Anarcissie:

This is not the 18th century. 

What are you for?  What would you like to see developing as things move forward
towards the 22nd century?

StuartH:
‘Folktruther:
“I don’t think much is going to be settled anymore by voting.”

This happens to be a nation founded on a system of government in which voting is basic. ...’

Not too basic.  In the 18th century, voting in most places was restricted to White males of a certain age who possessed real estate.

This regime was relaxed when the ruling classes discovered that the common people could easily be manipulated by the media and by the religious and academic institutions of the established order.

In other words, democracy was suspect until it was demonstrated that it could be turned into a sham.  Or as the popular proverb has it, “If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.”

Folktruther:

“I don’t think much is going to be settled anymore by voting.”

This happens to be a nation founded on a system of government in which
voting is basic.

It seems to me that many of us tend to go from being completely passive and
unable to think how to cope, to riding high on overgeneralization and
ineffective analysis, perhaps pridefully.

The first problem is to be clear minded and to think beyond well worn
assumptions.  To be articulate, so as to be persuasive. 

We all have to find some way of expressing ourselves as citizens, that is
meaningful enough that we can sustain the effort.  An effect can be had,
although it may be hard to see it and it may not come about exactly as we had
intended.  The fact is that you are alive on the planet and there is a certain
force and effect from that.  You matter, so don’t take yourself out. 

What the bastards are doing right now is shaking the tree, doing the old divide
and conquer thing.  The purpose is demobilization.  Don’t support that cause
or contribute to that working again. 

Here is this internet thingy.  It has not been around for that long.  Could be
very useful if we learn how to weave the threads together to make a stronger
community fabric.  Onward through the fog…

Yeah, Anarcissie, I guess so.  There’s a lot of yuppies in that district but apparently not good for much.  I sent Shehan some money as did Tony Wicher, but money apparently wasn’t the chief problem.

Stuart, I don’t know what to tell you.  I don’t think much is going to be settled anymore by voting.

Folktruther: ’... Why was it that Pelosi defeated Sheehan 80% to 20% in the vote in her progressive district, which included Castro in San Francisco?  That is amazing considering what a sellout Pelosi is, and that the Friscoans are more knowledgeble than Mr and MS small town.  Do you have any suggestions as to why this occurred? ...’

If you follow the scientific work on why and how people vote as they do, some of which I’ve alluded to (such as Louis Menand’s article in the New Yorker, you’ll see that only about five or at most ten percent of the electorate vote on ideological grounds.  A 20% vote for a marginal celebrity who has no known accomplishments as a working politician, against the Speaker of the House, is really remarkably large.  I believe you yourself came to roughly the same conclusion later on in this discussion, although you say “the elite”—but it is not just elites voting for elites but non-elites voting for elites because they believe the elites are going to do something for them, or look and act nicer than other people.

Folktruther:

Can we talk?

After I wrote that last post out, hoping to reach some middle ground with you, I worried about it and tried to think beyond this state of affairs we are stuck in. 

We see a lot of pain resulting from this.  I think you carried the thought forward a bit.  But are we simply doomed to observing the tragedy?

I did some temp work back then and thus, toured a lot of high rise offices in brief stints as a non-person.  A lot of people get seduced by the atmosphere or urban sophistication, expensive interior decor, and “beautiful people” talking about weekends in New York or Tokyo.  Those upper floors are the holy of holies of consumer culture.

It seems so odd that some small percent of the population, composed of oddities - those who worship money and people with megayachts, and those whose worship is really about moving backwards - should essentially be holding needed progress hostage for the whole of America.

Why should the most intelligent, progressive, future oriented people whose hearts are in tune with the great classic American progressive instinct be prevented from having at least equal influence over the political system - a system created by progressive thinkers?

I think that is an important question.  It may not be easy to address.  One of the first things that comes to mind is a lack of cohesion between the experience in one community and another, whether in another state or just on higher floors in the buildings one passes by every day. 

I have studied communication for a long time.  To some extent, we have developed a society in which relating to anyone is governed by firewalls that mitigate against developing a sense of the future together.  We invented media to transcend social barriers, but there is a struggle there.  There are interests looking to capture the means of communication, and then there is the fact that the structures from the 19th and 20th centuries may just be obsolete.  Political advertising is a very crude attempt to address this. A crass recognition that there is a problem, and further, that there is no point in dwelling on it.

As I look around at this time, I see that people are frustrated and angry everywhere.  To me, this means the stresses and strains we are feeling are more profound and deepset than the ability we have developed as a society to handle them.  It seems everyone thinks they are alone, wherever they are.

Perhaps these sorts of fora can be a place where new ways of communicating and assessing what is truly going on can be invented.  How else do we transcend the individual selfishness we all are prone to and become more of a national force equal to the backward factors?  We are all wounded people.  Can we become wounded healers and heal our society, our planet? ( I know that is a bit New Age, but it seems a good way to pose a question in a few words.)

Why, thank you, Stuart, you expressed in your leisurely fashion cogent reasons why the election was so one sided.  Voters voted their domestic interests rather than peace values.  what they do rather than what they say.  The Elite voting for the Elite, their career interests rather than surface values that they may express.

Now that I think of it, the huge peace demos against the Iraqi war was fueled by people coming in on trains from OUTSIDE the city.  It stands to reason.  If one is absorbed by one’s career, what need does on have for general values that unites the mass of humanity.  It is only those without such an absorbing interest that would identify with a general movment that does not immedicately benfit them personally.  the Elite would identify with the Elite, people who they hope to be like.

And Elite gays would vote for someone who is in a position to do them some good.

Folk:

“...why don’t you do something useful.  Hopefuly you actually know something
about elections.  Why was it that Pelosi defeated Sheehan 80% to 20% in the
vote in her progressive district, which included Castro in San Francisco?  That is
amazing considering what a sellout Pelosi is, and that the Friscoans are more
knowledgeble than Mr and MS small town.  Do you have any suggestions as to
why this occurred?  Inquiring minds want to know.”

Most of the time when someone uses this construction, it is a rhetorical
question and there is no interest in any sort of serious attempt to respond.

