There’s a man in Florida who has been writing to me for years (ten pages, handwritten) though I’ve never met him. He tells me the kinds of jobs he has held-security guard, repairman, etc. He has worked all kinds of shifts, night and day, to barely keep his family going. His letters to me have always been angry, railing against our capitalist system for its failure to assure “life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness” for working people.
Just today, a letter came. To my relief it was not handwritten because he is now using e-mail: “Well, I’m writing to you today because there is a wretched situation in this country that I cannot abide and must say something about. I am so enraged about this mortgage crisis. That the majority of Americans must live their lives in perpetual debt, and so many are sinking beneath the load, has me so steamed. Damn, that makes me so mad, I can’t tell you. . . . I did a security guard job today that involved watching over a house that had been foreclosed on and was up for auction. They held an open house, and I was there to watch over the place during this event. There were three of the guards doing the same thing in three other homes in this same community. I was sitting there during the quiet moments and wondering about who those people were who had been evicted and where they were now.”
On the same day I received this letter, there was a front-page story in the Boston Globe, with the headline “Thousands in Mass. Foreclosed on in ‘07.”
The subhead was “7,563 homes were seized, nearly 3 times the ‘06 rate.”
A few nights before, CBS television reported that 750,000 people with disabilities have been waiting for years for their Social Security benefits because the system is underfunded and there are not enough personnel to handle all the requests, even desperate ones.
Stories like these may be reported in the media, but they are gone in a flash. What’s not gone, what occupies the press day after day, impossible to ignore, is the election frenzy.
This seizes the country every four years because we have all been brought up to believe that voting is crucial in determining our destiny, that the most important act a citizen can engage in is to go to the polls and choose one of the two mediocrities who have already been chosen for us. It is a multiple choice test so narrow, so specious, that no self-respecting teacher would give it to students.
And sad to say, the Presidential contest has mesmerized liberals and radicals alike. We are all vulnerable.
Is it possible to get together with friends these days and avoid the subject of the Presidential elections?
The very people who should know better, having criticized the hold of the media on the national mind, find themselves transfixed by the press, glued to the television set, as the candidates preen and smile and bring forth a shower of clichés with a solemnity appropriate for epic poetry.
Even in the so-called left periodicals, we must admit there is an exorbitant amount of attention given to minutely examining the major candidates. An occasional bone is thrown to the minor candidates, though everyone knows our marvelous democratic political system won’t allow them in.
No, I’m not taking some ultra-left position that elections are totally insignificant, and that we should refuse to vote to preserve our moral purity. Yes, there are candidates who are somewhat better than others, and at certain times of national crisis (the Thirties, for instance, or right now) where even a slight difference between the two parties may be a matter of life and death.
I’m talking about a sense of proportion that gets lost in the election madness. Would I support one candidate against another? Yes, for two minutes-the amount of time it takes to pull the lever down in the voting booth.
But before and after those two minutes, our time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice.
Let’s remember that even when there is a “better” candidate (yes, better Roosevelt than Hoover, better anyone than George Bush), that difference will not mean anything unless the power of the people asserts itself in ways that the occupant of the White House will find it dangerous to ignore.
The unprecedented policies of the New Deal-Social Security, unemployment insurance, job creation, minimum wage, subsidized housing-were not simply the result of FDR’s progressivism. The Roosevelt Administration, coming into office, faced a nation in turmoil. The last year of the Hoover Administration had experienced the rebellion of the Bonus Army-thousands of veterans of the First World War descending on Washington to demand help from Congress as their families were going hungry. There were disturbances of the unemployed in Detroit, Chicago, Boston, New York, Seattle.
In 1934, early in the Roosevelt Presidency, strikes broke out all over the country, including a general strike in Minneapolis, a general strike in San Francisco, hundreds of thousands on strike in the textile mills of the South. Unemployed councils formed all over the country. Desperate people were taking action on their own, defying the police to put back the furniture of evicted tenants, and creating self-help organizations with hundreds of thousands of members.
Without a national crisis-economic destitution and rebellion-it is not likely the Roosevelt Administration would have instituted the bold reforms that it did.
Today, we can be sure that the Democratic Party, unless it faces a popular upsurge, will not move off center. The two leading Presidential candidates have made it clear that if elected, they will not bring an immediate end to the Iraq War, or institute a system of free health care for all.
They offer no radical change from the status quo.
They do not propose what the present desperation of people cries out for: a government guarantee of jobs to everyone who needs one, a minimum income for every household, housing relief to everyone who faces eviction or foreclosure.
They do not suggest the deep cuts in the military budget or the radical changes in the tax system that would free billions, even trillions, for social programs to transform the way we live.
None of this should surprise us. The Democratic Party has broken with its historic conservatism, its pandering to the rich, its predilection for war, only when it has encountered rebellion from below, as in the Thirties and the Sixties. We should not expect that a victory at the ballot box in November will even begin to budge the nation from its twin fundamental illnesses: capitalist greed and militarism.
So we need to free ourselves from the election madness engulfing the entire society, including the left.
Yes, two minutes. Before that, and after that, we should be taking direct action against the obstacles to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
For instance, the mortgage foreclosures that are driving millions from their homes-they should remind us of a similar situation after the Revolutionary War, when small farmers, many of them war veterans (like so many of our homeless today), could not afford to pay their taxes and were threatened with the loss of the land, their homes. They gathered by the thousands around courthouses and refused to allow the auctions to take place.
The evictions today of people who cannot pay their rents should remind us of what people did in the Thirties when they organized and put the belongings of the evicted families back in their apartments, in defiance of the authorities.
Historically, government, whether in the hands of Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals, has failed its responsibilities, until forced to by direct action: sit-ins and Freedom Rides for the rights of black people, strikes and boycotts for the rights of workers, mutinies and desertions of soldiers in order to stop a war.
Voting is easy and marginally useful, but it is a poor substitute for democracy, which requires direct action by concerned citizens.
Howard Zinn is the author of “A People’s History of the United States,” “Voices of a People’s History” (with Anthony Arnove), and most recently, “A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.”
©2008 The Progressive Magazine
Vote Nader and end the madness.
www.votenader.org
A vote cannot end the madness.
Thank you, sir, for the article. It’s an eye-opener, and should be read by everyone in this country. What you’re saying, unless I’m reading it wrong, is that we’ve got to make our elected leaders, regardless as to who they are, do the right thing, instead of just electing them and expecting them to do the right thing.
Good article Professor Zinn. But I don’t agree that “Historically, government, whether in the hands of Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals, has failed its responsibilities”. I see that only conservative government, often mistakenly labeled “liberal government” by our ultraconservative ruling class, has failed. The old conservative and the modern conservative are very different for sure. The former meant, frugal, careful, traditional, dependable and other good things. They are now poles apart. We haven’t had a “liberal government” since FDR and maybe not even then.
This campaign is the proverbial contest between conservative, fear-mongering, warmongering, war profiteering, superstitious, reactionary redneck followers of Mammon the Beast, its high oligarchy priests and its liberal (progressive) opposites.
The conservative disaster understandably causes liberals to react by becoming radicals. But when liberals react by becoming left wing conservatives in order to counter right wing conservatives, they’ve historically become as authoritarian and berserking as their right wing counterparts.
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”
John Kenneth Galbraith
Old conservative values are now much more similar to today’s liberal values than to modern conservative values. I hope you and Professor Chomsky will make this distinction because your defense of old conservatism simply helps today’s fascists.
The only alternative to right or left wing conservative’s concentration of wealth and power is direct democracy, as Senator Gravel realizes. I hope Ralph Nader will discuss this issue in his campaign and maybe back Senator Gravel’s National Initiative for Democracy before he hopefully drops out of the race at the last moment and backs Obama.
Political evolution, like biological evolution, usually takes place in small steps. Can changes made at a less than radical pace turn this huge vessel from its current course in time to avoid the catastrophe looming ahead? It is impossible to feel secure in any answer to that question.
