The Ati-thesis , Marxism

"By that definition, a state capitalist country is one where the government controls the economy and essentially acts like a single huge corporation, extracting the surplus value from the workforce in order to invest it in further production.[3] Friedrich Engels, in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, argues that state capitalism would be the final stage of capitalism consisting of ownership and management of large-scale production and communication by the bourgeois state.[4]"

Quoted from Wikepedia

Friday, July 31, 2015

Headline Politics - A Device For Disinformation Distribution

 Tweet This

According to Bill O'Reilly, a lot of people get their news strictly from the internet. I do not know how true that is and to what degree but I remember being told by a personal acquaintance, supposedly an informed acquaintance, a number of years ago that he and his wife only get their news on the internet.

This is a frightening thought after observing a few more days of headlines used to distribute disinformation across the internet. The headlines I speak of, make a statement which is a liberally construed interpretation rather than an accurate reporting of news but the headline- all by itself-  is taken as news- true news . To date all of the responders, with an exception of this author, accept the headline as true with no evidence of having read the article to find out anything further about the claim.

Here is one such typical headline

The article is about H.R. 237, a bill written by Congress in response to the new terrorist war strategy being conducted by ISIS, where in ISIS recruits home grown terrorists in the western world who travel over seas to terrorist training camps and then walk right back into their home country with passports.  The headline spins the bill as targeting ordinary Americans.  The bill, however uses the specific words "foreign terrorist organization". It is of course true that any law can be used for an unintended purpose but the headline spins the potential for abuse as the actual intent of the law and the culture of anti-establishmentarians swallow the headline whole without further thought or investigation- never clicking on the link and never reading the actual bill.
This is one of the online comments in response to my own observations:

This is how it works. It does not say in the bill that passports can be taken from those who support Isis. What is does say is that any mildly suspected American of supporting any terrorist group can have their passport taken away by the president without due process. Let me spell this out. Do you know what are considered terrorist groups by the US government? Tea party, Young Americans for Liberty, John Birch Society, etc. Do you know what groups aren't considered terrorist groups by the US government at this time? The USA Communist party. Get it.
The only true statement about what is in the bill made in the comment above is that the bill does not mention the name "ISIS" - but why should it? That would limit the authority of the bill to only one foreign terrorist organization when there are many. The bill does not mention Obama. It does not grant authority to the office of the presidency. The authority goes to the secretary of state who must report, within one month of taking passports, to both houses of congress . And the bill specifically uses the words "foreign terrorist organization" excluding domestic organizations.- and yet the comment is written as though on the authority of one who had read the bill.

It is the clear intent of much of the disinformation being distributed through headlines is to fabricate a case against the entire government establishment. The fact that the anti-establishment culture relies on misleading headlines to spread disinformation suggests a lack of an actual basis for their rallying call against anyone with expreince in government - with the exception of Ted Cruz, and even Cruz has been displaced by Donald Trump- who tops Cruz in his qualifying lack of expereince in functioning within a system designed as checks and balances against totalitarian power.

Alinsky's Rules for Radicals: "Known as the 'father of modern American radicalism,' Saul D. Alinsky (1909-1972) developed strategies and tactics that take the enormous, unfocused emotional energy of grassroots groups and transform it into effective anti-government and anti-corporate activism. ... Some of these rules are ruthless, but they work."
 2. Of Means and Ends [Forget  moral or ethical considerations]"The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. ... The real arena is corrupt and bloody." p.24

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck- could it be a duck?

Other articles in this series

Far Right Disinformation Campaign Takes Aim to Paint Jeb Bush as a Liberal.

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

Far Right Disinformation Campaign Takes Aim to Paint Jeb Bush as a Liberal.

Tweet This

Back in the 2012 campaign, the far right told the world that they are more principaled than the rest of us and ran a campign to defeat Romney in which a disinformation mantra was utilized which said : "Romney is the same as Obama''.

This was hardly true but it was repeated often. The far right seemed unaware that primary season had ended and that there was a general election going on. All though they informed the world that they are the only true conservatives, all through the election season, they campaigned to defeat Romney,with little attention paid to Obama.

The far left was composed of several third party contingencies but it's main candidate was Ron Paul who ran as a Republican. The far left campaigned against the "establishment" in the Republican party, of which Ron Paul was surely one, having been a United States Senator for many years.

I came to believe that there was covert pro-Obama contingency working the far right. Perhaps the mantra "Romney = Obama" was a creation of such a contingency.  If so it was a briliant move to set up Romney as a proxy for Obama and to utilize the outrage of the far right over not being able to run their own candidate as the Republican nominee. I remember one particular individual with whom I had for a while engaged in conversations, at first taking this individual to be a conservative but after I while I began to suspect that he was a covert progressive. On the eve of the election he was out and about in cyber space advocating that people vote for a third party candidate. When I asked him which third party candidate he supported- no answer was forth coming and I concluded that he was in fact advocating for an Obama victory.