However, maybe it would be better to try, even though it might be a “Lucy and
the football” moment from Peanuts. 

One might infer from your question that you live in San Francisco and either
live in or are familiar with the Castro district.  I lived in SF for a couple of years
in the mid seventies and spent a lot of time with a girlfriend dancing in gay
nightclubs, so I have a little familiarity with the city and the area.

San Francisco is one of the more densely populated places in the US.  It is a
hugely complex place, with a wonderful international ambience.  There is
nothing quite like it, except possibly the eastern suburb AKA New York City.

The essence of it, would be not confusing a crowd with a constituency, celebrity or fame with a platform, or sympathy for a heartbroken mother with political commitment. 

It may be the most liberal community on the planet, but amazingly, it also contains among the most wealthy and conservative people that can be found anywhere at the same time.  Up in those high rises are people who live in a culture that worships elite attainment, from degrees at Harvard or the Sorbonne, to vacations in the Alps.  They might commute in from somewhere in Marin County, but they also might own a townhouse downtown. 

With housing rates among the very highest in the world, not a lot of working class people can afford to live there.  A new paint job alone on a turn of the century italianate Victorian three story can cost more than the average price of a home anywhere else. 

Those who work in the financial sector who have more modest incomes pay a lot more for an efficiency apartment than someone might in other cities, and they do this because it comes with living in San Francisco in an atmosphere of urbane sophistication.  Some of these people are very leftist to hear them talk, but a lot of them are posers.  There is a lot of affectation.  People can afford it. 

Generally, a candidate perceived to be a one-issue only person, with no real experience in the practical matters associated with governance isn’t likely to get over 10%.  So for Sheehan to have gotten twice that is not too bad.  If she decides to get a grounding in a wide range of issues that convince more pragmatic voters that she understand their concerns, she might do better next time. 

However, when someone gains the stature of Speaker, it tends to mean more attention getting paid to more specific business of interest to the district.  Some of the more powerful high tech, venture capital, banking, and international financial interests are headquartered in this area.

I think the problem with Truthdig forums is that typing is too easy.  One can
insist very forcefully in the rightness of an opinion without ever having to do
any work to support the experience or facts it could be derived from.  It seems
to be likely to run people off who really know what they are talking about in
favor of people who agree with each other in an academic, speculative way.

You find that people won’t even exert the effort to really read and comprehend efforts that go beyond superficiality. 

The problem with politics is that, for some, there are no qualifications except
the ability to feel some sort of angst.  This can be the basis for a sort of blues
riff on an endless theme of indulgence.  It is a bit shocking to discover that
getting to be heard requires some discipline, to understand other people, to
have to actually get out of one’s own head and really engage.  That there is a
process to it that has to be mastered and it might take longer than a few
months to get anything done.  Real commitment might be required. 

That is a big fly in the ointment for those who want to satisfy some neurosis
with gathering likeminded admirers at the lunch table in the senior center. 

Meanwhile there is the real world.  Not a satisfying place. 

The real reason for formulating another political party may be to collect more
perfect, less contradictory, less neurotic folks and overthrow human nature.
Most people would like to see that revolution.

Meanwhile, I’m with Druthers.  The negativity agitators and the brainless shouters of the right wing are not about discussion.  They are unscrupulous. They are dangerous.  And, they are all too real.  One of those PAC groups may even be funding some sort of participation in this forum just to laugh and see the liberal firing squad promote an easier time in winning seats for right wing supporters in legislatures and in Congress.

Druthers, what if we (“we” in the grand rhetorical sense) agreed with
all you said?  What if we agree “they are totally unscrupulous,” which we
do, and what if we agree “they are dangerous,” and they are?  What do
you think “we” should do?

“Not so many years ago, nobody would have imagined that a bland presidential address to young students, urging them to remain in school, study hard and nurture their aspirations for success, could engender a raging national controversy”

I do not think there is a national controversy at all.  These are like mine fields laid one after the other, the truthers, the birthers, the tea baggers, organized, financed front organizations set up for the purposed of destabilizing the government.  They use the hate and fear cultivated by the corporate owned media.  Almost all dissident voices have been silenced or reduced to small audiences. Lies are repeated incessentely just as loud music and noises are used as torture on victims. Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly and now Beck lambast the radio waves 24 hours a day pushing people into a sort of hysterical and increasingly violent frenzy.
This is not about a discussion of any kind. They are organized, they have money, they are backed by powerful interests, they are totally unscrupulous and they are dangerous.

We just suffered eight years of boundless politics
where fear and torture controlled the masses. Fear was
used to start a war. Lies were used to manipulate all
of US. A presidency based on lies and distortions is
not a presidency, it is a dictatorship. bush and his
cabinet, were masters and champions.

I never argue over a man, Folktruther, (unless he is very very very good,...slim pickin’s there) so if
you want StuartH’s carcass you can have it.  But I’ve seen him fight back with some hot spitting so
beware of sleeping dragons (oh no! I’m the dragon! He’s got to be the sleeping samurai, they spit a
lot).  Also enjoying much of what Lakoff says, I’ve been using the metaphor of the boxing ring these
days to frame TD forums, so…

In this corrrrrnnnneeeerrrrr!  Folktruther!  And in the opposite corrrrrnnnneeeerrrrr! StuartH!  We ring
the bell…  Ding!  Will the judges have to declare a draw?

Shenonymous, you actually LIKED Stuart’s post?  It never occrurred to me that people actually enjoy vacuity.  As a sppechwriter for Dems, it is Stuart’s function to take out any particle of meaning from their speeches that might offend anyone.  But it never occurred to me that people llisten to them, or, if they do, actually LIKED them.  If this is a widespread phenomena, and not simply confined to the Educated, we are in real trouble.

That may be the reason there has never been any urgent need for my services on the part of authority.  And the exhibiting of so many shotguns and ropes.  Inssufficent vacuity; it could be a terminal disease. luckily we have a shitload of Stuarts to supply the Dems.

