Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiAmerica's Elephant In The Room
The second most astonishing thing about American politics is that John McCain and Sarah Palin have a respectable chance of winning the White House in 2008. (Or, for that matter, that any Republican could have a shot at any office for which the Democratic candidate hasn't suddenly died on the stump.)
Yeah, yeah, I know. Barack Obama has a funny name. He's relatively young and inexperienced. Oh, and - have you heard? - he's also black. But, just the same, I mean, c'mon. A Republican could win the presidency in 2008? You gotta be kidding, right?
All of this is deeply related, in multiple ways, to what is without a doubt absolutely the first most astonishing fact of American politics. And that is that conservatism (I prefer to call them ‘regressives') isn't the most repudiated ideology this side of cannibalism. And that regressive practitioners of this hateful disease masquerading as a political philosophy haven't been tarred-and-feathered, hung, drawn and quartered, then run out of town on an electrified rail. And that any red-blooded American wouldn't infinitely prefer in this day and age to be called a pedophile, a terrorist or a European - heck, or all of the above combined - rather than a conservative.
I mean, seriously, people. Now that Wall Street has imploded, potentially taking down with it the entire global economy in a fun reprise of the 1930s, what more could possibly be necessary to repudiate a set of ideas for which a good day is when thousands of people don't die (again) as a result of anyone, let alone the world's sole superpower, subscribing to something so astonishingly stupid? Really, is there anything that the regressive agenda has touched so far that hasn't completely turned into a pillar of salt? Not only do these nice pious Christians show every evidence of actually being the antichrist, they've also managed to be the anti-Midas as well.
The scope of the destruction is breathtaking to gaze upon. The rapidity with which American affluence and power and respect and responsibility were converted into their opposite numbers is mind-boggling. But the most astonishing thing of all is the absence of repudiation. Not from subscribers, of course. That army of clones was so existentially terrorized in their impressionable years by some toxic stew of religion, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-communism and/or some other forms of anti-otherism - along with a sinking economic status - that their cold, stiff fingers will never be pried from the politics of guns, gays and god. Especially now, when they can also add to their fears the blame for being so spectacularly wrong about everything imaginable these last decades. Who would want to own that?
But what about the rest
of us? What, indeed. We still live in an America where almost
nobody dares call themselves a liberal. But what's even more
bizarre - and I mean like watching-a-Twilight-Zone-
But I digress. What is conservatism, and how should it be regarded? Like any ideology, it has lots of flavors and sub-cults, many of which don't necessarily get along with each other, and certainly don't agree on which conservative projects should be given priority at any given time. All the same, I think we can boil the ideology down to a few key concepts - indeed, ones that even our regressive friends would agree accurately represent the ideological program.
Traditionally, well... tradition has been key, as a matter of fact. One key tenet of conservatism is to avoid change. Reactionaries go even further, preferring the (typically heavily mythologized) world that grandpa inhabited. Economically, conservatism is all about low taxes, low government spending (except when it comes to cops and bombs), balanced budgets, low regulation of the private sector and privatization of any service which might otherwise be provided by the government.
This is why conservatives love to describe themselves as the ideology which maximizes freedom, but this turns out - shockingly, I know - to be a lie. Indeed, it first turns out to be a lie because in practice supposedly conservative governments break most of their own economic rules catalogued above. Saint Ronald The Reagan quadrupled the national debt by irresponsibly slashing tax revenue (especially for the rich) and massively increasing spending. Before he sold out the country for his own career aspirations, George H. W. Bush described that formula as "voodoo economics". He ought to know. His voodoo spawn was not to be outdone by any White House predecessor. Or even all of them. Lil' Bush has followed an irradiated version of the same formula as Uncle Ron and has now doubled all the national debt which was incurred by his 42 predecessors. Combined. Very ‘conservative', eh?
But the even bigger lie is that the supposed ideology of freedom from government doesn't even pretend to extend outside of the economic sphere. Ladies, would you like to control your own bodies? Better try another ideology. Real conservatives don't even want you to have access to birth control or divorce, let alone abortion. Want the freedom to decide who you can sleep with, what you can do in bed (even if you're a married hetero couple), and who you can marry? Oops, you stumbled into the wrong philosophy, brother. And don't even get me started on substances of various sorts one might choose to imbibe, even to stay alive while undergoing chemotherapy. Freedom? Guess again. Unless of course you mean the freedom to live the life prescribed for you (but not themselves) by the likes of Jerry Falwell, Mark Foley, Larry Craig or Newt Gingrich, based on their selective misinterpretations of some obscure text written by hermit politicians 4,000 years ago in the Palestinian desert. (Where people are still fighting over ownership of the sand to this very day - hey, let's follow that model!)
Lastly, conservatism means hawkish aggression in the face of potential threat, real or imagined. Abroad, that translates into sending in the Marines or small nuclear devices to deal with pesky former clients who've now gotten a little uppity in their ambitions. Domestically, that means lots of cops, lots of judges, lots of jails and lots of electric chairs (but only for little people, of course, who can't afford good lawyers).
