EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Sooner or Later Our Children Will Ask: "How Did This Happen?"
“Sweetheart, I Guess We Just Forgot”
That it hasn’t happened yet, continues to amaze me. But sooner or later it will. Sooner or later our children, saddled with our debts, our endless wars and the ever more onerous demands of a predatory “national security state”, will turn to us in large numbers and ask how it happened. They will want to know how the many millions of us who were lucky enough to grow up in the American middle class of the 1960s and 1970s, let it come to this. They will want to know why we who enjoyed personal freedoms and opportunities to “find our bliss”, opportunities that they can only dream of, decided to leave them with a world structured, most of all, by fear and dread.
The smooth talkers among us—and there are many--will no doubt start by explaining just how complicated life really is, how processes over which we “have no control” such as globalization and terrorism, have chipped away at our good life and left them holding the bag. They will repeat over and again, and in one form or another, that these were “natural” and/or “unforeseen” developments that simply overwhelmed the ability our existing institutions. In other words, as they sit in the 4,000 square foot house they did not really need, a house that, in fact, no one really needs, they will paint themselves as victims of history.
They will of course being lying, to their children, and more importantly, for the umpteenth time, to themselves.
If they were really interested in have a profitable dialogue with their children, something that might actually begin the process of delivering us to a better place, they would start with something simple like: “Sweetheart (or Buddy), I guess we just forgot”.
I guess we just forgot:
- That globalization didn’t just happen, but was rather carefully planned by US and to some extent, European political leaders during the last three decades (take a look at the genesis of GATT, NAFTA and a whole host of other trade deals) as a means of guaranteeing that our countries’ economic elites would continue exert control over grotesquely inordinate amount of the world’s valuable resources and pecuniary wealth.
- That the relatively impressive middle class freedoms and security we enjoyed as kids didn’t just come about by accident. Rather, they were the result of people like your grandparents making sacrifices, and yes, sometimes even saying no to things that might have benefited them personally because they knew that doing so would have a deleterious effect on the broader progress of the community.
- That being entertained is no the same as being engaged. I like ESPN as much as the next guy. But it is no substitute for the careful following of public events. Only a cadre of citizens engaged citizens able, and willing, to pitilessly call out, and yes, embarrass, elected officials on the basis of policy details andtheir counterproductive effects is, sadly enough, the only thing that garners their respect, and therefore the possibility of fundamental change.
- That “journalists” unable or unwilling to identify with these same engaged citizens and who prefer instead to shy away from conflict in the name of guaranteeing their continuing “access” to power are not part of the solution but rather, a big part of the problem.
- That working within the system, or as our generation loves to say, “getting a place at the table in order to effect change” is a technique that has well-known limits, one that leads much more often than we have wanted to admit to the co-optation of good intentions by very powerful and ruthless forces.
- That when it comes to the creation of “public-private partnerships” the private part of the equation almost always gets more of what it wants or needs than does a broad swathe of the public.
- That just because Soviet-style Communism collapsed under the weight of its bastardized decrepitude, that didn’t mean that the problem of social class and the tendency of society’s economic elites to want to endlessly maximize their power over us has became a non-issue.
- That in America, the primary function of the government has never, ever, as the last two presidents like to endlessly tell us, been to “protect the nation from external attack”. No nation, especially one that maintains a world-wide empire and that arrogates to itself the “right” to engage in torture, kidnapping, extra-judicial killing and the unprovoked invasion of countries can, or should, be immune from the slightest suggestion of blowback. To suggest otherwise is to spin infantilizing fantasies that, in the end, lead only to the curtailment of our own liberties.
- That a society that allows laws to be portrayed (and used) not as the blueprint of universal hopes and desires across time, but rather as the plaything of the rich and powerful, condemns itself to a downward spiral of seething internecine conflict, or, alternatively, to the ever-greater imposition, by those same rich and powerful people, of repressive measure designed to keep that seething sense of injustice from threatening their interests.
- That being enduringly happy on the individual level is, more than anything else, about learning to know and govern your fears and anxieties in such a way that other things and, more importantly still, other people are allowed to become something more than a screen upon which to play out your personal needs, desires and impulses.
- That, as Phil Rockstroh reminded us the other day in this same space, the libido is much more than what our media culture, with its desire to make us believe that all is ultimately saleable and thus controllable tells us it is. Yes, the libido is about sex. But, more fundamentally, it is about freedom and creativity. It is the force that impels us to do things against our better judgment, to talk to the person we “shouldn’t” talk to, to take up the leisure or vocational pursuit “we have no business” taking up, to express the thoughts that no prudent person one “in his or right mind” should ever utter in public.
- That constantly putting your moist finger up in the air to see which way the wind is blowing (and building a political system around this “principle”) is not only quite boring, but ultimately quite soul-deadening…as is assuming, in the face of all historical evidence to the contrary, that the rules and pressures that govern you life today (including the vaunted two party system) more or less eternal and that, in the light of this “reality”, you’re best off, trying to cut the best deal you can with the parade of false and unsavory characters around see around you.
Yes, Sweetheart, we have forgotten a lot of things. And this is just the beginning of the list.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
100 Comments so far
Show AllNot bad points here. However, the context of 'what shall we tell our children' detracts, rather than adds here, in my opinion.
The 'kids' are even more numbed out than the adults. They don't ask many of these questions. They consume products and think 'reality tv' is....reality. His romanticizing of the 'children' is itself, rather naive. Sorry.