Traipsing in a bit late.  Do we know for a fact that Beck is a “recovering” alcoholic?  He appears to be
drunk all the time on his own Blathering.  Blathering is a brand of whiskey, if you didn’t know it. 
And he isn’t on Fox News anymore although I can’t really figure out why?  Some right-wing
upchucking station picked him up, probably from the floor.  So his plastered fans have found him,
datsaf’sure. Conason calls the skepticism of the libertarian Obama critics “healthy” so he must be
drinking the same beverage as Beck!  But he hits the nail squarely on the head when he said that
past Presidential speeches in classrooms were “mostly ignored by the press.”  Haven’t you figured it
out yet?  It’s the press, stupid!  The press, or rather the television tongue waggers that relentlessly
fan the flames into a holocaust of the most minute happenings in the world today that deserve
maybe 5 minutes of reportage.  Just a regimen for a day clicking from MSNBC, CNN, C-SPAN1 and 2,
PBS Nightly News, FOX, and a few other negligibles, would show the vomit that is spewed to viewers
on all channels.  Course some of you love vomit.  Oh well.  We could refer to the Michael Jackson
overdose, not his, but theirs, the newsmedia; or we could refer to Ted Kennedy’s death and funeral
that went on for daze and daze, or Farah Fawcett’s a month or two ago all day every day for three
daze, and most recently the glamorization of Joe Wilson the out and out idiot Congressman, when for
all these ‘happenings’ the news media on every single channel all day long kept repeating and
repeating ad nauseum the castor oil of pseudo-news.  I’m telling you all, boycott these vacant-
minded broken records and send letters to the producers that you will no longer be a viewer because
they do not deliver any news.  They are just bland tabloids that will numb your mind.  The recent
memorial for Walter Cronkite was amazing because there was not one, not one journalist or reporter
that could hold a candle to him and he was the only one since Edward R. Morrow to whom Cronkite
did hold a candle.  Better to surf the Net for news without all the melodrama of cookie cutter “news”
persons (male and female alike) whose charm school degree showed that they all failed to get a
decent passing grade.  Also the acting school they went to should be put out of business by the
thought police, and their voice training school, if they even had one, ought to be burned to the
ground.

Even so, my diatribe notwithstanding, and I realize I can get carried away with my own rhetoric,
Conason more or less redeems himself with his last paragraph, doesn’t he?

freedom I really like most of what you say, however, Birthers and teabagging got the ball
rolling so that in Aug they could make a show at selected Town Halls. Naw…their eye was on that
big “shewing” protest in D.C. the other day.  My belief is that the entire population of deranged right-
wing nuts were there and the ordinary folks was watching the news frenzy.  The media fell for the
strategy because they have putty for brains.  Obama’s Michigan speech saved that day!

Folksytruther, I take unbrage, sir, at your remarks.  Unbrage!  I pride myself on being a
gentleman and a gentleman never insults anyone unintentionally.  It is umbrage, and I have had
the pride and enjoyment of your intentional insults, and so far, you be the best!  But you make sense
a lot of the time (I just never tell you that, I don’t want to ruin our relationship).

StuartH you demonstrate what self-reflection can do!  Great post at 11:34 a.m.  Thank you.

C. Michael Cooper:
‘I see so many people circling the topic, but nobody has come right out and said it, from what I can tell.

The media continues to be the real source of our problems. ...’

The media don’t exist in a vacuum.  They are part of the State like other major corporations and institutions, and the interests, desires and prejudices of their managers are similar to those of the people who control those other corporations and institutions.  Indeed, they are often the same people.

If our problems can be said to have a “real source” it is in the daily life of the people as a whole, upon which the State is built.

Ths KKK thugs, Oreilly, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, and
Dick Armey, Chairman of freedomworks.com. The real
racist reasons for the march of freedom? Talk about
fanatics and crazies. Scary that they might even
think their doing things American’s really want.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42406957@N04/sets/721576
22225019439/show/

This is the most disgusting spewage of hatred I’ve
ever seen in my life. There is no place in America
for this. I think these fascist racists should leave
on a slave ship for a deserted island someplace on
another planet! Ignorant arrogant idiots! Get out of
my country you bunch of haters! You don’t deserve
freedom! Commie KKK killers!

“The Obama Nation” (on the New Yorker best-selling list 3 weeks in a row) came out in ‘08. Jerome Corsi, the author, said this of Obama - Obama is a corrupt, enraged, anti-American drug-dealing, anti-Israel, pseudo-Christian radical leftist, black-militant, plagerist, and liar, trained as a Muslim and mentored by a menagerie of Marxists and Communists, cryto-communists and terrorists.

Safe bet that the marchers today in DC read the book, believed what they read, and nothing Obama could or would do will ever stop their hatred, and more importantly, will ever allay their abject fear of him.

StuartH, the State of Georgia doesn’t civic, if it ever did. Perhaps at some point the civics of the Confederacy was taught, I don’t know.

I took my own advice.  Peremptory conclusions lead to errors in judgement which have costly consequences, not the least of which are injustice suffered by real people.  Quick, clever, but shallow thinking therefore is our worst enemy.

Something about this discussion roused my anger.  But what? Why?

Reflecting, brought up something I had forgotten.  Odd thing about experience. Sometimes the most important things get buried in the mental attic.  A source of deep hurt.  A source, possibly, of concern that we share.

Following several years of starving, working my ass off to apply newspapering skills to local progressive coalition building, I went to work for a while to design and write literature for a political consultant.

A widely respected elected official came into the office.  A really great guy with sincere policy concerns, but surprising to me, not a political specialist.  That was what he came for. 

There are rare people who impress you as being a Mozart.  A talent clearly beyond ordinary.  Brilliantly gifted.  Excellent in debate.  A poet in imagery as well as words.  Political astuteness that could cut through the muddle a roomful of geniuses were in, leaving all shaking their heads and muttering, “why didn’t I think of that?”

Consultants who specialize in TV and media production can earn in the range of hundreds of thousands of dollars - just in city or county races.  Not bad money for just another out-of-work writer for whom Journalism was a ship that sank.

I started writing positions from my knowledge of people in the precincts that one candidate was happy to OK, but really didn’t care about.  I saw an ethical abyss open up.  I wound up driving a cab. 