So that's the formula - and, again, I doubt even conservatives would dispute this rendering: traditionalism, the pretense of small government in the economic sphere, big government in the social domain, big stick abroad and on the streets.
But here's the part that they won't admit to, despite the fact that it is inescapably true. Indeed, precisely because it is true, and because of where it leads. And that's this: This is an ideology that has been tested. Nobody can say that George W. Bush, or his cronies in Congress or his enablers on the Supreme Court have pulled any punches these last eight miserable years. But the truth is, it runs a lot deeper than even that. With the exception of Bill Clinton's moderately and sporadically progressive social policies, it's actually been a solid thirty years of conservative politics in America, including Clinton's economic policies, which were indistinguishable from anything you'd get out of Wall Street or off the GOP convention platform of any given year. Ever since Reagan, and in some ways even back to Carter, Washington has been all about implementing a conservative agenda of tax cuts, deregulation and privatization, unraveling feminism, gay rights, civil rights and the Constitution, along with interventions abroad and mass incarcerations at home. In short, it would take an obscene distortion of truth - of which regressives have so often shown themselves singularly capable - to argue other than that we've had a very thorough and robust test of the ideology these last decades, and especially under George W. Bush.
So, hey, how's it all turned out? Can you say "unmitigated disaster"? Not even John McCain, who nowadays will say anything, argues that we're better off than we were four years ago. He, of course, neglects to mention the degree to which he's been part of the problem, and now even seeks to extend it another four or eight years.
Let's start with national security. The "grown-ups" who were supposed to come to town and show Clinton Democrats how to do government right were so obsessed with their little pet Iraqi project that they were asleep at the switch (if not behind the wheel) during America's worst national security crisis ever. Then they went to war against the supposed perpetrator of that crime in Afghanistan, until they got bored with it all and sent the troops to Iraq instead. The upshot has been two endless wars completely un-won seven years later (at least one of which was also completely unnecessary), a broken American military, global hatred toward the US, massive ‘defense' spending equal to more than that of every other country in the entire world combined, and a polarized and deceived public at home. Quite a score-card, eh?
It gets better. At home, the highest national surplus ever was rapidly turned into the greatest national deficit ever, adding and compounding now to nearly $10 trillion in debt (and rapidly rising), twice what it was (then falling) when the Little Bush came to Warshington. That's $66,666 (hey, don't all those sixes mean the devil is nearby?) per taxpayer, for those of you keeping score at home. If Bush's massive tax transfers (commonly but erroneously referred to as cuts) are continued, as McCain vows to do, that number will explode even more than it will still be mushrooming anyway without them. Meanwhile, the dollar is lower in value than ever, the trade deficit is astronomical, inflation is rising behind gas and food prices climbing off the charts, and a steady diet of regressive deregulation has jeopardized the entire global economy, requiring taxpayers to ante up another trillion bucks to rescue us from the depredations of the robber baron elites, whose vision of capitalism - abetted by their cronies in government - is that all profits go to them and all risks go to stupid regular people.
What a great economic record, eh? Since the 1970s, when the right side came to bat, polarization of wealth in America has increased to banana republic proportions. The rich now account for half of the income in this country - up from one-third during the liberal period of the 1930s through the 1960s - and the middle class has actually lost ground, despite an economy that has been fairly steadily growing over the last decades. It ain't rocket science, folks. Cut the legs off of unions, apply pressure to workers to keep them too frightened to organize, globalize jobs abroad and reward their export with tax incentives, change the structure of the tax system to favor the rich - guess what's going to happen? Guess what has happened? Of course, it hasn't hurt to also throw in a few scary foreign boogeyman monsters, racism, homophobia and some other nifty tricks to keep voters distracted long enough to loot their wallets.
The record outside of foreign and economic policy is hardly any better. Healthcare in America is a disaster, made worse by another eight years of standing by watching conditions deteriorate, and letting a sexually-obsessed American Taliban dictate policy on stem-cell research and anything else even remotely related to genitalia and other evil things. That whole idea of using government to reward cronies and political stormtroopers turns out to have worked just about as well as it did back in the nineteenth century - before we abandoned it the first time - as Heckuvajob Brownie so well demonstrated during Katrina. And won't history be kind to the regressive right for denying that global warming was a massive threat to humanity, and then blocking solutions once it became undeniable that it was? Or attempting to destroy the International Criminal Court (hmm, wonder why?). And so on, and so on...
These are the reasons, altogether, that Bush is the most widely reviled president ever seen in polling data, and that many notable historians have abandoned their traditional reluctance to weigh in on any subject that isn't half a century old and have gone ahead and declared the Bush presidency the worst in over 200 years of American history. But we need to remember that Bush, of course, is only the most visible manifestation of an entire regressive movement, which is as completely predatory as it is patently a failure.
