Showing posts with label Political Incompetence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political Incompetence. Show all posts

Saturday, July 31, 2021

Another Dem Political Disaster In the Making

I rarely comment on politics anymore as the situation has been dire and dismal for too long and I'm too old, grumpy and cynical to even bother with it any more. 

As far as I can tell, the Dems are done. They did what they saw themselves elected to do, passing the COVID relief plan of 2020, and that's it. Done. Going home now. Bye-bye. The Congress starts its LOOOONNNNNNGGGGG vacation tomorrow, and they, our elected representatives in the two Democrat controlled bodies, are outa here, so long, too bad about all the things they didn't get done. Maybe next year, eh?

It truly is shameful, primarily for the Dems' failure to recognize that anything is urgent enough to keep them from going home for the summer and letting everything burn while they do whatever it is they do during the hot months. 

Nothing at all is urgent enough for them. Certainly not the looming eviction tsunami. Climate catastrophe. COVID resurgence. Sputtering economic situation. Federal voting rights protections. The faltering lost in the weeds infrastructure half-plan. And on and on and on.

Enh. Too much trouble. Going home now. Y'all can fend for yourself. mkay?

I'm old enough to remember the catastrophic Democratic wipe out in the elections of 2010. At the time, I speculated that it was deliberate. The Dems did not try to hold state and local offices, and they failed to hold on to their congressional majorities, largely it seemed to me because of gross policy failures to adequately address the financial and economic meltdown of the failed previous administration, and perhaps worse, the imposition of what was at the time a very unpopular health insurance mandate (which was not yet in effect) on a long suffering and fearful population. 

This was like a one-two "fuck you" punch to the public, and the public responded by voting them out. 

Bye-bye, so long.

And as is so often the case, those superfluous Dems turned around and blamed the voters for failing to show up at the polls. 

The 2010 R take over of state houses meant that they would be in charge of gerrymandering election districts for the next ten years, possibly longer -- it will be twenty years because Rs still hold the majority of state houses -- and now with voter suppression all the rage among Rs, the outcomes of elections will be determinable by R legislatures and/or election officials regardless of the actual votes. 

It would be astonishing if we hadn't seen this sort of dereliction by Democrats before. In fact, it's so frequent, it's considered normal. Dems don't have a follow-through. They present X+++ as their Plan, they do Y-, and then they go home -- either voted out or as in this case simply because they want to. Nyah. Nyah. 

It's always the voters fault when they do this, never their own.

A lot of internet opinionators hate on the Dems for everything because it's their brand to do so. They claim to be "progressive" or something but objectively they're R shills in "progressive" drag, and they've been around in one form or another since before the internet was born.

And these days we should understand that a lot of Democrats, some in powerful positions in or out of office (particularly but not exclusively in the media) are ex-Republicans who are still ideologically aligned with conservative political and economic ideology. I like to think of Markos over at Daily Kos in this way. He was a die-hard Republican who "switched" during the Bush2 years, especially in support of the Dean campaign in 2004. Dean himself, though nominally a Democrat, was for all intents and purposes a Rockefeller Republican like his parents. Ie: he came from money, was raised in a Republican household, was basically conservative in ideology though with many old-line progressive attributes (Progressivism was originally formulated and implemented within a Republican political context), and had he been elected, he would have governed as a progressive Republican, in contrast to Bush2, who was essentially a corporate shill and war-monger, in other words, a representative of the un-progressive wing of the Republican Party.

Markos likes to claim that his site is intended to help elect "more and better Democrats" -- which it has utterly failed to do. Instead, his and many other ostensibly Democrat-aligned sites on the internet have served to elect many more -- and often worse -- Republicans who have turned into bat-shit fascists. 

I have often criticized Daily Kos for failing to even name a Democrat on its front page, even during election season, while featuring and amplifying Republicans endlessly. Interestingly, the tactic of constantly writing and talking about Republicans while ignoring Democrats doesn't seem to work very well in electing "more and better Democrats," does it?

But since the Republican Party has essentially taken over the Democrats, indeed become "Democrats", we're really dealing with two branches of a Uniparty that both serve corporate interests quite shamelessly, leaving the public to fend for itself. Relying on politicians of either party to serve the public is a fool's game. We haven't seen that happen for generations. And even then, political service to the public was limited.

The failure of Democrats in Congress and the White House to substantially move government from inappropriate corporate service to long-neglected and necessary public service -- again -- is likely to lead to yet another mid-term blow out election for Republicans which signs and signals suggest will be the last more or less "free and fair" election this nation/empire conducts.

Any future election will be an overt sham intended solely to preserve an illusion while protecting and perpetuating neo-fascist oligarchic rule regardless of which team nominally holds power. I think many would say this already happened, perhaps with the Bush v Gore decision of the Supreme Court in 2000.

There's no going back.

Every attempt at restoring some kind of public service -- as opposed to corporate service -- ethic to government since then has failed.

There is no sign any such effort will succeed in the future. Every sign suggests the opposite.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The Essentials of Disruption/Destruction

I've said I'm not much interested in the presidential campaign this year largely because the two main candidates are.... simply appalling. That's not to say that one or the other doesn't have some positive qualities, that's not the point. The point is that both of them represent ideals of the State and society that are loathsome. They are both ideologically neoLibCon. They are both exploiters and oppressors. Neither has a shred of faith in or genuine interest in the well-being of the masses.

Hillary is the avatar of the perpetuation of the status quo, and under other circumstances, that might be enough to get her back into the White House all by itself. After all, we've been propagandized for years that "everything's fine," the world is a better place, the economy is steaming along nicely, everyone who wants a job can find one, and now we are learning that incomes for the Lesser People are rising for the first time since 2007!!!! Yay!!!!!

Whut? Think about it. Household incomes are rising for the first time since 2007... what does that imply? Obvious, isn't it? Household incomes have been declining or flat since 2007. Ah, now that makes sense, because that's clearly the case. Actually, statistically, the median household income has been in decline since 1997. There may -- or may not -- have been a slight uptick in 2015 over 2014, but the overall trend is downward, and that hasn't changed.

Think. When was Obama elected on a promise to halt/reverse the Great (for the Rabble, the Endless) Recession? Ah. 2008. And guess what? He hasn't done it. At least not for the Rabble, not even close. The High and the Mighty, however, have made out like the bandits they are.

For many of them, there never was any Recession at all.

And Obama made sure that situation was institutionalized.

Hillary represents the continuation of, indeed the intensification of, the policies that make it so.

Thus, of course, the majority of the Highest of the Mighty support her candidacy over that of one of their own class, Donald Trump.

