Government of, by andfor the corporations

Bill Bertrand, in a letter to the Forum June 28 (“Things have changed”), claims

that I said, “Most people on Kaua’i exhibit a complacent subservience

coupled with an inborn inferiority complex.” I did not say “Most

people …” However, I did say “Kaua’i’s electorate majority,”

which is not the same thing as “most people.” One does not

necessarily need to run for public office in the United States to learn the

difference, but it doesn’t hurt to do so.

Bertrand says, “Buy the

Kaua’i Electric…use the $9 million a year that KE was sending to Citizens’

(Utilities Inc.) stockholders on the mainland per year.” Were I smart

enough to form a co-op, I would say “Right on, brother! You got it!”

Add it u: 50 years of guaranteed profits to the Investor? We own already.

Period. Even more, they owe us Kaua’i average citizen ratepayers. They already

got their money’s worth and more. The sweat of two and three Kaua’i generations

has long since paid them off, even if most us are too ignorant, too poorly led

to acknowledge that fact.

It is not that Kauaians owe $200 million, two

generations of electric rates fixed to satisfy speculative financial pursuits

which they claim to be their

right as divined by the U.S. Constitution.

Just because we have a government of the corporations, by the corporations and

for the corporations does not excuse the individual of responsibility to

exercise her or his freedom to express outrage toward perceived greed and

injustice. However, when one is of corporations (plantations), one is seldom

inclined to jeopardize one’s position by perceiving much beyond the immediate

bounty afforded one through one’s own plantation—justly, reasonably or

otherwise.

With this Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative deal, perhaps we are

at the beginning of something like a shark frenzy, with some people trying to

lead us to believe that if we appease the first shark, then the other sharks

(GTE/Bell, Nextel and other telecommunications investors, luxury hotel

investors, numerous speculative real estate ventures, the U.S. Department of

Defense et al, with the blessings of labor unions and financial

institutions—all with plans for Kaua’i ) will forget what they are here

for.

“plantations” (aka banks), the Pacific Missile Firing Range

“plantation,” the tour boat, tour bus, tour helicopter “plantations,” and the

luxury resorts/airlines/rental cars “plantations,” in addition to the

employment “plantations” of the state of Hawaii, Kaua’i County and their

associated government employee unions/retirement/health systems.

Citizens’

Telecommunications, of New England (New England being the major center for 19th

century colonialism), is a renamed company in the process of reinventing

itself, sucking the lifeblood from Kaua’i to the end. Small thanks to Kaua’i

aloha might go without mention, except for the likelihood that Citizens’ VIP

stockholders could be on Kaua’i to celebrate closure (aka, trickle down) with

Mayor Kusaka entertaining on behalf of Kaua’i (present and future) ratepayers,

KE, KIUC and the wonders of divine capitalism.

* No. 1: Ever-higher body

counts (aka “visitor”).

* No. 2: Ever-greater dollar extraction

from each visitor.

* No. 3: Ever greater average-joe investment/debiture

on behalf of asphalt/concreted, wired, plumbed and policed public systems of

technology to serve a diminishing base of average folks, an increasing base of

connected folks.

Bertrand closes by quoting Margaret Thatcher:

“`Consensus politics is the process of trying to satisfy people who have

many opinions, few thoughts, no facts and an unshakable belief in their own

importance.'” I say people should have an unshakable belief in their own

importance.

What alternative would either Bertrand or Thatcher suggest?

Thatcherism, i.e. public officials, are entitled to believe they are important,

whereas the nameless multitude are delusional when they feel entitled to such a

belief?

Does the average U.S. citizen have access to “facts” as

do many members/payrollees of the average citizen’s government? When the only

“facts” in one’s possession are those which have passed through an

ideologically-correct sieve of federally licensed, taxed/subsidized

‘communications’ conglomerates, from whence would sound opinions or thoughts

originate? On what foundation rests Bertrand’s/Thatcher’s apparent belief that

viable opinions/thoughts could/should exist independent of facts?

GREG

GOODWIN

Hanalei

0 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. If your comments are inappropriate, you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, send us an email.