I'm really getting annoyed with the comments on this site. The articles can be 100% dead on, and someone will STILL come in here and bitch about it, denigrating every single thing printed here. Jeesh, if you REALLY have NO ability to take a message and accept it, then why the hell do you even BOTHER to read anything at all? It must be incredibly frustrating.
One of the hall marks of a troll is that they never have a positive thing to say about anyone. If the dems do something good, it's still not enough. If someone says something that makes 100% perfect sense, you STILL see some reason to ignore it or put it down. It might even just be because the writer isn't perfect enough and ideologically pure enough for them. I find this to be really annoying, and largely STUPID. I doubt that it's even honest, for the most part.
Way to speak for those that you don't even know. And a whole generation, at that. Way to shit all over even just the IDEA that kids might find it annoying and incomprehensible that we would be SO fucking lazy, SO incredibly naive, so foolish as to leave them saddled with a country that has to pay for it's IDIOT leader's lying and stupidity for many generations to come. Maybe those kids, when they realize that there will be NO jobs for them, NO homes they can afford, NO representation in govt', and no legal way to change ANY of it, they WILL be madder than hell, they WILL do something about it, they WILL fix the things that WE fucked to the gills.
Take your attitude and go hide under your bed. You are the PROBLEM, not the solution. If you can't or won't HELP, then STFU. You are NOT helping anyone but instead are being nothing but a roadblock to what is NEEDED. Get out of the way. Constant bad mouthing and nay saying will NEVER create a change of ANY kind. Damn, your attitude PISSES ME OFF. As do the attitudes and words of so many here. It's one reason I don't post much here. You people bad mouth and nay say with the best of them, but do ANY of you have any ANSWERS? Do you EVER offer ANYTHING in reply? No, you just denigrate those who DO try, and offer NOTHING in return.
WJM, since you have no idea of who i am and what i do, i find *your* remarks even more incredibly presumptuous and absurd, than my own few sentences to this article. And by the way, nuance does indeed count.
Oh, yes. I am a known troll here, by the way. You are astute in your analysis inthis particular area. I've been trolling here for years.
Sorry you find me so insulting. I'm just tired of reading nothing but comments that denigrate and don't offer a thing but negativity. I just don't see anything positive in your comment. And for the record, I did not call you a troll, I merely said that the thing they do is to bad mouth and denigrate everything and everyone. I should have been a bit more clear in that.
I know lots of kids, and some of them are indeed boneheads who won't think past their own noses. But I also know more than enough adults like that, and plenty of kids who have brains and are learning how to use them. In fact, some of them actually give me hope for the future, believe it or not. I like hanging out with them, they have some really interesting insights and opinions.
I know you've been here for years, I've seen your posts many times in the over 5 years I've been here. I've also seen the comments go from being a decent discussion to a constant bad mouthing of every article, every author, every idea put forward and every other poster. No one is good enough, no one is pure enough, no idea has any merit (whether on it's own merits, or merely the messenger), and nothing is EVER good enough. It's just getting old. I used to like the comments here, now I guess I'm just out of the loop and find it all very depressing. It's not a good discussion of the ideas, anymore, it's just constant denigration and blaming everyone for everything without offering a thing or suggestion in return. Everyone is a critic, no one has anything positive to say. It gets really tiring to live in such a negative world.
I may indeed be a contemptuous blowhard, I certainly don't rule it out. But at least I'm trying to see a positive side to SOMETHING, instead of just being a constant nay sayer on everything (and no, I'm NOT calling you that. But I sure see a lot more of that than I do anything else).
Sorry for the insult. None was actually intended.
As Mike Roselle, co-founder of Earth First, Climate Ground Zero, The Ruckus Society ,RAN etc. has said about activists "Burnt out?, get out!" A little blunt perhaps, but these are blunt times!
I'm with WJM, if I could filter out your comments, I would. And I wouldn't be missing a thing
I hope that you at least get something out of reading your own posts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE
RTT has a very good, critical point; kids have indeed been numbed and dumbed down, and this too, is by design. Your own rant and blanket condemnation for a very thoughtful critique is the real downer here. Where does all that fury from? Please get a grip. Go away if you don't like the comments or don't read them. Your own long-winded divisiveness is far more destructive than the behavior you presume to condemn.
That said... Superb article, Professor Harrington, truly! Your analysis is incisive and logic unassailable. One day soon we will all say "these truths we hold to be self-evident."
No, RTT does not.
Sorry but it isn't "kids" who created reaganomics, it isn't "kids" who in general subscribed wholesale to the Randian economic thinking, it isn't "kids" who participated in the inflation of house prices, etc ad infinitum.
You appear to have reading comprehension problems. RTT did not blame children for Reaganomics, Libertarianism, or Wall Street bubbles. I have no idea where you read that. RTT's point, a valid one, is that children have generally been ill-served by the culture that raised them and are largely unprepared to ask the critical questions Harrington asks. My point was that this was by design --- decades of propaganda and "standardization" of schools that disables critical, independent thought.
No I don't.
RTT said:
"The 'kids' are even more numbed out than the adults. They don't ask many of these questions. They consume products and think 'reality tv' is....reality. His romanticizing of the 'children' is itself, rather naive. Sorry.
"
Where is the evidence that the "kids" are worse than the "adults"? The problems are caused by the "adults". So, since the problems are caused by the "adults", the "kids" are worse?
Great logic. Great dumbed down logic,
"
I've tried to challenge these people on their wholesale condemnations of other people. It really is a case of projection in my opinion. Rarely do they respond in coherent form. They usually engage in assorted hand waving or just skulk off. There is a lot of hatred roiling underneath. Whether it is Catholics, Muslims, or our youth, scratch under the surface and you'll find powerlessness and the mantra of victim and enabler underneath. Whether the POV is coming from an elitist hoping to maintain the status quo or someone who is fully embracing their own ignorance as a self-defense mechanism is of no concern mine. In either case, the posts are toxic.
