Incremental change is called for when one can clearly see the serial progression of events. It can be likened to building a watch. Collect the pieces, find a watchmaker, then... Wait a minute, Where are the parts for all of those things we need? Where is the watchmaker? Oh, it will just happen, after all, we have a table, someday we'll get a lamp. We can wait. zzzzz
Compromise between political parties is nonexistent. Accommodation with the elected government and the unelected 'establishment power centers/corporate oligarchy/ conservative ideology network or 'death star USA' is what passes for government and politics. In other blunt words, phony politics and control of power. A conservative wet dream. Incremental change in this scenario is gradual regression.
Two recent front page articles on DKos, Sun June 20, indicating two different progressive approaches, one was about a single individual who acted locally and used the system and gave to people that were already suffering and sacrificing and the other one about, what a president, a central figure, about what a reformer should do. It is a political statement, but it does not take into consideration that the elected politicians are out maneuvered by “death star USA” and require donations to both political parties and further sacrifices of time and money from the few remaining people that have something to sacrifice.
Remembering Luke Cole, pioneer of environmental justice and law
by Laurence Lewis
A beautiful diary about a beautiful man whom we all could learn from. He was a provider of non-governmental, non commercial service to a community. Everyone has a talent that they can offer besides expressing their opinions in a forum like this.
On presidential leadership :
by brooklynbadboy
Quotes from Lincoln, I will provide my own quotes from Lincoln to emphasise my point. There is something we all should do but we usually end up talking about what the other guy should do.
That is what I am about to do, let's figure out together what is going on and then come up with a solution. It may not even involve Obama. It may, howeve, involve, you.
The political parties are nothing more than a top down version of pit bulls working for the tripartite axis of “death star USA “. i.e. Conservative ideology+ corporate oligarchy+ the unelected establishment power structure. That includes both parties fighting in the dog ring for the entertainment of the masses. That is you and me, by the way.
Sunday, Rahm Emmanual characterized the stark difference between the parties. This is the start of a new blitz by the Democratic hierarchy to win elections. Saturday, it was Sheldon Whitehouse, the day before it was Obama hammering the Republicans.
This is their new weapon but they have not deployed this weapon with new tactics or strategy. It is a defensive weapon at best and not suited for the war they have half heartedly leapt at, heart pumping, taste of blood in their mouths and looking clear eyed at [danger]?
Whatever minds are changed by this campaign are subject to change again. It does not eliminate coercion from ”death star USA”, it does not eliminate the cynicism that has gripped the nation and it does not provide immunity from the cooption of the most 'progressive' Democrat.
I cannot predict the future and what I know about politics is derivative at best, I think it is enough to envision the best-case scenario. After deploying their new rhetorical weapon, namely, ”that Republicans favor big business at the expense of the little guy. That Republicans think that BP is the victim even though they, BP, have done incalculable damage to the Gulf and after bird migration in the fall, to the hemisphere, at least.”* *(my additions, were the DNC so far sighted, just a wish)
Best case scenario: So many people are going to realize that Democrats have to be kept in office that they will actually pick up seats in the house an senate. President Obama's popularity is going to reach his election-day 2008 levels. They will now be able to get real finance reform, the Democrats will revisit and pass cram down legislation for home mortgage revisions, DADT will be put on a fast track, DFA will take credit for getting out the vote but they will defer from intruding any agenda they might have on the Democratic Party. Health care will be revisited to create Medicare for all, DFM will be repealed and a carbon tax will be assessed.
People will not worry that even though they depend on employment at will, that they will be freed from economic cycles and the whims of businesses that downsize or farm out work to foreign countries will no longer affect them because it will be illegal.
That might produce some hope that incremental change is possible. I leave the worst case and the middle argument to others and try to figure out how to cram the incremental argument in. Oh wait, we are already in the middle argument, we just got out of the worse-case scenario.
The reality is that Republicans use rhetoric that we on the left discredit because of the content. Followers on the right do not weigh their content; they see that any tool that is used to defeat the enemy is valid. In a rhetorical war, lies are cheap ammunition. It causes a lot of reaction on the left and it takes a lot of effort to refute. It is effective because it is distracting, costly to the enemy and is harmful to morale of the enemy.