Personally, I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee (believing there is some small chance that his bottom-up approach and his supporters will push him left), though I plan on sending some money to Nader so that he can promote the issues progressives all care so deeply about. If Hellary is the nominee, I will of course vote for Ralph as I cannot discern any significant differences between her and Madman McCain.
It goes further than that ticonderoga, expect the elected leaders to do the wrong thing if they think they can get away with it. Bush certainly has done so. The people must decide if they are citizens or customers.
Anyone succumbing to holding their noses and voting for the least of evils (Whoever the hell THAT might be) is also succumbing to the programming that you MUST VOTE to make a difference. Please! If you vote for someone who does not represent you, then you are aiding and abetting a broken system. I will either vote for a 3rd party or Independent in November or stay at home
and ignore all the madness that is guaranteed–AGAIN!
skippyagogo41,
Bush is a very pure version of this, as is Giuliani. Others are more difficult to predict. Ever since Bush first became governor, as a resident of Austin and an observer of state politics I noted that Bush always made the most corrupt choice, aiding his cronies or his political prospects with no concern whatsoever for the public good, that he could possibly get away with, no matter what the issue. I suppose that was with Rove’s advice because W himself could not possibly have such discipline to be so consistent, especially not through all these years of his presidency.
ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 1:20 pm
“before he hopefully drops out of the race at the last moment and backs Obama.”
I hope the American people will wake up and back him all the way to winning the presidency. Otherwise like the article states nothing changes. It’s time to revolt and dump the two parties.
Ezeflyer, Nader is pushing for what we believe in, Hillary or Obama isn’t.
Nader all the way or we are just spitting into the wind. I want change not hope for change.
kivals February 24th, 2008 1:21 pm
“Personally, I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee (believing there is some small chance that his bottom-up approach and his supporters will push him left)”
Wake up, wake up, you’re dreaming. You will not see any change either way with the democrats; we will just continue to drift in the direction we are heading.
Ralph Nader is the answer; he just announced that he will run for president.
Although professor Zinn is very articulate and encouraging in his writing he missed a great point: the corporate stronghold was less strong then than it is now. The 30’s were indeed very difficult for the average worker, I called it a tumor that was removed before it spread its malignacy, what we have now is an incurable cancer. If we are to succeed we must join at whatever cost to make Ralph Nader the next president of this country. It won’t be easy. Common Dreams should publish the websites available for contributions to his campaign or volunteer our time. It will make my day, before I die, to see this country free fom wars, employment for everyone,
universal healthcare and a free Palestine.
I totally respect Professor Zinn, and this analysis.
But I think what he’s saying is pretty obvious, and, again, assumes everyone is drinking kool-aid and that we all have no historical perspective. His audience here is clear - all those “radicals” who the story goes think Obama is some sort of savior.
Electoral strategies have had an important impact in the global south, including but not limited to Venezuela and Bolivia. Of course, Obama is no Evo or Chavez. (Except maybe in symbolism, which Zinn’s above analysis skips.) But we can learn from Obama applying a community organizing strategy on a national scale - and that progressive and even Leftinesss (etemology: truthiness plus lefty) values and messages are resonating with large parts of the electorate, and then some.
And apply it to the day to day struggles to ensure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Skippy, I do expect our elected “leaders” to do the wrong thing if they can get away with it. That’s been their modus operandi for years.
What I got out of Zinn’s article, though, is that it’s up to us to NOT let them get away with it, and that we can’t put all our eggs in one basket, hoping that we’ll get the candidate that we want, and he or she will save us.
We have to save ourselves, regardless as to who gets elected, seems to be the point of Zinn’s article, IMO.
Indeed, most Americans are furious enough at their bought and sold Government that they can see through the cosmetic nonsense of another election. Sleazy coporate lobbyists at the feeding trough are who the major candidates are busy wooing. Your rights have eroded, your job security is gone and you live in a police state, and apparently you’re going to vote for more of the same.
It’s probably USELESS trying to explain something to you schleppes, but here goes:
When someone like Zinn-Chomsky writes, “…our time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools,” THEY ARE FULL OF SHIT!
Why?
Because people in the real world don’t care! They don’t want to be lectured at. They have chosen the life they want to lead, a life full of entertainment, consumerism, light pornography, and palliatives (cigarettes, drugs, booze, internet 24/7).
Zinn-Chomsky are MISTAKEN about human nature. They think people care about the “truth” as much as they do. They don’t see — they can’t see — what losers they are.
Zinn is correct. Change comes from the bottom. People however need a track to run on. What leaders like Zinn and Nader should be doing is formulating an action plan that people can join and participate in. Not an all encompassing plan but just one good specific plan. The idea of non-consumption comes to mind. The formulation of a culture of acceptance of the old and second hand. I do not suggest that any one leader do this. It takes a group of well known and respected people to lay out and direct the plan. Keep it simple and rally the citizens. Do you have the guts Nader and Zinn?
Thank you Professor Zinn, yours is a rare voice of grounded reason in this time of election madness indeed.
Excellent article.
“What leaders like Zinn and Nader should be doing is formulating an action plan that people can join and participate in.”
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
People have ALREADY made up their mind. They like this commercial culture of ours. They like high-def TVs, fast food, Internet porn. They don’t want to listen to old farts like Zinn and Chomsky tell them what they should be thinking and doing.
I’m amazed at how blind and stupid you all are.
debunker:
Let me out of that lineup. I hear you LOUD and clear. The human condition is beyond hopelessness–the “programming” is complete. Jeezus Khrist could run for Prez and he would have as much chance as Dennis Kucinich.
Case in point: Not ONE person responded to your post. They would rather intellectualize for a few minutes than get angry and start the engines of the “Asleep”. (Don’t feel badly, debunker, I get ignored all the time too. Ruts run deep! Even for the allegedly Liberal.)
Nader is a Republican.
Excellent article to remind us of our civic responsibilites. However anyone who votes for Nader is voting for McCain and if you didn’t learn anything 8 years ago (or even back when Carter fell to Reagan because of the third party candidate or when Bill Clinton had help from Perot) then there’s no hope for you.
Like Zinn says, take action between elections to bring on positive change. Go ahead and sit-in and protest and fight to elect progressive people to congress and to hold our leader accountable. But please stop throwing away any chance we have by voting for that tired old egomaniac Nader, all you are doing is throwing us to the wolves.
It’s thanks to the Nader supporters that we’ve had a war criminal in office these past 8 years instead of a Nobel Peace Laureate. Think about it.
debunker is closer to the truth than you Naderites who think Ralph has a ghost of a chance. However, debunker and you Naderites-or-nobodies all make me sick. If we refuse to focus on the realistic possibilities of incremental improvements, then we’re nowhere. Historically, everything moves in small steps unless you’re looking at the French revolution or something. And if you are looking at that as a hoped for new beginning, then you’re fucking nuts.
Surrender,
Whether I’m ignored or not, I don’t care. I was protesting a logic that apparently neither Zinn nor Chomsky ever finds the time to examine. And that’s this notion that IF ONLY PEOPLE ORGANIZE, the ecology of our political life will change. BS!
Have you found the time over the last month to talk to a single “ordinary” person? I have, and I can tell you that they don’t attach all that much meaning to politics. They care, but it’s not a substitute for religion, God, or morals for them. They talk about politics the same way they talk about sports. NOT ONE average, everyday person ascribes the importance to the political sphere that Zinn and Chomsky presume them to.
We have the system we have because people don’t want to escape from the world they’ve built up: a world of 24/7 entertainment, hedonism, booze, and workplace tediousness. If people really wanted a different society, we’d have it by now. I, for one, am tired of scapegoating corporations and those richer and more successful than I.
By the way, has all that Z-magazine liberal/feminist/leftist “organizing” done anything to stop wars, reduce the Pentagon budget, help the sick and needy, or enlighten anyone? I don’t think so.
“Ralph Nader is the answer.” And the question was?
GregR,
I intend to show up on Election Day to vote for Obama (I voted for Nader in 00 and 04).
But this fact has nothing to do with the points I’ve been making.
Besides reactionary ideology, what’s the difference between a right wing and a left wing conservative?