The far right is back again taking up multibillionaire Donald Trump as their "One"- rather a switcheroo from the last time around when Ron Paul advocated for foreign policy Isolationism and shocked many during the 2012 debates when he said that Iran wasn't really the threat it is made out to be.

This election season the far right's rock star is a hawk.  If the far right can make a 180 degree turn around in the policies they advocate, what then motivates them to put their support behind someone ? The answer, I submit, is simple- whoever is perceived to be the most anti-establishment candidate.

Donald Trump has taken up the far right's rallying cry by calling the entire government establishment corrupt - simply because the members there of have experience in government, which, coincidentally, Mr Trump lacks. So if Trump wins, he'll start out on day one with bad blood between himself and his own party.  The far right will blame congress and state governors - just as they do now when any member of the establishment levels criticism at Mr Trump.  Marco Rubio did so, likely well aware of what he was doing as he did it. Now Rubio has been added to the list of targets for the far rights disinfomation campaigns.

Before Donald Trump led in the polls, Jeb Bush led in the polls and so Jeb Bush became the primary disinformation target and new face in the far right's do over of their very successful 2012 mantra, "Romney = Obama" . Just switch out the names and make it "Jeb = Hillary". Who in the world believes that our world would look anything like it does today if Romney were president ? That doesn't matter because the far left can count on their targets having a memory as short as their ability to read anything longer than a tweet. Headline politics is the name of the game. The headline need not have an ounce of veracity to it. Politics is all about perception. Our self-proclaimed more principaled than thou faction knows this well and will use it to achieve their own ends.

 Here is an example of one of the latest acheivements in disinformation  aimed at transforming the perception of Jeb Bush into that of a Liberal:

You can see I tried to point out that Jeb Bush never said  he believed in unlimited amnesty. an attempt that landed on deaf ears. Jeb Bush will be hated for advocating unlimited amnesty whether it is ture or not! Truth" !" What difference does it make? Politics is all about perception !

I posted the actual words spoken by Bush as reported in the article with the misleading headline:

“For the 11 million people [who are here illegally], they must come out of the shadows, receive a work visa, start paying taxes and also pay a small fine, learn English, don’t receive government benefits, but they come out of the shadows and they receive legal status after some time,” Bush said on Monday, 
But the disinformation campaign continued on in total contradiction to the words spoken by Jeb Bush which I had just posed:

Flavia Eckholm When did Conservatives or the GOP make a law 

that foreign nationals were able to access our welfare net?

No one cared about the truth. Poster after poster joined the hate fest against Jeb Bush chanting the newly renovated mantra - Jeb Bush is a "progressive" !

It was like something out of a science fiction novel - or Nazi Germany- a virtual public stoning by a crazed mob. Heaven help us. Don't let the far right pick up where they left off during the last presidential election. Look where that got us.

Other articles in this series:

Headline Politics - A Device For Disinformation Distribution

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Public Hate Fests and Propaganda Proliferate Through Social Media! in the USA

Tweet This

I don't ususally comment on national issues but this national issue is just as strong in Maine as it is nationally- it is the new speech regulation climate and the occurence of social media directed hate fests against specific people which intentionally spread dis-information- in part relying on the fact that many people will only read a headline and do not click on the article supporting the headline- that makes spreading dis-information incredibly easy !

Take for example this story currently proliferated on FaceBook with a head line telling us that Jeb Bush "attacked" Fox News

Notice that the story in this link is based 100% on hear say but published on a website called "Truth Revolt", Sadly "Truth Revolt"  is a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center - a once respected name. It seems to be a pattern that organizations using the name of respected luminaries do not live up to their namesakes. There is not an ounce of what can constitute truth in the story. No video of Bush speaking- no direct quotes- a link to a CNN news source also without direct quotes or video ! Just 100% spin based in an unidentified words spoken by Jeb Bush. The people putting this out probably know that most will not click on the link to find out that is what it is- they will just absorb the disinformation as fact !

The article states that  Bush "expressed annoyance". Your guess is as good as any one's on what words he said to qualify the description because the article isn't telling you ! The article says Jeb Bush said he listens to Fox News- that was enough to spin Jeb Bush as "attacking Fox News" and for that headline to be distributed via social media as part of hate fest against Jeb Bush being conducted by the far right- supposedly the only conservative faction that operates out of principal. Exactly what kind of principal is that- one that perpetuates a characterization of a man based on nothing but unsourced hear say?

