Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Hopebroken and Hopesick: A Lexicon of Disappointment
All is not well in Obamafanland. It's not clear exactly what accounts for the change of mood. Maybe it was the rancid smell emanating from Treasury's latest bank bailout. Or the news that the president's chief economic adviser, Larry Summers, earned millions from the very Wall Street banks and hedge funds he is protecting from reregulation now. Or perhaps it began earlier, with Obama's silence during Israel's Gaza attack.
Whatever the last straw, a growing number of Obama enthusiasts are starting to entertain the possibility that their man is not, in fact, going to save the world if we all just hope really hard.
This is a good thing. If the superfan culture that brought Obama to power is going to transform itself into an independent political movement, one fierce enough to produce programs capable of meeting the current crises, we are all going to have to stop hoping and start demanding.
The first stage, however, is to understand fully the awkward in-between space in which many US progressive movements find themselves. To do that, we need a new language, one specific to the Obama moment. Here is a start.
Hopeover. Like a hangover, a hopeover comes from having overindulged in something that felt good at the time but wasn't really all that healthy, leading to feelings of remorse, even shame. It's the political equivalent of the crash after a sugar high. Sample sentence: "When I listened to Obama's economic speech my heart soared. But then, when I tried to tell a friend about his plans for the millions of layoffs and foreclosures, I found myself saying nothing at all. I've got a serious hopeover."
Hoper coaster. Like a roller coaster, the hoper coaster describes the intense emotional peaks and valleys of the Obama era, the veering between joy at having a president who supports safe-sex education and despondency that single-payer healthcare is off the table at the very moment when it could actually become a reality. Sample sentence: "I was so psyched when Obama said he is closing Guantánamo. But now they are fighting like mad to make sure the prisoners in Bagram have no legal rights at all. Stop this hoper coaster-I want to get off!"
Hopesick. Like the homesick, hopesick individuals are intensely nostalgic. They miss the rush of optimism from the campaign trail and are forever trying to recapture that warm, hopey feeling-usually by exaggerating the significance of relatively minor acts of Obama decency. Sample sentences: "I was feeling really hopesick about the escalation in Afghanistan, but then I watched a YouTube video of Michelle in her organic garden and it felt like inauguration day all over again. A few hours later, when I heard that the Obama administration was boycotting a major UN racism conference, the hopesickness came back hard. So I watched slideshows of Michelle wearing clothes made by ethnically diverse independent fashion designers, and that sort of helped."
Hope fiend. With hope receding, the hope fiend, like the dope fiend, goes into serious withdrawal, willing to do anything to chase the buzz. (Closely related to hopesickness but more severe, usually affecting middle-aged males.) Sample sentence: "Joe told me he actually believes Obama deliberately brought in Summers so that he would blow the bailout, and then Obama would have the excuse he needs to do what he really wants: nationalize the banks and turn them into credit unions. What a hope fiend!"
Hopebreak. Like the heartbroken lover, the hopebroken Obama-ite is not mad but terribly sad. She projected messianic powers on to Obama and is now inconsolable in her disappointment. Sample sentence: "I really believed Obama would finally force us to confront the legacy of slavery in this country and start a serious national conversation about race. But now whenever he seems to mention race, he's using twisted legal arguments to keep us from even confronting the crimes of the Bush years. Every time I hear him say ‘move forward,' I'm hopebroken all over again."
Hopelash. Like a backlash, hopelash is a 180-degree reversal of everything Obama-related. Sufferers were once Obama's most passionate evangelists. Now they are his angriest critics. Sample sentence: "At least with Bush everyone knew he was an asshole. Now we've got the same wars, the same lawless prisons, the same Washington corruption, but everyone is cheering like Stepford wives. It's time for a full-on hopelash."
In trying to name these various hope-related ailments, I found myself wondering what the late Studs Terkel would have said about our collective hopeover. He surely would have urged us not to give in to despair. I reached for one of his last books, Hope Dies Last. I didn't have to read long. The book opens with the words: "Hope has never trickled down. It has always sprung up."
And that pretty much says it all. Hope was a fine slogan when rooting for a long-shot presidential candidate. But as a posture toward the president of the most powerful nation on earth, it is dangerously deferential. The task as we move forward (as Obama likes to say) is not to abandon hope but to find more appropriate homes for it-in the factories, neighborhoods and schools where tactics like sit-ins, squats and occupations are seeing a resurgence.
Political scientist Sam Gindin wrote recently that the labor movement can do more than protect the status quo. It can demand, for instance, that shuttered auto plants be converted into green-future factories, capable of producing mass-transit vehicles and technology for a renewable energy system. "Being realistic means taking hope out of speeches," he wrote, "and putting it in the hands of workers."
