Unbreaking America: Solving the Corruption Crisis - Jennifer Lawrence [vid]

[Bryan]

 

[Anti Globalist]

Jennifer Lawrence is clearly an expert on politics.

 

[donnay]

Jennifer Lawrence ought to stick to acting and quit acting like she cares about the Republic. Very well crafted propaganda, that Edward Bernays' would be proud of.

 

[PAF]

The star was spotted wearing a "We Should All Be Feminists" T-shirt and carrying a book with Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises on it.

Actress Jennifer Lawrence is in the news this week for a number of reasons, including her impromptu performance at a Vienna strip club and her stepping out in a $700 Dior T-shirt that proclaims "We Should All Be Feminists." The Daily Mail even devoted a whole article to the shirt, noting that "the 26-year-old actress beamed as she left the set of her film Red Sparrow with her dog—and a balloon—in tow." But the Mail fails to note the other thing that J-Law was spotted carrying: a book with famed Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises on the back cover.

The Facebook group Being Classically Liberal first noted Lawrence's reading material yesterday, suggesting that perhaps she had picked up the von Mises book Socialism thinking it took a positive view of the subject. Lawrence—star of a slew of recent hit movies, including Joy, The Hunger Games, and American Hustle—has been outspoken in her criticism of conservative politicians (The Daily Beast even deemed her "Hollywood's Next Big Power Liberal").

But some crowdsourced sleuthing revealed that Lawrence's book isn't by von Mises but about him and other Austrian School economists. The book—Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan—was written by New York University professor Kim Phillips-Fein and looks at the rise of free-market economics in post-New Deal America and the role that businesses played in shaping mid-20th Century conservatism.

"Starting in the mid-1930s, a handful of prominent American businessmen forged alliances with the aim of rescuing America—and their profit margins—from socialism and the 'nanny state,'" says the publisher's blurb for the book. "Long before the 'culture wars' usually associated with the rise of conservative politics, these driven individuals funded think tanks, fought labor unions, and formed organizations to market their views."

So does this mean Lawrence is rethinking the reflexive Hollywood hate for free-market capitalism? It's probably a bit too soon to roll out the libertarian welcome mat just yet; for all we know, Lawrence is reading Invisible Hands as some sort of resistance manual, or doing research for a role in an exciting new film about economic theory. (OK, probably not that last one.) But, hey, you know what they say: Once you go Austrian School...


https://reason.com/blog/2017/05/19/jennifer-lawrence-libertarian-feminist

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Hmm. Hard to get past the very beginning where J.Law said that “America is no longer even considered a full democracy. We are witnessing a total political system failure in America, which is the complete opposite of what our nation’s founders had in mind.”

Sorry, we are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, and certainly not a direct democracy as implied by the charts of public opinion. The founders did NOT have a direct democracy in mind.

So the ideas are coming from Lawrence Lessig. The name sounds familiar.

They are probably correct in that there is public agreement that government has been corrupted, and is controlled by and for special interests. Guess they didn’t want to call DC a swamp.

But even if a problem is correctly identified, what solution will really work? It is doubtful that the solutions they are proposing will “fix” the problem.

More voter registration? Really? Will that solve any problems? One of our problems is the ignorance of the voters. More voters will not help.

By the end, it is rainbows and unicorns. Once they wipe out corruption through their “solutions”, then government will solve all of our problems, like expensive healthcare. Sounds like their final solution includes a very big government, that will defy all odds and become pure and for the people.

All in all, I’ll agree it would be nice to end the outsized political influence of special interests and the money they bribe politicians with, and perhaps something could be done about that. How specifically do you do that? How do you end the revolving door? Transparency laws? I’d have to see how all of that would work in the real world. Most efforts in this area fail, or make the problem worse.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

This movement has already started at some levels it seems, one of the guys funded by MAGA's top funder could be out soon:

Netanyahu to Stand Trial for Bribery, Fraud and Breach of Trust

 

[Brian4Liberty]

More on Josh Silver, who is heading this effort:

Josh Silver (born April 16, 1968) is the co-founder and director of RepresentUs, a post-partisan, nonprofit organization whose stated mission is to build the movement that fixes America's corrupt political system.[1] Silver formerly served as CEO and co-founder of Free Press, an "activist group that promotes accountability journalism and Internet openness."[2] He served as the director of development for a cultural arm of the Smithsonian Institution, and was the campaign manager of the successful 1998 "Clean Elections" ballot measure in Arizona. He has published widely on democracy, media, telecommunications, campaign finance and a range of other public policy issues. Silver has been profiled in the Wall Street Journal[3] and in most major media outlets. He speaks nationally on democracy and issues of money in politics.
...
Silver posits that a broken and corrupt political system has a paralyzing effect on nearly every issue. He advocates using the term “corruption” to describe the combined influence of lobbying, the “revolving door,” and campaign contributions, as well as broken election laws that foster extremism and block competition. Silver sees this corruption as afflicting politicians of both parties.