And what did Bush "express annoyance" about? Today's political climate " I have much stronger words than "annoyance" to describe today's political climate- one of targeted hate against certain individuals based on nothing but hear say and intended to instruct their followers not to listen to anything that their targeted victims say ! This is straight out of nazi Germany or a science fiction novel ! Public hate fests based on hear say and propaganda! And speech regulation to boot- Don't you dare criticize our tactics or we will conduct a hear say attack on you !

Bush said this before he announced his candidacy- so he knows the climate- he knows he is a target of that hate fests, and he still runs to serve his country! Bravo for his bravery !

After notes.

This is one of the latest campaigns being run by Donald Trump Supporters:
Bush and Rubio have shown that They are Bought and Sold Merchandice.....Has Walker also Demanded Trump Be Withdrawn???
Gee, more hate for The Donald from the Left AND the Right. If donors are asking Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker to boycott the debates if Trump is

Notice the statement is made that Bush and Rubio are bought and sold merchandise even though the unverified claims upon which these charges are based do not even make the claim that Bush and Rubio responded in any way to alleged demands from donors.  The "news story" being used to verify this claim isn't even a news story. At best you can call it rumor with a strong appearance of  pure fabrication.

This is what you see when you click the link: (annotated) 

Gee, more hate for The Donald from the Left AND the Right.( the claim- which is not substantiated is that Republican donors are making allegated demand- so how does the Trump base tie in the left on this one?- no need to say !) 

If donors are asking Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker to boycott the debates if Trump is allowed in, then I would be very, very leery of those candidates. (That's a big IF coming from an unidentified source, constituting a completely unverified story- but what difference does it make if its verified or not?) 

Jeb Bush is the RINO du jour of the ruling class. (Rino has become a meaningless political term used primarily by the far right to mean anyone that disagrees with their politically correct doctrine !- Ruling Class? when used by the far right, -code for "establishment" or "main stream" who are not following the far right's politically correct dictates. The far right positions itself as being more principled than the majority which encompassing the electorate and the 'establishment"). 

Marco Rubio is a tool of the establishment and changes his position to favor whichever way the political winds blow. ( The far right routinely invents this sort of statements which they arbitrarily apply to anyone whose strings they cannot pull- once again never a need to substantiate any of it- just repeat it !)

Scott Walker sounds good and has a proven record for bashing unions, but he has a guy on his team that hates true conservatives. (This one is a gem- Walker has on guy on his team - unidentified- that hates "true conservatives"- a term I have been using of late to identify that far right which has deemed itself the only principled people in the political landscape and the totalitarian adjudicators of who is a conservative and who is not- transforming the term "conservative" into as meaningless a label as "Rino: . This statement shows that the "true conservatives" are now brewing up a hate fest against Walker- on the flimsiest of evidence that Walker has one unidentified man who is battling their own mind games- Watch this one coming !)

Then you have Donald Trump, who has played both sides of the fence, but is currently addressing what the people want dealt with and isn’t afraid to do so. That is winning the hearts and minds of mainstream America. If he is boycotted, (setting this story line up in advance !) you will guarantee a third party and the Republicans will be finished. Careful what you wish for.( Priceless- Donald Trump -a 1%er -  is winning the minds and hearts of "mainstream America'- this is the closing that starts out saying the right AND the left are indicted in the far right's unverified claims about Republican donors? Has it not yet occurred to them that the left side of "main stream America targets the  1%? -Just as the far right is targeting the entire Republican establishment- meaning any Republican with experience in government" . The left  packages anyone who is a 1% as corrupt !"  The far right packages any Republican with an experience in government as corrupt ! 

Note also the common practice in which the far right while targeting the establishment- which generally encompasses a majority world view- takes the position that it represents "main stream Americans". The far right often frames its views as the voice of a collective "we" rather than as the voice of individual opinions.

A diary of responses:
  • Gerald Kimmel Most liberals are annoyed by Fox News because they bring out the truth.
    Like · Reply · 5 hrs
    • Mackenzie Andersen However you have hit on the subliminal message of this propaganda. It is supposed to associate Jeb Bush with Obama in the way that Obama attacks Fox News. It's at odds with another message being deliverd by this mind control collective- that we should reject Bush because he comes from a line of those who have served their country as president- If we are to reject Bush via associating him with his family name- the Bush's never went after the press- in fact George W Bush was criticized for not doing so - some thought he should have fought back but that is not the way the Bush's see it, a family who I would say have a gentle man's code. They conduct themselves in and post office with respect for the office itself.