Trolls, trolls, trolls: everyone seems to be seeing them these days. The accusations aren't helpful. Why don't you just state briefly and politely why you disagree, and leave it at that?
Young people, many of them, do seem numb these days, although many aren't. I sometimes post about the inanity of some of my students' thinking, and forget to mention remarkably aware students. The numb students don't know how to ask questions. When they learn, we'll have to help them find answers, and I think this article is helpful in this regard. Just my opinion. If you disagree, please don't call me a troll.
I commend you on your choice of profession. I have nothing but respect for teachers. I wish the rest of our country did.
I know kids that are smarter and more aware than most adults I know, and I know adults that can't think their way out of a wet paper bag with a cannon. I also know kids that will never get past playing a video game on the couch as their highest goal, and adults who never stopped learning. I don't think that the percentages are really that different from today than they were when I was growing up in the 60's and 70's. To make such a blanket statement is a denigration of the entire young generation. And wasn't it Socrates who said that the young of his time were unlike his generation, when the young were well behaved and serious thinkers who respected their elders? Seems that nothing has really changed in all that time. And for a country that keeps saying that "the young are our hope for the future", to essentially be calling them all brain dead slackers doesn't bode well, does it?
I've been reading the comments and writing my own on this site for over 5 years, now. They went from being decent to being blame everyone for everything fests. No one is good enough, no one is pure enough, no one is allowed to even be human anymore. One mistake or error in judgment and you are "just like all the rest". Sorry for my rant, but it's just really getting difficult to tell who has an honest opinion and who is just trying to short the conversation. And sorry for the length, sometimes a republican length sound bite just doesn't explain things clearly. As a teacher, you should know that.
I can and have disagreed with plenty of people without calling them trolls, and if you read what I wrote carefully, I did not call RTT a troll. it is perhaps implied, and that is incorrect. But that IS one of the games trolls play, making everyone seem guilty regardless of one side's clear culpability. The old "they ALL do it". It's nothing but a way to muddy the discussion and lower the accountability for the guilty.
Sorry, I'm going to skip on the arguing and skip to the kids.
I have the utmost confidence in the generation now coming of age. I have twin daughters now attending college. Both, along with their friends are becomming very politically active and yes, they do read and ask questions.
It seems that about every forty years, a generation comes along that has had it with the status quo, and the current generation is the new one for change. I for one urge them to continue their passions, unlike many of my generation (60's-70's) and keep up the good fight so they can pass it on to their grandkids! (Children tend to disagree with their parents, so their grandchildren will probably have to be the ones to carry the torch.) That is unless they are lucky as was I:)
I'm calling bullshit here. I live in a college town in California and the number of politically active college kids that are seen in the larger community could be hit with a single thrown handful of rice.
These students have very simple goals. Get a degree without actual learning or engagement. Get a cushy job. Return to drinking beer, random sex and video games.
I think it would be fair to say that like every generation, this generation of younger kids is a mix of those who are willing to fight for a revolution, possibly strong progressive, and the rest who just don't wanna rock the boat out of economic fear. Only time will tell if the former or latter prevail.
"Young people, many of them, do seem numb these days, although many aren't."
Well yes. And you've never met people in their 40s, their 50s, their 60s, etc who are "numb"?
"The numb students don't know how to ask questions"
And that is different from students 50, 30 years ago, how?
WJM - You have a point. But you'll get your hide tanned for being right. People have their favourite talking points or prejudices and will object to any viewpoint that can't be filtered through them.
Two of these, I find particularly annoying. The first, the reduction of every problem to a pro-cannabis issue; and second, the refusal to consider any analysis that does not acknowledge or incorporate the possibility of a 9/11 conspiracy. Why no one screamed over the S&L scandal or the Iran-Contra scandal and the conspiracies that underlay them is a mystery. Maybe everyone was too busy arguing about the Warren Commission report.
Oh, and it is irritating to see people take an oppositional stance to an obviously educated, experienced expert on a subject, in a knee-jerk sort of way. Maybe it's a need to prove some kind of equality to the populist squawker, that he can challenge a high-level academic. To that lot, facts make no difference and an education disqualifies you for being complicit in deception.
I'm respectful of Harrington's viewpoint, but...hahaaah...I do remember raising objections to many of the things he lists at the time of their occurrence, and being shot down as some kind of commie radical misfit at the time. Our prosperous society of the 60's was split - the social activists, hippies, beats, diggers, etc., etc., and the mainstream "straights", the narrow tie almost dittohead types of the day. The contrast between the two cultural views was most starkly outlined over the issue of the Vietnam war, the civil rights movement, in which a number of my classmates participated, and then the shock of Kent State. All that democracy in action became frightening, threatening to the moneyed upper crust, and plenty rich enough they could exert their considerable power to turn the machine of state around.
I do think Harrington must himself remember that the society of the 60's and 70's was not as monolithic as he is painting it. It kind of hurts my feelings. As an old person, I know I will be blamed for all that's wrong, just as we blamed our parents for everything we considered unjust. I do agree that too many of those 45 and over today capitulated, fell into line, basing their lives on cocoonism and consumerism, too occupied with their cookie-cutter, mindless suburban lifestyles to question or challenge what they were fed.