But I saw that the intellectual leadership in American politics, by default, had come to be these unseen and unkown behind the scenes stars, these media rainmakers, as their influence grew. 

Later, I developed a system of precinct volunteers in 2003/04 who wanted to take back America.  Young activists were rejecting the consultantocracy, innovating internet fundraising and mobilization. 

This is very new.  If you look at the million plus dollars Act Blue has raised over the South Carolina rep outburst the other day, you see a potential for making it possible to educate the public, empower dialogue, and mobilize progressive policy support. 

However, it all hangs in the balance.

If the Supreme Court shifts the balance of power to corporate finance, the era of consultants could come back with a vengeance.

Can the netroots sustain the balance?  One scary mother of a question. A lot of concerns pale beside it. 

Maybe technology and the great unmet needs expressed by progressives have become the toothpaste out of the tube. Or- maybe the internet can be brought to heel the way the mainstream media was beginning back in the 1950s.

The Democratic Party is not a monolith.  There are serious and sober people trying to figure out how to move things towards a better future.  There are used car salesmen out for their own interests.  There are stodgy bureaucratic people who don’t have a clue but use their power to block progress.  There are crazy people.  One might say just about anything and it could be true.

But the hearts of those who really want social justice and will work their whole lives for it against the odds deserve respect.  If “the arc of the universe bends towards justice” it is because disciplined thinking, avoiding facile conclusions, and real application of the best principles of modern education tend to be progressive.

Why else are troglodytes anti-intellectual?

We have to disobey the Wizard’s admonition to “ignore the little man behind the curtain.”  Exclusive “expert systems” created by Money are a relevant target for our protest and our anger at the way progressive reforms are prevented from becoming policy.

But we have to be the change.  Not just a bumpersticker.  That’s real citizenship.

Anarcisse- you can’t argue that any party that wants to keep the ruling class in power is Conservative, since all mainstream parties, conservative, liberal fake socialist and fascist all do.  and I diagree that the Gops are on the way out although, it is quite true, that their ideological gyrations are amazing.  But the Gops and the right wing Dem ruling class control the mass media and truth organs and have already indoctrinated the American people into bizarre irrationality. 

If the Gops ran Palin for president next time, she might actually win.  Reagan won.  and introduced the Hollywood distinction of ‘in front of the camera’ and ‘behind the camera’ i.e. policy.  If a sufficent fraction of the American people identify with the distinction, it could be President Palin soon, with her corporate advisers.  But your scenario is possible too.

Stuart- I take unbrage, sir, at your remarks.  Unbrage!  I pride myself on being a gentleman and a gentleman never insults anyone unintentionally.  And I realize you are highly Trained by the Dems to have a solution for all the historial problems facing us.  The destruction of our traditional climate?  Elect Dems to office.  Thermonuclear war?  Elect Dems to office.  Increasing inequality?  elect Dems to office.  A solution yuo expound with your customary elan and political sophistication.

But I suppose you can’t help being what you are.  No point in berating a wombat because he is not a grizzly.  So I apoligize.  O I’m so ashamed!  My heart goes out to you for all your suffering!  etc, etc

Alright, now that we love each other again, why don’t you do something useful.  Hopefuly you actually know something about elections.  Why was it that Pelosi defeated Sheehan 80% to 20% in the vote in her progressive district, which included Castro in San Francisco?  That is amazing considering what a sellout Pelosi is, and that the Friscoans are more knowledgeble than Mr and MS small town.  Do you have any suggestions as to why this occurred?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Folktruther—I think the Democrats are still the conservatives.  Smart conservatives are generally “liberal” in the sense that they know that adjustments have to be made here and there to ensure that the ruling class will be able to maintain its power, wealth, and status.  Some adjustments are on the left side, some on the right.  The main thing is to make sure those on top stay on top.  This is now being accomplished by the present administration as by those before it.

As for the Republicans, they may be in a terminal decline.  The nomination of someone like Palin for an important national office suggests that they have reached a state of total contempt for both themselves and their country.  This will not encourage the rich to give them the buckets of money they need to keep the party going.  And I don’t see a fascist opening for the Republicans along the lines of the Nazis in the 1930s.  They have no Fuehrer, no SA, no SS, no Hindenburg.  They are now stuck with their religious-fanatic base and the tide of political religiosity seems to be going out.

I could envision a scenario in which the Republican conservatives, what’s left of them, move the Democratic Party, the Democrats split into progressive and conservative factions, and the Republicans decline into a small regional-religious party able to win elections in sparsely-populated, backward areas but otherwise out of the game.

Folk:

“...the Dems are now a neoliberal reactionary party, willing to increase class
inequality, increasingly dispower the population, and repeal or restrict
Roosevelt age reforms, while promoting the Gop wars.  It is going back to the
age of neo-colonialism, neoliberalism, Faith and irrationality, along with
exuding the political pablum illustrated so well by Stuart.”

First of all, your broad generalizations describe other people’s motivations in a
way that is grossly unfair and insulting. 

Your posts drip with condescension, anti-social contempt for others and a
perfectionism that sounds like it comes from either an ivory tower or a
basement.

Perhaps you could be more persuasive if you actually were less given to insult
and irritating peremptory encyclicals and more to putting your own experience
and why you are feeling this way on the line. 

All there is here is a little text.  When it seems to come from a total sourpuss, it
is hard to see more to it than that.  Sourness is not useful.  Just indulgent.

You seem to describe a political category that is dysfunctional: the anti-social
socialist, grumbling about everyone else’s all too obvious shortcomings.  That
really recommends itself.

How, Joe, How?  Why don’t you read what so many on the so-called “left” post here?  They aren’t any closer connected to reality than Beck or Limbaugh are on the Right.

Read FT or Robert or KDelphi.  They aren’t any more connected to reality than the dittoheads or the Beck-dreck.