So the real question is, how come ‘conservative' isn't a dirty word today, a label that any politician outside of Mississippi would run from as if it were the Ebola virus? The answer, I think, has principally to do with marketing, and also with the will and motives of the so-called opposition party. I remember George Bush the Elder, carrier of the demon seed, mercilessly hammering the hapless Mike Dukakis across the 1988 campaign as "a liberal", spitting the word out as if it was the worst epithet imaginable. Week after week, Dukakis said nothing, as his poll number slid into the basement, missing the obvious retort of "If you mean someone who favors Social Security, Medicare, school loans, the GI Bill, civil rights, equality for women, protection of free speech and the Constitution - then, yeah, hell yes I'm a liberal!" Week after week he was silent, that is, until finally I saw him do it live, with my very own eyes. He copped to being a liberal. On the very last day of the campaign. In San Francisco, no less. Brilliant.
What's happened is that the regressive right has been wildly successful at one of the only two things they're good at (the other being theft), which is marketing lies. The Atwater/Rove/Schmidt machine is fairly brilliant at using fear, smear and queer to turn night into day, black into white, Palin into Truman. Nowhere does this show up so clearly as in the contrast between policy preferences and the ideological self-definition of voters. On issue after issue - yes, even including guns, gays and taxes - Americans definitively line up in favor of liberal positions, often by huge gaps. They want national healthcare, they want regulation of guns, they support equality for women and gays, they oppose ‘free trade', they favor government steps to ameliorate the polarization of wealth in America, they want to protect the environment, they approve ‘big government' providing more services, they want the minimum wage raised, they support stem-cell research and massively oppose Terri Schiavo-type government interventions into personal morality, they strongly support abortion rights and oppose repealing Roe by a two-to-one ratio. Nowadays, they're even giving up on the death penalty.
But then these same people have, over the last thirty years or so, self-identified as conservatives to the tune of about 30 percent of the population, versus liberal on the order of about 20 percent. And while there are decent arguments to be made that the public doesn't understand ideological labels as well as they might, or that the other 25 percent or so calling themselves moderates are really liberals, the more important point has to do with marketing success. Who in America wants to be labeled a ‘liberal' today? It's still a dirty word, even though all its policy prescriptions are widely held, and even though conservatism has been monstrously and emphatically disastrous. This is the product of a marketing coup of first proportions, a stunning Madison Avenue success at, well, putting lipstick on a pig. You could see it, most recently, at the Republican Convention last month, where neither George Bush nor Dick Cheney nor even the word Republican were anywhere to be found, and yet people bought into loads of the claptrap about Sarah Palin. Democrats would have been hopeless and morose with a hand like the one Republicans have dealt themselves in 2008. The GOP, on the other hand - them boys know how to peddle soap, man.
Meanwhile, the Dukakis tradition, well preserved by the likes of Gore in 2000 and John Kerry and still somewhat by Barack Obama today, continues to illustrate one of the few things a conservative ever got right - namely, Edmund Burke's oft-quoted observation that all that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. But there's good and then there's good. As another famous old quip notes, many progressives during the New Deal era came to Washington to do good and stayed to do well. One reason that regressivism has been so miraculously successful as a set of politics while being simultaneously so disastrous as policy is surely because of Democratic cowardice. But, just as surely, another is because far too many donkeys are nearly as bought into the corporate predatory nexus as are the elephants (and I don't mean Babar).
Why does this all matter? Well, for the same reason that eight years of Bush/Cheney matters, and that the very real prospect of a McCain presidency followed by a Palin presidency matters. Political battles are half-won or lost, in advance, by the framing and labeling which precede the actual contests. The right understands this so well, which is why, among other of their successes, liberal is a dirty word, and the press has been successfully labeled with a liberal bias. Progressives - or at least Democrats - are clueless about this stuff. They've never worked on Madison Avenue. They've never been driven by a rapacious ambition toward infantile self-aggrandizement. They've never had to sell gold-plated cappuccino machines or Hummers to idiot consumers just itching to depart with their own money in order to salve their raging insecurities. No wonder they can't win elections.
It's astonishing, if you think about it - how much can be sold on the basis of so little substance. Put it this way: I'd be willing to bet there isn't a day that doesn't go by in which Karl Rove doesn't salivate all over his Dockers, dreaming of the kind of empire he could build if he had the material progressives have to work with. An angry public, policy agreement on virtually every issue in the public sphere, a hated government powerfully representing the opposing ideology. What more could you want? It's true, conservative voters are incredibly susceptible to fear-based political appeals, and tend to have the critical analytical faculties of a pile of rocks. Still, it's been a very long time since the cards were stacked so heavily in favor of a progressive tsunami in America, and the right knows it. And they alternate between sheer astonishment and giddy joy as they contemplate the utter inability of progressives to pick up that ball and run with it.