But it wasn't all of us, Mr.H. And yes, we ought to heed the advice of Native Americans, to use the riches of the earth in a way that preserves or enhances them down to the seventh generation. As a society, we have taken everything we could for ourselves, heedless of the price of our selfishness for our children and grandchildren. Somebody told us we derserved it and we were too happy to believe that tripe.
So, WJM, get out your trusty fire extinguisher to get ready for the flame war headed your way.
Peace.
Your mention of Kent State reminded me of someone I know who was there, the day of the National Guard shooting of students. He did not become liberal over this outrage, he became a rich Wall Streeter and a Zionist instead, voting for the most staunchly Republican bankster right-wing and also pro-Israel politicians, and becoming a proud member of AIPAC.
It seems the generation that thought they would change the world became co-opted instead. And what was left of the Left apparently thought the compromises of politics and becoming politicians were beneath them, and that, anyway, from that time on, decent and ethical bureaucrats from that generation would keep the politicians in-line with the new progressive views. Boy ,were they wrong!
How about that! The Left mistrusted politicians and DID want freedom from personal government intrusion, but never SAID they did NOT want a responsible government (and even thought the justice, equality, social support, environmental protections and civilizing infrastructure only government can bring was now completely Ingrained into the US government, after their radicalizing generation... Big Mistake) so they did not go en masse into US politics or remain activists, due perhaps to being averse to the corrupting influence of the money that this required, as it requires even more so now.
The Right SAID they mistrusted government (still do), but firmly regained control of the government they 'hated' from the FDR politicians en masse, because they actually relished the corrupting influence of the money this required... and gained - it's just business! And conversely the Right WANTED personal government intrusion into individual lives, but did NOT want the justice, equality, social support, environmental protections and civilizing infrastructure only government can bring, as this costed the oligarchy too much... but personal intrusions, though, are just opportunities for profit. They wanted the US back in the Calvin Coolidge days, where "the business of (American government) is Business... And that 'filosofy' led directly to the Great Depression and World War. Just like Now!
The Right, and the Republicans, despite all their pretend-fury at government, instinctively know, perhaps because many were from the world of corporate-insider-dirty-politics and the Money-power, that the political control of government was the Big Enchilada, where the real Social-power was, so conversely, they became obsessed with controlling government and "running it like a business!" For their own personal profit... and into the ground!
Beginning with the first Actual-corporate-shill President, Reagan, the corporations and the Right, in a fascistic cabal, have taken over governments both national and local. And ran the Left out of town. And they (knowing also the power of defining the 'other' in the political world) pushed the very Definitions of 'radical' and 'liberal' to the center-right, leaving the true Left as being "treasonous, godless" kooks "way out in Left field", instead of true Americans, and inheritors of the traditions of the Progressive Social Left in America, and as the American Mainstream FDR contingent, trying to continually improve the nation and the society and community.
And those student radicals and leftists from the time of Kent State? Why, they have either been co-opted by the money-power and serve the corporate state, by either choice or necessity, or they are at the margins of society and have no power at all now. So much for the hopes of those days. And of these.
fvhorn,like you i came of age during the 60s&i &millions of hippy activists saw the insanity of the "american way of life"&, totally changed our programed minds,moved to the country,learned,and to grow food,build small homes and raise familys living a simply life without money as our god!!!i'm 69 now &living simply bin my third tipi,while sill fighting the evil&insanity of this horrible system of government&there are millions more like me waiting for the talking to stop&the revolution to begin before its too late!!.yes i agree with you that many of my generation became part of the problem,but there are ,i would guess,at least a third of the citizens aware&ready to stand up to and begin the end of this out of control&insane system that is destroying our planet!!!! hokahey
readytotransform,
I could easily fall into the cynicism you expressed here; but, how often do you talk to young people? Me and my common law spouse are childless 50-somethings ourselves, but at work and elsewhere, talking to summer employees and interns I find twenty somethings can be very receptive to gently-placed radial ideas.
And, in my old urban neighborhood, there is a substantial community of young anarchists, where the opposite problem exists - a distrust of anyone, if not over 30 (per the late Abbie Hoffman), then over 40.
The annual Pittsburgh Anarchist Picnic is this July 17 - Anderson Shelter, Shenley Park.
Some of us old farts will be there.
yes, readytotransform, the headline, indeed, contains a subtle reference to the crisis we still refuse to face, which is probably what is troubling you about it, deep down...
the headline implies we will continue to have children to tell anything to, at all...
this is the lie...
we have screwed things up so badly that we are, even now, beginning to see the end of normal reproductive patterns...sterility, fetal malformation await in rising numbers...any viable baby will, one day, be incredibly valuable...sacred...
of course, reproduction aside, the resources remaining are becoming either scarce, or poisoned, so that even that rare, sacred baby that navigates the body-building and birthing in relatively healthy condition will struggle to survive the life after, let alone thrive...
even the others to which they are born may victimize them, rather than love them...
throw in a climate that is being forced from narrow windows of viablility, and the notion of sitting around at some future time, discussing 'how things were' with our children seems quaintly optimistic, even a bit disturbing, given the sinister, comforting nature of the reassurance...as if we haven't moved out of the realm of complaining, explaining, apologizing...
explanations and apologies are so yesterday...
one wonders what the author truly knows, or intends...
if you love children so much, stop wrecking the earth by working...
Stop Individually by Starting Together, on Global Start Date: September 22, 2012...unanimous, planetwide rejection of the modern world...
not to tangent, but this is the same issue I have with education...we consider ourselves 'educated', yet we are utterly unable to connect our 'education' with the fact that we have done so horribly, as stewards of each other and the planet we share, primarily due to our legitimate fear of being murdered by our violent minority, since we do not fight back, yet we insist the best thing for our children is 'education', as well...
we teach our children to not fight back, then wonder why all the shit...
it all has to stop...
