Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Betrayal of Generation Hope
As I sit here preparing for my final college exams, I can't help but think back on the ups and downs of the past two years. Ups: the defeat of the Republican Party in 2008, my own graduation from college, and the formation of progressive student and veteran movements; and downs: suffering through a war and hospitalization due to post-traumatic stress, watching my friends die in foreign countries, and now, the betrayal of my generation by a President who we put our utmost faith in.
From Apathy to Activism
On election night in 2008, thousands of students in Bellingham, Washington reacted to the news of Obama's victory by noisily and merrily marching through the cold streets to drums and bullhorns. For the first time in my life since returning from the Iraq War, I proudly carried an American flag right-side-up, broke through police barricades with hundreds of youthful, jubilant demonstrators, and partied in the middle of a street till early in the morning. The elation of the crowd of young people was matched only by the distasteful negativity of the dozen-or-so old Republicans gathered at their headquarters around a TV playing FOXnews.
Billed as the opening victory of "Generation O," the momentum of the progressive campus movement felt unstoppable. Socialist, anti-war and counter-culture groups suddenly proliferated across the area. Pro-Obama graffiti appeared on buildings and walls everywhere; articles in student publications praised progressive values. The City of Bellingham seriously considered granting sanctuary to war-resisting AWOL soldiers-- a student-led initiative.
Within weeks, the conservative reaction was underway. Letters appeared in the local paper calling for the closing of Western Washington University and the drafting of all students into GOP wars. The chairwomen of the local republicans, Luanne Van Werven, appeared on FOXnews bashing college students and demeaning the higher education in general. Conservative groups sent salaried workers to organize a young-republican group at the college, unsuccessfully. Supporters of the Sanctuary idea were shouted down at a town-hall meeting by angry republicans with signs reading "Shoot the Traitors." All in all, it seemed that with every passing week, more youth were demanding their political empowerment and more old conservatives were angrily impotent. Led by a progressive president, it seemed like the generation of Hope had reached its peak.
That was in 2008. Fast-forward one year.
The Failure of "Dumb War Theory" and Capitalism
Last week, hundreds of students again gathered to march noisily. Unlike November of 2008, however, their signs now are angry and there is no dancing. Speakers railed against the latest Bush-like troop surge, and the crowd noisily and angrily rallied against the Obama administration's failure to capitalize on any political victory. Tired of waiting for the promised change, the young, it appears, are turning to that last-resort, dirty-word: Socialism.
And why not Socialism? Young people today cannot even remember a time without war, crushing student-loans, environmental catastrophe, torture and terror. All of these, according to Marxism, are necessarily end results of unbridled Capitalism at work. It seems obvious to any kid having grown up under the Bush regime-siblings in Iraq, parents in debt, education in ruins-that the two percent of "haves" are destroying the lives of the ninety-eight percent of the "have-nots." Socialism makes sense to us, if only because Capitalism does not.
Most disappointing of all to the youth, though, is Obama's betrayal of their values. Particularly, his extensions of Bush policies and war-mongering. Obama's "dumb war" theory (i.e. that some wars are just and some are just "dumb") is, to us, a complete abomination of the concept of peace. By evoking the Reverend Doctor King in his Nobel acceptance speech while in the same breath dismissing non-violence, Obama has bastardized the concept of peace and alienated us, anti-war youth, permanently from his politics.
For myself, I have come in my time in college to an understanding of the beauty of MLK's philosophy of world peace. That violent force cannot ever be justified --that two wrongs don't make a right-- seems like second nature now. Obama's twisted pseudo-intellectual rationalization of war-mongering stands in strict opposition to the teachings of Jesus Christ (love thy neighbor, turn the other cheek, blessed are the peacemakers, thou shalt not kill, et cetera) and make this veteran sick. I would not feign to argue with the leader of the free world, but then again I have seen war from the ground up, and he has not. I know that I speak for the young anti-war movement when I say that Obama has betrayed us. I also speak for the anti-war youth when I say that we won't forget it.
Last week at an anti-war rally I met two marines preparing to go to Afghanistan. Though they were skeptical of the "hippie" protestors, they listened closely to me as an experienced veteran. I explained to them that real courage doesn't need to hide behind an M-4 and body-armor. They asked me about pacifism, and were surprised when I told them that non-violence and pacifism are two separate things. These two young marines, both misinterpreted the teachings of non-violence (the same way Obama did in his Nobel lecture), gave me the familiar "we should kill them before they kill us" argument, but they had no response to my question: why not change their minds instead of killing them? I almost expect to hear misinterpretations of non-violence from a pair of 20-year-old marines at a peace protest, but I did not expect to hear it from Commander-in-Chief Obama a week later in almost the same words.
That Obama and his generals think the cultural and ideological problems of Asia can be solved with drones and surges is a testament only to their failure of imagination. That Obama could stand up at the Nobel podium and defend his mass murders (less-dumb wars?) is a complete abomination. I know I am expressing the collective concern of my fellow students when I wonder why doesn't Obama get it? The reason Islamic extremists hate American culture is the same reason we voted for change: the world is tired of war, globalization, exploitation, and the other trappings of the for-profit American culture. There is a common denominator in our politics that Obama would rather not let himself see: the failure of our way of life. The youth of today see this from the bottom of the heap looking up, whether they are soldiers interrogating Afghani villagers, or students working the night shift to get through college. Why can't Obama see it?
The Future of Politics
As I prepare to take my first college degree and enter into the world of the Great Recession, I look back on a time of great turmoil. Not only have we students roundly rejected the Neo-Con worldview, but we have been betrayed by the leader we helped to elect. I also look forward to a time of re-generation. Though our generation is the most democratic and least republican one since the civil war, don't be surprised if we turn away from the Democratic party soon. Fool us once, DNC, shame on you. But beware: it may not happen again.
My generation can't afford not to have health care. We can't afford to live on minimum wage. We can't afford to allow CEOs to rape our natural resources. Unlike some older folks, my generation understands the differences between communism and socialism. My generation understands that war is not the answer, and we are beginning to understand who President Obama really is. We will tirelessly dedicate ourselves to fixing the planet and realizing the ideals which our parents have rejected, but we will not forget which party promised us hope and which party failed us.
We the youth will bear the yoke of tomorrow, and we the youth are quickly learning that the best way to bear that yoke is to cast it off. Real change can't be far away, with or without Obama.
137 Comments so far
Show AllQuestion! Indeed, at the WTFcom CC!! Carry on!!!
You Go youth--and thanks for your service for real change and peace.
Amen! This generation of young people are indeed a reason to have hope! What a great bunch! Ya'll keep on keepin on!!!
I've printed out multiple copies and sending the hard copies to the Democratic Party members in my area. Thank you for this amazing piece. I remember LBJ's betrayal of my father, a decorated captain in WWII. Carry on, my friend.
Good luck with the insights that disappointment has brought you, Evan. Frankly, if you and your peers had listened more carefully to our hustler-in-chief, you would have heard that he promised nothing but another version of "Morning in America", more Bernaysian feel-good black propaganda. So, join the rest of us who have been suckered by this crap for the last forty years, and, yes, great idea, let us fight for democratic socialism with a new third party or "one big union" that represents working folk across vocational lines. Eugene Debs lives!
Tony Vodvarka
There was no Generation Hope forming by voting for Obama/Biden. If people around my age were to actually examine all the candidates on the issues and not on personality, polling, and money they would have turned to people like Nader or Mckinney in the general election or at least Kucinich or Gravel in the Democratic Primary. All 4 of them were persecuted and left out while Obama was elevated by the media so that he could lie and seduce his way into office with his followers acting nastier than even Dubya's supporters. I feel sorry for this author at such a young tender age but I hope that this is a lesson that he learns and corrects his voting come 2012.
I disagree with you. I'm a teacher. I spent many hours in the classroom in the spring of 2008 warning my students that Obama is actually a Neocon. I also spent many hours in 1999 warning them that Ralph Nader was lying to them when he said the difference between Gore and Bush was Twiddlydee and Twiddlydum. I say lie because he knew the difference, as did you, but those coming into politics for the first time might not have and I know many whom he duped. I also said that Nader was wrong when he explained that it was okay to vote for him even if it meant Bush would be elected, Bush's presidency would unify the Left. So, with Nader we have 1) A blatant liar as a candidate, not merely a lapse in judgment but somebody capable of looking youth in the face and repeating a bald faced lie. (Don't think I have any delusions about Al Gore but to conflate the two candidates takes a liar. ) 2) An unforgivable lapse of judgment, an inability to recognize that if you elect a man bent on destroying the constitution, he might well succeed and his successor might continue the process. Without constitutional rights, without privacy, with permanent war and with a shift toward even greater corporate power of the individual, the left is more splintered than ever. So, no, Ralph Nader was not an alternative to Obama. Ralph Nader betrayed youth already. Ralph Nader should stick to writing fiction. He's a tragic figure, somebody who preyed off the very youthful optimism and idealism that Obama did for his own self gain and will forever go down in history as the spoiler in the most seminal point in history in our lifetimes. I say this knowing I agree with his policies more than any other candidate but knowing that his moral fiber is often overshadowed by his narcissism. Choosing a candidate is more than merely looking at the issues. Obama is a one-off. Nobody has ever, and will likely ever, be so deceptive and manipulative of his constituents. Though I hated the man, the desire to see good in him was not the problem. The problem is and was that he is the greatest deceiver in US presidential history, unlikely to ever be matched, somebody who used his skin color, his fabricated background as a community organizer and his rhetoric using phrases like "the mindset of war" to hide his warmongering.
I think I take your point, Fenner. While I do see Nader as a narcissist, I do not see him as a spoiler in any manner. He had/has a constituency and they have every right to believe in him as any other candidate. And, there were several reasons Gore lost the election, not the least of which were a poorly run election and an outright theft by the Florida and Federal Supreme Courts.
Pied Pipers abound. It takes a certain "personality" trait to want to put one's self out there and run for public office, especially in such a huge arena as the presidency. The problem is, the system requires psycophants and that's generally who runs. Certainly, it is the character trait of those who make it all the way.
But it also takes the willing cadre of the easily deceived. Not so much that this president did this, or that president did that, but that we are so willing to believe that ANY president can do much at all given the current state of MIC affairs.
So, we've all been duped again! Yeah, so, what are we going to do about it? At least the young writer of this piece has come to the realization that he, personally, has to do something. I would venture to say that a very small portion of posters here on CD go that far. And then they have the temerity to wonder how the hell they got suckered again. Unbelievable!
Well, it's been another learning experience for the Left. And once again, I ask: So, what are we going to do about it?
Oh, wait, another election is coming up... That's the answer!
Sheesh.
The young writer will do what he can for his part but at some point, he will have to realize that his valiant efforts are being TRASHED by the rascals in Washington abusing their powers. Now I have said this to others and I will say it here. No amount of efforts will amount to anything as long as society continues to TRASH its own efforts by allowing mediocre leadership to prevail. Electing mediocre leadership in place of quality driven leadership is like foolishly choosing to buy a used car that is broken beyond repair and will cost more to maintain than buying a new or used car with a better foundation. Let's apply this back to politics. I cannot speak for every former Nader voter of 2000 now calling him a spoiler but perhaps they forgot that judging candidates by money, faux "personality", corporate polling, etc... gives us mediocre leadership and higher maintenance and repair costs compared to picking a leadership that actually sides with the people so that people can actually move on and not have to waste as much time, money, and energy trying to beg their pols to listen. Elections are all about choosing the foundation to shape society's direction. Are you proud of having voted for mediocre leadership that resulted in wasted efforts and costlier maintenance?
"Elections are all about choosing the foundation to shape society's direction."
No, Jennifer, this is where you have it backwards. Elections do not shape society's direction, you and I do that. Or at least, we're supposed to.
What is democracy (or even a representative republic) without you and me? Well, it currently isn't either of those, it's a plutocracy. If we don't like it then WE have a duty to change it no matter who is in power.
Elections are about keeping the status quo. Hard work by people acting more as citizens and less as consumers are what shapes our direction.
I just hosted a meeting with my permaculture group to pare down our consumption and lower our carbon footprint. That's the kind of work that will shape a new direction, in my humble opinion.
"Are you proud of having voted for mediocre leadership that resulted in wasted efforts and costlier maintenance?"
No. Are you proud of voting for someone who will never be president, and if he ever is, will fall into the same trap as every other president before him?
The game is rigged, Hon. We can't depend on any of them to fix it. It's up to you and me.
So, what are you doing?
"Elections do not shape society's direction, you and I do that. Or at least, we're supposed to."
That is not true. You do not have the power pols have to shape policies or the direction of this country unless you just so happen to be a high paid lobbyist which I don't think you are.
"What is democracy (or even a representative republic) without you and me? Well, it currently isn't either of those, it's a plutocracy. If we don't like it then WE have a duty to change it no matter who is in power."