At least they have until recently.

Now after Hillary's Unfortunate Incident at the 9/11 Memorial, they seem to be hedging their bets. Trump may not be The One -- yet -- but if Herself craps out, who they gonna turn to? And after all, Trump has long been One of the Tribe and he seems to be picking up steam among the Ignorant Rabble, soooooo.... why not?

After all, he is a Disruptor/Destructor. And that's important to the success and well-being of his class.  Part of their culture is the disruption and destruction of rivals below them. Trump is a master at that. He showed it on his TV show for years and years, and he is certainly adept at it in life. Not only does he disrupt and destroy, he often gets his victims to like it. Now that is a highly desirable skill among the rich and powerful. In fact, it is a necessary one given the ideological foundations of the modern political economy.

Obama has that skill too, though he's far more subtle about it than The Donald. He's been soothing the savage beast of the Rabble throughout his entire reign at the top, and he's better at it than any politician I know of.

Hillary simply does not have that skill, though her husband does, though that can't overcome some of his other qualities that we need not get into here.

Hillary inspires resistance, not so much because she's The Devil Incarnate (as she's been characterized by a large segment of the Internets) but because she tends to scold rather than uplift, tends to negatively characterize her opponents, tends to be less than inspirational in large gatherings, tends to be so wedded to preserving and extending the status quo, she's all but unable to recognize that the status quo hasn't worked for the majority for a generation or more.

She can see discreet elements of failure, but not the whole, basically because she's wedded to the whole picture, a picture which from below is horrendous.

She doesn't seem to see that, nor can she grasp it.

On the other hand, Trump sees it clearly -- because he's profiting from it -- and seeks to exploit the Rabble to the maximum degree he can, first by being elected, and then who knows what will follow?

No one.  No one can be sure, and that is a big part of his appeal. This was also part of Reagan's appeal. There were lots of dog whistles for those who were attuned, and there was his (suddenly forgotten and ignored by the media) governorship of California that clued some people into what his governance as President would become, but it was an era of hailing the hero, in contrast to the "failed" status quo represented by Carter, and in the public eye, a celebrity is almost always Heroic, no?

But nobody could be sure what Reagan would do, anymore than they could be sure what  Trump will do in the White House.

Hillary, like Carter, they already knew all about -- too much about. And they could anticipate policies that would do little or nothing on their behalf, or would actually make things worse for the many while ensuring that things would get better and better for the few.

Trump on the other hand can play the Rubes like a room full of marks much like the hucksters who sell real estate courses do. They dazzle the Rabble with the promise of getting rich! rich! rich!. But when it comes to it, the only one who really gets rich! is the course promoter. Gee, who'd a thunk?

Trump is pure show business, pure con-man. But that's what it takes anymore. Obama is more cerebral, but he's just as much a con-man, as too many people found out after he was elected. The con was that he held out such promise to the Rabble, but he delivered mostly  to the High and the Mighty whom he served.

Trump is a different kind of con-man; he serves no one but himself. No one. The concept of "public service" is anathema to him -- something he makes clear if you cut through his gobbledygook. He's in this for himself alone, period. End of discussion.

OK. So why does that appeal to anyone else? Well, why are gangsters often held in high esteem? Because, at least for those on their side, they hold out a promise of well-being, even prosperity, so long as you don't cross them. In other words, if you're on their side, you'll be OK -- until you aren't.

Gangster rule works, at least it can, but it is also disruptive and destructive of the Established Order.

Gangster rule is a rival and a threat to the Establishment. And the Establishment has to make deals with the Gangsters or be uprooted and destroyed by them. "Deals" are what Trump promises. "Deals".

Hillary offers essentially nothing new at all. She started her campaign with the implied slogan: "No you can't," and she really hasn't budged an inch since then. It's still a "No you can't" campaign, and it's hard to see any resonance among the People. She offers the Rabble nothing but a long-hard slog to gain marginal improvements -- eventually. "Stronger together," indeed, but to what object, when ultimately her message is that "nothing can be done," and "there is no alternative." (h/t Baroness Thatcher, may she burn in Hell.)

Further, Hillary posits that she knows best, and the rest of y'all need to go along with it. It's for your own good after all.

Sigh.

Trump promises to upend and overturn all that, sweep t all away, and in the end rule as a dictator, strongman, gangster. This is the ideal of his class after all. Whether this is the time for that, I can't say, but I was shocked to the bone in 1980 when Reagan won against arguably one of the nation's best presidents -- one who was, however, incapable of controlling the pile on of negative forces that undermined his authority and ability. Reagan just swept all that aside. This is what Trump promises to do as well.

If the status quo doesn't work for the majority -- and arguably it doesn't -- then a quasi or literal revolution is required.

But as I've long maintained, if the Revolution is to come, it will come from the Right.

I didn't think it would be quite as openly gangsterish, but that's what it looks like is in the offing.

Oh boy.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Hillary Hysteria Reaches Fever Pitch! Run For Your Lives! We're All Gonna Die!

Whoo.

This latest Hillary flap has brought out all the hysterics on the intertubes to ventilate their spleens over Hillary's Health Crisis Du Jour.

Her campaign says she's got pneumonia. I don't know whether it's true or not. There's no way to know. The campaigns are charades top to bottom and sorting out truth from fiction is an endless task. There's no way to keep up. That she's ill is clear enough. With what, though?

There have been rumors about her health for months or years, and I typically ascribe them to anti-Clinton bullshit. How it is that the Clintons, among all politicians, invite such over-the-top antagonism is a mystery to me. They have long fed their haters, though, so I don't entirely blame it on some kind of Derangement Syndrome. There seems to be something symbiotic about it, bizarre though it may be. They get something from being hated so strongly, and their haters need the Clintons just as much.

Be that as it may, Hillary's been sick, and the 9/11 Memorial Incident could not -- at least it wasn't -- hidden from the public. At one point, while awaiting her transport, she could barely stand and could not walk on her own. There were indications that she passed out. Oh boy.

When the announcement was made -- eventually -- that she had pneumonia, I nodded and said, "Yep." Her symptoms, at least visible ones, some of which had been rehashed over and over in the hysterical media no matter the political persuasion, were consistent with a severe and/or long-untreated case of pneumonia. I know. I've had it. Several times. What she was showing were symptoms very similar to some of the worst experiences I've had with pneumonia. Others would testify to having similar symptoms themselves.

But the intertubes exploded with authoritative but utterly false declarations of what pneumonia does and doesn't do, and with equally false declarations of how serious or not serious the condition must be in Hillary's case. Jebus dancing on a crust of Wonder Bread, this was insane. Utterly insane.