Mcaimless February 24th, 2008 3:01 pm
“all you are doing is throwing us to the wolves.”
Just were you need to be if you’re going to continue to support the leaders in the two party system.
There is no choice in either of the major two parties. They both represent no change for the better. Obama only offers hope and hope doesn’t get it done.
Good article. It’s important to keep perspective. While I slightly prefer Obama (due entirely to the other choices) it would be foolish th think his election will result in major change. We must focus on real issues.
I hope we all at least recognize that the future is quite unpredictable and we can only guess whether Nader’s approach or other similar approaches will move the ball in a positive direction over the long term. The political scene is of unbounded complexity. As some have noted, Bush did more for socialism (quite unintentionally of course) than anyone else on the planet has in the last few years.
ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 3:07 pm
Besides reactionary ideology, what’s the difference between a right wing and a left wing conservative?
The left wing conservatives (democrats today) don’t destroy the country as fast as the right wing conservatives. Outside of that there is no difference.
The difference between a right and left wing conservative is that of a Stalinist dictator or a Hitlerean one. Very little.
Let’s face it, individuals are powerless against a corporate or statist government. Zinn is correct that we have to come together. But the only way people will come together and take back our greater power is by becoming the government.
See Senator Gravel’s National Initiative for Democracy for more information on how the people can become the lawmakers.
Jaded Prole February 24th, 2008 3:09 pm
“We must focus on real issues.”
As long as people are focused on the selection of two evils that’s not going to happen. On the issues Nader is the only one addressing them the way the people want and still the people are flocking toward hope. Why? Because the MSM is selling it that way, hope has never gotten anything done. Obama offers hope Nader brings our problems to light.
#
rickster469 said:
“ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 3:07 pm
Besides reactionary ideology, what’s the difference between a right wing and a left wing conservative?
The left wing conservatives (democrats today) don’t destroy the country as fast as the right wing conservatives. Outside of that there is no difference.”
Actually, conservative Democrats like the many who consistently vote with Bush, are right wing conservatives. And conservatives can’t govern:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0607.wolfe.html
Kivals, did you delete your earlier reply to me? It was very good, and I agree with it.
It’s a shame that people of a leftist bent don’t challenge the Zinn-Chomsky notion of organizing. There are so many who just say “amen” to them, as though they and they alone were in possession of the truth.
Thank you Mr. Zinn, a little sanity is refreshing in the wake of the Obamarama.
I really worry that all these kids that are so agog abt Obama, they believe in him as a savior, will be crushed when it turns out Obama is merely a politician.
And I find it outrageous that there are all these folks old enough, like me, to know better, and they are some of the worse, giddiest, offenders.
Shame on my peers and elders for not at least suggesting people take a look at history and get a handle on the way things work and what has come before the Obamarama.
ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 3:23 pm
“Actually, conservative Democrats like the many who consistently vote with Bush, are right wing conservatives. And conservatives can’t govern:”
I can’t argue against that. Were does that leave Obama and Hillary? There record proves their conservatives. They have given the republicans every thing they’ve needed.
rickster469,
It’s time to get real. Sure, throw your vote away and see what that accomplishes. Do you really think this nation can survive god knows how many more years of Republicans in the White House? Do you really want us in Iraq for 100 more years? Easy for McCain to say, he won’t be around to watch it.
There are realistic ways to effect change but like Zinn says, it’s only going to happen from the bottom up. Of the two valid (and realistic) choices we have, Obama is the best. Kuschinich was a real progressive but it was obvious that he was not going to make it. Nader does us all a great disservice by running again.
I’m going with the candidate who can beat McCain, pure and simple. How about working on getting Greens into congress for a start and then in time the idea may catch on for a presidental run. Right now there are some major fires to put out that are just too important in my book to ignore while standing on principal.
I’m amazed at how blind and stupid you all are.
Are you really? After pointing out how most people love their stable enslavement and protective enprisonment?
I’m amazed at how blind and stupid you all are.
“Are you really? After pointing out how most people love their stable enslavement and protective enprisonment?”
“You all” meaning Zinn and the sheep who post comments here: i.e., those of you who believe you’re in the know.
debunker,
I did delete the earlier post right after I entered it as I found the first paragraph flawed when I read it.
While the majority may not give a damn, the time will come when they begin to feel the pain, and that’s when they’ll start caring. Of course by then they won’t be able to do anything about it. But history shows that when the downtrodden become the plowed under,rebellion takes root and change begins to occur.
Mcaimless February 24th, 2008 3:33 pm
“Sure, throw your vote away and see what that accomplishes.”
Actually I’m doing just what this article talks about. I’m revolting. If the Democrats want my vote then they better start supporting issues that is going to help this country. A vote for either party now days is noting more than a vote for the status-quo.
Who knows maybe you people will wake up after four more years of republican rule with democratic backing. It’s really rather obvious that Obama isn’t going to do anything different after he gets elected. If Nader get enough support maybe the democrats will get the message and change.
“But history shows that when the downtrodden become the plowed under,rebellion takes root and change begins to occur.”
Does history show that?
So, as more Americans “get plowed under,” they’ll get rid of their TV sets, their DVDs, their PCs and laptops? They’ll stop gambling, watching porn, buying liquor, going to the mall? They’ll become intelligent and see themselves as they really are?
No, I don’t think so.
I’m just saying you shouldn’t be amazed. Psychologists have been talking about it for decades, and philosophers for centuries. It’s tragic, but it makes perfect sense.
Does anybody remember John Anderson’s run for president in 1980? Do any of you think he helped Reagan get the white house? That was when I quit voting for the lesser of two evils and started voting for the person who best represented the needs of the people. I voted for Anderson, I voted for Ross, I voted for Nader. Anyone of these people would have made a better president than the ones we got. Still the American people haven’t learned that if they vote for the lesser of two evils they lose. We will continue to keep losing with that mind set.
Greg R -
Nader very carefully addresses the concerns you raise. It’s on his web site, and he restated it this morning. He doesn’t expect to win the election. He expects to press his issues, our issues, in a positive direction precisely so that incremental change will take place. If everybody folds (as debunker and surrender clearly have) or crawls back into the two party fold, where is this incremental change going to come from? This is a great year for Nader. If moderate Dems can’t beat McCain the situation is hopeless anyway, so progressives are free to be progressive - to advocate for that which is not yet “real.” If you don’t stand up and say what you want you will never get it.
a 72 year old lady February 24th, 2008 1:55 pm
“Although professor Zinn is very articulate and encouraging in his writing he missed a great point: the corporate stronghold was less strong then than it is now.”
This is and has been my point all during this election cycle.
People are so scared and so compliant that they can’t see the forest for the trees. The problem is who is behind the parties. The backers are the owners and they own it all - the whole game is rigged.
The key to Mr. Zinn’s article is: “But before and after those two minutes, our time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice.”
That’s it in a nutshell, isn’t it? If our ideal is to live in a democratic system, we must get involved. It can’t work without our involvement because then it isn’t a democracy. This is exactly what we’ve seen. Call it a democracy or a representative republic, we have neither. A plutocracy, theocracy, oligarchy - these are much more accurate. It is OUR fault that this has happened, and brow-beating each other because we vote for one or the other is like so much masturbation.
Vote for whomever you please, but before and after, get your ass out there and work for progressive values: Justice, peace, democratic principles, fairness, etc. That’s part of my list and what I work for.
Hopefully Obama will realize now that if he starts moving to the center, Nader will start picking up
those votes. I don’t think Zinn would have any second thoughts about voting for Nader.
For those of you who have never done so, it should be required reading to find a copy of Zinn’s
book “A Peoples History of The United States”.
Rickster says:
“Were does that leave Obama and Hillary? There record proves their conservatives. They have given the republicans every thing they’ve needed.”
I agree. But a lot of us are tired of 40 plus years of conservative and now fascist rule. I’m not a masochist. I’m tired and I can’t take it anymore. Like debunker says, people just don’t seem to care. I’ll be voting for Obama, the lesser evil dictator. For a kindler, gentler dictatorship.