Silver argues that past democracy reform efforts have failed partly because they were overly focused on appealing to the political Left and/or overly focused on passing reform legislation through Congress; he points out that members of Congress, who have achieved their positions under current election and campaign finance laws, are unlikely to approve legislation that would change those laws in order to increase political competition and/or limit the influence of the special interests and moneyed donors who have financed their political careers.[5]

Silver advocates a grassroots campaign of citizen-led legislative lobbying and ballot initiatives passed at the city and state level to fix policy locally while building momentum towards national reform. The organization he co-founded and directs, RepresentUs, was established to support these grassroots anti-corruption efforts.[6]
...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Silver_(nonprofit_director)

 

[Brian4Liberty]

In addition to Lawrence Lessig, Zephyr Teachout was named as one of the minds behind this project:

Zephyr Rain Teachout is an American attorney, author, and Associate Professor of Law at Fordham University.[2] She was a candidate for Attorney General of New York in the 2018 election[3] and her candidacy was endorsed by The New York Times.
...
Teachout was among the minority of Democratic congressional candidates who endorsed Bernie Sanders during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. She was also among the first candidates Sanders endorsed.[47] Sanders subsequently endorsed her for Attorney General of New York in 2018.[48]

Teachout's platform for her House campaign included a higher minimum wage, increased spending on public infrastructure, a ban on fracking, an increase in manufacturing jobs,[49] property tax cuts,[50] increased investment in rural infrastructure,[50] an end to Common Core and high-stakes testing,[51][52] and campaign finance reform (specifically working to overturn Citizens United v. FEC).[53]

While running for Attorney General of New York, Teachout pledged that she would use the power of the office to sue Trump for violating anti-corruption laws and to force him to divest from his businesses.
...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zephyr_Teachout

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Jennifer Lawrence is clearly an expert on politics.

This could be her payback against hollywood-Weinstein scandal, just speculating.
Even if she's a pretty face supporting an idea, the content in video is certainly thought provoking and far more data based than noise we hear from most of MSM and politicians playing the current donors/lobbies money game.

As current personality/opportunism/big money driven fad of GOP-Adelson sinks in next few years, ideology less GOP likely to be in worse shape than how Dem party was after Obama left his damaging Nobel Peace Prized war monger donors puppetring legacy behind in 2016. There is good opportunity ahead for third party or a genuine rebel from either of the two major parties.


I think everyone here would agree that Jen L would easily qualify to be a senior White House advisor:

https://video.newsserve.net/700/v/2...ka-May-Have-Convinced-Trump-To-Bomb-Syria.jpg



Related

Globalism snag? Trump top donor funded PM/top ally to be indicted for corruption

Coulter calls border agreement Trump's 'Yellow New Deal'
02/12/19

“Why would you [vote for him again]?” the provocative author and columnist asked during a Daily Caller interview on Dec. 20. “To make sure, I don’t know, Ivanka [Trump] and Jared [Kushner] can make money? That seems to be the main point of the presidency at this point.”
“They’re about to have a country where no Republican will ever be elected president again,” she added. “Trump will just have been a joke presidency who scammed the American people, amused the populists for a while, but he’ll have no legacy whatsoever."​

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/429622-coulter-calls-border-agreement-trumps-yellow-new-deal

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Full list of people involved or endorsing (plenty of celebrities):

https://represent.us/about/#our-team

 

[juleswin]

I completely agree with them about the problem, the solution is what I have a problem with. How do we stop the zionists from buying all the politicians. How can we do that?

 

[juleswin]

Hmm. Hard to get past the very beginning where J.Law said that “America is no longer even considered a full democracy. We are witnessing a total political system failure in America, which is the complete opposite of what our nation’s founders had in mind.”

Sorry, we are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, and certainly not a direct democracy as implied by the charts of public opinion. The founders did NOT have a direct democracy in mind.

So the ideas are coming from Lawrence Lessig. The name sounds familiar.

They are probably correct in that there is public agreement that government has been corrupted, and is controlled by and for special interests. Guess they didn’t want to call DC a swamp.