What I reacted to was the completely inane and false and almost universally encountered statements regarding how pneumonia behaves -- particularly how it is relatively mild or benign, and how, for example, it doesn't cause dehydration or make one feel hot or feverish in mild weather. This is utterly false. Yes, it can cause severe dehydration and feelings of fever or overheating. Yes. It. Can.

It can make you feel faint. It can make you pass out. It can cause "out of body" experiences. It can leave you disoriented, confused, incoherent, etc. A bad cough that doesn't go away with ordinary cough suppressants is routine.

It can give you the shakes, or you can be semi-paralyzed. It can be deadly.

Vaccines cannot and do not prevent all forms of pneumonia, but patients are not always told that they can still get pneumonia even if they've received both vaccines.

In my view, pneumonia is always serious, but its course may not involve all the most serious symptoms. It can be very difficult to control with antibiotics. I've usually required two courses of antibiotics every time I've had it. That's ten days each. But even after the infection is controlled, there are lingering after effects for months.The worst is fatigue, something that you really can't do anything about (but see below.)

Many authoritative commenters insisted that pneumonia is easily controlled with antibiotics. It's not always easily controlled at all. A few days on antibiotics and you're good as new. Not true. It may work for some people, for others, no.

Other commenters authoritatively insisted that Hillary couldn't have pneumonia because of this, that or the other symptom that pneumonia doesn't cause. Except for the fact that her visible symptoms were consistent with severe or untreated pneumonia...

Others seemed to have so much invested in their pet medical diagnosis for what ails Hillary that they couldn't accept something as uninteresting as pneumonia and dismissed it out of hand.

Many insisted that Hillary was obviously contagious and should be effectively quarantined. Or contrariwise, she was exposed to too many sick people and should be better protected by her staff. Some of her staff were apparently taken ill too.

Almost all of the intertube commentary was wrong, and most of it was ridiculous.

One of the most striking things after Hillary's episode at the 9/11 memorial was her astonishing recovery after an hour or so at Chelsea's place. My own perception is that it could not have happened without some kind of "boost." There were speculations she was given amphetamines.

Maybe.

It looked to me like she'd been ill with pneumonia for some time, perhaps months, and neither she nor her staff was aware of it. She thought it was allergies. She may have thought it was a persistent cold. Whatever the case, she showed some symptoms, but they went unrecognized, and so she went on with the campaign without treatment, or perhaps with treatment for the wrong condition.

Undiagnosed pneumonia is pretty common.

She probably didn't even see a doctor until she felt so bad she had to do something.

They say she was diagnosed last Friday and put on antibiotics. My guess? Too little, too late.

They didn't have time to work before the 9/11 memorial, and they may not have been effective in any case. For example, I had one course of antibiotics that had no effect at all.

Her condition likely would get worse under those circumstances. And so the episode at the van where she appeared to be either unconscious or semi-paralyzed.

This should have set off a whole series of alarm bells in the campaign, but it's not at all clear that it did. Taking her to Chelsea's house rather than to a hospital was a strategic move that Hillary probably insisted on -- it's clear enough that she sets the rules of the campaign -- but it may not have been medically wise.

If she was given a "boost" of some kind at Chelsea's but had no real medical treatment beyond already prescribed antibiotics and maybe an energy drink or two, I would be alarmed.

If she was severely dehydrated and actually passed out, then she should probably be under close medical supervision -- if not actually hospitalized -- for at least several days. It may require IV infusions of both stronger antibiotics and fluids.

That can take place at her home if need be, and that's likely what's going on at her place in Chappaqua.

There are many issues that can be raised over this situation, none of them particularly good, but the intertube hysterics over it are not helpful at all. Neither those who dismissed the seriousness of pneumonia nor those who made it out to be worse than it is really caught the fundamental problem:

1) she had apparently been ill for some time but was not diagnosed until last Friday.

2) either she denied she was as ill as she was or -- likely -- no one bothered to check what was wrong or how severe it was.

3) even after being diagnosed, her treatment was apparently inadequate to her condition.

4) her campaign was not forthcoming about her condition.

5) speculation was rampant for months before her diagnosis based on nothing at all but a perception that she wasn't well. She wasn't, it's true, but the speculation was allowed to run wild when a proper diagnosis and initiation of treatment early on might have scotched the speculation and she might have gotten well much sooner.

It's valid to question her judgment and the judgment of her staff and medical personnel. What were they thinking? There appears to be a dangerous level of disengagement from reality involved in this episode. Many questions about her judgment have already been raised, of course. There are plenty more questions to be raised. But the way this episode has been handled is not helpful either to understanding Hillary's condition or the many problems of this outrageous political season and the interests being served.

On the other hand, there is a whole series of unanswered and largely unasked questions about the other major candidate...

Good heavens, what a mess...


Friday, November 27, 2015

Godwin-going Apres Thanksgiving -- The Trumpen Proletariat Arise

Apparently the meme -- or is it now a trope ?-- about The Donald is that he is as thorough-going a fascist as there has ever been in American politics. Well, in recent memory, anyway. They're calling him a fascist straight out, no filters, among the Republican chatterati, at least from what I've seen on the intertubes. This is said to be unprecedented, and I suppose it is. The media is always reluctant to call out any Republican candidate, and Republican politicians and commentators generally hold their fire in public, but The Donald has caused something of a dilemma for the Big Boys.

At first, they didn't know what to do when he went off on one of his rightist-populist jags. It couldn't be for real, right? But then it got more and more real, especially as polling showed Trump leading the Republican field, despite the fact that Carson was catching him here and there and now and then (that's interesting) and Rubio was clearly the choice of the cognoscenti. After all, a nice clean Hispanic character should be good for the demographics, right? Especially after That Negro in the White House (eeek!)

The problem being that pesky populist billionaire who keeps surging in the polls, keeps drawing large crowds of rabid fanatics, and keeps getting his ugly mug on the teevee because of something outrageous he's said or one of his goons or one of his fans has done.

A "populist billionaire?" Whut? That's a key to understanding what's going on here as I see it. Trump is a famous personality first and foremost. He's been a character on the teevee for years, and he was in the news constantly before he became a television celebrity. He's known for the character he plays on teevee, and it's a character he's honed and perfected on the stump as a self-funded presidential candidate. The character is obnoxious and outrageous, but it touches a certain segment of the population that feels left out of the economic and social changes that have been going on in the nation for many years now. These people identify with Trump and his own outrageousness and so he's doing very well as he stalks the country for votes.