True and that's why we need the right foundation so that our efforts will have meaning.
"Elections are about keeping the status quo. Hard work by people acting more as citizens and less as consumers are what shapes our direction."
That is not true. You can talk all you want about "hard work" but none of it will matter as long as you reward having your hard work and everyone else's for worthy causes trashed by mediocre leadership. It's like working so hard to build your own car only to have the CEO of GM smash it because he has the power to do so thanks to Big Auto puppets in Washington bailing them out and rewarding them for bad behavior.
"I just hosted a meeting with my permaculture group to pare down our consumption and lower our carbon footprint. That's the kind of work that will shape a new direction, in my humble opinion."
That's nice but will those efforts mean anything especially if they are rendered useless thanks to Obama and Congress continuing to reward the corporate polluters?
"Are you proud of voting for someone who will never be president, and if he ever is, will fall into the same trap as every other president before him?"
Whether he wins or loses is irrelevant. When you voted for Nader in 2000, I know that you did not get distracted by all this "winnability" stuff. I don't know how you managed to trash that good spirit of yours that probably used to put quality driven progressives over DLC hacks. If all you care about is which lesser of the evil can win, then you are making yourself part of the problem and it sickens me when people apologize for the rotten status quo like that. Please snap out of it. I know you can do it but I can only guess that you have been brainwashed into believing that we should just turn a blind eye, judge books by their covers and not their contents, and gleefully be proud to have our efforts being trashed !
"So, what are you doing?"
Just how can you think of trying to divert anger away from the status quo and towards having us working class voters fight each other out? Are you trying to tell me to ignore the devils running this country onto the ground and be "happy" to see our hard work getting trashed? It is irrelevant what each of us does compared to what our leaders do for or against us. You cannot expect to defend the status quo by trying to tell people to ignore the devils behind the curtain running the country. THEY ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW. I'll continue to do what I have to but I will not put up with valiant efforts of mine and others to survive this Great Depression being trashed. Maybe I am too sensitive to this. If you can convince out of it, I am all open ears.
I'm going to start with your last two sentences because it seems to me, Jennifer, as if your sensitivity and anger are getting the best of you.
I am NOT trying to divert anger away from the status quo, I am trying to focus it to where it will count.
You keep referring to our "leaders." They are not our leaders - we are their leaders. At least, we should be. That is the trap that the system wants us to believe, the trap that subverts democracy and our participation in it.
As far as what we do as being irrelevant, you are dead wrong. Time will instruct you on this. No, you are not all open ears. I've been following many of your posts for the last year and you've hammered one note: Obama bad, Nader good. That won't do the trick - not by a long shot. Not that the power structure doesn't affect us, but that we cannot, nor should we (if we have any sense at all) wait for the power structure to change.
Jennifer, please let go of some of your anger and sensitivity - it is working against you. Believe me, I am not against you. I have gone down the road you're on and I can tell you that it hasn't worked. Maybe it will for you, who knows, but it hasn't worked for many others.
Not to say that THEY are irrelevant or that Obama is any different from the rest, just that the system will not be in our favor until and unless we do the work, including the working class.
Let me refine what I've said before: It's ALL important. Voting is important if only for the reason that if we're not strategic about it, we can make things worse. Oh yes, it can be worse!
""Elections do not shape society's direction, you and I do that. Or at least, we're supposed to.""
"That is not true. You do not have the power pols have to shape policies or the direction of this country unless you just so happen to be a high paid lobbyist which I don't think you are."
By myself, there is very little I can do. Multiplied across millions of people, there is a lot of power. Deny the system its life blood - our energy and money - and the system will realize our power. Voting wisely is only the first step. Getting off our asses is the next and essential step.
""Are you proud of voting for someone who will never be president, and if he ever is, will fall into the same trap as every other president before him?""
"Whether he wins or loses is irrelevant. When you voted for Nader in 2000, I know that you did not get distracted by all this "winnability" stuff."
Okay, look. I'll make you a deal, alright? I will vote for Nader or the GP candidate in 2012 if you start doing one thing that you think will change your world for the better. Not just sending a couple of bucks to a charity, but committing sustained time and energy to something that you really believe in and that you feel with move this society in a positive direction.
Deal?
You raise a lot excellent points about her being too angry but I can't blame her for being frustrated at this mess. We older ones owe younger people like her and this author more than a simple apology for allowing our leaders to drag them into the mess we did not have to go through. I fear that the more young people find out what lead them to where they are at, the more of them we will find as angry as Jennifer at us and never forgiving us even if it is customary to respect the elders.
Let's face it. You and I both voted for Obama. Obama may have won but what did we win out of it? The more time passes by, the more I felt like those of us who voted for Obama or for that matter Mccain have lost more than those who voted third party and won one big thing that may have looked like a small thing before, the fact that they were right. I think Obama and his party in Congress are doing their best to fail and their wish may be granted. I agree with you that we should do our part but at some point, we might just have to let the chips fall where they may and if the result is no good, go for a new thing. What do you have to lose?
Max, I may be angry and upset at what is going on but I will not lay all of the blame on the older generation. I understand the brainwashing and conditioning that they went through and similar happenings to younger generations but I am trying to find ways to help overcome it so that people like me and Evan don't feel left out and rejected while everyone else drowns in blissful ignorance. As to yours and Ted's voting, I already said before that I forgive both of you.
I'm not sure where to start as a reply, because I'm not sure where you're coming from.
First, I owe no one an apology for voting for Obama. I did so with a clear mind and a clear conscience. If you're in my age ballpark (54), you know that things can be worse, and they can we worse in a hurry. McCain/Palin would have been worse in a hurry!
Having said that... While I didn't have huge hopes that Obama would change our direction, I did have some. He sure sounded pretty! While I knew full well of the sell-out nature of the Democrats, I thought that after 8 years of Bush, even they would not be so stupid as to continue their spineless ways. I was wrong.
I am prepared to vote for a third party candidate, if that candidate is truly about building a new movement. Nader is not about that, and I can't sit here and lie about that. He may be a good man, but he is not about forwarding anything. My opinion.
Having said all this, I am not prepared to spend much more time on how bad Obama is or how great Nader could be, or any of that other horse manure. It is a distraction of the highest order. It takes us, you and me and Jennifer and the author of this piece that we are all blogging about, away from our real work, which is to do whatever we can to turn this country around. If that means marching - march! If that means writing - write! If that means organizing - organize! But if anyone thinks that this will all change just by voting in a 3rd party candidate or ever Ralph Nader, well, the Republocrats are dancing and singing at that notion! They have done everything in their power to make sure that will never happen.
I don't behoove Jennifer or anyone else the right to be hugely pissed. I am hugely pissed! Anyone who isn't oozing their brains from their ears is hugely pissed at what has gone down in the name of representation in this country. But being hugely pissed must be followed with concerted and effective effort.
Hey, you know, it's all good. If Jennifer can change things electorally, then that's what she should do. As well, with you, maxpayne. Go and do it. You have my blessing. But don't you dare tell me that my vote for anyone is wrong. I am working my ass off, and being thanked by others who don't seem to have the wherewithall to do it themselves, for giving my time and effort to organize people. And you know what? What I'm organizing for is "for a new thing." I'm organizing for what happens after this all comes down. Because believe me my friend, this house of cards is going to come down. Now ask yourself, how many chances do you think we have? And when the shit hits the fan, do you want to still be knocking on the door that never opens?
Yeah, I'm pissed. But I'm using that anger to open as many doors as I can.
Godspeed.
Ted, I used to be a staunch Democratic supporter but that has changed since 2007. I voted very reluctantly on the last minute for Obama despite my support for Ralph Nader. The more Obama screws up, the more I regret my vote for him.
There is nothing distracting about discussing Obama's and Nader's strengths and weaknesses. We can't afford to make the same mistakes repeatedly and ignore the problem. If the presidency is going bad, we can't ignore the problem and afford to allow the ship to sink. Either we try to pressure him into fighting for our cause or we prepare to throw him out come next election. Already the voters of NJ and VA spoke out and it ain't pretty especially for Jon Corzine who lost big.
I don't think I can change things electorally but I don't see anything wrong with bringing up the issue. I understand that I voted for Obama on the last minute because as one who has been eligible to vote for 2-3 decades, I realized that Nader had no chance against Congress or the corporate media. The only way that Nader would succeed in pushing forth his agenda is if he had a supporting Congress but then we would have to turn to state and local levels to prepare better leaders to later take over Congress and eventually the White House.
I understand that you are doing what you can and all as you have been discussing on this thread but if you actually think about it, you're sounding just like some of the conservatives in 2005 who made a big deal about church donations and Walmart being helpful and that we should not depend on the government to help us when we're in need. They even blamed the victims of all people. Think about it.
There is nothing to feel angry about admitting that your vote was wrong. I admit that my vote for Obama was wrong but only after he won and happily betrayed us. Now I respect your decision to deny that voting for Obama was wrong but that's like saying that voting for more national debt, more giveaways to Wall Street, more wars and funding, and similar aren't wrong. We may have anticipated different than what we are getting now but that doesn't change the fact that our votes for Obama turned out to be wrong after all.
Now I don't know much about your organization and what goes on and all but I'm willing to help you succeed on climate change talks in your local area since my place is a poopoo but I take it that your place listens to all sorts of ideas on cutting down carbon footprints. For your next meeting on climate change, how about bringing up algae for oil and discuss the benefits of green crude. I will be happy to assist you and help make your next meeting truly interesting. Algae for oil can be done on almost any location on the planet and can generate the chemical equivilant of light sweet crude oil and is carbon neutral. What do you think of opening that door?
"They even blamed the victims of all people. Think about it."
I am not blaming the people, I am exhorting them to do something about their situation! Waiting for those on top to fix it for us is a fool's dream.
"There is nothing to feel angry about admitting that your vote was wrong."
I am not angry that my vote was wrong - it wasn't. I am angry that the system is so corrupt that it keeps hurting us no matter who we vote for.
I have said several times that we need to do it ALL. Meaning, voting for the best candidate as well as doing what we can personally to change the system. What I get back is that my way is wrong and that if only I would vote for the correct candidate, the foundation will be laid. This is dangerous because it leads us into a false sense of security AND entitlement that someone else will fix things for us. That's just not the way a democratic (either direct or representative) works. Indeed, the people have grown complacent and exhausted and democracy is slipping away.
Are there any others on Common Dreams who agree with me, or am I just a single lunar out here flapping my gums? Is there any merit to what I say? Can I get just one, Amen, or should I go away and leave things to those who want to elect our problems away?
Ted, I agree with at least some of what you say even if everyone else on this forum doesn't. There is no reason to leave. I have plenty to disagree with others here too but we can find some common ground and use these forums to strategize and work out our thinkings and differences so that we can face life better. I don't expect to get an AMEN on everything and nor do I want to. Disagreements aren't necessarily a bad thing if you can justify them well enough to get people to respect them and I think you're doing a great job on it. This is a public forum and I share some of your concern on the outrage JenniferB, Beforkids, SiouxRose, RichM, etc... have and agree that they can sound a bit too overkill. Still, if things get worse no matter what we try to do for ourselves, who can blame them? Sometimes, they provide great talking points so that when I confront political opposition in a typical conversation, I am better prepared to counter their prowar pro-corporate talking points. I don't think I would have been as good without these people to dish it out.
Max,
Please don't try to paint me into a corner. Whether I leave or not depends on my needs, not on whether you agree with my point for doing so or not.
What I would like to see is whether I really am the only one here who agrees with my points. Perhaps I am, and if so, this saddens me much more than what our "leaders" are doing or not doing. If this is true, then we are truly beaten, and I'm not sure we will be able to constructively recover. I would hope that at least some of the elders on this board are not too cynical and burnt out to do some work themselves to change things and then advise younger people to do so.
I know I'm not alone here because I know others who are doing hard, personal, work. I will concede that the majority of people is not doing this - the majority is still waiting for things to come to them from the top. I'm happy to know that I'm in Howard Zinn's camp in my belief that Democracy works from the bottom, up. Tyranny works from the top down, and that is where we are headed.
You know, being a progressive is though. We just don't seem to like one another enough to work together. I have seen this over and over and it has been confirmed in many instances. We like to think that we are this way because we are independent, but I'm not so sure. I'm not sure why, but my theory is that we just don't see the value in doing the hard work that is necessary to create change. But occasionally, I see progressive folks doing things that take courage and conviction and I am inspired. So I keep going.
In short, for the most part, what I have found is that the people on Common Dreams do not inspire me. Some do, but I see far too many "elders" who are cynical. This is incredible. Our young people are fed a steady stream of shit by our culture and they have no elders, or precious few, to say, "Hey, there is something you can do. If you would just do something you believe in it would give you would see the power you have!" Young people today did not grow up being a part of huge, popular movements that changed the course of our society, one person at a time. They need people who have been there to say that it is possible - hard work, but possible. And it takes time. Boomers and other elders - we are needed! What the hell are we waiting for? Copping out is not an option!