As lefties express their anger and perceptions of indignity about this content, the right uses this to reinforce their message that they are fighting a war of survival. They use anger from the left as an incentive and as propaganda to inflame opponents with further outrages.
Rhetoric neutralized, electorate divided. Mission accomplished. Serendipity favors “death star USA “.
Both sides are divided from one another and antagonistic; “death star USA “, has succeeded in a 'divide and conquer' strategy. Not that it is really a strategy; the cynicism that pervades both sides generated by the policy of accommodation obligates cynicism. Blaming one party, regardless of its foibles is also ridiculous.
Since most people treat their party affiliation as a brand name, the electorate is uneccessarily divided ans confused.
Each group of supporters is submerged in this theme of a righteous war. In contrast to this, a progressive movement is apolitical, local, united, distributed, focused on providing concrete social justice needs like food, clothing, shelter, legal and medical services that compliment centralized government programs.
The movement is a struggle for human rights and social justice. Nonprofits are a good example. In other words, people acting on their own are already doing this. You know, people, most of whom, could not care a bit about politics. Yet, their actions are to be admired and emulated.
The Gulf disaster will highlight numerous environmental groups, large and small, forecasting effects of the oil, rehabilitating wildlife, helping with cleanup, disseminating information and raising awareness of the disaster. Yet disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and in Louisiana, in particular has been occurring for fifty years unabated due to “death star USA “. Who in Louisiana deserves your money, your party or your nonprofit? Are you lucky enough to do both and volunteer?
What would all of those party pollsters, pundits, strategists, candidates and apparatchiks do if they spent their time building your community rather than sucking money and time from it? Well, let us take their word for it that they are helping us, or anyone, and by helping, they are universally acclaimed as credible and trustworthy. Is that how it works? Unfortunately, yes.
War vs. struggle, a load of sexy bullshit or down to earth believable but boring quotidian determination, better soldiers or better citizens, compromise between ethically elected parties or accommodation to an inchoate mass of cynical industry? I see no evidence from any postings on this forum that anyone has put that together. I see talk of one and talk of the other but never how the two can provide competition against "death star USA".
The reasons that fighting a war is a ridiculous construct:(Try to hold your resentment at my word ridiculous. Remember, I do not know you personally, this is a public forum with individual access, sort of like advertising but I am not trying to kiss anyone's ass and this is deadly serious for both of us.)
1 You do not really know who the 'enemy' is. Is it a Republican, a Blue dog, a corporation, an industry, the Senate, politics, none of them or all of them? Peace be on you, my brothers and sisters.
2 You cannot win in a fight of any kind. You are outnumbered, outflanked and ill equipped no matter where you turn.
3 Any action to seek political dominance, (to get your own way, no matter how well intentioned or justified, is a conservative act.
4 As you 'defeat' a party politically, you divide the community. The vote is not democratically accepted because the government is accommodating an unelected artificial construct that it created.
5 Everyone is afraid of money. Funny, that is one of those artificial constructs. Those who are afraid of money have other personal issues that politics cannot solve.
6 If you are not in a struggle for human rights and social justice before you are a member of a political party, then your party has no compass, it can never improve, you are unwittingly defeating yourself simply by fighting a war, a phony war, at that.
7 Regardless of you feelings of personal outrage and loss, your heart is not in it. There is no end to war and you know it.
The axis does not need a strategy when people, on their own, divide themselves. Oh, I am such a hippie. Yes, and I am a good observer of human behavior. That was my profession, is my vocation, my hobby and my life long project. I am not here to gild the lily.
Are the progressive Democrats correct? Are they really progressive or just another breed of pit bull? We are still in two wars, this is an inadequate health bill, civil rights are being trampled daily in DADT and marriage inequality, the Bill of Rights is slowly being eroded on the basis of a ridiculous notion of 'national security'. These are all accommodations to an unelected power center not compromises between political parties. The parties are both in the thrall of the axis.
‘'The full plate’', seems to be a popular argument for patience and tolerance of incremental change. Who is fed with all that is on Obama's plate? The only thing that I am willing to give him credit for is, beating McCain/ Palin. He is president now; that is behind him. He is not strong enough to avoid accommodation of elected government with ‘'death star USA “. He clothed himself in a suit of rhetoric that was too large for him, now everyone is arguing about him. That tight belt of ''I told you so'' makes the loose fitting suit look more ridiculous. I am not counting on him to suddenly undergo a growth spurt. Sunday June 20th last, Frank Rich in the NY Times made it vey clear what the man has to do.