His populism, however, is more likely a mask for his real intent -- to impose Billionaires' Rule directly by capturing the levers of government power. Well, now. It wouldn't be the first time that billionaires or their equivalent have had control of the government, but it might be the first time a genuine billionaire was put in office or rather bought the office of the Presidency, as if it were a hostile take over.

Other billionaires don't seem to be cottoning to Trump's rising, and that seems to be at the root of the current memes (or is it tropes?) about Trump's fascism...

Is he a fascist? Genuinely? I don't know. He uses a lot of fascist-style rhetoric to appeal to the public, and that has given rise to the charge that he is a fascist along the lines of a Mussolini or a Hitler, which means he's no "conservative" (not that anybody seeking high office ever is these days), but he's been tapping something soul-satisfying to his constituency while he tub-thumps away on his racist and exclusionary policy prescriptions.

His approach is so deep-seated American. What he rants about are the things that so many (largely white) Americans have long held dear and want to see preserved for their progeny. They see the racist, sexist and exclusionary pillars of Real Americanism under attack from within and without, and Trump's rhetoric is a means of fighting back, as is his -- apparent -- fascism. In their lights, no one else is showing the fortitude and balls to do it.

Trump is the one. Some have said he's a stalking horse or not a "serious candidate," and they could be right, but I go back to Reagan, both his two terms as governor of California (he first took office in 1967 -- generations ago). He was thought to be a joke or a stalking horse or not a serious candidate too, and he swept into office over and over again, not so much because anybody cared for his policies, but because he was a personality, famous, and he touched the souls and spirit of so many (largely white) Americans who felt left out of the social and political milieus of the times. Reagan brought back their sense of importance, and he gave them much raw meat to chew on as his policies -- which favored the rich and ruined the lives of millions, throwing many into the streets and nearly destroying public education and tattering the social fabric -- were implemented.

Those policies were recognized as socially destructive and economically unsound from the outset, but there was no political will to oppose them sufficiently to prevent their implementation. What Reagan wanted was what the public wanted, so it was thought, therefore strenuous or active opposition was not considered viable.

And so it didn't happen. Democrats went along with Reagan, even praising him from time to time, because they didn't feel institutionally opposed. Or something.

There was much about his policies that were fascistic or precursors. Certainly authoritarian. His determination to use police power to crush the rising of students and blacks and other minorities was well-known and well-documented. To a surprising degree it was successful, too. His determination to dismantle the Progressive social and political system that had become nearly universal was not as well known, but he proceeded with little opposition, and again he was largely successful.

Trump is tapping into all of that and more, and if he were to be elected, I think it would be seen as the Will of the People and strenuous political opposition would evaporate.

So if he's a fascist, what does that make the System itself? What is the fundamental belief that underlies the American Way? Is it by nature fascist as well?

Has this nation's government and social arrangement always been a fascist construct? It's always been authoritarian and imperial. It becomes more so, not less so, as time goes by. If Trump succeeds, will he actually be doing something not in the nation's character, or will he simply be using the racist and exclusionary underpinnings of the national character to advance his personal and class interests at the expense of everyone else?

And if he is so popular, what is to be done about it?

One thing to recall about the interwar years in Europe and the political/economic situation just prior to the outbreak of WWII is that almost all of Europe had gone fascist or fascist-lite; German war-making and domination didn't necessarily interfere with the deep-rooted fascism of much of Europe at the time. The German goal was to unite Europe under its suzerainty to oppose, fight and ultimately conquer ('godless, communist') Russia. Many powerful Americans believe that the US and its allies were on the wrong side in WWII, and it's taken all this time to start correcting the errors made generations ago by well-meaning (some of them) but misguided (all of them) politicians who threw their lot with the commies and the socialists when they should have been supporting the Nazis and fascists...

So here we are.

The Trumpen proletariat are those who fear they don't have a future in the America that's becoming. They can only secure a future for themselves and their progeny through force of will and will to power. Trump appeals to their deepest fears. But then, despite the torrent of insults that have been flying, so do all the rest of the Republican field, and so... when you examine closely... do the Democratic candidates. Sanders is appealing to the fears of a different constituency, to be sure, but it's the same strategy.

Not to go all doom and gloom, but I don't see any easy way out of this mess. We've been down this path before; there seems to be little or no way to change direction...

Sunday, September 21, 2014

New Zealand Regime Change Effort Ends In Abject Failure

Oh my.

As I was cycling through some of the "news" channels on the internet today, I found that John Key's party in New Zealand picked up seats in parliament and the Kim Dotcom/Snowden/Greenwald/Assange/[Omidyar] effort to overthrow the government (through elections, of course) was a complete and utter disaster.

In fact, it was such a wipe-out that there are now no Maoris in parliament, though the Dotcom/Snowden/Greenwald/Omidyar effort was apparently focused on increasing Maori participation in government through the now defunct Internet Mana Party.

I really don't know enough about Kiwi politics, but this result is simply an astonishing rejection of whatever the Internet Mana Party with the assistance and funding of Dotcom/Greenwald/Snowden/Assange/[Omidyar] was selling.

What a mess.


Tuesday, April 29, 2014

The New Normal: This Is The Way The World Works... Now

The Ukrainian Thing seems to have stalled for the moment, as the mighty troops sent to smoke out the terrorists holding those public buildings in the Eastern Sector have an annoying tendency to run away or get caught by the refusniks. It would be funny if this were some fictional place in Mittel Europe pre-WWII, and the Marx Brothers made a movie about it.

Oh wait.

But it's the real thing. Insofar as these things are ever "real" -- in the sense that ordinary people and/or the high and the mighty can ever know fully what is really going on and the consequences thereof... it's real enough. People are being shot and killed and kidnapped and manhandled and otherwise being put through the wringer -- one that looks very much like gangland behavior under chaotic, ruthless, and lawless conditions. Everybody has their stick, their bat, their AK-47, their new camo uniform, their balaklava...

At least there are some productive uses for all the old tires in Ukrainia. Wouldn't want them to go to waste.

Meanwhile, the posturing by the principals goes on and on and on and on, in a kind of dance or minuet, something we haven't seen in quite this way since the run up to the tragedies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because the principals are behaving now very much the way they did then -- though they say that they have taken military adventuring off the table and they are clearly trying to fight an old-fashioned proxy war through their surrogates on the ground in Ukrainia -- people everywhere are nervous as heck. No doubt the survivalists are stockpiling even more goods for the ultimate End of Times they sincerely believe is so soon to come.