Anarcissie, I think during the time of Sevenson and for decades thereafter the Dems WERE a conservative party, but that changed with the election of Obama.  There was a fundamental change in the US power system with the Bushites and Obama is continuing Bushite policies with his Inspiring rhetoric.

the Dems are now a neoliberal reactionary party, willing to increase class inequality, increasingly dispower the population, and repeal or restrict Roosevelt age reforms, while promoting the Gop wars.  It is going back to the age of neo-colonialism, neoliberalism, Faith and irrationality, along with exuding the political pablum illustrated so well by Stuart.

If the Dems are now neolib reactionaires, the Gops are now neoconservaative fascists.  It is they who most likely will declare martial law, install religious delusion, possibly nuclear war, and perform the well known fascist internal cleansing.  In the modern electoral setup in the US, we have a choice of reaction or facism in our elections.  Isn’t this what Freedom&Democracy; is all about now?

Stuart, I managed to stay awake for most of your post before nodding off and I commend you for your Educated comments.  We are indeed fortunate to have someone like you joining us in converstion while the US sinks into the historical cesspool of barbarism.  Kind of like being young again, around the third grade.  With Dems like you forming the Progressive cadre the past four decades, is it any wonder the US has tipped continously so far to the right?  Keep up the..  well, work.  it helps people see what they are supporting when they support the dems.

Political literacy.  You’d think this would be a basic element of high school
civics, yet it seems to be elusive, as if it were a lost wisdom each of us had to
rediscover, and in an environment full of information antagonistic to its
revelation. 

First, there is the willingness to exert discipline over the way our words may or
may not match up with our most true and honest observation.  Then, there is
our willingness to honestly observe, and to be aware of how our fears and
hopes bend the light in ways that can confuse the senses.  What is reality?  Do
we really know?  Experience may be a guide, but what if we read it wrong? 
Garbage in, garbage out.  The mind is powerful.  Wanting the landscape to be
other than it is can cause us to see it as other than it is and become convinced
of this as truth, arguing with everyone over it. 

Our ability to see what ought to be instead of what really is there, is a faculty
that allows us to envision our own future and to set about doing what might
help get us there.  It makes no difference to others if our private illusions
motivate us, and in the end no one knows what guides our steps.  So we are
used to operating this way in perfect comfort.

This summer we have seen people allowing themselves to become blinded by
panic, and given over to emotionalism that drives rational thinking completely
out of the picture.  But that is just an extreme example.

Perhaps the balance between the rational, logical frameworks we believe our
mind to be constructed out of, and the more volcanic irrational stuff of dreams
it really is made of, is something we avoid so much we fall prey to it.  Emotion
takes over, surprising us and we are helpless to understand what is going on. 
Or, it is an ancient way to prepare for doing battle with others.  Something
takes over and the logical mind actually flips down out of the way. 

High School would be a good time to begin to offer an “Owner’s Manual”  to the
mind, with a section on how to approach the problem of thinking about
politics.  How to sort out the playground dynamics we are all too familiar with
from the more serious ways we need to dissect and analyze what is true and
separate it from what is not true. 

You would think preparation to participate as a citizen in the fabled
Enlightened Public would have become basic to high school civics a long time
ago.  You wouldn’t think that adults in middle age would be at a loss to grasp
such basics. 

But then, being anti social is as much a part of politics as astuteness.  Thus, we
are contradictory beings who demand others live up to standards we ourselves
cannot.  Thus, we have Antisocialists, anti-social socialists.

StuartH,

Thanks for your post.  Heartfelt and well expressed.  I think, though, that your argument that the Republicans are the only real conservatives (if I’ve understood your point) is sort of true but only if you use “conservative” with its new definition by context.  The original definition of the term describes the Democratic party quite adequately.  In fact in most eras the current Democratic party would be arch-conservative. 

The Republican party you describe of hard-nosed hard-headed racists hell-bent on theocracy and white domination is something ... but it ain’t conservative!

StuartH:
’... The Democratic Party is not the conservative party. ...’

Adlai Stevenson said it was the conservative party in 1956.  There was a bit of trouble from the Left in the ‘60s and ‘70s about its conservatism, but obviously by the time of Carter the lid was back on.  I would say it is even more conservative now, since, as I have noted, the Republicans have been abandoning rational positions in support of the established order in favor of ever wilder politics seemingly based on religious fanaticism, and the Democrats have been taking over the turf they have abandoned.  Now that the tide of religious excitement is going out, that may prove to be an excellent strategy.

It is instructive to look an electoral map of the McKinley-Bryan era and those of the last two or three presidential elections.  The geographical positions of the two major parties have been almost exactly reversed.  The rich, industrial, banker- and business-dominated, hard-money Northeast is now a Democratic Party stronghold.

Anarcissie:

“For some time now the Democratic Party has been the conservative party.  The
Southern Strategy pulled the Republicans off into a woods where they formerly
had not been.”

That is just offensive.  Look, I grew up in the South, in Central Texas.  My
parents were Republican, although they were Eisenhower and Nixon
Republicans. 

The Southern Strategy did not pull the GOP off into the woods.  They were
deeply, abidingly racist and were “in the woods” from way way back.  They were
also deeply elitist and into thinking that poverty was a punishment by God and
prosperity was reward on earth.  They didn’t bother to analyze it, but Calvinism
was the essential core belief system.  People who suffer on earth are to be
avoided lest they bring you down like drowning people might.  Ergo, black
people were un-Christian to be protesting what God had ordained.  All these
multicultural multitudes are an affront. 

That is the real reason for the protest at Obama’s speech.  He doesn’t look like
the Founding Fathers.  He is an abomination so repugnant as to be beyond
what can be said in public. 

The Democratic Party is not the conservative party. 

The battle is with Republicans - who really mean to win and dominate by any
means necessary.  They are taking over the State Board of Education in Texas
because they want to get textbooks and curriculae re-written so that the
concept of the wall of separation between church and state can be “corrected”
to reflect the “Christian origin” theory. 

Some of the kids I went to school with got into politics or went into business to become rich and influential precisely to do battle to the death with the evils of 1960s era progressivism, which they saw as leading society off the cliff.  They have spent their lives dedicated to this battle.  They meant business then, they meant business when they were able to back Bush, and they still mean business, probably more than every before.