You're right on with this. This was ALL done ON PURPOSE, just like I have been TRYING To tell people for over 30 years, now. And those who set it in play are now VERY wealthy, and the rest of us get to pay for their greed and avarice. And we will be for the next three or four generations.
The real problem is that those in my generation thought that people had changed, and for the better. Some had. Most hadn't, and those at the very top never even THOUGHT about it. We got lazy and thought that people actually had humanity and good in mind when they had never lost their greed. We thought that people could be trusted, regardless of the previous tens of thousands of years of proof that this was foolish. And those whose greed was their all consuming characteristic set about to make that their entire goal for life. It's been a 30 year screwing, but a screwing it's been.
The question is, what are we going to DO about it? I'm for a return to the Eisenhower tax rates, with NONE of the loopholes that allowed the rich and business to pay far less than that. Kennedy's tax change lowered the top rate to the low 70%'s, but eliminated the loopholes and collected more taxes as a result (which is the part the righties all conveniently forget when they say that lowering tax rates increases revenue). Then, kill off the whole IDEA of corporate personhood, and eliminate ALL private money in elections. Until we get rid of the private game the rich have been screwing us with we will just continue to get screwed.
As long as "we" are gonna tell them the truth, let's put the editorial "we" aside.
I didn't advocate for any of this stuff, and have tried to oppose most of it every step of the way. Many others can say the same. A lot of the bozos who led the charge to perdition are standing in plain sight. Call them out by name.
Great point. I didn't either. As for what to tell the kids, I would say we didn't have a say in the matter. It has been in the works since we first walked on this continent.
We told the kids that the Indians were evil heathens and had to be slaughtered or they would slaughter us. We didn't mention that we killed them with small pox blankets to steal their lands.
Then there were the slaves whose story didn't get told right either.
Now the fact that were we are today, I have tried to tell the kids to wake up and see what was happening but they were too busy living in the now.
I told everyone I could that when the first bank fell, this was going to be huge.
Everything this government has done, I tried to warn the kids about it. They didn't care.
I do feel sorry for the world they will live in. Massive die offs from Climate Change, no options for jobs and the worst part is the health problems they will face in the future from lining up like sheep to get very dangerous vaccines.
But I won't have to tell the kids anything. Probably have cancer and will be dead soon. Spent this morning thinking of what to do with all my stuff and how I will finally go back to California before I die.
Good article.
It makes me sick that a generation or so of people are leaving so much debt to their children, defunding public education, depleting the earth's resources, leaving vast regions of the earth and atmosphere contanimated, and drying up the social security trust fund by using up their children's contributions and not paying enough into the fund themselves. Unfortunately, so many people, especially the younger generation who inherit this mess, don't understand yet what is going on, for many reasons. Writing articles like these on CD is one way to educate and and affect change..
It's not a generation that is sscrewing the current generation out of anything. It's a *CLASS* of bastards born with a silver spoon in their mouth. You know who I'm talking about! Anyone remember a fool rich kid whose daddy gave every break in the world to, including the presdiency of the U.S. and who still fucked everything up that he touched? How about some trust fund babies named Walton, Koch, Clinton? These are the people who are destroying the hopes of everyone while ignorantly destroying their own without the slightest thought of doing so.
Right on, aussie!
I used to refer to Junior as a fecal king Midas. Everything he touched turned to shit. A definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results each time. Someone needs to outline the differences between a Clinton and an Obama because I am unable to grasp them. Better yet, what is the appreciable difference between Obama and Junior? Nice post.
You are correct. It is Class War. The best way to fight class war is to strengthen the working class. The best way to do that is through organizing and Unions. The right is scared shitless of Unions because they represent people. They are pure people power. You can't even fight that with all the money in the world. When people strike they join together and remove their bodies from the "Machine". WE can stop it. WE can start it. We forget our power.
Children learn by observing things around them with parental help, like, "don't strangle the little kitten, it hurts him". People like Hitler, Bush and Bonaparte have a basic personality disorder that comes with power and wealth. If Bush hadn't had wealth and power, he might have been a nice neighbor. He felt no remorse killing 30,00 innocent men women and children on that first evening when he invaded Iraq, than again neither did any other citizen of the US. Children also see when someone cuts in front of them on the lunch line and no one does anything about - it's ok to take from me - I can take from you without asking. That's how we are teaching, by what we do.
Union History should be taught in school. How does the working class bargain? That's what they need to learn and that's why the right wants so disparately to stamp out unions. This is how we fight. The demonstrations of the 60s and 70s taught us that if we band together, we can stop a war. We are losing all our worker's rights allowing cheap labor to compromise our wages and kill arbitration. This is Bush's "New World Order" - put the working class back where it belongs, at the bottom.
I don't think we let it happen. We had no choice. We can only vote for people not issues. People get in office and get compromised either that or they lied in the first place. Money talks and we have been sold down the river. There is no such thing as fair, you only get what you fight for if you don't have money.
The Supreme Court is eroding our freedoms because we allow conflict of interest on that bench, but would recuse a judge representing the same issue on a state level. Just because someone has been appointed to the Supreme Court doesn't mean they are beyond corruption. We need to revisit this if we want to have any freedom left at all.
>>I don't think we let it happen. We had no choice. We can only vote for people not issues.