Meanwhile, I’ll be working to get the Green Party and as many liberals into office as I can. And I’ll keep proposing solutions here like Senator Gravel’s National Initiative for (direct) Democracy, Incorporating We the People and ranting against overpopulation, extreme wealth and power concentration, theocrats, oligarchs, polluters, banks, corporations and other issues my main man Ralph Nader studiously describes.
ezeflyer,
My hat’s off to you.
How did Professor Zinn’s argument that the election charade is a way to sidetrack those who should be working on real issues degrade into an argument about which candidate to vote for?
I am working on single payer health care, legalization of medical marijuana, protection of our civil rights, against the war, and for Cynthia McKinney. That’s the grass roots organizing that may help society. (If we can overcome the corporations).
But I still like to drink, dance and party.
Why do we have to choose, debunker?
ezeflyer February 24th, 2008 4:34 pm
“But a lot of us are tired of 40 plus years of conservative and now fascist rule.”
That’s why you need to quit supporting the conservative leadership.
“I’ll be voting for Obama, the lesser evil dictator. For a kindler, gentler dictatorship.”
In other words don’t spank me master don’t spank me, instead of don’t whip me master don’t’ whip me. We need definite change, we need it real bad and none of the front-runners in either party is going to give it to us. If you haven’t learned by now that people following the lesser of two evils doesn’t work you’re probably not ever going to learn. Follow the lead of the MSM people and people like DK and Nader is never going to win. You’re all slaves to the same old thing.
The time for real change is now. People are in fact ready to act and be a part of something larger than themselves. The debunkers of this world know that real change is now possible and believe that their negative public relations can stop it. Sorry debunker, your century was last century. The currency of the future is creativity and change. The vision for the twenty first century has been in formation for a while now and is just gaining real traction. The acceleration will continue and the conservative old guard will crumble. The crumbling sound is easily heard and getting louder. The conservative star is badly tarnished and falling.
I am amazed that nobody so far has apparently gotten the gist of what Howard Zinn is trying to say. I will give my version:
There is absolutely nothing about our present situation that cannot be resolved if enough people make it their personal business to talk to enough other people (neighbors, coworkers, family, etc)and together demand change by changing their own conduct and spending priorities .
If you think about it briefly this is what the neocons and other imperialist appologists for capital did in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s with the result that we have a retarded couple of jack-asses occupying the presidency and vice presidency. They are supported by a cast of thousands of similarly mindless people in their administration and both houses of Congress.
The greater treachery is not what “the establishment” has done, but what “we the people” have allowed–mesmerized as we are by distracting media, and the pointless rituals of urban sprawl’s daily routine (eat,sleep, work, fight the daily commute, be distracted by media, and then grt up and do the same thing all over again the next day.)
The only reason things are the way they are is that “we” allow it not that “they” imposed it. Good writing Howard, when are you going to write another book?
Zinn can sound the clarion, make the call to arms, but it wont be acknowledged or even heard by public at large. ‘Things’ haven’t gotten bad enough, yet. Unless they get worse and worse at rate fast enough to get the attention of the contented and discontented a like, things wont change.
greenerthanthou February 24th, 2008 4:43 pm
“I am working on single payer health care, legalization of medical marijuana, protection of our civil rights, against the war, and for Cynthia McKinney.”
Screw medical marijuana end prohibition NOW. Outside of a small percentage of people medical marijuana is not going to help this country one bit. By the elimination of prohibition we eliminate the need for the police state and reduce violent crime by up to eighty percent. Nader wants to end prohibition.
rickster
You need to take your meds.
Deluding yourselves about what is likely to happen in the next election is nothing more than diversionist entertainment, similar to watching some brainless reality show on TV. Unless a new (to the U.S.A.) socialist political party is presented, then nothing has a chance of changing. In the end, regardless of hype or self-immolation, the Republican candidate is going to win the next election because the U.S.A. is the most racist nation in the world and they will never elect a black person as president so long as there is a white candidate.
Chances of your kid getting a good education in a public high school: 1 of 4
Chances that high school will require civics: 1 of zero.
Chances your kid won’t understand what’s going on within the power elites of this country by age 30: 1 of 10,000.
Chances anything will change substantively in this country in the next ten years: Priceless
“I am working on single payer health care, legalization of medical marijuana, protection of our civil rights, against the war, and for Cynthia McKinney. That’s the grass roots organizing that may help society. (If we can overcome the corporations).
But I still like to drink, dance and party.
Why do we have to choose, debunker?”
To understand why your question & premise are bad, greenerthanthou, you’d need to spend at least 7 to 10 years studying the works of McLuhan, Baudrillard, Postman, et al.
Try picking up Huxley’s “Brave New World” sometime. Contrary to what most educated people think, Huxley IS NOT SAYING what Orwell said in “1984.”
As Huxley sees it, we lead wretched and enslaved lives today not because of external coercion (Big Brother), not because of this bad guy or that bad entity. It is pleasure that has destroyed us. We’ve created a world in which every distraction and pleasure are at our fingertips. You name it: hundreds of TV channels, instant news, total information, soft and hard porn, iPods, iPhones, instantly downloadable tunes, YouTube videos, hot babes in thongs everywhere, etc etc. If we’re depressed we take Prozac. If we’re bored we turn the DVD on, or go shopping, or overeat.
Add to this situation the fact that electronic media have an imprisoning effect - we’re slaves to up to the nanosecond impressions. Everywhere there’s an ad for something, a product, a mirage.
Out of such a world you cannot have a serious politics. You cannot have intelligent, thoughtful people who care about truth and justice. You end up with a very mediocre society whose only bragging right is that it has succeeded in creating wealth.
We’ve had Chomsky/Zinn and their disciples yacking about “organizing” for 40 years now. Tell me, what significantly has changed? We spend half a trillion a year on the military. Our military is stationed everywhere on the globe. George Bush and Dick Cheney take the reins of the executive branch. A few corporations own about 95% of the media. I think their explanatory model is seriously flawed.
rickster, you’re right. And the Green Party is for decriminalization.
It’s just that I was listing what I’m actually working on right now. And my state has a bill to legalize medical marijuana, so that’s what we’re doing now.
debunker, I realize that people are distracted from politics by the mass media and other enticements.
But the whole monk thing has never worked either.
Humans, heck, all animals seek pleasure over pain. And not just over pain. We like pleasure.
You can’t really scold people into a better world.
Actually, the U.S.A. is going to be changed, in the near future, to such an extent that it will no longer be a sovereign country. The U.S.A. is nothing more than a criminal organization and, once they are suppressed, they will forever be remembered as the most vile nation in History, more so even than the Nazis. Anyone who does not have a sufficient understanding of History should do some reading and they will soon realize that evil empires, especially in this latter age, have a propensity to collapse at a phenomenal rate.
I’m not scolding at all. I’m merely saying that most people, including (especially) the types who post here, are completely in the dark about reality.
And liking pleasure has nothing to do with my point about the kind of Huxleyan world we’ve created, and how it prevents a rational, meaningful, Enlightenment-type society from ever developing.
greenerthanthou February 24th, 2008 5:50 pm
rickster, you’re right. And the Green Party is for decriminalization.
I’m not talking about decriminalization I’m talking about complete legalization.
I have no problem supporting medical MJ as per say but it’s not going to end the black market, violent crime and government corruption we have because of prohibition.
End prohibition and medical MJ is a mute point.
ezeflyer, you hit this nail squarely on the head! I am often accused of being ‘a liberal’ although my family has always been traditional conservatives, both socially and fiscally (In the past I was accused of being somewhere to the right of Attila-the-Hun).
I am still a traditional conservative - it’s just that this label has been co-opted by out-and-out fascists. (Sort of like Muslim = terrorist or ‘Christian’ is anything but…) There is no reason conservatives can’t be progressive (in fact, being regressive is hardly ‘conservative’) - we just want to look before we leap!
Here are some other John Kenneth Galbraith quotes that I think we should take into serious consideration as fascism continues to destroy our country:
“People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage.”