      So the propaganda can't have it both ways- reject Jeb Bush because he is a Bush- and invent a story that Jeb Bush attacked Fox News so that he can be likened to Obama- if you are going to associate him with being a Bush then this invented story looks all the more ludicrous. The Bush family has a tradition of public conduct which does not include going after the press.

Sunday, July 5, 2015

The Information Battlefront of Language

Tweet This !

I've been learning about profiles for photography printing . Different profiles represent different color spaces. Each color space has a different number of colors.

When I published the post of the title about rural Caribou seceding, I found that several people on FaceBook took it to mean that I was supporting secession from the USA and that is because a lot of people on FaceBook do not actually click on a post and read it and barely absorb what the short phrase in a title says. Certain words become automatic signals that, like a printing profile, have a usage meaning embedded in them. That usage is independent to the meaning implied by the the context in which the word is actually being used in the specific instance. I added the words urban Caribou to the title, hoping to avoid that impression, although it made the title longer than I wanted it to be.

So I started thinking that moving from posting a blog to writing a book is like using a different color space except that instead of quantifying the number of colors, it is quantifying the number of readers and thinkers. A person buys a book because he intends to read it and to think about it and so I will reach more readers and thinkers by publishing a book than by publishing a blog.

There are those who get to my blog because they searched for a particular term or subject and they might be the set that actually reads it. For political purposes one wants to reach a larger group than those who have the most analytical and thinking minds because that is the nature of politics. This dis-informed voter votes and so we have meme publishing,which puts out simple ideas or supposed facts often intentionally unrelated to context. There is seldom any substantiation given for the supposed facts found in memes. If one want's to be sure, one can look the supposed facts up but many memes are targeting people who seldom look up anything and to whom a word such as "secede" always has the same meaning and context in their own minds. To achieve a political goal in today's world one has to use meme messaging because that's how much of the populous acquires information and forms ideas:

This is a meme:
 My meme gives as much information as to why one should not vote for bonds, as one can give in the medium but many will just see the large letters and so the message becomes nothing more than an order. I put this out during election season when I was reading and writing about the bonds on the ballot in Maine but it occurred to me recently that I need to be publishing it all along so that it has a subliminal power to counteract what I perceive to be an opposing subliminal message. It's totally predictable. Maine voters always vote in the bonds. Say the words "job creation" and the public becomes like Pavlof's dog. My meme, in its simplest message says Think about it- there is another option- or maybe that is not the most simple sense. I was right the first time it is an order directed at those who respond to orders. I think that's called mind control. I shouldn't say that in today's world because it is just the sort of sentence that the thought police can latch on to, take it out of context, and twist the meaning of what one is saying to suit their own agenda, but in fact all memes function as a form of mind control directed at those who will respond automatically on que. It is seen all the time on Facebook. Someone posts a meme and a whole chorus chimes practically the same response in unison.

But politics is also influenced by thinking people who read and they also vote. In writing the book I have to translate the story that I have been narrating in this blog into a different reader thinker space- one in which the number of both is greater. In translating to that language I have to find the right tone and how to tell the flow of information that is now filed in my head and sporadically narrated on the pages of this blog into a different language which allows for a longer attention span- a longer story that tells the chronological story and also highlights various themes. I already have a timeline in place but it is not constructed in the style of a narrative but can be used as a guideline for the narrative

No one else is telling the story although it is out there to tell. Through the telling of the story.the reader will see that there is a hidden and distinct corporation that has no name and so I have called it Maine State Inc or the Maine Development Corporation and it has supplanted what was once the State of Maine

In order to understand that there was and continues to be a clear design to implement this transformation one has to acquire a data base of information in one's own mind and put each new implementation of that design into the context of the greater data base. An example is when I analyzed what is actually in the Expanded and Improved Seed Capital Tax Credit bill, as it was so called in blatant recognition of the fact that the Maine State legislature, of if you prefer another language, the Board of the Maine Development Corporation serves the interests of private capitalists and uses the taxpayers as mere pawns in the game whom they direct to deliver a lion's share of investment capital to the new designated owners of the means of production.

One needs to examine the language changes- the smallest change often hides the fundamental and hidden intent of the legal document as I discovered when examining the new and second Terms of Agreement at The New England Foundation For The Arts.

In the case of the  Expanded and Improved Seed Capital Tax Credit, that subtle language change was a replacement of "entity" which includes both private and public institutions with "private venture capital fund" - a change to which the general public would not pay much attention, if the general public were to actually read LD 743 or if the media were to actually report accurately on what is in the legislation.