Which brings me to the final entry in the lexicon.
Hoperoots. Sample sentence: "It's time to stop waiting for hope to be handed down, and start pushing it up, from the hoperoots."
- Posted in
197 Comments so far
Show AllI believe that the "movement" to which Ms. Klein refers, the one supposedly grown up and enabled by the candidacy of Barack Obaama, was doomed from the first. A coalition of first time activists, first time voters and those who were reacting more to an aversion to the eight years of Bush than to any real enlightened words of candidate Obama were simply grasping at straws.
I suspect that there were few folks in this for the long haul, and I believe that, once the perfidity of Obama's chosen course becomes clear, most will return to the alienation and ennui that marks most of America's electorate.
As long as we the people believe we need to find heroes we will overlook where the real power resides, in all of us.
Great points, Red Rick, especially the last.
At nearly 54, I no longer look to anyone to significantly change things. I vote strategically, as I did for Obama, not for a fix, but for the best chance. With Obama, that's what I got. Were the world a more rational place, perhaps Kucinich or Nader or someone else might have gotten in and made real progress, but that is not the world we have. We have a world of vastly conflicting interests and we are destined to careen along until something big forces us to change dramatically.
I still hope that this will have fired up some young people. I know most will go back to living their everyday lives, as we all do, but I believe some will stay with it long enough to make their mark.
"As long as we the people believe we need to find heroes we will overlook where the real power resides, in all of us."
I would add that the real power also resides in _each_ of us. We tend to fight this until we are in a corner and realize that no one else can do this for us.
"... for the best chance. With Obama, that's what I got."
You're still hopedrunk.
Though we do not share a common political goal I believe we share a common respect. I might not agree with what you posit but I must respect the manner in which you conduct yourself here.
I believe ( speaking of not sharing) that your reliance upon the status quo, voting as you do for the one who seems to give the best shot at your own goals, is a false reliance on a system gone rancid with greed and self interest. It will never give you the results you seek I fear. If we share a goal at all, and I believe that we both do want the best for our nation and our world, we must look to ways to reign in our politicians to once again reflect the wishes and best interests of the people . You do know, by the by, that President Obama just hedged his bets on stem cell lines dont you? Had to add that considering that stem cell research is really in the best interests of us all.
Today I heard, on my local NPR affiliate, a debate about whether Wall Street or the Federal Govt. was most responsible for the current economic dilemma. It was conducted by some some real heavyweights, including one of my favorite economists, Dr. Doom, Nouriel Roubini, the guy who not only predicted this entire scenario over two years ago but who is responsible for my turning my investment portfolio around in time to avoid disaster when my usual guy was preaching roses and profits. I made out he did not!
What do you think?
I'm not sure we're that far off, Rick.
While I voted for Obama, I too realize that the system is broken. My only other choice would have been to have not voted, as any other president would have walked into the same broken system.
I am doing several things to uncouple myself from this system. While this is not entirely possible, it is the only way I can see to rationally deal with what is going on. I do what I can and hope others are doing the same.
I hadn't heard about the stem cell deal. If Obama does go back on his word, it's another black mark against him. However, as bad as he seems, he is dealing in another universe. Not necessarily a good or pretty universe, but one that the rest of us don't live in. I don't like the deal and I think it's bad, but nobody going in there, not even Nader nor Kucinich nor J.C. himself could do a whole lot there. They would all be crucified.
As far as Roubini - I've heard him some. I also like what Peter Schiff said: "Economics - the science of satisfying unlimited demand with limited resources." Doesn't leave much room for improving things, does it? I get this. I do. This system is unsustainable. Again, I get back to the point you made: It's up to us to save ourselves and our country. There are as many ways as there are people who realize this. Politics is the least effective way, but it still plays a role and one that I will use to the best advantage possible. I don't like it. I don't agree with it. I don't hold out much hope for politics to address our concerns. But I won't be dumb enough to make things worse. And there is one thing I have come to understand: Things can always be worse!
A Shawfest
"If all economists were laid end to end, they couldn't reach a conclusion."
"The reasonable man adapts to his surroundings, the unreasonable man attempts to change his surroundings to suit himself; and all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."
G.B.Shaw
You and I, madcow, share a view that things are not going well. But you seem to put forth an individualistic intent that isolates I fear, and one that leads to no solutions. I seek ways to come together and retake the power that is ours by right.
You have no idea what I do, Rick.
By your response and puerile name-calling, I see that you are not part of the solution.