“We are accepting programmed death for the young and random slaughter for men and women of all ages. So it was in the first and second world wars, and is still so in Iraq. Civilised life, as it is called, is a great white tower celebrating human achievements, but at the top there is permanently a large black cloud. Human progress dominated by unimaginable cruelty and death… Mass slaughter has become the ultimate civilised achievement.” -John Kenneth Galbraith
Traditional conservatives are staunchly anti-war, although we fully support a strong defensive military force - limited by fiscal conservatism to the smallest size necessary to effectively defend our shores from any REAL threat (as opposed to imaginary foes). Ron Paul, although actually a libertarian, fully supports this stance.
Guess I’ll be voting for Ralph Nader - again. He is attractive because of his honesty and integrity as well as his anti-empire stance - foremost values to true conservatives, who view greed and conspicuous consumption as ugly distasteful VICES - not virtues.
Also, enlightened conservatives know that their own health, prosperity, and security are irrevocably tied to the fate of the poorest of any society. Overpopulation is the result of denying the lowest rungs of society the necessary security required to reduce their birth-rate - facts matter. There is nothing ‘conservative’ about ignoring or denying proven facts - such fatal dishonesty serves no one. But it is emblematic of fascism - corporate psychopaths (fascists) are inherently self-destructive. Hitler damned Germany for ‘failing’ him - the ultimate denial of reality that doomed the Nazis and may well doom us as well.
jmacneil February 24th, 2008 5:56 pm
“Actually, the U.S.A. is going to be changed, in the near future”
I agree and it’s going to happen because of your following statement.
“they will soon realize that evil empires, especially in this latter age, have a propensity to collapse at a phenomenal rate.”
Sounds kind of scary doesn’t it. I’m not afraid, kind of looking forward to it actually. Based on history it’s a form of evolution. I just hope every body I know and love lives through it.
WE’RE ON THE BRINK PEOPLE. Supporting the status quo isn’t going to stop it.
It makes one wonder if Nader is of sound mind, if he wants to take the risk of handing another election to the Repugs by running his impossible campaign. That would be quite a load to carry for most thinking people.
As some have said, to completely upset the present state of affairs would take direct and in many cases, fatal action by those who want fast change. We can start a list of volunteers for that mission anytime.
People that truly want to help our country should quit their useless trashing of the only ones that will be able to effect any change, which would be better that going on over the cliff.
The only reason that marijuana is illegal is because it is a more pleasurable, and safer, intoxicant than tobacco. The governments take in tens of billions of dollars annually from tobacco and if marijuana was legal the governments would lose that income because marijuana is so easy to grow that no one would need to go to a store to buy any marijuana, unless they were lazy.
If anyone legalizes the sale of tobacco, but outlaws the possession of marijuana, then they are more than hypocrites, they are criminal organizations. In some selected circumstances, such as when national security could be comprimised, it can be tolerated that a society adopt a temporary injunction against any product, but, in the long term, only a true adherence to human rights can be accepted.
You can’t really scold people into a better world.
In my opinion, the way so many on CommonDreams constantly insult and demean each other (if you look for it you’ll see it practically everywhere) is a manifestation of the system, of which we are a part, asserting itself. I’ve heard it said that a functional system serves its members whereas a dysfunctional system is served by its members. We’re “memebots,” part of a dysfunctional system, and we keep each other in line. Its as if the absence of Republicans makes us behave as Republicans to each other while seeing each other as Republicans.
With apologies to Iran , Pakistan , the sooner we attack these countries and any others who dare to challenge the American Empire and reduce the military to the thinness of Saran Wrap , the better . Do it slow with Obama/Clinton or really fast with McCain.
Like pulling off an adhesive bandage ; get it over with and vote McCain
That sure is funny! Especially since there isn’t going to be a U.S.A. in the future. McCain is nothing more than a steaming pile of stinky dogshit wrapped in a pale skin, and the election of that worthless A-hole will only accelerate the demise of the corrupt regime which is the U.S.A.. So, actually, I’d rather that McCain be elected before any other candidate. At least that way I know that the demise of the U.S.A. will occur faster than it would otherwise.
jmacneil February 24th, 2008 6:09 pm
The only reason that marijuana is illegal is because it is a more pleasurable, and safer, intoxicant than tobacco.
No that not right. The only reason MJ is illegal is because Mexican are lazy and Mexicans smoke MJ so MJ makes Mexican lazy. Funny thing I’ve never met a lazy Mexican. Well that’s not exactly right but that was the basic reasons why MJ was outlawed. Same thing with cocaine/blacks and opium/Chinese with he exception that white women were lured into use and being sexually abused by the races.
There was never any real reason to out law any of the drugs that could be used recreationally.
The lies still continue today.
You had better do some research if you want to reach a satisfactory understanding. Chase the money. Marijuana is illegal because it is competition. Period.
A vote for Nader or his Republican friends is a vote for Bush.
Debunker, either you’re right, or Zinn is.
If you’re right, then why bother discussing this kind of thing at all? Why not just say to hell with it and grab a beer and watch football? Why bother telling us that we have no chance to make a better world?
If Zinn is right, then talk to your neighbors, send letters to your local paper, send emails to your elected representatives, go to or organize protests, convince people to not join the military, and so on. And vote, even if it only takes two minutes to throw a lever, for who you think is the best candidate.
Yeah, there’s a difference between the New Deal and Vietnam eras. Things were worse then, in a number of ways. The Depression reigned during the New Deal, and the Draft reigned during Vietnam, so people’s lives were directly affected by what was going on. So they protested HARD. And it made a difference.
So we can keep on working to change things now, or we can wait until it gets even worse, which it will do if we just say to heck with it now.
“Voting is easy and marginally useful, but it is a poor substitute for democracy, which requires direct action by concerned citizens.”
Clear speaking from Zinn there. All true. Plus explicitly based on the central expression of the best values humanity has come up with so far: “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” - and that’s important. Benevolent reciprocity - “do unto others as you’d have them do to you” - is at the core of human interaction, no matter how much and many profiteering drinking-straws are inserted into these interactions – slurping the produce of human activity into too unequal distribution.
When criticizing, always mention the good alternative, in a proportion of at least twice the right to the wrong. Zinn’s good at that. We’re lucky to have an historian with such sharp, kind and practical attitudes, combined with vast specific knowledge of ignored history. These days, with greedy profiteering in charge, ignored history is the most fairness-minded egalitarian parts of the past. That usually means the most socialist trends, by any other name.
It could be the other way around, it could be the militaristic, greedy and grotesque parts of history that were downplayed. But it’s not, and that reveals which trends dominate now. Just like heavy, ingenious and personal violence all over the main entertainment media indirectly reveals and by necessity reflects what the controlling powers are up to. While entertaining excitement might just as easily – at least, and with less props – have been found in how much peaceful laughs and loving lessons we could construct, equally pertaining to the eternal everyday themes of Life, Sharing and Death.
«Election madness» functions as distraction from the substantial issues US and global democracies are facing, and even more so because it might – just might – serve to refocus societal attention on more important issues than elections. But as long as the central corporate media have hijacked the most efficient communication channels and means, it becomes important to insert recommendations at every opportunity for everyone to «Think yourself!» of how the world should work.
War and elections mostly serve as distractions from the paradisical eutopia the world is in many places and at many times. This eutopia of fair interaction, including the idea of it and how to keep it going, is what we need to push into the central attention of humanity.
If anyone votes in a corrupt system, then they are perpetuating the same corrupt system which is oppressing them. Telling people to vote in the system which is orchestrated in the U.S.A. is no different than telling them to jerk off. The pleasure will be immediate but transitory.
I simply want to reduce each and every corporation to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
Debunker: Young people do care. The importance of reaching the schools is very big indeed. I agree that there is a large mass that just wants to eat more and more, and I agree they are a problem, but the fervor for Obama, whether right or wrong does show that people care. Having said that, I think your post is extremely relevant and mostly true.
Recreational drugs were outlawed because Calvinists will not allow other people to enjoy what they believe should not be enjoyed.
