safe and less respected, not to mention the WASTE of 100,000s of arab lives and the WASTE of thousands of Americans lives based on those lies, wars of hubris, wars for empire, our 700+ military bases around the world, etc.

    Bottom line, Repugnant policies of the Republican party are all FOR WASTE when it suits them.

    Spending money to repair crumbling infrastructure, reduce child poverty, make sure grandparents have heat and healthcare, stop cash-starving the schools our kids are in, etc, THAT the Repugnant Republican party considers “waste”

    “Don’t talk about sacrifice..You talk about how ‘we’re all in this together.’ We either succeed together or we fail together.””

    Except when it comes to actual policies, it’s all about sacrifice and CUTS for the middle class and poor, and we’re NOT so “in it together” when the 1% gets more tax cuts, corporations get more Billions in subsidies, even the most polluting and already profitable ones…so nice rhetoric about “We’re in it together” but reality? not so much..

    “should forget about winning the battle over the ‘middle class.’ Call them ‘hardworking taxpayers.'”

    Translation: It’s too hard to hide the fact our policies will scr*w over the middle class…but if we talk about ‘hard workers’ then on TV we can always run that tired old line, which can still fool people, about ‘those people you see us scr*wing over, they were not hard-working, so pay no attention, and we don’t (fingers crossed so they can lie) we honestly won’t do that to you, dear TV viewer”

    “You shouldn’t be occupying Wall Street, you should be occupying Washington”

    We should occupy both. Republicans and the fake (rightwing) “libertarians” are all about a weak government not to put people in power but to put huge un-elected unaccountable corporations in power even more than they are right now.

    As Dewey himself put it, “politics is the shadow cast upon society by big business”

    Republicans want us to attack the shadow, and make what weak control is has over That Which Casts the Shadow even weaker…they want us to “move along, look away, pay no notice to” the monstrosity casting that shadow: the Corporate Feudalism that we live under.

  31. M Tucker says:

    Sorry Scott. I got your name wrong.

    Scott Olsen American veteran of an unjust war and American Hero of the occupy movement.

  32. Susan Anderson says:

    Two men. You forgot Grover Norquist. Looks like maybe Newtie will be joining them.

  33. Mike Specian says:

    Luntz is onto something with his clear, concise phrases. They’re effective. I’d like to suggest “cold capitalism.” It A) has alliteration which always helps and B) reminds people that our economic system produces losers, and sometime capriciously.

    I’ve also been using “finite, filthy, foreign fuels” and “crisp, clean, green American energy”, those these are clearly longer.

  34. Ziyu says:

    Tax the rich-Cut corporate welfare
    Government spending-public investment
    The rich/millionaires/wealthy-Robber barons
    Free market-anarchy economics, instead emphasize a “fair market”
    Always blame big business

  35. Pangolin says:

    If the “job creators” call it “capitalism” when they ship american manufacturing jobs overseas and automate half the jobs that were left well…….they’ve painted their own boat haven’t they.

    If pirates fly a lol-cat flag when they go burning and looting kitty flags will be hated and reviled. They’ve used the brand capitalism to label the destruction of hope for almost everybody under 30 and many of those over 30.

    Don’t be surprised when the “C-word” becomes more reviled than coital relations with the maternal parent.

  36. Pangolin says:

    Load a bike cart with apples and try and sell them from a downtown parking space. You’ll be cited within the hour by the local police for “practicing business without a license,” “zoning code violations,” and Dog knows what else. If you refuse to move you’ll be arrested.

    The apple cart/lemonade stand of “capitalism” or “free market” “entrepreneurship” is actually illegal due to the greed of fat cat businessmen. The story we’ve been told all along about economics is a lie and has been for at least 50 years.

  37. Solar Jim says:

    Liberty and the Rights to disperse Carbonic Acid:

    This discussion sounds like we are talking about nation-state sanctioned fuel fascism, occurring through such policy as massive economic subsidation, as related to propaganda of a distorted, captured capitalism of immoral, poisonous fuels. This situation seems to be primarily for the benefit of nation-state power dynamics in several fundamental defensive (and offensive) regards, especially status through finance and militant force.

    Mined lithosphere materials (carbon and uranium bearing) fired or fissioned, are not truly resources of “energy,” as in “sustainable” energy. They are poisoning explosive matter extracted and converted by human ignition (such as phase change from solid or liquid to carbonic acid gas) which are sanctioned by nation-state agendas of expansion of economic and political power and projection for “defense,” as well as offensive extraction of “wealth,” however temporary.

    We seem to be on a perverse “black gold” finance standard of a collapsing unregulated, crony, globalized, fossilized, state-encouraged fuel-fascism and associated critical carbonic acid contamination of the entire ecosphere. Pay no attention to the trillions of tons of melting polar ice caps moving our way, or to the trillions of historic and on-going Federal Reserve Note subsidies. Just take note that fossil and fissile agendas take many notes (including to protect investor status and reserve valuations).

    As for “nukular,” we seem to be nuking the climate just fine and, much against decades of warnings, poor Japan. Energy “too cheap to meter,” anyone have a Geiger counter? In several decades economic depression may be the least of our worries. Tend your garden, and your occupiers. Occupy.