Those, like Rove, in the regressive controlling class cannot believe their good fortune in not being completely chased from the field of play, as if they were transsexual Nazi pedophiles advocating for the national agenda a confiscation of all private property and America being annexed as a province of Bolivia. "Goddam, I'm good" Rove tells the guy in the mirror each morning as he shaves, I can assure you. And he's (very) right, I can also assure you, provided you take the talented meaning of the word ‘good', not the moral one.
But imagine if progressives were half as good, especially with all the material they now have to work with.
They could be the chemotherapy for the country's conservative cancer we've so badly needed for so long now. Instead of an America on life support, we could once again be a healthy polity, growing and thriving.
And the regressive disease could be banished from the body politic forever.
58 Comments so far
Show AllMaybe we aren't giving the right-wing enough credit. Slowly but surely, they have taken the reins on a central US issue: poverty. They own the discussion. Progressives today simply don't see this elephant in the room. There are no calls for economic morality, much less for basic human compassion. (The poor did exist for a moment following Hurricane Katrina, when it was politically useful to mention it.)
Maybe the Reagan Revolution was actually an outstanding success, and America no longer has real poverty. Sure, we have "the working poor", but not the outright destitute, those who can't even look forward to buying food on payday. After all, this is the first time in the very long history of America's Progressives that there is no acknowledgment of anyone poorer than "working poor" --- and that's a remarkable improvement!
I was a bit concerned about the impact of the almost-instant creation of a massive workforce of very desperate people, ready and willing to work for anything. There weren't enough jobs, or childcare, no transportation
for the rural poor. Our welfare reform stipulated that NO excuse was acceptable for failure to work, which was a problem for the very ill (note: it now takes as long as 5 years, from the date that one applies for disability benefits to receipt of the first disability check -- which well-exceeds the length of time anyone is permitted to receive any type of welfare benefits).
But I guess things worked out for everyone very well. It has been a decade since these policies were enacted, and if they had caused any real suffering, surely we would have heard about it, right?
Or maybe not. The political right hit the left in its most vulnerable spot -- pride. Those who care about the poor were ridiculed as "namby-pamby liberals", and it worked. Too bad, because in ending this discussion, they have failed to see how tearing out the foundation (primarily to create a super cheap/no rights workforce) has acted like a vacuum, wiping away unions and workers' protections, suppressing wages, and rapidly pulling the middle class down.
After eight years of Bush one might think even a dead Democrat would win in a cakewalk, but this election is a dead heat. The reason is that we the voters have a choice between a Republican McCain and a Republican Obama, take your choice! The Democrats have lost any appeal they might have had by their complicit and cowardly actions in the Legislature these past eight years, they are simply not a real choice for any thinking voter.
It is blatantly obvious that any moderate or progressive voter has only the choice of voting for Nader, McKinney or compromising her common sense and voting for the status quo.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
You left out race as an issue. Why?
Vote for Nader, get McCain.
True.
A sizeable portion of the American population cannot (even if they wanted to) vote for a Democrat because of abortion. They'll go Republican, complicitly approving the destruction of the nation, until as much money as possible is put into the private accounts of the top 1 percent (It'll trickle down anyway, they'll say and be told.) These top top Republicans will clamp down on their prey until they finally let the American people fall limp and lifeless from their bloody jaws. At least the hatred that the Republican positions foster in the world may help end terrorism when we lose our financial ability to be an imperialistic nation.
Elephant in the room?!?
That explains a lot ... I wondered why the stage at the St. Paul convention was littered with massive, steaming piles of dung.
Hey Folks, if you want to reply to a comment, please click on the word "reply" that appears under the same post. That way everybody would clearly see what you are replying to. Thanks
My Gosh! This is the best definition of conservatism that I have ever read, currently practiced by the Right Wing cabal in the United States.
This is a fantastic article, but Mr Green did not say much about the people. There are always two sides to an equation, like seller and buyer, supply and demand, etc. When you can fool all of the people all of the time, there must be something terribly wrong with the people. The Republican politicians could never get away with the shit they’ve been doing here in Europe, or in any other country for that matter, unless they first declared dictatorship.
Also not mentioned in the article is the fact that there’s a huge difference between democrats (the people), and the “Democratic” Party. Democratic Party is a misnomer. Currently there’s not much difference between the Republicans and Democrats in the Congress. At worst, they are one and the same; at best the so-called Democratic Party members are enablers of the Republicans.
Winning an election is not vitally important to these Democratic politicians because they’re almost sure that they would be re-elected by campaign money thrown in by special interests (AIPAC, etc.), so why bother? Which brings us to the fact that we do not have a real opposition party. The Congress pack of card is rigged. The only remedy is to change the system, by whatever means appropriate.
I agree that many people are fooled, while many are not. The fact that the people who comment on commondreams show that there are people who do pay attention. The whole system is corrupted. Every once in a while you get a congressman who will not be compromised, like Wellstone (murdered) and Kucinich (marginalized).