Barely human: Exactly. The insults that have been hurled at me make me think exactly the same thing. I feel no need to insult people but others apparently do. It reminds me of behavior behind the wheel. We can say what we want and just scurry away.
voting for obama?? I would think again…..
http://www.nysun.com/article/71421
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27075
To debunker,
It is obvious from your postings that you are an intelligent and well read person. I believe you are the kind of person that Zinn would like to have help educate and agitate fellow citizens. You yourself have found a certain level of enlightenment to where you no longer need “soma” to get through life. If you made it out from the dormant state of being asleep, why not help others? Isn’t this one of the main reasons the Buddha is respected around the world? When the Buddha reached enlightenment under the Lotus tree, he could have kept his wisdom to himself. But he decided to share it with humanity, which is why he is also referred to as the “compassionate” one. Find the compassion inside you to help others. Please for the sake of your soul, do not drink anymore from the cup of nihilism.
Debunker: If people can not gamble, eat, drink and watch porn, yeah, that will concentrate their minds wonderfully and make them think. Why not? You are right about the American mentality, but being deprived makes you change quickly. There is some hope in the coming economical hard times. Some.
What does “not taking it anymore” look like? A vote for Obama or Clinton? Yeah, right.
Have you heard of:
SICK OF IT DAY? March 19th.
Can they come to your house and arrest you for staying home? Can they shoot you with rubber bullets, pepper spray or even taser you if they catch you in your back yard, taking a siesta on a work day? Can your boss fire you if on March 19th you have a migraine headache … all day long, even though it’s officially “SICK OF IT DAY”? Can they ship you off to Guantanamo Bay gulag because you told your friends all about “SICK OF IT DAY”? Is it yet illegal to be SICK OF IT?
http://www.sickofitday.org/
“HOW SICK OF IT ARE YOU?” http://www.counterpunch.org/ferner02202008.html
Ullem, I really liked your post.
Howard Zinn has brought out diehards on all sides, but perhaps that’s evidence of a great thinker. Nader has the same effect, bless his heart. I too will vote for him if Hillary manages to steal the nomination. Hey, is this a free country or not? How dare anyone tell me who I should vote for?
Regarding pleasures seekers: pleasure can be enjoyed in it’s place, as long as it isn’t used to replace other facets of life.
There’s a cool article about the popularity of Obama, and I agree with it. I have believed all along that Obama’s attraction is not so much his political position, which is to the right of mine, but his ability to energize people, to make them aware of their own power. They do have it, they need to know it and use it. Our dispirited electorate, the half who don’t vote, can change our political landscape and throw the rascals out. The only way they can stop us is a lockdown and I don’t know if they dare go that far (Bush notwithstanding). The author has stated my observations more fully than I have, and used more space than I am inclined to use in these posts. The link follows:
http://www.miamiherald.com/851/story/429279.html
kathyodat
John F. Butterfield,
Grover Norquist. A piece of slim if there ever was.
One thing about liberals, they sure can’t agree on anything that is workable. ( myself included )
Howard Zinn is one of the finest Americans that ever lived and has an impressive background as a life long progressive activist as well as a teacher. For those of you who haven’t read any of Professor Zinn’s books, I encourage you to do so. And if you’re still curious, Scroll down on the left side of the Common Dreams web site to Free Speech TV, click it and ask them if you can purchase the documentary on Professor Zinn. You’ll see what real courage is.
People, if you want change, you HAVE to take the chance and reject the status quo. By continually voting for and subscribing to the agenda of the lessor of two evils, guess what you wind up with?
Hank Fur,
You’re talking my language. It’s way overdue!
Nader? Are you guys nuts? That guy is a walking ego machine. Maybe Obama or Clinton can’t resolve the world’s problems, but Nader only makes them worse. He gave the Presidency to Bush over Gore. Wake up people!
Nader seems to want to hand it to the Republicans. They have put money in his campaign before, they are doing it again.
WAKE UP! Good grief. Nader has lost all credit for any good he did years ago. He is helping with the ruin by feeding his own damn ego. If he really wanted change, he would find another Green Party candidate to run.
But, no, he has to put himself in charge. Puke.
okiegal February 24th, 2008 8:59 pm
“He gave the Presidency to Bush over Gore.”
That’s been proven wrong and you know it.
Gore got beat cause he wouldn’t stand up and fight for it. If he had of stood up and fought people would have came out of the wood work. I remember when he ceded the election and I thought you little wimp. You want to blame someone for gore losing blame gore.
Ticonderoga,
You write,
“Debunker, either you’re right, or Zinn is.
“If you’re right, then why bother discussing this kind of thing at all? Why not just say to hell with it and grab a beer and watch football? Why bother telling us that we have no chance to make a better world?”
Good and fair questions which would require a long and thoughtful reply, which I cannot give here, unfortunately. But two points.
First, I do sign petitions and in the past have made an effort to call congressmen, etc. Anyone who is curious about things who asks for my input, I gladly give it to, but it has been my experience that most people — even (perhaps especially) educated people — aren’t curious, don’t value wisdom, and believe one idea is just as good as the next. Most people in America — possibly 97 in 100 — don’t like to be lectured at and tend to look upon politics the way sports enthusiasts look at sports.
But no, I think we are at a point in history where in humanistic terms we are looking backward, not forward. This whole media system that we’ve created destroys meaning and precludes effective citizen action. It benumbs, it stupefies. The changes coming in the future will be mega-technological. In another generation or two we may all be cyborgs or aliens of one kind or another.
Secondly, it IS STILL POSSIBLE to do something, but what we must do is change how we think and express ourselves. We must see the whole media/cultural system monistically and understand that the liberal humanism model — i.e., that of someone like Zinn or Chomsky — is deeply flawed and only serves the system. We must NOT communicate the way everybody else does. We must understand the nature of electronic media (for starters you can go read McLuhan’s “Understanding Media”) and realize that content today is dead, that discourse has lost its luster. Most educators, most editors, most writers have NO CLUE whatsoever about the psychic effects of media. They’re as clueless as bloggers.
If you and others renounced the various assumptions you have about the world, developed your own language and thought, and found a way to use your words and ideas to oppose the system, to undermine prevalent notions of things, that would be a very worthwhile endeavor. In any case it would be a very satisfying one.
There is no hope for a meaningful politics. You and everyone else are incarcerated: in the living room with the TV, in the study den with the PC, in a public space inhabited by ghosts, malls, and corporate chain stores.
There you have it. Do what you will with these thoughts.
Howard:
It is easy to ignore the election madness. If you realize as I’m sure you do, that both Osama and Hillary are but two wheels on the same cart, and that the horse remains the same, then ignoring their journey becomes easy.
Remove yourself from pseudo-intellectual circles, and then you shall, remove yourself from the madness.
Ramsay
To poet,Feb.24,2008,5:17P.M.
i agree with most of what you are saying,however, here are my points of view which differ from Mr. Zinn:
1- there were less people in the 30’s than now.
2-people in the 30’s had similar backgrounds,could understand their problems better, we are now a country with more than 250 nationalities and different priorities.
3-there was a unifying force that kept them together-hunger and the soup line- now we do not know what is wrong with the country,confusion was created since the early 60’s and now it is in full bloom.
4-the lessons learned by the robber barons,of the social fiasco benefitting the working class, had to be eliminated, there is no right to have a decent
job anymore.
5- in the 30’s people use the word of mouth, now we do not talk to one another, Orwell’s 1984.
Givepeace,
You write, “If you made it out from the dormant state of being asleep, why not help others?”
Short answer: because most people (in America, that is) are not interested in wisdom. Insight cannot compete with American Idol, the Sunday ball game, the young beautiful women in thongs you see on YouTube, the propaganda of network TV, the noise screaming out of the radio, the latest coolest movie, and so on.
As for Buddhism, I’ve always seen it (I know there are different sects) as mostly an individualistic religion. The Buddha was enlightened because he went off on his own, alone, and found the answers for himself.