How did you cmne to see that post as name-calling? Did I strike a nerve? Unintentional I would assure you. Perhaps you might reexamine your anger in light of the entire exchange and begin to wonder where the anger and insult appeared?
You are an advocate here for small steps and working within the system, are you not? I am not, that was the only intent of that post....What name did I call you?
I think it was a typo. You called him "madcow" instead of markow.
Shit!
There is a poster by that name here, thus why believe it a perjorative? I gotta stop posting at 3AM.
No slur intended, just an exhibition of increasing senility on my part.
As someone once said to me,
Embrace the changes and learn from them -- as fortuitously along that path -- is wisdom
Namaste
Okay, intent understood.
See, the thing is, I was originally agreeing with you. At least, the part about the people having the power. Maybe I mistook what you were saying. Maybe you didn't intend to say that the power really lies with us, and maybe we veered off from that point on.
I have thought of our "discussion" and others, and still come to the same conclusion: It is up to us as individuals and as a people to right the wrongs. Yes, others were at fault, but no one is totally blameless. There are no pure innocents in life. We each carry responsibility to act, or at least, to speak out.
In another post, I compared us, the people, as being abused. As in any abusive relationship, there is the abuser and the abused. The worst thing that the abused can believe is that s/he has no power and no chance to change the situation. The best thing, and something that those who help abused people know, is that the abused need to know that they have the power to get out, or at least, to get help.
In our current situation, the abusers are the elite classes and the politicians. We, the people, are the abused. So, what are we to do? Keep begging our abusers to stop? Demand it? Fine, but prepare for a beating.
I have been called trite for repeating my belief that we have the power to stop this. We actually do, because we are the ones with the purchasing power. We can still NOT buy things that the elite create and we can still get together with others and form alternatives. This can still be done, but times are changing quickly and it may not be so easy in the future. If we keep thinking that we can persuade those in power to stop being greedy, power-hungry bastards, then we are screwed. What does it matter who is right when someone's foot is on your throat?
We must fight back. I don't mean they, or them, or those over there - you and I, Rick. People hate to believe that it's up to them, but that's the way it is. Doesn't matter who's fault all this is, it's still up to us to change things. After all, aren't we supposed to be in control? Let's stop being abused.
P.S. In the interest of "specifics", I have organized a permaculture group in my town. We started as a handful just 6 months ago and now have over 50 members. I am also part of a Transition Towns movement in my town. I am also part of another group that has met for over two years and we support each other and help each other and have bought bulk food together and share each other's gardens and lives. And other community-forming activities, but that's enough. Hardly "individualistic intent that isolates". No, by taking power into my own hands, and realizing that it's up to me to do things to improve my world, I have gone from wishing, to intent, to action. None of this is done by demanding anything from my abusers. It's done by growing up and getting off my ass.
I am so happy to see you a gracious and forgiving man, Mr. Markow ( see I CAN do it), I would apologise for mistaking you for another poster, (madcow) but I respect his work as much as I do your own so there really was no intent to insult.
This post of yours is both eloquent and perceptive and I applaud you for your thoughts and your efforts as enumerated. You stated, in an earlier effort, that we were not far apart politically, and now I fully agree with that assessment in that we are allies in seeking the same goals .
The one area in which we may differ is in my belief that our system must be changed , dramatically, and that continuing to work within it only perpetuates that system. I believe that third party politics is the only peaceful way to overturn the entrenched power of the Duopoly. I am in agreement that those who continue to work within that system are also following their conscience and seeking similar conclusions. It is a two front war we fight.
I look forward to reading more of your efforts as well as, hopefully, progress reports on your local work.
"The one area in which we may differ is in my belief that our system must be changed , dramatically, and that continuing to work within it only perpetuates that system. I believe that third party politics is the only peaceful way to overturn the entrenched power of the Duopoly."
But see, Rick, we're still in agreement.
I know the system is broken. Therefore, what would a third or fourth or fifth party do within the same broken system?
For the record: I am an independent after having been both a Democrat and a Green. As a Green, I saw great sentiments and ideas, but the actual implementation (such as it was) came around the same ego-based personalities and into the same broken system. Had Nader or McKinney won, we would be in a state of chaos now. While in theory chaos is interesting, in everyday life, it is hell. I don't want chaos.
Obama will not fix the system - he is part of it. But, so are you and I. It is a two-front war we fight, but I see it this way: We live in two worlds - the one we presently exist in, and the one we want to see come to fruition. While we can look to the future, the work is done in the present. It was going to be either Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin. That's the world we are in now. I prefer Obama/Biden knowing full well that they will disappoint. But, part of life is dealing with disappointment and working through it. And that's the key: Not letting disappointment stop our good work!