Change the system is necessary. I feel it's time, past due, to break up the country (empire). Let's see some states secede.
I'd like to say one thing about conservatism. They DO NOT LIKE BALANCED BUDGETS - they like deficits. In fact, in BC when the neo-Liberal (read conservative for this discussion) government came to power after three balanced budgets in a row by the left NDP they artificially created a massive deficit with a tax writeoff to a group of wealthy supporters. This gave the government the classical excuse of "oh, sorry, no money for health care and education!". This is what they always do. They only know how to operate government on a deficit. If they have too much money they have no idea how to spend it responsibly because they are so NARROW MINDED!!! Look at the US economy with a deficit that is infinite at this point and brought to us all by conservative, right wing ideologues who believe in dog eat dog and the death penalty. Not nice and not sustainable.
Ralph Nader for president.
I know, he can't win because the democrats (and republicans) use fear instead of issues to herd their supporters to the slaughter house.
The 'presidential' debates today? A joke.
Real issues discussed? O
Who will I be voting for. Someone who I can believe in.
Lesser evilism isn't corrupt because you get a president who is not as bad as the other guy. Lesser evilism is corrupt because you get a candidate who doesn't meet the minimum necessary standards to conduct a country that values peace and justice.
Don't support the corporate elite or their candidates.
Vote third party, vote Nader, Vote Green.
www.NoeOneMore.US
Why? I don't understand what it would accomplish?
Dear American friends! Prepare yourself for the following:
1. Stolen election - Republicans win;
2. Old man McCain falls off the perch sometime shortly after the win;
3. Pin-up bimbo is sworn in as your Prez;
4. Holy war on Iran;
5. Unholy but necessary war on Russia; and
6. Nazi-Germany style death... by China/India/some Latin American countries; and
7. After a lot of agony: a new world order with new leaders and you lot - well, looked after by the new leaders of the world.
It'll be a hell of a ride for all of us, but you'll be the worst off from every country. Brace yourselves.
Unless, of course:
1. You unite behind a quasi-progressiv president Obama;
2. Leave all your theatres of war (enough theatre already!!!);
3. Reorganize your economic system;
4. Try to live in the real world, not reality-world;
5. Learn about the world you live in: see the world, get interested in all of us non-USAmericans; and
6. Give up your fanatical religious beliefs!!!
I've been trying to fight this thing for over twenty years. At this point, I'm 55 years old, unmarried, and just want to continue caring for my older dogs and cat. After that, this whole "sucker" can explode (there's a large depleted uranium munitions plant nearby) and I'll have lived a good life. At least I can look myself in the mirror as being someone who tried to change things for the better. Maybe that's all any of us can hope for. Most people around here are self-interested regressives if they are older, and just interested in satisfying their private parts if they're younger. In the nearly 15 years I've lived in this area, with only a couple of exceptions, every time I've gotten into a discussion with someone they've turned out to be an ignorant racist warmonger at heart. Perhaps they deserve to die. But my two dogs and cat don't. At least not yet.
Hey orcan!
I am a 62 year old health professional, unmarried with 2 cats. I work for a self-interested regressive and his wife, a situation at times that is nearly unbearable. I am a progressive who understands the seriousness of the economy, environment and social justice issues. I did not support Hillary for president, and am not mad about a woman not being chosen to be the Democratic candidate. I think she is immensely capable, but I have a trust issue with her. I have the same trust issue with McCain and now a common sense one as well. I will vote for Obama; he is a critical thinker, cautious and thoughtful analyzer of issues, an intelligent communicator who will seek out resources and remedies to help correct the last 8 years of disastrous mistakes. I must hope for that, because there is no other way at the present time.
My point is, I'm a little miffed that individuals and groups in the media characterize age range or sex as a basis for labeling one's leanings or opinions.
I agree that the root of the problem is ignorance and short sightedness. Those underdeveloped folks cannot even imagine that "the Other" is oneself. The Golden Rule is answered with a "yeah, but..." excuse, and the war begins. As long as their overconsumption addiction is not denied them, the attitude of "I got mine, let the Devil take the hindmost" will continue to devalue our society. Well, and why not? We had such a great example given to us by Rove/Bush/Cheney who made sure that they and their friends at the top raked in as much as possible.
Two party system - ineffectual and too similar. Idea: no more electoral college. Promote all parties, each citizen 1 vote. First primary election includes all party candidates for president. Next primary, the top three. Then the final vote. I hear people saying it would be too costly.....yeah, and the cost of two idiotic wars, the meltdown of our economy and the subsequent bailout? Duh....
And something has to be done about insuring verifiable honest elections.
I'm with you orcan....I don't need to be rich, but I sure don't want to be robbed either. Would our own ignorance to these problems be bliss? Go hide in a cave somewhere, no TV or radio or newspapers? If McCain/Palin are elected, a cave might be the place to live.