The campaigns in Texas that people like Karl Rove perfected were crass and ruthless manipulations intended to yank the strings of born again Christians and yoke the congregations who were willing to march when told to, with the interests of the big corporations which had offices in Houston.  For those people, the stakes are very high.  For the righteous, the ends justify the means. 

What is happening now is raw desperation and is likely to become violent.  It is no accident that the fringe elements show up now and then with guns, and in the same time frame, we saw the murders of the abortion doctor and the attempted mass murder at that holocaust museum.

There are struggles going on that are real, that take the best people’s best efforts and lives going into years and decades. What it takes to win elections is to deal with the people out in the precincts and neighborhoods who work hard, are intelligent, and who believe in meeting practical problems with realistic and workable solutions.  Luckily, the majority of swing voters are not ideological, but down to earth and mostly concerned about making money.  They aren’t into the 40,000 view.  When the economy is OK, they are OK. 

Most of what I have seen in the text I have read here could best be described as middle aged angst from people indulging in arily looking down on reality as merely tedious. 

Most of us can’t afford to judge everyone else against a state of perfection. 

That is not one of the states in a “fifty state strategy.”

I can see how if analysis such as has been represented on this Truthdig forum were to be espoused by someone standing up at a meeting of local Democrats, it would be politely ignored.  Survival demands realism.

He may be gone but the parting shot at ACORN:

“The fact that ACORN was found by a Congressional committee to be organized crime and that folks in their organization have confessed and are helping in the continuing investigation means nothing to you.”

Wow!  I guess it’s possible that a Repub dominated committee prior to the 2006 elections could have come up with some finding which could be construed that way ... but the bit about “confession” and “continuing investigation”?  I’m suspecting that must be in some other time/space continuum where “Fox News” and reality have something in common.

RE: StuartH, September 10 at 3:50 pm
Alinsky had a different demographic and while there could be a lot of people eventually, there would not be at first, and of course money was almost nil.

Astroturf folk have money to burn, but few people would follow them if the real agenda was known, so they put that money to media and mailers, and have the entire “Grand Wurlitzer” crank up the noise.

Reality is irrelevant. The fear tale needs to be good only for a bit, by the time the tale is a laughing stock they will have moved on. Birthers and teabagging got the ball rolling so that in Aug they could make a show at selected Town Halls. Not a single point was true, but their Base will not know. It took enough money that they could have funded the folk without Health care, but spun by the “Wurlitzer” they gave cover to the blue dogs at least.

Class—

Good riddance to jjd1965, of course, but bless him that his comment constitutes an example of the red herring fallacy so impeccable it is textbook-worthy.

I have never heard such left-wing wacko comments in one place in my life. 

The fact that ACORN was found by a Congressional committee to be organized crime and that folks in their organization have confessed and are helping in the continuing investigation means nothing to you.

Just a lot of crazy opinions here founded in your conspiracy-theory-like arguments stringing together small facts, denials of fact, lies and distortions to “prove” your point.

I am removing the notification preference and leaving you wingnuts to your fantasies.

StuartH:
’... If the right wing is attempting to study Alinsky, you have to wonder what in the heck they are getting out of it.  The purpose of the organizing methods was to seek progressive change against a status quo that produces injustice and usually the conservative business oligarchy was the immoveable object that needed to be moved. ...’

For some time now the Democratic Party has been the conservative party.  The Southern Strategy pulled the Republicans off into a woods where they formerly had not been.  Many of the recruits they found out there seem to desire radical changes in both the U.S. Constitution (as, for instance, the “unitary executive”, the imposition of religious tests and maybe the establishment of religion, suppression of some kinds of speech, etc.)  In pursuing the new, the Republicans let go of the old, to wit, the rational support of the existing order, which was and is liberal-capitalist and corporate, and of course includes a certain amount of Welfare, regulation, involvement with foreign powers, imperialism, and other business-oriented practices which are not entirely in the classical liberal canon but certainly conserve existing power and economic relations.  The Democrats, then, appear to the Republicans as the established order and they themselves as the rebels against it, quite properly colored emotional red against the rational blue.  It is natural that Alinsky appeals to them.

Of course it is a curious situation since the Republican Party receives so much corporate money—perhaps even more than the Democrats, although I haven’t checked lately.  But if the Republicans continue to be the party of Palin and Beck, of birthers and televangelists and talk radio, that may not go on forever.  There is certainly a home for big money and other conservative types in Democratic Party.  And one must admit the Democrats know how to keep the Left down and mostly out.

Anarcissie, September 10 at 2:14 pm
On war and weed Libertarians tend to side with Liberals. On accountability not so much. If any libertarian styled Republicans have come out for prosecuting Bush era War Crimes, they have been very quiet about it.

I don’t doubt that they would be happy to prosecute Obama where he has not killed off the Bush era abuses, and I would be happy to round them all up, but now that the mud has been spread about I doubt anything will happen. I only hope that the next administration does not try to save Bush from the title of worst ever.

Oh and if you not have been blinded by all the hate speech you would notice that Obama is well to the Right of his base, and center right among all Democrats.

It should be noted that, after he graduated from college, Obama sought to find an organization that was doing community organizing that might hire him.  In his book, “Dreams From My Father.” he recounts discovering the Alinsky organization in Chicago, writing a letter to them and moving there after being interviewed and hired. 

He also describes his painful and embarrassing moments as he fails in his first attempts to be a community organizer.  I thought those were pretty telling.  It seems that here is a person who can stand back from himself, critically evaluate failings and learn how to overcome them.  That could certainly be a useful character trait in the White House.

If the right wing is attempting to study Alinsky, you have to wonder what in the heck they are getting out of it.  The purpose of the organizing methods was to seek progressive change against a status quo that produces injustice and usually the conservative business oligarchy was the immoveable object that
needed to be moved.

When there is no progressive change instinct behind protest, it isn’t ultimately going to maintain the energy needed.  Real reform can take a lifetime of commitment fired up by a vision of a better future.

Currently, the only vision the right wing has is destruction, fear of the future, and lies.