However, I started this journey of discovery when I encountered the Small Enterprise Growth Fund- now called the Maine Venture Fund  in the course of seeking capital to translate Andersen Design's molds into a rubber mold profile. So when I translated the language of the bill into my own data space profile  and the fact that the Maine Venture Fund was chartered by the legislature as  a body corporate and politic and a public instrumentality of the State the Small Enterprise Growth Board, which consists of 11 members appointed by the Governor took on meaningful significance as that change of language has the effect of excluding the states own venture capital investment corporation from the provisions of Section D, if one goes by strict interpretation of the letter of the law.

 The fact that the word change is clearly intentional substantiates that the intent is to exclude public entities from the provisions of Section D. This applies to the entire sentences that have been deleted for private entities as well, which to my layman's perspective appears to have the effect of saying that the limit is applied to the whole of the private investment corporations and not calculated for each individual associated with that corporation and as such dramatically limits the tax credits available to private venture capitalist firms but not for the state's own public venture capitalist firm, The Maine Venture Fund, which is only public because the legislature invests 10% of the funds using taxpayers money as a roll over investment- which means uses tax payer money in the same manner as if taxpayers are investing in a non-profit organization, while the other 90% of private investors are qualified as "high growth investors" which traditionally means they take a high risk in return for high profits but the state is taking the high risk out of that definition as it passes the risk on to the general taxpayers through the magic art of refundable tax credits, of which the Expanded and Improved Seed Capital Tax Credit offers the biggest payout for the private investor- up to 60% of his investment will be covered by the general Maine State Taxpayers.

D. The investment with respect to which any entity private venture capital fund is applying for a tax credit certificate may not be more than an aggregate of $500,000 $4,000,000 in any one eligible business invested in by a private venture capital fund in any 3 consecutive calendar years, except that this paragraph does not limit other investment by an applicant for which that applicant is not applying for a tax credit certificate and except that, if the entity applying for a tax credit certificate is a partnership, limited liability company, S corporation, nontaxable trust or any other entity that is treated as a flow-through entity for tax purposes under the federal Internal Revenue Code, the aggregate limit of $500,000 applies to each individual partner, member, stockholder, beneficiary or equity owner of the entity and not to the entity itselfThis paragraph does not limit other investment by an applicant for which that applicant is not applying for a tax credit certificate. A private venture capital fund must certify to the authority that it will be in compliance with these limitations. The tax credit certificate issued to a private venture capital fund may be revoked and any credit taken recaptured pursuant to Title 36, section 5216-B, subsection 5 if the fund is not in compliance with this paragraph.
The new improved Seed Capital Tax Credit is tailor made favoritism for the SEGF (Maine Venture Fund) pursuant to the changes found in Sect 3 D (and elsewhere in the bill) , in which the word "entity" is struck out and replaced by "private venture capital fund". The word "entity" included both public and private capital funds. The new change in language insures that the restrictions in Section 3D fare not applicable to the SEGF -a public corporation chartered by special act of legislation- with these words :
There is established as a body corporate and politic and a public instrumentality of the State the Small Enterprise Growth Board, which consists of 11 members appointed by the Governor. ....Now called the Maine Venture Fund

Lest one argue that the private investors in the public Maine Venture Fund qualify as a private venture capital fund- factor in that the definition in the statute is written like so:
Sec. 1. 10 MRSA §1100-T, sub-§1-A,  as enacted by PL 2011, c. 454, §2, is amended to read:1-A. Private venture capital fund.  As used in this section, "private venture capital fund" means a professionally managed pool of capital organized for a limited life to make equity or equity-like investments in unrelated private companies using capital derived from multiple limited partners or members at least half of which, measured in dollar commitments, are unaffiliated and unrelated, and includes any venture capital fund licensed by the United States Small Business Administration. The authority may require such information as may be necessary or desirable for determining whether an entity qualifies as a private venture capital fund. An entity that otherwise qualifies as a private venture capital fund may elect not to be treated as a private venture capital fund for purposes of this section with respect to any proposed investment.

The above could actually apply to any private venture capitalist fund - but it is more  solidly applicable to The Maine Venture Fund - chartered by special act of legislation with these words: in violation of the Maine State Constitution, Article IV, Part Third , Section 14,

1. Establishment; membership.  There is established as a body corporate and politic and a public instrumentality of the State the Small Enterprise Growth Board,
The above is in violation of the Maine State Constitution, Article IV, Part Third , Section 14:


Article IV.

Part Third.

Legislative Power.

Section 13.  Special legislation.  The Legislature shall, from time to time, provide, as far as practicable, by general laws, for all matters usually appertaining to special or private legislation.
Section 14.  Corporations, formed under general laws.  Corporations shall be formed under general laws, and shall not be created by special Acts of the Legislature, except for municipal purposes, and in cases where the objects of the corporation cannot otherwise be attained; and, however formed, they shall forever be subject to the general laws of the State.