But even if a problem is correctly identified, what solution will really work? It is doubtful that the solutions they are proposing will “fix” the problem.

More voter registration? Really? Will that solve any problems? One of our problems is the ignorance of the voters. More voters will not help.

By the end, it is rainbows and unicorns. Once they wipe out corruption through their “solutions”, then government will solve all of our problems, like expensive healthcare. Sounds like their final solution includes a very big government, that will defy all odds and become pure and for the people.

All in all, I’ll agree it would be nice to end the outsized political influence of special interests and the money they bribe politicians with, and perhaps something could be done about that. How specifically do you do that? How do you end the revolving door? Transparency laws? I’d have to see how all of that would work in the real world. Most efforts in this area fail, or make the problem worse.

So we are not a direct democracy right, so what kind of democracy are we? an indirect democracy? You can elect just about everyone in govt with a simple majority vote except for the president who needs to win the electoral college. So its, a democracy with a twist but still a democracy.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Jennifer Lawrence ought to stick to acting and quit acting like she cares about the Republic. Very well crafted propaganda, that Edward Bernays' would be proud of.

It is well crafted propaganda and it may influence many people.

BTW, do you believe Jen is qualified to be a senior White House advisor in a non-corrupt political system?

https://video.newsserve.net/700/v/2...ka-May-Have-Convinced-Trump-To-Bomb-Syria.jpg

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-Staged-quot&p=6752941&viewfull=1#post6752941

 

[acptulsa]

So we are not a direct democracy right, so what kind of democracy are we? an indirect democracy? You can elect just about everyone in govt with a simple majority vote except for the president who needs to win the electoral college. So its, a democracy with a twist but still a democracy.

We are a republic.

In a democracy, the mob makes the law. In a republic, the mob elects the politicians, and the politicians make the law. This prevents charismatic slick talkers from having undue influence on the process, and prevents injustice from happening in the heat of the moment. It protects the minority.

At least in theory.

Of course, when the government grows to the point that it has more departments than any corporation and more employees than some states have citizens, it becomes a mob. And then even a republic is mob rule.

 

[donnay]

It is well crafted propaganda and it may influence many people.

BTW, do you believe Jen is qualified to be a senior White House advisor in a non-corrupt political system?

https://video.newsserve.net/700/v/2...ka-May-Have-Convinced-Trump-To-Bomb-Syria.jpg

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...-Staged-quot&p=6752941&viewfull=1#post6752941

No, I don't think she is qualified.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

No, I don't think she is qualified.

Ok.
Had to ask because there have been numerous thread here about her relating to Syria bombing/China deals/US Israel policy etc but had not seen you asking her to stay out of politics unless I missed such expression in the past. So was bit surprised why private view of one young woman invoked such critical response while silence in other case so far.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

So we are not a direct democracy right, so what kind of democracy are we? an indirect democracy? You can elect just about everyone in govt with a simple majority vote except for the president who needs to win the electoral college. So its, a democracy with a twist but still a democracy.

I suppose for the average American uneducated in US history, calling it a Democracy is just fine. Their target seems to be uneducated Americans, so the video works just fine.

Watch this video, and you will know why we have a Consitutional Republic, and why the founders wanted it that way.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Another note on this “Represent Us” PAC is that they talk about money and influence, but they do not reference at all the main influencer of American voters: the media. The media is art of the swamp, funded by the most powerful special interests (especially the MIC and all of those interests that buy Congress). It is also the main purveyor of partisan establishment propaganda.

They want better elections, but they are going to ignore that the local and national news is biased, and will push establishment candidates?

 

[acptulsa]

They want better elections, but they are going to ignore that the local and national news is biased, and will push establishment candidates?

In other words, just another lightning rod. They don't want to harnass the energy and use it to change things. They just want to dissipate that energy to ground so it doesn't strike its rightful target.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Another note on this “Represent Us” PAC is that they talk about money and influence, but they do not reference at all the main influencer of American voters: the media. The media is art of the swamp, funded by the most powerful special interests (especially the MIC and all of those interests that buy Congress). It is also the main purveyor of partisan establishment propaganda.

They want better elections, but they are going to ignore that the local and national news is biased, and will push establishment candidates?

Well they have not burnt their bridges by going after hollywood-media machine nexus through this release. 'You will not work in this town again' can be a deterrent for an hollywood actress (or the writer behind the voice) who may still be intrerested in staying friendly with that industry.
But it does provoke some thoughts and offers a view rarely talked about in MSM.