I guess I was hoping that someone other than me would just give that notion some recognition - an Amen. Not for an "attaboy" but just to know that there are others who see what I do.
Finally, I'm not a Democrat either. Nor am I a Green. Been there. I fluctuate between believing that the best I can do electorally is to vote for the lesser evil and then do some hard, individual work, or to not vote at all. Yeah, I'd love to see a third party candidate take it, but the stage has not been set. Congress and the MIC would eviscerate anyone like that and we'd be royally screwed - even more so than we are now.
Can I get an Amen?
I'm not painting you into a corner. You are painting yourself into a corner and denying that and we're trying to help you snap out of it.
Do you want someone to agree with all of your points or only some of them? I agree with some and disagree with others.
If you still think people are lazy compared to you, then that is where your problem lies at, not giving credit where it is due and that may explain why JB gets angry at hard work getting trashed. Nobody is waiting for something to come for them but that does not excuse top leadership from lying and betraying as if they are above the law. You, me, JB, and each of us have different views of what really defines "hard work". I am tolerant of all views while most on this forum might not be as far as "hard work" is concerned. With reference to young people, today's young people do not share the luxuries of a true safety net that your generation and even mine had. No popular movement will work if we can't get some leadership to actually represent us. I think that both the individual/collective efforts combined with voting for proper representation is the answer. People during the Great Depression had pro populist leadership to honor their efforts in the form of FDR and Truman. Contrast that to today's Herbert Hoover-esque leadership in the form of Clinton, Bush, and Obama.
I understand the tough spirit among most posters on CD. I share some of it myself but I am willing to accommodate. I would be glad to honor your efforts but I don't know you. Furthermore, if you are expecting an AMEN on a silver plate, I don't think you will get it easy here. Alternet is usually more accommodating but not too Obama crazy unlike Huffington Post. Have you ever been to Alternet? I would be happy to meet you there.
Don't feel left out. I think that we all fluctuate but most either don't realize it or deny it out of fear of embarrassment.
I'll still give you some of that AMEN if not all of it. :)
It seems like the Palin/McCain ticket FORCED a lot of Americans to vote for Obama, rather than Nader.
This reveals a simply way to control American politics: make sure one of the two corporate parties is fronting idiots/maniacs. That makes voting for a third party "irresponsible" rather than a democratic choice like any other.
Ted, you don't have to make any deal. Maybe I am getting too hard on myself thinking that some of my efforts are useless. I will need to step back and fully examine this. Who you vote for has to come from the heart, not from some obligation. If I sounded too harsh, my apologies.
"Voting wisely is only the first step. Getting off our asses is the next and essential step."
That is true. The problem is that without getting the first step correct, the second step will amount to nothing. It is like building a house on a poor foundation and with "cheap" materials rather than building it on a better foundation and with better quality materials. The former will cost the owner more in maintenance and repairs that will more than cancel whatever he or she saved by taking the "cheap" route versus less in maintenance and repair and some peace of mind.
Similarly, if we had a Congress and White House with more people who thought like Nader, Kucinich, Mckinney, Gravel, etc... rather than Clinton and Obama, think of the hassles we could save ourselves. Kucinich and Sanders are the types of pols I like because progressives and liberals can trust them to be themselves and not have to be made to do the right thing unlike most Democrats who won't budge no matter how much pressuring gets put on them. Worse, those Democrats not listening to us "boldly" and shamelessly listen to and side with our enemies such as Wall $treet, James Dobson, Big Military, and the rest of the monied elites. Again, I will have to sit down and think this all through about wasted efforts and my bitter and upset feelings.
I was also jealous that people like Conyers possess the political powers that none of us have that he could use to improve things such as economic justice and health care while Kucinich never mind us has none of it and is thus marginalized. I don't know that even all of us put together could attain anything close to Conyers's powers. Maybe he has a big tradeoff that I don't know about that none of us have and I wished I knew more about what that was. I was reminded that he got into office at a time when the Civil Rights Act was being passed. Maybe the tradeoffs developed from there. I am still upset and bitter that all of our efforts to get single payer back on the table went nowhere and that Conyers added insult to the injury by voting yes to that rotten HR 3962 package and then having the nerve to show outrage on Obama when it is too late. But then if he ended up in the same risky position as MLK, oh I don't even want to think about it since it all gives me a throbbing headache. :(
"...if we had a Congress and White House with more people who thought like Nader, Kucinich, Mckinney, Gravel, etc..."
Well...well, look, I understand how you feel. I was where you are. I'd like to think that I didn't grow cynical with time, but maybe I did a little.
Still, the "what if's" have never served me well, nor do I believe they will serve you well. I hate the fact that Yahoos keep winding up in places of power. T'was ever thus.
I see my part now not in wondering why or what would happen if only, but in doing whatever little I can, no matter who does what or what could have been. Not to do so just adds to the burden.
I guess you and I will continue to come at this from opposite ends. And maybe there is more to the generational aspect than I cared to admit. Apparently, there is no better teacher than a few hard knocks. I'm sorry that you're headed for a few more. Maybe we all are.
Anyway, you keep doing what you do, Jennifer, and being fired up about the state of affairs. I know of too many others, of all generations, who don't give a fig or are just plain too flinty and cynical to even do that much. More's the pity for us all.
I'll wrap up with this rather trite, but unassailable, saying from the heyday of the 60's: You're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem.
Good night, Jennifer.
"You're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem."
I'll take the former and I still believe that step 2 will be useless until step 1 is done right. In the meantime, I'll keep up the enlightenment with others on this forum since I believe that our posts will eventually reach out to the masses on the Internet and may eventually help the electorate snap out of their tendencies to judge books by their book covers rather than by their contents. Plus, I take great ideas from the articles and comments and use them in face to face conversations. That in itself is plenty enough action on my part. The burden of responsibility still rests on the pols for whom we give them money in the form of taxes.
"I'll take the former and I still believe that step 2 will be useless until step 1 is done right."
Then Howard Zinn knows nothing.
What you are describing is Totalitarianism, not Democracy.
I don't believe you are ready to work for what you believe, Jennifer. Never fear, you have a lot of company.
Exactly what makes that totalitarianism and not democracy? Howard Zinn made the same mistakes you and I made in voting for Obama and there have been plenty of speeches from Howard Zinn begging for Obama to listen but what does it matter when Obama won and is happily giving you and me the middle finger. Does it ever occur to you that people on the Internet come across these public dialogues everyday? That said, there are plenty of very useful talking points people such as RichM, JenniferB, SiouxRose, BeForKids, and similar leave for the rest of us progressives to pick up on so that we can better confront the rightwing talking points in our daily lives. I share some of your concern at the way these people express their outrage but the worse things get, the less easy it is to ignore. I see nothing totalitarian about what she is prescribing. Democracy may involve both voting and working but true democracy involves sharpening our voting skills and getting a bang for the buck on our work. Totalitarianism is only possible when people continue to ignore the fascists in power selling our country to hell and dragging people into wars. Fascists can count on citizens to look the other way and try to turn others away from blaming the fascists who are the real culprits. Is that what you want to continue? If so, it ain't gonna happen. I made my mistake in voting for the wrong man but this time, I'm out to correct it and Obama is making it way too easy for me. You owe everyone on this forum a sincere apology for trying to discredit their enlightenment.
"Democracy may involve both voting and working but true democracy involves sharpening our voting skills and getting a bang for the buck on our work."
Okay, but how are you going to sharpen your skills when the system is rigged and so many of your fellow voters don't see it your way? And what of all the third parties that tried to break into this game? And what of the Green Party of the "We The People Party" of BeForKids' Party?
"You owe everyone on this forum a sincere apology for trying to discredit their enlightenment."
No I don't.
Follow from those who seek enlightenment, run from those who claim they have found it.
If the system is rigged, nothing you or I do will make a difference as far as individual efforts are concerned. A few people can thank you because you only served them. We're talking about leaders who have a higher set of responsibilities to follow but won't even follow their basic responsibilities. You can brag and boast about your hard work and so can I but none of it matters when we are trying to crack the rigged system. You cannot ignore the fact that the rigged system is killing you no matter what you do. If you read the novel "Animal Farm" by George Orwell, you would have come across one of the characters who is just like you. The pig leaders are just as fascist as the prior farmer but Boxer the horse doesn't mind trusting the pig despite the pigs stressing Boxer out worse than the prior farmer. What did Boxer receive for all his hard work on the farm despite the tyranny? A one way trip to the slaughter house.
I don't share Jennifer's views that third parties will win anytime soon as far as Washington is concerned. It will take at least a decade to see any signs of it. The same can be said of BeForKids's "Main Street Party" which I like but she and I agreed that the party will take a lot of organization and unity just to barely compete against the two party system. That doesn't mean that we should write them off though and stick to getting cheated. JenniferB, myself, and most of us on this site have acknowledged voting for third parties on local and state levels. Furthermore, this also does not excuse bad leadership in any way. There is no way you can justify telling others to forget about the Obama administration killing us all from behind the scenes and then blaming people for not doing enough in your personal opinion. It is disgraceful and self-defeating.
"It is disgraceful and self-defeating."
I think you feel threatened by what I have to say.
Do you feel threatened, Max? You shouldn't. If your beliefs and stance are true, you should not feel threatened.
And yeah, people are not doing enough. In another situation, I'll bet I could find you deriding Americans for being soft and having a sense of entitlement. I'm not talking about any one group, but the American people as a whole. Not true? Then how do you explain the fact that our nation has military bases in over 100 countries all fighting for our way of life? Yours and mine, Max! OUR way of life! Is this a sustainable way of life? Do you think our MIC "leaders" are going to address this? No, I think we need to man up and start doing things for ourselves. Not one thing, but everything, including voting wisely (however you define that - I'm not as myopic as you).
See, I never leave myself out of the equation, as you seem to do. I am as much a part of this problem as anyone else, including you. And you know what? There are many cases of poor people fighting and organizing and doing things and working for change. Indeed, in the history of social change, it has always been the downtrodden who have had to fight and scratch their way to the table. While I am not poor, I look to their struggles and willingness to organize and work for what they believe.
And I take courage and encouragement from them.
So, no, I don't believe that electoral efforts will yield much. Instead, I am throwing in with those who are organizing and working for change. If that makes me disgraceful and self-defeating, then I'm guilty. If that is the case, I'd rather be guilty with them than innocent with you.
I cannot believe you are acting this stubborn. You think it's fun to make people ignore the real culprits don't you? I don't expect to convince you but I will let readers from all over the world judge who supports totalitarianism vs democracy on this forum. In the meantime, please head on over to the Monsanto article and feel free to defend "Greg R" and the rest of the Big Agri shills ! :(
But Jennifer, I have conceded that both electoral actions and individual actions are necessary, and _I_ am being stubborn?
I don't think any of this is fun, Jennifer, so please don't conflate my belief and actions with what others on this site are doing with Big Agri. I'm not a fat cat - I'm feeling the effects just like everyone else.
I didn't mean to say that I think you support Totalitarianism. My bad if it sounded like that. I meant to say that top-down approaches are not democratic - actually, they are anti-democratic. Hence my use of totalitarian. Bad example perhaps, but that is how things work.
You know, I've offered to meet you in the middle and vote for Nader, but you refuse to meet me there. Why? Why can't I get you to talk about what you do, or plan to do? I'd love to hear what moves you to action, because you are about to inherit this world. I have two children (25 and 21) and I grieve for the world their elders are handing them. It isn't right or fair, but then, fairness has never really entered into the equation. What really matters is what we do about the situation at hand.
Jennifer, whether we vote for Nader or Obama, things are going to get worse. I don't say this because I think it's fun, but because I'm afraid that most people will not be prepared. Vote for whomever you want, but please prepare yourself. What I have done, and am doing (permaculture, transition towns, sustainability, community...especially building community) will all be very necessary in the new world, possibly a world made by hand. The "leaders" are dicking around while this planet burns up and our economy comes down and a whole host of other things swirl around into a perfect storm. We need to toughen up, and the best way is to get to work with others to change things in our own communities.
Alright, I think we've discussed this enough, so I'm going to stop. I bear you no ill-will, Jennifer. To the contrary, I like you and I like your intelligence and spunk. I wish I had had your spunk when I was your age but I was too involved in raising my family and my own life. What can I say, I'm a late bloomer.
Peace.