When translated into the information profile that I have created over six years of research these finer points of distinction are color-highlighted, so to speak. If one converts the informational space that I have constructed to the  informational space delivered by the Maine main stream media and then apply a gamut warning, you will see many bright florescent colors dominating the spectrum, which in terms of my analogy- florescent colors represent information in the profile I have constructed which does not exist in the Maine main stream media profile.

Don't Let The Maine Media Function Behind A Curtain ! Support the Preserving The American Political Philosophy Crowdfunder ! Please and Thank You !

Saturday, July 4, 2015

Quotes From Caribou Maine Secessionist Committee Report VS Bangor Daily News Collectivists Argument

Tweet This

I don't have a lot of time to day so I am just posting some quotes from The Caribou Secessionist Representatives Report which was largely ignored by the Bangor Daily News Editorial Staff as they published this sort of opinionated and dis-informed view:

 Worse, such an assessment makes it seem as if rural residents never go into cities or use their services. We doubt that is the case. -Bangor Daily News Editorial Opinion ! 

Commentary  ! Has it ever occurred to the editors of  Bangor Daily News that it is a two way street- that urban folk like to go to the country as well?  According to their logic all Maine taxpayers should be subsidizing Portland - Augusta, Bangor and other urban centers  along with the state courts of MRRA & Lorring ! That would drive taxes so high in rural Maine that current residents would be forced to lose their property , which a wealthier class o fcitizens could then take over !- Those made wealthy by Maine State Inc redistribution of wealth policies !

Report of The Caribou Succession Committee Representatives
References will be made to the 2014 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN of the City of Caribou. This plan was recently updated by the Planning Board and adopted by the City Council November 24, 2014. Portions of the plan contain factual information which the future town of Lyndon may adopt in the short term. Other portions of the Comprehensive Plan contain language which serves to expose the long standing and deeply rooted anti-rural bias held by the City Council and the Planning Board. It is very illustrative of the lack of fairness and institutional discrimination to which rural citizens are presently subjected.
And finally, our report will touch on the existence of “two Maines”. Not northern Maineversus southern Maine, as is usually discussed, but one of rural Maine versus urbanMaine. We will discuss the competing and disparate needs of its respective citizens with regards to the unequal delivery of government services. Presently, a condition existswhere about 31% of Caribou’s rural population resides in the Territory and pays taxes amounting to nearly 40% of all the revenue raised from property taxes citywide, yet receives less than half of the services that are provided to urban citizens! The Caribou Secession Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) recognizes that the city is constitutionally required to assess all property fairly and uniformly, but it is not obligated to provide equal services to every resident! 

This report also presents the reader with our vision of the future town of Lyndon as a self-governing, autonomous municipality utilizing the “Town Meeting” form government so prevalent in Maine today; wherein all its citizens receive the same level of services and taxes are never more than that which are absolutely essential to providing those basic services. A detailed analysis of the tax revenue that can be realized from real and personal property currently situated within the secession territory illustrates that it is sufficient to provide rural residents with the same level of basic services that they now have and receive a 28% reduction in their property tax bill, assuming a modest amount of state revenue sharing. If revenue sharing is discontinued as proposed in the Governor’s next biennial budget, the amount of the property tax savings will be reduced proportionally.
Police services are presently provided in the Secession Territory by different law enforcement agencies on a limited, shared and overlapping basis. They are the Caribou Police Department, the Aroostook County Sheriff’s Office, the Maine State Police and the Maine Warden Service.The Committee believes that the elimination of the Caribou PoliceDepartment from this phalanx of law enforcement officers does notdiminish public safety in the territory. Therefore, the Committee has noimmediate plan to provide additional and redundant police services.
Ambulance services are now provided by the City of Caribou. Future services for the town of Lyndon may be provided through a mediated agreement or contract with the City of Caribou or by the Crown Ambulance Company on a per capita basis, estimated to be about $32,000.00. agreement or contract with the City of Caribou or by the Crown Ambulance Company on a per capita basis, estimated to be about $32,000.00.
Fire protection services are now provided by the City of Caribou. Future services for the town of Lyndon may be provided through a mediatedagreement or contract with the City of Caribou on a per capita basis or by aVolunteer Fire Department established in collaboration with the County ofAroostook. Any volunteer department so established, would also serve theresidents of the unorganized territory of Connor and would be augmentedby mutual aide agreements with the surrounding departments. TheCommittee has begun discussions with the Aroostook CountyAdministrator and County Commissioners who have indicated they areopen to a future partnership agreement in this regard.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Taxation Without Representation: The Will To Secede - Rural Caribou Maine From Urban Caribou