You write, “Please for the sake of your soul, do not drink anymore from the cup of nihilism.” But what if nihilism is true? What if Friedrich Nietzsche saw the state of modern existence clearer and better than anyone else? We would be turning our back on the truth if we denied the negative state of things on the grounds that such a philosophy is “negative.”
Well, you certainly gave me a very interesting and imaginative response, debunker, but what it boils down to is that you’ve just said that there’s nothing we can do to make positive changes in society, for the very simple reason that the percentage of people in the country who can somehow magically transform their ways of thinking in the way that you describe is probably less than 5%. And you can’t change society with less than 5% of its members being able to contribute to the changing.
So it’s back to saying to heck with it all and grabbing a beer and watching football. Or not. It’s still up to us, as Zinn says, and I’d rather try than not.
And there’s one more reason why I think Zinn is right: the powers-that-be, the big corporations and the corrupt politicians, know full well that what they’re doing is destroying our civilization, even though they won’t admit it. They’re no more stupid than are the people on this site, and are, right now, trying to figure out a way to get themselves out of the mess they’ve created, without losing too much face (which means without losing too much money or too many votes) so what we really need to do is keep on telling them that we won’t buy what they have to sell, whether it’s products or lies or votes, until they get themselves (and us along with them) out of the mess they’ve created. And they will, because they know we’re right.
I guess that’s the best I can do with your thoughts.
Ticonderoga,
I appreciate your replies. What I reject, though, is your us-them dichotomy.
For all the bad talk about corporations, and I don’t object to it, don’t all of us use their products? Don’t we have big-screen TVs and the latest techno goodies? Don’t most of us over the age of 30 own stocks? Don’t many if not most of us work for a big corporation?
Is it the corporation’s fault if we as a society are drunk on hedonism? Does anybody make that young beauty strip into a thong and post a video on YouTube? Does anyone point a gun to the woman who poses for Playboy? Is it the corporation’s fault that WE CHOOSE to eat junk food, fill our minds with junk books and gossip, refuse to listen to those who are wise?
The fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves (Shakespeare).
Well, the “solemnity” may be appropriate for epic poetry, but the clichés sure as hell aren’t. Can you see Homer coming up with this vapid swill?
And what the hell do they mean by “change”?? Do we want “change”? Or is that all we’ll be left with after more “ownership society” crap.
“So it’s back to saying to heck with it all and grabbing a beer and watching football. Or not. It’s still up to us, as Zinn says, and I’d rather try than not.”
2 questions:
1. Isn’t that what most Americans do now? Say the hell with it?
2. I’m sure you’ve seen how hard it is for fellow liberals/leftists to agree on something. What makes you think that others are receptive to any kind of serious political message, especially in this day and age, with overworked people, with mass titillation, with people choosing to be separate from others?
To debunker:
You are correct in your analysis about the vast majority of people in America today. We have always had our “bread and circuses”. We have also had individuals who, on their own, have found enlightenment. The question still is what to do once you have reached that awakened state. The Buddha chose to help humanity and millions since have been awakened from their slumber. The masses will always need leaders. Be a “superman”. Towards the end of his life, even Nietzsche wrapped his arms around the neck of a whipped horse.
“The masses will always need leaders. Be a “superman”. Towards the end of his life, even Nietzsche wrapped his arms around the neck of a whipped horse.”
Someone like me needs great, rare minds from which to derive inspiration, but also people who are keen and interested enough to hear what I have to relay. I admit the truly great man — and Nietzsche surely was one, at least intellectually — is able to carry on without any inspiration or feedback at all. Looking into the abyss without blinking is how he put it.
It’s not completely either/or, debunker. There are big corporations and there are BIG corporations. And there are small businesses and people who are self-employed. And some of us have big screen TV’s and some of us have small screen TV’s and some of us don’t have TV’s at all. And some of us own stocks and some of us don’t. We’re all different, but we’re all in the same boat.
But is it our fault that we eat fast food and watch stupid TV shows and buy junk we don’t need? (What’s wrong with Playboy, though? Besides the beautiful women, the magazine often features good, and hard-hitting, political articles.) It is, partly, but we have been deliberately conditioned to think we need those things, and the conditioning hasn’t been done by ourselves. We have been trained/conditioned like dogs to think we want what “they” want us to want, and to think we should think the way “they” want us to think.
But we can want what we want, and we can think the way we want to think. And we can own TV’s and be more selective in what we watch. We can be more selective who we vote for. We can buy less junk. We can keep on keeping on, and write to our elected “leaders” and protest and not stop. And we can stop listening to people who tell us that there’s nothing we can do, because those are the people that “they” want us to listen to.
Goodnight, sir.
To debunker:
It is my guess that you have a fondness for Greek Literature. If you remember the story of Pandora’s Box, the only thing that remainded in the jar was hope. If ever a gift was given from the Gods, it was hope. When I feel the winds of change blowing, I will know you have looked into the abyss and have moved beyond good and evil. Good luck on your journey.
Ticon,
I’m not saying that everything is bad today. It surely isn’t. I think from the standpoint of meaning, of truth, things are very bad, and I don’t see an easy way out.
Perhaps it comes down to this: Is the cultural and media stream as a whole contaminated? Is the ecology of our culture any longer innocent or sacred? Have things changed to such an extent that there’s no way back to a meaningful, ideal era? Maybe McLuhan was right when he said people have a rear-view mentality, that they’re always thinking 20 or 30 years in the past and can’t see what’s plainly in front of them.
Givepeace,
Thanks for your comments. And just so you know, I made the “jenseits von Gut und Bose” (Nietzsche) leap a long time ago.
Poet
“The only reason things are the way they are is that “we” allow it not that “they” imposed it. Good writing Howard, when are you going to write another book?”
Yes! That’s what I’ve been saying too!
If this is a democracy, then the people rule. If the people won’t rule, then it ain’t a democracy.
Damn that Howard Zinn, he’s always stealing my ideas…
debunker February 24th, 2008 10:23 pm
“Don’t we have big-screen TVs and the latest techno goodies?”
Wish I knew somebody with a big screen TV then I could watch my three or four hours a week in style. Hell if it isn’t on the airways I can’t watch it. I think I get seven channels. If it wasn’t for PBS I probably wouldn’t even watch TV. I own a seven-year-old computer that I’m starting to have problems with. Luckily I know how to keep it ticking.
“Don’t most of us over the age of 30 own stocks?”
No most people don’t own stocks, we know the stock market is one of the biggest rip offs ever pulled on the American people. I know far more people who don’t own stocks than I know people who do. Most of us Americans spend our money on necessities not stock.
“Don’t many if not most of us work for a big corporation?”
No the big corporations don’t employ most of the people. For every person that works for the big corporations you can find ten or more who works for small business.
I actually work hard at staying away from corporate stores. Granted even the locally owned store sell products from the major corporations and I’m forced into supporting them in that way.
Given the fact that no third or fourth party candidate has any realistic chance of winning the presidency, any vote for one of them means that in a choice between two evils, the major parties, the greater evil usually wins, witness the 2000 election.
If anyone believes that there would have been no significant difference between a Gore Presidency for the past seven years or the disastrous Bush regime, I would like to know what he has been smoking or drinking. To my mind those who voted for Nader or Bush deserved what they got. The rest of us didn’t.
Nader’s decision to run again means far more harm than
good. Whatever good Nader did in earlier years is going to
be unremembered because of his egotistical belief that his
presidential runs are beneficial and not aiding and abetting disaster.
“To my mind those who voted for Nader or Bush deserved what they got. The rest of us didn’t.”
How do you people keep slithering into perfectly good discussions with your never-ending spew about Nader and those who supported him? What possible interest can it serve other than if you are Republican Party plants intending to disrupt and co-opt? I just can’t bring myself to believe that progressives are that regressive.
hmoon:
I don’t vote to win. I vote my conscience. If I voted to win, I’d not bother voting — and just let whoever win, win.
Think about it.
As for ego, how is it that the others have no ego? Come on, enough with the sound bites.
Yes, as Zinn says, there are better candidates this year, although not better in substance (maybe personality).