Interesting. I shall take this post into account. No hard feelings. By the way, thanks for standing up to Monsanto in that article. I guess we all want the best but will have to find some way to agree on the steps and how to approach them. Sigh. :(
Nader didn't cost Gore the election. Gore cost Gore the election. The last person I wanted to vote for was anyone associated with Bill Clinton. Democrats voted in mass for Bush because they were sick of the Democrats selling them out on NAFTA, health care, having the props knocked out from under them with the repeal of new deal legislation (Glass Steagle act, Welfare reform)etc. That fucking Clinton administration was the best republican administration that ever existed. That's why Gore lost. Obombya was cloned from Clinton cells left on a blue dress. You can tell it's true by looking at all the Clinton Administration officials Obombya has surrounded himself with. What we are looking at is four more years of the Clinton Gore Administration. I'm sure idiots like your self that think Gore was a good choice are in a masturbatory euphoria about that. You shouldn't be teaching and indoctrinating students with your fairy tale bullshit. God I'm sick of phoney ass liberals like yourself.
Hounddog4
Very well said. Fenner reminds me of other liberals who complain about Nader such as Eric Alterman and Todd Gitlin in the documentary An Unreasonable Man which detailed Nader's life. Perhaps Fenner is saying that Nader does have the right to run for president but then becomes quite worked up and distraught when someone like Nader dares to actually go ahead and exercise his constitutional rights.
Here is a news flash for Mr. Fenner. When people are in a voting booth not only can they vote for Nader but they also have a right NOT to vote for him if he or she so wishes. Nader believed that he was offering voters an alternative to the Democrats and the Republicans and, despite Fenner's misguided belief, he has every right to do so. As you imply, that is what Fenner should be teaching his students instead of brainwashing them into believing that third party candidates do not have a right to run for office if they so desire.
News for you. My objection is to his lie, not to his running for office and offering an alternative. No, my objection is to lying. He lied repeatedly about Gore v. Bush and tried to create a false paradigm in people's minds. I never heard Kucinich or Gravel voice such an outrageous lie nor any of the other great progressives. You must understand that a public servant conflating facts is egregious. Bush conflated Hussein and Al Queda. Obama conflates Al Queda and the Taliban. In a court of law, they could and should be convicted of murder. Nader did not commit a crime because he did not hold public office but his lie was as morally reprehensible as Gore's lie when he voted for Gulf War One.
What lie? Nader pointed out that there was little difference between the two political parties. They both work for capitals interest not the publics interest. Nader was talking truth to power. There was no false paradigm in what Nader was saying. The facts being conflated are the ones your putting out about Nader costing Gore the election. People have had enough of our one party system in this country. It doesn't matter who you vote for you get Bush. That's exactly what Nader was saying and history has proved him correct. It's a corporate run duopoly. Obombya is proof that you can blow smoke up the electorates ass, promise some change and continue with the corporate rape of our country. The facts are that phoney ass liberals like yourself really aren't interested in changing the status quo. You have tenure. your income is guaranteed. Your retirements are safe. You don't want real economic reform that might threaten your fairy tale life. You don't want equatable retirements, health care, job saftey because you find a true socialist economy threatening. Hence you support corporate candidates like Gore, Kerry, Obombya who truley are the lesser of two evils. Fuck that I want a voting system that allows me to vote for who I want without electing who I don't want.
Hounddog4
Ka-boom! You nailed it. Intelligently and persuasively well stated.
Hounddog - what/whom do you see as our likely options in 2012?
Power relinquishes nothing. You take power. You can't put yourself into debt peonage. If your borrowing money to go to school they own you. We have to realise that the corporate educational system is not the only source of knowledge. We have to reject this corporate economic system by not participating in it. We need to create our own systems of currency, employment, agriculture, education, art, music etc. that doesn't feed this profit driven corporate controlled system. Drop out of the current system. Tune out the corporate blather. Tune into a new way of thinking that doesn't reward profits but values life. The most importatant thing we have in life is our time and the ability to control that time. Why use it enriching some Wall Street crook? use it for your own enrichment. You should be rewarded for your own endeavors. The current system is based on preying on your inherent fears. If I don't get a good education I won't get a good job. If I don't get a good job I won't have a good wage. If I don't have a good wage I won't get a good house. I won't have a retirement. Hell the current economic collapse shows you you aren't going to get that anyway. In spite of your fears. I think we have to go back to small community units that value social values. I don't know what our options will be. I do know it's not going to be in the current system.
Sioux Rose
HOUND DOG: Great post and out of the box thinking.
I take your point. But it appears you probably trusted Ralph Nader enough to give him your vote when that was a possibility - or have I misunderstood you? And if Ralph Nader represented enough of a corrective to the politics-as-usual of Bush/Gore to garner your vote, then whom might the next corrective be, for 2012, assuming some of us will still want to trudge to the polling station for our quadrennial exercise in futility? Or assuming that some of us are /finally/ sufficiently motivated to start laying the groundwork for a takeover by better heads than those that now make ruinous decisions in our name?
Why do we need a leader? Why can't power be shared? Why can't we control our own decisions based on our own needs? Democracy depends on an informed electorate. That's why we have a corporate media system. The last thing corporations want is an informed electorate. I don't think it would matter if God was president of our government. It's a failed system. The quicker we can accept reality the quicker we can start to take action to change it for something other than corporate profits. We need a system based on life needs not profits at any cost.
Hounddog, come November 2012, /someone's/ going to be elected to succeed Barack Obama. And we all know that the range of potential successors ranges from the awful to the godawful, and there's a difference between the far ends of that spectrum - a difference I'm willing to take note of and craft a vote accordingly. Aren't you?
The system is surely a failed system. But like it or not, a still-powerful Executive Branch is going to oversee and shape its collapse, and not all landings are equal.
Again I ask: do you see anyone on the horizon who just might stem the tide at least a little, were enough desperate progressives willing to build a movement to get him/her elected? I've got a lot riding on this: I have a 26-year-old son.
I see no one capable of changing this thing. Like I said above it's going to become a matter of how will we survive. The current system won't provide for peoples needs. Please reread what I stated above. It's up to you to get your own life in order. It's up to you to develope the skills you need to cope with what's coming at us. Your wants can be insatiable. Your needs can be met. Learn how to be a human being.
"Power relinquishes nothing. You take power. You can't put yourself into debt peonage. If your borrowing money to go to school they own you. We have to realise that the corporate educational system is not the only source of knowledge. We have to reject this corporate economic system by not participating in it."
Well said. You said it better than I've been saying for over a year now, so thank you.
This is the tack I'm taking and I invite all willing and able citizens to join this leaderless movement.
Power never cedes power - it has to be taken. While I would not like to see it taken violently, it may come to that at some point. In the mean time, we, individual citizens, can do our part peacefully by withholding as much of our life energy from the system, the power.
With each election, we lose more power and control over our lives. The freedom to withhold our energies and money is still our right. Let's use it while we can.
FMI, check out (or form) a local permaculture or transition towns meetup (www.meetup.com and search for one). Join (or form) a time bank. Join (or form) a simplicity circle. People are hungry for community and alternatives to this current dis-eased culture.
Well, it's not just Gore who isn't different from Dubya but the entire party has gone out on a limb to prove Nader correct. Nader did not betray the youth. Most of the youth never gave him a chance because they fell for the lies from the Democrat Party. Algore would have allowed Joe Lieberman, his VP pick, to destroy the Constitution anyway. But all that aside, the President can trash the Constitution but only if Congress too easily allows him or her to do so. The Democrats had plenty enough in 2001-2006 to filibuster but they allowed the slight GOP majority to prevail. Even when the Democrats had the majority in 2007 and 2008 but they refused to use it to stop the president from further trashing to Constitution or even reverse some of the trashing. This year is no different. Nader never was a narcissist nor will he ever be one. I'm not going to get too deep into the politics for I'm not in a mood and I have already exhausted my energy doing that a few days ago.
Since you are a teacher, why don't you try a new method of training your students to put quality before quantity? To successfully overcome the seductive nature of criminals such as Dubya and this president, you have to convince people to think beyond politics and actually look at the issues non-politically. If you were to examine a little closer how Nader discusses the issues vs Gore/Kerry/Obama, you would have noted the difference being that Nader is non-political while the other side is too political.
Nicely said, I also agree with your other comments. I think you are spot on concerning Nader as well as Obama. It's very frustrating for those of us who were onto this fraud from the beginning.
I'm glad that Generation O is starting to wake up but I still have to live with the consequences of their inability to think their way out of a paper bag.
The worst part is that the ease with which they were fooled sets a terrible example for future unscrupulous politicians.
I used to believe that Al Gore would not have invaded and occupied Iraq. However, after the revolting disaster of FUBARack H. Obama, I am now convinced that he would have.
Get rid of the Republicans! Get rid of the Democrats! Or there is no hope!
Fenner. Haven't you learned ANYTHING over the last year? Everything Bush did Gore would have. You still fall for the rhetoric. Gore supported the dismembering of Yugoslavia under our bombs because they wouldn't allow themselves to be plundered by the Anglo-American banks. Yugoslavia was getting prosperous and, as Chomsky said as the Berlin Wall came down, eastern europe will be "underdeveloped", by force if necessary. Gore was an enthusiastic backer of the continual bombing of Iraq's civilian life support systems (electrical plants, water treatment facilities, etc), all in violation of international law (killing an est. 435,000 children). He supported the destruction of Welfare, imposition of NAFTA, and the repeal of Glass-Steagall (Gramm-Leach Bliley act) Don't you get it? They are 2 wings of the same party. Ask yourself; has Obama (Oh god this list is endless)... sought repeal of the Patriot Act, broken up the Too-Big-To-Fail banks, re-instituted Glass-Steagall, closed Gitmo, stopped rendition, ended 2 wars against people who never did ANYthing to us, reduced (real) troops in Iraq, held international torture criminals legally responsible (as our treaty obligations demand)... I could go on but you Nader-haters are one step up from Glenn Beckheads, it's like screaming at a clam.
"...Don't think I have any delusions [sic - he means 'illusions'] about Al Gore but to conflate the two candidates [ie, Gore & Bush] takes a liar..."
- Actually, the difference between Gore & Bush was very much like the difference between Obama & McCain. BOTH of these match-ups were essentially "Tweedle-dum vs Tweedle-dee," as Nader so accurately put it. In fact, the US political system permits ONLY such match-ups. The whole system is fake because BOTH parties are controlled by the same class interests, and agree on virtually everything but social wedge issues (like abortion & gay marriage). In particular, both parties agree on subordinating the whole population to the interests of the military-industrial complex & Wall St.
Once you agree on that much, the so-called "differences" between the parties pale into insignificance.
People like Fenner can't see straight because they're blinded by wild hatred for Bush. But the US corporate state no longer permits presidents who are anything but Bush. Apart from cosmetic differences (like speaking ability & style), ALL US presidents (and major-party candidates) are now basically Bush. Clinton, Gore, Kerry and McCain were all just slightly different flavors of Bush. In an ironic way, Bush was the most "honest" of them all, because he was such a simpleton that he couldn't conceal his true perspective. Democratic candidates differ from Republicans mainly in their ability to conceal how much alike they really are.
Gore appeared to be not quite as bad as Bush, just as Obama seemed not quite as bad as McCain. But the truth is, they were all just variants of the standard imperialism/corporatism/militarism recipe.
I know one thing for sure and that is this: nothing will split the posters on this site into two nasty name-calling factions faster than the mention of Mr. Nader.
"Nader!" (Horses whinney, omminous music sounds).
Took me a minute, but I remember Young Frankenstein. What Knockers!
my reply to anyone who blames Nader for W:
I will always vote 3rd party then Republican then Democrat in that order
at least the Republicans do what they say they will do
Nader saved me from voting for Bush
So your generation can't afford not to have health care? Your generation got suckered just like mine. There isn't going to be the basis for making mousetraps let alone the basis for a health care industry when the next portion of the plan unfolds. So take your self-entitledment thinking and stuff it.
I'm certain there is no real punch behind your generation's supposed bellicosity as it generally doesn't know how to check polarity of the batteries in the gd tv remote. You make me laugh.
I didn't read any self- entitlement thinking in this piece. I saw someone taking responsibility for shaping the future the way he wants to see it going. Since you're distancing yourself by at least a generation from this 24 year old, I assume you're about my age or maybe a little older. Yes, our generation has suffered some hard knocks from the pillaging by the Boomers that have, but bitterness is not going to ingratiate us into the new agenda makers that have the energy to build good things in the middle of the waste, the detritus the Banksters and PTOB have heaped on us. Those of us who are going to engage our world come what may, are going to share our experience(costly wisdom) and rocking slow and steady with those that might have more
idealism and initiating energy.
I didn't read any bellicosity in what he wrote, either. I read 'determination' , as in self-determination. If you don't have enough beautiful things in your life to maintain a level of equanimity or gratitude, maybe your personality is repellent.
Agreed.
I applaud the young man for coming to the realization at such a young age. At his age, I was freaking clueless.
The best way for him to move forward, is to let go of the shore of electoral solutions and swim into the river of personal action.