Politics no longer works to reconcile the voter with the candidate when a third unelected force has wormed its way into power and cynicism has spread to the left and right. That is what conservatism is, the quest for political dominance. If they have no one to fight, they will fight with each other. They do not notice our struggles now; why would that change if we stopped fighting them? If we are struggling, why attract their attention at all? Do you need that attention? I do not and if you do, I kindly ask you to stop.
Obama is not the issue; the issue is that you are disagreeing about something that is not the problem. You've been punked.
The biggest problem with Blanche Lincoln was that she would not bend to the will of the 'progressive' Democrats. Once elected, would their candidate do so? Even if Halter won Ark., the grassroots, at most, would have achieved parity with the Democratic Party establishment, an indeterminate voice and most likely been the victim of co-option by the party establishment. That incremental change, no one ought to believe in.
The pathetic aspect of that story is the amount of money that even the greediest committee chairperson takes is chump change compared to the looting they allow. Lincoln was once where Halter is, please tell me what strategically would be gained if he won the primary or even the seat. What exactly was the message that was sent? Be afraid, be very afraid. I do not think that she is afraid and a lot changes in six years.
That the top 1% of Americans own 70% of assets is not something that is happening to the country or to the government, friends, it is happening to us and our politicians that we worked so hard for and gave our money to, have done it to us. Both parties. You can thank Chris Dodd for the fine print on credit card offerings. Come on, pile on, there is more. I picked on him because he is writing Finance reform, so far, it sounds like another accommodation from the WH and him. Is that really a partisan problem?
It is not Capitalism any more than it was Ronnie boy's Communism that is the problem in the world; it is totalitarian rule without Democracy. That is "death star USA' and it is breathing down our necks. The corporate elite do not just own Republicans, the own Democrats as well.
The only way to have believable rhetoric is to compete with ”death star USA" and provide help to people. Right now, the corporate oligarchies are the only ones hiring workers and paying wages, even if they do it unfairly. I do not hear anyone thinking outside this box. Hint. Nonprofit organizations already collaborate with private business and government. They already account for 8% of wages and salaries in 2006. I have suggested ways to begin in my last diary but they are not as sexy as the 'phony war''.
If Democrats say that they are different, why then are they using the identical tactics and strategies as Republicans? Better arguments are not different strategies.
People, people, people. What did they say after 911, there was lack of imagination? Has it occurred to anyone that the answers are apolitical? That a unified country can have has to have two parties. All that I hear is panic and political bullshit or is it horseshit; it smells the same?
There is a difference between seeing a bright future and expressing hope as in brooklynbadbay’s Lincoln quote:
With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed. Consequently he who moulds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.
— Abraham Lincoln
and seeing the reality before you and not indulging in wool gathering about change in a vague future.
“The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.”
— Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln then prophetically added:
“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my Country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed.”
— Abraham Lincoln
The stakes of survival of this planet and the human species are untold magnitudes higher than the machinations about any political battle. In fact, it is wrong to couch our problems in terms of politics when politics is a miniscule portion of what has to be addressed. When people are able to conduct themselves morally, the politics will arrive unbidden.
I severely scrutinize the ethics of political campaigns close to me, regardless of my eventual vote. Progressivism is a state of mind that influences politics, to characterize it as anything else or to capitalize on its misinterpretation is wrong.
A shout out to potatohead who has disagreed with me without being disagreeable. He has challenged me to give concrete examples but being a good Democrat, I can only offer the excuse of a paltry offering this time around. I intended to write a different diary and I became distracted by new revelations of environmental insults from the Gulf and the continuous thundering of the herd indiscriminately trampling all that appeared before them. The good, the bad and the ugly.
I invite the good people of this enchanted land to contribute examples of how community activities have yielded concrete improvement despite "death star USA". Do my homework for me.
Tell me about your ideas. Right now, I am investigating how nonprofits can team with unions to help solve unemployment, much the same way that they do with private business for promotions or how they joined the public sector and Ge to develop wind energy on Lake Erie.
Let's go.