I have never come down on anyone for voting their conscience - that's what I did. I voted for Nader in 2000 (and have been accused of helping Bush win - c'est la vie). In 2008, my conscience told me to vote for Obama.
One thing that I have come to understand is that there are vastly conflicting needs and desires amongst any population, especially one as individualistic as ours. While I see my points as valid, so does the other side. Doesn't mean I like it or will sit passively as it unfolds, but I respect others at least enough to empathize with their desires and needs. I believe, for all his shortcomings, Obama gets this. That's why I voted for him. And, having done that, my work is here, where my nose leaves off and the rest of the world begins. The real work of change begins with me.
Well, enough. Hopefully this can be a learning moment for all of us on CD. So often I see folks here talking past each other, getting mired in the details of poorly written ideas, when actually our ideals are very similar. I hope (uh-oh, there's that word again) that we can have enough patience with each other to ask for clarification before jumping on each other. I will try to keep this in mind (and not post at 3:00 AM)....smiling.
If I were a bit brighter ( well a whole lot brighter actually) I might envision a nonviolent way to alter the existing system in a peaceful fashion that does not involve the insertion of third party and independent candidates, those pledged to avoid the curse of corporate money in politics.
I do not see our new president as an evil man, I think, as you so eruditely noted, that he does see the problems and , as far smarter than am I , he works in ways I do not fathom to bring about change the only way he can. Of course I cannot fit his cabinet appointments into this scenario, but what is one to do?
If we continue to build our third party presence we might see a scenario in which progressive agendas might be forced to the fore through the necessity of acquiring a voting bloc to push legislation. Thus both GOP and Democratic legislators would be forced to acknowledge such items as IRV, a political campaign run solely on govt money and forced media cooperation in giving candidates air and print time, perhaps even an end to lobbying and second careers as such by our elected officials.
I cast about most desperately for peaceful corrections to our growing problems of disenfranchisement and the growing power of the few in decision making at the expense of the needs of the many. I cannot wrap my mind about voting for those who are successful in our current system, as they are all to easily malleable in order to be successful.
We're all doing good and necessary work here. You do it in your way, I do it in mine. We're all necessary and each contribute in our own ways.
I hope whoever is left to read this remembers that there are many ways of affecting change. Even if it's a third party or any other political way or even extra political, it's still valid. We should all remember that there is no one right way to work for change, and the many ways that we are all working at it is necessary. There may be different tactics, but if the goal of working for a better world is true, we're doing good work.
Cheers for doing what you do.
"Perhaps you might reexamine your anger in light of the entire exchange and begin to wonder where the anger and insult appeared?"
Have I seemed angry? If so, it wasn't my intent. Other than being a little miffed at a perceived slur, I had no anger whatsoever. In fact, I agreed with some of what you wrote and said so. Did you perceive anger because I didn't agree 100 percent?
If others saw my words as anger, I'd love to hear about it. It's hard to convey feelings in words (for me, anyway), and I'm open to constructive criticism and suggestions.
Not to belabor this , hopefully closed, subject but this is what I (mis)took for anger:
"By your response and puerile name-calling, I see that you are not part of the solution."
mea culpa, mea maxima culpa
"As long as we the people believe we need to find heroes we will overlook where the real power resides, in all of us."
Right on Rick!!!!......
Exactly Red Rick! How do we push hope up is the question. I believe we do it by aggressively participating in the emerging green culture of sustainability. The old culture is collapsing and the new culture must be in place to supplant it. More of a sustainable less is needed.
OBAMANOMICS: FATTEN THE RICH, STARVE THE POOR, SMILE REAL PRETTY !
great writers such as Klein, often have to write retarded ...for certain forums. the Nation is an example.
a 'great magazine'.....since the only alternative is time, newsweek etc....but a magazine filled with homilies, and hopes, and no substance of real libertarian, left action. Take their foolish 'labor' issues yearly. Somehow, conservative pro imperialist, non democratic, even death squad supporting, unions are going to 'lead us' to change!
But the 'obama-ities' was a thin fringe of the corporatist democratic party. Most people were happy for the change from the
guy that couldn't form a sentence. There were really few 'first time activists'.....just people that 'hoped' and 'hoped'...
If we all got to work, and did our own free newspapers in all our cities and burbs, we might get some real
militant bottom up organizing going. this reliance on blogs and the net is pathetic. do you all know only about 20% of the entire population actually looks at this stuff, left and right? Do you all know what 'income level' actually discusses on these forums..for the most part?