Enthusiastically seconded.
well said.
37 years ago, at the writer's age, I knew hope was hopeless.
It is individual determination and conviction which succeeds.
The illusion of choice behind the voting booth's curtain is futile.
What was the Wizard of Oz's advice?
"Ignore the man behind the curtain."
Clarence, maybe there are some things this young man has yet to learn but as much as we all would like to laugh and sneer at him, I think that it is time we actually helped people like him out. I wished I could just email him my thoughts and give him some more help but there is no contact information for him. We are at a point where maintenance and repair costs are flying through the roof but the least we could do is try to convince these young ones better ways to distinguish voting for real change vs illusion.
A thoughtful, well written article by this former Iraq War veteran. I am not sure, however, that I share his enthusiasm that this current young generation has now become that scornful and skeptical of Obama. It seems that whenever I travel to the nearby liberal town of Olympia in Washington I never fail to discover vehicles which still carry Obama/Biden 08 stickers and next to them another sticker which proclaims, apparently without irony, Wage Peace. This generation today is the one that will have to storm the barricades and will have to do its utmost in persuading its fellow citizens that Obama is leading this country down the wrong path by dropping 500 lb. bombs and drone missiles on innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Perhaps the author can take encouragement from these words:
"You do not become a "dissident" just because you decide one day to take up this most unusual career. You are thrown into it by your personal sense of responsibility, combined with a complex set of external circumstances. You are cast out of the existing structures and placed in a position of conflict with them. It begins as an attempt to do your work well, and ends with being branded an enemy of society."-Vaclav Havel
bravo Evan Knappenberger.
You have found the right word = socialism and total rejection of Capitalism = that economical equivalent of self=defeating HIV virus. I believe that your generation will start removing layers upon layers of sh$t thrown upon history of humankind by masters of of manipulation. Start from reading of Communist Manifesto and compare this 161 years old document with current situation. You will be surprised young man. Sorry for mispunctuation = I use Turkish keyboard. Ame to the stars.
IMHO any system founded on heirarchy will fail to serve the well being of the people. Isms of any flavor are dead ends. "Leadership" is one of the great myths of powerbrokers. Fed on a diet of "heros and leaders" the people are simply led to serve.
Still,,, I liked this piece of writing. It felt inciteful and decisive.
I would like to believe that the spirit of freedom has found it's generation... my problem with that idea is that so many of the young seem pretty addicted to the soporifics of capitalism... big screen plasma TVs, the newest Ipods, air conditioning, and Spring Breaks all seem rather essential to the majority... I know young adults who not only aren't into ecology, they want nothing to do with Nature - except maybe a nice sand beach - as long as it comes with a frosty six-pack!
To Mr. Knappenberger I say Bravo for your awareness and commitment to a higher vision. I am happy to support any non violent means to Change. It seems to me our current "developed" society is mentally, spiritually, emotionally. and physically imbalanced. When we stop looking for "leaders" and start taking responsibility for our lives and the policies supported by our "taxes"... then freedom may actually stand a chance!
Live Simply So That Others May Simply Live
Your generation is as vapid and foolish as mine has been. It gloms onto the most charismatic candidate and doesn't hold that candidate to any issue. It doesn't want to pay for other people's health care. It facily accepts Obama's just war theory. It hypes its own entrapenurialism without looking at social consequences. It still has the American Dream of consumption and self aggrandizement. And it is in for a very rough ride.
Do we have to classify generations like this? I am only a few years older than him and while I think differently from him, I still say he has room for improvement. In fact, I still say that your generation has room for improvement because I have seen and met people around my parents' age have a change of heart and try their best to repair and reverse the damage despite their efforts getting TRASHED by Washington. The least you and I can do is teach and convince these young minds to distinguish between real change vs illusions so that they can join us in voting for changing the foundation and making our individual efforts mean something rather than allowing them to continue voting to keep the same defective foundation intact where our individual efforts will get TRASHED. I hate it when valiant efforts get trashed all because a bad foundation resulted in bigshot criminals butting in for the MIC and Wall $treet. The sooner we strive for a better foundation, the sooner we can live in peace and not be put tears with efforts rendered wasted and useless along with higher maintenance and repair costs generation after generation.
"Do we have to classify generations like this? I am only a few years older than him and while I think differently from him, I still say he has room for improvement. In fact, I still say that your generation has room for improvement..."
Bravo! I heartily agree with all of what you wrote above.
We don't need another "ism" to further split us. Classism, recism and all the rest are doing just fine without one more.
My generation (square in the middle of the baby boom) has much room for improvement!
I always thought that even though every generation can be unique, there are always bright spots worth examining in each and every one of them. I still believe in respecting my elders and I don't want to give that up.
Lovely town, Bellingham, set between ocean water and some nice lakes, commuting distance to the mountains, right on the I-5 corridor, and only 40-odd miles to Canada. Lovely article, too, well-written and AFAIK accurate - certainly sincere.
A small typo confuses 'feign' with 'deign', I suspect, but I applaud this effort, this piece for peace.
Evan Knappenberger, thank you for this excellent, inspiring essay!
It seems to me that it is the young and the old who are most likely to see through the lies that form our cultural milieu.
I don't know what happens to so many of us when we're in the middle, but somehow we become blind to reality for several decades. It is voices like yours which may be successful in sounding the wake-up-to-reality call.
Best wishes and thanks!
Yes, indeed, this young man is right on, and I applaud his courage and determination.
It did not take him long to see through the layers and layers of ideological obfuscation dispensed by most of the institutions (of education or otherwise) of this country.
It is time for a great shake down, and the Democratic Party must be left behind, as much as its kin in sin, the Repugnant Party.
Those two allegedly separate parties are in fact the two right wings of the one party that is bent on destroying the country by sucking the majority's blood to feed the greedy insanity of a tiny minority of private interests (the predatory corporations and their various enablers and enforcers).
As Ralph Nader responded to the charge that he'd cost Gore the election, " I was under the impression that Al Gore won the election." How soon we forget the first outrage of 2001.
Barack Obama' ascendency to the Presidency was a gift, a no-brainer following 8 years of Cheney-Bush, gift-wrapped with the candidacy of Sarah Palin. I mean, I've wondered if there any other way to explain the choice of that poor, foolish woman to be the V.P. Candidate, except to insure the election of the candidate of "change and hope (and maybe even peace)" Barack Obama. From which we are delivered another disappointment. Were we suckered? Hasn't the collective we always been?
Anyway, as a Vietnam vet, I applaud Even Knappenberger for being so much more alert, active and articulate than I was at the same age following my year participating in the bloody, cruel, imperial criminality of Vietnam.
To others who say " I told you so" I ask, what's the benefit of thatand other recriminations now? It wasn't a democracy then, it isn't now, but could become one if we recognize who our allies are, not berate them for their mistakes and work together. But, it will need be more than pushing pixels on screens such as this.
See you at the Barricades?
Thank you, Chamoke. A brilliant observation:
"I mean, I've wondered if there any other way to explain the choice of that poor, foolish woman to be the V.P. Candidate, except to insure the election of the candidate of "change and hope (and maybe even peace)" Barack Obama." The weirdness of it seems almost obvious in retrospect; watch for it again in 2010 & 2012. Obama's best insurance is the absurd theater played by the "opposition".
...and a sharp admonishment:
"To others who say " I told you so" I ask, what's the benefit of that and other recriminations now? It wasn't a democracy then, it isn't now, but could become one if we recognize who our allies are, not berate them for their mistakes and work together." That same sentiment should apply even to tea-baggers, who need enlightened empathy not vilification.
Yes, see you at the barricades!
"what's the benefit of that and other recriminations now?"
The benefit is to analyze what happened and learn from it. Obama whispered sweet nothings in a generation's ear and they swooned. They bought into "our time has come" and rejected older progressives. We couldn't be heard over the ecstasy of a new generation with all the answers. Turns out they were sold a lie. So it is time to work together instead of believing those who went before have nothing of value to offer. And, it is a two-way street: for the older generation to not stereotype and sell-short the younger and vice a versa.
Recriminations have a place in learning. When it degenerates into divisive stereotyping, then it means the psy-ops succeeded. But we do have to see what happened in order to learn from it.
"It sounds kind of arbitrary, but I'm not joking," the Green Party candidate told The Denver Post. "There's really no other way to end this. At this point, no one's ever going to know who really won Florida."
Conveniently changed his story later to suit his needs.
Knappenberger passionately expresses the painful difference between the hope-deterred of Republicans and the hope-decieved-and-betrayed of Obama, a level of magnitude difference that the Democratic Party has yet to understand or experience. The damage is (ever) lasting.
"...Obama has bastardized the concept of peace and alienated us, anti-war youth, permanently from his politics ... I have seen war from the ground up, and [Oabma] has not ... Obama has betrayed us ... we won't forget it."
With a perverse application of 'just war' theory, Obama joins the ranks of sliver-tongued armchair warriors who tickle the ears of pseudo patriots prompting them to rise reflexively in standing ovation.
Ironically, I agree with Obama (and King Solomon)---that there is a time for violence. To wit:
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ---John F. Kennedy 1962
"And why not Socialism?"
In one word..."failure"
Socialism has been an abject and total failure and generally a painful one where ever its been tried.
There are various justifications for its failure trotted out from time to time, like "real" socialism wasn't tried.
Simply name one sucessful "Socialist" government. There isn't and hasn't been one.
The only form that has had any degree osf longlevity has been one that uses a Capitalist Market Economy to sustain itself.
What horseshit. You better read about Cuba. It's how Cubans have been able to survive the collapse of the Soviet Union and the years of economic embargos put on them by the USA. By the way their population enjoys a 99% literacy rate and their # export is doctors. Dear Eight Ball you don't know of what you speak. You probably just got back from church with a belly full of Jesus and don't realize he is the worlds greatest purveyor of socialism. Less masturbation for you Eight Ball your blind enough.
PS Eight Ball The Cubans don't have 47 million people without health insurance. OHHHH what failure. Dumbass!
"population enjoys a 99% literacy rate.."
BS. That's what the govts in eastern Europe were claimng too. Turned out it was not entirely accurate.
"Cubans don't have 47 million people without health insurance". Correct, they don't. They only have 11 million with minimal healthcare. Don't believe everthing Michael Moore says.
If I were to have to make a judgement call as to whose government provided Statistics more accurate , I would pick that of Cuba's over that of the United States.
In virtually every measure the USA "Cooks the books" from its true rate of unemployemnt to its deficits, from the true rate of inflation to job creation.
Ok, so I've read a lot of your posts and besides yoru obvious bias against capitalism you seem like an intelligent adult. I can't believe you just said that: "If I were to have to make a judgment call as to whose government provided Statistics more accurate , I would pick that of Cuba's over that of the United States."
I have seen several posts from different users comparing USA to Cuba. Of course, Cuba comes out on top. Just a word of advice. If you want to compare the US to another country try, Canada, UK or some western European nation. Saying Cuba is better makes informed people think you are either lying or have no idea what you are talking about.
"...Simply name one sucessful "Socialist" government. There isn't and hasn't been one..."
- This is an ignorant remark. First of all, those who believed in the divine right of kings in 1650 could have said the same exact thing to visionary proponents of popularly-elected democracy. "Simply name one successful 'democratic' government. There isn't and hasn't been one..." // Jeering at socialism as "never yet having succeeded" is the same as jeering at attempts at manned flight, before the Wright Brothers. Socialism is a proposal for organizing economic & political life in a more enlightened & rational way than has thus far been seen. The claim is not that "socialism has already been successful," but rather that it COULD be successful, & would be a great improvement over what we now have.
- Secondly, a major reason limiting the success of the few attempts at socialist government made thus far, is that every time an attempt so much as threatened to get off the ground, the US & other capitalist powers swooped in to isolate & destroy it.
"...The only form that has had any degree osf longlevity has been one that uses a Capitalist Market Economy to sustain itself..."
- This is another ridiculous ahistorical assertion. For instance, ancient & medieval systems like feudalism, absolute rule by kings & pharaohs, slavery, etc all had considerable longevity. None of these systems were "capitalist market economies."
RichM
A very well-reasoned and persuasive comment that you have put forth.
Right on.
You are woefully misinformed.
Name one Successful "Capitalist Government". There is not and have not been one.
Unless you consider Old age pensions, minimum wage laws, prohibitions against Child Labor, Unemployment insurance, food stamps , Universal health Care as coming to us from CAPITALISM.
None of these are market based. They come to us via SOCIAL Programs.