We have choices. One of them is to stop participating in these sham elections. Every vote we cast is a stamp of approval on this phony democracy. Take a look at K Street and the rampant corruption that has infested this nation. We have no representation. When you go to the polls and vote, it is your implicit stamp of approval of this failed system. The time for a Constitutional Convention and round up and jailing of these criminals is long overdue.
"The time for a Constitutional Convention and round up and jailing of these criminals is long overdue."
All right, a solution. So what are the steps?
I'm down for not voting, I just don't see how that's effective.....
>>So what are the steps?
The four phases of change:
1. Admit the problem exists.
2. Contemplate change.
3. Prepare for change.
4. Action.
>>I just don't see how that's effective
I can assure you that a 20% turn out at the next presidential election would send a chill down the spines of the corporate fascists. Whether we want to admit it or not, the corporate fascists now control all of the federal government, both major parties are beholden to them. You can be a good little monkey and pull the lever like you are supposed to or you can begin the process of radicalization. The choice is yours. A good first radical step would be to stop participating in these sham elections.
How effective is it? Take a look at history. As leaders become more corrupt and craven, the general public begins to turn their back on civic duty. This eventually leads to collapse. It is an oft repeated cycle in human history.
Right on!
I've been making that argument here for a while, and in fact I haven't voted very often in my life, usually for third-party candidates like Nader/LaDuke in 2000.
You are absolutely correct about voting providing legitimacy, and there is no better way to eliminate consent and undermine legitimacy than by refusing to vote. The reality of the matter is that the political process is so controlled that were voting capable of achieving significant change, it would immediately be declared illegal.
Claudia L wrote:
If Bush hadn't had wealth and power, he might have been a nice neighbor. He felt no remorse killing 30,00 innocent men women and children on that first evening when he invaded Iraq, than [sic] again neither did any other citizen of the US.
* * * * *
My Reply:
No one?
I am sorry Claudia L. but the last clause in your statement quoted above is ridiculous.
There were protests all over the world including in the United States.
Many people in the United States who opposed the "Shock and Awe" prelude and the invasion and occupation from the start did so because they knew many innocent Iraqis would be killed, that U.S. soldiers would die and be maimed physically and psychologocally in an illegal war justified by lies and fear mongering, and that the threat of terrorism would more likely be increased than reduced by invading Iraq. This wasn't just some intellectualized opposition. For those of us who remembered the Vietnam War and the first Gulf War, many of us were very upset.
We did nothing before - we did nothing after A FACT!
This is the problem that the thread is kicking around. No leadership. How did we get where we are, why aren't the kids doing more? Because there was no leadership. There was talk of climate issues back in the 70s and now 40 years later the discussion is just getting mainstream. Unjust wars, CIA actions, Afghanistan itself, all these issues were known about, but no one took the helm in stopping them. Now my generation is left with the mess (as Dyer might say) and seemingly few elders to provide guidance. Most "boomers" I meet, or people in their 40s and 50s are so god damn clueless! Excited when a Wal-Mart comes to town, delighted when a Timmies opens up nearby. They've bought into the system for so long that they don't question it, they might bitch a little bit about the price of gas, or the automated callling, or the foreign call centers, but they just keep it going. They want it all, they want it cheap, and they teach their fat little kids the same thing.
We need societal role models, not NHL players. The young generation needs to see adults value intellectuals, not golfers and movie stars. At the same time, these same aging people are desperately chasing youth with anti-wrinkle cream, viagra, and cosmetic surgeries. They flee from age and diminish it's respectability making the youth feel ever more narcissitic and justified in their foolish childish behaviour.
As a result the generation I'm a part of, under 30, wants nothing more than to be rich and comfortable. They feel entitled too it, just as their seniors do, I know several well-educated people my age who are aware of societal problems and injustices but could really give a damn because they're so certain that's it just a matter of time before they're on top, shitting on everyone else.
The posters on this site do not represent the majority of the population I'm discussing. There is a lot of good commentary and insights here, but as displayed extensively above there is also plenty of bickering and needless infighting.
I am a member of Veterans for Peace, I taught at risk high schoolers in an alternative setting, I have two kids, 22 and 42, four grandchildren. The kid today are no different than their parent generation. Some are totally pissed and raring to make changes, some are so swacked out they don't know what day it is, and most just want a job and 40 inch tv and be left alone to be serfs. [Serfs don't have to do hard stuff like think and make decisions and get off the couch.] We can hope that the first category will be able to do something. Revolutions have always been organized and run by 20% of the population. OTOH the 20% represented on this and other progressive websites have not managed to get a damned thing past the corporate whores.
Ironblood
I am not sure that I agree with you when you say that, "The kid[s] today are no different than their parent[s'] generation." To risk a generalization, it appears to me that the generation of today seems much less eager to question authority than the generation that was around during the 1960s and 1970s. Why are the college campuses in this country not teeming with protests against Obama's militant policies overseas? I think that it would be much too facile an explanation to state that this is because a military draft is no longer in effect in this country. Can they not speak out against their government simply because they realize that Obama's policies are killing many innocent people overseas?
I wish that many more of this current generation would think about wearing and acting upon the shirt that Mahar Arar had worn and which stated: We Will Not Be Silent. That way they might not be thought of as being The Silent Generation.
One problem, is that with the high cost of higher education nowadays, the economic-class of students in our state U's is very different from the days when I was in school, when higher education was affordable to anyone who could work a part-time job. I periodically visit my old alma mater, Virginia Tech, class of 1980, and over the years the campus has become starkly richer and whiter.