This is all dangerous as heck, given the fact that the Superpowers are involved, the nuclear armed states, the Global Terror States of times gone by, when only they, the USA and the Soviet Union, had nukes and were brandishing and rattling them at one another...

So it is once again... except... for something. Something has changed.

Oh, that's right. One of the Superpowers, the other one, the Soviet Union, no longer exists. And its successor, the Russian Federation ("Russia") is a pale shadow of its former incarnation. A picked apart pale shadow of what it once was at that, ringed with hostile and in some cases competitive independent states aligned with, often hosting the military of, the vaunted "West" -- led by the USofA. So... what's this all about?

I've pointed out several times now what I think is going on, really going on, and though I haven't gotten much into why (the Global Great Game interests me less than its consequences to the ordinary people on the ground), I have little doubt that what's happening is the result of a Game-play that went wrong. It's "real" in that real people are being made to suffer for the forced and unforced errors of their Betters (as always, no?) and it's "real" in that the capture by the EU of the EU's Eastern Partnership nations (Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia) is a fundamental policy objective.

Regardless of what happened in Kiev, in other words, the EU, NATO and the US would have been pursuing policy goals to capture ever more territory and peoples from the orbit of the Russian Federation. It's apparently hard-wired into the EU's self-conception as technically assisted by the US.

Russia, for its part, has not been able to resist, and really hasn't resisted until now. Even now, the Russian resistance is more guerrilla-esque than military. What happened in Vilnius last November -- and its consequences in Kiev -- seems to have taken the Kremlin by as much surprise as it did in Brussels, Berlin, London and Washington.

Yanukovych was apparently expected by all parties to sign the Integration Agreement he was presented with at the Vilnius Conference of the EU's Eastern Partnership on November 29, 2013, and he refused. They say that he saw the actual terms of the agreement for the first time at that meeting, on the last day of the meeting, and he balked. Those terms -- which I seem to have misplaced the link to for the moment -- were devastating to the Ukrainian people, forcing them ever further into poverty, and they basically turned over the very fragile sovereignty of Ukraine to unelected technocrats and strategic wonks at the IMF, the European Central Bank, and NATO. Under the terms Yanukovych was presented, Ukraine would effectively become a colonial possession of the EU and NATO.

He was expected by all concerned -- including the Kremlin, apparently -- to sign away what limited patrimony Ukraine had in order to receive an economic package from the EU/IMF that would primarily benefit Ukraine's Russian creditors. Shockingly, he said no.

Nyet.

Oh.

Almost immediately protests and demonstrations formed in the Maidan Square in Kiev, somewhat patterned on the Color Revolution/Occupy model (with some interesting and important differences), and Yanukovych's government was subjected to typical subversion and destabilization tactics that have long been employed by "Color Revolutionists" in Eastern Europe and around the world. Occupy never used those tactics, which may be a clue to why Occupy never overthrew any government. It wasn't trying to. That wasn't its purpose. But overthrow and replacement of governments was very much a part of the main objective of Color Revolutions, including the "Orange Revolution" that had occurred in Kiev in the winter of 2004-2005.

Yanukovych had messed with his masters in Brussels, Berlin, London, Washington -- and Moscow, apparently -- and he had to go, one way or another.

And so it would be. The Maidan Model included a level of violence that had not been seen in these Color Revolutions previously, a truly shocking level of violence culminating in shadowy and unknown snipers firing on the crowds assembled at the square. Prior to that still mysterious event, however, the police had been routinely firebombed with Molotov cocktails, and armed and violent gangs of fascists and Nazis (yeah, the real thing) had patrolled the perimeters and enforced "discipline" on the crowd and they periodically stormed and took over government buildings in the center of Kiev and in other towns in Western Ukraine.

Much of what is being done in the East now is based quite closely on the Maidan Model, albeit with the absence of the large crowds of demonstrators that were typical of the Maidan protests. The difference has to do, I'm sure, with the fact that the crowds in Kiev were fired on by those snipers... the same could easily happen to large crowds elsewhere. It has happened in other cases.

Snipering the crowds of protestors was typical of the 2013 post-coup Cairo Model of dispersing demonstrators; they were shot at, and many were killed or wounded, by snipers strategically emplaced around the pro-Morsi demonstrations. So it would be in Kiev as well. This tactic tends to limit the number of demonstrators who will turn out... it also has an effect on who and what demonstrators will support.

The coup-regime in Kiev, as it's called, has agreed to the terms that the EU/IMF/NATO et al tried to impose on the Yanukovych government, with the proviso, apparently, that the funding not go to Russian creditors, only to EU creditors. Interesting.

When Yanukovych balked in Vilnius, Russia -- specifically Putin -- was blamed, though it's not at all clear that Putin engineered the last-minute refusal by Yanukovych to sign on the dotted line. Russia had offered a different deal to Ukraine, but its terms were only slightly less onerous and exploitative. The issue seemed to be one of a tug-of-war between the EU and RF for Ukraine's future. The people were not to be consulted. They were simply to be led. In whichever direction the leadership and elites (in this part of the world, read: "Oligarchs") wanted to go.

Apparently, Yanukovych wanted to blaze his own path, and thought he could do it best under Russian aegis.

Well, that didn't work out.

In other words, Yanukovych's refusal triggered a cascade of unanticipated events that no only led to his overthrow and ouster and the installation of an EU/NATO approved coup-regime in Kiev, but to the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, and the stalemate now in place on Ukraine's eastern borders, which stalemate could lead to some kind of nuclear exchange between the EU/US/NATO -- out of sheer incompetence if not strategy.

I say these were not anticipated events, in part because most of it looks to be ad hoc, even the Maidan protests that were clearly rather carefully organized and remarkably well presented via professional public relations efforts. The preparations for the Maidan protests had clearly been made in advance and were carried out as efficiently as possible, but there were so many uncoordinated aspects of it that didn't fit the pre-conceived and arranged pattern of these sorts of things. The enormous stage and the demagoguery  that was conducted from it seemed to me to be one of those ad hoc rather than pre-planned arrangements. Even the snipering that climaxed the demonstrations seemed to be ad hoc rather than pre-planned. The use of Nazis and fascists as shock troops may well have come about spontaneously.

In other words, while the demonstrations and assemblies seemed pretty well planned in advance (if, for example, the Yanukovych government refused some aspect of the EU integration agreements) the fact that he refused the whole thing was the surprise, and the response became much more spontaneous, vigorous -- and violent -- than was anticipated.

I've pointed out that the ground was laid long before the uprising by the hundreds of "educational" and "democracy" NGOs that had been operating in Ukraine for decades before the Maidan protests. Many of them were dedicated to EU "integration" -- and that has been the focus of the Kiev coup-regime ever since they seized power in February.