Tweet This

Crowdfunder Update :
  • I have committed to the iuniversal program with a down payment, which I am feeling very good about
  • I continue to run this crowdfunder to cover the cost of the iuniversal program at a discounted rate of 50%.
  • If I succeed in meeting my crowdfunding goal of $800.00 then I will be elegable to become an author on Beacon Reader, which has a unique program for funding journalists on an ongoing basis- I have no idea how much but something beats nothing and it will connect me to a wider community.
  • Please help me to break the long trend of no response by making a contribution- it can be any amount.The Twenty five dollars is just a suggested amount.
  • The context of my book will attempt to paint a portrait of what is taking place among the States of the United States.I do not expect to be able to cover every state but will follow the leads where ever it takes me, in this case to Rhode Island
If you appreciate reading the news that the main stream media doesn't see fit to print- Support this Crowdfunder by Making A Pledge & Becoming A Backer ! See Side Bar App !
In recent news there is published an opinion by the editorial staff of the Bangor Daily News which typifies the propaganda nature that is prevalent across the Maine main stream media. The story offers an opinion on what it calls a lengthy report submitted by the secession committee of the rural sector of Caribou ,Maine which is petitioning the state to break it's association with the town of Caribou and to form a new township called Lyndon- it's reason, in a nut shell is taxation without representation, a case laid out in the report in great detail using facts backed up by statistics,  history and opinion.

Article I. Declaration of Rights.
Power inherent in people.  All power is inherent in the people; all free governments are founded in their authority and instituted for their benefit; they have therefore an unalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and to alter, reform, or totally change the same, when their safety and happiness require it.

The Report  also quotes the requirements found  The law of CONSOLIDATION, SECESSION AND ANNEXATION, 30-A M.R.S. Sections2171-C & 2172  of the Maine State Statutes
But only one sentence from the Report , one sentence,referencing Portland is mentioned in the snarky editorial by the BDN Staff, which delivers a fact free lecture on how it is a collectivist community duty to pay taxes - no matter what- and don't expect to have a voice in how those taxes are distributed: 
Paying for services is what it means to be part of a community By The BDN Editorial Board
“We are rural fiscal conservatives and we renounce expensive municipal government and the high taxes that accompany it,” they write. “Caribou is becoming the Portland of the North and we choose not to be part of that change.”
A lengthy document put together by a group that wants to secede from the city of Caribou neatly summarizes a tension that has sprung up across the state: Rural residents believe they are unfairly being made to support the more developed parts of the state, and they resent it. ........................
Dissing Portland has long been a mantra of rural residents and lawmakers. Such thinking, however, ignores the fact that the greater Portland area accounts for more than half the state’s economic output ......
Worse, such an assessment makes it seem as if rural residents never go into cities or use their services. We doubt that is the case.
The rational presented above by the BDN editorial staff is pure collectivist ideology in which the state is a corporation whose interest - revenue produced for the corporation- via taxation- is the bottom line that the corporation and all the inhabitants in the corporations dominion must serve.

The link  lengthy document in the BDN opinion takes us to the Report By the Caribou Secession Committee but there are no comments in the comment section- no surprise there because when one clicks on the comment link it is dead !

The misleading title of the BDN editorial portrays the rural inhabitants of Caribou as not wanting to pay taxes. The Editors choose to selectively omit almost the entire content of the Report by the caribou Secession Representatives - which makes this clarifying statement:

WE ARE ALL FISCAL CONSERVATIVES! We are not backed by a political party, a large corporation or a wealthy benefactor. And, most importantly, we are NOT AGAINST reasonable taxation. We are registered voters defending ourselves from a city government that has for far too long, ignored the needs of the rural community and treats us as second class citizens. Even the 2014 Comprehensive Plan of the City of Caribou contains language that exposes their strong anti-rural bias.

The Report calls for reverting back to a Town  Meeting form of government amid an environment when the Maine media has been favoring the call by the state's would be central mangers of the economy to consolidate smaller towns into larger ones justified as being more sound fiscal management. The rural contingency of Caribou, Maine argues just the opposite- that the only way for rural Caribou to achieve sounder and fairer fiscal management is to secede from the urban compact of Caribou.