Your spelling of "theatre" is a clue. Where are you on the globe? (I spell it theatre,too and I like to spell the veggie, potatoe. While I like your ideas, I would like to point out, you could be making the same mistake many Americans make about folks around the world, "give up your fanatical religious beliefs". You imply it's the whole of the US. Not so.
They just make a lot of noise. And cut into right to chose, etc.
Some interesting predictions and solutions. Ten Bucks the first never materializes the way you see it. For your solution? I agree with #2. For the rest of it; misguided. My advice. Quit hoping for Armageddon. It's bad business for all.
toad_goddess: Thank you. I agree 100%.
Peaceout.
Why would the war on Russia be unholy? It's full of atheists and Russian Orthodox Christians...which I'm sure Palin's cult views as not Christian. Thus, it'd be holy :-)
Teamplayermania is behind why so many people are too cowardly to call themselves liberal.
As a society, we've so completely bought into the teamplayer ethos that virtually no one is willing to stand up anymore and say anything but the party line.
Being a teamplayer means going along with the program. It's just like patriotism has been redefined to mean agreeing with everything the President says.
Too many Americans are so snow-jobbed with these things that they are completely clueless when it comes to common sense.
John Andersen
http://www.unconventionalideas.com
While I would never underestimate the capacity of the average self preoccupied american for indifference and social irresponsibility (may be linked to a gene length called AVPR1a), we should not discount the negative influence of our predatory capitalist media that promotes such reactionary views and values 24/7. Until Progressives prioritise this and build a mainstream presence there we can only expect more of the same cultural trends and indeed lawlessness. William Simon, with help later from Richard Mellon Scaife, did this after the Goldwater debacle. We now need to get organized and step up to the plate for the next generation if not our own.
Conservatism today in America is having faith in one of the two parties in the two party system. The author, David Michael Green, is a conservative.
toast*: "... the real enemy among us. It isn't Democrat or Republican politicians. It's Democrats AND Republicans who are waging the war against us ..."
Walk down your block and knock on the door or if you don't live on a block go to the nearest strip mall with a Walmart's, Target or comparable store, and tell the folks you meet who are of voting age that you are doing a survey, and could they answer a few questions. If yes, ask, just as Sarah Palin was asked, "Do you know what the Bush Doctrine is?" Ask them to define conservative and liberal; ask them to name 5 of the 10 Bill of Rights, maybe even three; ask them how many senators are in The Senate and how many representatives are in the House of Representatives; ask them the name of their Congressional representative; ask them what Habeus Corpus is; ask them who Evo Morales is and what country he heads; ask them, as Jay Leno did in his man/woman on the street questions, who is buried in Grant's tomb? [uhhhh ... Thomas Jefferson?]; ask them who Celine Dion is or Willie Nelson. Make up a few of your own questions.
Chances are the last question [Dion or Nelson] will be an easy and right answer.
The rest ... ????
I'll bet you'll find out what is the real enemy.
Egad, I'm so sick of this snide humor about Obama's name and color. The only people making fun of his name are the xenophobic Republicans, what do we expect from them ? As for color, Obama is as white as he is black. African-American, yes, in the truest sense. But black ? He's half-black.
I am disappointed by Obama, especially by his acceptance of militarism as a basic way to approach problems with Russia, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan and by some of his choices for advisors.
But I heard something that made me so mad. Somebody's elderly mother told her that she could not vote for Obama because Michelle Obama looked like her cleaning lady. I cannot even begin to list all the things that are wrong with that remark. Race still matters, a lot. And class, evidently. The two are often intertwined as in this case.
Joe
There's a wonderful article about Obama's mother by Janny Scott, NYTimes (also IHT online),March l3,2008. (IHT is International Herald Tribune)
Btw, what is Obama's economic plan ? To vote for the mega billions handout ?
Astonishment of the Do-Nothing Democrats
"The second most astonishing thing about American politics is that John McCain and Sarah Palin have a respectable chance of winning the White House in 2008."
Astonishing!
The Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress for a couple of years, and what did they do to prevent the trillion-dollar disaster that has slowly rolled down upon us?
Nothing!
The Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress for a couple of years, and what did they do about the war in Iraq?
(Are you ready for the chorus?)
Nothing!
The Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress for a couple of years, and what is the only significant environmental proposal that is actually turning into legislation?
Offshore drilling!
(At least it's something!)
Now the Democrats are astonished that their shiny new candidate Barack Obama isn't running away with the election, and some polls even show John McCain leading in the Electoral College!
Don't the voters know that it was John McCain's party who brought us the financial meltdown, the war in Iraq, and a collapsing biosphere, while the Democrats were doing...
(Are you ready for the chorus?)
Nothing!
Jacob Freeze
"Why does this all matter? Well, for the same reason that eight years of Bush/Cheney matters, and that the very real prospect of a McCain presidency followed by a Palin presidency matters. Political battles are half-won or lost, in advance, by the framing and labeling which precede the actual contests."
Jacob Freeze
Thank you for framing an argument for McCain/Palin. Please continue supporting them in other threads.