The coup-regime was allowed to seize power, however. They didn't have the means or authority to seize it on their own. Yanukovych's flight from Kiev seems to have been arranged by the Kremlin, a flight which enabled the almost immediate installation of a pre-selected group of financiers, technocrats and Nazi-bullies to rule. But it couldn't have happened if Yanukovych hadn't fled. That he did so under a Russian wing indicates to me that the Kremlin was OK with his overthrow, and indeed may have been behind it. (He was, after all, a bumbler at best.)

What the Kremlin is not OK with is the EU/NATO/US take over of Ukraine without recognition of Russian national interest. The fact that the Kiev coup-regime and its backers deny there is a legitimate Russian interest in Ukraine is the key flashpoint which can -- especially through the incompetence of the elites involved -- lead directly to severely unpleasant consequences, such as an unfortunate nuclear exchange.

The partition and dismemberment of the Russian Federation is one of those long term projects of the ruling class in the West that won't soon be accomplished and won't soon go away. Russia is to be eliminated as a major global influence and power according to long-standing neo-conservative principles. Once that's accomplished, then China.

These are insane principles, but they're now the New Normal.

It's the way the world works.

Monday, March 10, 2014

More "New Citizen" Members

The next one I could find a website for -- at least that wasn't flashing malware warnings -- is the Association of Broadcasters Ukraine which, from appearances, is primarily concerned with media coordination (anti-Russia, pro-EU) and freedom from government restrictions in the East and Crimea.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Democracy! Freedom! Justice! is next. It appears to be a kind of open forum where items of interest can be posted. Varied content from sports to intricate political and social arguments. No obvious political stance. Contact is Alexander KOLOMYJEC who appears to be an actor in Kiev. Interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Next is something called "UkrProstir," but the website opens to a site called "NGO.zp.ua" which is short for "NGOs Zaporozhye" which is a city in SE Ukraine. The outfit is apparently the "youth council" in Zaporozhye, and is primarily concerned with issues important to youth. One of their projects us UkrProstir, which is either a separate entity or is the originating entity for NGO.zp.ua. According to the UkrProstir tab, it exists as a media relations tool to coordinate messages and methods between NGOs. From what I can tell, it appears to be quite sophisticated. The contact is: Nicholas Kolodyazhniy

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next with a website that opens is the Information Press Center
It appears to be yet another media umbrella organization, but this one is in Crimea, and so its focus is on the situation in Crimea, and from what I can tell, it is hosting lots of discussion which is not particularly skewed toward anti-Russian propaganda. Refreshing. I'll post their mission:

Mission IPC:
We promote awareness of Crimean residents and their meaningful participation in decision-making processes through professional development of independent media and the establishment of public dialogue between the public, government and business.
ipc_map_ru
IPC organizes press conferences and round table discussions on matters of public concern, and also works as a training center for journalists, regularly holds seminars and trainings. In addition, IPC conducts media literacy program for community organizations.
On the basis of Ukrainian gymnasium in Simferopol and school number 1 in Sevastopol School work young Internet reporter, where students are taught the basics of journalism, let the school newspaper "College Times» and their online publication.

IPC regularly monitors violations of professional standards and ethics of journalism - Publication ordered materials and use of "hate speech" in the print media.

IPC develops judicial journalism - to establish a dialogue with the courts, promoting greater transparency of the judicial system, and conducts training for journalists writing on legal topics. In addition, IPC journalists themselves cover the activities of vessels - the online edition of the "Bureau of Justice information" .

Since 2008, based on the IPC operates the online edition of "investigative reporter" , and produced a TV program of investigative journalism "matter of national security" and the program of media and media literacy "Focus".

IPC broadcast television projects "Black Sea" TRK, and some regional broadcasting companies. 
Successfully operating a network of media centers IPC in Yalta, Sevastopol, Djankov, Theodosia, and from March 2012 - in Yalta, where various media events involving representatives of local organizations, governments and businesses, as well as available public Internet Publishing Media Center «IPC-Big Yalta" , Ecopolis , media center «IPC-Djankoi», «IPC-Evpatoria" and media center «IPC-Theodosius."
Hard to dispute these activities and mission. Contact is: Anna Lukinova who appears to be ethnic Russian and who is fairly well connected in the NGO community in Crimea and Europe.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We next find something called "Popular Diplomacy" -- again with a malware website. It is primarily concerned, it seems, with the integration of Ukraine with the EU. The contact is Bogdan Kavulych.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then there is "Kiev National Control" which has a severely malware website. It appears to be a "government accountability" org, but its focus seems to be on the Euromaidan protests and EU integration above anything else. The contacts are: Dmitry Motaylenko, Vadim Logvinov of whom I could find nothing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Had to skip a bunch of orgs either because they had nothing online or because they're no longer in existence...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then we have: PAUCI -- the Ukrainian-Polish Cooperation Foundation. Seems self-evident, no? It does have a page that expresses the more or less commonplace EU Eastern Territories expansion ideas and plans.



What is happening in Eastern Europe and South Caucasus has a direct impact on the European Union. Enlargement of the European Union in 2004 brought these countries into the EU, and this strengthened the influence of their security, stability and prosperity in the EU. So, for example, the potential for energy supplies from these countries are important for the diversification of energy resources to the EU.

All of these countries, to varying degrees, carry out political, social and economic reforms and expressed his desire to move closer to the European Union. The conflict that occurred in August 2008 in Georgia, which showed weak can these countries and the EU security begins far beyond its borders.

The European Commission has expressed specific ideas on how to improve relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. They also include a new association agreement, including expanded free trade agreements with those countries that are willing and able to enter into a deeper cooperation and gradual integration into the EU economy. This will also simplify the EU journey through gradual visa liberalization, accompanied by measures to prevent illegal migration.
Etc. These ideas are little known or understood in the US, but they are apparently well-known in Europe and in Russia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next one that had a useful website was called "European Choice" which has a powerfully evocative mission:

The EUROPEAN CHOICE - is a nonprofit CSO based in Ukraine since 2003. We are highly experienced professionals with a unique blend of skills, knowledge and liaisons for international investors, european policy and integration., Intelligence, international development, anticorruption, media and lobby, culture and CSR.