Get your heads out of the brainwashed 'new age' carrot and stick head up butt,
and realize it's face to face democracy and tangible hand, metaphorical fist, to the people, with papers, action, and organizing, that works...
occupy, resist, and produce.
and that takes millions.
and it don't happen by typing...or networking with complete strangers.
we are human beings. we need to be face to face and demand direct democracy from each other. There will be no authoritarian marxist solutions....only the peoples solutions.
we will build loyalty and militant mass groups......only by doing that.....which is HUMAN and social.
you cant stop a juggernaught by typing on a laptop.
Ho hum.
Amazing isn't it--the Right that considers itself lackluster compared to the Left's ability to organize online, patted itself for it's recent success at online organizing.
Shoot, it ain't the organizing medium--it is the forces that demand people act and then when they do, redbait them (ANSWER), mock them (Code Pink), sneer at them (Keith Olberman at the G20 protestors)or refuse to recognize that many of those on the Right share common ground when it comes to class issues. And class is what it all comes down to.
Here's an example of where Olbermann rocks !
Video - Special Comment to President Obama, You're Wrong on Torture - Prosecutions - U.S. future depends on torture accountability
See
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/182130-Video-Special-Comment-to-President-Obama-You-re-Wrong-on-Torture-Prosecutions-U-S-future-depends-on-torture-accountability
or see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTLi7j0T9HQ&feature=player_embedded
Namaste
Red Rick: "I believe that the "movement" to which Ms. Klein refers, the one supposedly grown up and enabled by the candidacy of Barack Obaama, was doomed from the first. A coalition of first time activists, first time voters and those who were reacting more to an aversion to the eight years of Bush than to any real enlightened words of candidate Obama were simply grasping at straws."
And yet in the great land there exists no person nor just cause better able to conform a collective of "real power" than this?
Red Rick: "As long as we the people believe we need to find heroes we will overlook where the real power resides, in all of us."
AND, Amendment X provides a constitutionally viable vehicle for us to organize and express that power. Without channeling that "real power" for a socially meaningful purpose it means nothing.
So, what now? Exceptionally valid points, but what's the point? Are we to babble and impress ourselves with intellect and insight, or are we seeking to achieve something real?
I am sorry that you believe we all babble pointlessly here. You are certainly entitled to your opinion of course. I see these sorts of forums as places wherein people can understand that we are not as alone as we believe ourselves to be, not as isolated, not as unique in our views as the media makes us out to be either.
Perhaps some do use posts as substitutes for actions, perhaps others use them to reinforce their will to find others with like minds and take positive actions within their own communities. Perhaps posts like yours are really counterproductive? They certainly make a point you are not entitled to assume; that everyone here is doing nothing.
lol
You think they're ready for what we got? It takes a lot to put together something so spectacular that everyone's gotta be part, to experience a thing so inspiring and liberating it changes your world, forever, that you want to make sure, you want to know they're ready, to soar with you, you know? And that you're ready, so you don't disappoint. It's all in the timing you know. That's really really important. The timing has be right.
>>As long as we the people believe we need to find heroes we will overlook where the real power resides, in all of us
Its the Messiah syndrome. No matter how bad iit gets if you just WAIT long enough the Son of God will come down to save it all.
I am soo sorry that anyone thought that Obama was the second coming or could walk on water. I voted for him with a clear head. He has not backtracked on anything he has said if you were really paying attention to what he said. He has and still does speak carefully with intent and deliberation. I think most people are smart enough to know that. He is not perfect he is just a man. He is at least being proactive and open. If you can do better then do it or get out of the way or move away I don't care Obama did not invent the word or its meaning. I hope you get that.
I agree with red rick that the real power resides with us the voter. That was and still is Obama's position and rallying cry. As far as hope goes we all need it especially when things are the way they are. Hope is a verb and it requires action on our part for it to succeed . If Obama is allowed to be trivialized for getting people to hope we are lost , or that he is untrustworthy as Red Rick suggests then I say to you look in the mirror and see the person who is fooling who. Most often people like Red here have the depth of a sheet of paper and for that I pity them.
Yeah, this old Indian geezer thought you might have all the problems of your Nation solved today but I wasn't placing any bets in Vegas upon that such thing.
Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
The hopelessly hopesick should ask themselves if the man they cheered for when he came up the ranks is the same guy who now is in office. If he is, then they have been wilfully fooling themselves. It is of course possible that the bright young advocate of hope from the fall of 2007 attracted the attention of Wall Street when it was looking for someone to beat the too unpredictable and progressive deemed Hillary Clinton and that before he took their money they spelled it out to him loud and clear what it means to become chairman of the empire. Welcome to the machine.