Who brought up "capitalist governments"? I didn't make the slightest mention of such, Better yet were you attempting ever so poorly to make a comment about my throwing a wet blanket on the loony idea of direct democracy which has never worked except back in the times of hunting and gathering societies which didn't have any permanent institutionalized authority, But ever since then nothing even close to this except in those few hunting and gathering societies still left has ever worked,
Read some solid anthropology or even oral history from these societies,
AD
GWN, who prey tell is woefully misinformed? Oh, and I was replying to your "comments" about "capitalist governments," as I hadn't made any such comments nor do I think at that point any other commenter had, I may have missed some, But regardless I'm not a water carrier for capitalism, and you don't have to convince me that "capitalist governments" whatever they are and capitalist economic systems in bed with prostituted political systems wedded to super rich white men as pimps is anything worth a damn,
AD
GWN, who prey tell is woefully misinformed? Oh, and I was replying to your "comments" about "capitalist governments," as I hadn't made any such comments nor do I think at that point any other commenter had, I may have missed some, But regardless I'm not a water carrier for capitalism, and you don't have to convince me that "capitalist governments" whatever they are and capitalist economic systems wed to prostituted political systems wedded to super rich white men as pimps is anything worth a damn,
AD
AD
Perhaps I am mistaken but I think that your criticism of GwNorth is misplaced as his comments were directed not at you but rather at Henry8.
I was responding to henry8. There is and never has been such a thing as a free market economy because they do not work.
That we have SOCIAL programs and regulations on banks and monopolies and the like shows that CAPITALISM is unworkable.
Watch Henry pulling out the great idol of mad industrialism, "the Capitalist Market Economy."
Trouble is that capitalism is a whore that accomodates any and every political system, from the National-Socialism of Hitler, the fascism of Mussolini, the totalitarian Catholicism of Franco to the Chinese Communist Party and the phoney democracy of Japan.
I suppose that by 'market economy', you mean 'free market economy'. Trouble with that other great idol of predatory industrialism is that there is no such thing as a free market, save in the minds of the ideologues (mostly rich white men) that loiter the halls of Congress and that fill the pages of publications such as the Wall Street Journal, and in the economics departments of our universities. All markets have controls attached to them: controls emanating from large firms and their monopolistic agendas, various types of institutions, and, of course, the state and its institutions. No market is constituted by mere relations of exchange (that is the utopian concept of "the" free market economy peddled by all the free market preachers), but also by relations of cooperation, conflict, solidarity, and domination.
Another source of trouble to your phantasy is that capitalism and the market are perfectly separate and separable phenomena: there were market economies before the advent of capitalism in many prosperous cities or city states; there are markets (in certain social spaces and certain geographical regions) during the era of capitalism that manage to escape the dominion of capitalist relations; and there will be market economies after capitalism has been relegated to the dustbin of history. Also, need I mention that the market in China is highly regimented? Or that the U.S. is constantly at odds with this or that country owing to its policies on import tariffs and other customs regulations?
Big trouble is that the mechanisms of a deregulated market wreak havoc on entire populations, as we have had yet again to learn the hard way in the last two years with the collapse of the real estate market and the financial institutions of this country.
Super big trouble is that the free market mechanisms are totally incapable of dealing with problems of unemployment and corruption, the destruction of the environment, drug, organs, weapons, and human trafficking, and violence.
Et cetera... I could go on, but this should suffice to guard you against the seductions of the easy and cozy language of free market phantasies.
How socialist does it have to be?
Can I name Norway or Sweden? Can I name France, which elected Mitterand in its day, or does France count?
If indeed universal health coverage is socialist, why should we not name every post-manufacturing country outside of the US of good old A?
While we're at it, why does FDR's New Deal not qualify as socialist? Do I paint FDR as a commie if I mention that the idea of a graduated income tax or the WPA derives in many ways from Marx and various Marxists? FDR's New Deal did manage to reverse the spiral of unemployment in 1932. Unemployment rose again as measures were repealed, and began to reduce again when they were reinstated. Is that not success or not socialism?
The question of "real" or "unreal" socialism might be taken many ways, but if we're going to say that Leninist state capitalism is socialist (and yes, I see some reason for that) then I don't see why other economies based on socialist ideas should not be included.
How successful does it have to be?
Can I name the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, who improved the country considerably for their people by removing the Somocistas, despite massive problems created by the US and narcotics bankrolled mercenaries? The Sandinistas were voted out because people got tired of picking body parts out of schools and sending 14-year-old divers to defuse American mines in the harbors, but an admittedly compromised Daniel Ortega has been voted back into office.
Ho Chi Minh successfully removed Japanese fascists, French imperialists, and American neo-imperialists. The resulting government may not be democratic, but neither were those that preceded it.
While I concede that one might argue the point, I would say that Castro has improved Cuba from the paradiso mafiosi run by Batista in the '50's. It's not like Cuba had a free press before Castro, but Castro has probably made that worse nonetheless - though this may in part be a condition that accompanies repeated assassination attempts, decades of blockade and the constant threat of foreign invasion. On the other hand, education and medicine are clearly improved, and most economic indicators show improvement despite the blockade.
There are plenty of reasons to argue that Hugo Chavez' socialismo para el siglo 21 is successful. Evo Morales' policies involve some socialistic premises.
Of course, if the measure is just "longevity," I suppose this is all irrelevant.
I suppose you're counting China as "using a capitalist economy to sustain itself," but I don't see how that fits. Wealthy Chinese, party members and ex-party members, are getting rich off of the sufferings of their supposed comrades. Is this a communist regime with a capitalist economy, a fascist regime under a different name and smelling about as sweet, or a neo-Confucian society that has laboriously overthrown foreign imperialism and may be readying itself to confront its inner demons (and I imagine someone more educated about this could name them and the offices they hold specifically).
By similar standards, what can we call a successful capitalist economy. It seems that every capitalist economy worthy of being called successful has resorted to socialist measures to survive.
If people are fine with laissez faire systems, why the monopoly laws? If people don't mind being cast off when they become a loss on company ledgers, why do they seem so reluctant to jettison Social Security?
Henry, I have read enough posts to know your attachment to capitalism runs deep, and I can imagine strong arguments you might present, but this particular one sounds like it could use a going over, at least to qualify it.
Very well said. Capitalism generally externalizes lots of its 'costs' such as environmental damage, military-related expenditure (a lot of which is incurred to support a capitalist system), etc. I am not an economist, and I'm still reading up on things - but I know enough to see that capitalism as practiced is not sustainable. I do like the concept of economic freedom - within limits. And I can also understand why people are put off by 'socialism' - possibly because it formed the theoretical basis of the communist regimes? (I could be wrong). From what I understand, ecological sustainability is not front and center of the prevailing socialist thought, though it's not contradictory either. So maybe it's time to blend the best of all systems so as to arrive at something that's ecologically sustainable, economically equitable and which clearly respects individual rights (like I said, within agreed upon limits).
A failure. Where, pray tell? Your ignorance is appalling. The longest lasting governments have not been capitalist: Egypt, China, for example. Not socialist, either. An excellent modern example of successful socialism might be Sweden. You need to do some research, though I recognize that it can be hard work ....
Well done, Evan Knappenberger. I'm afraid all the fight has gone out of me, so it is--well, hopeful, to hear a new generation take up the cause. Thank you for your service, and thank you for your service.
Wonderful article and quite encouraging to read that a thinking young man attempting to speak for his generation would make the claim that: "Socialism makes sense to us, if only because Capitalism does not."
Though he is a young man without many years of observations of the US political process, his essay indicates he may understand that Obama is not particularly unique for a Democrat and his actions are not that surprising. Actually, Bill Clinton was a very similar political creature to BO. Raised in a chaotic and unstable family environment, Clinton, like BO, craved the approval of all and especially those he feared were his superior. His feelings of inadequacy and inferiority created within him an obsessive desire to succeed, by hook or crook, and prove his "worthiness" to those elites he admired, making him an opportunist of the first order. BO is almost a carbon copy. These pure opportunists are the only Democrats the corporatocracy will allow to assume positions of power (the others are knee-capped by the corporate media if they make an attempt), as they are the Democrats the elite corporatists most trust.
I'm right in there with you, Evan. And I'm 60 years old.
You have not been 'betrayed.'
You chose to buy the hype in spite of all the warning to the contrary.
Those of us who knew better do not feel betrayed at all. We feel vindicated.
And, BTW, y'all aren't 'Generation 0', y'all are Generation Screwed. Get used to it.
Frank, your cynicism grows tiresome.
Samuel Johnson wrote that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. I guess he never met a cynic.
Today's youth might not be all that different from yesterday's youth but the methods of hooking people to US militarism have only gotten nastier. I may have lost my limbs in Vietnam but even then, one of my nephews who lost his life in Afghanistan in 2003 refused to listen to his parents or take my lessons and warnings on joining. The same thing with voting for presidents. Despite all the damage Reagan did back in the 1980s, we either didn't learn or we refused to take those lessons seriously thinking that the next time was different. It's no coincidence that most of us were dumb enough to elect pro-Reagan trash such as Clinton, Bush, and now Obama although some of us voted out of fear or simply because we didn't have as many candidates to choose from in some states.
Jennifer, you're right but I will have to correct some of your upset feelings. Valiant efforts can get trashed but you have to realize that most of us don't learn until we suffer. Only then do many of us find ourselves having to learn our lessons the hard way and then we join those who didn't have to go through as much trouble to learn their lessons. I know the pain and sorrow when young people like you and Evan find your efforts trashed but this does not mean that you have to despair and give up. Life is trial and error and sometimes it takes just that to find the cure. Whatever you and Evan do, please do not give up. Both of you should not make the same mistake I made which is to not credit yourselves for learning. The least you can do is give credit to yourselves even when no one else does and keep plugging away until you win. I give both of you credit for not putting your families through the kind of pain and suffering I put my wife and both her family and mine through when I lost my limbs and refused to live and move on.
To the rest of you on this forum trashing him, give it a rest and have a heart !
Thanks JWVerez but I don't know how giving myself credit for my efforts when they are being trashed will help me overcome my bitter and upset feeling about those efforts being wasted. What can we give ourselves credit for when our efforts are rendered useless and irrelevent? As much as I would like to get mad with people in the rurals showing their anger in the wrong way by voting for creeps like Dubya and Palin, when I trace back a lot of the hardworking efforts out there and I find out just how much they have been trashed by both parties, I almost feel like crying and I think these people are so devastated having to put up with their valiant efforts getting trashed that they feel like wanting to have some revenge even if it means voting for authoritarian warmongers that will make them "feel good" before the election. At that point, trying to convince them to consider people such as Ralph Nader who will make their efforts meaningful and not trash them is about as "easy" as trying to tell people devastated by 8 years of Dubya's full blown mess that Obama is no different. Those of us who voted our hearts and minds for Nader and Mckinney because we really wanted a true top quality progressive to govern are still feeling wasted that our efforts to warn others that a vote for Obama or Mccain was a vote for more of the same and worse. The ignorance is still there but I am trying to figure out ways to get people to snap out of the seductive idea of judging books by their book covers and not by their contents without having our efforts wasted just like last year's depressing election.
I don't know what you mean by trial and error anymore. I won't give up but I won't do the same thing and expect a different result every time. As I told Ted earlier, maybe I am too sensitive and upset about seeing good efforts in life by hard working people getting trashed by the elites who hold powers we don't have. Then again, I'm also jealous and angry at pols who have the power to do the right thing but refuse to use it and then complain afterwards. I don't know but I just keep getting the bitter feeling that Uncle Sam Scrooge is continuing to laugh and persecute us working class with glee. :(
Just because you have stopped believing in Obama, doesn't mean that you have to stop believing in yourselves. Be your own heroes. Select your most charismatic and capable, to lead you, and seize the day!
Hey here we another Iraq vet against war. I'll back that all the way!
But rest assured the mainstream media will do its best to ignore him and others like he. The same media types were damn good at it during the Vietnam War too,
AD
Yeah, direct democracy will "work" in the USA today just like it did in Germany in 1934 when the people voted in a direct vote to give the Nazis all the power for as long as they wanted it and by an absolutely huge margin, Oh, it really "worked" well in the ancient Greek city state of Athens when the people turned in a crisis to the tyrants and discarded all democracy,
AD
There are some historical inaccuracies here.
In the LAST democratic vote in Germany, in 1933, the Nazi Party gained just over 33% of the vote, and actually had a slightly smaller vote than in the previous election.
Hitler was soon thereafter APPOINTED Chancellor by President Hindenburg, and the total consolidation of power that ensued had nothing to do with a popular vote of any kind.
The Greek and Romans regularly chose "dictators" to take control on the eve of serious war making, and these men almost always resigned office, as they were expected to do, when that particular war had ended.
Germany never had "direct democracy."
This is one of most passionate and clear-sighted articles I've yet seen in the progressive press. The key question is "Why doesn't Obama get it?" and the answer is that he sees with different eyes than the generation he inspired and then so quickly betrayed. As many of Evan's generation are beginning to perceive, Marxist analysis has the tools to understand this enigma.
