Too often freedom for one person comes at the liability of another. Socialism could be a label to suggest balancing away from exploitation of this type, if it must be labeled. Another phrase could be respect for natural, human, and civil rights. Either way, everyone should have a voice in defining freedom, not only the hierarchy.
Do we hand over our Constitutional rights too compliantly? As Affirmative Action is discussed by the Supreme Court, is this seriously more important than, for example, free and functional communication among humanity? Indoctrination lends itself to self censorship.
Some fragments of institutionalized religion seem to be about the business of diminishing the position of women. One has long been impressed with the story of Hildegard von Bingen and the legacy she has left the world. One has considered it fortunate that she was never challenged by institutionalized hierarchy as a witch, which was the fate of so many women throughout history.
The diversity of targets of types of fraud and predatory practice in the USA reveals less about individual offenses than an overall system of corruption. Please note the youth who are seriously engaged in raising voice that hearkens back to similar involvement in the ’60’s.
Patriarchy expects enabling from others——
This feels like an example of how hierarchical Establishment labels as free trade that which is FACTually speaking, socialism.—–
It’s almost as though global oligarchs regardless of nation of origin have found an excellent distraction for the transfer of wealth from the 100% to the 1%
Remembering that the Haudenosaunee are said to be the origin of principles included in the US Constitution that don’t appear to rest on a foundation of capitalism but rather on a foundation of free enterprise as pertains to but are not limited to financial matters, hope continues that culture as lived pre-colonization can triumph. Time will tell. Meanwhile, Upstate NY is benefiting, so far, from said leadership. The hope builds that we remember nature and the wilderness.
The label of American can be used to include many more people than those residing in the USA, but to use this definition to exclude US citizens seems interesting.
Mitch McConnell needs to define his notion of “American” for us—-