By jjd1965, September 10 at 1:32 pm
I know ACORN. I have worked around them for many years. (but not actually ever a member) They build up from local people to take on issues that happen to just those folks, the communication is three way. Local individuals get training and help and those help others back home. That is Grass roots. The stuff made up about them, illogical on its face, is proof that they are effective.

When there is massive Corporate sponsorship and corporate agenda, and Fox pumping everyone to show up, and no method of information going up , but just made up stuff promulgated down.  That is Astroturf.

The very call to get folk to spread out through the rooms at Town Halls is a classic Alinsky tactic to make your group look bigger than it actually is, and is also telling in that they did not in fact have the numbers in spite of major support, spin, and promotion by Fox and others with estimated costs (probably a lot more) of 1.5 million dollars a day paid by Insurance companies.

Another tell was that industry employees were pushed to try and fill in the numbers, and when a person hides the fact that they are insurance executives to try to play act a happy insurance customer, ridicule is deserved.

freedem:
‘Libertarian is among the least honest. (there is a lot of competition for the title)

There is a reason that totalitarian theocrats and supposedly anti-government Libertarians find themselves on the same side in almost every issue against Liberals. ...’

I wouldn’t say that.  On the very important issues of war, imperialism, and global domination by the U.S., the libertarians tend not only to be against the religious fanatics and neocons now dominating the Republican Party but to the left of many liberals and Democrats as well, including Mr. O.

Libertarian is among the least honest. (there is a lot of competition for the title)

There is a reason that totalitarian theocrats and supposedly anti-government Libertarians find themselves on the same side in almost every issue against Liberals.

The key to the Liberal agenda is empathy and concern for the empowerment of everyone, and since leadership is granted the job of organizing a collective enterprise, there is a need to hold that leadership accountable to do that job and not benefit only themselves. The twin goals of empowerment of all and accountability of leadership are the areas that theocrat and libertarian both hate.

Without such accountability the Libertarian imagines himself as the sole actor with all others just hanging on, when in fact he stands on the backs and necks of those who made the enterprise work, and without them it would not have happened.

Because there is no accountability their expectations will not be met and they will be given no respect. And any attempt to achieve justice will just get howls of protest from that boss that folks are stealing from him!

Anarcissie,

Thanks for the link.  That only attributed a newspaper making the following observation:

Among the Alinsky “trademarks” that the Times’ Noam Cohen pointed to are “using spectacle to make up for lack of numbers,” targeting an individual — in this case Obama — and “using ridicule to persuade the undecided.”

Not exactly a very compelling case.  No “lack of numbers” shown and quite to the contrary in keeping with public opinion per all the polls.  Further, no evidence of ACORN-like “astroturf”; just concerned citizens of all political stripes and ages.

Ridiculing the President is standard fare no matter who has been in the oval office.  And Bush probably received more than most, if you care to be honest.

Those two factors mentioned fall FAR short of making that case.

And “status quo”?  Where have you been doing your research?  Noone is for the status quo; even the President acknowledged that last evening.  Have you even tried to look at all the proposals?  Including the bipartisan HAA?  It was in the works for 2 years!

Take off the partisan glasses and things are likely to get clearer.

By jjd1965, September 10 at 11:12 am - all you really need do is to Google - Saul Alinsky there are endless Right wing sites going on about him and the actual tactics used by birthers and teabaggers in raising a stink are right out of his playbook.

As to the others, I am not personally acquainted with Obama, and I would hope that Alinsky would be history that he would know, but in all the classes and other organizing groups including specifically Obama groups I have been at, neither his name or rules, or even tactics are mentioned and if I bring his name up there is rarely recognition and that is vague.

So yes there is an obsession with him on the Right, but the Left barely remembers. I am not actually fond of either fact.

jjd1965: ’
Freedem, You say “His work is now the bible on the right for political actions.”  Have anything other than your opinion to back that up? ...’

Something to that effect came over the right-wing Newsmax mailing list a week or two ago.  See http://www.newsmax.com/insider_report/Healthcare_Reform_Foes/2009/08/30/254246.html

I don’t know if I would call it the bible for rightist political action, though.  Alinsky’s methods are meant to stir up trouble, call attention to, provoke discussion.  The Right’s present position on the delivery of medical care is that the status quo is best.  The attempted disruption of public meetings on the issue will not actually lead to conserving the status quo.  But as I said before (see below), the Right doesn’t have a lot of ideological real estate left these days.

In reading a whole lot of social studies question responses to a standardized test taken by high school kids recently, I was struck by how many seemed to be reflecting information that came very obviously from right wing talk radio rather than the classroom.

I think what the right is doing, especially with attempts like those being made in Texas to re-write textbooks and curriculae, is trying to dumb down the “body politick” including education, so that the next generation might go for leaders of the caliber of Sarah Palin.

One way to look at Obama’s speech is not at the content.  George H.W. Bush’s talk was very similar. But something is very different: the subtext is addressed to those kids most likely to be on the chopping block.

Kids with single mothers, some of whom will themsevles become single mothers as pregnant teenagers.  Minority kids who have been led to have low expectations.  Kids who live in constant economic and family turmoil.  Kids who live in urban contexts where there is a lot of violence and mayhem. 

The right wing is always about turning a blind eye to conditions that lead kids to drop out of school or punish them for being punished.  They promoted the abstinence-only approach to preventing teenage pregnancy which has led to an increase in multiple-generation tragedy. 

Their policies have driven the education system into a ditch. 

They have been failures, nay, disasters. 

Obama threatens to actually lead through example, as someone who overcame what most normally would have happened to him.  The right hates that.  They also hate that he is not only black, but multicultural and a reminder that the future is in fact a multicultural America. 

No wonder they are apoplectic to see the shining faces of kids who see in Obama a reflection of themselves.

As long as Obama stays Black, the “patriots” will stay conspirational. It’s really that simple.

Freedem,

You say “His work is now the bible on the right for political actions.”  Have anything other than your opinion to back that up?