Despite a firm commitment to nonviolence, I must acknowledge the reality of class warfare. This is not a war chosen by the exploited, but by those who repress them and then accuse resisters of "violence", as did Obama in his speech. Though major media constantly strive to suppress awareness of this struggle, it continues with the same intensity as before. Obama is a member of the ruling class and he strives, very successfully up to now, to advance the interests of his class.
Consider Glenn Greenwald's description of the elite reaction to the speech, "Yesterday's speech and the odd, extremely bipartisan reaction to it underscored one of the real dangers of the Obama presidency: taking what had been ideas previously discredited as Republican or right-wing dogma and transforming them into bipartisan consensus." The "danger" here is actually stronger than he characterizes it. The crude destruction of constitutional rights under the previous administration now has the stamp of progressive approval added to it. But this approval of militarism and its consequent degradation of human dignity is far from "odd". It is the natural consequence of their philosophy of dominance.
This is precisely the point of the Obama administration - "...Obama has actually done more to legitimize Bush/Cheney 'counter-terrorism' policies than Bush and Cheney themselves -- because he made them bipartisan." Once we understand his actions from the viewpoint of class warfare, many otherwise inexplicable betrayals begin to fall into place. His role is to legitimize the instruments of exploitation which are now necessary in order to continue imperial domination. That he can do this with the blessing of the Nobel Committee adds the stamp of moral idealism to his brutal policies in the Middle East.
Once we lay aside liberal prejudices about "class warfare" and our ingrained taboos about "socialism", the realities of power finally stand out stark and clear. And the nonviolent battle plan can be made with confidence when we see the real enemy and throw off his yoke, no matter what moralistic flowers he decorates it with.
Sioux Rose
BOYD: You laid out the case for my worst fears, and I think your analysis is powerfully true. Obama and his ilk are the black magicians of politics as their use of sleight of hand with words and images leads the viewing public to believe their rights have been returned to them, when no such thing is on the agenda. How smooth goes the transition as the heat is surreptitiously turned up on a population of near-to-boiling "frogs."
Even when debates raged on this site exposing the machinations of both party elites and their agendas, I think most of us PRESUMED that with Obama some token benefits would be tossed to the left; and that he (and the democrats) would slow the descent into fascism-lite (not exactly lite for many, like those ensconced in the criminal justice system or those unable to meet living costs given the wages they earn, etc.). It is mind-boggling the theft and deceit broadcast in the light of day as if the very PREMISE of justice, of law, of accountability, of diplomacy have themselves been divested of all meaning. These are the final days of a way of life that has allowed the worst in persons to gain ascendancy with "leaders" boldly displaying the traits of sociopaths... and prizes (!!!) are given to such as these? It strains credulity to keep abreast of events underway in the modern USA.
Sioux Rose: Thanks for your eloquent response. I think your insight that "...the very PREMISE of justice, of law, of accountability, of diplomacy have themselves been divested of all meaning" is devastatingly accurate. All of these ideals have been reduced to a rhetorical performance by Obama. In order to prevent further deceptions, it is necessary to keep focus on the realities of power, to maintain an eagle eye on the actions, not the words, of the ruling elite.
OK, I wrote this somewhere else, but repost it here (sue me):
Young people in America have just been handed the result of three decades of free-market ideology: a $12 trillion national debt, an economy in free-fall, a hollowed-out manufacturing sector, and a climate catastrophe obvious enough that Lyndon Johnson warned Congress about it in 1965. Unregulated markets are easily corrupted by the powerful, after which they aren't exactly 'free'. The only way to keep them free is to regulate them to stay open.
The 'free-market' evolves to elevate the corporate 'person' above all other individuals as the producer of goods and services. The corporate 'person', however, is large enough to subvert the markets it trades in, which is HARDLY in the spirit of Adam Smith. Consider for example, the personal computer. At this point in history, Microsoft tells you what you can have, and you bend over and take it. That's not a free market; its just where a free, unregulated market takes you. Take Healthcare (oh, lets not even go there).
Free-market ideology supported a culture of tax cuts that released huge sums of money to the individuals who own corporations. The wealthiest 1% of Americans used to own 20% of America, before Reagan. Now, they own almost 50% of America. And that ownership is ownership of corporations. The corporate 'person' is a mask behind which are the wealthiest people in the country. The crime that has befallen this country is THEIR crime, done for their benefit (and BOY have they benefitted).
Don't hate capitalism for something free-market ideology did to you. Fix your capitalism. It was fixed for FIVE DECADES (1930-1980), after another generation got a taste of what free-market ideology had in store for them. What a shame America has to repeat its own, hard fought history.
>>>Unlike some older folks, my generation understands the differences between communism and socialism.
First of all, hats off to you, young man - for keeping your integrity, independent mind and passion intact. I just wish (hope?) that your statement about young people understanding the difference between communism and socialism were true. I also hope that those posting comments on other newspapers (in the US and the UK) by invoking socialism to attack any progressive ideas are just senile (mentally), and not young people.
Generation Hope is more usefully c alled Generation Hopelessly Confused.
Memorias, you are wrong: Evan Knappenberger is not confused in the least.
At the age of 24, he sees right through the nonsense, deceptions, and lies that have been fed to this nation for decades on end. And he has an alternative to the misery of extremist (a.k.a. savage or predatory) capitalism. More than I can say for many people of my age.
I suppose you never make any mistakes and you were born with total political knowledge and insight.
He sees right through it because it ran over him like a Mack truck.
The folks of his generation are generally massively apathetic and hopelessly confused.
As for my skills at birth: Native Americans who do not develop political knowledge and insight very young--among other skills--simply don´t make it.
I come from a group with a life expectancy average here in the American Nightmare of 50 years! Not to mention an infant mortality rate 14.5 times the national average.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
You may well be Native American, but that fact does not in the least justify your prejudicial and prejudiced generalizations, no more than my being of European stock justifies or provides grounds for any of my utterances.
Genesis or origins is one thing, validity of statements is another one altogether.
Also, need you be reminded that there are Native Americans who have no political consciousness at all (in fact, I worked closely with one such person at my last full-time job)?
Voting for 0bama was a misstep, but the feet were moving, and they were not baited by promise of riches but promise of and hints towards far more reasonable and honorable things.
The massive betrayal by 0bama and Pelosi and the lot will cost a lot of that energy and will breed a lot of stupid and facile cynicism, but these kids are really going to have to work fast if they're ever going to get as screwed up as their parents.
Google expands tracking to logged out users
http://joshfulton.blogspot.com/2009/12/google-expands-tracking-to-logged-out.html
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
This article actually improves my hopes for the future. I hope the author soon learns though, that in America the college environment and the work-a-day (or workless-a-day) private sector world are too entirely different realities and that some regions and some colleges are much more open to left-wing ideas than others. Many schools have "independent studies" curricula that load would-be activists up with this and that theory of activist organization and reform that are well-intentioned but have so far met only with very small successes.
They, like many older progressives and socialists, still don't seem to grasp the magnitude of the movement it will take to push & pull this country into a better direction. It needs unity, a real sense of solidarity across racial, income and age boundaries, and large numbers of determined, well-funded activists prepared to simultaneously educate the public and pitch their reform ideas and candidates to them.
This means the portion of the progressive establishment (and later, the liberal establishment increasingly alienated by DLC corporatists like Obama) that has substantial wealth needs to start sacrificing to support the scale of movement necessary--along with regular membership fund raising.
I think all of this requires a new national umbrella progressive Party to unite authentic progressives, democratic socialists and supporters of participatory economics with the goal of fulfilling 3 to 5 national policy platform planks that can be easily explained and justified to the broader public at large. A national summit of progressive & democratic socialist & parecon leaders should be convened to compile a list of possible policy planks to take back to their various groups and put to the vote. Then a second leadership summit can vote on the top five.
The voters to whom we should appeal to aside from the groups previously mentioned are alienate Democrats who have given up on the failed Democratic Party and the mostly very poor, minorities who comprise the roughly 80 million eligible voters who consistently do not vote in general elections because both the GOP and DLC Democrats have ignored them and abandoned their interests for over 25 years now. We need to build connections with their communities and address their needs directly at the local and State level with new and better candidates and policies than the old Parties can field.
We do not need to follow the Democrat's failed strategy of constantly bending over backwards to placate and reach out to "conservative swing voters" and egregiously confused dithering independents who can't decide if they're committed Libertarians or semiliterate bigots. We need to build a movement starting far-Left to Left-of-the-current-Center and drag the Center of American politics back towards the Left.
Another article that Obama somehow "betrayed" people by doing exactly what he said he was going to - hand a trillion to the banksters and expand land war in Asia.
Nice article Evan. You see though the progressive deceptions of the Obama militarist Trojan Horse.
Yes, progressive change can come—if we see clearly; and unify politically; and act; and work for electoral power; and make our movements more massive.
Bravo to you Evan.
He is correct, but what does he excpect. I do not defend Obama making Bushs' war his Vietnam, actually I am slightly appalled myself. Yet, when we sit back and look at the pressure he is under, I sympathize in a fashion.
He has surrounded himself with people that do not care much for him. Clinton for one, Bidden, well he was in polotics when Kennedy was possibly killed by his own team, Martin Luther and Malcom X were shot, what are his ingrained views on a black man running the country? Just a thought. Not only is he trying to bring World War 3 to a close but he is also trying to install medicare in a country where a large part of the population thinks this means that it is euthanasia for the elderly.
I wonder if he is ever frightened some days. I know he asked for this job, but does he ever throw his hands up in the air and wonder what the heck he got himself into. This is not a Juniour Bush who had the backing of not only his Daddy but his Grand Daddy as well. This man finished paying off his student loans with the release of his first book in 2005. He is one of four men that have been voted in to the presidential seat under the age of forty.
He is trying to impose medicare.....every other president that has done that has tried to do this has been shot. Maybe he is not doing the best job......maybe you feel dissapointed, I am too and I am not even American, I am dissapointed in the Canadian leading party at present.
I have never been to war, not like you have. I understand the thought of "change their minds not kill them", my question to you is how does he do that. The world is so extreme. This war did not begin with the two towers, I know you know this. This has been going on since 1986, like you said we have grown up in a time of war, we are an extreme generation, we want what we want and we want it now.....but so are they.....how can he teach the middle road, when it has been blown to shit....I wish you could respond....Only because...I just understand your dissapointment, maybe not your pain, or your PTS, but dissapointment, yes.
He's "surrounded by people who don't like him"?! Who chose those people?!
Most Americans are surrounded by people who don't like them - it's called going to work. People do their jobs anyway. "I'm sorry, folks, but while your grandma was on the operating table for that hip replacement I decided to cut off her head... I think the nurses and my office assistant don't like me..."
I'm sick of all of this excuse-making for Obama. He's awful, period.
Obama surrounded himself with those neo con hacks, knowing what they represented. He surrendered on day one. How can even the staunchest of his supporters say he is trying to do what he promised? He is a traitor to our cause, an oreo of the worst kind, a charlatan.
One thing must happen for the corporate-fascists to dominate this country, and you can bet they got plans on the shelf just like Bush/Cheney had the Patriot Act on the shelf ready to implement at a moment's notice.
That thing is suppression of the internet. That is, the end of Net Neutrality. Yahoo (or was it Google) already knows how to do it. They already did it for China.
The national print, radio, and TV media is already controlled to the point where no "radical views" get a fair hearing.
The internet is the only place where progressives can get together in large numbers and even out the playing field somewhat.
Indeed, the without the internet, Obama would not have been elected (back when we thought, perhaps naively, Obama was one of us).
Knappenberger is correct when he says that the vast majority of the young are ready for Swedish-type socialism. He is also right that the vast majority of 2008 young Obama supporters feel betrayed. The Democratic Party is just a party that competes with the Republicans to see who gets the priviledge of representing Corporate America.
The Corporatists know that the young are both the most radical (that is, anti-corporate, pro-democratic socialist) AND tech savvy.
The traditional right-wing approach to suppressing progressivism is to divide along racial lines use wedge issues, not to mention depicting those aligned against them as unpatriotic. But that won't be enough this time around.
They need to destroy the progressives ability to electronically assemble in cyberspace.
So stay tuned for the code words that will be used to destroy the internet as we know it. Those words will be, as usual, deregulation and empowerment. They will talk about bringing "free market" principles to the internet.
Net Neutrality is the single greatest upcoming fight we have to face. The stakes are nothing less than free speech itself.
redrightman, we find ourselves in total agreement.
Not only the young are ready for Swedish-style socialism. I am middle-aged and the need for it in my mind is nakedly evident.
Unfortunately, I am surrounded by people my age who cling desperately to Fox News- subjugated and abused by their oppressors, scared to death of any sign of change. they make me angry, but at the same time I feel great pity for them. They aren't fascists. They just ape the usual party line out of fear. these people need to be understood, sympathized with, and lifted up.