Our strategy goal is to create and manage
First Europe Direct Office in Ukraine
before 1 January 2015
Europe Direct Logo


The EUROPEAN CHOICE goals are:
  • to promote and contribute to foreign policy debate in Ukraine,
  • to advise decision makers from politics, business, and civil society
  • to inform the public on foreign and european policy questions / issues
  • to strengthen the Ukraine foreign policy community
  • to advance Ukraine's foreign affairs status in the world

To achieve this since 2003 we:
  • Facilitate the EU People Network with more that 800 people all over Ukraine

Measurable deliveries for 10 year:
  • 500 000 online visitors of ON-Line EUROPEAN CHOICE Websites and Social Media
  • 200 000 visitors of OFF-Line street events
  • 25 000 photo
  • 130 seminars
  • 80 tv-progrmas
  • 6 Eurotours
  • 1400 publications in media
  • 23 European Campaign `s during 2009-2012
  • 400 legal consultations
  • 18 LIVE broadcasting on RADIO and TV
  • 3 offices in Kremenchug and Kyiv
  • 21 staff member and 150 volunters
  • 5 national wide researches on economy, health, governance
  • 15 grants from SOROS, USAID, IRF, CIDA, SIDA, UCAN, UNDP, EU foundations
There you have it, that's what it's all about. By the numbers.
----------------------------------------------------------------
There are several members with nonfunctioning or malware websites which I'll skip. The next one with an interesting site, though, is one called Center for Political Education, which is code for pro-EU, anti-Russian propaganda -- styled "voter education." Unlike some, this one is very simple and straightforward, announcing their topics and purposes with no effort to mask them:
Fair and transparent elections

Чесні та прозорі вибори

We are committed to ensuring the competitiveness of the electoral process, the proper administration of elections and promote voter awareness.


»» »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

European Integration of Ukraine

Європейська інтеграція України

We contribute to the formation of Ukrainian citizens to the European democratic values, institutions and procedures of the European Union shall inform the European Community and Ukraine on its achievements.


»» »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Effective associations

Дієві громадські об’єднання

We help sustainable development NGOs that are able to represent the interests of citizens effectively with public institutions.


»» »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Democratic youth leadership

Демократичне молодіжне лідерство

We provide becoming responsible young leaders who share the principles of service, integrity and openness in politics and social activities.


»» »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Responsible political parties

Відповідальні політичні партії

We promote the development of responsible party environment, enhance the ability of parties to implement the education of their staff, to establish better communication with citizens.


»» »
On the surface, none of this would look particularly pernicious to Americans, yet in the context of Ukraine, the rest of the EU's Eastern Territories, and the other targeted nations for overthrow of governments, these activities and objectives are essentially "subversive" in the sense it was meant during the various Red Scares the United States has endured. This is how it is done, step by step, slowly and generally out in the open. Where it can't be done in the open, it's done covertly. The US has had plenty of practice. But it appears that Europe is quite capable of handling these matters independently... (don't know whether any of the links above will work, but if they do, they should go to translated pages...)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Center for Youth Initiatives" is next. It appears to be an Armenian focused youth organization, though it's hard to tell, as its website is not opening correctly for me. I'm not getting a malware warning, but it has all the signs of malware. Like most of the youth initiatives it's mainly interested in "education" about clean government, candidates and European integration. I won't link to the New Citizen web listing, but I did some research through other sources and found the Center listed among those receiving grants from the EU's Eastern Partnership Program. Make of this what you will. It's a demonstration of how extensive the EU's EP is into Ukrainian society if nothing else.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next one I'll list is the International Democracy Institute (aka "International Institute of Democracies") headed by Serhiy Taran. Their mission:

International Institute of Democracies is an independent nonprofit organization that examines the problem of institutional formation in transition democracies. The main activities of the organization are - monitoring of political mobilization, expert discussions and round tables, public opinion polls and expert interviews. His mission organization sees the formation of a qualitatively new political discourse that contribute to the qualitative transformation in transitional democracies, and in particular the promotion of new findings, ideas and meanings that have contributed to a radical renewal of Ukrainian society.
"Radical renewal..." what could that mean? Of course, sometimes it's necessary.

Serhiy Taran something interesting in November of last year:
 "This is the paradox of the current relations between the Government and the people. I can add that the Orange Revolution - it was an objective process of political change in generations. Typically, a political generation - is 15 years, and every time a new generation comes to power, there are some turmoil in the country. These can be "peaceful" shock and as revolutions. If you recall the story, take 1917, add 15 years and we get 1933 and all hazards associated with it: promoted Stalin destroyed all the revolutionary elite who actually made the revolution.
And this formula in 15 years concluded the entire Soviet history. Fit it for an independent Ukraine, starting from 1990. Based on the theory of a new political generation restoration Ukraine, only 15 years after the revolution of 2004 possible any new major revolution or turmoil that is only in the years 2019-2020. During these years, according to my predictions, there will be major changes in Ukraine and only with the advent of a new political generation"- sums Taran.
In other words, despite the rumblings in the streets and squares last fall and winter, it wasn't quite time for a real revolution in Ukraine. Which gets into some interesting territory -- why did the EuroMaidan Revolt happen the way it did, "too soon," and what forces were behind it? Furthermore, was the EuroMaidan Revolt a real revolution or was it merely a replacement of one set of kleptocrats with another more amenable to the diktats out of Berlin and Brussels? I've never doubted that the rumblings in the streets and squares of Ukraine represented deep discontent, but the demagoguing and manipulation of that discontent that was obvious from the stage set up in Maidan Square from the outset made it clear (to me at any rate) that this was not what it was being touted as.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Center for Civil Liberties is next. Anyone familiar with my writing knows my Question for Civil Libertarians: "Liberty for whom? To do what?" Of course, there is never -- ever -- an answer. To find that one of the NGOs under the "New Citizen" umbrella is a "civil liberties" center, therefore, is interesting. For whom, I ask. To do what?

According to its own Partners and Donors page it is a partner of the EU.

And apparently this outfit has been active in other parts of the EU's Eastern Territories as well as Ukraine.

TSHS coordinates the project «Enhancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in countries and regions where they are most at risk», funded by the European Commission hr-nis.org . Besides Ukraine project applies to Belarus, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. The priorities of the project is to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms, development of international solidarity and protection of human rights defenders and civil society activists from political persecution of power in the court and out of court. More information on the project website ( http://hr-nis.org/ ).