Our President was himself trained in and uses Alinsky’s methods:

“Alinsky’s teachings influenced Barack Obama in his early career as a community organizer on the far South Side of Chicago.[8][9] Working for Gerald Kellman’s Developing Communities Project, Obama learned and taught Alinsky’s methods for community organizing.” 

Just read Alinsky’s bio at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky for confirmation.

Freedem,

Don’t know what article you were reading.  The article I linked didn’t say any such thing; and it concluded:

Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush’s speech itself, like Obama’s today, was entirely unremarkable. “Block out the kids who think it’s not cool to be smart,” the president told students. “If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they’re stuck in a dead end job. Don’t let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

And the further point is still made—-this article is blatantly wrong.

jjd1965 - I am indeed familiar with Alinsky, but am actually dismayed that his work is little known or cared about on the left. The points he makes are themselves apolitical, and can be used to accomplish goals Alinsky could agree with or be appalled by.

His work is now the bible on the right for political actions even though they do not have the masses of people, they can still create a noise or a stink, and unlike in Alinsky’s day have a puppy press ready to astroturf anything.

However the techniques described by Blumenthal and Klein not only were unknown to him (I assume as they were not used at the time) but are of such empathy crushing evil intent that nobody on the real left would touch them, especially Alinsky, even if there was some way he could have done so.

As with everything else those empathy devoid cannot imagine the motives of anyone with actual empathy, and project horrors found only in their own “hearts”.

jjd1965 the article you link to refutes your own point.

AFTER his speech, when the contents were known and shown to be blatantly political, THEN there was an uproar!

Obama’s speech to children was devoid of any such ulterior motives or actions. But since Conservatives would have used such a speech to propagandize students, they immediately projected their extreme, corrupt and pathetic mindset on to others.

The political blandness of setting goals, working hard, and not giving up on school, was indeed the opposite of the Rovian scheming that is what passes for a soul of the Republicans these days, but not in the way they imagined.

Freedem,

You sound like you are describing the playbook from Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”.  In fact, what you describe sounds more like what this Administration is doing by proposing a budget that increases the deficit 900% to 9 TRILLION DOLLARS, proposing legislation on Cap n Trade that is a jobs killer and cannot possibly work without China and India following suit (which they have clearly stated they will not), and passing a stimulus package that has not stimulated squat.  All so when we continue the downward spiral, the government can play the role of our savior once again in ways we never would have tolerated, after having caused the mess in the first place.

Go libertarian.  It’s more honest.

The Idiots on the right are talking nonsense and proposing ideas, and launching destructive and expensive wars because that is what the plan on the Right is. The more messed up peoples lives are the less they are able to resist, actions and policies they would be up in arms over if they felt otherwise secure.

Naomi Klein http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2007/sept/video/dnB20070917a.rm&proto=rtsp laid out the Corporate strategy in her book “Shock Doctrine” speaking of causing general disasters as a way to attack society(9/11, Katrina< economic crash, etc)

What is newly revealed is that in http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/4/republican_gomorrah_inside_the_movement_that Max Blumenthal has shown how it is done on the personal scale as well, by Right Wing Religious organizations like Dobson and Focus on the Family, handing out detailed bad information with the specific goal of creating disaster and dependency, and creating a generation of damaged children, that grow into damaged adults, that will make the troops for their assault on democracy.

Besides being a dropout and alcoholic he’s obviously mentally ill, manic depressive. The combination of alcoholism and mental illness is psychosis, Beck is a 10th rate psycho whining from the comfort of his studio which makes him a coward. If parents want to use psychos as their children role models go for the 1st rate psycho’s such as Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, all WW1 veterans who battled in the streets in the 20’s and 30’s. Certainly not cowards like Beck. America with its 6th grade literacy ability are so cowered, ignorant and gullible Americans don’t even have the ability to go for the 1st class psycho’s.

“Nobody would have believed that such an ordinary event could excite suspicions among a significant part of the population…”

I don’t know.  They might be “statistically significant” from a strictly mathematical point of view, but people are probably better described by other academic disciplines.  How about anthropology, economics, sociology, philosophy or even literature? 

I strongly suspect that the people sucked in by this blatantly politically motivated slander and rumour mongering are not significantly successful.  Nor would they be significantly intelligent people.  In fact, the only reason they are worth a moment’s attention is that they could at some point be significantly violent.  Many would be the remnants or descendants of lynch mobs.

To quote them, report on them, worry about them or try to reason with them is kind of pointless.  They must be a rapidly shrinking group as the old die-hard racists do actually die ... there surely can’t be enough simple-minded young people to replace them.

As Anarcissie so accurately notes, the Democrats are now the conservative corporate party.  There is no representation for progressives and the Republicans seem to appeal to nostalgic loyalists and looney-tunes.

Answer: America always has in times of stress. Textbook example: Senator Joe McCarthy. Ergo: there is nothing new happening today. It is the old song and dance.

You might want to do a little research before writing an article that makes progressives look so woefully uninformed.  The Democrat Party in fact went a lot further in 1991 when Bush spoke to students, actually holding HEARINGS after the benign speech to address its legality.  I wonder if any Progressives will have the integrity to correct this erroneous piece wherever it was published? 

And to the low-brow commentator:  taking a swipe at folks that suffer from the disease of Alcoholism is reprehensible.  All of it is nonsense. 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/When-Bush-spoke-to-students-Democrats-investigated-held-hearings-57694347.html

Education is not synonymous with either intelligence or common sense.

We are seeing a lot of odd behavior from Republicans because ideologically speaking the Democrats have stolen the old Republican territory.  The Democrats are now the sensible, conservative people as well as the party of the Common Man and all that.

“So why have the idols of the right, notably Glenn Beck of Fox News Channel, instead seized this moment to stir anger and fear among Republican parents by claiming that the president intends harm to their kids? Why did many Republican leaders, notably the party chairman of Florida, echo the craziness? (And why would any parent take advice from Beck, a college dropout and recovering alcoholic?)”

You answer your own question.  Those who listen to Beck are even lower on the education scale than he is.  It is appropriate that the pied piper of the right should be a failed and emotionally weak white man.  Be careful, Glenn, your bigotry and IQ are showing!