I really thought Obama could do this. Maybe part of his game plan is he has been trying to do just that. But Fox News and their robot army are showing no signs of interest. If Obama has been pandering to these people in the desire to get them on board for a sweeping agenda encompassing both left and right, it may be too little, too late at this point. Better to stop the attempt and move on with a more progressive agenda. If he has one, still.
I have been sorely disappointed in Obama this year, like many of you. But I can't help wondering if these are the actions of a man determined to change course without destroying the ship in the process. If that is his intent, it's a noble one. Misguided, but noble.
I'm afraid the only way to fix this problem is the break the ship and rebuilt significant parts of it. The old corporatist system has been allowed to run amuck too long. it's poisoned the water supply. But getting out from under this 800 lb gorilla is not going to be easy. it's not going to be overnight. it's not going to be bloodless.
it's possible that the economic problems we are enduring must get worse before they get better. Wall Street will no doubt react like a injured animal being poked in the sensitive places if the regulation the financial system desperately needs were to be invoked. But, just like in the Great Depression, the engine of commerce will adjust and eventually thrive. We just need to find new fuel for it this time. We keep trying to find the new Hitler and in my opinion he can be found- mainly in corporate boardrooms, lobbyist junkets and the halls of Washington. This new Hitler is bent on destroying the planet and bankrupting the public trust. This is the enemy we need to fight in this new world war. Perhaps a whole alternative economy could arise solely from doing just that.
I just hope it catches on before it's too late.
"Socialism makes sense to us, if only because Capitalism does not. Most disappointing of all to the youth, though, is Obama's betrayal of their values."
In the first sentence this guy indicates that the youth don't really appreciate the benefits of socialism. In the second sentence he claims the youth have values betrayed by bam bam. If this were true, then he would have to say that the youth embrace socialism. But he didn't, because they don't. So I don't know what kind of values he's talking about. USans have to get hip to socialism before they can help make it happen.
Now let's take this a step further. The elites are very adept at socialism, for their own class and their pet godzillas. So why can't the people do the same for themselves? It's because the people haven't really rejected socialism, per se. They have rejected their own group, regular people, non-elites. The USan people have met the enemy, and the enemy is them.
Add to that quote another one from the article: "And why not Socialism? Young people today cannot even remember a time without war, crushing student-loans, environmental catastrophe, torture and terror."
Young people today cannot remember a time without war -- please name for me a time when there was no war. There have been numerous times when there was no war in which the US was overtly involved, but pretty much no time otherwise.
Crushing student loans -- as someone who is just now getting out from under 17 years of student loans, when were they not crushing?
Snark aside, it's the last three that really need to be more closely examined. Young people today do not remember the horrors of, well, every highly socialistic society.
Environmental catastrophe? Try Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Or China right now.
Torture? Are you being serious? The Gulag, China's treatment of dissidents, the Stasi (and that's just off the top of my head)
Terror? Even more so, are you serious? KGB/NKVD, the Stasi (again), North Korea, China with internet freedom (as a more prosasic example) and that's just off the top of my head again.
I think it was Churchhill who said "Democracy is the worst form of government, excepting all the others". Capitalism is a close substitute for the aphorism.
The main problem I have with people advocating socialism is their belief that the only decisions that will ever emminate from the government will be ones with which they already agree.
Here's a thought experiement, folks: Let's say that government health care passes. Hooray! No more big insurance, everything's free. Well, what about the next time the political pendulum swings and 1994 happens all over again (Republicans in charge of the Congress, maybe even with a Republican in the White House, or -- heaven forfend -- with majorities in both houses just like the Democrats have right now). How long do you think it would be before abortion would be removed from the list of things available through government health care?
Gerald Ford (of all the people in the world I ever thought I'd quote, I would not have expected it to be him) once said "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." Just something to keep in mind...
Are Americans a Broken People? Why We've Stopped Fighting Back Against the Forces of Oppression
By Bruce E. Levine, AlterNet
Posted on December 11, 2009, Printed on December 14, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/144529/
Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not "set them free" but instead further demoralize them? Has such a demoralization happened in the United States?
Do some totalitarians actually want us to hear how we have been screwed because they know that humiliating passivity in the face of obvious oppression will demoralize us even further?
What forces have created a demoralized, passive, dis-couraged U.S. population?
Can anything be done to turn this around?
Can people become so broken that truths of how they are being screwed do not "set them free" but instead further demoralize them?
Yes. It is called the "abuse syndrome." How do abusive pimps, spouses, bosses, corporations, and governments stay in control? They shove lies, emotional and physical abuses, and injustices in their victims' faces, and when victims are afraid to exit from these relationships, they get weaker. So the abuser then makes their victims eat even more lies, abuses, and injustices, resulting in victims even weaker as they remain in these relationships.
Does knowing the truth of their abuse set people free when they are deep in these abuse syndromes?
No. For victims of the abuse syndrome, the truth of their passive submission to humiliating oppression is more than embarrassing; it can feel shameful -- and there is nothing more painful than shame. When one already feels beaten down and demoralized, the likely response to the pain of shame is not constructive action, but more attempts to shut down or divert oneself from this pain. It is not likely that the truth of one's humiliating oppression is going to energize one to constructive actions.
.
.
.
Can anything be done to turn this around?
When people get caught up in humiliating abuse syndromes, more truths about their oppressive humiliations don't set them free. What sets them free is morale.
What gives people morale? Encouragement. Small victories. Models of courageous behaviors. And anything that helps them break out of the vicious cycle of pain, shut down, immobilization, shame over immobilization, more pain, and more shut down.
---
[Doing something yourself to change your situation, however small or insignificant you think it may be, will improve your morale. Doing the same thing you've always done, as defined by the abusers, will reinforce your poor morale and immobilize you ever further.]
Evan, Your insights are profound and remarkably mature and I appreciate your service to our nation, much of which is, I suspect, yet to come.
I read many common dreams articles but yours is the first that has inspired me enough to respond.
When Obama campaigned here in Iowa in the primaries it was immedeiately apparent that he was a master pol who knew how to play individual egos as well as crowds. It was all hype and marketing. The rhetoric and the slogans didn't match his voting record.
But this is America, and we all want to believe that we're "special," and Obama played the ego card beautifully. Not many people WANT^ED to see the mismatched voting record, they were deaf to the more than palpable words of a war monger. In America our eyes edit the unaccomodating.
Your vision is clear. Capitalism will never create a humane society. Some form of socialism is the right directon. I believe that it's similar to christianity in that human beings have never really been able to make it a reality. Greed interferes. Individual egos trample the interests of the common good. Maybe your generation can finally overcome these roadblocks.
I am a veteran of the Vietnam struggle, old now, cynical and almost without hope. You have lit a flicker of hope again in my heart.
Please don't give up. Please keep on the right track. And know that there are many who are with you. I hope we meet someday soon to celebrate a genuine victory.
Nice work, Evan. Like the tower downtown, like your involvement in IVAW and VFP, your work in the anti war movement, this is a great step forward, and I applaud you for it. Your statements here are clear and well made. We build a movement piece by piece, and you are important in the Pacific Northwest movement. In the face of disaster, there are two possible responses: lie down, do nothing, go along,... or fight. As you already know, I soundly approve of your choice.
Here's another thing: If you're into engineering, both software and hardware, you're very likely aware of the idea of open standards versus trade secrets.
And even if you're not technical you can likely imaging the difference. Openness supports cooperation, and cooperation among people supports a society's productivity and health.
Trade secrets support destructive/disastrous competition.
If the political candidate you vote for does not support openness and cooperation explicitly in the great majority of his/her actions then you voted for the wrong candidate no matter how charismatic the chimp may be. The emperor of planet earth elected Nov 2008 is another elite candidate for the trade secret status quo.
Next time your Windows PC gives you grief, you can associate that with your vote in the computer marketplace for trade secrets instead of open standards. You voted competition over cooperation. Same thing when you vote elite candidates in the elections. Unnecessary self-inflicted grief.
Instead of that, try voting in your own personal better interest in all of your exchange/association: Openness, cooperation. Study the markets, study the politics. Make the better choice. This means third parties, the little guy, the no-name brand, the one with the better principles in action. Blank checks for endless peace.
rtdrury, good points and good advice. I've made my computers and notebook dual-boot (they came with Windows preloaded or as part of the package), and I rarely switch to Windows - like when helping out a kid to print something from some unusual program or when a Linux driver is not available for something. I must admit - I was a late convert on this whole intellectual property thing - after seeing repeated cases where the so-called IP advocates kept stealing or copying knowhow from smaller companies and poor countries (in the case of drug development). I try to make a small donation every now and then to some of the open-source and free software that I use - but I can never repay what I've gained from this community.
>>>Openness supports cooperation, and cooperation among people supports a society's productivity and health.
That's such a profound thought :) When you draw the boundary around the whole society (not just around a single person or a corporation), you can see that so much waste can be eliminated, so much creativity can be unleashed and you are not stuck with inefficient products and systems.
Evan,
Beautifully stated, Man _ I'm proud to be a fellow Northwesterner because of your writing talent, and even more so because of the lucidity of your brain and the promise you hold.
Finding out Glenn Beck was from our corner of the world sure was a downer. Knowing you are too surely helps.
I'm far away now, but sure wish I could march beside you through those cold streets. I saw videos of those teabaggers fouling our hometown with their ignorant hatefulness, and know it's a lonely slog out there for someone with your values, particularly if you're out in the County. God bless you, you're not alone. Just wanted to encourage you to keep going, because our sad world need you. Thank you for your service.
Cheers,
Zell
You make a compelling statement but let us remember what Obama said during his campaign. He clearly stated that he would focus military efforts toward Afghanistan. His statements never waivered on this (all easily searchable).
He is simply doing what he said he was going to, if that does not fit in with what you think is right, then by all means protest but don't portray it as a "Betrayal". It is easy to project our own ideas onto others but we need to be clear on the facts.
Many of you are on the right track but are too swift to give up and complain about everything as being equally bad. Change cannot be instantaneous. To simply lump Obama into the same category as Bush is preposterous. Other than having to act as the figurehead of one of the largest and most prosperous counties in the world, their ideologies are nothing alike. Even lumping Bush and Gore into the same category is just naive. Like it or not, some aspects of this country are so huge, radical change is still a slower process than many of us would like. So instead of abandoning the momentum we used to get Obama into office to push him towards the right track, why not keep pushing? Of course that means also pushing on your Congressmen to cooperate and voting out the idiots who are stonewalling the process. It means not giving up on trying to get others to think. It means not giving up on opposing teabagger idiots and Beck/O’Rielly/Limbaugh/Dodd followers. It means not being appalled by how big an idiot Sarah Palin is. (And to think some of you would have rather put her & McCain in? You’ve really lost sight of what is going on!)
This discussion demonstrates exactly why so many radical improvements we’d like to see happen are running into trouble. Instead of bracing ourselves for the long hard push, too many just give up, become disillusioned and spend their time complaining instead of participating. Obama hasn’t even been in office for a whole year. It is way too early to give up and lump him into the same heap with idiots like Bush & Chaney. Go hunt for the real changes - and there are many! He has reversed many bad policies of the previous administration on stem cells, science, GitMo, torture, climate, energy and much more still in progress. How many US presidents have been celebrated all over the world in the past like Obama was the day he was elected? That has never happened! Just because he has been forced into some compromises… it is a part of the process, not the end result.
There are obviously BIG issues we all want to fix and even while he was campaigning, he warned us that change on that level would not be instantaneous. But the big ones just cannot happen in an instant. How would you go about getting 305 million people (the US Population) to all jump at once and change their direction? You can’t lose sight of scale either. The Titanic did not turn on a dime and it was a mere toy tugboat in comparison.
In 28 years of voting, Obama is the closest to ever run for that office to my own progressive ideals. I’m thrilled that he is the first candidate I ever voted for who actually got into the office. I wasted some earlier votes on 3rd party candidates more as a protest than any realistic idea that they might win. But Obama is also not a dictator. He still has to contend with opposition and like it or not, real government involves compromise. But some of that will be short term and not forever. Change is not going to happen in an instant. We have to push constantly. Not for days or weeks or months - but for YEARS to get the changes we want through. Think “evolutionary process” and not “off/on switch.”
Go young people, retreat in the face of the likes of Limbaugh, Beck and O’Reilly. While these guys are motivating the thugs and goons to “retake” the country back, you have chosen to retreat so soon. The other side is banking on you to capitulate while they regroup. Dr. King did not retreat in the face of opposition; he pushed forward against all odds. His was a life of sacrifice and struggle for incremental change, for which he gave his life. Go young people…turn your back against the possibilities for stem cell research, renewable energy, open trials, women’s choice, diversity and decent supreme court justices. Retreat… pave the way for the fascists to regain control of our country again to bring back GitMo, torture, environmental catastrophes, financial destructions, wars and more.