I so agree with your post.
I'm still astounded that the Dem party is completely ignoring the chance to promote Obama, to allow him to present a detailed plan and look like he can act as a President instead of just a skilled orator. And yet I'm hearing little. I'll watch the debate, not expecting much there either, though.
"i have sown dragon's teeth and harvested fleas!" something like that from Uncle Karl.
Paraphrasing JK Galbraith...Conservatism: An exercise in Moral Philosophy which is engaged in finding ever new justifications for greed and avarice.
Quoting Churchill...Leftists: "Let them quit these gospels of envy, hate, and malice. Let them abandon the utter fallacy, the grotesque, erroneous, fatal blunder of believing that by limiting the enterprise of man, by riveting the shackles of a false equality...they will increase the well-being of the world."
I'm still not having fun here...
This quote is out of the context of its time.
And, of course you are not having fun. Your attitude is all wrong.
My, my what a dour person you are. No sense of humor. Sir Winston's comment is perfectly in context and is a nice piece of contrast to the earlier posting.
Sorry you don't like my attitude, but I am beginning to have some fun.
First of all, as Dale Carnegie reminds, most people never admit they were wrong - instead, they will defend themselves to the death.
The vast majority of McPalin supporters are religious "conservatives," (which is actually doubly regressive,) who believe we're all living "God's plan," in which case, all the lying and stealing and killing must be accepted, because God and his plan may not be questioned.
The Iraq 'war' is a "task that is from God," Palin said.
"Since God is our Steward and loves us, He will care for us. If global warming was really happening, it would be bad for us and God the Steward would Intervene to protect his chosen people, most likely by causing global cooling."
Pick a topic, doesn't matter - God did it, so shut up!
Plus, there's this: God is never wrong, I believe in God, hence: I am never wrong, and anyone who accuses me of being wrong is an enemy of God.
Go ahead - try convincing that tribe otherwise and see how far that gets ya...
I think Dale Carnegie was talking about men, never admitting their wrong. Women can do that.
Perhaps the study of semantics and economics would be helpful for the public.
Why not include the history or herstory of imperialism... Certainly liberals would not want to be branded as being in favor of ‘neo-liberalism’ or the policies of the WTO or the IMF.
Americas collective head has been in the sand long before Custer’s last stand.
A changing of the two/one party rule may not change much.
How rare to see "herstory", but why linked with imperialism in history? Curious. Also, your age group.
Not a single Republican/conservative/regressive policy in the last 50 years has bettered the human condition in this country. How these clowns are still able to get elected is a tribute to the gullibility, apathy, and stupity of the American voter and non-voter, encouraged by the corporate media.
Sioux Rose
I like the points Green makes, and you gotta hand it to him, he's king of metaphors that show contempt for the injustices and homocidal inanities that have become the "rule" of our empire. You may not agree with the "team" designations, but he sure understands all the things that have gone awry and his flowery language conveys the depth and breadth of all that.
As the map is not the territory, the party is not the ideology.
Yes, both parties are complicit, but marginalizing this discussion by focusing it on the political parties misses the greater and more significant point.
Could the author have framed the discussion better? Maybe, but in the end we should be talking about ideologies made into policies, culminating in very real events that have either been good for posterity or not.
Just maybe if we could keep narrow-minded party-related idiocy from dragging down the discussion, we could focus on the ideologies and policies in an actual constructive way.
And you're going to start an article about an "elephant in the room" in re Rep. can still ... with any Dem. candidate who "hadn't died on the stump"? Race?The issue needs real space and serious discussion. Ouch.
I totally agree. The trip wire of conservatism is hard-wired racism and I was astonished that there was no mention of it in this article. (Not that plenty of liberals aren't racist too.) Still in indepth examination of this basic element of conservatism is a must.
Thanks, and agreed. There is also the question of the southern Republicans who were Democrats (or their families were) until the Voting Rights Act of 1964. So, there's an overlap. And the whole question of people continuing to vote the way families voted. And yes, racism in liberals. (Which then makes me think of Phil Ochs' song, "Love me I'm A Liberal".
Sorry. As long as everyone within "The Party" works exclusively for the same corporatist boss, I'm going to have to point to self-delusion on your part.
Oh, I agree that there's much posturing and dissembling on "the issues" as defined by "The Party". In fact, at times the performances are so well scripted and delivered as to deserve a smattering of applause... but only that.
All this misdirection is to the detriment of those outside the group of two percenters. We harm ourselves for the benefit of those who control "The Party". There is a war going on, but it's not what you portray it to be. The war is against the huge majority of us by those within a corporatist ruling class and administered by all within "The Party".
To believe otherwise is to have lost focus upon the real enemy among us. It isn't Democrat or Republican politicians.... It's Democrats AND Republicans who are waging the war against us, acting as proxy for CheneyOilCo and buds.
That we would support those who do us the most harm is very telling.