Also TSHS continues to work in an international network of "Society and Army» ( http://nis-army.org/ ), International School of Human Rights and Civil Action ( www.inthschool.org ), the Coalition of Hate ( CAH www.mhg- . org ) and the Coalition for the protection of fundamental freedoms in Eurasia.
Immediate focus is on the EuroMaidan protests in Kiev (stopped being updated last December, tho), but they have other interests including matters of law and justice and internal security. But the question, "Civil Liberties for whom, to do what?" is never answered or even addressed. According to some of their other pages, however, they are active in fields of prison and mental health care reform, so there is that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last, but by no means least (and with the understanding that I left out quite a few orgs because of malware or nonfunctional websites) we have the "Ukrainian Association of Student Government" -- an EU front. Their program seems to be focused -- like that of so many other youth organizations under the New Citizen wing -- on EU integration. One of its partner/funders, interestingly, is "The Public Affairs Section of the US Embassy." Its call for proposals in Ukraine is interesting:
2014 general call for proposals by the Democracy

U.S. Embassy invites Ukrainian non-profit and non-governmental organizations to participate in the contest by the Democracy Project. Applications are accepted continuously, there is no deadline for applications - competition is permanent. Applications are accepted continuously, there is no deadline for applications - competition is permanent.
The purpose of the program
Democracy is intended to support projects to foster the development and construction of civil society in Ukraine. Democracy - a focused but flexible mechanism, which provides seed money for unique and sustainable projects, especially those that contribute to the development of the capacity and sustainability of NGOs in Ukraine. In projects that receive grants, organizations demonstrate concrete achievements and their impact on a particular area or community. Since July 1996, about 600 projects of Ukrainian NGOs have received funding under the "Foundation for Democracy." Applications are accepted on an ongoing basis.
The main requirements for the project:
  • Grants are provided to Ukrainian organizations that have the status of non-governmental and non-profit and registered in accordance with Ukrainian legislation. These include: non-governmental organizations (associations), charitable foundations and think tanks.
  • Organizations and their members can not represent a political party, appointed or elected officials.
    The maximum funding for a single grant is $ 24,000, the average amount of grants is between $ 5,000 and $ 15,000
  • U.S. and foreign organizations and individuals are not eligible to apply for grants.
  • Grant applications must be submitted in English and Ukrainian languages.
  • In addition to this competition, the U.S. Embassy conducts regional and thematic competitions, where the requirements for organizations and projects may differ from this competition. Watch for announcements on the website and in the local media.
  • Project duration should not exceed one year. Project costs can not h distribution ATIS before signing the grant agreement. Costs incurred before the official start date will not be reimbursed.
Scope of projects
Theme prioryrety the Democracy Fund:
  • Human Rights Education, monitoring and reporting violations of human rights: Proposals should indicate which segments of the population will be targeted and what activities are planned for the project and after its completion;
  • The rule of law and reform in law: reforms in various areas of law, legal clinics / advising, legal education of citizens, judicial support, lobbying and activities after the project;
  • Economic Reform: Promoting initiatives in the area of market economy, small and medium-sized businesses, reforms in the agricultural sector, support for links between the public and private sectors to lobby tax reform and other issues relating to entrepreneurship;
  • Civil Society: Initiatives that promote the continued development effectiveness and sustainability of the third sector;
    Electoral System: Voter education and election monitoring, training of election commissions, etc.;
  • Anti-Corruption and Transparency in Government: Education and awareness campaigns problems;
  • Preventing Human Trafficking: Projects aimed at awareness, prevention and legal assistance;
  • Equality of women, ethnic and other minorities protection, legal aid, aimed at creating associations and others.
In a nutshell, there you have it. That is the US program in the EU's Eastern Territories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
There are more New Citizen/Center UA initiatives that need some clarification including this one:

The public demands from politicians of primary 13 reforms that have to revive and unite the country. Public figures emphasize that Yevromaydan has not yet completed its primary mission - to change the rules, not the person

 More than 120 experts and public figures together and presented "reanimation package of reforms" - 13 priority legislative initiatives aimed at changing the system of governance and a healthy start work of public institutions. The initiative was born in New Partnership citizen and civil society Maidan.

Reform package consists of 2 blocks. 7 immediate reform experts respected NGOs willing to work out how to introduce specific legislation and Parliament over the next few months.
  1. Judicial reform. Reform of the Procuracy
  2. The reform of law enforcement
  3. Anti-corruption reform
  4. The reform of the electoral law
  5. Administrative Reform
  6. The reform of decentralization and regional development
  7. Tax Reform
The experts also called for the implementation of 5 reforms in the medium term, requiring extensive work involving all political actors and actors in the process:
  1. Deregulation and incentives for business development and investment
  2. Pension reform and the reform of social security
  3. Education Reform
  4. Health
  5. Land reform
"The public and the politicians got a real chance to change the country, although a very high price. We have to take the daily hard work of the reform, which is one of the instruments of change, or not build new Ukraine ", - said the activist public sector Yevromaydanu Hanna Hopko.
Public figures call for pro-democracy MPs to form a group in order to work together on reforms and invite government representatives to actively spipratsi. Participants of the initiative "resuscitation reform package" seeking not only willing laws output, but also to change the principle of cooperation between authorities and society as parliament and government will indeed platform presentation and implementation of public interest.
"Until now, social activists could count on effective cooperation in promoting needed public law just a few MPs. It's time to change that. We want all MPs listened to the opinions of experts and civil society activists, and every law passed before the adoption of the discussion is not "under the carpet" and a broad discussion of the whole society, "- Maxim Latsyba, Project Manager Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research.
"This initiative - an attempt zaprovatydyty mechanism of" change from below "- added Olga Halabala, activist public sector Yevromaydanu.
Participants of the initiative "resuscitation reform package" together in groups, each of which highlighted expert and organizational subgroups elected chief expert and general manager. The initiative seeking new members with proposals to cover even wider range of reforms, such as media reform, including the transformation of state broadcasters into public, military and security reform, and others. Reform package expands, and the initiative is open to accession stakeholders.
After the public launch initiative "resuscitation reform package," the participants to be involved in promoting reforms of citizens in Ukraine. For next week, experts will travel to the regions present their results to local activists, experts, politicians and journalists.
There follows a list of experts who will cheerfully provide their services in all necessary categories. This is, I think, the distillation of what "New Citizen" and its members as well as "Center UA" is all about. It is nothing less than the full-on implementation of neo-liberal economic, social and political "reforms" in Ukraine and their eventual extension into the other Eastern Territories of the EU, without further let or hindrance from Russia or any other impediment.

The Ukrainian people have many legitimate grievances, but a quick review of this page explains as clearly as possible what the "revolutionaries"  have been after all along. It has very little to do with the "people," and everything to do with "reform" along the lines of Chicago School Neo-Liberalism as it is imposed by the EU and the US.

The Ukrainians are in for a world of hurt.

As if things weren't bad enough already.