In what Bizarro universe would Hillary be considered progressive?
q
"In what Bizarro universe would Hillary be considered progressive?"
In the Bizarro World of progressive groups, apparently.
The following are polls from progressive groups, rating Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, on how often they vote for progressive issues.
Clinton Vs. Barack Obama (progressivepunch)
Overall Progressive Score: 92% 90%
Aid to Less Advantaged People at Home and Abroad: 98% 97%
Corporate Subsidies 100% N/A
Education, Humanities and the Arts 88% 100%
Environment 92% 100%
Fair Taxation 97% 100%
Family Planning 88% 80%
Government Checks on Corporate Power 95% 97%
Healthcare 98% 94%
Housing 100% 100%
Human Rights & Civil Liberties 82% 77%
Justice for All: Civil and Criminal 94% 91%
Labor Rights 91% 91%
Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful 94% 90%
War and Peace 80% 86%
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011142.php
All you've accomplished it to point out that Hillary may be considered more progressive than Obama, who has demonstrated that he is not progresssive at all. Both are primarily political opportunists.
One may reasonable argue that Richard Nixon was more progressive than George W. Bush. That argument would not make Nixon a progressive.
q
...but this is a reflection of VOTES. Meaning: already watered down compromise legislation that actually made it to the Senate floor. That makes it all very relative. How many truly progressive pieces of legislation did either of them actually write, sponsor, or co-sponsor?
Even more troubling to ponder: How many truly progressive initiatives did Obama and Clinton help water down until they were anything but?
to be progressive in the united states is an oxymoron
morons are not progressive at all - they are just morons
as chomsky says, the terms used in american politics are meaningless, as is every facet of life in the states
left - right only applies to shoes in corporate america where people are so pathetic they think that no health care is a good thing, ponzy scheme banks are the soup du jour
corporate media and illiterate sheeple
progressive indeed.....
not
...amoungst her DLC corporate corupted "Democratic" associates she is noticably more progressive.
...amoungst her christofascist heretic "The Family" associates she is freakishly more progressive.
...amoungst Bursten Marseller's $atanic client list she
stands out as more progressive.
...generally if a progressive cause means more power for her, without much downside, she can be counted as "more progressive".
So, by her "bizarro universe" right-wing associations she can actually think she is a progressive.
we all know hillary went to europe to defend bush missiles aimed at russia - but we don't know the logic behind the bush-hillary-obama endeviour / in counties like poland you have american businesses with polish leaders as minor shareholders, in russia businesses are russian with americans as minor shareholdes - the missiles will not change that but in political world symbols account for much
There goes yet another campaign promise down the drain. Secretary of Defense Gates who presumably speaks for the President because he has discussed the issue with him said that ending "don't ask, don't tell" of our armed forces will be difficult and take years. He did not say how many years.
All of this is a warning for enthusiastic Obama supporters in 2012. If you believe anything he promises you during that campaign will be severely disappointed again.
It is increasingly becoming evident that Mr. Obama was merely a hot-air spewing demagogue during the 2008 campaign.
Furthermore, his "advice" to Cuba to "straighten out" (i. e. a change WE but not necessarily the Cuban people can believe in!) before all Americans can travel there and before Obama can lift the sanctions is ludicrous. Mexicans obviously don't accept his arrant nonsense. Mexicans can travel legally wherever they want to in the world and despise our Cuban sanctions.
Suppose you are a "hard working Cuban" who takes a look at the USA. Would you want what we have? No health insurance or exorbitantly expensive health insurance? Six million unemployed, a number that is rising? Retirement pensions devastated? Home foreclosed? I am not so sure.
The sanctions on Cuba are now a collective punishment of a nation that does not threaten us. I believe that collective punishment is illegal under international law but so is torture which Mr. Obama also ignores.
Never marry your candidate. Though I voted and caucused for Obama, it was in fear of First Dude wandering the White House with personel files under his arm. I mean, what kind of choice was that? My candidate, Edwards, flames out philandering with a flakey campaign aide. Collectively we need to realize that money rules this system, as we now see the ruling class is emptying out the remains of our wealth to cover their gambling debts. A real movement with ideas and thinking people would be nice. No more of this thinking that one person will change our course. That's nice for dictatorships, shouldn't be considered in a democracy.
What's really disturbing about this administration, is it's response to the FISA lawsuits. Their term "sovereign immunity" in response to violating our rights. We had a revolution to throw off a sovereign. And poof, what do you know, we have another one.