"he kid[s] today are no different than their parent[s'] generation." To risk a generalization, it appears to me that the generation of today seems much less eager to question authority than the generation that was around during the 1960s and 1970s"
You're comparing apples and oranges. The situations are different, things are different. For example, in the 60s, and 70s, there were some pretty "obvious" issues race, gender to question authority about.
"Why are the college campuses in this country not teeming with protests against Obama's militant policies overseas?"
Because students aren't drafted, they aren't fighting in those overseas wars.
Also, because student fees are going ever up and up. Even compared to just 10 years ago, fees now are ridiculous, doubled, more than doubled. 10 years ago, as long as your grades were good enough, you could get an education, at a state university, without worrying much about finances: you would have to work part time, but it was doable. Now, fees even at state unis are at around 20k. An "in state" student now, would be paying more than what an "out of state" student paid 10 years ago.
Or your question could be rephrased: why are people everywhere not protesting against Obama's military policies? Why are those who protested against the Vietnam war, not out in droves protesting now?
rfloh
Your reference to students today not being drafted ignores my last two sentences in that paragraph which brings out the fact that that is too facile an explanation for them not to protest on campus against what the United States is doing overseas. Or perhaps it brings out your point, however inadvertently, that Americans will not act unless it is not in their own self-interests to do so.
I agree with your last paragraph that more Americans should certainly be taking to the streets against another Democratic president who is engaging in more unnecessary military conflicts overseas. But that hardly gets the youth of today off the hook for not engaging, for the most part, in any kind of critical thinking especially when it comes to a president who seems to be doing his best in emulating another Democratic president named Lyndon Baines Johnson.
What I remember back then is that much of the protest movement against the bellicose policies of LBJ and Nixon was made up of young people. That being the case it again begs the question why the youth of today are not doing what their counterparts did those many years ago and that is to say NO to Obama's militant policies the way the youth of the 1960s and the early 1970s did against Johnson and Nixon. If the young could protest against U.S. militarism during the Vietnam conflict then the youth of today can certainly do the same regarding the militant policies of the Obama administration.
I agree that a lack of a military draft is a big consideration why many of them are so complacent. But I think ultimately that is no excuse why they are not expressing outrage on the campuses and in the cities and towns of the United States at the fact that many innocent people are being bombed and killed overseas for no justifiable reason whatsoever by the U.S. military.
Where are the Abbie Hoffmans and Jerry Rubins and Country Joe McDonalds and Tom Haydens and Jane Fondas of today? It seems that those who are below the age of 40 have become M.I.A. in regard to the anti-war movement of today. Critical thinking, for so many of them, seems to have become, lamentably, moribund.
For that matter, a hell of a lot more military personnel should be part of the GI movement. Contrast that lack of action to the GI movement that took place during the Vietnam conflict and one once again recognizes how the current generation seems to be so hesitant in wanting to question authority. And your reference to the lack of a military draft is not really applicable here as the majority of those who took part in the GI movement back then were, as David Cortright points out in his classic work Soldiers In Revolt: GI Resistance During the Vietnam War. composed not of draftees but rather [surprise] of enlistees.
"Your reference to students today not being drafted ignores my last two sentences in that paragraph which brings out the fact that that is too facile an explanation for them not to protest on campus against what the United States is doing overseas. Or perhaps it brings out your point, however inadvertently, that Americans will not act unless it is not in their own self-interests to do so.
"
Well yes. People, no not just Americans, will only get out onto the streets marching, protesting, engaging in civil disobedience, engaging in confrontations with police, if it affects them directly, and most often, if it affects them directly economically.
"I agree with your last paragraph that more Americans should certainly be taking to the streets against another Democratic president who is engaging in more unnecessary military conflicts overseas. But that hardly gets the youth of today off the hook for not engaging, for the most part, in any kind of critical thinking especially when it comes to a president who seems to be doing his best in emulating another Democratic president named Lyndon Baines Johnson.
"
No, it doesn't get the kids off the hook. The point is that the kids are no different from any generation of kids, or from kids, or non kids in any country in the world. For most Americans, regardless of generation, the wars are remote and have little noticeable direct effect (they obviously have direct effects via how much money the military vacuums up, but that isn't a directly noticeable effect, not in the ways getting drafted, having yourself, your family, your friends, your lovers, maimed / killed are).
As for LBJ, for all of LBJ's faults, he is a thousands times better a president (in terms of his policies relative to what most posters on this site want) than Obama.
"I agree that a lack of a military draft is a big consideration why many of them are so complacent. But I think ultimately that is no excuse why they are not expressing outrage on the campuses and in the cities and towns of the United States at the fact that many innocent people are being bombed and killed overseas for no justifiable reason whatsoever by the U.S. military.
"
I am not saying that it is an excuse. It is an explanation for the problem. And like I said, take a look at college fees today. They have far outpaced the rate of inflation, and especially the rate of income growth. The last time I paid attention to them seriously was slightly less than 10 years ago. I took a look at them recently, and was shocked at how much they have gone up.
"Where are the Abbie Hoffmans and Jerry Rubins and Country Joe McDonalds and Tom Haydens and Jane Fondas of today? It seems that those who are below the age of 40 have become M.I.A. in regard to the anti-war movement of today. Critical thinking, for so many of them, seems to have become, lamentably, moribund.
"
What is Jane Fonda saying about the wars today? Etc. It isn't just people under 40 MIA. It is people in general being MIA. This isn't a generational problem.