Time to take stock. Time to get in the streets again. Time for REAL change... a change that is unperverted by political sloganeers. Work against those who work against us. Anything less is self-destructive.
'progressiveparty':
"These type of intellectual arguments are foolish and go right over the head of most voters. Better to end pragmatism and fully support all REAL progressives..."
This article by Prof. Green "washed right over the head" of 'progressiveparty,' that is very clear. But then, I tend to doubt the sanity of anyone who presumes to be the spoken word for an actual movement in this country. Especially when ignorance raises the ugly breath of deceit as in the quote.
I'll lather my mind with thought from a knowledgeable human being with a real name before I'll entertain your fucking stupidity with 'no name.'
What the US desperately needs is some more political parties and, of course, people with an open mind. Your liberals are Europe's conservatives, don't you realize that? And I remember some Chinese gentleman, Deng Xiaoping, saying: "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice." Americans seem to be obsessed by trivial matters like religion, feminism, (homo-)sexuality etcetera that have no real influence on their lives; who cares about that when they lose their job, their home, their life-savings? I would rather have a lesbian, black and atheist president who's got the interest of the country as a whole at heart, then some rich guy who only cares about his rich friends and who uses fear and ignorance to keep the people in line while he ruins the country.
"A Republican could win the presidency in 2008? You gotta be kidding, right?"
There's the L-Pill, the cyanide capsule, that the great geniuses called the American people are going to swallow on the first Tuesday in November. McCain/Palin because "we ain' gonna 'lect no friggin' (expletive deleted) to be prezdent." McCain/Palin, perhaps the first true two-headed monster in history, will then proceed to play Russian Roulette with a six shot revolver with bullets in every chamber. But the gun will be pointed at you, not at themselves.
This bickering and fighting must end. The elections must be suspended until "Our Beloved Leader" gets our economy back on track and this war against evil is honorably concluded.
DUH, hey Mike green, it would be so easy for the Liberals to stomp the fricken "conservative" retards into the dust, if you just stopped bickering among yourselves, and trying to be nice.
Or better TAKE BACK the "conservative" label by rounding up all the CONSERVATIONISTS and conserve something.
If you take their NAME over they will have to revert to threir default label MORONS.
Oh you bunch of bickering pansies... your all so much deadmeat. The only KIDS who have any GUTS left are the grubby little ANARCHISTS that are targeted at EVERY protest by the PIG NAZI ROBOTS that you call 'yes officer'.
If I was president I would give every dirty little punk a MEDAL because THEY astre the only ones who SHOW UP IN THE STREET to defend YOUR conitution. And most people wont give them half a sandwich.
America you deserve a president Palin you really do.
Yikes!
This takes the cake!
***Progressives - or at least Democrats - are clueless about this stuff. They've never worked on Madison Avenue. They've never been driven by a rapacious ambition toward infantile self-aggrandizement. They've never had to sell gold-plated cappuccino machines or Hummers to idiot consumers just itching to depart with their own money in order to salve their raging insecurities. No wonder they can't win elections. ****
LOL!
What planet has this author been living in? The Democrats are just as much, if not even more, corporate big money fraud driven as the Republicans. Come on, do some research at least about the Demo. Party's big money connections, and especially the fraud Obama's senate campagin funed by big time corporate lawyers (no the community organizers did not fun him, it was the people who the community organizers fight against who elected Obama to the senate).
The elephant in the room is the complete and total blindfold that liberals have tied around their head. AND that is why liberal is such a dirty word, it is meaningless, and disconnected from reality. So are the Republicans, but at least they hold true to their social conservative crowd and respond to their issues. The Democrats not only don't respond to their base, they respond to the Republican Party's base - ala the fraud Obama.
The article (as do paractically all of CD's articles) assume that "progressive" means being a Democrat - what a hoot.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
Not all progressives have spent their lives sipping fair trade coffee. (not that there is anything wrong with that). A lot of us have had to work "in the belly of the beast" to earn a living. Some have had jobs in oil companies, on Wall Street, in the military as drillers or secretaries, or clerks for sure - but close enough to notice the nonsense that goes on. Thus comics like Dilbert, movies like Office Space, Harold and Kumar, 9 to 5, many many books and stories. The details of daily work as seen through the eyes of the invisible nobodies on the job can be very telling about the big picture. The nature of the details are replicated over and over and larger and larger.
Joe
Well said progressive party
Liberalism brought the world out of the dark ages - it will again.
Until we learn.
The reason they have a chance is because Democrats aren't really an opposition party. The corporate media and the corporate sponsors of candidates won't "allow" articulate progressive voices to be heard. In the absence of REAL substantive opposition there is a void that voters can't get past. Obama is NOT the answer, he's part of the problem. I still think Obama will win unless this is another stolen election. These type of intellectual arguments are foolish and go right over the head of most voters. Better to end pragmatism and fully support all REAL progressives cycle after cycle; we will eventually really win!