Obama has said that he needs support from the ground to do anything constructive. Why not take him at his word? I'm as pessimistic as anyone about real change, but before we start shouting gloom and doom, why not take him at his word?
As long as the progressive citizens in this 'democracy' sit on their asses whining and complaining, nothing will change. Even the neo-conservative corporate sponsored Republicans are out there with their little tea parties. Are we going to let them represent us? Is that all Obama will have to listen too? I'm all for starting a violent revolution. I think this is the only way out of this mess. I don't believe this country has ever had the necessary sort of ground-swell revolution against 'landed interests'. But on the other hand, let's see how far Obama is willing to go if we start shouting in his ear. It's worth a try.
George - I believe you are correct. Until the progressive-minded folks actually hit the streets in large numbers Obama is not forced, or given the opportunity to legislatively react to our demands. Politics is simply pressure applied at the right time and the right spot - and we haven't done that. Just a thought though, are the masses in this country so poorly educated as to not truly understand what is at stake here? And, if so, is that what the Republican / investment class knows, controls, and takes advantage of? And again, if true, how can we educate the masses so they react intellectually and not emotionally?
To me, those are key. When we find the answer we will be able to control a government in truly democratic fashion. If we can't do that, we are headed rapidly for at least a soft fascism, maybe worse.
I call the time and place to apply pressure with the maximum results --------- THE FULCRUM MOMENT
More illustrative than critical mass or the accumulation of neutron producing items, which is merely the explosive bomb model of expanding " change " when the correct pieces are brought together,
I prefer the quantum mechanism of
Light Amplification through Stimulated Emission of Radiation ( L A S E R ),
which replies upon the operation and creation of a "population inversion". Here's the idea stretched to include masses of people ( as if they were each quantum states of matter ) :
(1.) The population is initially at a nominal "temperature", and nothing happens for want of an extreme enough triggering event.
(2.) Some thing "pumps" the energy states upward, and the temperature overall gradually rises ( but is really only incidental ) of population. This can not be easily seen, as the majority are clueless to an incremental 'raising the frog water' situation. This is in some ways an emergent phenomenon, and doesn't match the usual top down organization of the hierarchy.
(3.) Now within that unstable inverted population ( as its temperature is upside down compared with nominal reality ), there occurs an avalanch effect of an initial burst of quantum states ( people ) all dropping back to reality.
But because they were all channeled into a single unstable state, they all tend to react together in a "stimulated emission" or radiation in a coherent manner, as a LASER all lasing together.
(4.) The crucial distuinction of a laser beam of light compared to nominal light ( however bright ), is that it is phased all together peak and troughs -- at a single frequency -- so that the light intensity is amplified and magnified to extreme levels.
WHOOOSE & POOF,
change happens when enough people are pumped up, and cohere together -- which is then going to cause an avalanche of devastation when the rest of the crowd comes along for the fun of it. Some experts modeling chaotic systems, beleive that the massive overall transistion -- can occur when as few as 5 % of people become coherent ( spiritually and consciously aligned ).
Namaste
"Am I concerned about those who for one reason or another can't afford shelter or food or health care or an education? Or am I concerned about myself and how far up the 'ladder' I can climb and how much wealth I can accumulate?" I've always thought the difference between those 'masses' that seem to be in thrall to the monied (fascist) elements and those labeled progressive is one of basic perspective. I don't think it's a matter of ignorance. I've met very poor people who are self educated, kind, generous, etc. and I've met college graduates who are the most selfish asses on the planet. Then there is a group in the United States who give up their reason to religion and let evangelists and those of their ilk scare them and manipulate them with words like abortionist (=child killer) and communist or socialist (=godless dictator), and immigrant hordes (=inhuman roaches) and gay (=degenerate family destroyer). As long as these monsters use phraseology such as 'born again', and 'washed in the blood' their followers will follow no matter what. My family falls into that category, so I know all about THAT. Anyway, I'm foolish enough to believe that appealing to people's 'better nature' will work wonders. I also believe that eventually it will come down to violence. Those who rule us won't give it up easily. We have to get rid of the 'what's in it for me' attitude and those who profit from it.
Oh, and I believe we are already in a soft fascism, and have just left eight years of worse. Answer truthfully, when have you ever felt in control?
We have taken him at his word to hold him accountable, but those addicted to hope are still in denial.
Holding Obama accountable starts with realization and recognition that he talks a good show and makes minor adjustments, but basically it comes more obvious with each passing hour that he is just an empty actor. Any attempt to hold him accountable is met with evasive rhetoric, lies or the defense that he has no reason to be held in account.