"For that matter, a hell of a lot more military personnel should be part of the GI movement. Contrast that lack of action to the GI movement that took place during the Vietnam conflict and one once again recognizes how the current generation seems to be so hesitant in wanting to question authority. And your reference to the lack of a military draft is not really applicable here as the majority of those who took part in the GI movement back then were, as David Cortright points out in his classic work Soldiers In Revolt: GI Resistance During the Vietnam War. composed not of draftees but rather [surprise] of enlistees.
.."
Partially. Yes, those in the GI movement during Vietnam might have been majority enlistees. But, they lived, and fought, in a system where soldiers were drafted, where there was a prominent / strong antiwar movement. Or at least, one more prominent and stronger than the antiwar movement today. People are not just completely autonomous disconnected individuals. Those enlistees might have family / friends who were draftees, family / friends who opposed the war. The general societal milieu influences individuals (who obviously shape the societal milieu too)
Sorry, but all I seem to hear from you are excuses and feeble ones at that. You state, and probably quite correctly, that, "As for LBJ, for all of LBJ's faults, he is a thousand times better a president than ... than Obama." If we take this to be true it then begs the question why you seem to be, despite your denials, trying to excuse the indifference of the youth of today instead of condemning them for not protesting against the destructive militant policies of their government.
Your point about the puny GI movement today which may be a result of the indifferent anti-war movement may be true. But like that silent antiwar movement that should not excuse the fact that the soldiers in the military today are not deserting and protesting in anything close to the GI rebellion that took place during the Vietnam conflict. Since there are some soldiers who are part of the IVAW that then means that there are some soldiers who have a conscience. And if some can speak out against their government and the military then that means that others can too.
The bottom line, to me, is that the soldiers in the military today and what constitutes an antiwar movement these days should be speaking out a hell of a lot more than they are currently doing. That is because we know and, most importantly, they also should know, especially with the availability of the Internet, about the many atrocities that are going on in the Middle East. They should be aware of the many people who have been killed in Iraq and now in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen and Somalia and Libya. They should know that many thousands of innocent civilians have had their limbs torn apart from their bodies, their guts scattered across the land, their vision blinded by 500 lb. bombs. But instead of being outraged by all this they seem to have little regard for the plight of these wretched people while you go to great lengths to provide cover for their lack of action.
Sorry, but all I hear from you is the usual "kids nowadays are useless, get off my lawn" mantra that has been repeateed by one generation against a younger generation since Socrates.
"If we take this to be true it then begs the question why you seem to be, despite your denials, trying to excuse the indifference of the youth of today instead of condemning them for not protesting against the destructive militant policies of their government.
"
Why are the youth of today the only ones who should be responsible for the protesting? Where are all the heroes who protested against Vietnam? Why are they silent? Have they gotten fat and lazy in their suburban homes, driving their SUVs, looking at their stock options, watching their 42 inch plasma TVs?
"Your point about the puny GI movement today which may be a result of the indifferent anti-war movement may be true. But like that silent antiwar movement that should not excuse the fact that the soldiers in the military today are not deserting and protesting in anything close to the GI rebellion that took place during the Vietnam conflict. Since there are some soldiers who are part of the IVAW that then means that there are some soldiers who have a conscience. And if some can speak out against their government and the military then that means that others can too."
WTF said I'm excusing them? Yes, soldiers today are not protesting like they did during Vietnam, that is because the anti-war movement today is puny, that is because there are no draftees unhappy about being drafted to fight a war thousands of miles away, that is because for some at least, the army provides a good paying career.
"The bottom line, to me, is that the soldiers in the military today and what constitutes an antiwar movement these days should be speaking out a hell of a lot more than they are currently doing."
No, the bottom line: people generally are not political junkies. They do not care all that much about things happening thousands of miles away, that barely affect them, or that they perceive as barely affecting them.
"That is because we know and, most importantly, they also should know, especially with the availability of the Internet, about the many atrocities that are going on in the Middle East. They should be aware of the many people who have been killed in Iraq and now in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen and Somalia and Libya. They should know that many thousands of innocent civilians have had their limbs torn apart from their bodies, their guts scattered across the land, their vision blinded by 500 lb. bombs."
They do not care to know. That is reality. That is reality all over the world. That is reality regardless of generation. People are driven to protest, to revolt by factors, usually economic, that affect them personally. I would think that a poster on a leftish site would understand this. For many people in the world, Afghanistan is remote. Just as the mass rape in the Congo is remote.
"But instead of being outraged by all this they seem to have little regard for the plight of these wretched people while you go to great lengths to provide cover for their lack of action.
.."
Spare me the sanctimony. I am not providing cover. Pointing out WHY is not providing cover. You can scream and whine as much as you want and engage in generational war. If that makes you feel better about yourself, sure, suit yourself.
>>Where are the Abbie Hoffmans and Jerry Rubins and Country Joe McDonalds and Tom Haydens and Jane Fondas of today?
Ask yourself why media deregulation became a high priority for the government over the last couple of decades. Out of sight, out of mind. Main stream media is now controlled by a handful of corporate forces. The Hoffmans and Fondas are out there, their voices have been muted. Take a look at the college campus situation. They have become hotbeds of corporate influence and control. Go try and pass out literature on a college campus these days. WE have allowed this corporate fascist control to overtake the country, now we attempt to blame our children? This doesn't pass the sniff test.
Perfect essay. Thank you, Thomas Harrington, for writing it. Thank you, Common Dreams, for publishing it. In addition to the answer of, "We forgot", there is also, "We were cowardly" and "We we liked hearing and believing propaganda". Or, to some it all up, we could answer our children's questions with, "We were just like the Germans in the 1930s."
There's also Kurt Vonnegut's "We could have saved it all, but we were too damn cheap."