It’s also true, as he says, that the frontrunning Dem candidates both support the status quo. In fact, their voting records are nearly identical.
I guess I just don’t see a reason to split hairs. Clinton and Obama’s sameness on the issues is close enough to being “no difference” for me.
There is a reason to vote - just not for the Dems and Repugs. Build a third party.
debunker, thanks so much for your posts. As someone who has read McLuhan, Postman, Huxley, Bowers and others, I know full well the direction things are going, and the immensity of the challenge before us. I fundamentally believe voting is a farce, and that something more is necessary, yet I also see the vast forces that are arrayed against any changes in that direction. You are spot-on in many regards.
Yet I think Zinn is identifying the problem properly. What is necessary is direct action, direct involvement. Face to face involvement, unmediated by any technology and with a common collective metaphor to unite behind. The problem for the progressive movement is that the corporate powers, merged with the government in a fascist arrangement, have been vigorously attacking and defusing any collective progressive action for decades.
One of the major factors that differentiates the left from the right is the organizing power of the churches, particularly the Christian churches. One could argue that no other power has been so effective in putting the masses to sleep and distracting them from exercising their real power. That, and the 118 million prescriptions for anti-depressants in 2007. Not quite soma, but good enough.
And it has been my opinion for years that the internet is simply diffusing the energy of a real resistance, diverting it into channels that can: 1) be observed anonymously, 2) analyzed in a coherent manner, and 3) enabling the creation of techniques by ‘the powers that be’ to diffuse these energies and frustrate them into believing that nothing can be done, in order to divide and paralyze them.
So again, it gets down to what can be done? Frankly, I don’t know, but such a system as exists cannot last for long. The seeds of its own destruction are built-in, and I seriously doubt they can be delayed much longer. Probably it will be external forces that will break the back of the system, so to speak, much like the Nazi’s in WWII. - The rest of the world is starting to clue into the fact that the US will be perfectly happy to destroy the entire planet, if need be. I have to think that there are greater powers who will stop this from happening. If not, we will all go back to the stone age, and start all over again.
Well put by a long standing Sage of our American democratic tradition. However, I think Prof. Zinn could do a little more in terms of endorsing a candidate..even if he were to endorse Nader we would atleast have his well-respected opinion to grapple with. My suspicions is that he will vote for Obama..but after all, the point of his article is to get us to be more self-reliant (don’t forget the older sage of Concord, Emerson, whom Nietzsche read and got most of his ideas from…I noticed to posters speaking admirably of the German nihilist..why not first be proud of our own intellectual traditions?!) So it doesn’t matter for those of us who have an insight into the over-soul as to which way Howard Zinn votes..but for all those undecided, lost souls..perhaps a Howard Zinn endorsement would help the chances of the candidate with the greatest possibilities for amelioration.
nader a great mind
BUT too sad to represent us in gloomy present.
the willful blinded populace applauds the
rabid wolf/ves after the white house We prefer to applaud dishonorable men who represent our corrupt values
we the masses must change our principles
and be less gullible this time.
War designers are ready to give hillary a midnight call with a war script
and she will be ready.
meaning?
Greenpeace, you’re right: without hope we’ll give up, and if we give up, we’ll lose. Guaranteed.
Culicomorpha,
A lot of people seem to think we still live in the era of nation-states. The system is globalized, so that it’s not accurate to speak of the U.S. as a lone rogue power whose reign is about to end. The rest of the world’s powers — China, Japan, Europe — still have a great stake in America’s prosperity. The economic system is inter-dependent and inter-connected.
Secondly, people like Zinn and Chomsky never bother to explain what an “organizing moment” looks like. When’s the last time you tried talking politics with your neighborhood grocer, your pharmacist, the taxicab driver, or an in-law? Haven’t you noticed that they’re nowhere near as serious about politics as Zinn and Chomsky? They speak loosely about liking this guy or that guy, or express contempt for George Bush, or offer up platitudes. Members of my own family voted for George Bush, are staunchly “pro-life,” and read Ann Coulter! I can’t even have a conversation with these creeps! So all this talk about “organizing” rings very hollow to me, to say the least.
Or take a look at the comments on this thread. Some are intelligent, some silly, but most diverge rather than converge on various interests and themes. Can you imagine trying to organize the people just on this thread toward a common cause?
Radical,
It’s true Nietzsche admired Emerson and even got a few ideas from him, but it’s incorrect to say he got “most of his ideas” from him. Other people, like Schopenhauer and Wagner, influenced his thinking as much or more.
Rick,
Roughly 50% of American households have some investment in stocks/bonds. A great chunk of that percentage is IRA & 401(k) accounts.
Even if you yourself are able to lead an abstemious and largely media-free existence, 98% of Americans cannot. Most are imprisoned in their living room (TV), their study den (PC), and are also attached to electronic-techno devices (iPhones, iPods, etc.).
Debunker, the media has always been contaminated, the only thing to question is exactly how contaminated it is. And our culture has never been pure or sacred. No culture has, for the very simple reason that cultures consist of people and their ideas, and people are neither pure nor sacred. And there never was an ideal era, at least not in the real world.
I’m seeing an incongruity here: you’ve been talking about going into the future and doing things differently, although you haven’t actually explained what you mean by this in any sort of concrete way, but what you use to base your ideas on, Nietzsche and his Beyond Good and Evil, are from a long-ago time that was vastly dissimilar to ours. So you’re going back in time to find a way to head into the future, thereby somehow proving that Zinn is wrong, and in your future there’s nothing we can do to avert the upcoming catastrophe.
Isn’t this exactly what Bush and Co. have done to us all, only with God and the Bible and Armaggeddon, instead of with Nietzsche and Beyond Good and Evil? Telling us that an old book proves that the world is coming to an end and we can’t do anything about it? Isn’t it?
One other thought.
In the weeks and months following the Iraq war, literally millions of America protested in hundreds of cities nationwide. Indeed, millions more protested in European cities. All this protesting didn’t stop the war, did it?
I think a lot of people already know what’s going on in the world. They don’t need to be told that American foreign policy is imperialistic, or that the two political parties are the same, etc. The issue may be less one of spreading knowledge than taking the next step and storming the Capitol Building and White House.
Why don’t people rebel violently like that?
Perhaps because they LIKE the existence they lead. They like their house, their SUV, all the junk food they consume, TV/Internet/radio, the vacation they take a couple of times a year. This media-money system is actually congenial to them.
This is a point with which a thinker like Chomsky doesn’t come to terms. It would force him to question whether people really are cast from the Enlightenment mold.
Ticon,
You write, “…people are neither pure nor sacred. And there never was an ideal era, at least not in the real world.”
True, but no previous era had upwards of a thousand televison channels; living rooms & bedrooms bedecked with TV sets; the World Wide Web with its billions of web sites; overproduction and overcapacity, such as the kind you see in bookstores and movie rental stores; endless entertainment, and so on. This mediatized world exerts an enormous, perhaps incomprehensible, influence on our collective psyche.
My point of departure is less Nietzsche and more McLuhan, Baudrillard, and Postman.
Go find Thomas de Zengotita’s “The Numbing of the American Mind” on the Internet. It touches very well on some of what I’m saying.
culic: “So again, it gets down to what can be done?”
The FIRST & BEST THING is to realize that not everything is bad about our world. Leftists as a group tend to be too serious and uptight.
– Right now, as I type, a 20-year-old is getting laid for the first time. Who knows, maybe he’s doing it with a hot babe, and her pink lacy underwear is wrapped around his neck.
– A CEO has just written a check for $10 million to a new art gallery.
– Someone is emailing a friend a YouTube link of Howard Zinn talking about American history.
– A chemist has found a gene that is implicated in coronary heart disease, which means a revolutionary new treatment may be available within 5 years.
– A couple of Stanford University students have come up with a new web application that will bank them millions of dollars.
And so on. Might it be that if you’re angry or depressed something may not be right in YOUR life?
Yeah, its a high tech dark age we have here, but there is much beauty in this mean old world at the same time. Where to strike the balance, with dawn in your eyes, your feet on the tomorrow road with peace turning wi