And what do you suggest we do? Attend demonstrations that never get any coverage, organized by groups like ANSWER that are red-baited by so-called progressives, join Code Pink who are sneered at by Socialists? Nader is probably more despised than Bush...Kucincsh is framed as a quack and even those Right-wing protests were scorned by the Left--many of those people have very real grievances that have no avenues of expression--yet here everyone smirks at their attempts to find some way of having their voices heard.
Instead of whining that we should be doing something--why not try to stop sabotaging people's efforts to do just that.
Vern - explain 'sabotage.'
And I am not whining Vern - and in my previous post I stated that until we arrive in 'large enough numbers' which is a far cry from what we have done in the past. And, dare I say, until progressives inundate the primary system and put forward candidates who are not owned, who are educated, and who do have an alternative vision, nothing will change. Both parties control the system because they control the choice process, not to mention the electoral process. Kucinich, Gravel et al weren't even on camera during most of the debates, and both literally begged to be asked questions - that type of systemic behavior is what has to change. No Vern, I don't have all the answers, but I try everyday of my life to make things better, talk to people, ask questions, push, cajole, educate. I really don't think I am working against the cause. Quite the opposite.
True , it was in response to you, but it really wasn't directed to you.
It remains a most relevant point that those who voted O'Bamba into the oval orifice essentially gave themselves an opportunity to push him and if they don't now seize that opportunity, they've squandered their vote. If they fail to push him, they ultimately reveal loyalty to elites and submission to elite rule. They might have voted for Nader which would cause elites to fear disruption of voter reliability in the next election, and respond accordingly.
I think this is a bit unfair of a commentary. The Obama voters were the ones shouting at Nader voters, quite honestly. No one was listening when we told Obama voters that they should look at his voting record. I was told, point blank, that if I didn't vote for Obama, it was a vote for McCain. We were called fringe and I have repeatedly seen people refer to Nader as being egotistical. I didn't start out supporting Nader. Never voted for him before. In fact, I considered myself a Democrat until this past election. Well, actually just after 2006 when Pelosi declared Impeachment off the table. They lost me after that. And I realized what they really are: corporate lackeys. There are exceptions, of course. I love Kucinich. If he was the nominee, he would have received my vote. But he dropped out too soon and encouraged people to vote for Obama, which was really sad for me. So then I supported Gravel. Yet another Democrat who the mainstream media deemed to be "the crazy uncle in the attic". Seriously. I studied up on him after Kucinich dropped out. I learned what incredible contributions the man has made in his lifetime and he earned my support. He clearly wants to put the power in the people's hands with his National Initiative. But then he lost the Libertarian ticket when Barr and his crew took over the convention. Again, pretty sad. I will continue to vote with my heart, for the candidate that most closely represents MY beliefs. I prefer to pick one that has the most similar beliefs up front rather than fighting the uphill battle that is trying to make a candidate act the way you think they should. I knew it would be that with Obama. I don't hate the man. Honestly. But I saw him for what he was during the campaign. He's a centrist at best. He's not a progressive. I don't care what the right wing media says he is. I saw his voting record. I heard what he said during debates and interviews. Stop maligning all Nader voters. We are not all alike, just like all Obama voters are not all alike.
I see both "sides" of this 3rd party after-thinking of the 2008 vote.
DISCLAIMER : I voted for Cynthia McKinney
Please conside that in hindsight, that the populous expression of dismay over the lost $hrubi$h decade, had yet to reach the necessary cumulation ( for whatever reason of apathy, PSYOPS propaganda, or entrenched beliefs ).
Belief that the existence of a half-ass and ineffective 3rd party would negatively impact the election was re-enforced from 2000 [s]election, regardless if true. Blamming Nadar is just wrong and an artifical channeled reaction -- manufactured consensus is winning.
Whatever happened to write-in candidate elections ?
What we have today is the realization that Americans have yet to reach that point, where they massively give up on the pathocrats ( either Dems or Repuklicans ). What we need for that massive counter-reaction to occur, is exactly what we have today in ◎, which will indubitably open more doors into an unprecedented future.
I beleive strongly that the power brokers gave us this ridiculous choice ( Palin was Pathetic ), to steer the vote and to assuage widespread feelings of powerlessness against the neoCONing gov't and banksters.
It was a choice, and we're better off with ◎ -- but it wasn't a fair choice representative of actual American beliefs and issues.
The greater the contrast and the starker the reality -- the more likely we will reach that tipping point to awken the sleeping beast of popular outrage.
We must continue and PERSEVERE -- the future is ours for the taking
Namaste