The most fairly presented coverage in the Maine main stream media is found in two sources thus far:

An article in the Bangor Daily News by staff writer  Christoper Burns gives equal consideration to both sides of the issue:
The article reveals that the people of Caribou, including its rural community are paying higher property taxes than in the city of Portland:

In 2014, the property tax rate for Long Island was $6.99 for every $1,000 in property value compared with $19.41 for Portland....... ( Long Island seceded from Portland in 1993)

The final numbers aren’t in, but Camping said that Lyndon could expect a property tax rate of $15.90 for every $1,000 in property value compared with Caribou’s tax rate of $22.30. That’s a 28 percent decrease that could mean huge savings for residents.
Maine Public Radio  reported on the upcoming meeting in which the Caribou Secession Committee presents its report: After that I found no further coverage by Maine's Public radio, which is under the jurisdiction of the Maine Legislature .

To find fair coverage of the secessionists issues one has to go beyond the Maine main stream media to a affiliate of the national station, Fox News, WGAM which has produced these two articles with an interview with the Caribou Secession Committee.

Oddly missing from a Google search is any coverage in Maine's premier main stream media newspaper, The Portland Press Herald There is minimal coverage by wcsh6 of Portland  announcing that Caribou wants to secede but the bias is evident in the way that facts are reported:

To secede from a town is a long process. It a starts with a petition of signatures. Back in March, the secession committee submitted more than 1,100 signatures, which led to Thursday's public hearing. The meeting will focus on the potential impact of the proposed secession and possible solutions. 
Bangor Daily News Report on the Secessionist obtaining their signatures:
When secessionists — expressing frustration with high taxes — first announced their intentions to the Caribou City Council in July of 2014, they estimated there were 2,063 registered voters in that part of the community they proposed become the town of Lyndon. The petition for a public hearing on the plan needed to contain the support of 1,096 voters — more than 50 percent of the registered voters in the area — before the proposal formally could be considered.
The Caribou Secession Committee submitted 1,315 signatures March 9, and Caribou city clerk Jayne Farrin verified in an email Monday she validated 1,198.
Notice that information per the number of registered voters in the rural sector is omitted from the WSCH TV reporting which then goes on to report the following:( in fairness after giving some space for secessionist views)
 Caribou's city manager, Austin Bleess, said he has heard that people do not want to secede from the city because they don't want to lose the services they have now. "Recent survey that the Council did last year at the election showed that the vast majority of people were okay paying the taxes that they do in order to have the services that we have," he said.
 Caribous city manager is manager of the current city of Caribou of which 69% live in the urban center. What does one expect them to say? The statement is made as if it is conclusive data that the rural sector does not support secession but if that were true why did the secessionists collect well above their fifty percentage of registered voters in the rural area target? The omitted facts and information in this story are intended to give a false impression.

Caribou is in close proximity to the state governed town of Lorring the elder sister of the state governed town of MRRA, both towns are chartered by the Maine legislature as municipal corporations serving as instrumentalities of the state  but are commonly referred to as economic development centers. As local corporations governed by the state neither the government of the town of Lorring nor the town of MRRA can provide municipal services since it is not a state function to provide municipal services (because it is not within state authority to govern municipal corporations) . Both towns receive massive subsidies from state and federal taxpayers, money spent within their own municipal borders. This begs the question : If these state governed local towns are really regional economic development centers- why are property taxes so high in Lorring's neighboring town of Caribou and why is the population of Caribou decreasing? With all that taxpayer money pouring into the near by regional economic development center of Lorring, shouldn't the population of Caribou be increasing? Is not Caribou part of the region that the town of Lorring serves in justification for all the taxpayer funding flowing into the town of Lorring ? Being that government by the inhabitants of the  municipality has been supplanted in the city-state of Lorring with government by the state- as in centralization of economic development management-, the town of Lorring cannot collect property taxes and cannot provide municipal services and so like the town of MRRA must be contracting for municipal services from another community which is governed locally.

The debate over Caribou's secession is being framed in the media as a confrontation between the two Maine's - rural Maine and urban Maine,. The economic development policy makers of Maine have  been advocating for more centralized government in Maine via merging local towns into singular regional communities- argued on the basis that this would be sounder fiscal management. Here comes Caribou, next door to a municipality that is being governed by the state and serves as a court for state central management headquarters. What a rich story and most likely I am the only voice bringing it up at this juncture, since I have never seen any other voices mentioning that a municipality, which by definition is local government cannot legally be an instrumentality of the state in the USA. It is such a glaringly obvious truth that I feel like the boy in the fable saying out-loud that the Emperor has no cloths and wondering why no one else is joining me in saying so.

An Apt Comment found on the BDN editorial
Wow. There really is not a lot to differentiate the BDN's opinion from medieval feudalism.
For society to function, the BDN urges the peasantry to make life comfortable for the lords and their whims. In return, the peasants get to believe they are being protected and cared for.
In reality, no one owns their property. It belongs to the "lord" who is elected by promising the land's wealth to a connected few.

Couldn't agree more !